Solidworks vs. ProE

[kbrault]

Thanks C_thompson_68,<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />

So, SW will automatically fully define a sketch if you manually tell it to

. I would guess the dimensions it uses are strong then?

Solidworm, I would define the ProE Intent Manager as the device that automatically adds weak dimensions and constraints (horizontal, coincident, etc) to the sketch to make it fully defined. What constraints it uses is somewhat configurable. Weak dimensions can be modified by the user (and they will become strong) and weak constraints will be automatically removed as other constraints or dimensions are user created.

Unless there is a configuration setting allowing the user to not have fully defined sketches that I do not know about, all sketches in ProE are automatically fully defined (with weak constraints). In SW this is not the case. You can sketch a square with one dimension, and later modify that dimension and end up with a twisted trapezoid.

Kevin

 

[solidworm]

i don't see any difference between proe sketcher with intent manager on and solidworks sketcher.i don't know why you guys think solidworks lacks "intent manager" functionality. solidworks creates automatic relations when sketching and the weak dimensions are hidden from user, just like when you turn them off in proe. and squares wouldn't twist because it automatically creates perpendicular relations between the sides when sketching.
i also wonder why strong dimensions can change? i've turned the auto lock options to lock strong dimensions.


Edited by: solidworm

 

[Metoo]

First of all, Pro-E is not the standard for electronics file transfer for Government jobs; and, here's more news, neither is DWG. Since 1982 the standard, unless defined otherwise in the contract, is IGES.


Solidworks not having weak or strong dimensioning has nothing to do with the ability to constrain a sketch element in Solidworks. There is no requirement to use dimensions as contraints. Nevertheless, if you use them and leave them driving, they will act as a contraint.


FYI, in Central Florida, which has more government contractors than most urban areas, PRO-E is not the CAD software most used. And, even in companies here that do have it as their main cad system, it is not used exclusively.

 

[kbrault]

In ProE:<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><O></O>
Create a sketch of a square. Create a dimension on one line length. All the constraints from the intent manager will show (lines horizontal, vertical, orthogonal, parallel, etc). If no other dimensions show up then an equal constraint will show on at least two line lengths. Let

 

[carrieives]

BTW, today I am working in Solidworks. I just spent several minutes trying to figure out why I didn't have a fully constrained sketch that someone else had created. Intent manager would have made sure that there were sufficient constraints (relations in SW) and dimensions to fully define the sketch. If I didn't like the constraints ProE Intent Manager put in, I could change them. Lack of intent manager is one of my dislikes of Solidworks. It's called intent manager because the first thing you do as you enter a sketch can be (used to be required that you do it, now Pro/E will assume things for you) is tell it what you intend to relate the sketch to. So, you start by picking what you want to dimension from - then Pro/E will put the dimensions and constraints in for you.

I'm also really worried about how some of these Solidworks parts I inherited are going to blow up if I have to change things. Since you don't have to fully define your sketch, the people that created the parts I am working on, didn't always. This can be a benifit early in the design when you don't really need to tie everything down, but we've got molds that were made from these parts and I want to know how the geometry is changing if I change something.

Have any of you regular Solidworks users found a good way to replace references? (Pro/E reroute or redefine references) For example, if I have a cut 1" from the middle plane, but really want it 1" from the left wall, what's the easiest and fastest way to accomplish that?

BTW, I'm using Solidworks 2007 and Pro/E Wildfire 3.0.

 

[Metoo]

Question from above;


"For example, if I have a cut 1" from the middle plane, but really want it 1" from the left wall, what's the easiest and fastest way to accomplish that?"



simply go back to the cut operation and choose to start the cut from the wall by selecting from surface optionand thenclick on the wall (if wall is planer). Then, set direction and distant/through/offset; which ever applies in this case.


Yes, you can change your references after an operation is completed; including switching sketch planes. The default selection is for an extrude or cut is to start from the sketch plane, but you aren't limited to this. BTW, you can still do a mid-plane even after starting from an offset distance, or offest point, offset plane, or surface.


Solidworks is probably not the best modeling softwarefor beginners tolearn from. Peoplepick upbad habits; like not constraining their sketches. If you are dealing with a large number of part modelsdesigned this way, my sugestion is to go through the history tree and "fix" (locking constraint)every sketch. If this takes too long; save the part out in a neutral format and then run feature recognition. Set sketch default to "fixed" so itlocks/fully constrainsall sketches as it re-creates them. FYI, Solidworks feature recognition won't work on parts with free-form features, but if the part is like most -a bunch of linear extrudes and cuts -it will reproduce a clean part with a good history tree.

 

[GLEN20]

YEP ---- Its that time again! Haven't heard anything...... then bang 10 automatic e-mails on Almighty Pro vs. Solidworks! How about this, For 2009-2010, who gives a sh*t what platform we use, lets just network with each other, in-case we loose our jobs. That would really suck to be a Pro Guru, SolidWorks/ SolidEdge/ Re-INVENTOR Studs and we end up on the un-employment Line. It would suck to be our Technical Brothers in the automotive industry------ I'm sure they're not bragging about their contracts being in IGES or STEP files right now or what platforms they use! Focus on Cost Reduction, No Bonuses, and No pay increases!


