Toolbox & Custom Hardware

[Austin Schukar]

Hey all,

I'm in the process of researching whether or not to implement SW Toolbox. We are finally rolling out SW PDM over the next few weeks, so I thought it would be prudent to take this opportunity to review all alternatives. I've narrowed my options to:

• Custom Toolbox Hardware in PDM, or

• Design Library in PDM.

I can see the benefits of implementing Toolbox in general, but the catch is we will not be using ANY of the standard Toolbox components. Transitioning all of our hardware to Toolbox may not be as difficult as I think it will be, but I am worried about getting everything right on the first try. I've been thrown into the fire that is PDM administration, and Toolbox seems to have a whole other set of rules that will need to be applied and inadvertently broken. Is having a whole custom Toolbox directory worth it? Also, I can't seem to find anything difinitive on the subject of Smart Fasteners. Can I reassign the Smart Fastener of a hole type to one of our custom components? Is it just a matter of matching mate references, face IDs, etc.? Smart Fasteners was a significant 'pro' to implementing Toolbox, and if it only works for the standard Toolbox components, that may be a deal-breaker.

Utilizing a directory for Design Library seems straight-forward. Simply move the files into the correct PDM directory and all is well...????

Should mention that I want to go through all of our hardware and update the models, properties, add mate references, face IDs, etc. In PDM I will hopefully have a Legacy & New set of standard hardware. So, either way I will have my hands full.

I'd love to hear from anyone that operates in Toolbox that primarily uses their own custom hardware, and the issues involved. I also realize that this can be a hot topic. If something I've asked doesn't makes sense, I apologize. I've tried to do as much research as I can, short of getting the VAR involved.

Thanks!

[SPerman]

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=602&hilit=toolbox

[Craig Schultz]

I always kept a separate hardware/component library. I'd create the toolbox components, but then save them off as there own part. The main reason for this was back in the day when toolbox components would blow up using the wrong configuration. I can't remember what version SW this was, but I incurred enough PTSD, I don't trust toolbox.

Once you create your components, run C:\Program Files\SOLIDWORKS Corp\SOLIDWORKS\Toolbox\data utilities\sldsetdocprop.exe to set the toolbox to yes. This will allow you to do copy/move tree actions without including toolbox components.

[Tom G]

The main reason for this was back in the day when toolbox components would blow up using the wrong configuration. I can't remember what version SW this was, but I incurred enough PTSD, I don't trust toolbox.

Exactly this. I also do not trust TB parts, so I saved out all the common pieces to their own parts, or downloaded from McMaster-Carr, or made it myself. "Apology accepted, Trust denied."
My 2¢, but do what works for you.

[jcapriotti]

@Austin Schukar Considering you aren't using any of the toolbox components, I'm not sure I'd bother with building a completely custom library in it. Too many potential headaches.

[MJuric]

but the catch is we will not be using ANY of the standard Toolbox components.

As stated if you're not using the tool box components there's no reason to use tool box. One of the major drawback with toolbox is that there's no easy way to add completely new hardware to it.

If you could create your own parts with all the TB functionality from a model or from scratch that would be a great enhancement, but so far that's not possible.

[Austin Schukar]

If you could create your own parts with all the TB functionality from a model or from scratch that would be a great enhancement, but so far that's not possible.

Really wish this was a thing. I've scoured all of the forums I could on TB, and was willing to take a chance on it, even considering most of the community seems against it.

@MJuric @jcapriotti @Tom G @Craig Schultz @SPerman

Thanks for all of your input, it's much appreciated...think that makes it clear that it's not worth implementing. I know it sounds silly to ask if I could implement TB w/o using any TB components, but we just can't make it happen otherwise, and I hadn't seen anyone trying to do this. Probably should've figured there was a reason for that, but that's hindsight for you (me?).

[MJuric]

Really wish this was a thing. I've scoured all of the forums I could on TB, and was willing to take a chance on it, even considering most of the community seems against it.

