solid edge, doubts about the definition cad 3d...

[frpaolini]

1- someone tried to import axious steps, parasolids or any other kind in themselves st?
Well, it doesn't work, it breaks the axieme and creates copies of random parts.
the same file imported in se19 is good (you can not say perfect as the surfaces do not digest this "3d"). but be quiet that despite this solid edge assistance will do anything to convince you that the problem is the cad with which you created the hybrid...

2- can you define 3d a "cad" where to perform a series of transverse holes on a round profile at a certain angle step for a certain linear step you have to resort to excel and build the table manually setting the curve formulas?

other thing... in 2010 it seems obsolete to create macros in .bas, anything else and very limited compared to other cads where it is already understood vba, besides if you save the .bas file in a folder (or related higher folders) containing a space in the name, or if you save in a network folder the macro does not work! but no one explains why, no explanatory message! At least this happens to me, but I think it's his problem.

every day it is really a struggle to fight and tick it up with this tool of slowing so effective.... users of if you do not take it bad but it is really a shameful program. I had heard enough talk and hoped it was different from solid works and inventor. I must note that it is worse or cmq not better in so many things.

and there are also some thread-solid edges? Strange, really strange, unless you only make sheets (the only real strong part of the program)!

 

[cacciatorino]

I don't have such a bad opinion of this cad, maybe I have lower needs than yours but in principle I'm satisfied with it.

It seems to me that the problems you tell (other than importing iges) are common to all products in the same market. If you have more push needs maybe you should switch to top-end products like pro/e, catia, ug.

 

[Be_on_edge]

I would be tempted to erase this post. but the more I read it and the more evident how you seek a polemic by affirming totally false things.

I leave the post, if nothing else for the bad figure that the user such paolini does.

Hi.

 

[Tequila]

if it has gaps, but like all cad evolves and improves, sometimes it takes more time than others sometimes not. I have already in the past widely criticized siemens for many choices and demands of improvements ever implemented, but from the latest releases they introduced them. you are free to use the cad you prefer but keep in mind a fundamental thing that between a cad and another modeling methods change and the things that on one do in one way, on the other can be different and essential to use it thoroughly the DIY is only to be able to pull 4 lines so to speak. If you really want to take advantage of a program you have to know it thoroughly and it takes courses.. .

I do not judge in swx ne inv because I have never used them. I saw swx and does the same things as if, but then on the deeper detail I didn't go so it's hard to judge a product if you don't know it well.

 

[Marco74]

It seems to me that it is a polemic, I do not think that if it is less than other cads of the same level, indeed for certain things it is quite superior.

 

[frpaolini]

hi, I'm sorry that my post has passed only for polemic, but I wanted to point out that other cads of the same band have definitely other problems but generally, for example they can read the parasolid models and step without problems, as well as the surfaces; have the possibility to draw a 3d curve without having to first draw other models or resort to Moroccan strategies.

 

[cacciatorino]

I don't know, I've been studying quite extensively on swx 2009 and I have to tell you that I found it quite lacunous compared to if.

on imports of neutral formats I usually work with very simple geometries and I almost never have problems. the serious problems I usually find them with the iges that come from catia, while several times I exchanged files with osd and pro/e without apparent problems.
I can't do this without the license for the most advanced modules.

If you're at first, I think you should insist a little, and you'll be rewarded because the program may not be as powerful as it works, but it's really highly productive at the end of the day, if you go see the drawings made.

Then for now, maybe you should let go of sync. that does not yet seem very mature for use in production, at least to feel who has been using it for a while. I'm sorry for you that you came into contact with if with the release st1, maybe one of the worst ever released.

 

[SOLID]

Why don't you show up first?

and there are also some thread-solid edges? Strange, really strange, unless you only make sheets (the only real strong part of the program)!

Sure as there are ironcad threads like you...

 

[Be_on_edge]

hi, I'm sorry that my post has passed only for polemic, but I wanted to point out that other cads of the same band have definitely other problems but generally, for example they can read the parasolid models and step without problems, as well as the surfaces; have the possibility to draw a 3d curve without having to first draw other models or resort to Moroccan strategies.

parasolid models that do not charge perfectly in themselves I still have to see, maybe post some.

I am very puzzled about your intentions. parasolid is developed directly by siemens, and the models on which it works if they are directly parasolids with the database of processing and other specific things. In fact to load a parasolid you do not pass through a real conversion but it is a reading of data and structuring in files.

regarding the step, never seen particular problems. also here I would like to see a file with such problems.

As for the 3d curve, could you describe a typical problem ? there are many of those commands to get that your simplification is too generic.

Hi.

 

[Focus]

actually with st 1 there is some problem importing parasolid models or step....

Hi.

 

[sampom]

I don't know, I've been studying pretty deep swx 2009 and I have to tell you that I found it quite lacunous than if..

Watch what you say.:biggrin:
No, I'm kidding. But I haven't seen you "in there", how did it go with that job? If you repeat, you could argue these "lacunes" to arrive at constructive comparisons that would help not little users (I personally do not care to support one or the other, all "equal" tools are. I use what I have)

actually with st 1 there is some problem importing parasolid models or step....
Hi.

But how? the beauty of the st was not to be in the management/editation of "generics"?

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[cacciatorino]

But I haven't seen you "in there", how did it go with that job?

The thing is still pending, it's going to start with the first job they're gonna ask me for the solidwrks files. for now nothing, I continue with my beloved corner-solid. :tongue:

 

[gerod]

I'm testing st2 and I have to say that, just on imports, it seems improved.
(only defect, for now, is that when you close the program the edge.exe file continues to turn and you have to kill it from the tm).
I didn't understand anything about the synchronous environment but I'm getting used to the ribbon bar!

returning to the controversy, I must say that I have used it for almost 10 years.
I don't think it's so bad.
If he was not born on the surfaces and I think what he does is discreetly acceptable.

I therefore invite the user who started this discussion to:
- to present itself because it is a good rule (at least we know who it is - if I put myself in my statements it is right that others know who it is the one who claims)
- to post concrete examples

I agree with beonedge on "not to close" the discussion but I would like the criticisms to be constructive and not destructive.
Thank you.

 

[Leso]

(only defect, for now, is that when you close the program the edge.exe file continues to spin and you have to kill it from the tm)

He thinks I was always going on with st1 while now with st2 no longer happens to me.

 

[gerod]

Hahaha, but I only saw st1 on the box.
If you want it is still packed! ! !

 

[Focus]

But how? the beauty of the st was not to be in the management/editation of "generics"?

greetings
Marco:smile:

the problem is present importing complicated models in the classic environment, in the synchronous environment I do not know why not use it.


Hi.

 

[beppino]

But how? the beauty of the st was not to be in the management/editation of "generics"?

I don't know solid-edge, but I use his "big brother" nx.
nx also introduced (with a certain emphasis) st, but interfaces with neutrals are really poor (not to say worse).
iges and steps are very slow, and the final result is far from good.
I expected, together with the introduction of the st, an improvement of these interfaces, but nothing.

 

[Leso]

Hahaha, but I only saw st1 on the box.
If you want it is still packed! ! !

No thanks, do as if I had accepted:wink: