Pro E Vs Solid Works - The ol' debate 5

[Hayden]

Hi all, ok let's have it!

I am working for a place currently using Pro E. We are considering switching to Solid Works.

There are a few reasons for this being lower maintainence cost, lower product cost, better integration with windows apps.

There are a few percieved improvement too, being better customer service and quicker modelling.

I'm sure many of you out there are pro E converts, I'm wondering if any have any regrets.

We only have 4 seats, but we all have at lest 4 years experience on pro E full time. The modelling we do is pretty basic. We do, however use heaps of family tables and simplified reps. The useability of our legacy data would also play an important part in our decesion.

We are looking at taking on Pro Mechanica, but think perhap Cosmos works could be easier to learn and use, which is yet another reason to switch over.

I'd be really grateful for any advice anyone could give me here as this will be a key decesiosion for us to make.

Cheers

Hayden

 

[Standing]

Hayden
We have 19 SolidWorks users and converted from Pro-E’s PT\Modeler to SolidWorks when the cost went up to upgrade. We do have regrets. We could not transfer Pro-E’s PT\Modeler drawings to SolidWorks drawings at the time and still cannot. The models we could transfer, but I did not like the conversion and would remodel the parts. That was the easy part. As far as switching to SolidWorks was a very good decision and have not regrets.
Bradley

 

[RawheadRex]

We converted from ProE/PT Modeler almost five years ago now (my the time flies when you're having fun). I'm happy to offer some thoughts/insight for you.

Definitely the cost ultimately ends up being less in terms of base price and maintenance over the long haul (at least that's what we've found). Integration with Windows is unquestionable but on the other hand you're also saddled with the bumps and bruises of Windows at the same time (thanks Bill).

As for "quicker modelling" it's kinda hard to say. I think that ProE sketching probably does a better job of automatically creating sketch relations whereas in SolidWorks I found that I was better off creating the sketch relations manually. Rollbacks, Reordering, Patterning, etc. were much more easily accomplished in SolidWorks than ProE when we converted however. The last version of ProE that we used was v18 though which was before PTC apparently implemented the more Windows-like GUI so perhaps my previous statement is no longer true. It's a toss-up here in my opinion because someone who's good at modelling in ProE doesn't seem likely to be able to properly model something any faster or slower than someone who's similarly talented with SolidWorks.

On the whole however in SolidWorks favor is the fact that we've not encountered anything that we needed to model which made us wish that we'd stuck with ProE. In general I'd say that our models aren't overly complex either so this might be a decent analogy to your particular situation.

The other side of the equation is that ultimately ProE is the more powerful tool if you really need to push the envelope of solid-modelling. But it doesn't sound like you do that so you might be well-served by SolidWorks.


I'd say if nothing else your ProE experience puts you in a good position to convert to SolidWorks. A word of caution though, I work with a couple of guys who joined us after having some substantial time in on ProE (one of them actually is former PTC Application Engineer). While they acknowledge that SolidWorks does have good points there are strong feelings about ProE having serious upside on SolidWorks in areas these guys consider to be normal functionality (specific examples escape me at the moment, none were show-stoppers though insofar as there was a work-around available in each case). So you'd probably find some pet-peeves if you decided to go with SolidWorks.

Hope this provides something useful for you to think about.

Chris Gervais
Mechanical Designer
American Superconductor

 

[macPT]

Hayden

I have worked for 7 years with Pro/E. The last version I have worked was the v17, running on good old Sun SparkStations (unix/solaris). At that point I did not dare to install v18 on those machines (no disk space, not enough memory).
In 99 I needed to make strategic decision: by a new system. The PC's where allredy powerfull enough to run CAD systems. The price did not justify an UNIX system. After some evaluations the final battle was between Pro/E (PC version)and SW. The SW presented the following advantages: compatible with Pro/E files; compatible with ACAD(we also use it); lower price and maintenace costs; Windows integration; short learning time for new users; good support. Pro/E had, at that time, a big problem: the portuguese office was closed down (not a very good sign). SW was suitable for our products and I decided por it.

Do I have regrets? No. In some aspects the Pro/E was better than SW (for exemple, pattern of pattern is available now in SW 2003; Pro/E had it, at least since V15-92/93) but, after 4 years with SW, I am shure I have made the right decision.

