NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
(OP)
Could somebody please explain the difference between what one or the other does? I mean Solid edge can model, asemble, animate and be adapted for a CAM software... NX 4 does the same thing and what more?





RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Solid Edge V19 SP1 on WinXP SP2
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Jason
SolidWorks 2007 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
First, no offense intended, but if you only created models and assemblies, then how can you say SolidWorks is better if you've never used all of the modules for both softwares AND you've used NX for only a few months? Seems pretty biased off the bat, so it's no wonder you're struggling with NX....you've already decided it's not any better, or at least that's what your post is reading like to me. You'd be surprised how much easier it is to learn something with an open mindset.
Next, I don't recall anyone here saying they loved NX. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that if you'd do a little reading on the UGS BBS Notes you'd find far more complaints than adoration regarding NX. ALL softwares have their downsides to them and users of softwares tend to be loyal users, especially if they've been using it for 10+ years.
Sure, SolidWorks can do SOME things in a much more efficient manner than NX....then again, SolidWorks wasn't around 25 years ago, was it? It's a NEW (at least new compared to NX, I-DEAS, CATIA and others) software that was written from scratch about 10 or 15 years ago....a baby compared to some of the softwares that have been absorbed into high-end CAD softwares, of which only ONE has been totally re-written from scratch recently and that is CATIA v5 and even it has things that it cannot do very well.
In regards to your struggling with NX....that says to me that SolidWorks does things in a very structured manner, which doesn't translate very well to other CAD softwares. Do you really think that is a GOOD thing? I've been using NX for close to 15 years now and I've routinely been able to sit down at other CAD softwares, without ever using them before, and have a good understanding of how to model with them.
What exactly are you struggling with in regards to NX...is there a particular area (modeling, sketching, drafting) that is giving you fits? I'm sure some of the regular posters might be able to offer some assistance or advice.
Have you been to ANY introductory training yet, particularly any UGS-offered courses?
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
Some people are like slinkies....they don't really have a purpose, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Are you saying that SW has this functionality right out of the box? I can create and control surfaces to the same degree as I can with NX?
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Having said that though, I would have to say that NX is 'quirkier' than the others. I can do anything with it, but it almost always takes longer. Assembly constraints are the suck (supposedly fixed in NX5) and probably one of the more frustrating things to do. No way to redefine constraints, no auto recognition of valid operations based on topology, come on...
Another one - to create a split draft you have to create a sketch, then split the surface, then apply separate draft features to both sides of the parting curve. In Pro/E it was done in one feature; NX takes four. Another minor nit - no ability to define diameter dims in the sketch, workaound is to mirror the entities about the revolve axis and flip 1/2 the sketch to reference, but it is extra work.
Some things that you may come to like about NX:
Parts and Assemblies are pretty interchangable. In Pro or SW did you ever create a very complex drawing of a part, only to have to add a pin or something, which requires that it become an assembly? But you can't turn a part into an assembly, so you get to do the whole drawing over again. You won't get this problem with NX.
Their rendering tools are also first-rate.
Also, if you have to create a bunch of wireframe geometry, NX has all the entity creation tools from 30 years ago. I created a complex truss for a school project for my son in just a few minutes - it would have taken hours in Pro. (I know about SW 3D curves, but it's still difficult).
In a perfect world, I'd take Pro/E mainly because its regen speed is so fast, and I love the sketcher. I'm still skeptical about the usefullness of hybrid modelers. I fully constrain all my sketches all the time anyway, so why not have the system do it for me, like Pro/E does?
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Lots of other people do too.
I even remember a few years back UGS and PTC signed a letter of intent or some such to make the kernals fully interoperable. I wonder what became of that?
Sorry, I'm drunk and rambling...
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
The way they were implemented was different, however. NX can open a Pro/E file without Pro/E on your workstation. Pro/E requires NX on your workstation to open a NX file.
For both systems, these are extra cost modules, with the PTC price about double the UGS price.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Does that include the feature history, or do they just exchange an import solid?
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Chill Brother! I responded to a question about NX vs Solid Edge not Solid Works. So the comparison isn't a direct one. Nor did I mean to seriously offend anyone. I think I can have a wee dig a Solid Edge because it comes from the same Stable as UG.