HAPPY NEW YEAR!

 

[design-engine]

I don't have the new version of SW... and i know Chris... but I still don't believe it completely till i see it.... i.e. intent manager like kbrault describes so clearly.

As far as Florida and contracting.... From the transient state.... I think we should let them transient southerners use soldiworks there so they can compete in a world all their own.I had to say something. I actually love Miami from all the Brazilian-Argentinian tourists...

If it were not for lovely tourists i think I would have to say Florida ain't got much more than strip clubs, rednecks, white sandy beaches and a whole lot of Cops to keep everyone from speeding. And it's difficult to find book stores that actually have books you can read from all the picture books.
Edited by: design-engine

 

[Metoo]

As I stated before, yourposts come fromignorance or malice, butthat last one tops all, revealingyour most intelligent thoughts. Stupid F***ing Yankee!

 

[design-engine]

I am trying to be more funny than malice honestly.

And hey about red neck ... I know best too because I am from Georgia.I also work and travel thru Florida often... so would guess Tampa (maybe more south of there) or Ocala might top my book for the most red neck parts of the the United States. But then Chicago South side is kinda red neck too... its just you could not tell them that.

I once saw a guy slap the top of his beer and completely knock the bottom out of the glass beer bottle. With one slap! now that was Ocala FL and they used Pro/ENGINEER too.I never seen that in Georgia.As for traffic cops... I think Houston might have the entire state of FL beat for traffic cops looking for the random speeder on expressways. I get more tickets in those states at least.

BTW I like the more red neck Strip clubs. I did a search on Google for redneck strip clubs and got the Deja Vu street sign came up. 50 beautiful and 3 ugly. Ive been there and Google don't lie.

Did E-ONE covert to solidworks? They should be heavily ingrained into Pro/ENGINEER work flow and methodology.

Is Orlando considered central FL?Don't we have the PTCUSER world conference there for 2009? com-on.... Ill buy beers at Deja vu!
Edited by: design-engine

 

[GLEN20]

I don't think we need to start another Civil War!

I was just emphasizing on keeping our jobs without bragging who gets the contracts. We have to admit there are "Rednecks" down South, and We have "Woodchucks or Tree Toads" up here (North EAST) ---- they are about the same type of people without the Southern accent....

There's nothing wrong with Yanks and/or Rebs both areinnovative by design----- just like Rednecks and Woodchucksare innovative in the trailer park or their copy of Ford BigFoot - or Dodge Gravedigger. Can't we just all get along?


I have to admit, I'd rather read the rant and rave over the cops and strip clubs - but then again - this would be the wrong Forum! God Bless Pure Platinum Strip Clubs, Cheetah, even the Deja Vu.... I'll take a few beers from Bart --- as long as it's not DRAG nite!!!


I have to go back to my original posts ---- Does it really matter on what platform we use? I'm making more $$ now using ACAD LT or dabbling with Inventor 11 than when I was using Pro-E (Wilfire2) or Solidworks 07....... so did it matter in the "Old School" --- If you used a #2 Pencil with Velumn paper vs. Ink Pen on Malar (do you prefer paper or plastic)?

 

[design-engine]

good one glen,I did use ink on Mylar and pencil on velum both. Though i did start young I guess using plastic or ink on Mylar gives away ones age.

So I guess I would still argue that there are not that many designers or engineers using solidworks in military contracts.I understand that in middle FL there are quite a few companies. Maybe I would have not heard of those companies if they were listed out because i am biased Pro/E?Where it is easy for me to list out companies that use Pro/ENGINEER I am less apt to do so with Solidworks?
Edited by: design-engine

 

[Heathbn]

Just One thing to Say.

Solidworks jobs pay less then half what Pro-E jobs pay.

 

[GLEN20]

It's all relative ...... a job is a job, as I mentioned I'm making more $$ now using ACAD LT and having a College Coop finish my design in ACAD 08.


"I know a guy" when he was looking for work......vendors offered to payhim cash to make parts and assemblies ---- since he had Pro 2001, and Solidworks 05, he was making a lot of $$ making iges or step files (IGES for Pro users, STEP for Solidworks and Inventor users) or native files if the customer had the same release or newer.......I guess I'm just saying that it does not really matter what platform you use ----- It's more important to know your Thermodynamics, hydraulics/pneumatics, Strength of Materials, Physics, Chemistry courses........ Core courses that gets you the $$ and then have the Employer send you out for Pro-SolidWorks-Re-Inventor-Unigraphics.......

 

[design-engine]

since we are going to talk about AutoCAD some... I pulled off a job once in Pro/ENGINEER and the customer wanted it done in AutoCAD. I quoted 150 hrs.Did it in 15 hrs using Pro/E on a sparc2 ... exported all the dxf drawings to AutoCAD and detailed the 20 drawings one hour or so each.40 hrs and billed 150. The customer was blown away that there were no changes. I miss those days. 1994That's the kind of Relative I want. I cant imagine doing a project in AutoCAD even in 1994 but of course I did that crap back in the late 80's...Sucked so bad i don't even like reminiscing about it.for you youngsters, imagine looking through layers and colors to see other parts in your assembly... and your cross sections were build with lines.And back then AutoCAD folks would ague that Pro/E drafting was not up to par.


