×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

What the big guys use?

What the big guys use?

What the big guys use?

(OP)
I did a search in the forum and found a couple of threads from a few years ago talking about how Boeing using Catia, etc.  I was wondering if any of this has changed with the latest versions of Solidworks.  I was always curious as to what the big guys like Boeing, Airbus, all the big car companies, Nasa, our government, etc. uses for their engineering departments.  I was watching a discover channel show about a month back where they were showing the building of the new Airbus A380 plane and there were some seens of the engineers working on their computers with a 3d model of the actual plane but I couldn't tell what software they were using, in any event, those have got to be some HUGE assembly files.

RE: What the big guys use?

I have done work with about 4-5 fortune 500 companies (Gillette, Proctor & Gamble, Boeing), and they either use Catia (pretty preminant in aircraft industry), or Unigraphics.  Since Solidworks is fairly new in regards to Catia and UG, i think thats why they use them because they were the only thing available.  I know that some of them are starting to move to Solidworks due to its ever growing use.

Mike Puckett
Los Angeles/Orange County
Solidworks User Group

RE: What the big guys use?

They seem to often use CATIA or other full PLM packages. It is also common for companies to developed in house packages if they need them. SolidWorks is not used for this kind of thing because it does not have fully featured PLM control and it is not robust enough to deal with such complex referencing in general.

RE: What the big guys use?

The big guys are using the likes of Pro-E and SDRC Ideas, and those companies catered to them.  In slips SW and pulled the rug out from under them.  Most large corporations have seats of solidworks, but may not use it as the core system.  I find it similar to the Mac era when Macs hung onto life due to the extensive use in the publishing world.  If you've ever seen a Pro-E demo vs. a Solidworks demo you probably know the history.  I've used both SDRC and Solidworks starting back in 89 switching to SW in 96, it's definately matured over the years.

John

RE: What the big guys use?

I remember back in the early 90's when Pro/e was the new kid on the block.....I saw a reluctance to spending thousands of dollars transfering data.  It was very expensive for a small company to buy a 3D MCAD design tool because they ran on UNIX based workstations which cost $25K-$50K plus the cost of software.  It wasn't until the mid 90's that PTC ported Pro/e to Windows NT.  Oh, times have changed thanks to SWx and Solid Edge which have put a strong hold onto PTC's customer base.

Here are the details how I know them:

Boeing aircraft(includes Phantom Works MAC-Douglas) - CATIA
Boeing Space Systems (formely Hughs Space & Comm) - Pro/e
Raytheon - Pro/e
Lockheed Martin (Skunk Works) - CATIA & some Pro/e
Lockheed Martin Missile Systems - SDRC Ideas & some Pro/e

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
very interesting, I wonder if the big guys will one day use Solidworks for their core systems.... it just seems that solidworks is so much easier to use than the others, but I am not sure of what features sw is missing over the others..

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote (solidmecman):

I wonder if the big guys will one day use Solidworks for their core systems....

I doubt it.  There are some things SolidWorks isn't even close to doing as well as CATIA and UG, especially w.r.t. complex surface building.  Styled surfaces and surfaces that dependend on mathematic qualities (like airfoils and nozzles) would still be better off in UG.

RE: What the big guys use?

I think that what will most likely happen, is that the translation tools between SW and CATIA may become better, allowing for smaller companies to work with the big boys. My example here is, as a boeing supplier, being contractually required to deliver in CATIA. You get CATIA, as already stated, for the PLM ability, not so much for the actual down and dirty part modeling tools.

Yes, solidworks, seems easier to use, but it is much harder to customize. This is what imho seems to make SW easier to use... because so much goes on "behind the scenes".

But since they are both owned by DS, then hopefully they will eventually integrate them better.

But who knows... people have talked about this for a couple of years now...  

Wes C.
------------------------------
When they broke open molecules, they found they were only stuffed with atoms. But when they broke open atoms, they found them stuffed with explosions...

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote (solidmecman):

I wonder if the big guys will one day use Solidworks for their core systems....