There's only one thing I miss: UNIX (can you believe that I've had about 5 crashes in 6 years?)

But be carefull. Each case is a different case and you should study very well your needs and problems to make the best decision.

Regards

 

[Scoobystu]

Coming from a Pro/E background, the last version I used being 2000i2, I have switched to Solid Works due to changing jobs.

I also used family tables in Pro/E and once you get the hang of them they are really helpful. The solid works "Design Table" does not have the same functionality that family tables have in respect to features. Also the replace item by family table option in pro/e is better and smoother in my opinion than the SolidWorks reload function.
The place I now work does not have the same number of variations on products so it's not really the problem for me that it could have been.


As for speed of modelling they are pretty much the same. I constantly told my colleague that Pro/E was much better than SolidWorks. To stop the arguments we borrowed a workstation from another place next door and decided what to model on a piece of paper. He would model it in SolidWorks and I on Pro/E.

The result I would like to tell you is that I thrashed him hands down with Pro/E but it was generally pretty close. I wasn't allowed to use Shortcut keys however and as Solidworks is mainly icon based he was able to make up the time I was gaining on the sketcher. I would like to think that using shortcut keys I would have wiped the floor with him.

After a full day of challenges it was pretty even and the arguments stopped.... to some extent.

Hope this has been of help to you.

 

[alexsasdad]

Greetings,

I first started using Pro/E 8 years ago. I have been using SolidWorks for the past 15 months. SolidWorks has some advantages, but it has 5 times as many disadvantages and I keep finding more the deeper I get into SolidWorks. I could not justify a switch from Pro/E to SolidWorks at this time. If there is a maintenance cost issue for your company there are several ways to handle it.

If you purchased Pro/E when the cost was 4 times what SolidWorks is and you are still paying maintenance based on that price, I can see why it is expensive. But Pro/E's price is just a few hundred dollars more than Solidworks now and the maintenance should be competitive as well.

If I were paying maintenance at the old price structure I would try two strategies. First investigate the cost if you were to drop your current Pro/E and re-purchase Pro/E. We showed that a company that I had previously worked for could save $20,000 by doing this. Second if the first is not possible, then use the evaluation as leverage. Vars do have some flexibility on price and maintenance fees.

Here are major reasons why I wouldn't change.
a) Your user are used to Pro/E, no learning curve.
b) Your users are dependant on datums and rightfully so. Datum creation is very limited and difficult in SolidWorks. (I.E. You can't create datums on the fly.)
c) Solid works is a surface based software, not feature based. I will get a lot of flack for this one but it is true. (I.E. You put a hole in a block in SolidWorks and then assemble to that feature. If you then cut the portion of the part that has the hole, your assembly constraints fail. This is because it references the cylindrical surface and not the feature.
d) Solidworks assembly is chaotic. The order in which the parts are placed in the assembly is irrelevant. It also doesn't track the constraints that were used to place it in the assembly. It reports all constraints that the components is a part of, meaning the constraints of part that are assembled to it.
e) Pattern tables in SolidWorks are x,y coordinate tables. This doesn't sound like feature based software to me.
f) Family Tables are far superior to the design configurations method that SolidWorks uses.

Sorry for the length of this post. The above just scratches the surface. In general what I have found is that when solid works says that we can do that now it means that they have attempted to do it and you will be very disappointed in the result. (I.E. disjoint geometry)

Hope it helps,

Mike

 

[RawheadRex]

I was interested to read the comments offered by "ScoobyStu" and "alexsasdad" on ProE. They seem to confirm (at least to a certain extent) that ProE is still inherently a better package. Many of the points they raised are precisely what my colleagues have brought up in discussions that I've had with them on the subject. I am curious though about people's thoughts/opinions on a couple of points that I was aware of at one time or another that I forgot to mention in my original reply.

1. I live in Massachusetts and work less than 30 minutes from PTC's main offices. It's a well-known fact that PTC is notorious for bait-and-switch tactics with their products (e.g. PT Modeler had limited assembly modelling capability, we would have been required to purchase the baseline ProE package at ~$10-12k in order to get at functionality included in SolidWorks such as assembly cuts). In years past, purchasing SolidWorks was like buying a new car. In order for the package to be of any practical use one needed to purchase certain core modules (as I recall either the Assembly and/or Drafting modules at one time were not part of the core product). When referring to the current price structure of ProE, one has to wonder what exactly does "just a few hundred dollars more than Solidworks" actually buy someone?

