Does anyone think Catia V5 is any good? 3

[Darrude]

Hi,

I've been using catia V4 and V5 simultaniously now for about 4 years. I think V4 is far ahead of V5 in functionality and overal ease of use for modelling. The only people I've come across that say V5 is better than V4 is V5 salesmen.

Please let me know if you agree or disagree.

Thanks,

Darren

 

[ubrben]

Never used V4 but I've designed two small formula-SAE cars using V5 and have been using V5 for over two years. The bulk of my work has been solid modelling and drafting, but I've recently done some complex hybrid solid/surface modelling at my current job.

I have to say I find the programme powerful and reasonably intuitive. Are you sure your problems aren't simply because it's just different to V4 rather than being inherently worse?

Ben Michell
Math Modelling Engineer
Westland Helicopters Ltd

 

[Darrude]

Hi Thanks for you comments, it more than likley is, everybody I have spoken to that uses V5 comes from a V4 background and has the same point of view as me.

 

[ubrben]

I have seen a number of posts on this forum along these lines. The best was;

Q: "How do I do layers in V5?"
A: "You don't"

They are two different packages which require different work methodologies.

Ben

 

[catiajim]

We are 3 years into our migration from V4 to V5, and it is going very well. I have very few users that would willingly switch back. Most of them hate it for the first 2-3 months, but after that, they are hooked. Most of the functionality that they had in V4 is now there (R13-R14), and there is a huge amount of functionality that was never there in V4. The ease of modification of V5 is it's real power.
Probably the biggest drawback is in the drafting package, and most of our problems here at this point is merely because we are still in a Unix/VPM world. There is still some significant functionality that works well in V5 but is not available on AIX or in VPM. The biggest restrictions are drafting in Approximate Mode, drafting in b-rep mode, saving flexible assemblies, saving and using Scenes.

 

[Darrude]

We have just upgraded to V5R14SP2 and it does seem to be a big improvment, we also have V5R11 on unix. Thanks for the feed back.

 

[Configurator]

If you are doing hybrid modeling or anything with surfaces, V5 is supreme. I suppose if all you want is dumb-solid volumetric modeling, V4 might be better.

As catiajim mentioned, V5 is fully parametric, so much geometry can easily be modified. I wouldn't say that's its real power, though. I'd say it's real power is a function of that ease: collaborative design.

The only people I've encountered who've used both V4 and V5 and say that V4 is better are people who haven't learned V5 well enough. It is very easy, but they expect it to be like V4 and they end up using it wrong. Misuse can cause a lot of problems.

As for V4 being ahead of V5 functionality-wise, that's just laughable.

 

[itsmyjob]

Hi,

I have seen many V4->V5 users, 98% prefere V5 . Even with the small bugs we are dealing with....

Main poblem is still big assembly drawing, but XP /3GB and R14 really improve the result.

indocti discant et ament meminisse periti
Eric N.​

 

[ubrben]

I completely agree with Configurator. As I mentioned above I did some pretty complex hybrid modelling just before christmas to create some geometry for flexible body modelling in ADAMS. The ability to easily wireframe between two solids and create a unified solid of the resultant volume was awesome. It did take me a while to learn but given that I did it on my own with just the basic help files I was still impressed.

Also when managing the race car designs I used the assembly modelling extensively and I would also concur with Configurator that collaborative design is an important biproduct of such a usable package.

Ben

 

[Darrude]

Hi all, Thanks for the responses. Most people I come across have taken a dislike to V5. This most be due to it been quite new to automotive and not fully understood. I will try to be a bit more patient with it rather than just switching Back to V4 in the future.

Thanks all.

 

[jackk]

Darrude....

I'm curious which V5 workbenches you're using?

I've used V4 and V5.

I agree with you that V4 drafting, kinematics, and solids creation is better (faster and easier) than V5.

But I'd much rather use V5 because of relational design and editing/updating of models.

I think training is key also. Too many times management mistakenly minimizes V5 training because they were told V5 is much easier to learn. (It is, but there's alot more to learn compared to V4)

...Jack

 

[catiajim]

I disagree that Kinematics and Solids Creation are easier in V4. For a casual Kinematics user, V5 is much easier to user, because I think it is easier to figure out what you want to do next.

As for Solid Creation, there are more tools available in V5 for creating useable solids. In addition, Modification of your solid is a very large part of Design, and V5 is much, much easier to modify.

Drafting, on the other hand, leaves a LOT to be desired. The biggest problem we have is performance.

I also agree with the comment on Training. While V5 is easier to learn than V4, it still takes a significant amount of time.

 

[Configurator]

"Drafting, on the other hand, leaves a LOT to be desired. The biggest problem we have is performance."



Agreed. It's much MUCH better in 5.14, though.