@MJuric @jcapriotti @Tom G @Craig Schultz @SPerman

Thanks for all of your input, it's much appreciated...think that makes it clear that it's not worth implementing. I know it sounds silly to ask if I could implement TB w/o using any TB components, but we just can't make it happen otherwise, and I hadn't seen anyone trying to do this. Probably should've figured there was a reason for that, but that's hindsight for you (me?).

Yes, adding parts into TB with TB functionally has been on the wish list for years as far as I know. There are a couple things you can do but both are "Risky" and difficult and for the most part not worth it for anything other than a few special cases.

1) You can attempt to copy an existing TB part and remodel it using the same dims etc from the previous part. That only really works if you have "Similar parts"
2) You can go directly into the database and make changes using a database editor. That is risky in the sense of being able to corrupt the entire database. I've only heard of a couple people that have said they have had success doing this.

[Austin Schukar]

...
2) You can go directly into the database and make changes using a database editor. That is risky in the sense of being able to corrupt the entire database. I've only heard of a couple people that have said they have had success doing this.

That's interesting. If I hypothetically wanted to modify the database, what program would I use to do so? Looks like it used to be accessible with MS Access, but they changed the file format from .mdb to .sldedb. Also, if I hypothetically had nothing to lose by messing around with the database, then it sounds like something worth toying around with at the very least. Like I said, either way I am going to be revamping our custom hardware, simply because it's in need of it. Get everything polished, so to speak.

At this point I'm just curious about what one can do with TB

[MJuric]

That's interesting. If I hypothetically wanted to modify the database, what program would I use to do so? Looks like it used to be accessible with MS Access, but they changed the file format from .mdb to .sldedb. Also, if I hypothetically had nothing to lose by messing around with the database, then it sounds like something worth toying around with at the very least. Like I said, either way I am going to be revamping our custom hardware, simply because it's in need of it. Get everything polished, so to speak.

At this point I'm just curious about what one can do with TB

I poked around in the TB database with SQLite I believe. I really didn't take it any further than that other than to send it to my brother who looked at it and said I should put a post on one of the sub contract websites with what I wanted to do and see what people offered to do it for

My application was to add things like pneumatic fittings, flow controls, hydraulic fittings etc etc. Would be super nice to be able to just add those to TB and be able to have all the sizing, mating, custom characteristics etc that TB has to offer....but, nope.

[Austin Schukar]

I poked around in the TB database with SQLite I believe. I really didn't take it any further than that other than to send it to my brother who looked at it and said I should put a post on one of the sub contract websites with what I wanted to do and see what people offered to do it for

My application was to add things like pneumatic fittings, flow controls, hydraulic fittings etc etc. Would be super nice to be able to just add those to TB and be able to have all the sizing, mating, custom characteristics etc that TB has to offer....but, nope.

Gosh dang it, this sounds like a rabbit hole that I am inevitably going to throw myself down, just to see what it can do. Pretty cool. It does look like SQLite will be able to modify the DB. I was only able to find one reference to this...a seemingly random Slideshare presentation. SQLite installation instructions looks like a foreign language for the layman like myself, though

[MJuric]

Gosh dang it, this sounds like a rabbit hole that I am inevitably going to throw myself down, just to see what it can do. Pretty cool. It does look like SQLite will be able to modify the DB. I was only able to find one reference to this...a seemingly random Slideshare presentation. SQLite installation instructions looks like a foreign language for the layman like myself, though

Yes, I decided to not crawl down the rabbit hole as I was already redoing our entire toolbox.

I think if you were pretty decent with SQL data bases you could probably pull it off and do some pretty cool things with it....I am not good with SQL.

Thats why I sent it to my brother who is much better than I at those things and when he got it he said he could probably do it but it would be more involved than what he'd like to mess. Which is why he sent me to contractor site.

It would be super cool if you could either do the changes in the database or even better yet write a front end for the DB so you could easily enter additional models and get the TB functionality.

