Pro/ENGINEER or CATIA? 5

[asdfc]

I am a recently graduate mechanical engineer, beginning my career in the automotive industry. I am going to take a course on CAD/CAE software but I am not sure whether to learn Pro/ENGINEER or CATIA.

How do they perform in modelling, assemblies, analysis, ...?
What are the differences between them, if there are any?
Which is best suited for automotive engineering?

Thanks to all.

 

The right stuff at the moment and for the future is Catia. (not only automotive,...
shipbuilding,....aerospace, ... consumer goods... even medical)
The problem with pro-e is that it's going to end very soon.
I-DEAS ?! where are they ? Autocad inventor : a laugh ! solidworks : who bought
solidworks (Dassault systems = Catia), OK UG is still very strong.
But it's all a question of time.... Every year there going to be less players.
Look at all the companies who are changing from death computervision to
other cad and it's not PRO_E !
Don't stare blind at the CATIAV4_V5 problem (will be solved in no time, see BMW in
Germany !!!!!!)
A very happy Catia user in a multicad automotive enviroment !

 

[pkbruin]

I've used I-DEAS, Pro/E, and Mechanical Desktop. The best I've used is I-DEAS, since it is the most straightforward and flexible (of course for some people these are mutually exclusive). Mechanical Desktop is just a pain in the neck, and Pro/E is somewhere in between.

Ford and Nissan use I-DEAS as does Toyota (I think).
Harley-Davidson uses Pro/E (I think it's the only vehicle manufacturer that uses Pro/E).
Caterpillar used to use Pro/E until the lawsuit - I don't know what they use now.

Among high-tech companies: Raytheon uses both Pro/E and some I-DEAS (and speaking from experience, even where they send out the final product as having been designed in Pro/E - the major part of the actual designing (as opposed to modeling) was done in I-DEAS). Boeing uses Unigraphics and I-DEAS. Lockheed-Martin uses I-DEAS, Catia, Unigraphics, and an internal software. Hewlett-Packard uses their own software. TRW uses I-DEAS and Pro/E. Kodak uses anything you like to use (since there are translators available for just about everything).

My advice would be to learn Pro/E, I-DEAS, and Catia - you will have many options ahead of you. (The only problem with learning I-DEAS, however, is that you will see many more flaws in all the other CAD software that might frustrate you).

 

[pconnor]

In response to the above posting, IDEAS is now owned by Unigraphics and like other packages the software will be assimilated into Unigraphics or it will stagnate. IDEAS is a good package but one has to wonder about it's future. Ford will have issues with development of their base CAD software being driven by General Motors grip on Unigraphics.
Pro/E was the software of choice per the Ford benchmark but the deal fell through when PTC refused to hand over their source code. My consulting firm handles most of the major software packages in the Detroit area, we use the best tool based on the job at hand. There are good and bad points to all CAD packages some are more robust than others. To pinpoint large corperations with one software is a mistake. Ford, GM, Chrysler, all use a hodge podge of CAD software. They may have a base system but they do not exclued other software. I can't tell you how many body pannels have been designed in other softwares such as CDRS, Alias, ect..
Your choice of CAD system to align yourself with should be based on what type of work your going into and the task at hand. Learning more than one package is a great idea for employment security, since some packages have a stronger grip on certain industries. When one market surges you can ride that wave instead of waiting for your first pick to make a comeback. Don't limit yourself, learn as many as you can and boost your salery. A good Engineer can adapt.

 

to pkbruin
Boeing is one of the biggest Catia user