Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

Solidworks vs. ProE

Vendor is a vendor... they should be up to speed and if they are not willing simply choose another that is.

One time 15 years ago while at a major cellphone manufacture 1994 or so, the Japanese vendor said they only had 16 megs of ram on their CNC machine. In the next day morning meeting i said, "there's an easy solution to the problem, choose a different vendor".
Edited by: design-engine
 
If you function in a captive environment, then I can see some small benefit in associative links between design software and shop software. It doesn
 
Metoo-You are right that I havn't spent alot of time on other cam systems recently.I have used smartcam,mastercam,surfcam,cimatron and gibbs in the past,but in the last 12 years it's been pro/nc.We did have the solidworks and mastercampeople come in and do a demo last year.After they did their canned demo,I duplicated it using pro and even they admitted they could'nt top the associativity.I have done alot of injection molds with pro/nc,making cavities,cores and electrodes with the same surface.When making electrodes you use a negative stock allowance making them smaller for overburn.I did sit through some cam demo's at last years IMTS show and was quite impressed with Delcam.
 
rharter52


For guys that have used same software for many years it is hard to see the benifits in another. I still rely on MasterCAM; its like abandage over a heeledwound. I have an older version I keep loaded on my laptop; just in case. That case never comes, and the more time that passes, the less likely it every will.


It took years to shake PRO-E's grip; being the first parametric modeler, everything else seemed different and unfamiliar. Before 2000,I would have rather used a non-parametric modeler then go with one of Pro-E's competitors. Looking back on it now, using Pro-Ewas like a bad habit or ediction.


Heretofore, both Pro-E and MasterCamhaveenjoyed large market sharesin their respective fields. Both, though,suffer from similar ailments; legacy background in their software that stims and limits advancement to keep up with the market trends. To get back in the lead and remain there, both would have to make drastic changes to their core products. MasterCam would have to immediately develop a sophisticated feature recognition system, the likes in which UG and other are working on.Same for Pro-E, becausein five year parametric modeling will be a punch-line to a party joke.
 
As I've mentioned in recent posts my managers position has been terminated.......The economy sucks - and I don't think the platforms guarantees us any jobs.


What platform does Catepillar use? They hacked 20,000, so how many seats of Pro - Soldworks - Solidegde - or Inventor is there?


2000 from GM - how many licenses of UG?


Right now - WHO CARES WHICH PLATFORM ROCKS?
 
design-engine said:
Vendor is a vendor... they should be up to speed and if they are not willing simply choose another that is.



One time 15 years ago while at a major cellphone manufacture 1994 or so, the Japanese vendor said they only had 16 megs of ram on their CNC machine. In the next day morning meeting i said, "there's an easy solution to the problem, choose a different vendor".
Click to expand...

I guess we'll disagree on this. I see a difference between generating you intellectual property and manufacturing parts. The former is far more important than the later as far as using the right CAD software.

In order to propagate that philosophy through the manufacturing side, you are going to need to convince management and purchasing that there's a benefit. I would have a hard time making that case. The purchasing folks only care that we get the right part, at the right price on time. Frankly, that's all that matters. If using a Pro|E vendor helps that, great, but if the non-Pro|E guy can do it faster, cheaper or better, well, why not let him?

In your CNC RAM example, if they could get the job done with that little RAM, I don't care. If they were telling me that would add cost, limit their ability to make our deadline or get our parts right, that's a different story.

PTC likes to sell that integrated story, and it probably works for the big guys like Deere, but for the rest of us it's of little value.

I have a friend out of town who works in engineering for a large, well respected manufacturer. They do all their preliminary engineering layouts, checking clearances, developing design concepts, in 2D unfolded sections. Some of the production drawings are still done in 2D. This is a major manufacturer, well known world wide for superior engineering and quality products. I was shocked, but the process works for them and they deliver world class products.

Fancy, integrated tools do not automatically make better products.
 
Caterpillar uses Pro/ENGINEER of course. I feel as though I have my ear to the tracks so to speak since...I have 5 past 'month long comprehensive' students that have gone permanent at CAT. Only one was offered a severance to quit and he turned it down because all the older perm around him took the offer. Now our past student is a Senior to everyone else. There are another 50 or more past students that are working as contractors off site thru various agencies like eserve, butler and volt.


As for on site contractors we have one past student that was let go in December but I spoke with him yesterday and he says that his rate is too high on purpose and that he is going to repair his new home for six months. And that includes CASE, John Deere and Caterpillar.They usually call or email me right when they complete a contract which is why i feel i have my ear firmly placed on the tracks.

Everyone is worried tho that is for sure.
Edited by: design-engine
 
I had a trainer originally for John Deere....... they are on deck!


Sorry fellas, I have to stick to any platforms that offers the job. It won't matter what system, or what vendor....... everyone is going to survival mode!


56,000 people in 1.5 days lost their jobs - it sucks!!!


"Right now - WHO CARES WHICH PLATFORM ROCKS?"
 
I suppose this is the core problem with theselong-time Pro/E users like design-engine who are not familiar with SW: they are living in the past, and have little interest in developing new skills, having found a comfortable niche which requires little effort to maintain - other than trying tofend offthose annoying advances by the competition through bluff and bluster, in an effort to protect their own selfish interests.


