Inventor basics for a convert

[ungarata]

guys;

i just started a new job, and they use Inventor here. I have 10 years experience with Pro/E, and (2) years experience with Solid Edge. we use Inventor 11 here, but i currently have 2013 installed as a demo to learn it; but in six days or so the trial period will expire and i'll install v11 (we're short on licenses so it'll be a juggling act). i went through a tutorial book, but that's about all i've done. here's a few questions:

while searching for other things, i keep seeing the discussions regarding visible work planes. this works differently in Inventor that what i'm used to; why is there such little emphasis on work planes/axes/points/etc? i typically will model a part using the datum planes for symmetry, etc. then, downstream, i'll use those part-level datums to help place and constrain my parts into the assembly, often using the assembly datums. somebody walk me through why Inventor shuns this, and what the best practice is for this...

another thing; i dont like how Inventor uses external sketches. i see it as extra steps to first create a sketch, then exit it, then perform an operation; it's a lot of extra work and clicks. other programs (Pro and SE) allow you to choose; you can use an internal sketch by default, or you can use an external sketch. Inventor, it seems, doesn't give you a choice. why is this?

I have a ton of other questions, but this is a good start for now...

-ungarata

 

[GregLocock]

I don't know the specific answers, but rather than fight it and question its philosophy why not work with it?

Buy Banach-Jones-Kalameja and do the exercises. Then you will be working with the program the way it is designed.

or you can have a religious war.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[rollupswx]

...why is there such little emphasis on work planes/axes/points/etc? i typically will model a part using the datum planes for symmetry, etc. then, downstream, i'll use those part-level datums to help place and constrain my parts into the assembly, often using the assembly datums. somebody walk me through why Inventor shuns this...

I thought that was normal practice in any parametric modeler? I have never heard anyone say Inventor shuns this?
Are you using v11 or reall v2011.
In any case

http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/AU2007/MA105-1L Mather.pdf

and/or

http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/skillsusa university.pdf

 

[ungarata]

rollupswx;

I am currently using 2013 demo; i will have to switch to V11 (NOT 2011) in a few days.

I say "shun" because 2013 (at least) makes is difficult to work with the datum planes. They're off by default; you have to turn them on to use them, then once they are visible, you still have to project geometry to be able to do anything useful with them. in other programs, lines in sketches and dimensions will automatically snap to the datums, you don't have to do anything extra to use them as actual datums (not just some visual representation), etc.

...and I read through posts on here and seasoned Inventor users keep telling newbies to quit worrying about using datums; just sketch away!...

 

[EMorel]

ungarata,

I also came from a Pro/E and Solidworks environment into Inventor. It didn't take me long to fall in love with Inventor. My best advice for your gripes is to set up your own hot keys. The things I use the most, I have designated hot keys for. So if you like to constrain to planes and axis and what not, set up a hot key that is well within reach during normal sketching operations to project geometry. That will save you a few clicks. I also like to constrain to planes and axis for the most part, but I've never found it a hassle to project the planes and axis I've wanted to use during sketching.

As far as external sketches, I'm not sure I follow. You can sketch something in the sketch environment and then hit "E" while still in sketch environment to extrude, or "R" for revolve, etc. Again, check out the hot keys that are default and play around with them. Saves a ton of time. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding this question?

 

[ungarata]

EMorel;

Okay, that last hint there is a lot closer to what I'm looking for; I can perform the function without saving and exiting the sketch, then starting another command, etc. I will probably use that quite a bit; thanks.

 

[mflayler]

Also bear in mind that you are 6 releases back on the software from current. A lot of nice changes have happened since then.

 

[EngAddict]

So many problems with R11 too, was a very 'buggy' release.

 

[ungarata]

mflayler/EngAddict;

everything i've written about has been on the trial version of 2013 (see above posts). i've never used V11; if it's a giant step backward from 2013, i think i'm in trouble. i don't feel that 2013 is good enough to keep using, let alone what i'm going to find about V11.

 

[EngAddict]

Your comments are pretty typical for new users, you have to persevere and don't expect it to drive like the last package. There are some features that are better than others in all programs, you might find you actually like some of the Inventor features better after a while. I knew a user around the time of R11 who came from Pro|E and much preferred Inventor. I don't know what it is like these days but all the programs are quite comparable. I still think Inventor has a slight edge where it counts but it depends on what you do day to day.

Either way R11 is a big step back, a lot changes in 6 years in this industry.

Do you have any Inventor gurus to help with the transition? Otherwise the users might tell you it can't be done when that isn't quite the case.

 

[ungarata]

EngAddict;

I agree that I have to give it a chance; when I started using Edge, it took a while to find things that it did really well - some better than Pro/E. I haven't found anything like that yet in Inventor that is better than Creo or SE.

We have Inventor users; I wouldn't say we have any gurus here. I've done some higher-level things in Pro and SE, things that really help leverage the power of a 3D CAD application to help with product design, production, etc. When I enquire here if Inventor can do similar things, I not only get a response of "I don't know", I get a response of "I don't know what that is/means". So, the users here are very basic and haven't done a lot of more advanced things with Inventor. Thus, it will be up to me to find out the capabilities of it. The Inventor users have only used Inventor for a 3D CAD system, or only have basic training in other programs (for instance, one semester of Works in school but that's it).

Other than going through a tutorial in Inventor 2013, I haven't done anything else. I will now try to explore other things it can do and see how well it does it - for example, the iparts/iassemblies stuff. It seems (at first glance) better than SE, but way less capable and more cumbersome than Family Tables in Creo. There are many other things for me to check out; top-down design aspects, customization of parameter-driven tables of information to use for production downstream of engineering, etc.

 

[mflayler]

I would be worried too if I was using R11 compared to learning 2013. Interface is completly different, a lot of tools like iLogic (similar but way better than ProProgram) don't exist there, I could go on and on. A lot of development money went into Inventor around that time and the fruits of it came around Inventor 2008-2010.

I would double check with another reseller on that license inquiry though. Autodesk does not like license changes with software they don't support anymore. More importantly it sounds like you need to get your staff better trained on the software from a reputable source (VAR or Professional Services company) and check their knowledge before letting them come in to train. You will also pick up the tricks you will no doubt want to know to make the transition easier as well. From personal experience, I have been doing the training (Pro-E and Inventor) for a 15 billion dollar company that went cold turkey off of Pro-E to Inventor to save millions in licensing year to year. I've heard it all.