Evaluating changing to a new Cad Products! Which one is better?

[PatCouture]

I have made some research about using a new cad software. I've been thinking about switching from Mechanical Desktop 6 to a new software such as SolidWorks, Solid Edge, or Inventor but as far as I'm concerned they seem to be able to do approximately all the same thing. So it makes my decision very difficult. So if anybody has some comments about it that could help me make differences between each products, I'll be very grateful.

Thanks

Patrick

 

[jbknudsen]

Patrick,

There are many factors in selection of a new software package. Economics, support, training, ramp up time to become profecient, hardware, and so on. It seems that you have a good handle on finding out important info and valuable data. The research could go on and on. I am currently using SolidWorks 2003. I like it over Autodesk products for several reasons. I have evaluated Desktop and Inventor. Unless they have changed in the recent past, I prefer the user interface and intuitive programming from SolidWorks. SolidEdge is another very powerful and cost effective software. Again the research could be endless. I would look for a package that will accommodate my specific needs ie: piping, sheetmetal, structural, mechanical electrical, etc. Check this thread, it may give you some insight from others with similar questions.

Thread404-7528

Good Luck,

Jay

 

[MadMango]

Selecting CAD packages is like buying a new car. Honda, Toyota and Nissan all make fine products, it's finding one that you're happy with, and that have the options you are looking for.

Choosing between SolidWorks, SolidEdge and Inventor will require the same choices. You test drive a car before you buy it, you need to test drive CAD programs as well. What's the fuel economy going to be like (what are your hardware requirements)? Investigate maintenance requirements as well (anual subscriptions), though all should be about the same.

Wanna Tip? faq731-376
"Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities."

 

[DetroitPickles]

Pat,

Like the others, I think you are in for a long trial period of reading and what not. I used to sell and support AutoCrap and, thus Mechanical Etch-A-Sketch, err I mean Desktop. back then, it was not a very robust product. That is not the case anymore. The problem in my opinion with MDT and Inventor is that they are both AutoDesk products, and they basically compete against each other in a lot of areas, which just to confusing to me. It is vastly different from SolidWorks and Catia. Both owned by the same rich guys, but they are not direct competitors.

I think SW is a very capable product. SolidEdge is too. Perhaps we could help better if you tell use what you are building or designing. If it is sheet metal, molds, machine parts, CNC stuff, widgets, whatever, maybe we can isolate and help you better.


Mr. Pickles

 

[PatCouture]

Thanks for the advices guys. I appreciate

For now I try to concentrate only on the ease of use of the program, I'm working a lot on Welded assembly, on Sheetmetal, and also on some large assembly. Except for animating assembly the rest is less useful.

I know That each products can do this type of things but I'd really appreciate having the opinion of someone else than a salesman.

Thanks again

Patrick

 

[PatCouture]

I don't use any CNC machines, we only have a conventionnal milling and turning machine. And you made me think about transforming my Cad library from MDT6 to the new Cad software I will work with.

Patrick

 

[TheTick]

No matter which software you switch to, be prepared for months of "It's not like the old one" complaints. Such complaints are usually best handled with pepper spray.

I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.

 

[MadMango]

I haven't used SolidWdg in a production environment, but I have heard good things about their sheet metal capabilities. I do use SolidWorks however, and remember the learning curve to be very short. I was up and running with SW after a week of tutorial use, after that it was a matter of simple conitnual exposure using the software.

SW's sheet metal capabilities are powerful and accurate. We make products where 90% of the parts are sheet metal.

SW's ability to handle large (800-1400 parts custom parts) assemblies has worked well for us.

As far as SW weldments, don't even bother with the weld beads the program creates. I find them rather tedious to maintain and a royal pain to apply.

The biggest thing to remember is that any parametric solid modeler is going to be vastly different than the existing CAD software you are currently using. Don't try to get them to do things like you've "always done". Also be prepared to upgrade your hardware (memory and video cards). And now might also be a good time to investigate PDM solutions as well. Trust me, if you are in any production or manufacturing environment, you'll need it sooner than later.

Wanna Tip? faq731-376
"Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities."

 

[StarrRider]

PatCouture

No mater who you eventually choose, there are several things that are going happen when you make the transition. The first is that your entire team will be slow. Learning a new program takes time no matter how intuitive the package is. SolidWorks is one of the best – but it does not work in the same way that MDT does – your first hurdle will be to stop thinking the MDT way. For me – it took 2 or 3 months before I stopped comparing SW to MDT and complaining about the deficiencies that I perceived in SW – Then I started thinking and doing things the SW way – and everything got better in a hurry. Most of what I had originally consider a deficiency simply wasn’t needed if I did it this way.

