NEW TO NX 4 FROM SOLIDWORKS, PLEASE HELP!!!! 2

[CADWHORE]

I have just started a new job where I will be using NX4 to do all of my solid modeling. I have roughly 5000 hours experience with Solidworks and am very comfortable with that CAD software. I have been doing a few small projects in NX4 and am getting very frustrated at the interface and how unfriendly all of the commands are. Does anyone have any tips or pointers on what I can do to make NX4 a little bit more like what I am used to? Has anyone made the switch from SW to NX4 happily? What are the advantages to the NX4 software? Thanks for your information

 

[looslib]

NX5 should be an easier interface for you to pick up.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

 

[ewh]

I had the same experience trying to pick up SolidWorks from NX. Since I had a choice of which to use, I stuck with NX.

 

[jackley]

Thing is, some people are forced to work in older UG versions.

I am still on NX 3.0 and probably won't see NX 4 or NX 5 til GM upgrades.

Justin Ackley
Designer
jackley@gmail.com

 

[CADWHORE]

Thanks for the comments, I don't understand why a company like GM would be using old software like NX 3.0. I guess the company that I worked for didn't have to worry so much about file management, but I am still wondering what if anything is better on NX4 than on Solidworks?

 

[ewh]

Have you read about the debacle Airbus found themselves in by using two different versions of Catia? GM is being prudent (though I don't think UGS would provide an incapatible version upgrade).

 

[looslib]

Have you ever tried to migrate 6-10,000 seats of your companies CAD modeling system to a new version and maintain all of your customized tools? GM has to do a global upgrade over a weekend. It takes a LOT of planning and coordination.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

 

[J-C]

It gets easier but after nearly 3 years on UG after 5 years on Solidworks......I still prefer Solidworks over UG (Maybe another 2 years will make a difference).

I could run circles around the fastest UG users here with Solidworks. Both have advantages and disadvantages but I feel Solidworks has more advantages than UG....of course that depends on the work you do. NX5 looks a lot more like Solidworks so who knows.

I miss configurations the most. But on the other hand..UGs equations are really good.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
UG NX4.01.0 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2007 SP3.1 on WinXP SP2

 

[acciardi]

I have been on NX4 for almost a year now, and I feel your pain. I was on Pro/E for 13 years and I have never gotten "fast" with NX. I find part modeling to be pretty smooth, but file management and assemblies are a nightmare. Not being able to redefine assembly constraints is criminal, and trying to "clone" an assembly while renaming the components and retaining the drawings is, well... I would rather defuse bombs to relax.

I also have some SW experience and would choose it in an instant over NX if it were my call.

I appreciate the help and support I have received from those on this forum, but frankly, I can't understand why anyone would ever *want* to use NX. It is just no fun.

Ed

 

[CADWHORE]

I am glad to see I am not the only one who thinks NX4 is the Mickey Mouse of CAD progams, I can never see myself being as fast or efficient on it as I was on SW. At least it is a step up from Ideas which is what this company was using up to a year ago. I will be on the forum alot looking for answers, thanks for you opinions!!

 

[ewh]

Mickey Mouse of CAD progams

With an attitude like that, you probably won't get as much help as you could have.

 

[acciardi]

I wouldn't call it Mickey Mouse, but it is overkill for us and it is showing its age. I find it to be dreadfully slow at almost everything. I did some benchmarking of my own on identical parts modeled the same way, and Wildfire regenerated 3X faster consistently. I also seem to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to get sketches right. The NX sketcher seems to be about 5 years behind the Pro/E sketcher.

On the other hand, NX can bring in models created 30 years ago with no problems. It can also bring in solids from any system and work on them with direct face modeling, even though I never use it. I know of only one other system that can do that, from CoCreate.

I just want a robust, easy to use modeling/drafting/assembly package for small to medium sized designs. SW would fill the bill nicely and probably save my company a fortune in the process. NX is waaaaay overkill for our business.

Ed

 

[CADWHORE]

Well, I was just agreeing with what the two previous posts have said, and that is my initial opinion of this software, which will most likely change in the up coming years. But it is really hard to go from a program that is so user friendly and powerful to one in which I can't even figure out how to mate two planes together.