 

[ubrben]

I would agree on the drafting. We did some transmission design and the sectioning didn't follow conventions like not sectioning shafts. BTW does anyone know how to fix that (V5R12)?

In terms of kinematics there is a commercial incentive for Dassault not to improve the kinematics because that will tread on MSC and Dassault implementing ADAMS within V5 as SimDesigner.

Ben

 

[gmendonc]

Hi,

I've been using V4 for 7 years and V5 for 4 years.
In my opinion V5 is umbeatable for hybrid relation design and its change management capabilities are far ahead V4.

 

[cadmgr]

Sorry - I am weighing in on this. I ahve used V4 & now V5, Unigraphics, Pro Engineer, Solid Edge, CV & Anvil (For us older guys) and boy do the programs vary.

However, the CATIA side of business - obviously, V5 is more powerful and easier to navigate, more windowsy (Yuk - Literal dication to unstable). but what caught my eye was CATIAJIM - OMG - Years to migrate to V5 - no wonder the users complain - Of course if themigration was becuase Dessault has never had a good migration path to V5 that is understandable.

I have found migration from V4 to V5 cumbersome and downward compatabillity from V5 r14 to r12 almost impossible - If there are some best practices I am missing please send them..

 

[Kapitan]

To me CATIA V5 is not just any good but superb, I've used Catia since early 1983 when it was V1. In those days it was only in Black and White and driven with a light pen on the screen and it was terrific then, as I had been using IBM Cadam Mesh as a coarse 3D modeller up to then.

The first big change was when a handful of basic colours became available and the light pen went, along with the massive Function keyboard and gradually it got even better. The puck and tablet went and the mouse arrived but by the time it was V4 it had become a mess and needed tidying up and a fresh start.

So the jump to V5 was a big one and I've used it now for four years. The thought of going back would be awful, to me. To handle V5 properly don't keep comparing it to V4, forget all that, go forward. During the Eighties and Nineties I trained many people on Catia, to use Surfaces, Solids, Kinematics etc. and I used to tell them to put any previous working practices behind them, whether it was some other system or even a drawing board.

I can't say anything about Drafting on Catia because I have only ever used it as a modeller, all my Catia work has been in Aerospace and Automotive places and Drafters would pick up the models and do the detail drawings, BOMs etc.

Don't be a Loser, wallowing in V4 mire. V5 has been well described by others here, just get into it and before you know it your conversion will be complete.

But I have to be honest, I didn't forget my drawing board, I took it home many years ago and still use it occasionally.

 

[catiajim]

Just a comment back to cadmgr: Yes, it has taken us years to migrate to V5. Not, however, for new design. I'm not sure what industry you are in, but in the aerospace industry, our products last for decades, both after production and actually in production. We still have Mylar drawings that have not been migrated to CATIA - and these drawings are still producing new aircraft.

Our biggest problem at this point in getting off of V4 is in the maintenance of existing V4 Drawings. We have 20 years of V4 CATIA models & drawings, that utilized every bit and form of CATIA techniques that DS ever provided. We have wireframe models that used Graphic Dressup Noshow. We have models with dozens of Solidm Solids. We have models with dozens of Solide Solides. We have transparent auxviews with multiple overlays. We have Auxview2 views linked thru VPM to mono-detail solids. We even have a large number of Draw Only models that came from CADAM.

In order to move off of V4, we need to be able to assure our customers (i.e. Engineering and Manufacturing) that they will be able to perform revisions to these models with no loss in productivity over today. That's a HUGE challenge. And you're right - Dassault has not yet stepped up to the plate in providing the tools to do this.

V5 is a fantastic tool for new design. Unfortunately, it is so fundamentally different from V4 that seamless data migration is a major hurdle.

 

[Darrude]

HI All, Thanks for your comments, Its interesting to see that V5 is liked by the people that use it on a regular basis, I notice that most of the feedback is from Aerospace.

To Jackk, I'm using generative shape design, parts and products.

Maybe with the change automotive from V4 to V5 coming soon I will transistion to V5 and start to like it, apart from maybe the drafting!

 

[jackk]

Darrude...

Thanks for your reply. Like you, I found it very difficult to prefer V5 when I was working with V4 and trying to learn V5. Once I was able to get on V5 full-time, my preference changed very quickly. Especially with the workbenches you have. Look how easy it is to make a change to a V5 surface part, when you don't have to erase the volume and faces and then modify the surface (hopefully it's a SURF2 that can be modified) and rebuild the faces and volume.

I do think V5 is much better than V4. But I still miss those solid primitive shapes! (it is much easier to make a a cuboid (or cylinder, cone, sphere, etc) than to make a sketch and then a pad, etc.)

...Jack