Search results for query: *

Thanks for the galvanizing link - very useful. I suppose what I want to know in simpler terms is: Does distortion due to dissimilar material thicknesses occur in box section construction? ... or this distortion more unique to open sections, flats etc? I'll also pose the question to my local...

I am proposing a design for galvanizing where a 1/8" thick 3" box section is welded to the side of a 3/8" thick 4" box section - where one wall of the 3" box is inline with the side of the 4" box - ie. it is off centre by 1/2". The 3" box cantilevers out from the 4" box and is unsupported at...

Next time I'm on SolidWorks I'll need to verify this. Specifically this is a sketcher issue - not a drawing issue. At the time (8 years ago or so) all the SolidWorks "pros" told me I could not do it ... except when I could place a point on a curve at a vertical or horizonal position.

An interesting difference between Pro/E and SolidWorks at a very fundamental level is that Pro/E breaks circles into 2 semicircles while SolidWorks does not. By breaking the circles in half Pro/E prevents there being 2 solutions when dimensioning. In Pro/E one can always dimension to a...

The trouble with SolidWorks is that it bends over to be so friendly & automatic that it's users often do not have a sense of the fundemental workings of the software and how to use it at a high level. This is fine for one-off smaller assemblies - but it can be very problematic when it comes to...

I see "design by committee" as being different from "distributed design control". Design control must be centralised or it simply is not design ... it's some kind of wild west cowboy jungle evolution.

I second drawoh's motion that: "Distributed design control sounds to me like a bad idea"

Definitely not if you heat it past the melting point.

SMath Studio is an open source version of Mathcad. It's pretty decent.

My experience is mostly with Pro/E and SolidWorks. Pro/E to SolidWorks is like a manual transmission car is to an automatic. If you learn Pro/E first it will be easy to go to SolidWorks - not so easy vice versa. And if you learn Pro/E you will probably have a better grasp of the inner...

It used to be that if you wanted to write, you wrote with a pen and once you were finished you gave it to a typist to type. If you wanted to design you used to make sketches and once you were finished you gave it to a draftperson to draft. Now, if you want to write - you learn Word or a...

When comparing refined products designed to serve the same general purpose - you find that in each product certain features are more optimised at the expense of other features being less optimised. This is how you can compare products to one another. Your preference in product will come down...

Yes, keep the part (or assembly) and drawing numbers the same. Only one part detailed per drawing (multiple parts detailed on one drawing is old-school that was of particular value in the days of manual drafting on a drafting board ... and Autocad emulated this old approach). Having the part...

Not really certain what you fellows are on about. “Parent View” is a term that I use only when referring to laying out drawing views in solids modelling CAD packages. I have not heard this term used in any drafting standards. If one view is the projection of another … who’s to say which one...

AboveRedline, 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.

Gee, sounds to me like David has turned this into a “This software is better” thread. And that’s not such a bad thing … except that I don’t think that one should state a software preference without putting some effort into justification. In contrast, I will explain why Pro/E is actually far...

I would suggest that SolidWorks would be a more appropriate software to teach in a high school or elementary school class while Pro/Engineer would be more appropriate for a mechanical engineering university level course. To me SolidWorks is to Pro/E as a standard calculator is to an RPN...

Here's anouther great link on the subject I found: http://www.npd-solutions.com/configmgt.html The website looks like a really good resource in general.

Interesting article somewhat related: http://www.dmsms.org/file.jsp?storename=Form_Fit___Function_Fundamentals.pdf

swertel, Ok, now I see what you are saying ... and you are absolutely right. We have been changing revision levels when we really should have been creating new parts to replace old ones. By the form, fit, function requirement, you really can't change a heck of a lot before you need to create...