I laughed all the way to the bank.
Edited by: design-engine

 

[GLEN20]

I'm with you Bart......I was using Personal Designer by Computervision but mainly IGESed Pro-E Rev12-14 parts for typewriter components back then (Ironic designing typewriter parts with CAD).


I'm using DXF outto ACAD LT......still loughing all the way to the bank. The current company does not know how Icreated the ISO views and shaded rendered assemblies ----- they think I used their one seat of Inventor but it's nothing but a step file of my Pro-E model done in 8-10 hrs....


If it gets busy again and the side jobs gets out of hand - I might give you a shout and we can both laugh all the way to the bank. Just remember you can't sandbag another sandbagger....

 

[Bugzuki]

I thought that we had this one all buttoned up back in
October. Thanks Bart.

My biggest complaint lately about programs that don't
require you to dimension your sketches is the lack of
dimensioning. I have been recreating a bunch of models
made in Pro/Create (as Bart coined the phrase)and SW.
CoCreate is similar to SW in that it does not require
fully constrained sketches. There are so many times when
the metric dims have more then 15 decimal places. Other
times you would think that holes were supposed to be in
line, but they are out of alignment by by some amount.
Or, two apparently identical features on opposite sides
of the part are actually different.

I do not understand how people can expect the fab shop
to make their parts if the model they are working from
requires 15 decimal places. How are we supposed to be
working toward any kind of tolerance if the model does
not even hold to the tolerance.

Then, dimensions are put on the drawing that are
different then what the model shows, because the model
is not correct. This just drives me crazy.

I hear the statement "SW lets me focus on the design and
not worry about things like failed features or dims I
don't care about."

My question is how can you make a robust design if you
have failed features or you don't care about some of
your parts dimensions. You need to at least show that
you have looked at every aspect of your design. You do
this by making your features in the center of the
tolerance. You can not do that if you do not create the
dimensions.

In Pro/E having the weak dims shown is very helpful. For
one it shows you what a dimension will be if you do not
change it. The second thing is that the weak dims show
you when you do not have two point coincident. In this
case two weak dimensions show up. Then you know you have
to add a constraint. That way your model acts correctly
when you go to change it.

I'll step down now.

 

[GLEN20]

Bug --- I can relate to what your saying! As I mentioned before I love Pro-E, and as my ADMIN always asked are you sure it's not OE (Operator Error) instead of Pro-E? Seriously ---- how many preferred vendors really use our native models, rather than an IGES or STEP files to fabricate our parts anyways? When I was in SolidWorks training ---- I often wondered why the 3 constraints rule did not apply, bottom line I think the full constrains rule does not apply to SW, because of the way they present the product in assembly mode..... it's easy to show of animator and make parts move in assembly. I usually just FIX all of the components after I open a STEP file from PRO (files from SW and Inventor). Lets face it, if the only thing from holding you back is adding another constraint or re-dimensioning the part from letting it fail ...... then "its ALL GOOD". The reality of it ---- is working with someone else other than our own design!!! It could be just as big of a nightmare working on the same platform but with a self proclaimed Pro, SW, Inventor......user with bad habits. Today - what counts is releasing the design.... so adding to bad habits - I usually do everything in PRO - show all dims. change the scale to 1:1 and DXF out. Open in ACAD LT in model space, add the template on paper space and save it as a .dwg and print it out into Adobe and send it out to the vendors.....4-6 weeks later I get my perfect parts and I have .prt, .drw,.dxf, .dwg, .pdf as back up------- that's why we make the big bucks

We just make it happen ---- without the drama constrained to any platform!

 

[design-engine]

glen,

I disagree some. See I buy into the deal where vendors should use Pro/E just like me. If I use SW then I want them using SW too.None of this export business.... especially of you can get your vendors and their vendors to all buy into your quality plan, drawings, CNC or Pro/MAN all the way to the robotics for pic and place components.I guess a PDF is an export but that should happen automatically when the drawing is submitted to PDM/Intralink/Library.

I think it terribly rude if my customer chooses to do everything with an export. Then as I make a modification they have to re-export and re-run the tool path. If we educate our buyers (buyers should take the plastics class to learn how to buy tooling properly) to choose vendors that can be educated and are thru an RFP use top down design, utilize Pro/MANUFACTURE, and surfacing and all that.... then modifications and updates are more seamless.

I thought thats what PTC sold to customers in the early days.1992 thru 1997

Does anyone remember that? I think when PTC went to the VAR program things went down hill from there. But what do i know?Im a Georga Boy.
Edited by: design-engine

 

[wsylvester]

have to re-export and re-run the tool path.


you have to rerun toolpaths with pro/man and re-post if mods are made. the cnc file, the .tap is not associative, at what point does the break matter, at the last one or 2 before.
Edited by: wsylvester