2. Just a general question to any users who've made the switch, setting personal preferences limitations aside (real and perceived), are you accomplishing the work you need to complete with SolidWorks? I ask only because ultimately this will carry some significant amount of weight in the decision for anyone considering switching from ProE.

3. Given that my personal experience dealing with PTC reps in the past has made root canal procedure preferable to dealing with these guys (and I personally know many others who share this view with me) I'm led to this final question. Does anyone believe that it's fair to say that dealing with the majority of SolidWorks VARs is infinitely better than the superiority complex and holier than thou PTC?

I know that my comments might come off sounding like a sugar-coated endorsement of Solidworks so I want to be clear in my position regarding the software (not the companies or individuals working there). ProE as design package has a number of advantages over SolidWorks and if I were starting a company where time, money, and learning curve were not an issue that would likely be that package I would choose. However obviously noone operates in a vacuum so those other considerations would come into play and need to be evaluated at one level or another.

Chris Gervais
Mechanical Designer
American Superconductor

 

[alexsasdad]

I have to agree that Pro/E has a real weakness when it comes to customer relations and in the past they were more interested in selling you additional modules instead of supporting what you have already purchased. I think this environment has changed largely due to SolidWorks impact on the market.

The company that I am working with is using SolidWorks to model their parts and assemblies and documenting them in AutoCAD. I am changing this practice and we are starting to make some headway. I think that Pro/E's drawing package is better than SolidWorks as well.

I would also like to say in regards to the learning curve in Pro/E at least there is one. This seems like a funny comment but let me explain. The company that I am working with has had SolidWorks for over 5 years and the people using the system have not learned anything about 3D parametric modeling. When you look at the models that have been created there is no evidence of design intent and most of the time very few things have been totally defined "(-)". It is very frustrating to get an assembly with over 100 components that have "-" in front of them. By being less flexible Pro/E instills discipline.

Anyway just a few additional thoughts on the subject.

Mike

 

[RawheadRex]

"I would also like to say in regards to the learning curve in Pro/E at least there is one. This seems like a funny comment but let me explain. The company that I am working with has had SolidWorks for over 5 years and the people using the system have not learned anything about 3D parametric modeling. When you look at the models that have been created there is no evidence of design intent and most of the time very few things have been totally defined "(-)". It is very frustrating to get an assembly with over 100 components that have "-" in front of them. By being less flexible Pro/E instills discipline."

I absolutely couldn't agree with you more on these points. Without having learned the structured approach of ProE first I would've been in the category of people you described with 4+ years of SolidWorks experience and zero understanding of how to convey design intent.

Truth be told my total cumulative ProE experience was less than a year but having that experience and beginning with that approach put me far ahead of my colleagues when we switched to SolidWorks. Whenever I teach someone the basics of SolidWorks the first thing that I tell them is never to leave ANYTHING underdefined. I approach it similarly to how I learned ProE.

One of the first sales points to us when we evaluated SolidWorks was that we needn't fully define sketches and components. Anyone who's tried working that way for even 1 hour will learn quickly that that method only leads to a world of hurt.

There is one exception though, that being the evaluation of assembly motion, interference detection and the like.

Chris Gervais
Mechanical Designer
American Superconductor

 

[Standing]

Chris Gervais,
You are so right on the money with this one. We have been using SolidWorks for 3 years now. I find it very difficult helping Engineers that say, “I just want to get it done, for a design review”. This goes on for several weeks, and then when the drawings are put into documentation for release, drafting spends weeks fixing all the hanging problems. Then drafting does not know the design intent, so they delete anything that gives them trouble, e.g. relationships, top down design, equations and mates.
Bradley

 

[MadMango]

I'm not a ProE past user, but I would just like to chime in and say that this "lack of discipline" when using SW is not a limitation or downside of the software itself. It comes from a change in mind-set when transitioning from a 2d CAD system to a 3d system. Many of these 4-5 year users of SW probably came from an AutoCAD environment, and simply aren't used to all the "extra" things you have to build into your models to capture design intent.

