Learning Solidworks 15

[kroth]

Does anyone have any thoughts or experiences on learning Solidworks efficiently and thoroughly (and fast). Where and how does one dig in to lay a solid conceptual foundation capable of growing rapidly to fluid use of the program?

I am a mechanical engineer, and am working on learning Solidworks from a base of Autcad (have used A from ver2.7 to ver2002, however only as 2d layout and planning tool). For some reason, Solidworks simply doesn't click with me.

Is Solidworks really as easy to learn as resellers claim, does lengthy experience with Autocad block learning, or does it require substantial rote learning (vs conceptual oversight learning).

 

[MadMango]

Each part you create has 3 reference planes by default. Usually there is no need to add more references for the sake of mating your components together.

[green]"But what... is it good for?"[/green]
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[SBaugh]

However MM, if you plan to in-context your parts to the assembly I use planes and a DT. The DT in an assembly can control the plane locations and if any parts that have configurations the Assembly can control that too. That's why in an assembly I offset as many Planes as I think I'll need, and probably later. Then I place one part at a time into the assembly and mating them until I have the all the parts fully mated to the planes. Once I have that I go back to each part and in-context as I see fit. Then once completed I can adjust the planes and my model works great.

Sounds easy... it isn't. The one job I worked on like this took 2 months to build and perfect. you can see a picture of it and some of the tools I used to make it at my site.

http://www.scottjbaugh.com/Design_P...DT_and_VBA/Program_design_Article_example.zip

http://www.scottjbaugh.com/Design_Portfolio/SW_Models_w_DT_and_VBA/SS_Article.zip

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users

 

[kroth]

Hi again --

Thanks for your encouragement above - my effort to re-tool my brain from Autocad 2D to SW is going very well, and I am starting to think SW.

Apart from this, one of my main goals is ultimately a comfortable top-down technique of concept evolution.

While the following is unrelated to learning SW, I would appreciate your comment if something like the strategy/method described in this link (Inventor) also applies to SW.

http://www.mymcad.com/iv_tipstricks_answer2009.html

 

[MadMango]

It seems to me that you are doing double the work using the presented method.

1) You create a "root" part that represents a subsystem in your top level model, with a giant feature tree to represent all the various parts in the subsystem.
2) You create individual derived parts from the features in the root part.
3) Changes to the root part filter through the rest of the derived parts.

I've never done anything like this, so any comments from me would be very biased.

[green]"But what... is it good for?"[/green]
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[SBaugh]

If you build a single part with this monster tree. It's kind of the something I'm talking about, accept I build everything at the assemlby level. Building on part maybe another option, but without testing I can't say either way.

I have lots of experience in the way I did it above. By using it at the assembly level, it gives me the ability to control the entire model and all the parts from a single DT. That IMO is better then tring to control a single part. Plus by using the Assembly DT, you can have equations and VBA code that will give the DT some intelligence. That intelligence will drive the cells that make up the assembly DT.

IMO - This away is better, but that maybe because I have plenty of expereince in this. I did lead on my customers that was very good with SW and he loved the functionality that he got from this type of top-down designing.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users

 

[rhpe]

Even though I had very little CAD experience and spent the majority of my career as an engineering manager I was able to learn SW (to a very usable level) in a very short period of time.

I went to the resellers training program for 4 days and with an excellent instructor returned home with competence and confidence to learn. From there I jumped in with both feet and drew. I found it to be very intuitive. It is just like you would make something in the shop--cut it, extrude it, weld it, etc. This is coming from a VP of engineering who bought 20+ stations of PROE over the years and watched the tedium and frustration of our "expert" CAD designers having to learn it. I would say the ease and use is excellent.

To further this, I started my own company, the money comes out of my pocket--and I could not be happier with the choice.

 

[kroth]

rhpe

Hi -

I appreciate your comments - particularly from your background end use perspective.

Incidental comment:

Apart from my SW learning effort, I am pursuing out of interest various side issues to 3d modelling --- for example -- having just recently looked beyond Autocad 2d (which suited my needs adequately), I am now discovering that there are numerous mid level 3d design programs on the market, all claiming to be this and that and everything else. I am very curious how all of this is going to shake out, will SW become the world standard in due course?? Or not? (SW claims to have 300,000 seats world wide -- is this significant -- or a drop in the bucket).

SW is pricey and overly intricate for independents, who need limited 3d capabilities. Others offer graded versions, starting at affordable levels ($800 randge) and offer several levels of increased functionality.

SW would be well advised to offer a "lite" version - perhaps that ttey don't is a sign of their success - they don't have to bother.

