I often get STEP files from CATIA users that contains assembly information without the actual parts.
From reading the file in Notepad it seems the file has the parts name and their position/orientation but not the actual geometry. I guess it’s a setting they have to check while creating the STEP file and it’s not our problem… But it would be nice if Rhino told us what happened, right now it says the file was successfully read and that the assembly is contained in a block.
I think it should warn us with a message like: "No geometry created. File contains unavailable links to the following part(s): xxxx1.catpart, xxxx2.catpart, etc."
I can send an example STEP file in private if needed.
Hi Marc,
Yes, please provide a sample indicating which block is created and what geometry is missing if you can and I’ll file the feature request. you can use www.rhino3d.com/upload
I get this error when clicking on upload: AccessDeniedInvalid according to Policy: Policy Condition failed: [“eq”, “$acl”, “private”]3C548D4D1AFC03A6YrIy48+lqPe3XdmYG2ezP8b86oJWzBb84dGie6RlgIwaCexatdSzY2u0z6J7FYLO
Same problem from home. Here is the result:
“Aucune information de style ne semble associée à ce fichier XML. L’arbre du document est affiché ci-dessous. AccessDeniedInvalid according to Policy: Policy Condition failed: [“eq”, “$acl”, “private”]E30F4DE8E1AC5954Y1jv+iMXRb16RS8037IbkMqn9KjlnZhjew8g78wU12DHmV+XK6j5sEAE/1SxKISk”
Thanks for trying again. @stevebaer will need to weigh in on this for me to know more about the error you’re getting. In the meantime, can you email a smaller file to tech@mcneel.com (10mb or so) that shows the issue or use another server option you have access to like Google drive or Dropbox? I’d like to figure out the problem with the upload site on your end but it’d be great to get the file from you in another way if possible with a full description for filing of the bug or feature request.
Hi Brian,
I just sent it by e-mail. It’s a small file anyway…
I think my first post in this thread explains the situation well, is there something that’s not clear?
As you noticed, the file contains a bunch of references to other files. When the files are present in the same directory as the main one, the geometry gets created in a block. If not, the block is created without the geometry and without a warning. Those empty blocks are thrown away in a post-process. It should not be difficult to give a warning for each nonexistent file. I’ll put it on the list and should get to it pretty soon.
If you have one of these with the children present, please test to be sure they are read. The way the external files are represented in your file is a little different from what I’ve seen, and know will work, in the past. If not, let me know and I’ll fix that.
On closer inspection, the document entities in the step file do not seem to refer to actual files, but to part names, much as you had said in your initial post. I don’t think just including the part files would work. The place in the document entity that would normally hold a step file name just has a number. There is probably an export option that gives the choice of a) saving everything in one step file, b) saving the parts in separate files and linking those to the main file, or c) just save the assembly structure without saving the parts. And you’re getting c. I don’t have access to Catia, so I’m only guessing. If you can get one with the parts written out in separate step files, that would be great.
I made the step importer print out, in the command line, this message for each missing document.
Unavailable document id=(id from step document entity - this is a file name if the main step file refers to another step file), name=(name from step document entity - this is the name of the part in Marc’s case)
