that 3d choose?

[The_Matrix]

That's interesting. Would you be a cad manager? so a kind of pdm to the ancient, with checkin/out, search codes, etc?

on which server does it turn? with solid edge also give something free, but that turns on sharepoint that I think is a soft of the paid ms.

It's not an ancient pdm... is teamcenter.
Exactly. ago:
- implicit and explicit check-in/out
- coding
- query
turn on oracle or ms-sql

 

[ShareMind]

I had responded about t-flex, exposing the perplexities I had when I tried it at the time, perplexity that had no response from the dealer who then represented here on cad3d t-flex.

as the hunter said you had (and you still have) the possibility to show how t-flex works and why it is not true, as I support, that for example the sketcher and the management of constraints is a delirium.
You have not intervened on the observations made on the images of that propeller. Why?

I'm not a member of any big family with my shirt logo! I use it for part of my work which is much more stimulating than to model an object on screen. I chose it more than ten years ago trying differently, and the fregual from modeling challenges has passed me for a while.
When I design something I think about what I'll have to do and not with which I fall, so please don't even try to put me in the category of retailers. . .
here the dealers who tried to play games to increase the visibility of their products at the expense of users (read by taking them by the ass) in the past (and if it will also serve in the future) when it was necessary they took sounds read in the teeth and now travel to semolina :smile:

I see that you also use other cads which are treated on cad3d and used by many (rhino for example): Why don't you try to make your contribution to the community you signed up for by helping users who ask for help or advice on various procedures and working methods?

with regard to the sketcher, or any other thing about t-flex, I am very pleased if you are interested, and I have no problem organizing a remote microsession with teamviewer. I think it's the fastest way to get an idea, rather than write dozens of posts on a forum. You can write me a personal message and we can arrange this. My email address is pm@sharemind.eu.
the example of the propeller posted was intended to exemplify a case in which a 2d approach to a problem can be beneficial. I used a very dated example, as the goal was to discuss an approach, not a particular model. the comments and their tone you must have read them too.
I don't care much about this. as I repeat, if someone is interested in making an idea about the characteristics and positioning of a product, first examines it, then talks about it. when the opposite happens, there's something that doesn't work.

Yes, I know discreetly rhinoceros. I use it since 1993. I went to meet bob mcneel in honing in 1994. I was the first retailer to sell it in Italy. I translated for mcneel the first Italian version (3.0), including interface, manual and online help. My name is on the second page of the paper manual, if you own the 3.0. I also translated t-flex, sprutcam, visualmill, moi, aspire, deskproto, all products aist, simlab, protowizard, ventura publisher, some sofware of electronic microscopes and x-ray devices, various process control applications for olive groves, fiat, philips, samgroup, bosch, several cam and dncsel software for roland, charlyrobot Maybe I could also be useful to someone. I have not much time, but I have written some posts in other threads, in which I did not find, as in this, an equally hostile attitude. so I may continue to write to us. We'll see.

 

[ShareMind]

I could propose a scrap of a plant already made or if it's too much, I would take the filter previously placed to start.

send the model, and let's see what happens.

 

[re_solidworks]

with regard to the sketcher, or any other thing about t-flex, I am very pleased if you are interested, and I have no problem organizing a remote microsession with teamviewer. I think it's the fastest way to get an idea, rather than write dozens of posts on a forum. You can write me a personal message and we can arrange this. My email address is pm@sharemind.eu.
the example of the propeller posted was intended to exemplify a case in which a 2d approach to a problem can be beneficial. I used a very dated example, as the goal was to discuss an approach, not a particular model. the comments and their tone you must have read them too.
I don't care much about this. as I repeat, if someone is interested in making an idea about the characteristics and positioning of a product, first examines it, then talks about it. when the opposite happens, there's something that doesn't work.

I apologize, but I owe you a criticism. write dozens of posts steals time to all, but leaves a trace of a useful comparison to community.
Obviously if someone reads you and is interested in tflex contact you in pvt and you do your negotiation, but in this case there is an open discussion to all users and it would be useful to continue here the comparison between the various tools.
Don't you think it's a little sterile to continue the pvt discussion between you and the client? at this point instead of a forum we put an ad site. I find that your strategy is much more commercial than that of maxopus and I begin to understand why his intervention has so annoyed you....

 

[re_solidworks]

I could propose a scrap of a plant already made or if it's too much, I would take the filter previously placed to start.

claim to make it model under the eyes, so see the real timing of realization and the difficulties of the instrument.
If I model the filter I can tell you that I took 2 hours with extreme simplicity and maybe I put 20 by making the mortal jumps.
See to believe!