"The attempt and not the deed confounds us."

 

[macPT]

RawheadRex

I disagree with you. You are right when you say that Pro/E needs more discipline (I think this was lost in the last versions) but this does not have anything to do with design intent. Pro/E (at least until V18) does not let the user to leave things not defined (not even the sketches). This does not mean that the defenitions were correctly done. I have seen bad designs in Pro/E and things were all defined (for example,an hole centered in a bar, on a simmety axe, looks the same as an hole with a dimension, from one side, half of the length: the behaviour of these two designs, even in Pro/E, will be very different and the design intent is also different).

It's very important to make people understand and use the design intent. And this is important to everyone in he design process. This is valid for Pro/E, Soidworks, CATIA and all the feature based prametric CAD's. It's a powerfull tool and if no correctly used, can give us big troubles, no mater the CAD you have.

Another problem is the freedom that SW gives to users. This is valid for other things. Focussing on software, MSWord gives freedom to create documents you want, the way you want. But I am shure that yor company as rules regarding how to produce reports or how to comunicate with other departments. With SW (and other CADs) is the same. You must have rules: rules for design intent, rules for naming files, rules for saving, rules for dimensioning.... Otherwise two designers are enough to create problems.

One rule we have, is that the drawing is made by the person that designed the 3D.

People discuss which is better, if SW or Pro/E, but I would like to know how many users of these CAD are really in trouble because of software limitations (not because of wrong working procedures). Either are good CAD's and I am shure that there is allways a way out for allmost every problem.

If I had the money, I would bet on CATIA.

Regards

 

[scsqdg]

We use both Solidworks & Pro/E. Simple answer, go with Solidworks. Overall efficiency will be increased, after a short period of learning.

The limitations that several of the people have posted regarding Solidworks are untrue. With all due respect, if I understand the posts correctly, and I believe I do, the stated limitations exist only in the training of the user.

I also agree with the person that posted concerning modeling/design technique vs. software limitations. Garbage in = gargage out.

You can probably be successful with either package. Both are capable of accomplishing similar tasks. We design a wide range of products and therefore need a flexible package. Solidworks does this better. Solidworks also seems to build more robust models/assemblies. Solidworks is easier to use and more efficient.

We have also run head to head (parallel) projects using both packages (Pro/E and Solidworks). In these "tests" (actual,real life projects) Solidworks has come out on top. Solidworks is better in (1) efficiency of use, (2) robustness of the models and assemblies, and (3) ability to create features and designs as intended. Clarifying this last item, I mean that we have been able to create features in Solidworks that Pro/E could NOT accomplish. When PTC (NOT VAR) was shown this, their response was that it was a limitaion of the software, and suggested that we modify the design to suit the software. They were NOT able to show us cases when the reverse was true (i.e. Pro/E able, SW not).

Both packages are "capable". My suggestion is to check out both packages. Run parallel tests on both using real life projects, and then decide. Test drive before you buy.

 

[DennisD]

Regarding the issue about Pro/E requiring fully defined sketches and SWX not: This is an option with SWX and the default is to not require fully defined sketches. However you can change this by going to Tools, Options, System Options, Sketch and checking the very top box that says "Use fully defined sketches".

If your users are as dumb and lazy as you indicate then you can change this on their system and they won't know how to get rid of it.

While in this settings area I do hope that you also have checked the box "Name feature on creation" which is in Tools, Options, System Options, FeatureManager. It is a good practice to not only name the features but to do it as they are created. I've seen a few models where the designer had good intentions of going back and naming the features but did not. These are a pain to work on.

- - -DennisD

 

[dukeoflonewolf]

I used Pro/E back in the UNIX days '96. The user interface was horrible unless you like menu's nested 10 deep. I was unable learn to do even simple things without factory training. After a week of factory training I could do simple things and after using it for a year I still didn't feel proficient with it. I started my own company in '97 and knew Pro/E would not work. It was too expensive and too hard to use. I bought SW 97 and felt proficient with it after 3 days of self tutoring. I'm not familiar with the Windows version of Pro/E. I suspect PTC would only be selling it's $20k/seat UNIX version if SW had not forced them into being more user friendly. If you are all Pro/E guru's, I'm not sure I would change. But if you have people who are still struggling with it or if you hire new engineers that don't have a lot of Pro/E experience, I think you'd find SW a lot easier to use. Unless Pro/E has become a lot friendlier since I used it.

