Drafts for quotes

[onefjef]

Our company has a standard product line but makes as many custom machines. Each begins with a 2D rough draft. Because of the number of iterations involved in getting what the customer wants I do these in Autocad. To give customer rought sizing, etc. I'm finding it hard to give up my custom tools (AutoLisp) that I have. Autocad still has a superior 2d environment to make 2d drawings fast. I sometimes send 2-3 very different drafts a day for the same project. Is anybody else in the same boat?

It seems that until we get the order for the machine I can't justify 3d development. 3d Seems like a waste of time for quote drawings.

Jef.

 

[swertel]

Not to sound like a bad marketing buzz, but that's where SE is strong.

If you have standard parts and other equipment that you have used for a previous build, you can create a layout sketch in your assembly, add the 3D geometry where it exists, and finish up with the final 2D polish. You could also just use the SE draft environment and the 2D "model" space (like ACAD's model vs. paper space).

I know making the transition from ACAD to SE was tough for me because of all the AutoLISP routines I had to perform my mundane tasks. But after a while, I learned the new techniques of 3D modeling and creating my own set of workflows to make 3D more efficient.

So you are on the right boat going down the right path. Use 3D for the equipment design. Use 2D for the quick sketch for a quote. But where I think you'll see a benefit is if you use SE to create your 2D quick-quote drawing because then you can use that drawing as the basis for the 3D detailed design.

--Scott

http://wertel.eng.pro

 

[onefjef]

I'll definitely give it a try. Thanks

jef

 

[KENAT]

Don't know if it's relevant to your application but I'll often scheme things out as a single part even though in the finished model they'll be separate parts in an assembly.

This speeds things up a lot of the time while maintaining many of the advantages of 3D models.

Bad thing is managers will think all the works been done when really you need to start back almost from scratch to actually create the product documentation with separate parts & assemblies.

Also over time I've learnt what can be left out of concept models that the real ones need etc.

 

[Folke]

Yes Kenat, But the features are mobile now so it's still possible to delete unwanted features (one By one) and get all the parts out of the "assemblypart"

 

[onefjef]

kenat,

What you said is exactly where I am. I have used a solid to represent an entire assembly before. Then I part/copy and use it as a design body to make the assembly. It seems that this is still not fast enough for the managers who are waiting for drafts.

Flip side: When 3D model is finished I can generate all the drafts I need in a fraction of the time as Autocad.

Marketing only seems to care about design speed up to the point they get an order.

Jef

 

[KENAT]

Folke, the level of simplification I normally use means making the piece parts out of the assembly part isn't really practical.

onefjef, I have used 2D drafts or hybrids but usually end up wishing I'd modelled it, which is what I tend to do now.

Is there any way you could generate a library of 'generic models' or something that support minor tweaking to get the informatin you need for your tendor packs?

 

[onefjef]

KENAT, I'm trying to get to that point. I used to be in the same position with AutoCad. I'm just spoiled. I have most of the standard parts modeled already. Just need to develop some of the more common sub assemblies.

Thanks.