College setting: how much faster to learn & use is SW v. ProE? 10

[dmalicky]

We are re-evaluating which package to teach and use with undergraduate mechanical engineering students. We currenly have ProE/M though we are not heavily vested in it. I know historically SW has been faster to learn and use, compared to ProE. But ProE has improved in recent years and I don't know where they stand today. It would be great to know some rough estimates (e.g., %s, weeks, hours, mouse clicks) of the current differences.

Speed of learning and using is one of our considerations. I'd value your perspectives on these other factors:
1. Acceptance in industry: ProE is probably a little better because a ProE user can more easily learn SW than v.v.
2. Integration with a good FEA program: ProMechanica is probably enough for most undergrads although non-linear capabilities would be desirable. We're considering Ansys, Abaqus, Marc, __Nastran... to augment ProM. NEiWorks/Nastran looks like a logical and good choice for SW, since Cosmosworks is probably not enough.
3. Integration with a good CFD program: still working on this one.
4. Integration with a good CAM program: ProE has ProNC modules in the education edition, although I haven't heard much about them in industry. We have and would like to keep using SurfCam, so SW is better here.
5. Academic pricing: getting these quotes now.

Thanks,
David Malicky
University of San Diego

http://www.sandiego.edu/engineering

 

[Standing]

When hiring a drafter or designer and having to opt between one who does not know machining and one that does know machining, all else being equal. I would choose the one who does have at least an understanding of machining. Chris is right, and an instructor should encourage a student to study machining even if it is not taught in school.

We hired a designer here and he did not know how large or small .001 of an inch was. It took days to teach him the difference between a tenth and a tenth, meaning .0001 and .1
If an Engineer says he want the hard anodize to be 3 tenths thick, he does not mean .3


Bradley

 

[bvanhiel]

About 10 posts up boffin5 asked about my preference for surfacing in Pro/E vs. Solidworks. It actually has more to do with the structure of references than the surfacing itself. Pro/E allows me (via Publish Geoms)to select surfaces off of a master model to reference directly in a slave model. This ends up much cleaner and more lightweight than the assembly references or base part techniques that are available in SW.

The surfacing in Pro also has more visualization tools, and somewhat more capability (we have ISDX).

-b

 

[Theophilus]

Bradley, that's an excellent demonstration of why such knowledge is important--and of course, there are many other such instances.

I was fortunate enough to have had an internship as a model maker while in college--excellent experience, since I was already good at making things and enjoyed doing so. There's a sort of "callibration" that occurs when working with materials, dimensions, processes, etc. that is, essentially, experience.

The more experience a person has, the more immediately useful that person will be to me--which is where this discussion seems to be going now. (Great point, GregLocock!)

Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe trumps reason.

 

[MElam]

We had to take a machining class when I was in school. The goal was not necessarily to teach us how to be great machinists.

The goal was showing what needs to be on the drawing for the machinist to get the part made right.

 

[aerohap]

Heckler,

US News & World Report

Best Colleges and Universities Issue

Not just my opinion.

Thanks for asking

 

[ewh]

While the high-end systems are good as far as use in industry, not all industries use the same package. That is why I feel that SW would be a very good choice. It will allow students to become familiar with modeling methods which are common regardless of the cad package used. Once they get out into the real world, they should be able to more easily pick up whatever their future employers are using.

As an aside, Embry-Riddle is very well regarded in the aerospace industy.

 

[yanceman]

Dave,

I have been teaching Solidworks as a side job at Corporate College in the Cleveland Ohio area and have found that my students get a very good basic understanding of the functionality of Solidworks in the 32 hours of training of the level one class. Most of my students are currently AutoCAD users and the companies they work for have recently purchased Solidworks as a new platform.
While I have never used Pro-E, I have known people who have, and they tell me that to perform the same function in Pro-E that I show them in Solidworks, the answer is almost always the same. Solidworks is easier to understand, and Pro-E has more steps to achieve the same results.

Good luck with which ever choice you make.
Yanceman.

 

[Heckler]

aerohap - Thanks for listing the documentation. Here is the link

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/rankengineering_brief.php

number one for universities that only offer masters level degrees.

Yanceman - try doing a varible section sweep in SWx?

David - I think if you teach any of the top 3D MCAD programs you will give your students the skills to learn other programs. Once they understand the basics of parametric modeling they can cross over to other programs. So pick the one that makes $$$$$$ sense.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[ParaCAD]

The last version of Pro i used was 2000i. I now have been using SW for the last 3yrs. SW seems easier to learn than Pro.

Just as Yanceman said "Solidworks is easier to understand, and Pro-E has more steps to achieve the same results."

Soldiworks is Dassult's mid-range product, Catia high-end
Pro/E (Wildfire) is PTC main/only CAD product, considered high-end

correct me if im wrong

Adam
Solidworks 2005 SP01.1
Windows 2000

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

I thought Wildfire was the "mid-range" offshoot of the full blown Pro/E.


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[Heckler]

CBL - IMO the last real version of Pro/E was 2001. Wildfire is PTC way of making their product look like SWx and in the process they screwed things up. All the advanced modules work with WF. Once SWx came on the market PTC had no choice but to lower the price from the $20K it use to sell for in 1996

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[ParaCAD]

Wildfire is just the latest version of Pro/E. They change the name from Pro/E 19, 20, 21, 2000, 2000i, 2000i².....
Started the new Wildfire 1.0, 2.0, 3.0.

Im not real versed on WF because its so different than the previous versions. Now has more of a SW look, icons, easier navigation.


Adam
Solidworks 2005 SP01.1
Windows 2000

 

[ParaCAD]

I agree Heckler. I test drove WF 2.0. I was lost for a while. I missed the old Pro/E. But thats neither here nor there. I run nothing but SW now.

Adam
Solidworks 2005 SP01.1
Windows 2000

 

[mjh368]

If you can drive a race car you can drive a honda.

I am a recent graduate who learned on both Pro 2001 and wildfire. At work we use autocad and SW. I have had no trouble learning these packages, and although i am a little slower im getting better. They tried to switch to pro/e two years ago here and only one of seven designers really picked it up. Pro/e is simply a more advanced package.

How could you could post a recomendation in the solid works forum. I think the people hear might have a preference.

 

[ctopher]

No difference where you post, everyone has their own preference. You will find a lot of people prefer SW, and more every year.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[ewh]

mjh368,

I made my recommendation for SW, though I seldom use it and am a UG driver. I agree though that those who read this forum may tend to be somewhat biased.

 

[mjh368]

preference?

I do not believe preference has any place in this conversation. Preferences develope from years of doing the same thing. The question was what package is best for students. Anyone doing serious surface moldling and/or required C2 continuity must use Pro/e.

I know a guy who prefers word perfect. I sure aint teaching anyone that.

 

[ewh]

"...must use Pro/e."

Thanks for the laugh!

 

[mjh368]

excuse me
must use pro/e if your options are pro/e or solid works.

 

[ewh]

That makes more sense. However, the majority of the CAD positions in industry don't require such surface accuracy. If your goal is to work in product design or automotive design, then yes, surface continuity is important. If you want to design working mechanisms, then SW is a good choice.