What can I expect from Solidw*ks ?

[dgs]

another feature in SW that I found very useful was the ability to create a sketched entity at the intersection between your sketch plane and any intersecting geometry.

That is very handy. Pro|E can do it, but you've got to pause the current feature and create a datum point. Not the same, but the point is then available to reuse alter.

I think SW had surface replace functionality before Pro E did but they both seem to have it now.

I'm pretty sure Pro|E has had that as long as I've used it, which is longer than SW has existed.

Drag and drop parts from your model tree into your assembly. if you have multiple screws in your assembly, you assemble one by browsing for it just like you do in Pro E. but, if you need to assemble others, you can just drag the part from your model tree into your assembly window and it becomes "packaged". then you can go in and define your assembly references. much faster than having to navigate your workspace all the time for the parts you want to assemble if they're already in your assembly.

Have you looked at teh edi -> repeat function? Or, if you need to assembly more than one, Pro|E pre-selects the last item assembled when you select file -> open.

measuring: ...

The measure tool in Pro|E sux, the SW tool is far better. It is far from perfect, however. I love that Pro|E lets you select a 'starting item' to measure from and then you can select item after item to measure to. In SW it's one pair at a time.

 

[jvidal]

I love that Pro|E lets you select a 'starting item' to measure from and then you can select item after item to measure to.

 

[michaelpaul]

Or, if you need to assembly more than one, Pro|E pre-selects the last item assembled when you select file -> open.

this I do know and it is very handy......if you are assembling all of the same part in sequence at the same time. I was thinking how much I miss the drag and drop of SW more when you assemble several screws at once and then you add other pieces to your assembly but want to use those same screws later in your assembly. now, you have to go back through your file list and find it instead of being able to just drag it into your window.

it's not that you cannot do it in Pro-E, it just seems unnecessarily difficult sometimes

 

[Mindripper]

I love that SW gives you measurements in X,Y and Z all at the same time, plus the vector data. In inches and metric, if you want. And it lets you select from the nearest entity then works back into the model. And you can change the second item selected, just like Pro/E. This has saved me many hours when using SW, and the lack of this simple functionality has cost me many hours in Pro/E. This is a classic example of Pro/E's unwillingness to develop their product or topursue any genuine effort to make their product easy to learn and use. Pro/E's code is probably still in FORTRAN.

 

[design-engine]

you should use a detail drawing to dial in your measurements not x,y,z dimensions. Workflow runs smoother. You should do that in SW or Pro/E ... to many people look at info measure to see interferences etc.

 

[dgs]

And you can change the second item selected, just like Pro/E.

Mindripper, you're a riot. Sure, you can change the second item selected, once you go to the measure dialog and RMB on one of the selections and remove it. Not anywhere close to as easy as Pro|E. In Pro|E, you simply click away to measure to new items, in SW it's a 3 clicks and two changes of focus. It's lost me HOURS of time in SW.

This is a
classic example of Pro/E's unwillingness to develop their product or
topursue any genuine effort to make their product easy to learn and
use.

LOL, right, no willingness to develop or improve. WF5 is just like 2001, right? Nothing new there like the ability to change from a protrusion to a cut to a surface and back or the use of external sketches or the import feature recognition tool or the variety of new patterning options or Manikin or widespread use of the dashboard interface that allows feature definition in any order or drag geometry in real time in WF5 or use a sketched datum point feature to drive a pattern in WF5 or ISDX or Intent chains or mechanism connections or a revamped drawing interface in WF5 or ... Yeah, some of that stuff was a response to SW (and some SW still doesn't have), but the point is that the statement that PTC is unwilling to improve is simply false.

I love that SW gives you measurements in X,Y and Z
all at the same time, plus the vector data.

Me too. Frankly, the Pro|E measure tool is adequate, but could be so much more. I hope there is a new tool in the works, but it does the job.

Listen, I won't defend Pro|E as the be all and end all in user friendliness, in fact I've been a pretty vocal critic of the interface over the years, but a lot of the differences some down to differences in philosophy. Some are real advantages, like the measure tool, but others are just different ways of doing things.

 

[alwaysdrunk]

how do you give a hinge mechanism a maximum and minimum opening in SW? say for example, I'd like the hinge to be open @ 90 deg and close @ 0deg.and if you give it a 95 deg it will always go back to 90 deg. i have SW 2009 but haven't explored that much.I can do it with proe but I don't know on SW.

