Solidworks vs UG
Solidworks vs UG
(OP)
For the last few years I have been banging my head in frustration. The company that I work in we have two sets of engineers. One set uses UG and another team uses Solidworks.
CAD files are given to both teams, but I love it when the Solidworks team is involved because I am a Solidworks user and can hand over native files. When working with the UG team they have to reconstruct the parasolid that I hand over to them (which seems to me like a big waste)
This would not be much of an issue if UG wasnt so slow. From my point of view every feature seems to be nested and calling up top level assemblies seems to be a big problem. Changes in UG take about twice as long as changes in Solidworks. (please proceed to educate me as to what I am not seeing)
Apart from disparaging remarks like calling Solidworks a toy and "Saladworks", I have not heard any solid reasons that UG is better for our purposes (we design a range of products from GPS hand-held to large assembly products 500-1000 parts). If anything- the geometry from SWX we hand over tends to be cleaner! We have robust models that can be modified faster. My team is a human factors engineering team and hand down the ergonomic interface elements down for further detailing.
What did you get for the money that you paid. Perhaps UG needs power users to unlock its power. If anyone can give me good info I would appreciate it very much. Is there a particular threshold beyond which the power of UG is fully utilized?
I feel like I have never been given a straight anser either way and would love to hear a UG engineers point of view. Thank you for your time.
CAD files are given to both teams, but I love it when the Solidworks team is involved because I am a Solidworks user and can hand over native files. When working with the UG team they have to reconstruct the parasolid that I hand over to them (which seems to me like a big waste)
This would not be much of an issue if UG wasnt so slow. From my point of view every feature seems to be nested and calling up top level assemblies seems to be a big problem. Changes in UG take about twice as long as changes in Solidworks. (please proceed to educate me as to what I am not seeing)
Apart from disparaging remarks like calling Solidworks a toy and "Saladworks", I have not heard any solid reasons that UG is better for our purposes (we design a range of products from GPS hand-held to large assembly products 500-1000 parts). If anything- the geometry from SWX we hand over tends to be cleaner! We have robust models that can be modified faster. My team is a human factors engineering team and hand down the ergonomic interface elements down for further detailing.
What did you get for the money that you paid. Perhaps UG needs power users to unlock its power. If anyone can give me good info I would appreciate it very much. Is there a particular threshold beyond which the power of UG is fully utilized?
I feel like I have never been given a straight anser either way and would love to hear a UG engineers point of view. Thank you for your time.





RE: Solidworks vs UG
RE: Solidworks vs UG
There were lot of discussions about these in these forum.
Its all depends on where to use and why to use.
Please search thru this forum and you will find more about this.
Please check this "http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=11036"
RE: Solidworks vs UG
RE: Solidworks vs UG
The company I work for is similar in their approach as yours. I am a UG driver and often hand parts over to the solidworks operators, and I share in your frustrations.
We use UG because we work with complex shapes that are not easily defined and manipulated in SW. One of the advantages of UG (which we do not take advantage of) is in the seamless compatibility between the design and manufacture of parts.
I agree that in most instances, SW is indeed faster and easier to use to create and modify parts. It does lack however in meeting the needs of our customers to model and control complex aerodynamic forms. Unfortunately for us, we will design, model and detail parts in UG, only to have the final assemblies done in SW. This, to me, seems a waste of valuable time and effort whenever any changes are required. The excuse given is that we have more SW licenses and it would be cost prohibitive to buy more seats of UG. Penny wise and pound foolish in my opinion.
Hopefully, there will be more posts explaining which circumstances UG is the better program.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
If the design work requires just making fast simple shapes, then solid-works scores over high end cad softwares. eg. designing of printing machinery or for that matter any machinery design.
At the point, where the design turns a bit complicated, the high end start scoring points like aerodynamics, free form designs etc.
that apart, mid-range softwares like solid-work / edge are desinged for faster performance for purely design related works and does not encompass the wide variety of funcationalities like mfg, analysis, motion etc.
rgds
Anil acharya
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Any UG users have had this problem. Recommendations are appreciated.
Here is hardware spec:
1 gig ram, dell workstation PWS420 x86 family 6 model 8 stepping 6, nvidia quatro pro graphics card
RE: Solidworks vs UG
If the Solidworks models have higher surface quality, which in our case they do (granted we dont do class A), what other advantages does UG have. So far most people have hit on surface creation and analysis tools as being the plus- but Solidworks has been really pushing on the surfacing front, and can create at least c2 tangency.
Maybe the crux of the answer lies here-o you know that UG is too powerful for you?
RE: Solidworks vs UG
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.
Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Memory is important, UG will happily use up all you have and then some. I'd recommend at least 2 gigabytes if you have large assemblies. Also, I have heard that UG will convert older part files up to the latest version when it opens it (someone else please confirm or deny this). So if there are many older files in your assembly it may be taking time to convert the file as it opens it. If you open the file and don't save it then it has to do it again next time. This can significantly increase load times.
PlasticFantastic,
I deal with mostly injection molded parts for consumer goods and I stronly suspect that UG is much more power than we need. Our model shop occasionally uses the machining aspect of UG, and we do what would be considered class A surfacing (though our surfaces are nowhere near as important as airfoils or car bodies). I have not used Solidworks or Solidedge so I cannot make a direct comparison, but from what I have read and heard either seems like it would work fine for us. I think there are 2 stumbling blocks for switching software: compatibility and user buy in. Even if we went with Solidedge (made by the same company as UG) there would be headaches with all our existing files (of which there are many) and we would end up needing a seat or two of UG until all of those files became obsolete (maybe longer). And users grow strangely fond of (and defensive of) the software they use (bugs and all). There would be much resistance (mostly undeserved) if we switched. To sum it up, it is my opinion that it is momentum keeping my company on UG.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
We run ug_refile_part on all library and purchased component files when we upgrade UG versions.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.
Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand
RE: Solidworks vs UG
What is a ug_refile_part ?
where do i get this and how to use?
thank you
RE: Solidworks vs UG
It comes with UG. Look in the the <loadpoint>UGII folder for refile_part.exe.
Help is available if you run it from a command prompt with no options or -h.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.
Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand
RE: Solidworks vs UG
thank you
RE: Solidworks vs UG
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Even the more complex surfacing we do seems easier in Solidworks. UG does give you more options but often when you select them, you can't edit them later and switch an option, oh and the interface changes. Solidworks editing is way faster and consistent.
UG has the upper hand in expressions, selecting objects for use in features, and the ability to change all aspects of drawing objects(colors, etc.)
I hate messing with layers and modeling tolerances probably more than anything. They are needed for UG because of it's interface, but they aren't needed in the CAD modeling world.
Looking forward to NX3 or 4 whenever we get it as the interface is suppossed to be better.
Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Please explain how that's possible. Then explain how one is supposed to model freeform surfaces that are 100% accurate in relation to the adjoining edges & the relating curves that create the surfaces. Since numbers are infinte & the software's coding rounds off the calculations being used to create the geometry, where have tolerances not been used in some fashion? If there's a CAD modeler out there that's not using tolerances for surfacing/freeform modeling in some fashion, then I want it.
I don't mind hearing critical remarks about UG at all, because EVERY modeling software has some sort of downside to it. Had UG been introduced 10-15 years ago & originally spawned from a Windows environment, I would expect it to function more consistently or smoothly like Solid Edge, Solidworks, Inventor or some of the other (and somewhat unfairly labeled) mid-range softwares. However, UG is one of the older CAD softwares & has had code built on top of code as well as going through interface changes & now a merging of two completely different softwares (IDEAS & UG). Based on the replies here, it's usually surfacing & super sized assemblies where the 'mid-range' softwares stumble & those are the main reasons UG & CATIA are favored in the larger industries.
Unfortunately, there isn't a single software out there that can be called THE best without a doubt because it's up to you & your company to choose the one (sometimes more) that fits into what YOU need.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
RE: Solidworks vs UG
If you aren't doing freeform, I can see no reason to use UG over Solidworks, Solidedge or even Inventor. The maint is higher and you don't get everything you get with the "Mid Range" packages.
Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
I've been creating Class A surfaces natively in UG for close to 10 years & the ONLY time I have to adjust ANY tolerance for Freeform Features is if the curve quality creating the FFF is not what it should be. As a matter of fact, if you go to a UGS-led training class, they will tell you the same thing (so do the folks at Alias). Freeform surfacing in relation to the parent curves is more often than not a garbage in garbage out type of operation. 90% of the time you can take a situation where you've had to raise tolerances & find the problem resides in the curves in some way. Fix the curves & then there is no need to adjust the tolerances.
If you're having to adjust tolerances on features or feature operations as well as Freeform Features, then maybe you need to re-evaluate your default tolerances or techniques (used in UG). I personally would not feel comfortable not knowing what tolerances I was modeling at (tolerances blind to user in Solidworks). Maybe you're modeling at a tolerance that's very forgiving (0.05) in SW compared to a much tighter tolerance in UG....but the fact is, you don't KNOW what you're modeling at, which in my area of usage isn't acceptable. Hence why we're using using UG and CATIA (which by the way makes Solidworks as I'm sure you know, and in v4 the tighest one could model was at 0.01mm but has since been changed to 0.001mm in v5). However, it may be quite acceptable for the parts you are/were creaing in SW.
Like I said in my previous post, it's probably much wiser to invest in a CAD system that fits your needs than a CAD system that is high end only because it's high end & not because you can create parts in it in an efficient manner. If Solidworks or any other midrange software fits your needs, then by all means use it. My personal opinion is that yes, they are very nice programs & they probably come closer than UG, IDEAS & CATIA to being a complete AND affordable modeling solution. However, they sometimes stumble in specific areas when dealing with massive assemblies, large PDM databases, Class A surfacing, machining, non-linear FEA, natural frequency & having the ability of designing a complex part completely through, as Ben said, the concept to final part...it's not just freeform. Sometimes it's because of downstream applications or the complexity of the part being modeled.
I was simply pointing out that tolerances are always used in math-based CAD in some way & that midrange systems don't ALWAYS fit everyone's needs and that is where UG, CATIA & IDEAS fall into place. Unless we all start designing the exact same parts and thinking the exact same way, I don't feel anyone can prove one system is better than another.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Can you elaborate bit more on the curve quality, not sure what you mean by that.
Solidworks would work here as we don't do large assemblies or class a surfacing, but there's a lot of legacy UG stuff and I don't have much say in the matter anyway.
Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Regarding tolerances, it's just going to depend on your product & the required or acceptable surface appearance. For example, there is more than likely a larger tolerance (like 0.001" [0.025mm] or higher) used when modeling a cast finish engine part than there is when modeling surfaces to be used on the surfaces used for exterior automotive surfaces like a car body, interior surfaces (dash, seat, etc.) or even visible wheel surfaces. The appearance isn't as critical to the cast engine part, therefore the tolerance may be able to be loosened up a but (made larger). If you're using the 0.00000001", that is even tighter than what is used in Class A surfacing (at least in the automotive application). I would consider 0.00254" (0.0001mm) to be very tight (and difficult) to model in UG. We use 0.0254" (0.001mm) for our surfacing & rarely have any problems (such as having surface edges show up) when we cut our models into wood composite for verification. That is entirely preference, not fact. It might be good for you to read some of the tolerance-related posts on the UG BBS Notes webpage or even post a question relating to the usage of tolerances in UG to get a better idea of what might fit YOUR application. I can't speak for SW though.
I'll do my best to elaborate on the curves, but it's difficult to transfer that into words. Also, I'm not claiming this as "law" for freeform modelers, this is just what I have been instructed & practice, but may conflict with information other folks have learned or practice when using UG. Also, some of this information may be word for word from the UG Industrial Design training manual. The problem here is trying to explain this without visual examples for you too see what I'm talking about. And there is quite a bit of material to explain. Due to time constraints, I may have to respond in several posts at different times.
Basically, if you do not pay close attention to the characteristics of your curves when surfacing (like spline degree & segmentation), then you may have a difficult time predicting the results that you will get with your surfaces or with secondary or tertiary surfaces (such as blends or blend surfaces). Surfaces inherit their degree & patch count directly from the curves that are used to create them. In certain instances, if a spline's degree is too high or the segment count is too high, the resulting surface may appear to have discontinuities. Or if your parent curve(s) have too low of a degree or segment count, the surface may deviate (be further away) from the general shape of the parent curve(s) or be very difficult to control the desired shape/look of the surface. Really it just depends on how strict you need to be with the quality of surfaces.
"Splines have a degree and a segment count. The number of poles is related to both the degree and segment count. A spline will have AT LEAST one more pole than its degree. (A 3 degree spline will have at least 4 poles but could have more poles). If you know the degree of a spline, you can calculate the number of segments" as follows: # of poles - degree = # of segments. Also, the higher the # of segments in a spline, the closer the spline will be to the poles.
Based on the calculation above, a 3 degree spline with 5 poles will have 2 segments. This type of curve is quite easy to work with. But a 3 degree spline with 10 poles will have 8 segments, which will make the curve closer to the poles, but more difficult to manipulate because of the high number of segments. The higher the number of segments, the higher the patch count in your surfaces, which CAN (but not always) cause problems when editing or create discontinuities like ripples or dips in the surface. So, if you're not paying attention to your curves, then any problems you may be having with surfaces might trace back to the curves themselves.
Other modeling techniques can also come into play when it comes to tolerance issues. For example, if you're creating surfaces, make sure they pass completely through any bounding surfaces that you may use to trim to later on. If at all possible, avoid trimming to edges & trim to faces or bodies. Edges have tolerances & you also set a tolerance to a Trim. Using an edge as a trim boundary MAY (not always) lead to tolerances stacking up & increasing more & more as you get further along in your modeling. I know that sometimes it's impossible to avoid using edges as trim boundaries and that's fine, but if you can, then by all means avoid it.
I would recommend playing around with curve quality, specifically spline quality and the resulting surface degree & patch counts. Keep the degree for splines as low as you can (3 deg. min. & 5 deg. max with maybe 7 deg being the absolute stopping point). Keep the segment count for splines as low as you can. This will sort of cause you headaches at first, but once you get a feel for it, you will begin to see the results in the surfaces & eventually get a sort of "feel" for it. Use your analysis tools in UG. Look at the splines, the curvature combs, the segments, the degree/segments of curves vs. resulting surface degree/patches. You should start to see what I'm talking about if I've explained this well enough. I'm not a very good teacher unfortunately.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
RE: Solidworks vs UG
In solidworks, splines have no degree, or no option to specify one. You just click the points where you want them. If you want more you right click it and insert one, if you want less you select it and hit delete.
Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
I'll have to do some research on giving you a straight definition of a spline segment. I don't want to pass along inaccurate information.
I find it quite interesting that SW doesn't place as much importance on the splines or the information about the splines as UG does. Maybe the folks at SW just didn't feel that complex surfacing was something they wanted to get into & wanted to keep things as simple as possible. I would be willing to guess that by default SW models with 3 degree splines just to keep things standardized. It could also have something to do with the level of math that the entire software is based upon...maybe it just can't handle high order curves & surfaces as far as creation is concerned. Would be interesting to know the details.
It DOES get difficult when you begin working with higher degree splines & surfaces in any software....at least in terms of knowing what sort of behavior to expect when using certain types of splines & the nature of the resulting surfaces.
Also, please remember that when I explain details of modeling, I'm speaking in terms of UG only. Other softwares may or may not be similar or they may or may not place as much emphasis on the curves side of things. It all just depends on the tools you have to work with & the intent of the software.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
RE: Solidworks vs UG
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Do you happen to know what characteristics would result in C0 or C1 knots being applied to a spline? At a glance, it appears that it is degree/pole related, as I opened UG & created a 2 degree spline with 4 points & the resulting spline had 2 segments with 1 C1 knot. It's been a while since formal training, but I'm thinking that if you lower the degree while increasing segment count then the spline will lie closer to the poles & be "stiffer" due to the decrease in type of continuity assigned to the knot(s).
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
RE: Solidworks vs UG
This is the first time I ever heard someone state that solidworks is better then UG in advanced surfaces. I´m wondering if he really talkes about advanced surfaces as class A.
About tolerance tweaking, the only time I need to tweak it is when get bad data to work with.
I´m working with UG, Catia V5 and alias, I have tried Solidworks, solidegde and inventor and must say that if you with non complex parts the three last mentioned system works just fine but when it gets complicated they aren´t in the same league
RE: Solidworks vs UG
"About spline degrees, a 5 degree multisegment spline will get c2 continuity. Prefered for styling if you don´t use single segment splines."
It is C3 continuity
RE: Solidworks vs UG
UG does indeed have more tools for creating curves and surfaces than Solidworks. Solidworks is just easier for most stuff I've run across here, at least what I've found when I go home and try modeling it in Solidworks. Something that I and even an experienced co-worker struggled to get to work in UG was a breeze in Solidworks. Also I never done much freeform surfacing even in Solidworks so there's a learning curve there too.
I'm not here to UG bash, fact is I work with UG so I'm trying to make the most of it.
Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
The knot type can also be a result of using 'join curve' indiscriminately. For example, if you draw a quick rectangle and use join curves on the 4 lines you will end up with a degree 3 spline with c0 knots. Be careful with 'join curve', it gives you what you ask for - not necessarily what you want.
It is true if you lower the degree, the spline will lie closer to the poles, however, (to be consistent with the UG docs) I would call this spline "looser" (or maybe "pliable"). UG documentation defines a stiff spline as one that doesn't lie close to the poles (ie a large change in pole location results in a small change in the spline). I wouldn't recommend using anything lower than a degree 3 spline, and if you do high end class A stuff (I don't) you may want to use degree 5 splines as Azrael has suggested.
Regular splines in UG only report c0, c1, and c2 knots but a degree 4 (or higher) spline could technically have c3 knots. I wonder if knots higher than c2 are simply not reported or if you can only get them using studio splines?
RE: Solidworks vs UG
I really like the Shape Studio Curve on Surface, but it lacks (at least in NX2) the ability of assigning continuity across multiple surfaces.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Using UG NX, if you put in a spline by poles, and select "single segment", the curve degree option grays out. Is the degree of the spline then driven by the number of poles? ie Poles-1=Degree
I'm curious because in the "good spines" tips, it says:
* Use single segment splines whenever possible.
* Use degree 3 splines when possible
-Dave
Everything should be designed as simple as possible, but not simpler.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
I believe this is limited by the mathematics used, not by the software. A similar question was asked some time ago in this forum, and nkwheelguy (I think it was Tim) posted a very good explanation.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
"Notice that the curve degree and closed curve options are no longer selectable. The curve degree will be derived from the number of points used to create the spline"
-Dave
Everything should be designed as simple as possible, but not simpler.
RE: Solidworks vs UG
What About UG open ?
No other cad package has this much functionality if we go for automation work.With 4 years of experience in UG i definitely believe that UG is the best for customisation work and all other packages are years behind UG in this field.
For repititive kind of work and customised model creation no other CAD package can beat UG. With Knowledge fusion adding power to customisation work definitely UG is my Choice .
Thanks,
KarthikJ
QuEST
RE: Solidworks vs UG
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com