[jcapriotti]

Yes, I decided to not crawl down the rabbit hole as I was already redoing our entire toolbox.

I think if you were pretty decent with SQL data bases you could probably pull it off and do some pretty cool things with it.

Until you upgrade SolidWorks and it updates the Toolbox DB.......

[MJuric]

Until you upgrade SolidWorks and it updates the Toolbox DB.......

Well....there's always that. Half the time I'm afraid to try and implement half the stuff SW can do because they end up breaking it in the next release.

[S.Casale]

TB is very powerful. It has a library that is detailed and works. Customizing the toolbox to have specials is easy yet requires detailed attention. Customizing the toolbox with using PDM is also easy and also requires detailed attention. Using the TB requires attention to detail, just as users should need to while using SolidWorks or TB anyway.

A few things to note.
1. Be mindful of the files associated with TB when controlled in PDM. There are two that need to be verified when in PDM.
2. I found that it is best to copy an existing toolbox and modify that to one you desire.
3. Make sure ALL users understand how TB works and how it works with PDM. This is integral to its functionality. If users are not interested in paying attention to detail, they shouldn't use the tool (perhaps this should be written about using SolidWorks itself as well).
4. SolidWorks PDM add-in does not always properly check TB and its associated files back in to PDM when used (see line items 1).
5. Not all default TB parts are geometrically real world parts (always verify geometry).
a. The same can be written for hole wizard default sizes for certain features (e.g., not all C'bores can be identified as sizes that are able to be purchased without add'l machining or some sizes are not practical for real world application).
6. Y'all should not modify the database file itself (MS Access) unless the organization has multiple users that know how to modify and maintain it.
a. it's best to stick with using the TB editor (Toolbox Settings application).

[Austin Schukar]

@S.Casale - thank you for the thoughtful response. At this point I think that I have to write TB off, unfortunately. Your item #3 is another big hurdle that would just gum up all of the works. We'll be implementing PDM here soon, and it will be an uphill battle in making sure that everything goes smoothly in that aspect...going to be to tough getting everyone to take the time to understand what PDM is and how to use it. I can't imagine the issues that the group would have with multiple major implementations.

[MJuric]

Customizing the toolbox to have specials is easy yet requires detailed attention.

[/quote]

I'd be curious as to how you're doing this. I've been asking around and looking around for a couple years, forums, VAR's etc and no one has come up with an "Easy" way to add new parts to the tool box that I've been able to find. Unless you're talking "Specials" in the sense of changing existing parts, yes, that is not hard but adding "Specials", IE parts that do not exist in the TB I've not found an "Easy" way.

[Uncle_Hairball]

I have been holding my tongue about Toolbox and all it's irritations, but yesterday I got reminded of the straw that broke the camel's back. I left Toolbox and went to fasteners as standard parts a couple of years ago. Here's why:

Yesterday, I was out of the office, but needed to open an assembly. Because I was working from cached data, I did not have access to the Toolbox. When I opened the assembly, which contained hundreds of Toolbox fasteners, Solidworks complained that it couldn't find the Toolbox data. I clicked Ok. It complained again. I clicked Ok. It complained again... It complained about every, single Toolbox part, so I had to click Ok around 500 times, proving once again that no one at Solidworks ever uses the application. That's enough, I'm done with Toolbox.

It's not that I cannot find a way to solve this problem; I'm not looking for advice, it's that the problem is the final straw in a long line of unacceptable and destructive behaviors that I should not have to deal with.

And that is the end of my complaint.

[S.Casale]

I'd be curious as to how you're doing this. I've been asking around and looking around for a couple years, forums, VAR's etc and no one has come up with an "Easy" way to add new parts to the tool box that I've been able to find. Unless you're talking "Specials" in the sense of changing existing parts, yes, that is not hard but adding "Specials", IE parts that do not exist in the TB I've not found an "Easy" way.
[/quote]

I don't have it open in front of me. When you add or modify the options (as in new options or sizes), the column header description and requirements are very specific. If you don't express the correct definition, the information translated to SolidWorks will be incorrect.

If you copy an existing Toolbox Item, be clear as to what it is as it is easy to have multiple items that are the same. As an example, if you copy the SHCS to modify it to be torque (as they aren't the same) but don't change all the info, you may have users selecting and sizing incorrectly.

[MJuric]

I'd be curious as to how you're doing this. I've been asking around and looking around for a couple years, forums, VAR's etc and no one has come up with an "Easy" way to add new parts to the tool box that I've been able to find. Unless you're talking "Specials" in the sense of changing existing parts, yes, that is not hard but adding "Specials", IE parts that do not exist in the TB I've not found an "Easy" way.

I don't have it open in front of me. When you add or modify the options (as in new options or sizes), the column header description and requirements are very specific. If you don't express the correct definition, the information translated to SolidWorks will be incorrect.

If you copy an existing Toolbox Item, be clear as to what it is as it is easy to have multiple items that are the same. As an example, if you copy the SHCS to modify it to be torque (as they aren't the same) but don't change all the info, you may have users selecting and sizing incorrectly.
[/quote]

So if I'm understanding you correctly you mean "Specials" as in copying a TB item and making it something similar, Like a special head of a screw or different drive type that may not be available in the TB. Yes that can be done fairly easily.

What I'm looking for is something like being able to add a pneumatic fitting or special bearing or something we use all the time that is nothing like a fastener that currently exists in the TB. I've not seen an easy way to do that or even a really good way to do it.

[S.Casale]

What I'm looking for is something like being able to add a pneumatic fitting or special bearing or something we use all the time that is nothing like a fastener that currently exists in the TB. I've not seen an easy way to do that or even a really good way to do it.

That's fair, it's not when it comes to fully customized. I wonder if the resellers may have expert knowledge our SWIFTY's don't.

[MJuric]

That's fair, it's not when it comes to fully customized. I wonder if the resellers may have expert knowledge our SWIFTY's don't.

When we did ours I completely redid the entire thing by copying the entire database and separating out fine from course thread etc etc and that was fairly straight forward. However from what I've found out if you want to add something really different there are only a couple choices and I've not heard of anyone ever having success doing it.

1) modify the database directly using a SQL tool of some sort
2) Copy an existing model, remodel it using the exact same dims, names etc but creating a new model entirely. You would have to retain and use only the original features which would be a limitation as well. This would be far from clean, but I think it could be done for somewhat similar parts.

Why there isn't a TB front end that would allow you to create some basic models and insert them into the TB is beyond me.

[Frederick_Law]

Adding new part is difficult in Toolbox.
Changing material, description, add extra size is easier.

I copied a few bolts to a custom standard. Added a few thread size. Changed description and material.
All in Toolbox editor and excel with export and import.
Try a few before you put it in PDM for everyone. Took sometime the learn what to change.

[MJuric]

Adding new part is difficult in Toolbox.
Changing material, description, add extra size is easier.

I copied a few bolts to a custom standard. Added a few thread size. Changed description and material.
All in Toolbox editor and excel with export and import.
Try a few before you put it in PDM for everyone. Took sometime the learn what to change.

My suggestion would be to copy the entire TB and do everything offline in that TB. I did significant changes to ours and on more than one occasion then entire DB corrupted. Copy the TB, Make a backup, Make a change, Make a backup, Make a change....

When you're all done copy it back to the active location.

[Tom G]

Why there isn't a TB front end that would allow you to create some basic models and insert them into the TB is beyond me.

Now THAT is a great idea (which we will never see).

Not to filter a new good idea through existing bad idea, but this sounds like Routing Component Wizard (see on YouTube if unfamiliar). That front end is necessary b/c Routing components also exist in a database. Then again, that sounds awful unless it's primarily aimed at expanding categories of TB hardware.

Entirely aside, there are no TOOLS in the TOOL Box. There's only these fasteners. Where are tools to tighten my fasteners?