 

[michaelpaul]

you should use a detail drawing to dial in your measurements not x,y,z dimensions. Workflow runs smoother.

why? if I just want to measure the distance between two things I shouldn't have to or need to go into a drawing, create a section, then create the dimension in question. I just need to be aware of what I'm looking at and what the dimension really means. I should perform an interference check to check for interferences and not rely on measurements anyway. Although, getting a quick idea of interferences is a prime use of the dynamic cross section in SW with a reasonably small step size for the area you're looking at.

you can do a lot of things in pro-e. as I'm sure you will argue you can do anything in Pro E that you can do in SW. the point in this case is that in SW you can do it faster and easier. that's the key. I get tired of hearing how I can perform some convoluted sequence of steps thought up by Rube Goldberg to do something in Pro E that takes one or two clicks in SW to perform. Yes, I can do it but I spend half of my day performing those convoluted steps. that's not faster modeling.

 

[design-engine]

I teach to use the drawing instead of measuring because often our process utilizes the Thomas edition method of dialing in inconsistencies of parts in an assembly.ie. clearance and interference issues. If you don't use the drawing its much easier to make an embarrassing mistake. I teach instead to make a working drawing complete with a cross section in several places of concern. Then modify the parts ... regenerate the assembly drawing... oops wrong direction... modify the parts again... update the assembly drawing.... fine. .015 clearance.Then do the same process in the other direction.



Same in solidworks... catia...

"we teach product design and choose to use proe", Bart's quote at ptc world last month.


Edited by: design-engine

 

[Bugzuki]

That is a great quote Bart.


I think that the measure tool works great in Pro/E. The angular measurement is a little tiring how it always give you the angle you don't want. But, you just have to switch the arrows around.


The only thing I liked better in solidworks was the radiate feature.


Dimensioning a sketch in SW is very time consuming. Oh wait you do not have to have fully dimensioned sketches. My bad. Just draw what ever, who cares if your model goes out to 15 mm decimal places. Just fudge the drawing.


I shouldn't read these threads anymore, they just waste my time and make my blood pressure go up.

 

[FireWild]

Solidworks, just plain sucks, and makes a bad designer worse. End of story... I've used both every day for the past 10 years and not just simple things all modules, surface, advanced surface, detail, assembly, advanced assembly, etc, etc. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />


If you truly understand CAD, top down design and bottom up design, start parts, templates, mapkeys, relations, skeletons, draft, rounds, advanced surface, mechanism, sweeps, etc. Pro/Engineer is a better solution.


From my experience people like Mindripper design very simple things and their opinions are slanted because they only really touch the basics of the software. Drawing with colored Pencil

 

[design-engine]

give that man a red bull!

 

[sanjeevkar1]

here is your RED BULL

 

[Bugzuki]

Firewild I just posted your post up on the wall in my office. Thats perfect. Maybe it will put some more fire under our Solidworks promoters here.


I second that Red Bull.

 

[michael3130]

Amazing that one guy's genuine question about SW turns into this series of posts hurling abuse at each other cause we use a particular piece of software. I'm not going to debate it at all as there's no point, I'm just thankful I've got a job in the current climate.


One of our group companies laid off 60 people last week and the remaining to take a 20% pay cut which is pretty hard to take.


At the end of the day, if an employer comes to me and asks me to use ProE or SW I'll be happy to use either and won't gripe that it takes 2 mouse clicks more to do a command than that other piece of software.

 

[FireWild]

Heythanks I love Red Bull.


Yeah this does get a little old from time to time... Solid Works vs. Pro/Engineer.


Mindripper is always all over beating upPro. Itwould be interesting if he were to take a class from Bart! I'm thinking it might change his outlook a little. Maybe Bart would even give him aspecial MCAD Centraldiscount on the class.


What do you say Mindripper?

 

[michaelpaul]

Solidworks, just plain sucks, and makes a bad designer worse. End of story... I've used both every day for the past 10 years and not just simple things all modules, surface, advanced surface, detail, assembly, advanced assembly, etc, etc.

