• This forum is the machine-generated translation of www.cad3d.it/forum1 - the Italian design community. Several terms are not translated correctly.

tanks, with which cad?

  • Thread starter Thread starter silvius
  • Start date Start date
the output is the design, or the sizing object of that design?

I would answer from catia to gimp passing by autocad and draftsight.. .
 
autocad, microstation... .

I'd say they didn't start with a 3d to fly it, but I might be wrong.
 
my curiosity was born because I read of discussions about it; mainly on the use of cad 3d vs 2d
the sizing is done a priori....there is only the putting into the table
what intrigues me is how much time you need more or less using a cad 3d (cat, sw, inventor etccc)
 
with the 3d what you invest in modeling* you earn enormously with the table (always that that design does not have smart representations that a 3d, which is very rigid, can not do. in this case making an identical table would not be possible, but this does not mean equally correct)
Consider: automatic and always accurate views and sections, distinct materials and immediate ball, weights of each individual component or body without having to make calculations and checks... and in this case the construction starting from a drawing already made that allows you to verify that there are no problems in the drafting of the latter.

* depends on the capacity of the person and the software that can handle more or less well certain aspects of modeling.
 
for the table in question any cad 3d or 2d.

for the design the scope is the piping. so what you have to ask is which cad has the best module dedicated to this specific field? which has bookcases, which can be inserted in the flight "couple using this flange", given a path "use this standard tube and put to flight these elbow fittings on the curves" etc. etc.

It is not only a matter of drawing it, all cads draw it.
 
painaz said:
for the table in question any cad 3d or 2d.

for the design the scope is the piping. so what you have to ask is which cad has the best module dedicated to this specific field? which has bookcases, which can be inserted in the flight "couple using this flange", given a path "use this standard tube and put to flight these elbow fittings on the curves" etc. etc.

It is not only a matter of drawing it, all cads draw it.
Click to expand...
I keep seeing 3d design on software and tabled with other software, for finishings, tables, symbols. in autocad you do first and better.. .

personal opinion of course
 
maxopus said:
sbagliatissimo c3kka...
Click to expand...
and I may also agree:)

in theoretical line though.. I said this only because unfortunately I need to be practical and flexible and sometimes the various solidworks and company are not....

I can't waste time "litigare" with autogenerate boms and/or custom properties, I often have to manage various designs of which only a small part is "born" by a 3d parametric. . .

autocad and his "lightness" (at least in his incarnations prior to 2010) is sometimes of great help.
 
c3kkos said:
and I may also agree:)

in theoretical line though.. I said this only because unfortunately I need to be practical and flexible and sometimes the various solidworks and company are not....

I can't waste time "litigare" with autogenerate boms and/or custom properties, I often have to manage various designs of which only a small part is "born" by a 3d parametric. . .

autocad and his "lightness" (at least in his incarnations prior to 2010) is sometimes of great help.
Click to expand...
It's just a question of method.
if you work in an orderly and rational way the putting into the table inside the cad with which you modeled the 3d is much faster than ... stay to export the views to then quote and annotate with another program.
as to manage symbols and annotation libraries, all 3d cads are able to do it as and better than autocad.
 
maxopus said:
It's just a question of method. .
Click to expand...
absolutely true.. I'm quoting everything you wrote. .

I repeat, however, that unfortunately the real dynamics of a medium/small company sometimes do not allow to respect this method... .
 
c3kkos said:
absolutely true.. I'm quoting everything you wrote. .

I repeat, however, that unfortunately the real dynamics of a medium/small company sometimes do not allow to respect this method... .
Click to expand...
"oohhh, listen, but how did you get a group to send me that I'm going to buy it...? Are the codes missing??? We're gonna get it from here, so much for now it's just to order the materials, no no no no, it's okay to give it so much, it's preliminary, so in the morning when I get to the office, you make me find everything ready?
 
c3kkos said:
absolutely true.. I'm quoting everything you wrote. .

I repeat, however, that unfortunately the real dynamics of a medium/small company sometimes do not allow to respect this method... .
Click to expand...
I only work for small middle firms so I know the problem. the time you earn with these shortcuts you almost always lose with wear interests after. Sometimes time to make similar items you earn just when, with a neat and managed 3d archive, you can quickly find the most similar object already produced, cloning the components that change and change to the flight. Obviously the updating of the tables is all assisted by the cad, it should not intervene by hand with the risks of errors that follow them.
for the talk of fighting with the bom... I have never quarreled and use solidworks since '99. sometimes you just have to avoid doing some sort of dressing handles. then if the property understands ok, otherwise you lose time in useless stupidity (not supported by any norms).
I would work 100% in 3d even in the case of tanks like this.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
44,997
Messages
339,767
Members
4
Latest member
ibt

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 0 (members: 0, guests: 0)
Back
Top