Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
(OP)
I got many responses to a similar post in the SWx forum. But since that forum might be biased, it would be great to hear from some Pro/E WF users, too.
We're evaluating which package to teach and use with undergraduate mechanical engineering students.
I know WF2/3 is easier to use and learn than the older Pro/E versions, but I don't know how WF2/3 compares to SWx today. It would be great to know some rough estimates of the differences in how long they take to learn and use (e.g., % differences, weeks, mouse clicks to accomplish a task, frequency of non-intuitive commands, etc.)
Speed of learning and using is one of our considerations. I'd value your perspectives on these other factors:
1. Acceptance in industry: ProE is probably a little better because a ProE user can more easily learn SW than v.v.
2. Integration with a good FEA program: ProMechanica is probably enough for most undergrads although non-linear capabilities would be desirable. We're considering Ansys, Abaqus, Marc, __Nastran... to augment ProM.
3. Integration with a good CAM program: ProE has ProNC modules in the education edition, although I haven't heard much about them in industry. How well does Pro/E interface with Surfcam?
Thanks,
David Malicky
University of San Diego
www.sandiego.edu/engineering
We're evaluating which package to teach and use with undergraduate mechanical engineering students.
I know WF2/3 is easier to use and learn than the older Pro/E versions, but I don't know how WF2/3 compares to SWx today. It would be great to know some rough estimates of the differences in how long they take to learn and use (e.g., % differences, weeks, mouse clicks to accomplish a task, frequency of non-intuitive commands, etc.)
Speed of learning and using is one of our considerations. I'd value your perspectives on these other factors:
1. Acceptance in industry: ProE is probably a little better because a ProE user can more easily learn SW than v.v.
2. Integration with a good FEA program: ProMechanica is probably enough for most undergrads although non-linear capabilities would be desirable. We're considering Ansys, Abaqus, Marc, __Nastran... to augment ProM.
3. Integration with a good CAM program: ProE has ProNC modules in the education edition, although I haven't heard much about them in industry. How well does Pro/E interface with Surfcam?
Thanks,
David Malicky
University of San Diego
www.sandiego.edu/engineering





RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
http:
If you're willing to go with the assumption a
lot can be learned about a program by simply
looking thru tutorials and instructional
materials ...
http://w
... might prove helpful.
See also a post on comp.cad.pro-engineer titled
"Pro/e help, training, tutorials and other resources"
posted by David Janes 04-06-2006 for some additional resource links.
Good luck with the quest.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Not sure if there is a native ProE file translator for SurfCam, so you will probably need to Iges or Step it out
where as ProMan will take it directly.
Translation really shouldn't be a big problem unless you are doing some really weird shapes.
ProMan isn't as user friendly as say SurfCam or MasterCam
when it comes to making cutter paths at least for the majority of parts, but for those 10%, highly complex parts it excels. I understand the WF3 is going to be much better.
Also you need to consider how many different machines your school uses, If it's just 1 or 2 then no big deal.Post processors can be quite a pain and $$.
You have a strong users group there Insane Diego
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
ProE throws in a pretty nice package for the schools.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
On the other hand, if the course is about using a CAD platform to complete a small, one off design project, I might suggest solidworks. If you have never used a solid modelling package, are working solo, and need to get one off drawings out the door - sure, SolidWorks is a good bet. Pro/E gets its value when is set up and configured thoughtfully across a company or team ... or to suit a specific large scale product or project. And that may also make it good for a large class ... because it can be configured to suit the curriculum.
I know this responce is a bit "wafely" ... its quickly written. Hopefully it is sufficient to give you some sense of my feelings on the matter.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Now that im on the job the fewer operators the better in the world is my new thought (more money more jobs kinda thing) so teach them solidworks and they will get by fine and will stay out our little piece of the world. there is no doubt pro-e would beat up solidworks if we could set up a death cage match between the 2
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for 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
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)
Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Dave Hyman
Mechanical Engineer
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
You may also want to consider CATIA. I believe that Dessault (sp) had a program where they "give" the package to a college. It's also an excellent package.
I went to Cal State LA, and know that they teach all 3 packages(CATIA, SWx and ProE) there. You might want to contact their program (look into the industrial technology dept), as they run the "drafting and 3D design" part of the school, not ME).
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: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Some of the opinions here are biased also. I've used Solidworks, and Wildfire, for over a year each on some simple, and many complex projects. I have found no advantage of Pro/E Wildfire. It isn't as logically set-up as Solidworks, and the "help" is ussually no help. There is a lot that could be improved... especially when it comes to creating drawings. Soldiworks is much better in this area, so might be better for students.
And before the "Pro/E is king" people step in, I have used both for large assemblies, plastic part, and composite part design.
Anyway, I don't want to turn his into a "This softare is better" thread, so to answer your question, In my opinion, each them either, and they'll be fine. Just make sure they don't limit themselves to the one they learned in school when job-hunting after school.
David
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
In contrast, I will explain why Pro/E is actually far superior to SolidWorks when it comes to creating drawings:
In Pro/E, you can change your views from section to non-section or vice versa whenever you like. In SolidWorks you can’t do this.
Let’s say you started by laying out a top view. Then you used it to project a front view and finally a bottom view. Then you merrily add all your dimensions, notes and whatnot to finish the drawing. The design changes and you realise that you need to make the top view (your parent view) a sectional view (or partial section). In Pro/E you just click on that view, hit modify, specify the section cutting plane on any other view, and presto, your drawing now shows a sectional top view. In SolidWorks, game over – you have to delete every single view and start again. That includes all the effort you put into dimensions, notes etc. WOW.
But usually you don’t want to do that so you start adding extra redundant views in order to get that section you need … you have to work around the software problem … and that can get very messy.
To me, this is the single biggest flaw of the SolidWorks software, and one that I find totally unacceptable. In Pro/E I just slap views down without having to worry … I know the software has the intelligence to allow me to change my mind later without penalty. I never worry about having to revisit a Pro/E drawing … I know that I can push things around. When having to modify a SolidWorks drawing I am always holding my breath wondering if I will either have to entirely delete and redo views or whether I will have to add redundant views and have to sign off a mess of a drawing.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
I can see students getting frustrated by Pr/E's illogical help structure. It is very hard to find help on anything however simple.
Keep in mind, these students are possibly learning CAD from the ground up.
In my opinion, teach them Solidworks, then they'll be able to learn Pr/E if necessary, more easily.
It might also come down to which has the better student / school support. I know I had the Solidworks student addition, and was able to get help easily while learning it. Can't speak on Pro/E in that regard though.
David
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
I've never heard of a section being the parent view. Sections should project off the parent.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
In Pro/E, you can make any view you like a section view ... parent view or not ... the software does not descriminate.
Does SolidWorks not allow the parent view to be a section? ... Perhaps you have a good point there. Another limitation of the SolidWorks drawing module.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
David
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
If I was a student, I'd seek a university with Pro/E.
http://www.rmeng.com
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
I think anyone from any particular cad program could pick out things one 3d program can do that others can't.
Natewebb, Pro/E users get paid more cause it takes more experience to master the program, plus the typical high costs involved with the "high end" programs. I think this a dying trend though as Pro has already mostly lowered it's priced.More
Jason
UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2006 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Let’s take this example: Your drawing comprises only a top view and a front view. Which view is the parent? Either one could be the parent. In Pro/E, in rev A you might lay both those views down without needing either of them to be sections. Then you add a new feature and now must update the drawing to rev B to include a section on the top view. In Pro/E, it does not matter which view you placed first in your rev 0 drawing … you can place the section on either view. Is this not a good thing? Please explain. It would seem to be ridiculous to have to delete both these views and all the accompanying dimensions in the event that you were not lucky enough to have placed the front view first.
RE: Pro/E WF v. SWx for college setting: anyone for Pro/E?
Getting back to the original question.....
"some rough estimates of the differences in how long they take to learn and use (e.g., % differences, weeks, mouse clicks to accomplish a task, frequency of non-intuitive commands, etc.)" - The only way to determine this is to conduct your own tests on the typical data you are likely to need to make. I doubt that you would find much difference however.
On the other questions:
1 Acceptance in industry - both Pro/E and SolidWorks are widely used in industry, but you might need to check which CAD software your local companies use, if this is where the students are most likely to be employed.
2 Pro/Mechanica is really easy to learn and use because it's all within the Pro/E interface, and gives good quality results without needing to worry about the mesh - ideal for students, but you're right that it cannot do non-linear.
3 Integration with a good CAM program - Pro/NC is completely integrated and is very easy if you have your tools and parameters defined, In don't know about Surfcam, but I'm sure it could work with Pro/E geometry.
In summary your students will benefit from either Pro/E or SolidWorks, and there are pros and cons in each, but I doubt that you will find a significant difference which will force your decision. It sounds like you've already got Pro/E, so in my opinion stick with it.
Good Luck !!!!!