CAD Forum

I am attempting to check in an assembly downloaded from a vendor website. PDM gives me the following message. Any idea what this means or how to solve it?
I have opened the assembly, as well as the 3 parts included in the assembly. They have all been recently saved, and I don't see anything obvious that is wrong.

S-071657

Question:. : When I check in an assembly in the SOLIDWORKS® PDM 2016 SP4 and later software, why do I see the warning ‘Missing data necessary for BOM, needs resaving in SOLIDWORKS’?

Answer:. This is a new warning that was introduced in the SOLIDWORKS® PDM 2016 SP4 software. This warning occurs if the assembly is missing an XML stream. Without an XML stream, there will be no configuration reference information for the file and the BOM will be incorrect. For example, the reference count (quantity) in the BOM will show incorrect values.

For a visual reference, see the attached image.

To resolve this issue, open the file in the SOLIDWORKS software, and then resave it. Then, try again to check the file in. If the warning persists, contact Technical Support. It may be necessary to repair the file.

If you create new users in the SOLIDWORKS PDM 2016 SP4 or later software, the warning is defined as a blocking warning in the user properties. This prevents users from checking in incomplete assembly data to the file vault. It is possible for an administrator to change the warning to be non-blocking. However, SOLIDWORKS Technical Support recommends that you DO NO check in an assembly file that shows this warning because the BOM information is incorrect.

For more details about what problems you can encounter when the XML stream is missing, see the Knowledge Base solution S-065743.

I had a similar problem with downloaded data as well.

We have an internal rule that makes mandatory to import all the external data in our template before check them in in the vault. The engineer tried to check in the downloaded data as is, while one of the component was corrupted.
IIRC I read in the KB that saving a SLDDOT as a SLDPRT file could cause incomplete information to be saved in the metadata or something corrupting the file.
PDM is just stopping a file ready to blow up inside the vault and it is a good thing.
If possible I suggest to export all the data as parasolid, reimport inside your templates and try to check them in again.
My problem was solved with that procedure.

I think the XML is a red herring. I recreated the assembly and had the same problems. Even though the parts were allowed to be checked in, I think they are the culprit. As time permits, I will follow mp3-250's advice and rebuild the components and assembly. For now, it's not hurting anything.

I ended up having to completely rebuild the assembly from imported step files. I never could figure out why PDM didn't like the old one.

SPerman wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 9:24 am I ended up having to completely rebuild the assembly from imported step files. I never could figure out why PDM didn't like the old one.

Is the vendor model something I can download? I'd like to investigate.

Sometimes the xml inside the download data is broken for reasons. It takes time, but avoid uncontrolled 3rd party SW data inside our PDM is a no-go for us. Also topological errors, problematic properties etc

Were the parts from a parts supplier called CADENAS? Back in December they had an issue where a lot of their parts were corrupted with no xml stream data that would cause these check in errors in PDM.
See SPR 1245529

The part was a pneumatic cylinder from PHD. You have to create an account to download the files. The part number is CTS2U50x1/2. https://www.phdinc.com/cad/buildpart?se ... from=myphd

It looks like I downloaded this last december, so that would align with the issue Diaval mentioned. The download occurs on the PHD web site, but it is possible the models come from CADENAS.

SPerman wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 4:24 pm It looks like I downloaded this last december, so that would align with the issue Diaval mentioned. The download occurs on the PHD web site, but it is possible the models come from CADENAS.

Yep. They're from CADENAS. The README file that is included with the download starts out like this:

=====================================
EN Your download at 05/16/2023 on PARTcommunity/PARTserver/3Dfindit.com:

Dear user,

attached please find the following file of our 3D CAD download portal PARTcommunity/PARTserver/3Dfindit.com powered by CADENAS:
=====================================

SPR1245529 lists that models from mid-December 2022 to January 18, 2023 had the problem.