standard (regulation) technical office design

[cacciatorino]

off topic but it is a matter that I am very interested in: what do you mean by solid 'dead'?
I don't know if this is true for myself and I ask @cacciatorinoin nx is not so, they removed thehistory free mode, which already provided a mountain of parametric controls, and the st returned to be direct modeling.
Thanks for the answers.

I almost never use synchronous mode, I can't answer. I think it is a hyperspecific question that only marginally touches the question posed in the discussion.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

I don't agree at all: design is design, calculation, sizing. what happens downstream is modeling and drawing.

who needs to make a mold affects something if the object has been shaped with a feature or another?

I have the impression that it depends a lot on what you mean by "design" .

If you mean it in terms of signatures, qualifications, responsibilities, yes.

If you mean what "comes out" from the technical office as a whole, not by any idea.

It is very simple to understand if only, instead of referring to modeling 3d, we refer to quotation.

We are well aware that the quotas (as far as possible) are not superimposed and are arranged neatly, does not mean that the relative mechanism does not work ? probably, if the quotation is, however, correct, and does not cause errors, the mechanism will work as desired . but, overall, you have "put a grain of sand in the gear".

The fact that it says "I was faster to do it from scratch than to change it", gives the measure of how much time loss it can lead to not build a 3d according to shared standards. for more reason if the files are parametric and shared between different offices, scattered around the planet.

a banal example is the "chunky" mode of nx. In your opinion, why, for years, some companies have been moving forward requiring their models to be made in that way (which meant the same geometry in a certain way instead of another )? Want to spend tens of hours more on thousands of designers/designers?
who made the mold, maybe with another system, do you think it was important?

and here on the forum there are discussions where, someone clarifies how, in order to avoid problems in a certain software cad, they had to "give a rule" and, I think I understand, impose a certain way of working .

the opening of a group in a difficult way on different positions is the result of poor planning.
use...... from a life and, in the past, I have had great problems of that kind, as long as it is said enough, it is necessary to arrange things, it was heavy, but now I turn 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.
....

Because if, at the end of the project, the file falls "high for air" , you want to explain in the tip of civil code and vocabulary, to the Chinese or American lord, on the other side of the phone, that the project of the mechanism is perfect , but they must delay the production of the phone by 500€ because the update fails, the file is no longer recoverable and you have to remake it from scratch.

 

[cacciatorino]

I have the impression that it depends a lot on what you mean by "design" .

If you mean it in terms of signatures, qualifications, responsibilities, yes.

If you mean what "comes out" from the technical office as a whole, not by any idea.

It is very simple to understand if only, instead of referring to modeling 3d, we refer to quotation.

I still don't agree. designing for me means devising a mechanism, dimensionaling a section, a transmission, choosing a production process rather than another, heat or surface treatment, etc.

the realization of models and drawings, as often as it requires pushed skills, is not design but is creation of documentation. I think there can be more design content in an excel file than in a design or model.

 

[ceschi1959]

When I talk about design, I don't think about bureaucratic paperwork, but the idea process.
from the technical office come out, it is true, elaborate design and


I still don't agree. designing for me means devising a mechanism, dimensionaling a section, a transmission, choosing a production process rather than another, heat or surface treatment, etc.

the realization of models and drawings, as often as it requires pushed skills, is not design but is creation of documentation. I think there can be more design content in an excel file than in a design or model.

seems to me that positions so 'tranchant' is @cacciatorino sia in @expat manifold are counterproductive.
For example @cacciatorino if I model a particular 'from mold' and that is equipped with sforms closures and all that is needed for realization, am I making design or am I simply doing documentation?
the design is constituted, in variable parts according to the projects, precisely from all these aspects.
on the aspect of design-design there opens a world.
c.

 

[cacciatorino]

seems to me that positions so 'tranchant' is @cacciatorino sia in @expat manifold are counterproductive.
For example @cacciatorino if I model a particular 'from mold' and that is equipped with sforms closures and all that is needed for realization, am I making design or am I simply doing documentation?
the design is constituted, in variable parts according to the projects, precisely from all these aspects.
on the aspect of design-design there opens a world.
c.

but in fact, deciding the right shape is the task of the designer, choosing the right feature on the cad is the task of the designer