The cost of transfering legacy data is out of this world.  Let along maintaining two high systems for a decade until the transfer is completed.  I was involved in some data transfer between CADDAM and SDRC Ideas....It was a costly venture.  I have a friend that did a contract with Freightliner for this very thing.  They were transfering from CATIA 4 to CATIA 5 and from what I hear was a huge project that affected every department in the organization.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

solidmecman,
The Airbus A380 is done on Catia.

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
okay so I guess both Boeing and Airbus use Catia, interesting, aerospace is what has always interested me the greatest.  I wonder if there is big money/big demand for 3d engineers in aerospace companies.

RE: What the big guys use?

I wonder what people use for castings and forgings that have complex contours. Our castings were drawn years ago by draftsmen who were pretty handy with a french curve and circle templates, plus the pattern maker might have done some blending to make it all fit together. Converting that into a solid model has been very difficult with the operations allowed by Solidworks. I also can't imagine how a shape like a car body could be done with Solidworks.

RE: What the big guys use?

These days, Engineers must know 3D design for aerospace. In general...If you can't grasp the 3D modelling concept, aerospace engineering is not your field. CATIA is the big software for aerospace and automotive.

Chris
Systems Analyst
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
and do you think all these big engineering places use 3dconnexion controllers?  I was debating whether to get a SpaceBall 5000 or the the SpaceTraveler, can't make up my mind yet..

RE: What the big guys use?

EngJW,

You said:  "Our castings were drawn years ago by draftsmen who were pretty handy with a french curve and circle templates, plus the pattern maker might have done some blending to make it all fit together. Converting that into a solid model has been very difficult with the operations allowed by Solidworks."

   Do you know how to utilize the surfacing commands in solidworks to create geometry?  Check out these sites...

http://www.productdesignforums.com/index.php?showtopic=230
http://www.productdesignforums.com/index.php?showtopic=2221
http://www.mikejwilson.com/solidworks/solidworks_files.htm
http://www.zxys.com/swparts/

RE: What the big guys use?

I heard Chrysler, BMW & Mercedes are also using CATIA. Plus I know for sure Pratt & Whitney is using CATIA.

RE: What the big guys use?

Might add - Canadair is using CATIA, so is Bell Helicopter (at least in Mirabel - Montreal)

I think Rolls-Royce is (was ??) using CADDS5

RE: What the big guys use?

From what I have seen so far with new CATIA and future, looks like CAT and SW will have more similarities. Also, possibly become one software in the future...one high end and one lower end.
I can see both capturing all engineering with the exception of Arch, that is where ADesk has the market.

Chris
Systems Analyst
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
well Autocad is still much more widely used than solidworks isn't it?  even though acad is 2d haven't most companies NOT switched to 3d yet?  I would of thought that Inventor would be much more popular with all of the existing autocad users..

RE: What the big guys use?

ACAD isn't 2D, but the solid modeling is primarily basic geometrics.  Inventor is a fierce competitor to SW and works hard to lower its price to stay ahead in the market.  It isn't entirely successful.  While it does have more seats in the market, its annual sales, I believe, is losing ground to SW...at least, that's the rumors I 'hear'.

RE: What the big guys use?

Acad has a huge 3rd party market--the last I heard it was around 4,000 programs. When we were looking at Acad and Cadkey (in the 90's) we found out that Acad had 3,500 3rd party programs to Cadkey's 150, but that Cadkey had more 3rd party mechanical engineering  programs than Acad! The mechanical users of Cadkey were better served because Acad was (and still is) primarily a Civil Engrg/Architectural 2D program. Inventor is Abase of 2D to 3D users who haven't switched. But they lost a lot of their mechanical engineering users to Sworks and other low-end parametric solids programs before they got their heads out of the ground and developed Inventor.

So, to answer the question:

Quote:

Autocad is still much more widely used than solidworks isn't it?
Yes. But the wide base of Acad users can't switch to SolidWorks because it doesn't work so well in their disciplines.

RE: What the big guys use?

Don't forget ACAD also give all it's Mechanical Desktop users and I think ACAD users free Inventor seats, but without Maintanance.

That brings their numbers up quite a bit... that's like cheating to me though. I honestly hate AutoCAD simply because they dropped the ball on their users for years. They would have been on top if they had not let their power ego trip confuse their path. That is obivous because when SW came out they struggled for years to come up with something that would work. MDT is a prime example of how hard they tried and it fell flat on it's face when it was released... IMO.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376

RE: What the big guys use?