However, it sems to me that offering a "Lite" version in the $500 range would not cannibalize their current business, but would go a long way to help assure that SW becomes the standard (which might, or might not be a good idea).

What difference would it have made to your efforts if SW had been available in commercial "Lite" version - in your instance, would this have been of advantage both to yourself, and to SW?

 

[MadMango]

Our company made the switch from 2D to 3D back in 1997. At the time, we reveiwed ProE, SolidEdge, Ashlar and Mechanical Desktop. After reviewing each software for 3 weeks each, we decided to go with SolidWorks. At the time it was the "lite" version compared to the others we looked at, as far as price, hardware requirements and training.

I think these Eng-Tips forums represent a good cross-section of the working engineering force. Considering this, take a look at the other CAD related forums, and their membership number (bearing in mind that many people are subscribing to more than one forum).

AutoCAD- ~9,700 subscribed
Mechanical Desktop- ~1,400 subscribed
Inventor- ~1,700 subscribed
Catia- ~4,000 subscribed
ProE- ~6,000 subscribed
SolidEdge- ~1,600 subscribed
MicroStation- ~1,000 subscribed
Alibre- ~400 subscribed
CadKey- ~250 subscribed
I-Deas- ~1,500 subscribed
Unigraphics- ~2,000 subscribed

SolidWorks- ~9,000 subscribed

Is this an accurate comparison or scientific, of course not. There are many factors influencing these numbers, from users that have not heard of Eng-Tips, to users that find all the support they need from the software vendor. But I think it's a good gage.

[green]"But what... is it good for?"[/green]
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[ctopher]

For those of you that don't know, SolidWorks does offer a student version for ~$100.

 

[SBaugh]

It's true, but you to realize some of those a Educational seats too.

SW is inexpensive if you compare it other 3D CAD systems, plus the power that it has in it. It comes down to this. Do you Quality (SW) or Price (AutoCAD = free INV)

SW is not AutoCAD, so I hope they never come up with a SWLite product. If you want a cheap CAD system that has cheap tag on it like IntelliCAD. Or spend the cash for a good corporate edition of SW. SW offers a Education seat for $99, try getting that instead. It has a water mark on it, that you can't get rid of.

Having a Lite would require more support on both my end and SW end. SW and myself are already busy enough with the Corporate, and education versions. In the end a LITE SW would cost more money and it would not benefit anybody but those that are buying it. We would probably see a jump in maintainence on the corporate and education side as well as a jump in the Liet side.

SW Lite is bad idea no matter how you cut it. If you want Lite get the personal edition for al little while then buy the edition seat for $99 bucks. But the deal is you can't produce production drawings without the watermark, plus you will be breaking an agreement with SW. So if you want SW, try getting in close to a VAR and maybe, just maybe they will give you a discount on a single seat of SW.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users

 

[Dennyd]

I believe that in addition to the watermark Scott spoke of, the files from the educational seat of SWX cannot be opened in a regular version of SWX. Someone please verify this. Also, you'd have to qualify for the educational seat.

$4k/seat may seem like a lot if you are buying it for yourself, but if you are buying it for yourself then you're doing so to generate income. This is not just a business expense, it is a very smart investment.

The last two companies I worked for were using Pro/E and Wildfire. We did a clean sheet evaluation and in both cases decided on SolidWorks hands down. This evaluation was done from the standpoint of the users. We let them define the criteria and they came up with the usual which can be summed up as: Does it do what I need it to do? Is it easy to learn, use and re-learn for the casual user? We did not ask them to consider purchase price nor maintenance since they weren't paying for it. That was the enlightening part - they chose SolidWorks over the Pro/E they were using based soley on its abilities and ease of use. Management loved the recommendation since the SolidWorks with maintenance was cheaper than the Pro/E maintenance alone. A win-win!

Sometimes you get what what you pay for and sometimes you get a whole lot more!

- - -Dennyd

 

[rhpe]

I believe the original question was efficiently and thoroughly learning SW. At our class we had three AutoCad user and they did struggle changing from a 2D mindset to SW. It was their thousands of hours of Autocad experience that held them back.

As I said before, I had none, and left the class more capable than them.

As far as the price of SW, I wasn't looking for something to fool around with at home--I wasn't in the hobby business but rather looking for a product that would make my business money. It was my money so maybe I had more incentive to learn.

Good Luck with your choices.

 

[kroth]

Back to "Educational Seat" -- this was my first thought on coming upon SW some month's ago, and I reviewed several educational products resellers. For SW and Autocad they required that one was a full time degree seeking student or full time teacher.

Naturally, as "self educator", I didn't qualify --- then the "Personal Edition" was handed out at a reseller seminar, and that has been my learning tool.

However, it does not contain the other elements of the regular package -- it is in many ways a teaser -- SW must think that normal adult learners (who normally need to educate themselves under adverse cconditions), are less worthy than learners enrolled in degree seeking programs.

I don't see why SW plays this game - discriminating between "degree seeking" learners and "non-degree" seeking learners, and force the latter to learn from this 90 day, stripped down version.

Neither one is used or usable for paid work - which after all is the isuue - to buy the tool once it has earnings potential (until the entire tool feels good) and assured useable. Until then, the 5K is a gamble.

Putting forth a serious educational effort on an incomplete, limited program seems foolish somehow.

Or do I have this wrong -- is an "Educational Version" available to me as well?? - and if so, how??

 

[SBaugh]

If those are the rules of the Education then your not eligible for the ED seat. The Personal version is like your Lite version of SW that you pointed out a few posts ago. What do you expect a lite version would be? The same thing as corporate version? I don't think so. If you don't like the PE version then a Lite version that were talking about will not suite your fancy either.

I don't SW is playing any games. They are protecting their investment and if you want into the same investment then you have to take a chance and buy the software. There is no way around it.

Besides you can't do production work with the PE edition or the EDU edition. You just said that is pretty much what you want SW for. I sounds to me like your something for nothing. The world doens't work like that as i'm sure your completely aware of. But you have to be willing to take a chance. if you want to teach yourself then get the 90 day PE version and teach yourself.

kroth - have you used the Corporate version and the PE version? what are the difference - Please advise?

I would like to know what is the difference between the PE version and the Corporate Version. From my understanding they are the same except, the PE version has a watermark that cannot be removed. And the files cannot be converted to Corporate version even if you purchase it.

DennyD yes this is true same goes for Personal Edition files.

Regards,



Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users

 

[2ManyHats]

AutoCAD is just as relevent as SW. Look at what you want to produce as an end result. If you want mail merged letters then you use MS Word, if you want a quick printed list of a dozen names then why not use Wordpad or even notepad? You can't say a software package is not worth using because it isn't as powerful as another if you're not going to use the extra features.

I invested a lot of time in 2D mechanical drawings in AutoCad, if I want a 2D drawing now then why should I spend time modelling it in 3D when I've still got to lay out the 2D version even if SW does shortcut a few 'bits'.

The biggest mindset change I found whilst starting to learn SW was exactly as rhpe said earlier, you work with SW by imagining how physically you would produce this part, which is as much a design aide as the resulting model/drawings.

 

[kroth]

SBaugh:

I have not been exposed to the corporate version - my plan was/is as I said earlier to learn SW from the Personal Edition - which is just fine for that purpose, and if it truly fits me, to buy the full version (at one time , did things the other way around - bought the software, then threw it out when I discovered it didn't suit me - very wasteful - although I would rather learn using something I own -- more comitment that way).

Which brings me to SW Lite - I would buy a $500 version, for example, that would cover the entry level engineering effort -- PARTS and ASSEMBLIES only - without quibbling (assuming that these two make a reasonable entry level package) --. That $500 from me now is better than $5,000 maybe - and in the process, who knows how many full version sales would result due to my enthusiam and missionary work (all free to SW).

 

[cadman98]

Will just add my $0.02 worth.
Agree with what has been said about learning. You learn more by jumping in and concentrating on using SW exclusively. Going back & forth between AutoCRUD & SW gets confusing. Classes are OK, classes at local community college are good to force you to take the time to learn, and they are off site so your not bugged with other responsibilities. VAR classes are probably OK, but rather expensive and are more helpful after you have been using SW a while.
Just one more thing for your consideration: Look at a site called cadpo.com. They offer a free class on "What's new in SW 2005" as a teaser, but for $400 for a years worth of classes, it may help you.

 

[kroth]

Hi Everyone - I'm back

You are all absolutely right, and thanks for everyone's input and encouragement.

Took a lot of effort to retool an Autocad wired brain - but I now think Solid Modeler. Actually, it's very easy.


Regards

Kroth

 

[macduff]

Welcome to Solidworks World.

Very Best,

Macduff
Meggitt Airdynamics Inc.
Dell Precision 370
SW2004 Pro SP4.1
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1300

 

[HikinMike]

You have been assimilated, resistance is futile!

It took me a while too, but now when I have to go back to AutoCAD to edit a drawing or something, I find myself trying to do it the way SolidWorks does.

Mike
Engineering Technician
Fisher Research Laboratory