Thank you for taking the time to make this video! Its over six years old, but still very relevant and extremely helpful. Please continue making great videos like this!
You are very welcome. I'm a little surprised to learn that it is over six years old, but you're right of course. I will make a new one if they ever change the practice exam, but there isn't much I'd change about this one.
Thank you. I made it for some training I was doing and posting it on here was the easiest way to get it to everyone in the company. I may add another about the drawing exam.
I've received a number of questions from people who have not gotten the same mass as I did on this part. In all but one case the problem was the result of not fully defining all sketches. The alignment of a center mark is one common problem. Another is not noticing that once cylinder has a diameter that references variable X, the other references Y. I consider it good practice to fully define every sketch in a part. Some users apply the same logic to parts in an assembly, but that requires locking parts that would be free to turn in an actual assembly. The concentric mate now has a locking option to make that easier.
Great video. I took the practice exam before watching and was surprised at how little I got done in 30 minutes (just the first three parts). The shortcuts you suggested will be key to a successful passing grade.
Wayne , Thank you for your comments. I'm glad you found the video helpful. I do not know how close the precision must be in the answers on the exam. I don't think you could be making an error of any significance to get the answer you got, so I would assume that your answer would be considered correct. But I don't work for SolidWorks and I don't know how they manage their exams.
At 7:58 you change the setting on the "FROM" box. I've used SW for over 20 years, I've never really noticed/changed that setting ever. I simply change the Extrude setting in the "END CONDITION" box from "Blind" to "Offset from" and click on the bottom surface then enter 35mm for distance. I think this is the way most SW users would do it. We frequently change end condition: blind, up to surface, offset surface, midplane,...etc. However, your method is good to know, because I may come across an SW file created by someone else and need to edit.
Maybe you've figured this out, but when you extruded the round, starting @ 100mm, you click on the dim itself. This allows you to change the dim. If you click on the leader, or arrow, the the properties window opens. If you right click the leader or arrow, then you can link your variable.
Javier, Thank you. Someone else commented several years ago that de-selecting the Instant 3D button also helps with this. I may redo this video with the current release at some point, but your comment caused me to watch it for the first time in a while and I think it is still useful even though there are some things I would do differently now. I do appreciate your suggestion though.
You are welcome. I did not make any videos for the next two sections because there are no practice exams for assemblies. I might do a couple in the future, so check back.
thanks for putting it together with audio... other TH-camrs simply don't include narration while building the part. At the 8:02 timestamp, your point about building up the boss (60mmx60mm) for the counterbore hole REALLY solved my frustration tonight. I was getting the wrong answer because what I was doing was extruding 10mm up from the top of the base (25mm height) to arrive at the 35mm instead of using what was on the print. So I get it now, duplicate EVERY dimension on the print as the gospel. With making the correction for that single feature, I arrived at the same answer as you without making any other sketch-feature changes. Now as for taking the CSWA-FEA aka CSWA-S, a TH-camr the prerequisite for that is that you must have passed the CSWA. Is that correct?
My understanding is that you are required to take and pass the associate level exam before taking the professional exam. Not a bad warm-up, since the professional exam is definitely challenging. Glad the video was helpful.
Great video; appreciate alot of the good design intent, & practices that would help avoid errors, & are efficient. My concern at this point is it's great if they give you these multiple choice answers in the practice exam, but if that's not the case for the actually exam, it looks like you have to get everything perfect, & wouldn't get the time to correct things. It sounds like this would also have a domino effect on all the questions that follow, if you get the first wrong etc. Do you know if your answer is wrong do you have time to fix it, even if there are no multiple choices or do you just have to get it right the first time?
Rob, Generally you will be given multiple choice answers on the first couple of questions regarding a particular part, and then you'll have to type in answers for the remainder. It is indeed possible to have a domino effect for part of the questions, but generally you'll have the reassurance of finding a correct answer among several when you first make a part or an assembly.
Very well done video..! I appreciate that you took the time to explain things clearly and make comments from your personal experiences. I am still having trouble getting the exact 'mass' for the part in question 4 and 5, as Q.4 mass was off only by a few grams, and Q.5 was off by more than 150grams. Any help would be appreciated, as I am trying to get the company I work for to help me pay to take both the CSWA and CSWP exams. Thanks..!!!
Check to see if all of your sketches are fully defined. If not, fix them and check again. One common error is not locating the center of the arc part of the rib. If you want to send me your model at dabbott@smccME.edu, I'd be happy to take a look at it.
Hi Dan Great SW prep video. It's helped a lot in getting me ready to do the exam and really appreciate you taking the time. I have a query though, when going through everything with a fine tooth comb, I'm finding some of my mass values to be a few 0.00 grams out i.e. answer for #2 is 16490.45 but I'm getting 16490.48. If I put that answer in for the actual exam will that be a fail? Thanks Wayne
You did indeed. Sorry, I got interrupted by my kids and never got to finish the video but I had a copy of the PDF test questions. Thanks again for a great tutorial :)
great video Dan! much appreciated. id assume the solidworks certified associate exam is much less involved than this? and do you know if its possible to jump over that one and go right to the CSWP certification? thanks in advance for any response
MATT You can take the Professional Exam without having taken the associates exam. The associates is less involved, particularly for the assemblies, and has more questions that are multiple choice, so you have more feedback (i.e. you can find an answer that matches your value. There is a practice exam for that too. I took the professional exam without taking the associates, but I give the associates to my students at the end of their first class, so I've taken it several times since. If you feel pretty confident, take the first part of the professional exam. If you don't pass that, you probably don't want to take the other two parts right away, and it may make sense to do the Associates exam instead.
Daniel Abbott Thanks for the response! i think i would pass both of them.... i followed along with this video and most things seemed to work out fine... i did not get the same final answer but thats neither here nor there. Do you see any benefit to having both? As far as I would think, having the professional cert would override the associate.... its not like i would list them both on my resume... or is that something you think would be a benefit?
Daniel Abbott also, you mention three different parts of the professional exam.... would you elaborate on this please? not sure what you are referring to with the "two other parts"
Hello Daniel, The video instructionally is very well organized, my question : I use SolidWorks 2016, for question 2 when i try to update the global variables, the values in the equations do not change. Is there an option that I have to change or have I missed to change a setting ? The rebuild option does not work either.
The most likely problem is that you typed the variable name without typing an = sign. When you do that, the value of the variable is used for the dimension, but the dimension is not being driven by the variable. See if there is an epsilon sign in front of the dimension value (denoting an equation-driven dimension). If not, delete and then add the proper dimension by typing the = sign and then selecting the down arrow just below the dimension and then "global variables." Select the variable name directly or type it with quotation marks around it.
Dan, Great video and very easy to follow along with. I am a new teacher at a vocational high school and I would like to use your video in my classroom. I would like to know if you are ok with me sharing your video with my students? Thanks, Isreal
When I did the practice test myself the first time I got a mass that was just a bit over (14215.something), I couldn't figure out what was wrong so I re-made the part (following the same process) and the mass is quite a bit under. I just re-made the part for the third time following how you did it and the part is still under mass (13717.26). The part is set as alloy steel w/ a density of .0077kg/cm^3, and I have no idea why the part is under mass. Can you think of any reason why this would be?
I got the right mass value for the Initial part (14207.34g), but when I change the equation to Second (15165.40g instead of 16490.45g) or third condition (14791.68g instead of 15100.47g) the answer deviate very vastly. I am using 2020 version. Any suggestions?
Send me the part at dabbott@smccme.edu and I'll take a look. It sounds like you may not have actually applied the global variables to some of your dimensions. That can happen if you type in the letter rather than selecting it from the list of global variables that is displayed when you enter the = sign. (You can also place quotes around the letter). When you do that, the value is used, but the dimension is not linked to the global variable. If there is no Epsilon symbol on the dimension, is it not equation driven.
@@DanAbbott-SMCC Hi Daniel, thank you for responding. My friend figured it out just like u suggested. I didn't link the dimensions properly and the fillet near hole wizard was in wrong size.
Check for under-defined sketches. If you have any, that is probably where your error is. If not, make sure you used only the dimensions given in the exam and don't add meaningless dimensions just to make the sketch fully defined. Relations in sketches are often the source of problems as well. You may have inadvertently added a perpendicular or parallel relationship where it is in conflict with something else. If you really can't figure out what you did, send me the .sldprt file at dabbott@smccme.edu and I'll take a quick look at it.
It is specified on the print as 4X 2 X 45(deg). 45 is the standard angle for a chamfer unless specified otherwise. I think it should be specified even when 45 degrees, but if not specified you can assume 45, since if it had been a different angle you'd need more information than just one chamfer distance, since it would differ for each leg of the resulting triangle.
This question is very weird.. I've made it over 10 times today and gotten not totally different answers but off by let's say 200 g to 400 g to 20 g to 30g it's really annoying.
You shouldn't be getting much variation. Check to see that ALL of your sketches are fully-defined for each attempt. If any are under-defined, fix them and check the results. If you can't figure out what's going wrong, send me a couple of the files with different results and I'd be happy to look at them for you.
the mass thing dude , it never comes in 14k range , the figure is always fully defined , alloy steel is selected properly , the object is made exactly the same but the mass is never the same . helpppp
Well, that depends on how prepared people are going into the exam. This is certainly not meant to be the only preparation one does for taking it, but it's been helpful to many people who have passed it. But you are correct that you also need to have used the software seriously for a while. I've had a few students pass the CSWP after a one semester class and an additional semester of application.
New generation of solidwork learner here, awesome video! Just getting into solid works and this video is tremendous, thank you!!!
Glad it was helpful. Thanks for the kind words.
Thank you for taking the time to make this video! Its over six years old, but still very relevant and extremely helpful. Please continue making great videos like this!
You are very welcome. I'm a little surprised to learn that it is over six years old, but you're right of course. I will make a new one if they ever change the practice exam, but there isn't much I'd change about this one.
Thank you. I made it for some training I was doing and posting it on here was the easiest way to get it to everyone in the company. I may add another about the drawing exam.
Fantastic! Watched this last night before bed, and with no further preperation got my CSWP done today. Appreciated, great video!
Glad it was helpful
Thank you so much sir! This seems to be one of the highest quality [free] videos for this exam.
I'm glad you found it helpful.
Thank you for your simple explanation on design intent. I passed cswp segment 1.
You're welcome, and congratulations.
that's awesome!! I am taking all 3 segments of the CSWP. Segment 1 is definitely the most difficult.
I've received a number of questions from people who have not gotten the same mass as I did on this part. In all but one case the problem was the result of not fully defining all sketches. The alignment of a center mark is one common problem. Another is not noticing that once cylinder has a diameter that references variable X, the other references Y.
I consider it good practice to fully define every sketch in a part. Some users apply the same logic to parts in an assembly, but that requires locking parts that would be free to turn in an actual assembly. The concentric mate now has a locking option to make that easier.
Great video. I took the practice exam before watching and was surprised at how little I got done in 30 minutes (just the first three parts). The shortcuts you suggested will be key to a successful passing grade.
Glad you found it useful.
Wayne ,
Thank you for your comments. I'm glad you found the video helpful. I do not know how close the precision must be in the answers on the exam. I don't think you could be making an error of any significance to get the answer you got, so I would assume that your answer would be considered correct. But I don't work for SolidWorks and I don't know how they manage their exams.
My only mistake was extruding that thin feature from the top and not the bottom. It was driving me insane, luckily your video helped me catch it!
Glad it helped.
At 7:58 you change the setting on the "FROM" box. I've used SW for over 20 years, I've never really noticed/changed that setting ever.
I simply change the Extrude setting in the "END CONDITION" box from "Blind" to "Offset from" and click on the bottom surface then enter 35mm for distance. I think this is the way most SW users would do it. We frequently change end condition: blind, up to surface, offset surface, midplane,...etc.
However, your method is good to know, because I may come across an SW file created by someone else and need to edit.
I use both often, and they are helpful in different situations.
Very good exercise and very well presented! thank you very much, I learned a lot.
Glad it was helpful.
Maybe you've figured this out, but when you extruded the round, starting @ 100mm, you click on the dim itself. This allows you to change the dim. If you click on the leader, or arrow, the the properties window opens. If you right click the leader or arrow, then you can link your variable.
Javier,
Thank you. Someone else commented several years ago that de-selecting the Instant 3D button also helps with this. I may redo this video with the current release at some point, but your comment caused me to watch it for the first time in a while and I think it is still useful even though there are some things I would do differently now. I do appreciate your suggestion though.
This is great! thank you Daniel! are there videos for CSWP section 2/3 and 3/3?
