I know we have various softwear forums, but I thought I would start here, as it is a basic question. I also didn't do a search, since I wasn't really sure what my search terms would be. Here goes--is there 3D softwear available, at a reasonable price, for small engine building shops to allow one to see how stuff, such as engine accessories, will fit? I am guessing most places do this on a trial and error basis--try a pulley or accessory and if it doesn't fit, rework and try again.
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
3D Softwear for Engine Fit-Up
- Thread starter swall
- Start date
What do you consider a reasonable price?
There are tons of 3d cad programs that will do what you want.
Alibre ($995 for the basic package which allows assemblies) is pretty cheap. There free version is nice but it just allows parts and not creation of assemblies.
Personally I use Autodesk Inventor and it will easily do what you need.
Pro-E (most common for now in my opinion/industry)
Solidworks
Catia
Turbocad
Unigraphics,etc..
There are tons of 3d cad programs that will do what you want.
Alibre ($995 for the basic package which allows assemblies) is pretty cheap. There free version is nice but it just allows parts and not creation of assemblies.
Personally I use Autodesk Inventor and it will easily do what you need.
Pro-E (most common for now in my opinion/industry)
Solidworks
Catia
Turbocad
Unigraphics,etc..
BrianPetersen
Mechanical
It is possible.
The expensive part is buying the software.
The difficult part can be finding accurate solid models of the equipment in question. At least in the automotive world, manufacturers keep this stuff between themselves and their suppliers (with non-disclosure agreements so third parties don't get their hands on it).
The time-consuming part can be learning how to use the software to make it do what you want it to do.
Possible ... certainly. It's only time, effort, and money.
The expensive part is buying the software.
The difficult part can be finding accurate solid models of the equipment in question. At least in the automotive world, manufacturers keep this stuff between themselves and their suppliers (with non-disclosure agreements so third parties don't get their hands on it).
The time-consuming part can be learning how to use the software to make it do what you want it to do.
Possible ... certainly. It's only time, effort, and money.
- Thread starter
- #4
GregLocock
Automotive
Cut and shut is probably the cheapest, and certainly the fastest, method. I wouldn't dream of modelling the parts just to establish that they would fit.
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG
lease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG
lease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.I work in the genset industry. 3D-Models of industrial engines from perkins, Deutz etc. are usually available by request. The quality of the model and the ease of getting one varies greatly between the companies. I would say Deutz is outstanding in this regard. Good models and good service.
It is a great help to have the model when constructing engine frames, pipes for intercooler etc.
It is a great help to have the model when constructing engine frames, pipes for intercooler etc.
Even if you don't have OEM models available for virtual mockup, you will realize a lot of benefits from good 3D CAD software. Most really goodl packages like Pro/E & SW cost more like $5k but you will also need to invest time & money in proper workstations and training. Poorly implementing CAD can cause as many problems as it solves.
TDIMeister
Automotive
At Ford where I worked several years ago, they used a "digital buck" software that allowed them to place simplified representations of CAD solid models in arbitrary space. The advantage is that these models are not full-blown parametric solid models or assemblies in I-DEAS (or any other CAD software for that matter), which would result in huge files and very slow processing). These full assemblies do exist for close-up investigations and CAE, but for most of packaging and integration work, the digital buck is used.
The OEMs have the benefit of already having all the CAD data on-hand. I agree with Greg -- it wouldn't make any sense to detail model parts from scratch only to assemble them to see how they fit. Even for the best modelers it would take an inordinate amount of time and effort. Some CAD software do quick and dirty buck assemblies the same way as in real life: simply create geometric primitives of the part envelop dimensions (cubes, spheres, cylinders, etc.) and assemble them together.
The OEMs have the benefit of already having all the CAD data on-hand. I agree with Greg -- it wouldn't make any sense to detail model parts from scratch only to assemble them to see how they fit. Even for the best modelers it would take an inordinate amount of time and effort. Some CAD software do quick and dirty buck assemblies the same way as in real life: simply create geometric primitives of the part envelop dimensions (cubes, spheres, cylinders, etc.) and assemble them together.
GregLocock
Automotive
Yes, Digibuck is great. But, each vehicle has its own digital buck mechanic, who oversees the 'automatic' build of the buck from the CAD data. It is a non trivial exercise.
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIGlease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG
lease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.I think the ideal solution would be a CMM creating simplified 3d models of the interfaces and common componets, 3d modeling software to create the new parts, with all of the final work fed directly into CNC manufacturing methods.
This of course comes at a high initial cost for the software and equipment, and high overhead cost for all of the trained personal.
A sketch/drawing created from measured features using common measuring tools should be sufficient for a small shop (Prototype or very low production runs). Just remember, measure twice, cut once.
This of course comes at a high initial cost for the software and equipment, and high overhead cost for all of the trained personal.
A sketch/drawing created from measured features using common measuring tools should be sufficient for a small shop (Prototype or very low production runs). Just remember, measure twice, cut once.
wgknestrick
Mechanical
Another recommendation for the free Google Sketchup. As long as you aren't looking to detail things, this should be good enough, and you can't beat the price of free.
If you are looking to get serious, I am a Solidworks man.
If you are looking to get serious, I am a Solidworks man.
There are plenty of rapid prototyping service bureaus offering 3D scanning which they can convert from cloud point data to CAD surface geometry. Much faster but not as accurate as a CMM. It is very fast & easy these days. I had both knees scanned for custom fitted carbon fiber knee braces.
paultracey
Computer
- Sep 1, 2008
- 1
- 0
- 0
TurboCAD would be ideal and probably the cheapest. At there is a getting started guide to help explain drawining in 3D and you can even buy an animation plug in.
- Status