So when you make that transition – Do NOT expect to maintain your current workload. Make sure that your VP knows what is going on and choose a slow period to do it.

There are several way to handle your CAD library. First – your VAR will be more than willing to convert your entire library to whatever package you choose. From personal experience – I would not recommend doing this – at least – don’t do it to your entire library.

The problem is that they will take your files and run them through some automatic conversion programs to create your new files. Those programs are not all equal – some do a better job than others but they are not human – they simply read one database and convert it to another. We had several thousand Pro-E files that we did this to. Most of the files made the transition correctly – sort of. Until the file needed to be modified it was fine – but when changes needed to be made it was normally easier to simply recreate the model - instead of a nicely structured file – every feature had it’s own plain and there were no relationships between features – so a part with an array of 30 holes had 30 planes and 30 individual holes and nothing was located with dimensions.

So spend a month or two examining the files in your library. Send your VAR the simple files that are needed but nothing really complex. Don’t bother sending fasteners or hardware – buy a professional library – There are several on the market and they more than pay for themselves. Don’t bother converting purchased parts either – most of those can be readily downloaded from the manufacturer.

So now all you have left are the more complex files that your team has created. Send a few of them to your VAR for conversion as examples and pay attention to what he returns. Part that are not likely to be modified in the near future (a year or two) are good candidates for conversion no matter how screwed up the returned file is. For those that probably will be modified - your staff needs to learn with something don’t they – let them recreate them manually. The faster you get past that transition period the better.

Lee

Consciousness: That annoying time between naps.

 

[ClydeMule]

Pat,

* Don't take the sales people too seriously when they tell you how bad one CAD program is vs. another. Even if there information is correct, the comparisons are not always very meaningful:

For example (I am a Solid Edge User,V14) a guy was trying to sell me on changing to Solidworks. He gave me a power point slide with about 12 reasons why solid works was better than SE in sheet metal. I think 8 of them were incorrect (they said SE could not do this xyz, but it actually could etc.) 3 were vague and irrelevant and one was true. THe one that was true was not really a big deal, you learn to work around. I am sure SW has an identical short coming.

*Try out the software on YOUR parts, with YOUR MFG process. See which one works best.

*Like others have said, people will bitch and moan about the change. 2 months later they won't be able to manage how you could functio using AutoCAD.

I have used SE since version4. I got a student copy in college for 200 bucks. Been an edger ever since. I hired a new engineer who used SW. I got the usual SW did this, why does SE do it this way. 2 weeks later he was over it.

I think both SE and SW are great packages. If I had gotten cheap copy in school of SW I probably would be using that now.

Good Luck!

CLyde

 

[Morglisn]

We chose SW over the others. I admit, we never got the opportunity to try SE, though.

We primarily use the software's sheet metal capabilities, since we design custom-fit insulation blankets, and need to unfold virtually every model to create a cutting pattern. Inventor's guys told us outright that they couldn't do it. Pro/E came out, but we opted for the lower learning curve of SW, even though we had heard Pro/E had more power in larger assemblies. We don't really use the larger assemblies, so... SW it was, and we've been very pleased with it ever since..

Now, if I could only find some SW to help me unfold dual-radius bends, or parts of varying thicknesses (so we could identify hot spots), I'd be giggling like a schoolgirl.

 

[PatCouture]

Thanks a lot guys your help is a lot more appreciated than you think.

Frankly I'm not very interested in staying with autodesk because even if a lot of people told me that he can get the job done. I'm more likely to go with Solid Edge or SolidWorks because I really think that they are the best between these three software.

I will try both of them for a short period of time and then I'll be able to do a smarter choice for my company

Thanks again

Patrick

 

[ClydeMule]

Pat,

I had one other thought. You might be wondering why an SE user in reading the SW newsgroup. Well, that is because the SE newgroups is closed only to people that use SE. It is a pretty good group, real active and responsive to questions.

There are just more users of SW out there and the forums and other 3rd party information (I actually saw a SolidWorks book at Barnes & Noble the other day) available to you outside of the SOlidworks realm.

Not necessarily a deal breaker, but since SE and SW are so close any small comparision helps.