We are having a training session on Acad2006 Machanical (what a joke). The trainer told us that each seat of Invento comes with a seat of Autocad and  MDT! There are still some die hard users of MDT out there, and they're trying to woo them to Inventor.

RE: What the big guys use?

I'm about 6'2", I don't know if that makes me a 'BIG GUY'

...but I use SolidWorks.

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote:

I'm about 6'2", I don't know if that makes me a 'BIG GUY'

...but I use SolidWorks.
thumbsup
I agree that AutoDesk is "cheating" in the numbers game by giving Inventor away, they were doing that 5 years ago.  I don't know if I am a "die hard" MDT user, but when it came to parametric modeling, MDT was better 5 years ago than SW is today.  Their equations/variables were much easier to work with.  

Flores
SW06 SP2.0

RE: What the big guys use?

Getting back to what the big guys use - back when I worked for Lockheed in Sunnyvale we had a dedicated onsite support engineer from SDRC to help with training and issues when converting legacy data.  I once heard that LM bought 600 seats for the entire corporation.  I know every engineer had a HP workstation on their desk for MCAD apps and a MAC for e-mails and such.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

With all due respect I'm having a hard time believing you!  I've used Inventor which according to A-Desk is their next generation above MDT and it sucked.  SWx 98+ was better then Inventor 5.3......so I challenge you to find one person on this forum or any supporting data (links to articles) that supports your opinion.

Quote:

I don't know if I am a "die hard" MDT user, but when it came to parametric modeling, MDT was better 5 years ago than SW is today.  Their equations/variables were much easier to work with.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote:

I don't know if I am a "die hard" MDT user, but when it came to parametric modeling, MDT was better 5 years ago than SW is today.  Their equations/variables were much easier to work with.

Solidworks equations do blow, but configurations almost completely make up for it. MDT better than SWX? I think not. I'm glad I left that garbage behind. If was better, how come they developed Inventor?

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2005 SP5.0 on WinXP SP2
SolidWorks 2006 SP1.0 on WinXP SP2

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
since many of you have worked for large companies as mechanical engineers using programs such as solidworks, etc. can you comment on what the pay scales are like in this field of work?  I am just using Solidworks for my own business endevor.

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote (rfus):

I'm about 6'2", I don't know if that makes me a 'BIG GUY'

That's it just 6'2"... hehe I got you beat... I'm 6'7"

Cheers,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376

RE: What the big guys use?

In automotive, as a rough guide:

DCX use CATIA. GM uses UG. Ford use IDEAS but are moving to CATIA.

I think you guys are focussing far too much on ease of use at the desktop level. The real cost in a large company is database maintenance and version control. Bunging lines on screens is just the fun part.

Round here a top end 3d designer with some supervisory responsibility will be on a scale up to about 85k US (ie the same as an engineer), but our cost of living is pretty low. Straight out of uni it's more like 40k.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: What the big guys use?

Jack0841 said: "Plus I know for sure Pratt & Whitney is using CATIA." But that is only P&W-Canada.

Pratt&Whitney-USA and GE Engines both use UG.
GE Locomotive uses 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
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
Well it's been nice to hear about everybodies opinions, does anybody in this thread work for a good size engineering company as a 3d mech designer?

RE: What the big guys use?

Nice thread.  I work in the MCAD industry, as it stands now 32 out of the 38 major autmobile manufactures do use Catia, as well as a lot of the aerospace industry.  This is primarily due to the class A surfacing that is required in this industry.  As SolidWorks continues to develop over the years, we will be seeing this capability grow as well.  

Having worked with several company's using SDRC Ideas, it is painful to watch their day to day process.  More and more of these companies are starting to put aside their notion that their software is "superior", and in fact been neglected from years of automotive tier demand.  As the US marked moves further and further away from Automotive dependancy, and the notion that if Chrystler is using Catia I have to use Catia, you will see much more of the MCAD market (SolidWorks, Inventor, Solid Edge, ProE) grow to fill these voids.  I have worked with many of these tools and found their "Advanced" capabilied to be way overshadowed by their bulkiness, slow performance and cost of ownership.

RE: What the big guys use?

Heckler, Gildashard
I never said that MDT is bettern than SW: re-read my post. Do you just start drawing lines and circles and let the chips fall where they may, or do you think ahead of what may be modified and build your parts with design intent?  For example,
http://multiterra.mooload.com/file.php?file=files/1134572711/Stairs_and_Handrail.pdf is and old drawing in MDT 6 with Power Pack.  After doing this for awhile, you know that "in-field" measurements are hardly ever on the mark to pre-production drawings.  I knew that the height, length, etc. of the stairs would change.  I put the numbers in design variables, and after in-field measurement of the site, I changed a few variables, and everything from the steps to the hand-rails and guard-rails updated.
Double-click a dimension and you can easily enter design-variables by picking them from a list.
http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/1225/dimdoubleclick6ty.jpg

Not until 2005 did SW include global variables, and once made, they cannot be renamed on the fly.  You can't just double-click a dim for modification, you have to pick the text.  
I can't comment on Inventor because I never used it.
Uh-oh, did I just open Pandora's Box?

Flores
SW06 SP2.0

RE: What the big guys use?

Greg

Quote:

Round here a top end 3d designer with some supervisory responsibility will be on a scale up to about 85k US (ie the same as an engineer), but our cost of living is pretty low. Straight out of uni it's more like 40k.

What's the employment outlook like in the UK?  I've often thought about moving back to the UK.  That salary for a MCAD designer is a lot better then what I've seen here in the USA.

Ben,

When did you leave IR?

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote (14_Dec_05_10:47):

I never said that MDT is bettern than SW

Quote (13_Dec_05_17:57):

but when it came to parametric modeling, MDT was better 5 years ago than SW is today

cheers
Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

RE: What the big guys use?

smcadman (Mechanical)
CBL: touché, ALMOST!  It seems we are forgetting the caveat

Quote:

but when it came to parametric modeling,

http://alum.wpi.edu/~gregm/thesis/node11.html

Quote:

Another feature of modern CAD systems is the ability to create parametric models. In a parametric model, each entity, such as a boolean primitive, a line or arc in a wireframe, or a filleting operation, has parameters associated with it. ... These parameters can be changed by the operator as necessary to create the desired part.

http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=146865

Quote:

Then came parametric modeling engines that used parameters (numbers or characteristics) to determine the behavior of a graphical entity and define relationships between model components -- for example, "the diameter of this hole is 1 inch" or "the center of this hole is midway between these edges." This meant that the design criteria or intent could be captured during the modeling process. Editing the model became much easier and preserved the original design intent.
I try to use a structured, methodical process to create parts and assemblies, and equations WAS one of the ways that I achieved that.  If you never use equations in your parts or assemblies, then any points brought up with equations are moot.

Flores
SW06 SP2.0

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
smcadman, don't want to bring this topic into something else, but I thought that's the whole purpose of design tables in solidworks.  you can just change the dimensions in a design table and then the model will update.  Or if you want, link these design tables to specific configurations so you can see the model in many different ways by just changing an excel spreadsheet.

RE: What the big guys use?

It's good for that, but has many other uses as well. THe help lists many of the thing that a DT can reference.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376

RE: What the big guys use?

Yeah, SW is parametric, so we have tools like equations and design tables, however something like CATIA is more parametric in that it can also control complex relationships in parts. CATIA supports the whole Product Lifecycle Management system; every aspect of a product, from original design, through development to managing the production line can be done with Dassault Systems suite of tools. CATIA being the best known of these. These tools are designed for large design and development teams, SolidWorks and other desktop packages do not compare in that they do not support the same kind of pipeline. I can’t imagine that SolidWorks will ever threaten CATIA and other PLM packages because SolidWorks is not designed to be used in that way. As was mentioned earlier, the drawing is the easy part. Creating content is not expensive, managing it is.

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
I can definately relate to how important PLM is coming from a software engineering background having worked for some very large software companies.

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote:

I can’t imagine that SolidWorks will ever threaten CATIA ...

Probably not, as far as I know, both softwares are coming out from the same company ...

RE: What the big guys use?

