More on Chips' discussion below on 3D CAD software

[vesselguy]

Chip started a discussion of which 3D CAD software to learn. I too understand his situation. I too want to get really good on a 3D package but don't know which one to invest my time and very limited amount of money on. My use for 3-D CAD is to build model for finite element analysis.

I noticed nobody suggested learning AutoCAD's 3-D feature. Why not?

Thanks.

 

[dsi]

If your primary goal is to perform finite element analyses, you should be looking at that in conjunction with modeling software. Some modeling software has FEA add-ins that are designed to work together. Looking for a complete solution will, most likely, narrow your search down significanlty.
For example, we use SolidWorks as our primary modeling package but we perform several types of FEA. The Cosmos/Works application that is integrated with SolidWorks is suited to some, but not all of the analyses we perform. Some of our more complex components require the use of shell elements and axisymmetric modelling. Since we can not use the 3D models for these, we use the Cosmos/M package which has it's own design interface (GeoStar).

In short, the FEA will probably have (or should have) more influence on your decision than the modeling software.

Good luck... DimensionalSolutions@Core.com
While I welcome e-mail messages, please post all thread activity in these forums for the benefit of all members.

 

[Adrian2]

Dear vesselguy;

If AutoCad 2002 is all you can afford, I'm sure you could make out fine doing 3D with it. Many people do. I find the built in features of solid modellers so much more productive, but thats all I've been exposed to. Someone with 3D experience in many versions of regular AutoCad could likely be just as productive.

I think it would take a beginner a lot longer to get used to AutoCad 2002 3D than Desktop, Inventor or Solidworks. There are so many canned features in these packages that you have to set up manually in AutoCad. Also consider the marketability of your acquired skills. Solid Modellers are what everybody is learning now. If you learn AutoCad 3D you will eventually be forced into learning these modellers.
Why not do it now ?

Regards Adrian

 

[vesselguy]

Thanks all who responded.

dsi, how do you like Cosmos/M? Is it easier than Ansys to build model?

 

[dsi]

vesselguy:

I am not familiar with Ansys. Modeling in the GeoStar interface is not that difficult, but it is time consuming because you need to specify the coordinates for each point. DimensionalSolutions@Core.com
While I welcome e-mail messages, please post all thread activity in these forums for the benefit of all members.

 

To whom it may concern;

The issue is not what package to learn but rather, what is being used and where is it being used. If you are in Petro-Chem, Plants, Refineries in Europe/ Middle East you may want to look at Cadcentre, Intergraph or Rebis. If you are in West Canada, Intergraph or Rebis not much Cadcentre. If you are in Most of the USA you will more than likely hit Rebis/Integraph if you like Offshore work Cadcentre. And if you have no money, look at Bentley or AutoCAD and understand the basic 3D aspects and learn them as most Eng. companies will train you on the intelligent 3D packages if youy understand the basics well.