Clyde

 

[TheTick]

One of the things I really like about SW is its accesibility to non-users and third parties. The API is well-documented, and it works very well with other windows applications.

This is especially refreshing after dealing with PTC.

SW has a broad user base, which may be key when trying to find personnel. However, my experience is that a person with sound geometry and visualisation skills can adapt to any CAD system in short order. The only possible exception is when treating victims of "PTC sclerosis", which I define as a form of Stockholm syndrome.

I'm sure you will find companies effectively using any of the programs you are considering. Mostly, it comes down to the competency and willingness of your user base.

I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.

 

[Rocko]

I went through what you are doing Pat, 6-8 months ago. I tried PTC Desktop, Solid Edge, SolidWorks, and Inventor.
I hated Inventor it reminded me of why i quit using autocad years ago.
PTC Desktop was nice but not powerfull enough, plus it is a hook to get you to buy its big brother.
Solid Edge was a nice product, but at the time its focus was on machine design not as much industrial design.
Solid Works has its good and bad like all products but it was the best for US out of all of them.
The key thing is to have 5 parts that cover the gambit of what you will be designing and try Solid Edge and SW to make them. This is a good test to see if they have the design tools you will need and also which is easier to use. I tried SE, SW, and Inventor for 1.5 months before purchasing.

 

[PatCouture]

Thanks Rocko

Just like I said, I'm not very interested in Autodesk anymore so I'll do some testing with SW and SE as you did and see what goes best

Pat

 

[macPT]

Some aditional thougts.

First, I think it's a litle bit "dangerous" try to test the software yourself. If the software is new to you (otherwyse you would not started this thread)and you don't know the trick's to better explore the software. You can even think that it can´t do something, and just find latter that the feature was "hidden" in a menu that you didn't explore properly. This can drive you in wrong conclusions. I changed from pro/E to SW, with no complaints, but in the beginning it was a dificcult to do things in a different way.

I think the best way to "drive test" is by selecting some samples of your designs (try to select some triky designs) and make the VAR's create the designs in their CAD system (with practice, some day you will perform better than them, so I think it's a good method to evaluate CAD systems). Pay attention to: time spent; how many clicks; how many errors; how many "go back"; the interface;...

Choose the VAR carefully. A bad VAR can make your life miserable, if he can't help you properly (no matter what CAD you choose, you will need it). In the "test drive" you can also test the VAR knowlege. If a VAR does not perform well, try another one.

No matter what CAD you choose, there's allways some things that will not perform according to your needs. Choose a CAD that can easely "modified" with macros and/or API's.

Be careful with your design team. Some people react in strange ways to the change (it is a global problem, not a CAD problem). Expect a poor performance for some weeks.

Good Luck

 

[TheTick]

An observation:

Changing CAD systems is a wonderful opportunity to observe the character of your subordinates. You can learn a lot about people from how they react and adapt. Take special note of those who seem determined to make it work, even if they do grumble and grunt a little.

I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.

 

[StarrRider]

PatCouture

I have to agree with macPT

The only problem with it is that your VAR will be under some serious time constraints. I am sure that they would be willing to create the files for you - but I doubt if they would do it while you watched. When we purchased SW - our VAR did come to our establishment for a week to do the training – but the amount of time that they will be able to spend on an evaluation is a completely different story.

A slightly different solution might be to ask them for a candidates to help you with the evaluation. When you find someone willing to help - hire them as a contractor for a week or two. With the economy today – I don’t believe you will have any trouble finding a someone who is qualified. That way – you would not only be able to watch him create the files - you could get an explanation of why he is doing what he does. That always make learning easier.

After you have made your decision, your VAR has set your systems up, and you have gone through the training - Call that contractor back and let him assist you for a month or two. The reasoning for this is that
1. He becomes a temporary in-house expert that can help you train your staff.
2. There are a lot of little mistakes made by new users that can prove to be very expensive.
3. You can get some real work out of him in a time when your entire staff will not be at their best.

I also like TheTicks

Idea about watching you staff during this transition. It ought to provide you with some very valuable information about them that can be used at their next review.

Lee

Consciousness: That annoying time between naps.

 

[MadMango]

Another option might be to ask the VAR for a list of other software users in the local area. It doesn't hurt to try to contact other users, one might be willing to spend a few minutes in the evenings with your lead "users" to give them a jump start on the software.

At least I know I'd be willing to do that for someone.

Wanna Tip? faq731-376
"Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities."