part management - layers

[The_Matrix]

explain to me why the most ostico then

Hi, pat.
without entering the merit "better ug, better pro/e", I try to explain. . .
the mode of operation of ug, especially in the assembly environment, is very performing and "free".
some special features:
1) nug has double display (exact math and faceted) which is kept automatically.
this makes the performance of loading, handling graphics etc higher, thanks to the levels of detail, streaming etc.
2) the components can be substantiated or even "free".
3) I can easily do "drag & drop" of components from one sub-assembly to another (regardless of interpart link)
4) possibility to charge the assembly only as structure, navigate it and open a component data and the neighboring ones (through proximity)
5) real time sections on the tile, with automatic extraction of the real curves
6) automatic mount/dismount of components (manual or automatic... the automatic one has as a kineo engine, the only one that has adequate performance in case of complex "extracts")
7) component envelope that allows you to freely move a component and have the movement's footprint (without motion, of course)
... there are others, but I'll show you if you come to my side once... So let's finally get an aperitif.

in general, what amazes of ug in the assembly (if you know how to use it...) is the freedom that allows you and the performances.

I do not say that pro/e or cat or swx etc are ca.cche, in the most absolute way, but, on the assembly management, nug brings together the best of all.

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Hi, pat.
without entering the merit "better ug, better pro/e", I try to explain. . .
the mode of operation of ug, especially in the assembly environment, is very performing and "free".
some special features:
1) nug has double display (exact math and faceted) which is kept automatically.
this makes the performance of loading, handling graphics etc higher, thanks to the levels of detail, streaming etc.
2) the components can be substantiated or even "free".
3) I can easily do "drag & drop" of components from one sub-assembly to another (regardless of interpart link)
4) possibility to charge the assembly only as structure, navigate it and open a component data and the neighboring ones (through proximity)
5) real time sections on the tile, with automatic extraction of the real curves
6) automatic mount/dismount of components (manual or automatic... the automatic one has as a kineo engine, the only one that has adequate performance in case of complex "extracts")
7) component envelope that allows you to freely move a component and have the movement's footprint (without motion, of course)
... there are others, but I'll show you if you come to my side once... So let's finally get an aperitif.

in general, what amazes of ug in the assembly (if you know how to use it...) is the freedom that allows you and the performances.

I do not say that pro/e or cat or swx etc are ca.cche, in the most absolute way, but, on the assembly management, nug brings together the best of all.

hi beppe!

ok this is already a little more weighted and detailed answer on which there could be thousands of ideas to talk, now putroppo I don't have time to do it, but I tell you only that many of these things mentioned have integrated them also proe, perhaps it is only so many years that you do not see it, in any case it would be really nice to be able to find yourself to confront each other and take myself I am blessed aperitif.
the weather unfortunately is tyrant...:frown:

 

[stef_design]

I got to see nx in assembly context at the presentation of the 7.5 made by team3d (made very much Well).
(I come from catia and proe).
the only interesting thing I could see is the ability to select the entities to load based on different factors (weight files, parts of the axieme, n.componeti, etc.).
for the rest, all the novelties proposed by the 7.5 (in assembly) I also found in catia from r15 (so about 5/6 years ago).
for the issue of opening "fast" of the large assemblies I think that it is ahead to everyone for lightness and speed.

 

[Utente NX]

I don't understand why you have to keep active (repeat: or use reference set "model" or hide/show) the 498 parts if you only have to bind part 499 with the 500....

see....for simple tasks, such as verification, mating, design, you are always wasting time to activate/disable layers and display/hide components.
on a 4 click real task, you have to do it or double or triple to understand something.
in a design day...you lost hours for operations that do not concern design.
this also applies to the use of reference sets.
I give you advice... expand your knowledge about what other cad...also considered mid-range and you will realize that innovation is not at home.

 

[matfio]

see....for simple tasks, such as verification, mating, design, you are always wasting time to activate/disable layers and display/hide components.
on a 4 click real task, you have to do it or double or triple to understand something.
in a design day...you lost hours for operations that do not concern design.
this also applies to the use of reference sets.
I give you advice... expand your knowledge about what other cad...also considered mid-range and you will realize that innovation is not at home.

Why do you use nx?

 

[stef_design]

Why do you use nx?

I answer you...probably because the company uses nx is therefore the designer or the new hire must use nx.
It is not that the cad is like the morosa you can choose it:tongue:

 

[matfio]

Let's go back to the layers. una Of the Resolving validation to keep things in order, that you use nx or other cad.

 

[ceschi1959]

I answer you...probably because the company uses nx is therefore the designer or the new hire must use nx.
It is not that the cad is like the morosa you can choose it:tongue:

not being in a company I chose the cad as the morosa, at those times I saw them all, what better adapted to my needs was, and remains, no.
but in a company why was that kind of cad chosen?

 

[stef_design]

but in a company why was that kind of cad chosen?

I think the question is very difficult to answer:
the choice so many times non is made according to the real potential of the cad but:
- Who's cheaper?
Who gives me the gift every Christmas?
- Who's running me for free?
- Who invites me to sit and take me out to eat fish?
- Who gives me forms?

often even the tests done in the company are piloted.

 

[matfio]

I think the question is very difficult to answer:
the choice so many times non is made according to the real potential of the cad but:
- Who's cheaper?
Who gives me the gift every Christmas?
- Who's running me for free?
- Who invites me to sit and take me out to eat fish?
- Who gives me forms?

often even the tests done in the company are piloted.

In fact, I think of a company that was evaluating the "fantastics 3" nx, catia, pro-e .... finally the answer was: beautiful nx ...... It does amazing things, it's our software..... price? .... mmmmm... ok we buy pro-e. so now they use pro-e..... :mixed:

 

[matfio]

not being in a company I chose the cad as the morosa, at those times I saw them all, what better adapted to my needs was, and remains, no.
but in a company why was that kind of cad chosen?

ho la stessa fortune

 

[stef_design]

ho la stessa fortune

Maybe you work for the same study... it would be a beautiful carrambata:biggrin::biggrin:

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

In fact, I think of a company that was evaluating the "fantastics 3" nx, catia, pro-e .... finally the answer was: beautiful nx ...... It does amazing things, it's our software..... price? .... mmmmm... ok we buy pro-e. so now they use pro-e..... :mixed:

very often the price is the main discriminant in choice, but many choose the cad also according to the demo that is proposed to him, therefore to the skill of the demonstrator more than to the quality of the sw and to the flank of the commercial close them, than to sell also some important detail. . .
all always very subjective, everyone throws water to his mill but there are many tricks around, who discredit and are based on metropolitan legends now passed by a nice piece. .

 

[matfio]

Maybe you work for the same study... it would be a beautiful carrambata:biggrin::biggrin:

we say for myself...:finger:

 

[The_Matrix]

I got to see nx in assembly context at the presentation of the 7.5 made by team3d (made very much Well).
(I come from catia and proe).
the only interesting thing I could see is the ability to select the entities to load based on different factors (weight files, parts of the axieme, n.componeti, etc.).
for the rest, all the novelties proposed by the 7.5 (in assembly) I also found in catia from r15 (so about 5/6 years ago).
for the issue of opening "fast" of the large assemblies I think that it is ahead to everyone for lightness and speed.

I didn't say that ug does unique things. . .
I said he's all doing a lot of things that others do.

 

[ceschi1959]

I think the question is very difficult to answer:
the choice many times is not made according to the real potential of the cad but:
- Who's cheaper?
Who gives me the gift every Christmas?
- Who's running me for free?
- Who invites me to sit and take me out to eat fish?
- Who gives me forms?

often even the tests done in the company are piloted.

These are things I know, my question was 'provoking'.
I add to your sequence the suppliers forced to use the customer system, which wants native files.
the fact that often those who choose the cad do not understand 'na ma@a'.
I still add that often the price is seen 'in the short term' without considering the advantages or disadvantages productive to 'medium-long term'.
et cetera.

and then I wonder why some questions in the forum. Why don't you do it to the responsible? Why not ask who physically bought the cad?
This is also a provocative question of course.

Maybe you work for the same study... it would be a beautiful carrambata:biggrin::biggrin:

we have the same bite (node locked though).:biggrin: