09-10-2011 09:15 AM
We have a large customer requesting the ability to write a V5 assembly that references some/all its parts as V4 .model files.
Now from the docs I can't see anywhere that says this is ruled out, so I knocked up a simple program based
on the InterOp sample for converting EBOM asembly to V5 and it appears to run, but doesn't look like it really worked.
I get a CATProduct assembly file, but all my .model part files seem to get converted to CATParts, even though I've
specified the option:
The CATProduct also has problems opening in V5, it says it has internal errors.
I've attached the xml file that I'm using. Can you see what I'm missing here?
09-19-2011 03:55 PM
I assume the problem statement is:
Given a EBOM file which referes to CATIA V4 model files as its definition nodes, you would like to write V5 assembly file ( .CATProduct ) which will "reuse" the CATIA V4 model files as they are. The generated .CATProduct file will refer to same CATIA V4 files for its definitions of leaf nodes.
If the above statement correctly captures your requirement, it is not supported in InterOp. The reason is EBOM referring to CATIA V4 models is a very non-standard combination. And converting such EBOM to .CATProduct containing V4 model files is again not in vogue.
Please let me know if I have understood the problem correctly in first place!
09-19-2011 11:32 PM
You have captured the problem correctly in your statement.
I disagree with your assumption that V5 assemblies referencing V4 .model files is "very non-standard" and "not in vogue". We are working with several large
companies doing exactly this as a means to reduce the migration of V4 data to V5. One very large US company with a heavy CATIA
user base have asked for this much needed functionality to be added to our product, hence why I was trying to get InterOp to
Technically it seems a bit of a no-brainer. If the EBOM file references a .model file then bypass the unecessary convertion to a CATPart file and pass V5 the .model file instead?
V5 assemblies are just as happy to point to a .model file as they are a .CATPart.
Can this be added to the development plans for a future InterOp release?
09-20-2011 08:40 AM
This would be best logged as an enhnacement request in the Call Tracking System. That ensures it will be correctly managed.