Dezignstuff SolidWorks Blog

I like TB, but I use locally.
In shared mode is very very slow.

My experience with toolbox is that I use it to create “standard” parts that go in a static library. And I have to say this works very well for me.

In my case all I need is bearings, some screws and some washers. I realize that the list of options is much bigger than that, but I don’t have a use for it at this point in time.

One of the advantages of using parts from a static library, is that it’s easy for me to share assemblies with vendors in Asia.

In my opinion, sometimes it’s better to have “dumb” parts. Take a bearing as an example, a #6000 will always be 10x26x8mm. Why does that part need intelligence? All the information I need from standard parts is their size to ensure proper functionality of my assemblies.

Matt, I’m afraid of Toolbox because we use Smarteam as our PDM system and I’m not sure if it could be set up correctly.

I’ve used Toolbox before, and I thought it was useful, though at the time I was in a situation where we could avoid some of the big drawbacks (never shared assemblies outside the company, and everyone theoretically had access to the same toolbox library). I’d use it again given the chance, but it’s considered out of the question by my current employer. There are much bigger problems we should solve before considering implementing it anyhow – like any given component having a different part number (and often model) depending on which office you’re working at.

I use Toolbox as a parts generator and put the parts in a static library. That seems to be the best use of it in my opinion.

Hi Matt,
I dont have Toolbox having had SW std all along but everything I have read about it over the years suggests its something to avoid anyway.
I really could do with a simple parts library for nuts and bolts, O rings etc. – the everyday stuff.
I suspect a lot of users would like that too.
Really I dont understand why this couldnt be included in Std even if they call it PartsExpress and leave out the calculators or whatever.
Why is it I can have some Express functionality for Molds/Simult/Sustain but I get no basic parts with SW?
Perhaps these items are too high tech to be considered safe for a common CAD monkey to handle..
IMO this is another aspect of the whole SW package that needs a revisit.
SW need to get serious about providing useful engineering tools and quit busking for content with more and pretty UI enhancements.

I make good use of the Solidworks toolbox.The toolbox that I really want is a library of the CAD models from the McMaster Carr catalog. Those parts are nice native Solidworks parts. The on line catalog can provide the browser to find the right part. The price and specifications are thus handy.

Most if not all of the content and calculators included in TB are available on-line for free, somewhere. That reduces the value of TB to being a one-stop shop for the content, and some automation. The automation didn’t work that well for me the last time I tried it (’06, think) and the content lacks custom properties I can use.

I might have used it as a component generator if not for the fact that you have to add custom property information manually. You can do that faster for most part families if you model it yourself with a design table. I have that done for just about everything we use, so now I don’t even need a component generator.

Matt,

Toolbox does not have enough value for us to upgrade our 5 core SolidWorks seats to Pro seats. We make little use of the 1 seat of Premuim add-ins. To many dollars for very little value to us.

Cheers,

Anna

We use TB for 98% of our hardware (screws/nuts/washers/snap rings/etc) the other 2% we draw or get from McMaster. The TB is on the server and populates the drawing BOM with descriptions and P/Ns. I don’t manage it but hasn’t given me any trouble.

I seem to dodge the problems most people see with TB by letting TB create the geometry, and then immediately saving the hardware in my current project directory. This separates the model from any of the unexpected headaches (like lost/changed configurations) and essentially makes a static model for me.

What I cannot stand is that each part I create ignores my standard Part template. Why? Can there possibly be a rational explanation for displaying each dimension at 3-point type–or else at 1/2 the size of my monitor? (No.) How does SolidWorks come up with the most useless possible defaults for their templates? (I’ll bet they pay someone to do this.)

The other headache is the reckless/dangerous defaults of the installation manager when installing a given version of SolidWorks. If you go with the defaults, you must understand this will be the only version of SolidWorks installed on your machine at a given time–since no distinction is made between versions. (I run v2007, v2008, and v2009 concurrently.) The default installation directory will write over whatever you had in your previous install unless you rename it something reasonable, like “SolidWorks2009″ and “SolidWorks2009 Data”. Fail to do this, and you’ll certainly run into frustrations with things like Toolbox.

I look forward to the administration bible. It’s tough to keep all the options straight and some guidance will be greatly appreciated from my side.

i use ToolBox. But only for a single user situation and only in its simplistic form. i.e. create a bolt/nut/washer/pin/bearing etc and save it out as a separate part to go with the project its used in (i think i do this to try and avoid troubles of years gone by with TB).

I have been wanting to create full static libraries so i can set up every file to have the properties i want and the settings in each file how i want (massive dimensions or view quality low or planes not autosized etc). But again i use it in a simple form and i’ve not bothered to get that far yet!

PS. i forgot to say… i’m not sure if TB has the options to do what i mention above (i dont believe there is a “use default template for TB parts” option but i’ve not dived in so deep due to time limites in recent versions. But basically i feel it could do with some ‘fixing up’ still.

Some important parts of SW seem to be left as old clunky things while other parts are made flashy new bits even though they pose minimal real world benefit!

I am useing solid 2009 student kit, and i dont have the TB option at the Tools>add ins .
why is that?