Well, we dropped Catia for Solidworks 6-7 years ago. We just didn't need Catia's total functionality. I guess each fills a niche, I just think the niche Solidworks aims for is a lot larger than the one Catia and UG go for.

Not everyone needs PLM. I would venture a guess that most companies don't need it, only the largest companies do.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2005 SP5.0 on WinXP SP2
SolidWorks 2006 SP1.0 on WinXP SP2

RE: What the big guys use?

Heckler

"
What's the employment outlook like in the UK?  I've often thought about moving back to the UK.  That salary for a MCAD designer is a lot better then what I've seen here in the USA."

I don't know what the market is like in the UK. In Australia I know we have great trouble finding enough experienced drafties.





Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
do you find that 3d mechanical designers need to know 2d drafting (autocad) very well?  or can somebody be a good 3d designer and not know much about 2d drafting or 2d cad at all?

I started directly in 3d with solidworks, I think that if I used 2d programs first like autocad I would of had a harder time adjusting my mind into 3d mode..

RE: What the big guys use?

Greg,

For some strange reason I thought you were in the UK.  What part of Australia?  Does the industry in Australia recognize US engineering degrees?

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote:

do you find that 3d mechanical designers need to know 2d drafting (autocad) very well?  or can somebody be a good 3d designer and not know much about 2d drafting or 2d cad at all?
The human mind is a wonderfully flexible thing. There are advantages to modeling with 2D drafting experience. But then there are advantages to learning modeling without such experience. There is  a different way of seeing the process from 2D to Boolean solids, and from Boolean solids to parametric solids. Once you start thinking in "solids" the 2D and non-2D guys are pretty close to each other.

At a job several years ago I was hired to design, but having many years experience drafting, I ended up being a drafting checker/modeling tutor. The engineers working there had no experience drafting and no experience modeling. What a mess! By the time they were through with the model it was so chaotic that it was difficult to draft, and in some cases the dimensions they wanted were actually a tertiary effect of the modeling (to change the angle of a feature--which was the dimension on the drawing--it was necessary to adjust two diameters of a lofted part). Simple things like determining what were the important features to make into GD&T datums were mysteries to them. It took a long time to drive home the concept that since everything was dimensioned off a datum--directly or indirectly--then the datums should be some of the first features modeled and subsequent features derived from them.

My point: any good modeling has to have structure and rigor. A 2D background tends to develop that. But it can be developed without that background too. But I also feel that, since the model is ultimately drafted, it helps to know drafting so it can be easily drafted.

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
well it seems that the drafting is something that is now automatically done for you, look at solidworks, you build a parametric model, and then it creates a 2d drafting drawing for you, so I assume one day everything will be done in 3d and then the software will MAKE the 2d drafting (drawing) for you..

RE: What the big guys use?

Heckler, I'm near Melbourne, Victoria, the automotive capital of Australia (and the South Pacific I suppose!).

Yes, contact the Institute of Engineers (Australia) for equivalency for degrees. Probably not an issue, to be honest.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: What the big guys use?

Heckler,

Last Friday was my last day at IR.
I started on Monday at L-3 Integrated Systems.

Warmer climate and closer to the kids/grandkids.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

RE: What the big guys use?

solidmecman,
  You can be a good designer without 2D knowledge, but as wgchere pointed out, you still need to know how to set up a datum structure.
I have yet to meet anyone with only 3D design experience create a good drawing.  An excellent modeler is not the same as an excellent drafter.  SolidWorks may automate it somewhat, but it doesn't know enough to do it correctly.  Little things can make a big difference in drawing legibility (such as leader lines crossing dimension lines or proper section view orientation).
A designer will have had to pay his dues in drawing cration to be considered well rounded.  This is becoming more rare as drawing checkers seem to be a thing of the past at most companies.

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
being I don't know much at all about drawing, what do you mean by 'datum structure'?

RE: What the big guys use?

You should get a copy of ASME-Y14.5 1994 if you will be doing mech design/drafting. Not enough time or space to teach it here.

Chris
Systems Analyst
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

RE: What the big guys use?

Setting up your primary datum planes and controlling features to those datums, either directly or indirectly.

