Why SW + Why not Autocad ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul van Uden
  • Start date Start date
P

Paul van Uden

Why SW + Why not Autocad ?

Please can someone give me the answer of the question above ?

I'm a 3D Autocad user, and now for my work, on SW, its a pretty nice program

but i'm getting nuts about the all the relations, and the non flexabilitie of SW

Is it the problem that i must now more about SW our what?

also in large assemblies ( above ~50 parts ) the relations killing me



For now i prefer Acad, what i'm doeing wrong ?

greets from Holland,



Paul van Uden
 
The problem is probably more that you need to forget about what you
were doing in AutoCAD I too came from using AutoCAD 3D solids for 4
years and find SolidWorks to be light years ahead of what I was doing
in AutoCAD. More training would be a good idea, it will give you an
understanding of how things are working together.

Corey
 
Or he could get himself a text - there are some pretty good books like
inside solid works.

Bigbear
 
Oh yeah also SolidWorks for Dummies (that wasn't a joke or a slam ;^)

Corey
 
I tell everyone that I meet thats intrested in moving from Autocad to
Solidworks, that the first step is to forget everything you know in
Autocad. When I first started using SW, mates and relations were the
hardest things for me to understand and grasp. Now im getting ready to
start putting together a presentation on the subject to present at our
user group.

I would suggest three things:

1. Get as much training as possible. Lots of cummunity colleges now
offer SW courses.

2. Getting some of the excellent books out there I.E.: Solidworks for
Dummies by Greg Jankowski, or any of the Planchard & Planchard books.

3. Find a user group in your area. The meetings are extremely
informative, and there are lots of people to ask questions too.

Main thing is to not give up. I took a Mastercam class for the fun of
it, and I found myself getting frustrated knowing that all the geometry
I was creating inside of MC, I could do 100X fatser inside SW. There
is a reason SW is one of the most popular 3D programs out there.
 
When teaching new SW users I ask the class "who here has the most
AutoCad Experience and who has the least".
From the show of hands I then "buddy" up (have workstations beside each
Click to expand...
other) each most/least pair.

I've found the more experience engineering type passes on their design
knowledge to the younger ones in exchange for the younger designers
(who don't have a pre-conceived notion of how the software should work)
"grasp" of the mechanics of using SW. During the four day course you
can see a change in body language when each of the "AutoCad" users
makes the transition to SW "thinking". Some people take longer which in
those cases I may get an email weeks or months later saying "I
understand now what you were saying". When asked if they would willing
go back to 2D now that they "get" 3-D they all ways say no.

The point is to listen to the suggestions of other users and ignore
everything you know about AutoCAD. When the light bulb goes off you
will understand. In the mean time HAVE FUN!!!!!!

I used AutoCAD for 12 years prior to switching to SW back in 97.

Best of luck and welcome...

Len
 
Paul,

I, too, worked in 3D AutoCAD for many years before switching to
SolidWorks.

What is frustrating you right now is a common feeling most have, but it
passes. Now, it has been a few years since I even tried to make a
solid in AutoCAD, but when I was using it there wasn't a tree which is
one of the greatest flexibilities of any tree-based system over the
AutoCAD I remember.

When I was creating something in AutoCAD I would make copies of the
part as I was working on it in case I made a mistake. Let's say, early
on, you needed to put a fillet on your part, but later (after a couple
saves) you find that that fillet was messed up. Without the tree your
options were to revert to an older version or figure out a way to
fill-in the fillet geometry (that was always frustrating). Tree-based
systems don't have that issue as you can always change what you have
created.