I agree that if you do sloppy things in any CAD system, you will have problems. I also agree that the guy who does the model should also do the drawing. Eliminating the need for draftsmen is a major advantage of any 3-D system.

 

[jackboot]

We switched from Pro to Solidworks 2 years ago.

This is how I have always advised people and I considered myself and my group experts at Pro:

1. Solidworks will have 85% of the functionality of Pro
2. However, that common functionality will be much easier and quicker than using Pro
3. The feature creation logic is better in Solidworks than Pro
4. The PTC tech support and the representatives were the hardest group of people to work with that I have ever seen- this is no joking matter. I still tell them about the problems they gave me when they call for a "welcome back special". This issue alone erases any of the "betterness" of Pro over Solidworks.
5. Solidworks is getting better with every new release- and it is getting faster.
6. The add-on modules work very nicely -better than I remember the Pro modules working.
7. Training can be done in a few days verse weeks - all things being equal.

Pro will still do things that Solidworks can not- a formed datum curve for instance. But I don't regret the switch- which was a very big decision for us due to the legacy of Pro information.

That's all.

jackboot

 

[jdsmi]

I also use both SolidWorks and Pro/E (20001). As stated, there are some things that Pro/E does better. In my case, it's dealing with and cleaning up imported data. But, like mentioned, SolidWorks is improving and the differences are decreasing. We've standardized on SolidWorks as our company platform and retain Pro/E for customer-specific applications.

The other basic differences have already been pounded out but consider that SolidWorks has a much more logical interface (I've checked out Pro/Wildfire - JOKE) and SolidWorks, as a whole, is much more willing to listen to your comments for enhancement.

Over the years, I have become more intolerant of PTC's "holier-than-thou, we-know-everything" attitude. The sales staff I've dealt with (I've dealt with many of them) are nothing more than glorified used-car salesman. All buzz word talk, no content and don't know what "NO" means.

 

[RawheadRex]

macPT,

"I disagree with you. You are right when you say that Pro/E needs more discipline (I think this was lost in the last versions) but this does not have anything to do with design intent. Pro/E (at least until V18) does not let the user to leave things not defined (not even the sketches). This does not mean that the defenitions were correctly done. I have seen bad designs in Pro/E and things were all defined (for example,an hole centered in a bar, on a simmety axe, looks the same as an hole with a dimension, from one side, half of the length: the behaviour of these two designs, even in Pro/E, will be very different and the design intent is also different).

It's very important to make people understand and use the design intent. And this is important to everyone in he design process. This is valid for Pro/E, Soidworks, CATIA and all the feature based prametric CAD's. It's a powerfull tool and if no correctly used, can give us big troubles, no mater the CAD you have."

I'm uncertain of where your specific disagreement is here. I believe my previous statements (and I reviewed them) were to the effect of what you're saying here. You just seem to be conveying similar concepts in a different manner. Your points are all well taken in any case and can't be overstated or repeated enough times.

To be clear, I always found that the inherent lack of flexibility (at least in older versions) in ProE encouraged me to carefully think and be sure of how I was defining geometry and conveying design intent. Yes, I agree one can certainly "fully define" sketch geometry, etc. and still not convey a single useful piece of information to another user who steps through their model tree. My comments weren't ever intended to imply anything otherwise.

Chris Gervais
Mechanical Designer
American Superconductor

 

[SnowCrash]

At the factory school in about 1994 it was explained that the PTC philosophy was that design intent and compliance with drafting standards drove the design of Pro/E. This means that the usefulness for engineers and user interface would be secondary. It's a European/German/Swiss mindset kind of thing. This is a valid point of view, but it seems we American engineers want to actually USE the software to do design work.
Solidworks emphasises the usfulness of the software and the efficiency of the interface.
When I went through Pro/E training locally ca 1999 We were given a foam rubber "CAD Brick" to throw at the monitor when we got frustrated with the program. It can be that awful to use Pro/E.
For me one of the great advances in Solidworks over Pro/E is to be able to save a part with errors. This lets you go home to fight another day. With Pro/E I had to leave the computer on overnight
When the time came to renew the maintenance contract I asked Pro/E and later, RAND, "Tell me one thing that Pro/E can do that Sworks cannot, or tell me one thing Pro/E does better and I will stay with you?" They never even called back.

