improved or solid edge

[stefanobruno]

the opening of a group in a difficult way on different positions is the result of poor planning.
I use inventor from a life and, in the past, I had great problems of that kind, until it is said enough, it is necessary to arrange things, it was heavy, but now I row everything smoothly.
I do not know how much other systems are tolerant in this, I think they are all more or less in the same conditions, if you work disorderly, it cannot be the cad that satisfies this.
As for switching from sw to sw, I was invited to help at least three companies move from sw to inv, so the trend is quite varied.
not having accepted the commitment, since there are those who do courses their job, I can not say how it was the passage.

 

[JohnVa]

Good day, I was looking in the web reviews about the cad inventor and I am encapsulated in the forum reading. not within the various discussions but as read by a previous I agree that most cases are given by the incorrect setting of groups as well as in the assemblies.
I started in the 80s with the first cad and there was only very expensive and Moroccan cai... then spent with other colleague in autocad (2d ) and then again with proengineering (today I create) at the time though also Moroccan much more manageable than catia.
in 95 with another company the choice between solidworks or solid edge, and for economic issues supported on itself. I remember that only a few years after the dassault systems made a gigantic promotion in the area of the high Vicenza with sw spying on the growth of the competitors cad. oovviously we technicians were practically obliged by companies to such choices and so the strong demand for users in sw.
Only then between the various crashes and bugs between these two predominant brands emerges autodesk with inventor that logically could not fit negatively into a market niche already well exploited and do worse.
summarily I think that today's cads resemble a little everyone in one way or less in the other, currently we use both sw2020 and st10 and at least among us technicians we can confirm that the table is a lot leaner and faster in st10.
The choice now dictated by the company with inventor for us is subjective but it always depends on my modest opinion, on the use of the work that goes on. a cordial greeting to all -

 

[Mario SJPD]

Good morning.
with a friend we are considering opening a design studio,

is it better inventor or solid edge?

I think you ask the wrong question.
If you want to open a technical office you must be able to use as many programs as possible, the purchase of a license in my own way to see and not recommendable you can rent it in the version you need when and for the time you need and clear that the rental costs more than the purchase in absolute terms but allows you to cope better with the demands of your possible customers.

 

[stefanobruno]

It's better what your future client asks if you already know who it might be.
Although, when comau asked me to buy computervision to continue working for them, I greeted them warmly.
Afterwards, my inventor-made projects went well.

 

[stevie]

It's better what your future client asks if you already know who it might be.
Although, when comau asked me to buy computervision to continue working for them, I greeted them warmly.
Afterwards, my inventor-made projects went well.

if I have 10 clients with 10 different software what do I do?

 

[PIETRO2002]

if I have 10 clients with 10 different software what do I do?

change jobs!

 

[stevie]

I found a very interesting video on the comparison between different cads, such as if, swx, alibre and zw3d...

to sum up at levels of realization times if and alibre are equal, swx remains very spaced (for the joy of all those who judge him superior) , great surprise for zw3d that emerges a few seconds less than the first two.
Obviously these comparisons always leave the time they find, but a certain macchinosity in the swx sketching appears obvious.

 

[stevie]

change jobs!

What's the answer?

 

[PIETRO2002]

What's the answer?

I responded provocatively to a provocative question!

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I found a very interesting video on the comparison between different cads, such as if, swx, alibre and zw3d...

to sum up at levels of realization times if and alibre are equal, swx remains very spaced (for the joy of all those who judge him superior) , great surprise for zw3d that emerges a few seconds less than the first two.
Obviously these comparisons always leave the time they find, but a certain macchinosity in the swx sketching appears obvious.