While it is true that any job is a good job these days, none of the other companies in my industry segment use Pro/E in the major metropolitan area where I reside (the Silicon Valley): almost all use SolidWorks and a few use Inventor. Many of these companies (especially the big ones) abandoned Pro/E in this millenium (the New Millenium: are you familiar with it?). And almost all other companies in the Silicon Valley have made the switch too (except for a few big ones, who are laying off workers by the thousands). Should I ever be compelled to change jobs (by choice or otherwise), it would be far more more difficult for me to find work elsewhere if Pro/E was the only CAD software I was qualified to run. So I have renewed my license for SolidWorks, and am working on my own time on some projectswith it to keep my skills current. This isn't hard to do, as SW is such a joy to use: much more user-friendly than Pro/E, vastly superior graphics and all of the surfacing capabilities now too. In doing this, I am protecting my future by not just diversifying my fundamental job skills, I'm doing what I can to ensure that I have basic skills that relevant both to my industry segment and the community where I live. I have been in the situation before where I knew a great CAD system and had advanced skills in a particular market segment. But I was laid off, and found out the hard way that no one else was running that software in my area and there were no job openings in that industry segment.


Which reminds me: didn't Catepillar just announce thousands of layoffs? Where are all those Pro/E users in downstate Illinois going to look for work?
 
Mindripper,


Great job. I couldn't have explained it better. And also great advice. I learned more about SW, in two hours using their embetted tutorials, than I did in a year struggling with Pro-E. In my opinion: If Pro-e is going to survive, they need to emulate the user freindliness of S.W. Do you think PTC should start by reading this forum? PTC. like GM, needs to hire people with vision, and imagination. They all can't be working for SW.
 
proper approach mindripper,

however difficult to follow. If one tries to catch all tools that are seemed to be in demand now, one should skill himself in at leat 4 - 6 applications. Is anybody up to this?

I mean by "skill" not only do simple things, but understand why software gives what it gives in feedback. In Pro/E it tooks at least a year, and You should be narrowed to some particulary cases(surfacing, solids for casting, sheetmetal etc).

Catching modeling in SW or Inventor should be easy to handle if same modules are well known in Pro/E. However I do not belive same would be achieved for FEM apps(Mechanica, Part Advisor). Too much to catch, too long to skill.

Still trying to figure out what to skill next - Mechanica, Part Advisor, Ansys? Maybe SW package?

Suppose Pro/E won`t lose its match on the market considering "big corporations". That is for sure. It does lose for small buisness. The ease of use is major factor here and Pro/e`s unix pop menus helps SW so much.

If one would ask me what to do, I would say - let`s attempt for quarter to invest new interface for Pro/E, instead of trying to figure out the sense of complicated error messages after failed analisys in Pro/M or Ansys.

Better Pro/E, more instalations, more job for us - hope it would be so simple
smiley19.gif


but, why do not try?
 
I wouldn't stop at just learning solidworks either.

And you can go into 'presentation training' or 'manager workshops' or materials training classes.How about offer to do a user presentation at a local PTCUSER group meeting. After two or three you can get good at it plus it helps you practice you presentation skills... or solidworks presentations.

I once spoke at an Alias user group conference on import geometry.
Edited by: design-engine
 
maybe spelling error - I meant let`s spent the time on inventing new, better interface for Pro/E. If PTC can not handle it, why should not we(user) do that?

We are traveling all the same bus, who said the driver knows best the right way. Could be he is blind either. Let`s take a wheel...
smiley36.gif
 
suppose greatest ideas do not come from deep involved people...

...the come from fresh guys, and gurus are to polish them up.

same here, I read once a post considering Sheetmetal, related to the minor changes introduced in WF 4.0. The answer was - yea, guys(PTC) knew about that(not great improvement), it is old, but works fine, just wait for next release... Same heard from r. 2001

Suppose for experienced guys it always works fine, but they are not new clients....
 
Mindripper-
"I suppose this is the core problem with these long-time Pro/E users like design-engine who ..."

I might have under 1200 hrs in solidworks but I bet I pushed the tool harder than you.... I designed a one week surface course with solidworks by trying to duplicate the Pro/E surfacing course.I would not limit yourself to just solidworks... there are only a few modules in solidworks for differentiation. I think there is a new harness tool in solidworks now. Learn that!

Furthermore I will say that I can problem solve solidworks and push the tools such as surfacing in solidworks so well because i have created the same course in Maya and Alias years before.
Edited by: design-engine
 
Assuming we want a powerful CAD package and you are going to look at Solidworks, why not keep going and just get CATIA? I appreciate it means a few more pennies, but isn't Solidworks always going to be CATIA lite? I guess the same applies to NX and Solidedge. I've spoken to a few fairly small suppliers to aerospace primes who's customers demand CATIA anyway.

I'd be interested to know the situations where Solidworks resellers say "no, you want CATIA for that...".

Sam

Edited by: SW
 
Mindripper,


Your points were well stated.No doubtDesign Engine (I suspect a few others who frequently post on this forum)has a vested interest intrying to sustainPro-e in spite of its dimenishing laurels. PTC may be happy with their position; but, make no mistake; it is a declining one. I think when the founders of Solidworks left to start Solidworks Pro-e's best days were behind them.


As for this continuing nonsense about Pro-e's surfacing being better than Solidworks; I don't see it. I do 3-dsurfacing for a living, and have since the late 1980's. (Solid modeling is a Johnny-come-lately in the world of 3-d modeling, and offers very little to someone designing commercial products) I've used Pro-e's surfacing, including their ISDN; it isn'tmore capable thanSolidworks's surfacing. For that matter, Solid Edge's surfacing is better than Pro-e's. NX offers a large number surfacing methods, and theiy very capable, but just because a softwarehas 5 ways to get the same end results doesn't make it better. Rail & guide (loft), fill (multi-side) both with tangency control, or the ability to create base geometry with tangency and curviture control, along with the ability to trim surface patchesand untrim surface patchesand heal edges is all that is needed to do anything in surfacing. Why Pro-e sells a separate module to bring their software capability up to par with Solidworks is mind-numbing.


Flayl Payne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top