off topic question about why i am forced to change my way of engineering 1

[duk748]

hello sorry about the topic i posted here but i was unsure of where to post this so here goes - all of our engineering dept uses solidworks to create their designs -
i like to layout my parts & assembly in autocad then import my sketches to solidworks thus creating my parts & model - i am getting alot of flack from the others
about the way i work - i am not holding up any projects nor have i been late on a release date - on the other hand i have been early most of the time -
my work is always complete & my designs seem to be well thought out & almost error free - others are complaining that i am just not with the program &
i must abandon my way of doing things & get on board w/ the rest of the class - i thought that the end result was what was important not how we get there -
the engineering takes 1st priority not what cad system you use & the product must be right - maybe i am wrong - would like to here others views on this if you please -
also some i work w/ are "tellling on me to the teacher (read my boss)" about why i work this way & it is starting to impact my work & my morale -
if i am wrong i will "get on board" & be a team player even though i really do not like the team all that much - thank you

 

[rb1957]

am i right in understanding that you

1) make a bunch of 2D views in autocad, and transfer these to SW and make a solid model in SW ? 0r

2) are you just arranging your views in SW and printing on a SW drawing frame ?

if 1) ... why ?

if 2), then there is no underlying model and if someone else has to change the drawing later then they'll have a lot of work to do.
and no model to import into the next ass'y, no virtual ass'y.

do you still run windows 3 ? or wordperfect ? for me, you should get your company to pay for SW training, if you're experienced in AC then it shouldn't be that hard.


Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

 

[drawoh]

duk748, I haven't used SW in anger but is there not some way to do a 2 D layout if you so desire in say the assembly as a sketch then create parts in place/context or whatever the term is? While I don't often do it as such our 'solid' software allows this kind of thing.
...

Yes, you can draw a 2D[ ]sketch in SolidWorks, and use it to control your 3D[ ]geometry. You can also make the sketch parametric.

Right now, I am working on an optical system, and I am using a 3D[ ]sketch to control the routing of optics. Getting light from some lasers to a scanner is proving to be horribly non-orthogonal. This would have been quite a challenge on a drafting board.

--
JHG

 

[MintJulep]

I suppose much of this is a combination of personal "inertia" and thought process.

Back when I actually designed things for a living I very much preferred working in a solid model environment - even though the tools were exceedingly primitive compared to what is available today.

For the way I think I found it much more efficient and intuitive. The design exists in my mind, then it gets directly "created" as a solid model.

Working in a 2D tool involves the intermediate step of translating the vision in my mind into orthogonal projections. For me that interrupted the creative process to figure out the mundane details of drafting.

 

[TheTick]

I reacted negatively because I have wasted countless hours trying in vain to coach new SW users who simply could not bring themselves to learn because they could not bear to part with their precious AutoCrayon.

When I worked on a board (oh, so briefly... old enough I am), I had to practice holding and turning the pencil and making good letters. Since then, I have transitioned to AutoCAD, UG, Pro/E, and SW. Each time, new skills to learn and master, and old skills to set aside.

In failing to embrace SW, you are cheating yourself out of many valuable lessons. The more you cling to a competency of fading relevance, the less you are gaining in new and more relevant competency. Get into it, learn it, make it your b!+©# and get dangerously great with it.

Keep the old lessons, but move on to new skills. That, or see if anyone in 1990 is still hiring.

 

[johg]

Hi,

Company policies are made to get structure in the organisation. But details as how a person works, is up to your boss. I think the way you work, works for you and the result is the same.
The software programms you work with are only tools. It is all about the result. If your work you deliver at the end is conform company policy, and collegaes can work with the result. What is problem. Your are most efficient this way.

Keep up the good work.
Johg

 

[MikeHalloran]

Yeah, the junior SW expert coached me by modeling a few of the component parts I needed, lightning- quick, some the 'old school' way, some the 'new school' way (I have no idea of the difference). He gave me a set of tutorial books he had received with his training. ... and my training was over.

The books were seriously out of date, of course, but helpful eventually. I worked through all the tutorials, which were also seriously out of date, so sometimes I got confused because I was looking for stuff that wasn't there anymore, or had been moved or just renamed.

I couldn't make use of many online tutorials, because the company blocked YouTube from their network, and just flat would not negotiate about that, or pay for any more training. The local VAR was extremely helpful, to his great credit.

Then they laid off the junior SW expert, and then the senior SW expert, and then it was just me and a new-hire drafter who was newer to SW than me. Now the drafter and I are gone, and their lone EE, who struggles with AutoCAD, is trying to keep up, with zero training and zero available time in which to be trained.







Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[GregLocock]

Idle thought, if the OP ever has to change jobs, how is the discussion going to go in the part of the interview where he says "Yes I am highly skilled at SW, but I'll need a copy of AC to do my sketches"

Resume hits round file PDQ.

Cheers

Greg Locock


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

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

 

[cjccmc]

"i thought that the end result was what was important not how we get there -
the engineering takes 1st priority not what cad system you use & the product must be right"

What you said would likely be what most managers would say in a speech to an engineering society. But in actual practice they value employees who are not PITA's much more than they would like to admit. In terms of job security for the typical engineer, an average one who is pleasant to deal with has the edge over the more talented and productive one who causes grief for the boss.

 

[tbuelna]

duk748-

I do a lot of mechanical systems design (gearboxes, actuators, etc) and I also prefer to start new designs by doing a 2D layout in an old version of AutoCAD 2000. Once I am happy with the 2D AutoCAD layout I then build a database of parametric solid models/assemblies using CATIA V5 and a PDM like SmarTeam. However, when I am done there is no link between the AutoCAD 2D geometry and the CATIA solid models. And once the CATIA solid models are built I rely on them exclusively for the remainder of the design, analysis and drawing work.

The reason I often start with a 2D AutoCAD layout is that most of what I design involves axisymmetric parts (bearings, gears, shafts, etc), and it is very quick and easy to do accurate 2D layouts in AutoCAD. The 2D layout also helps me to figure out how I will construct my CATIA part models and structure my CATIA products (how each part/sub-assy feeds into the next). Time spent upfront planning how to construct parametric models and assemblies is always worthwhile since it can save lots of rework headaches later on. Modern parametric CAD systems use a complex system of links and geometric relationships between individual part model features to create assemblies, and with large projects there can be dozens of engineers concurrently working from a common database. Even simple changes made to individual part model geometries, or how the constraints/relationships/links in a product model are arranged, can easily create a domino effect on numerous related models. It is surprising how much engineering time and budget is spent continually correcting issues with broken/dropped links between CAD models.

While I also catch some grief from younger coworkers over my use of 2D AutoCAD layouts, I honestly feel the time I spend on these layouts at the start of a design project is very worthwhile since it makes things go much smoother later on.

Regards,
Terry