I'll disagree with you but with this argument it's going to come down to Democrat vs. Republican, pro life vs. pro choice, gay marriage vs. no gay marriage, Jesus vs. Buddha, etc. There's never going to be a consensus and each side is never going to convince the other because neither side ever wants to admit that their beloved CAD package may not be Best or that they may not even need the Best to actually do their work.


Pro E lovers/advocates will never believe that Pro E isn't the best package and they'll never understand why anybody would use anything else. SW lovers will never like Pro E because it's a P.I.T.A. to use regardless of it's power.

If you truly understand CAD, top down design and bottom up design, start parts, templates, mapkeys, relations, skeletons, draft, rounds, advanced surface, mechanism, sweeps, etc. Pro/Engineer is a better solution.

A Porsche is a better solution as an automobile than a Ford Escort too but they'll both get you to work, to the grocery store, to the doctor, etc. Better is a relative term. Pro E may be more powerful but 98% of all CAD users don't need the power. just because a CAD package can do something doesn't mean everybody needs to us it. when's the last time you did a torroidal bend? I've been using pro E for 10 years and have never done one but gosh darn it if I ever need to I suppose I must use Pro E because SW can't do it!

F.W.I.W, I think draft is a hell of a lot easier in SW when you can draft while extrude but most Pro E advocates don't like it because it runs contrary to the very principal of modeling with Pro E. drafting your extruds cleans up your model tree and is a heck of a lot easier to fix when features do fail in my opinion.

mapkeys are a relic of the past too. I shouldn't need to write a mapkey to do something that every user wants to do regularly. a mapkey should be custom code for the very random thing that only I do. I shouldn't need mapkeys to quickly make a part wireframe or shaded. it should be quickly and easily accessible in the CAD packages code. But, with Pro E I have to write mapkeys to do simple things because the interface sucks. in SW you hover your mouse and right click and you have almost every option you would want for the feature in question.

Edited by: michaelpaul

 

[michaelpaul]

After all, today SW will do pretty much everything Pro/E can do (and more),

First of all, I dont like these "my_cad_is_better_then_yours" threads...makes me bored...but,as i

 

[Bugzuki]

If you guys love Solidworks so much why do you come into the Pro/E section to fight these battles? Are you on the Solidworks payroll?

I have never understood the analogy of I don't need a Porsche to go get groceries. Of course you don't if you always want to do everything the same all the time. A Ford Escort can go the speed limit and make all the turns necessary. Lets ignore the illeagality of this converstation for a moment and pertend you can drive however you please. Let say for instance that you are always trying to make yourself better and improve the way you do things. Eventually you are going to reach the limits of where your Escort can get you, even after you have added all the aftermarket addons available. You are still starting with a mid range product. Where as if you purchased the Porsche or Ferrari to begin with you would be starting out with a plateform that gave you the ability to grow as you learn more. You will get a lot farther before you will need to start adding those 3rd party addons.


The object of product design is to come up with new exciting designs that are well formulated. If we alway stick to old ways of doing things and never experiment and add to our toolbox we are not helping the world advance.


Here is an examle. DAF Trucks use lots of self locking nuts and washers. If they just continued using the same Nylock nuts they have continually issues with prevailing torque. If they use conventional locking washers they have issues with the washer maring the surface finish allowing a spotfor rust. They designed a newnut with build in washer. This nut has a concave mating surface that deforms as it is torqued down. The nut has no prevailing torque, does not exposed the metal surface and does not come loose.


Lets all build our abilities and make better products. If your tool is the limiting factor, maybe it is time to get a new tool not say I don't need to do that.


Here is a nice example of a torroidal bend: [url]http://www.mcadcentral.com/proe/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30 653&PN=1[/url]


It is your opinion that Mapkeys are a relic from the past. An engineer should not be limited to only the functionality that the manufacturer included. It is very nice to be able to create functionality that does what you want it to do. For instance, we have many old parts and drawings. When those drawings are changed they need to be updated to the current format. We have some new parameters in the models that save time on the drawing. I created some mapkeys that automatically create these new parameters and relations. This saves a ton of time and makes sure all the needed parameters are created properly. I agree the Pro/E interface could be better, but I should not be limited in my ablitiy to create the mapkeys automatically because PTC did not plan for my parameter choice.

 

[design-engine]

Bugzuki... I bought a GSXR 600 Suzuki and pick it up maybe as early as Friday the 17th.

i have converted many solidworks cheer leaders through education.