For those who care for my opinion after almost 20 years on UG it is all too easy for me to praise the product because I admittedly have a high level of comfort with it. If I use other systems at all then its Catia, Pro-E or one of the surfacing packages Alias or Rhino. I don't use a lot of sketches and I love the freedom that gives me to design without the strict discipline required by some other systems to deal with the mechanics of making geometry. I revel in carving away at a solid using all the wonderful tools that UG has including surfacing and direct modeling.
I recently did some work with a company taking a group of Solid Edge users into UG. We all found it a very interesting experience to be able to give them the option of using some of the really powerful tools that UG has to take short cuts and be more productive. Sometimes you need to be structured and mindful of how your model is built and sometimes you just need to "git 'er done". Knowing when is the thing, having the option is the difference between walking and crawling.
Please don't get offended. It confuses me! I mean why come to this forum if you don't like UG.
Regards,
Hudson
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Yes, they do license the kernel but that by no means implies that Siemens wants to see one of the top competitors to 2 of their products keep using the kernel that they more or less own. It makes perfect sense to make things as difficult as possible on SW. Besides, that's just something I heard and it really cannot be debated until it does or does not happen.
In regards to NX4...forget about it...it doesn't compare to NX5 at all in my opinion. Yes, NX is quirky at times, but I mainly chalk that up to what all UGS is trying to accomplish at the same time: improve the product, add new features/commands/interface operation while at the same time making all of it seem familiar to I-DEAS users that will be migrating to NX. Yeah, it sucks going through all those changes and bugs, but in the end NX is a much stronger product than it was 2 years ago and if UGS stays on this path, it will become even better.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
Some people are like slinkies....they don't really have a purpose, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Re: NX5 - so far I see lots of improvements. I really hope so, because I have been very disappointed with NX4. I mean conceptually it is fine, and very flexible, but in practice our site has had a lot of issues not related to user training or configuration. 4 just seemed 'unfinished' to me.
Re: interoperability - thanks Ben, that's what I thought.
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
http://www
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7Aj8d7brSc
Comes in handy for things like defining the profile of say a joystick handle in a single feature. Much easier to click and drag and control curvature, weighting, etc... Don't know how UG works. I would be curious to see a video of UG. I'm sure its freeform surfacing capabilities far surpass this - I would hope so for the money.
Pete
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
Jason
SolidWorks 2007 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
As for CAD systems actually "talking" to each other and being able to count on the CAD companies to solve the interoperability problem for you, you are dreaming!!! Think about it, when they allow another to read their file format, they have solved one of the bariers for the other CAD to get their customers to change. "Not a problem, we can open their file, your legacy data is not a problem". This means a potential loss of revenue and market share. If they do by some magic agreement allow others to read their file format, what happens to the features and geometry that they can not re-create?? CATIA V5 can not consistently recreate V4 models with (or without) all the features. They just leave out the stuff they can not re-create! UGNX can not consistently recreate Ideas models with (or without) features. These companies own the source code for their respective parent CAD systems! One CAD system "reading" a foreign model will always be a Brep or a Brep with some sort of feature recognition off of the Brep import. Even the idea of a 100% automatic history tree translation is a pipe dream.
No CAD system is "the best" for all situations. Find one that best fits your needs both price and funtionality. Why buy a Fararri when you never drive on the freeway?
Bart
RE: NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
NX Freeform is Ruled, Through Curves (skinning and/or lofting), Through Curve Mesh (net of curves), N-Sided Surface (for filling in areas), Section, Swept, Bridge (a type of fill or transition between 2 or more sheets) along with more tools for specific scenarios (flanges, ribbons, transitions, extensions and quilts). This comes with MOST bundles for any type of modeling.
Shape Studio, which is more along the lines of something to compete with Alias and the like, adds Swoop (define and shape a surface in one command), 4 Point Surface, Studio Surface (a type of Sweep that can use 1 guide and 1 section or you can go up to a mesh of curves and assign up to G2 continuity), Styled Sweep, a powerful editing tool called X-Form for shaping a surface, Transform Surface, Deform Sheet (twist, bend and skew with sliders), Match Edge (for matching continuities up to G3), Snip Surface (a permanent Trim that cannot be Untrimmed), Refit Face for editing surface degree and patches, Pole Smoothing for editing a surface, Curve on Surface, Styled Blend (up to G3 continuity), Styled Corner (complex ball-end or set back corners up to G3) and Shape by Template for shaping splines to a template spline. This module is an add-on and wasn't that expensive the last I checked...well under $10,0000 for the above, and I believe included Analyze Shape and Visualize Shape.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
www.enkei.com
Some people are like slinkies....they don't really have a purpose, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.