 

[cacciatorino]

Don't you think it's a little sterile to continue the pvt discussion between you and the client? at this point instead of a forum we put an ad site. I find that your strategy is much more commercial than that of maxopus and I begin to understand why his intervention has so annoyed you....

I agree... .

 

[The_Matrix]

Yes, I know discreetly rhinoceros. I use it since 1993. I went to meet bob mcneel in honing in 1994. I was the first retailer to sell it in Italy. I translated for mcneel the first Italian version (3.0), including interface, manual and online help. My name is on the second page of the paper manual, if you own the 3.0. I also translated t-flex, sprutcam, visualmill, moi, aspire, deskproto, all products aist, simlab, protowizard, ventura publisher, some sofware of electronic microscopes and x-ray devices, various process control applications for olive groves, fiat, philips, samgroup, bosch, several cam and dncsel software for roland, charlyrobot Maybe I could also be useful to someone. I have not much time, but I have written some posts in other threads, in which I did not find, as in this, an equally hostile attitude. so I may continue to write to us. We'll see.

You know, sharemind. .
here is the typical error of those who think they know everything (so? everything? .
I have been using cad since 1985.
But you know what I say when someone asks me for my experience?
... I modeled/designed anthropomorphic robot and portal... I supported the modeling of aircraft engines (ge90)... I modeled everything... from gearboxes, automatic machines, weapons, motor heads, to a base of a v12, to the burner of an industrial boiler, to the biellas, to the intake and exhaust collectors of the jtd 16v and 20v, to the intake bin of 3.2 v6 jts, to realize the first true and working parametric model of a car door... I managed the emgine bay layout of the 940... I won and lost (I saw that I made them...) all the major benchmarks of the last 15 years in the cad.
... the fact that to do this I learned and become master on autocad v2, cadam, catia v3, euclid3, megavision, euclid quantum, strim100, icem, pro/e, nx, division... It's part of my job, it's definitely not the main part. . I'm not #1 because I know cad, but because I know how a plm should be implemented in a manufacturing company.
If they ask me, along with other 4/5 in the world, the future of nx is not because I know/know how to use 10 cad... it is because they are how to use and know what companies allegedly will need in the years to come.

here is the error (of course iho): I am like marcofNot like you and Luini... (and I say... thankfully)

When he "collaborated" with ptc I was in ptc... vabbé... go... let alone... It is no coincidence that those professional figures no longer exist... replaced by those who really know how solutions apply to companies.

Come on. from today we will all have more "paura" of t-flex, seen your resume... :finger:

 

[cacciatorino]

It's not an ancient pdm... is teamcenter.

I apologize if I misunderstood, with "old" I meant a pdm that only does cad manager, before these tools evolved towards plm/erp structures.

 

[marcof]

with regard to the sketcher, or any other thing about t-flex, I am very pleased if you are interested, and I have no problem organizing a remote microsession with teamviewer. I think it's the fastest way to get an idea, rather than write dozens of posts on a forum. You can write me a personal message and we can arrange this.

They have already answered you about this, but I also want to point out that proposing private contacts in a public forum, where you should share/change experiences and knowledge, for more gratia and love of, is precisely the antithesis of the purpose of these forums.

 

[Enzolog]

:biggrin:

claim to make it model under the eyes, so see the real timing of realization and the difficulties of the instrument.
If I model the filter I can tell you that I took 2 hours with extreme simplicity and maybe I put 20 by making the mortal jumps.
See to believe!

I was hoping for a video even a few minutes:redface:
The place is still unknown.
I apologize in advance for the file rough:biggrin:

 

[re_solidworks]

:biggrin:

I was hoping for a video even a few minutes:redface:
The place is still unknown.
I apologize in advance for the file rough:biggrin:

especially what would you like to see about that filter? You want to see how to shape it? It would take a few hours and a video like that would weigh a lot, I don't think you can upload it to the site.

 

[RS4]

:biggrin:

I was hoping for a video even a few minutes:redface:
The place is still unknown.
I apologize in advance for the file rough:biggrin:

Good day to all

I've been following you for a few days

In my opinion we are talking about bending and development of hoppers and various cuts with pro\e go of luxury and not only can you make us much but much more than you do not even imagine. .

pro\e is the top and head of the parametric, you just need to see and inform you about the costs of sheet metal licenses

comparison cad proe = catia= nx

the others are in the tail having the same price of pro\e

in a few words quality price pro\e according to me is great

I have been using catia for 7 years but I have also used pro/e before and I have always equated them as software of the same caliber... the difference where it is!!!! in the price that catia costs more because used by the big aerospace and automotive

greetings

♪

 

[Enzolog]

especially what would you like to see about that filter? You want to see how to shape it? It would take a few hours and a video like that would weigh a lot, I don't think you can upload it to the site.

This was my modeling in autocad, I do it to verify any interference but it is crazy, as I would work on the contrary unfortunately.
What I'd like to see is the dxf extraction after modeling.
ie I create the various pieces (you know how to model them with all the software except pro-e but I don't think it would be a problem for me), I create the assembly, then I go into the tree, I select the single part and I can say "stirami the piece in plan" and export the dxf with the bending data?
I'm the one who saves the files in a folder or should I encode them to make the program recognize it so that I can order the files automatically?
I'd love to see all this.

 

[tartufon80]

really regarding t-flex sales you're doing everything yourself... without knowing neither who, nor how many I sell.
more than I, it seems to be you to take it, perhaps because the market runs away from you. Things change. once microsystem sold toptron with 120 employees. Now he's almost gone. I used to lecture polytechnic on pro-e with professor claudio luini, maybe when you and maxopus had short pants. but I always thought that the products alternate, and emerge with better price-performance ratio or new qualities.
and what I care about are the opinions that express my customers during demonstrations, rather than your affectionate considerations.

I don't contact anyone in pvt because I'm not here for this reason. I do not consider, as someone said, places like this as occasions of fare marketing. I do not even do so in the forum of my site, in which if anything I limit myself to suggest the cheapest products that can solve a problem. the attitude that is found here, and that qualifies people like you and those who adopt it, is that to anyone - any need express - are suggested, often by moderators who should express the utmost impartiality, the products with which they work with the same ease with which all others are denigrated. no interest in emerging or alternative solutions - trouble in trouble They obviously draw something. economic advantages? power of knowledge? little changes.
but I think they can understand it well. so, if you want to continue to join you towards anyone expressing voices other than yours, go ahead. All good advertising you do.

Bye!

premise: I've just started doing interventions in the forum, while following it for about two years. I have no prejudice to anyone, much less to yours (even because I do not know you).

Mine doesn't want to be a defense, but only a point of view.

I use pro/e now, and since I follow the forum I have solved so many problems and I have clarified many doubts, thanks to people who patiently decide to give a free hand. I received these aid from those who expressly sell the product in question (see ozzy), but also by those who are a simple user of this software, including maxopus. I don't know him, but I think his investing in this product and his passion for the work he does leads him to emphasize its qualities (which I think there are still); I tell you this because it happens to me among colleagues. and the point is precisely this: here you are among people who do the same job, and it is normal that if I ask someone advice on a software rather than on another everyone will tell me about the program that you use and know about dead life and miracles (mostly if you also have terms of comparison).

I agree with you when you say that the market evolves, and time will tell in the future whether pro/e will be destined to perish.
I only say that there are few discussions I have read, in which maxopus does not participate actively and successfully.

Maybe you took too much!


greetings and good work!

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

This was my modeling in autocad, I do it to verify any interference but it is crazy, as I would work on the contrary unfortunately.
What I'd like to see is the dxf extraction after modeling.
ie I create the various pieces (you know how to model them with all the software except pro-e but I don't think it would be a problem for me), I create the assembly, then I go into the tree, I select the single part and I can say "stirami the piece in plan" and export the dxf with the bending data?
I'm the one who saves the files in a folder or should I encode them to make the program recognize it so that I can order the files automatically?
I'd love to see all this.

Enzo,
Perhaps it is not clear to you but you had already been told, I try to answer you, the procedure is this:
1-model pieces in 3d (with any cad of those mentioned)
2-Do the assembly verify everything you want, interference, weights, bars, etc., etc.
3-Make the 3d model construction boards and assembly assemblies, I want to remind you that this phase is automatic, in the sense that the table is a mirror of your model or together 3d, so it is only a matter to put a parent view and on this to generate your clearly automatic projections you must not draw anything.
quoti and details the automatic,hexaemia or manual manner depending on the sw.
4-to this point if the customer needs to carry the table in the following formats: dxf,dwg,pdf,tiff,hpgl, as you wish. .

ps: point 2-3 can also be reversed, you can develop the tables at the same time if you want.

I hope I've been clear.


for the demo.. As King told you, it is clear that to model that filter it takes a moment, you do not do just in 5 minutes, but as far as I understand, if you use a more or less corporate demo of any of the cad citati would already well enough to make you understand the process.
greetings

 

[Enzolog]

Enzo,
Perhaps it is not clear to you but you had already been told, I try to answer you, the procedure is this:
1-model pieces in 3d (with any cad of those mentioned)
2-Do the assembly verify everything you want, interference, weights, bars, etc., etc.
3-Make the 3d model construction boards and assembly assemblies, I want to remind you that this phase is automatic, in the sense that the table is a mirror of your model or together 3d, so it is only a matter to put a parent view and on this to generate your clearly automatic projections you must not draw anything.
quoti and details the automatic,hexaemia or manual manner depending on the sw.
4-to this point if the customer needs to carry the table in the following formats: dxf,dwg,pdf,tiff,hpgl, as you wish. .

ps: point 2-3 can also be reversed, you can develop the tables at the same time if you want.

I hope I've been clear.


for the demo.. As King told you, it is clear that to model that filter it takes a moment, you do not do just in 5 minutes, but as far as I understand, if you use a more or less corporate demo of any of the cad citati would already well enough to make you understand the process.
greetings

Hello, Ozzy, excuse me if I'm making you repeat twice the procedure but I want to tell you this:
points 1-2-3 are not a problem, I had already understood them before,
While on point 4 you misunderstood, as I know very well that a table you can export it in various formats, including the dxf, but as we design and build, I need the dxf of the single piece cleaned from quotas, written, double entities, already ready for the laser cut that we ourselves do, I don't know if I was clear.
If you want, I can post the three-dimensional dwg if it can be converted.

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Hello, Ozzy, excuse me if I'm making you repeat twice the procedure but I want to tell you this:
points 1-2-3 are not a problem, I had already understood them before,
While on point 4 you misunderstood, as I know very well that a table you can export it in various formats, including the dxf, but as we design and build, I need the dxf of the single piece cleaned from quotas, written, double entities, already ready for the laser cut that we ourselves do, I don't know if I was clear.
If you want, I can post the three-dimensional dwg if it can be converted.

but it is not all clear, the process is the same does not change a patch as they say in these parts.
as you have the single piece quoted with all notes, you can also have it without anything by simply using templates or inserting it in a second sheet, procedures there is a tide to automate everything.

at the end it is always an export but to use an autocaddiano language to layers off..

 

[Enzolog]

but it is not all clear, the process is the same does not change a patch as they say in these parts.
as you have the single piece quoted with all notes, you can also have it without anything by simply using templates or inserting it in a second sheet, procedures there is a tide to automate everything.

at the end it is always an export but to use an autocaddiano language to layers off..

I don't care. I thought you were messing around.
I'm getting more and more 'the mechanism anyway, even because my problem is not modeling (certainly with autocad is Moroccan to say little), but the tide of pieces that I have to manage which now literally make me sweat. . .
I imagine that for that plant, so much to begin, I needed 4 filters so but of different dimensions (i.e., a piece equal to between the 4 not even legs; ), 2 silos of storage, a tide of hoppers, a tide of piping (suction and transport), fans, spietrators, bilances, coclee, conveyor belts, support structure to 3 floors.. .
I mean, that filter is gonna be a minimum 20th of the whole job.

 

[The_Matrix]

but it is not all clear, the process is the same does not change a patch as they say in these parts.
as you have the single piece quoted with all notes, you can also have it without anything by simply using templates or inserting it in a second sheet, procedures there is a tide to automate everything.

at the end it is always an export but to use an autocaddiano language to layers off..

Here... if one puts a pdm could make the dxf be generated at the time of release.
if there is no pdm, you might think of some "batch" tool (nx, for example, can generate dxfs automatically, if these are deposited in a directory)

 

[The_Matrix]

I don't care. I thought you were messing around.
I'm getting more and more 'the mechanism anyway, even because my problem is not modeling (certainly with autocad is Moroccan to say little), but the tide of pieces that I have to manage which now literally make me sweat. . .
I imagine that for that plant, so much to begin, I needed 4 filters so but of different dimensions (i.e., a piece equal to between the 4 not even legs; ), 2 silos of storage, a tide of hoppers, a tide of piping (suction and transport), fans, spietrators, bilances, coclee, conveyor belts, support structure to 3 floors.. .
I mean, that filter is gonna be a minimum 20th of the whole job.

with "modern" cad systems a convenient approach is to use the multi-body approach.
nx and swx can do it.