As wgchere noted "Simple things like determining what were the important features to make into GD&T datums were mysteries to them. It took a long time to drive home the concept that since everything was dimensioned off a datum--directly or indirectly--then the datums should be some of the first features modeled and subsequent features derived from them."

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
I guess I should get a better understand of what a datum is, lol  I understand planes in solidworks

RE: What the big guys use?

It would be a good idea to familiarize yourself with ASME Y14.5.  Understanding GD&T is an important skill for mechanical design.  If you have any questions about the standard, try the Drafting Standards and GD&T forum. Good luck!

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
is ASME Y14.5 a standard or book?

RE: What the big guys use?

It is a standard that is a book.  The title is Dimensioning and Tolerancing.  Another good one to become familiar with (though it has not yet been widely adopted) is ASME Y14.41 Digital Product Definition Data Practices.

RE: What the big guys use?

solidmecman,

What is your technical background?  Do you have a two year technical degree in drafting, are you a degreed engineer or are you self taught?

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

(OP)
Heckler, I am a degreed software engineer.  I have been self-teaching myself in Solidworks and using it to draw pretty simplistic parts for my own business to have my machinist make.

RE: What the big guys use?

I would suggest getting a mechanical drawing book, and a copy of ASME Y14.5 (or a ASME Y14.5 work book) along with understanding SWx.  This should enable you to create sound mechanical drawings thus resulting in your design intent being communicated effectively to your machinist.  Make note that if tolerances are not well thought out and applied the results will be parts that cost more then they should.  Also, if your intent is to design something to make money I would consider hiring a mechanical engineer to QA the design for manufactureability (DFM).  Best of luck

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - Henry Ford



 

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote:

well it seems that the drafting is something that is now automatically done for you, look at solidworks, you build a parametric model, and then it creates a 2d drafting drawing for you, so I assume one day everything will be done in 3d and then the software will MAKE the 2d drafting (drawing) for you.

Parametric drafting programs draft as well as Word's grammar checker writes sentences. Well, actually, they draft worse. But if one knows little about English grammar one might think that Word has now made learning the rules of English grammar a thing of the past.

As has been pointed out already, drafting is more that putting dimensions on a drawing. As far as the automatic drafting goes, if you didn't make the dimension in the model, it won't be on the drawing.

Take the same part and make two drawings, one drafted well, and one drafted poorly. The bad drafting may take several hours to interpret correctly, while the good drafting may only take 15 or 20 minutes. Over the life of the drawing hundreds or thousands of man-hours may be lost trying to interpret the bad drawing. That costs money and wastes time, and will be reflected in any quote for manufacture.

Drafting is a skill and an art, and like most skills takes practice to master and become efficient.

RE: What the big guys use?

Quote:

I can see both capturing all engineering with the exception of Arch, that is where ADesk has the market.

Well i know this is from like 40 posts ago, but just thought i'd let you know, that a number of the bigger modern arch firms are switching to CATIA. Ghery has been using it for years now.. and a number of others are starting to follow.

Ben,

Congrats on the new job.. Which L3 are you at? Waco?

Wes C.
------------------------------
When they broke open molecules, they found they were only stuffed with atoms. But when they broke open atoms, they found them stuffed with explosions...

RE: What the big guys use?

wes616,
Yes, I am in Waco supportting the Wildfire/PDMLink implementation. Same thing I did for IR. More challenges here, as they did the installation and configuration by themselves. They did a fantastic job considering they had no PDM consultants when compared to what IR paid to PTC in consulting charges in 2005 for the 2 sites that were setup. There are things that L-3 did not implement that I would have done, but it does the job they wanted it to do.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

RE: What the big guys use?

This thread is all over the place... like it's "yahoo messenger" or something smile

I would recommend "Fundamentals of Graphics Communication" by Gary Bertoline because it covers 3D principles, correct drawing/drafting practices, and ANSI standards.  
You can pay several hundred for a book on ASME standards, but many companies use "company standards".  

We started with ANSI standards as our base, but modified it for our company.  We only use A and B size sheets (8.5 x 11, 11 x 17), so we modified the text height on dims to .094, our arrow tails are shorter, etc.  

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0072502606/qid=1134745127/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/104-6012361-5831925?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Flores
SW06 SP2.0

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources