Importing DXF - missing patterns in 3D window only
I am opening a pattern from a factory and it shows in the 2D window but half the pieces are missing in the 3D window. I have tried the Shift Q and doesnt help.
Anyone have experience working with overseas factory patterns in CLO ?
-
When you open a DXF file you can check the file itself and the header if saved in the DXF AAMA (Asci) format. That can help you to read in a text editor where the file came from and what software origination and layer structure (group structure) is used. However failing that you can ascertain that generally with a email with those whom saved out the file (not always possible) and ask them what version and software did they save the DXF AAMA file from? Dependent on what software and how they actually exported the file the data could be in a variety of states, making it usable or not, so it's always prudent to work with your previous agent to ensure the DXF AAMA export approach within their software is suitable. That's actually a rigid ISO process function within most companies, so don't dismiss it as simply 'what you get is what you have to work with' that's not ever a structured approach to ensuring the integrity of the DXF or Datafile transfer is consistent. So it's important to treat that as a key ingredient of process control that needs to be documented between any manufacturer and recipient of data-files. And if factories ignore that - simply remind them of the need to work within ISO document controls, that should make them sit up and take notice.
So this is generally an issue that is both external, and crucial for smooth reliable data exchange. To that end I always stipulate in an online area in multiple languages how my fashion garment data transfer needs to be set up for good exchange and the options they can take with the 3 most common fashion CAD softwares, and I keep that process under version control, with a current test set of CLO3D project files that both you and they can test, so it's kept as a single communication point for all factories or suppliers to view. Do once, do it well and then never get the issue again. So when CLO3D make a new version of CLO3D or a technical update the 1st thing I always do is take my test project and export it to make sure the new version is working as standard, that's me doing my part of the ISO process, next I update my knowledge online area for all factories so they have access to that for checking.
Having written all that preamble, it sounds like your technical issue with missing pieces is more to do with the factory simply issuing a dxf file type and not checking what standard of DXF they should best exchange with, eg: 'continuous' pattern outlines or cut-line and seams, to work with CLO3D eg: as listed in the manual. There are many possible configurations of DXF-AAMA export and it should be written by the factory what origination software they used, and version of software. In conjunction to that information coming in an email its common to also provide the file (with internationally recognized character sets) eg: such that Chinese text sets do not impact on the exchange of text notations, a common problem. So although a factory may simply say we do this routinely and walk away from the data exchange problem, I would press them harder to illustrate exactly their export process in detail as it may be at fault, or their setup might be unsuitable for you a new vendor using a different software such as CLO3D, and that maybe they need to add that export process to their knowledge base (eg: a export preset that works from their software to your software).
There is always a fallback position with DXF AAMA export, that is one of it's core strengths as a format, you can assign line types, layers and pattern notation to overcome almost any software data exchange down the line between different software, but what often happens is that factories fail to recognize they need to have a knowledgeable person doing the DXF AAMA export to make those export tweaks in their export, and then to record their setup, and instead simply hit a button and leave it at that. That is why I suggest if you deal with many factories it's better for you to drive that process from a common online knowledge area, so they can all interface in one place that you are confident works, then you only ever need to do that once and push all factories to adhere to that process flow.
0
댓글