 

[Darthdad]

I have been working in the 3d field for 22 years. I have worked on practically every major CAD package. From Applicon
to Cadkey, Catia V3 to V4, Autocad , Intergraph , Solid Edge ,
Caddie, Microstation , UG v18 to NX4 , and a few not so well known packages.
It always comes back to the operator. They are all extremely competent packages, it's just a matter of applying yourself.
To call UG a mickey mouse package is extremely short sighted.
I find it one of the better modelers out there.

 

[ewh]

I do miss the stylus that Applicon used...

 

[acciardi]

I'm not so sure I agree with your sentiment. Do you have Pro/E or SW experience? I have 27 years CAD experience, and our team of 8 engineers has an average of over 20 years experience, so there is a lot of gray hair here. We have all survived over 20 layoffs in this outfit, so we're pretty good, and most of us have our MS degrees.

We all were very competent with Pro/E without ever taking training. We put out great products with a very lean design team. Our products kicked ass. Everyone could always figure out exactly what they had to do to get the models and drawings out.

Last year we got acquired by a competitor (an I-Deas shop). We are the first group to transition to NX, and we all all fully committed to this product, but we struggle much more than I would have ever imagined possible. We can get the work out, but we struggle.

If you have not used Pro/E or SW in the last few years, you may not be able to imagine how easy they have made this job.

Ed

 

[Darthdad]

Fair comment acciardi. But I'm sure you will agree that if it had been the other way around (your gray haired experienced team)moving from UG to Pro/E, you would be having the same debate on a Pro/E forum.

ewh - aahhh, those were the days.

 

[acciardi]

Darthdad - I don't know about that - I used UG from '80 to '94. We (Digital Equipment Corp) switched from UG to Pro/E when EDS released version 10 which was their first big changeover to feature-based parametric.

We were always told that Pro/E was very difficult to master, but everyone here picked it up very quickly. Yes it was (and is) very rigid, but once you learned it's rules it was very straighforward. I actually liked the cascading text menus.

When PTC released Wildfire, which was an obvious move to staunch the defection of the smaller accounts to SW, we didn't spend more than a week acclimating to the new interface. The same old functionality was underneath the new interface.

I think part of the problem, if you will, with NX is that it is extremely capable. With increased functionality comes increased learning curve. You have to make a lot more decisions. It also incorporates every modeling technology known to man. I would assume that this is a lot of code to carry around.

NX5 is supposed to be a big improvement in usability. We'll see. I like my job, and I would like to see UGS be successful (have you ever dealt with PTC? They are devils). So I have every reason to strive to make NX work at this site.

PS: The best CAD interface ever invented was the Techtronix 4014 with the PFK box on the left and the small message monitor above the main vector display. God, could we fly with that setup.

Ed

 

[J-C]

My beef with UG is the little stuff that takes so long. Like mating two planes together...you can do it but its not as easy as Solidworks. In UG...chances are you have to create a reference set with the planes in it which means modifying the part file which you may not have access to. You could show the "Entire part" reference set but then you usually get curves and planes everywhere. In Solidworks you just expand the part in the tree to see its planes, control select it and the other plane you want, select "mate" and you're done. Very quick.

This same thing applies to sketcher as well...just seems faster to select stuff and add sketch relations in swx.

I hate layers.....Solidworks doesn't need them.....but in UG you have to use them. Doesn't help that we have no layer standards here.....and the long time experienced users here always vote "no" to setting up a layer standard. They say they don't want to be told how to model...there's no benefit. I disagree but I don't get as much respect since I've only been on UG a little less than 3 years (Even though I have years of Autocad, Catia, and Solidworks experience and have setup standards for each one). Done ranting.....for now.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
UG NX4.01.0 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2007 SP3.1 on WinXP SP2

 

[acciardi]

One nice thing that NX did bring to the table is a dramatic reduction in the number of work planes needed to model, at least compared to Pro/E. I usually sketch right on a primary work plane and rarely need to create new ones. I used to get pissed at all the reference geometry hanging around Pro/E models. We'd push them off to layers, but it was a bitch to find them again.

And you're right about standards - an organization really has to have them. It has a big payback for such a small investment.

FWIW, we do not use layers in NX. Reference sets pretty much handle all the things you would have used layers for in the past. Your mileage may vary.

Having said all that, any CAD vendor who does not watch SW very closely to see the innovations that they bring every year does so at their own peril. For the money it is an amazing tool. We put one guy, with no training, on SW and in hours he was creating production quality models and drawings. It really is that easy. The online help is fabulous, and the software prompts you every step of the way. It's like dying and going to CAD heaven.

Ed