The hardest part of the switch-over for me was the use of relations in
sketches. The AutoCAD theory that a created line/arc/circle/spline is
set in stone unless you move it with a move command was hard to
overcome. In SolidWorks when you move a line -- ten other things may
move with it causing a "what the hell is going on" moment. Once you
learn to control this you will thrive off of it. I now make a point to
fully constrain every (or nearly) sketch. This is actually a strength.
In AutoCAD you could draw a line tangent to a circle, but it couldn't
be constrained that way so you end up either redrawing the line, the
circle, or both everytime you need to make a change, but this is not
the case in SWx. Their is nothing cooler than having all your
relations properly set to make a sketch change with the input of a
modified dimension. The hardest part of relations is learning to
constrain a sketch properly for any changes you may need to make, but
sketches can always be modified if something over-constrains during a
change.

In assembly mode SWx is very different than AutoCAD (similar to
AutoCAD's sketching). In AutoCAD a 3D part is locked in place in the
model until you use a move or rotate command. When you build an
Assembly in AutoCAD you need to use numerous command to place each item
where it belongs(all those rotate and move commands and constantly
changing the working plane). Once you learn SWx you'll see that each
part in an assembly requires a maximum of three relations (or am I
off-base here) to lock a part in place. Some parts will require less
(screws and nuts typically require two). The best part about SWx
relations over AutoCAD is you can move parts to see an assembly's
motion.

I believe once you conquer these two areas you'll change your tune. I
haven't missed AutoCAD at all in the realm of 3D.

Dan Sommerfeld
Design Engineer
ITW-Dahti Technologies
 
When you build an
Assembly in AutoCAD you need to use numerous command to place each item

where it belongs(all those rotate and move commands and constantly
changing the working plane).

Huh? One command - align (al)
 
CS said:
Oh yeah also SolidWorks for Dummies (that wasn't a joke or a slam ;^)
Click to expand...


Yeah, if you can find someone who went to SolidWorks World (I'm amazed how
many people came from around the world) they'll probably give you the free
copy they got. (Most people who go to SWW probably don't need their copy.)

Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"
 
In addition to some of the other (quite good) advice I might offer that you are
a victim of advertising (crafted especially for you, the 2D going to 3D
designer). If you have no prior experience in parametric solid modeling, top
down design techniques, etc. you are in for a pretty steep learning curve. Get
some good info; books, tutorial, training and plan on living and breathing SW
for several months and you'll be well on your way.

You know; there are designers that are probably better off staying with 2D, at
least partially, but if you consider 50 parts to be a large assembly I doubt you
are one of them. What sort of products or industry are you involved with?
 
2. Getting some of the excellent books out there I.E.: >Solidworks for
Dummies by Greg Jankowski, or any of >the Planchard & Planchard books.
Click to expand...

Mike, I learned the basics of solidworks 2003 with Sham Ticko's book - what
do you think on this book?
 
"Huh? One command - align (al)"

Which version of AutoCAD is that in? Like I said, I haven't used it in
many years for 3D work. I do remember Mech Desktop having many more
options, but we already were using SolidWorks when we got Mech Desktop
so I didn't do much in it.

Dan S.
 
I seem to recall Align and 3dAlign in Autocad2000 I abandoned 3dAllign
it had rounding issues that caused SOLDRAW to crash. The rotation
would be really close but it would be off by .000000123 degrees or
something rediculous.

Corey
 
Thank you all for your messages,

Now I have seen, that i'm not alone in this SW-World, and that is
hartwarming
and i will take notice of all the answers that are given to me
and i hope that i can answer some of the future questions,
of beginning SW'ers and so i will close the chain of hope

Friendly Greetings to you all

Paul van Uden
Innovation Designer (NL)
 
Paul,

Relations are one of the basic principals of using a parametric
modeler. Every feature is supposed to rest on a previous feature. You
will have to learn to plan the dependencies when you model. What this
allows you to do is capture design intent. For example, ACAD allows you
to create a hole before you create the block containing the hole. SW
does not allow this.

Where ACAD closely mimics what you would do with pencil and paper, SW
closely mimics what you would do with a milling machine.

Learn to use the Parent/Child relationship information you get by right
clicking in the feature tree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest threads

Back
Top