3d connection - table 2d

[Shaba]

hello to all

I don't know the inventor world at all..
Since our future customer uses inventor we need to dialogue with his cad, inventor
for solids I do not think there will be problems: step or sat or x_t should pass
I think the problem will definitely concern threads.. (which will not be recognized)
we use for the 3d keycreator, which for what we do is not bad (there are gaps, but this is not the home.. )
the biggest problem will be the 2d tables
I thought I'd generate the harvests with autocad lt and pass them to inventor
What problems can there be according to you with this procedure?
you would also want to try to create the tables so that with a command, or a macro or procedure are reconnected to the 3d inventor
Is that something you think is feasible or I shot it big?
the alternative is (if the customer compels us to generate connected tables) buy an invetor license.. .

What do you think?
Tnx

 

[cacciatorino]

hello to all

I don't know the inventor world at all..
Since our future customer uses inventor we need to dialogue with his cad, inventor
for solids I do not think there will be problems: step or sat or x_t should pass
I think the problem will definitely concern threads.. (which will not be recognized)
we use for the 3d keycreator, which for what we do is not bad (there are gaps, but this is not the home.. )
the biggest problem will be the 2d tables
I thought I'd generate the harvests with autocad lt and pass them to inventor
What problems can there be according to you with this procedure?
you would also want to try to create the tables so that with a command, or a macro or procedure are reconnected to the 3d inventor
Is that something you think is feasible or I shot it big?
the alternative is (if the customer compels us to generate connected tables) buy an invetor license.. .

What do you think?
Tnx

you have to understand what level of integration asks your client. If you want the tables reassociated with the 3d (and therefore presumably you will also want other things) then you have no other way than using inventor from the beginning, so you know very well that the step/sat/parasolid does not transmit anything about the metadata, materials, bonds of assemblies, associates with the 2d.... naked and raw geometry, to be able to implement problems. On the limit, see if it's possible to rent, with some soft you can.

 

[Shaba]

you have to understand what level of integration asks your client. If you want the tables reassociated with the 3d (and therefore presumably you will also want other things) then you have no other way than using inventor from the beginning, so you know very well that the step/sat/parasolid does not transmit anything about the metadata, materials, bonds of assemblies, associates with the 2d.... naked and raw geometry, to be able to implement problems. On the limit, see if it's possible to rent, with some soft you can.

This is my boss. .
and if I modeled with solidworks that is parametric?
Is there a possibility that 3d models and 2d boards are recognized?

 

[stefanobruno]

This is my boss. .
and if I modeled with solidworks that is parametric?
Is there a possibility that 3d models and 2d boards are recognized?

If they ask you inventor, you have to use inventor.
If you use solidworks hoping that in some way the masses on the table will pretend to be an inventor, you have wronged everything.
every cad 3d is a closed world, much more in the passage to the table.

Bye.

 

[Shaba]

Well, the thing is, solidworks already got it.
if you could use that was a saving
talking to my boss we saw that there is also a light version of inventor
inventor lt
You think this might be suff?
What has less than the basic version?
Thank you.

 

[stefanobruno]

inventor lt

No, it's for individual details, no axioms.

 

[cacciatorino]

Well, the thing is, solidworks already got it.
if you could use that was a saving
talking to my boss we saw that there is also a light version of inventor
inventor lt
You think this might be suff?
What has less than the basic version?
Thank you.

If it comes to the first job you propose to him the patched step/dwg, if he is choked of people who understand how the modno turns I don't think they will be too taxable. if then the collaboration goes well and there are prospects of development, make the investment and buy inventor.

 

[Shaba]

Let me understand. .
( Forgive my ignorance)
if with inventor I have 10 particular singles I have therefore 10 files and of these generos the 10 masses in the table
then I pass these 10 details to the customer then he is able to use the individual details to build the axieme?
a particular with 2 welded plates can be done? or is this already a set?
for example in the future if the collaborative speech is consolidated can be that we take a license 2011 and a 2011 lt..
Thank you!

 

[Shaba]

If it comes to the first job you propose to him the patched step/dwg, if he is choked of people who understand how the modno turns I don't think they will be too taxable. if then the collaboration goes well and there are prospects of development, make the investment and buy inventor.

What you say is true, but to take the customer we are evaluating all the possibilities

 

[stefanobruno]

Let me understand. .
( Forgive my ignorance)
if with inventor I have 10 particular singles I have therefore 10 files and of these generos the 10 masses in the table
then I pass these 10 details to the customer then he is able to use the individual details to build the axieme?

Yes, but for what concerns your client's ability, it depends on him.
you can do but I doubt that the customer accepts the individual details and is willing to reassemble them and then make the table of the total.

a particular with 2 welded plates can be done? or is this already a set?

I'm afraid so, but I'm not sure.

for example in the future if the collaborative speech is consolidated can be that we take a license 2011 and a 2011 lt..

now exists rel 2014 and you can not have 2011

 

[cacciatorino]

now exists rel 2014 and you can not have 2011

could buy the license 2014 and install the cad 2011, usually the valid controls of the license allow this mode.

 

[Shaba]

could buy the license 2014 and install the cad 2011, usually the valid controls of the license allow this mode.

I think so..
I contacted a couple of retailers see they say

 

[stefanobruno]

could buy the license 2014 and install the cad 2011, usually the valid controls of the license allow this mode.

with inventor buy the last rel. released.
if you have the subscription you are entitled to mount 3 previous rel., using it clearly only once.
I don't know if anyone who enters subscriptions for the first time with 2014 can actually take advantage of this option having not been the owner of previous rel.
as already said several times, there is no retrocompatibility for part 3d while the 2d of autocad 2014 allows, as always, to save as previous version.