I don't want to break spears in favor of swx, even because I don't know the modeling with other software, but the machinacy of the use of the sketch is due to the use it does in the video that I don't know if it is wanted or not.
to say a macroscopic pair:
-the mirror, with a single line of construction you do it by selecting everything and launching the mirror command; automatically the construction line will be used as a mirroring axis and should not be selected back. by the way the sezection with the lazo instead of the rectangle is very dispersive and it is seen in the video.
- selecting with ctrl a multiple entity is automatically proposed a list of reports and then launch the relationship command and select entities is a useless step.
I do not say that the gap of 1 minute is zero, but it would be considerably less; Moreover not knowing other software, which maybe automatically give the constraints when selecting two entities, maybe the video is set to show with the same steps the modeling time.

 

[Stan9411]

if I have 10 clients with 10 different software what do I do?

please what makes you invoice more!

apart from jokes, it is rare that you create so much variety of software. . even to want to count, those that the majority use will be 5/6... if you then work as a supplier in the supply chain of a very specific sector, usually the leading company of that sector does the standard and competition adjusts a bit because you think the tool makes the difference, a little because so when you happen to him some model duly not covered by corporate secret, if you can look at it and turn as you want.. the consequence is that your customers' park falls to 1/2..

Clearly it's not always worth it, but I don't even think I'm saying shit. .

 

[Stefano5]

I started in 99 with two licenses, a se v7 and a proe 2000i. after a year I abandoned proes (too expensive to adapt the license to the packages of each individual customer) and since then I work continuously with it. Of course the secret is to filter into the area the possible customers who use if, then I happen to work for customers with different software, but this only happens if you can give a high added value with your project. the advice is to do a prior investigation on which software use your potential customers, then, before proposing, learn to use decently the chosen software.

 

[stevie]

I don't want to break spears in favor of swx, even because I don't know the modeling with other software, but the machinacy of the use of the sketch is due to the use it does in the video that I don't know if it is wanted or not.
to say a macroscopic pair:
-the mirror, with a single line of construction you do it by selecting everything and launching the mirror command; automatically the construction line will be used as a mirroring axis and should not be selected back. by the way the sezection with the lazo instead of the rectangle is very dispersive and it is seen in the video.
- selecting with ctrl a multiple entity is automatically proposed a list of reports and then launch the relationship command and select entities is a useless step.
I do not say that the gap of 1 minute is zero, but it would be considerably less; Moreover not knowing other software, which maybe automatically give the constraints when selecting two entities, maybe the video is set to show with the same steps the modeling time.

I don't know solidworks so well to say if the author has "barato". I know enough solid edge, while alibre and zw3d for nothing.
I don't think the author wanted to fake the results in one way or another, from what I understood is a video of a Brazilian university.

I would be curious to see "sacred monsters" as a cat and nx modeling such a solid, I think it would be funny...

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I don't know solidworks so well to say if the author has "barato". I know enough solid edge, while alibre and zw3d for nothing.
I don't think the author wanted to fake the results in one way or another, from what I understood is a video of a Brazilian university.

be careful that I am not saying absolutely that the result is false specially.
as I have predicted I don't know the other software and I can't say if to put relationships between two points you the only possible way (in this you can help me); I say that however in swx it is not necessary to do all those steps and that, for example, by selecting a point and a line the average point relationship is proposed automatically without passing through the icon that the video shows.
in itself the same thing happens?
in if the mirror can be done by selecting all the sketch because it automatically recognizes what is the axis (of course there must be only one half-way line)?

 

[Stefano5]

I think these speed tests make no sense. I think I am skillful with solid edge, I can take a ride from who is more skilled than me, as the saying says: As pure as you feel, there comes always a purer that purges you. therefore the comparisons of speed between two different software is too influenced by the level of knowledge of each one, without considering that even the characteristics of the designer himself can be profoundly different, there are those of the speed of execution makes it a reason for existence, while instead there are those who prefer to have models perfectly organized and editable quickly in the future, at the expense of the rapidity of first execution. which of the two operating modes allows you to check lower times on the long path? (imho la seconda). even benchmarks made in companies where you use a certain software for decades, which after a couple of months of use of an alternative software you run a test and turns out that the previous one is faster....we are at the commies. in decades of use of solid edge at each course I always learn something I could have done faster. I repeat, these speed benchmarks on the implementation of a component, in my opinion do not make sense. the difference between the suitability to your product (also this can make the difference) of a software compared to another, you could see at the end of the complete cycle of design and production of two equivalent projects (6 months/1 year), comparison that obviously should be carried out to equal weapons, between two designers with the same years of experience on the software analyzed and with the same design ability ( easier to make a tern to the lot), not on the speed of execution of a component.

 

[stefanobruno]

I've already written it, but I'll do it again.
year '85 about, I am in michelin with my two current members, the company thinks to buy a cad and takes my younger partner, to the tecnigraph, and an expert of autocad of the epoch.
ready, go, draw something, methodist with the chronometer to the hand.
at the end of the test wins, at low hands, my partner Amanuense.
result, the Italian michelin still spends at least 5 years without cad.
then, a quick designer, by hand, did about 100 boards a0 / a1 per year (they also counted that to give you increases, thinks that phenomena ), today you do 100 and more per month.
there will always be someone who says that with that sw you do first and better, typically it is just what he is using, even it was rhino against inventor (the only two I know and use, each for a different purpose ).

 

[Stefano5]

quoto!
relaunch telling me that I have worked for a company in the medical sector, with a type of product strongly customised to customer requests. the final products are similar to each other, but each time they are new projects, a stuff from several hundred components to prevalence plated. in ut the statistics of the amount of tables generated by each individual designer are kept. in the period in which I collaborated the sceptre is touched to a designer who in the year held an average of 23 tables/day.
the software used is solid edge.
then to make a single table starting from zero, surely with the tecnigraph you do first;-)
without considering that having the internal laser cut, the dxf of the developed are free.

 

[stefanobruno]

from us was drawing at the table, minimum size 10 x 10 cm, the French Micragnosa school imperava.
we had two people to control the drawings, if possible they made you draw the washer only for 1/4, putting on the two axes the symbol ==.
in this climate, to reach the 100 tables/year, someone made the washers in scale 20:1, reaching the magical threshold of the format a1.
It looks like a movie, we just missed it.
to no, there was also him, totò randisi, you saw him 4 days a year, in time to interrupt the mutual and return.
in one of those 4 days, he was punished by the great bibendum, the stool of his tecnigraph, not being accustomed to having a weight to endure, broke, and a tearing cry reached the other 195 ears of the other technicians ( tarro was deaf by an ear), I still hear it now: " for the Madonna! " paapunfetè.
six months of earned mutuals.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

It's better what your future client asks if you already know who it might be.
Although, when comau asked me to buy computervision to continue working for them, I greeted them warmly.
Afterwards, my inventor-made projects went well.

Is there a 20-year-old plus a few more cads (beyond cads5 ) in half or wrong?
However, employees who can decide their own cad are increasingly reduced...

 

[ceschi1959]

The comparison leaves the time he finds but...

I would be curious to see "sacred monsters" as a cat and nx modeling such a solid, I think it would be funny...

I mean? How much do you think a nx user would put on that piece?

call to jokes here are touching very interesting aspects and that are related to another discussion
the sense of taking a high-end cad
(https://www.cad3d.it/forum1/threads/ma-ad-oggi-qualè-il-senso-di-prendere-un-cad-3d-di-fascia-alta.59109/#post-465354).
I got to help an acquaintance in the very difficult passage from sw to nx, in reproposing the same working methods this person has become crazy to do even the simplest things.
in my company, fortunately, I don't break my head to draw out some outline models where just an indication or a footprint to have all the necessary info. in other companies, however, it seems that these are the most important things.
two examples for which I ask how they would be made with software like inventor, sw or if and are:
The spring and the label. to make them I used methodologies-features that maybe there are also in other software but that, perhaps, the average user does not even know that they exist, while they are daily bread for those who use my software.
I mean, it's very interesting to see how other people work with other software and maybe one says, "looks a little interesting about the method that used such!"