You are welcome. I did not make any videos for the next two sections because there are no practice exams for assemblies. I might do a couple in the future, so check back.
thanks for putting it together with audio... other TH-camrs simply don't include narration while building the part. At the 8:02 timestamp, your point about building up the boss (60mmx60mm) for the counterbore hole REALLY solved my frustration tonight. I was getting the wrong answer because what I was doing was extruding 10mm up from the top of the base (25mm height) to arrive at the 35mm instead of using what was on the print. So I get it now, duplicate EVERY dimension on the print as the gospel. With making the correction for that single feature, I arrived at the same answer as you without making any other sketch-feature changes.
Now as for taking the CSWA-FEA aka CSWA-S, a TH-camr the prerequisite for that is that you must have passed the CSWA. Is that correct?
My understanding is that you are required to take and pass the associate level exam before taking the professional exam. Not a bad warm-up, since the professional exam is definitely challenging. Glad the video was helpful.
Great video; appreciate alot of the good design intent, & practices that would help avoid errors, & are efficient. My concern at this point is it's great if they give you these multiple choice answers in the practice exam, but if that's not the case for the actually exam, it looks like you have to get everything perfect, & wouldn't get the time to correct things. It sounds like this would also have a domino effect on all the questions that follow, if you get the first wrong etc. Do you know if your answer is wrong do you have time to fix it, even if there are no multiple choices or do you just have to get it right the first time?
Rob,
Generally you will be given multiple choice answers on the first couple of questions regarding a particular part, and then you'll have to type in answers for the remainder. It is indeed possible to have a domino effect for part of the questions, but generally you'll have the reassurance of finding a correct answer among several when you first make a part or an assembly.
Thanks so much Dan for this
My pleasure!
Very well done video..! I appreciate that you took the time to explain things clearly and make comments from your personal experiences.
I am still having trouble getting the exact 'mass' for the part in question 4 and 5, as Q.4 mass was off only by a few grams, and Q.5 was off by more than 150grams. Any help would be appreciated, as I am trying to get the company I work for to help me pay to take both the CSWA and CSWP exams.
Thanks..!!!
Check to see if all of your sketches are fully defined. If not, fix them and check again. One common error is not locating the center of the arc part of the rib. If you want to send me your model at dabbott@smccME.edu, I'd be happy to take a look at it.
Hi Dan
Great SW prep video. It's helped a lot in getting me ready to do the exam and really appreciate you taking the time. I have a query though, when going through everything with a fine tooth comb, I'm finding some of my mass values to be a few 0.00 grams out i.e. answer for #2 is 16490.45 but I'm getting 16490.48. If I put that answer in for the actual exam will that be a fail?
Thanks
Wayne
Wayne Harrison
I put a general public comment on the TH-cam video page in response.
You did indeed. Sorry, I got interrupted by my kids and never got to finish the video but I had a copy of the PDF test questions. Thanks again for a great tutorial :)
great video Dan! much appreciated. id assume the solidworks certified associate exam is much less involved than this? and do you know if its possible to jump over that one and go right to the CSWP certification? thanks in advance for any response
MATT
You can take the Professional Exam without having taken the associates exam. The associates is less involved, particularly for the assemblies, and has more questions that are multiple choice, so you have more feedback (i.e. you can find an answer that matches your value. There is a practice exam for that too. I took the professional exam without taking the associates, but I give the associates to my students at the end of their first class, so I've taken it several times since. If you feel pretty confident, take the first part of the professional exam. If you don't pass that, you probably don't want to take the other two parts right away, and it may make sense to do the Associates exam instead.
Daniel Abbott Thanks for the response! i think i would pass both of them.... i followed along with this video and most things seemed to work out fine... i did not get the same final answer but thats neither here nor there. Do you see any benefit to having both? As far as I would think, having the professional cert would override the associate.... its not like i would list them both on my resume... or is that something you think would be a benefit?
Daniel Abbott also, you mention three different parts of the professional exam.... would you elaborate on this please? not sure what you are referring to with the "two other parts"
Hello Daniel,
The video instructionally is very well organized,
my question : I use SolidWorks 2016, for question 2 when i try to update the global variables, the values in the equations do not change. Is there an option that I have to change or have I missed to change a setting ?
The rebuild option does not work either.
The most likely problem is that you typed the variable name without typing an = sign. When you do that, the value of the variable is used for the dimension, but the dimension is not being driven by the variable. See if there is an epsilon sign in front of the dimension value (denoting an equation-driven dimension). If not, delete and then add the proper dimension by typing the = sign and then selecting the down arrow just below the dimension and then "global variables." Select the variable name directly or type it with quotation marks around it.
