solid edge o inventor?

[junior]

Good morning to all,
I am at my first message and here I am with an agroment already discussed in the past (trying not to make the moderators angry :angry: )....
I approached the world of 3d for passion a few years ago, with autocad 2004 and sev14, that still use with great difficulties (instability of the system).
Now I should turn this passion into work, so I'm trying to figure out who between two would do to my case: to design appliances, to understand us from the blender to the oven, which of the two would you recommend?
I would be more likely to inventor, also because I have a lot of autocad material and I would not risk losing it. . .

Hi.

 

[Marco74]

then you have already chosen....

 

[junior]

Orca... I asked myself the question and gave me the answer? ?
with if the designs made with autocad would not be recoverable?
regarding the realization of the cablings and the plates, who of the two is better?

 

[cacciatorino]

Orca... I asked myself the question and gave me the answer? ?
with if the designs made with autocad would not be recoverable?
regarding the realization of the cablings and the plates, who of the two is better?

Yes, with if you can import the files made with autocad, I think with the same results you will have with inventor (the 2d no problem, the 3d I think you will have to export to sat and then import into if).

I don't know the functions of the two systems enough to compare them.

 

[Be_on_edge]

household appliances (indesit, ariston) and hotpoint (made in uk appliances) use solid edge.

Hi.

 

[davide75]

for the sheet metal according to me inv is very valid but it is only that maybe I am better with inv. for the wiring unfortunately I do not know to tell you anything.cmq you should try to call indesit, ariston and ask directly to them
cmq you can import from autocad to if

 

[stefanobruno]

I can't tell you anything.

the wiring you make them, with inventor, only with the professional version.
the basic version allows you to make wiring only using, laboriously, artifacts.

Bye.

 

[gerod]

the wiring fans even with it. the latest version has a number of extra applications, of course to pay aside!

 

[ebrazz]

health to all I am new but then not so much, I rarely wrote before the fallout of the site.
I take care of carpenters, refrigerators, automations, garbage, agricultural machinery etc.
I used it for a long time until 16 and then I went to inventor.
that travase was deleterious for the number of extra clik than inventor 2008 forced to do compared to if, besides the sheet environment was much less functional, last in the design top down, I always had difficulty rebuilding the bonds between sketches derived parts etc. who were lost serenely even perhaps because of me:wink:.
I then built the sheets using the surfaces and moving from solid modeling to the sheet in a smart process if we want, not intuitive (i.e. not assimilable to the production process), functional, although not at the finishing levels of if but still acceptable, inv though, compared to the motion environment of itself is on a much better level.
the return to itself was traumatic with the st, regarding the number of clik they made a decided step backwards.
the process times, I feel a little longer with inv, the morning start in my planned coffee break and to change a connection of a part to the table you had to play the three cards.
for the rest we call everything both to each other.
the ball of the conversion acad is a ball you have to struggle with both to recover the 2d.
...production of serial pieces with numerous variants derived from the same project, as in the case of household appliances ... maybe I would prefer if for the best "intuibility" and stability in tracking the links between the parts and keeping them such, I refer to the classic environment with the synchronous I did only some commercial part.
greetings

 

[brex]

it will be that I learned to draw to the computer with if, but I prefer it by far to inventor (I never used the latest versions). the only thing in which I see the inventor's lamiere environment a little better is the angle treatment (the nesting man sometimes tells me a mouth of words because he has to put hand to my dxf), but for the work is much richer, intuitive and performing. inventor has autocad zoom and I found them more comfortable than if, and the table is better for what concerns broken views, sections and few other robes.
I will be drastic, but you will see that at the long time of your 2d you will do very little, especially those of the plates.

 

[Marco74]

for what concerns me if we talk about sheet metal for me if it is much better, maybe the latest releases of inventor are improved. I can say that when we rated various 3d cads for the sheet if for me it was the top, what drawings you can make it without much shock from reality, good developments. for loft flanges (tramoges in general) if he did things that inventor and solidworks didn't even think they were doing, except to do it with various artifacts.

I hope I've been helpful, bye.

 

[brex]

to discover a lot from reality, good developments. for loft flanges (tramoges in general) if he did things that inventor and solidworks didn't even think they were doing, except to do it with various artifacts.

I hope I've been helpful, bye.

Yes, absolutely true.

 

[davide75]

Well in the 2010 version of inventor now added the hopper command, which creates it in a second and wanting you develop it also on the plane. obvious that then in reality I never happened to see a hopper made from a single sheet of sheet metal

 

[Marco74]

Well in the 2010 version of inventor now added the hopper command, which creates it in a second and wanting you develop it also on the plane. obvious that then in reality I never happened to see a hopper made from a single sheet of sheet metal

the 2010 version did not see it, but it was for certain that in the previous versions it moved from rectangle to round both straight and inclined could not do it, even from rectangle to tilted rectangle (in inventor ne solidworks) they forgot a bend on the road, they made a deformation.

Bye.

 

[g2r]

Hi.
I use both inv and if
both have qualities and defects, points of advantage or disadvantage to each other
If you have no surface modeling to deal with, I believe that they can be considered equivalent (by understanding the merits and defects at the end are equal) but by working alongside other people you understand that some judgments are too subjective to be encoded.
I prefer by far if but I must recognize that some aspects of inv I miss when I project with
the matter of importing the 2d is a false problem, avoid leaving here, as you have already been suggested
if you can do so I suggest you deal with an exemplary project with both systems, and bring it to the bottom including the table harvests
if you didn't choose if you were resentful....

apologise l'ot: a special greeting to be_on_edge, which I haven't seen for years.
♪

 

[re_solidworks]

the 2010 version did not see it, but it was for certain that in the previous versions it moved from rectangle to round both straight and inclined could not do it, even from rectangle to tilted rectangle (in inventor ne solidworks) they forgot a bend on the road, they made a deformation.

Bye.

I speak for swx, even if it hits little it was pulled out... I've been doing it for years and all kinds. Did you know how to use it well before trying to do it?
sincerely with the swx sheet I do everything and with excellent results.

 

[davide75]

the 2010 version did not see it, but it was for certain that in the previous versions it moved from rectangle to round both straight and inclined could not do it, even from rectangle to tilted rectangle (in inventor ne solidworks) they forgot a bend on the road, they made a deformation.

Bye.

I don't know it in previous versions, but in 2010 it does it quietly because it seems that the autodesk took the form of the German spi plates that made the development of the stilts.
Bye.