Pro/E business practices are aggressive and unfriendly. If you want the new cheaper support you have to purchase the new package and lose the old version. Sux. Solidworks is pleasure to work with.

Crashj 'I Solidworks' Johnson

 

[oharag]

jdsmi, is Wildfire "a joke"?

We currently use SW. We left Pro-E about 1 year ago. I never looked back. I was kind of interested in Wildfire though (I'm always interested in New Cad Stuff).

I just find it funny that the company that's changed the most has been PTC. We looked at SW at another company way back at Rev 1 (I believe 1995). It was awesome back then. It had functionality that no mid priced CAD system had back then, and it came close to rivaling High-End systems. SW's interface hasn't changed much since then (it was awesome from the start), and they've been adding functionality at an amazing pace. PTC was forced to respond. In fact they actually look like SW today (with Wildfire), and act like SW as well. The problem with PTC is the fact they were the first. Many called them a new Paradigm at the time (SW has set a new Paradigm). PTC's insistence on forcing users to FULLY define everything has been an albatross around their neck from the beginning. They used to explain it as "you have to fully define in order to manufacture a part". The issue really was that the early programmers made the decision to go this route, and users were made to suffer. I was told early on ProE was and excellent package if you know how your parts will look like, but if you actually want to change or modify the parts to do "what if" designs it was a terrible package. Thus the appeal of "Hybrid" modelers (tweak this, tweak that, and then commit to a fully defined product when the time comes). PTC has relaxed its initial stance on "fully defined", but they implemented poorly. They have this Intention Manager that guesses what the user wants. It's kind of silly, and it was the only way PTC could become somewhat of a Hybrid Modeler (again that albatross of Fully Defined biting them in the arse). With Wildfire I believe they finally get it. Instead of selecting a operation and then sketching they are following the SW route of sketching first and then performing an operation! Thank you PTC.

This whole argument that PTC is a more robust modeler, or that it has more functionality is a joke. I find SW can round features so much better than PTC. In fact that is the reason why we switched (besides the cost issue). I was building a fairly complex part. I was trying to add fillets in specific areas. I could not manage to do this in ProE. We had SW at the time. I tried the same fillet in SW, and boom it worked. Also, the part became so cumbersome in ProE that I could not even edit it anymore. The file was actually dead. That's when we decided to throw out ProE. Modeling the same part in SW was a dream. It's a pleasure to do work in SW.

Another thing. ProE Foundation is a joke. This is the package that was supposed to compete with SW. It costs $1000 more, and maintenance costs more. It lacked one functionality that I thought critical to design work, and that's simplified reps. Foundation gives you Explode States, but no Simplified Reps. We called our local PTC rep and had him quote on getting Pro Process for Assy (this package gives you Simp Reps). It would have cost us $30,000 for four seats!!!!!!!!! What a joke. All we wanted was Simp Reps! SW comes with FULL functionality right out of the box. Everything included, and no hidden costs. PTC will nickel and dime you to death. I hated this back in the old days, and I hate it till this day.

I'm sorry there's no contest. SW is the best Cad package out there. It allows you to do most of everything that you would need to build 99% of the products out there. If you need additional functionality go find a Gold Partner to add additional functionality to SW. It then becomes FULLY capable of designing all products. PTC in fact keeps trying to become all things to everyone (ie. design, man, analysis and PDM/ERP). When revenue falls (like it is right now) where do you put your resources? Something’s going to fall by the wayside (that's why I think ProE has fallen behind, because PTC's been pushing their Windchill product). SW's motto from the start has been to build the best in class design, assy and drafting package out there. If you want additional functionality (ie. analysis, man, etc...) then chose one of it's Gold Partners. They know how to do their function better anyway. Choose Best In Class while using SW, and choose just PTC if you go with ProE (I realize that you can add other products to ProE, but I do not believe the integration is as tight as it is with SW solution partners. Besides PTC will end up pushing their products on you anyway).

I always said the ProE was an adequate program. That's it. Not great, just good. For the money it stinks (even today). Go elsewhere if you want to find a CAD system.