Daniel Abbott
I’ve been struck on this for a while,
I will try this and update you.
Thanks for the prompt reply.
If that doesn't do it, send me the file at dabbott@smccme.edu so I can check it out.
Sure Daniel.,
Thank you Daniel, the usage of = sign while dimensioning has helped to fix the issue.
I used a Logitech headset. Nothing particularly fancy. Sorry I didn't respond sooner, but I just checked this for the first time in a while.
i would save as new part after each question with question number, Part 1 Q1, Part 1 Q2 ect, to quickly go back and check
Always a good idea.
Dan,
Great video and very easy to follow along with. I am a new teacher at a vocational high school and I would like to use your video in my classroom. I would like to know if you are ok with me sharing your video with my students?
Thanks,
Isreal
Isreal,
Sorry I didn't see this earlier. You have my permission to use any of the videos I have posted in your classroom.
Thank You so much for making this video
My pleasure
You're very welcome.
When I did the practice test myself the first time I got a mass that was just a bit over (14215.something), I couldn't figure out what was wrong so I re-made the part (following the same process) and the mass is quite a bit under. I just re-made the part for the third time following how you did it and the part is still under mass (13717.26). The part is set as alloy steel w/ a density of .0077kg/cm^3, and I have no idea why the part is under mass. Can you think of any reason why this would be?
Send it to me at dan@danabbott.com and I'll take a look at it.
I got the right mass value for the Initial part (14207.34g), but when I change the equation to Second (15165.40g instead of 16490.45g) or third condition (14791.68g instead of 15100.47g) the answer deviate very vastly. I am using 2020 version. Any suggestions?
Send me the part at dabbott@smccme.edu and I'll take a look. It sounds like you may not have actually applied the global variables to some of your dimensions. That can happen if you type in the letter rather than selecting it from the list of global variables that is displayed when you enter the = sign. (You can also place quotes around the letter). When you do that, the value is used, but the dimension is not linked to the global variable. If there is no Epsilon symbol on the dimension, is it not equation driven.
@@DanAbbott-SMCC Hi Daniel, thank you for responding. My friend figured it out just like u suggested. I didn't link the dimensions properly and the fillet near hole wizard was in wrong size.
i am getting 13157.72 g for the first question. i followed the same procedure. i don't know where i committed the mistake. please help me
Check for under-defined sketches. If you have any, that is probably where your error is. If not, make sure you used only the dimensions given in the exam and don't add meaningless dimensions just to make the sketch fully defined. Relations in sketches are often the source of problems as well. You may have inadvertently added a perpendicular or parallel relationship where it is in conflict with something else. If you really can't figure out what you did, send me the .sldprt file at dabbott@smccme.edu and I'll take a quick look at it.
how do you know that the chamfer is 45 deg
It is specified on the print as 4X 2 X 45(deg). 45 is the standard angle for a chamfer unless specified otherwise. I think it should be specified even when 45 degrees, but if not specified you can assume 45, since if it had been a different angle you'd need more information than just one chamfer distance, since it would differ for each leg of the resulting triangle.
This question is very weird.. I've made it over 10 times today and gotten not totally different answers but off by let's say 200 g to 400 g to 20 g to 30g it's really annoying.
You shouldn't be getting much variation. Check to see that ALL of your sketches are fully-defined for each attempt. If any are under-defined, fix them and check the results. If you can't figure out what's going wrong, send me a couple of the files with different results and I'd be happy to look at them for you.
in part 1 i get 14207,34 grams but in part 2 i get 16151.18 grams 20:49 , i don't know where i committed the mistake, please help mee, :(
If you send me your part at dabbott@smccme.edu, I'll take a look at it when I get a chance.
the mass thing dude , it never comes in 14k range , the figure is always fully defined , alloy steel is selected properly , the object is made exactly the same but the mass is never the same . helpppp
Evil ANGELS
send me your model
dan@danabbott.com
Great video, but please do not feel you are ready for the exam after this or you will be greatly disappointed.
Well, that depends on how prepared people are going into the exam. This is certainly not meant to be the only preparation one does for taking it, but it's been helpful to many people who have passed it. But you are correct that you also need to have used the software seriously for a while. I've had a few students pass the CSWP after a one semester class and an additional semester of application.
This such easy part lol
Belatedly catching up on my TH-cam channel. I agree, it's pretty easy now that I've done it a few times!
You're very welcome.