D6-51991.pdf

The first question one should ask themself is whether the IGES datafrom CATIA accurately reflects the internal CATIA. To this end someBoeing sites use a program (written by Boeing) which creates asecond CATIA model from any input CATIA model. This program runs asa batch job on MVS and uses Dassault evaluators to grid numerouspoints on all the curves and surfaces in a model. We then IGES bothCATIA models out. The assumption is that CATIGE can surely dopoints correctly. Using IGES_CHK, we can now determine that theCATIA IGES file of curves and surfaces lies at the same locus asall of the points in the CATIA IGES file of points. This proves thevalidity of the IGES curves and surfaces. The second question oneshould ask themself is whether a given CAD system hears the CATIAIGES well. To this end we ask our suppliers to import the CATIAIGES and to echo it back as a second IGES file. The second IGESfile is compared back to the CATIA IGES file. If the check isfavorable, we assume the CAD system translated the CATIA IGES well.These checks are to be executed by the supplier.

In any case, it would be prudent for anyone using IGES as atranslation tool to run some sort of validation check to verify theintegrity of the data coming from the sending CAD systsem.

The SW Import diagnostics tool should NOT be used on imported fileswith out customer approval because it would defeat the D6-51991spec.

The STEP format has virtually replaced the IGES format but Boeingdoes not have a validate program for STEP files.

The STEP AP203ed2, 210, 214 224, 238 Application Protocol willaccommodate GD&T data so hopefully this will be the newstandard soon...CATIA will export the STEP 203 ed2 format.ISO_10303
SC4online

Please help me with this topic as it may shape new enhancementrequests for SW.


SolidworksImport export