Uses of Inventor.......

[Sirius]

Hi, we have just embarked on the long process of choosing a new CAD system.

Basicly, without going into everything, I was wondering if it is true that Inventor will come with a *full* set of surfacing tools on the next release (as we were told...)?. We need a hybrid CAD system really...also a parametrically linked CNC package which seamlessly works inside Inventor - Is this possible?.

Does anyone use inventor for designing jigs and fixtures and press tooling?????. This is the area we are interested in (rather than the over hyped by CAD vendors 'product' design. It would be really handy if someone who used inventor for jigs and fixtures (or especially presstools) could give advice on how well it fairs up compared to 2d.

I would be really grateful if someone could send me some 'screen captures' of a presstool or jig/fixtures showing it done on Inventor................

Thanks,

Sirius

 

[Sirius]

Also!...........whats the deal with the RedSpark standard parts?????. Do they come 'in-built' into the cad station upon install?? somebody once said you need to get them off the internet........this cant be right can it??. I would hope they come with the package pre installed!, not every computer in smaller offices has a modem or internet access.....it aint cheap in the UK either!.

Anyway, dont let this defer from the above post ...

cheers,

Sirius.

 

Re: Your Post on Inventor.
We design and build Progressive Stamping Dies, primarily for Automotive Parts, but do get into Jigs & Fixtures also.

We have the current Mechanical Desktop v6 & Inventor 5.3 package, and 90% of our designs are in full 3D.

The use of 3D is a definite plus for both visual construction and export of components as solids for CNC machining.

Despite the hype from Autodesk & CAD Vendors, we do not find Inventor to be much of an asset.

Previous to obtaining Inventor, all designs were in either AutoCAD or Mechanical Desktop, and our long familiarity with this may be part of the problem.

We are professional Tool & Diemakers, and thus tend to have a precise 'game plan' of the size and position of the Die Blocks and the apertures/features within these, so the concept of making a 'doodle sketch' and then frigging with that to get the numbers right is totally foreign to us.

But we do not find Inventor to be either "intuitive" or easier to work with, and the illogical scrambled menu does not help. We do not seem to be able to customize it as we can with any AutoCAD product.

To date, we have not started a project in Inventor, that sooner or later we have not dumped out to MDT6.
Even this can be a problem, as Inventor does not handle 3D .DWG files as well as they claim. This can be a problem with downstream sub-contractors etc. - you have to open it with Autocad or whatever they use to check that all is well.

As Jig & Tool Designers we do not 'create' the final Sheet Metal Product - that comes from the Customer, none of whom use or will supply an Inventor compatible file apart from IGES and STEP.
Limited File Conversion to mainstream applications is one short coming of Inventor.
The fabled sheet metal functions within Inventor seem to lack the ability to progressively unfold or 'reverse engineer' the finished part to suit a progressive strip.

We recently obtained SolidWorks and while this also does not work as well as we would like for the above progressive strip layouts (we may learn how to improve this), but the file import/export abilitiies alone were worth the cost.

For Automotive based end customers, Inventor is not there yet.

 

Hmmn. Interesting. Thanks a lot for taking time out. I think I (personally, not the company) am in the same frame of mind.
We currently use an awful system which you could seriously get more 2d function from a 'free' package and the 3d is totally line/mesh orientated and just takes forever to construct even basic shapes....also there is no communication whatsoever with the 2d side of the package. Therefore design in 3d for us is just a waste of time, except the odd block here and there for CNC purposes.

I used Autocad elsewhere before the system at work, and because I was feeling 'trapped' in old technology at work I embarked on a night school course on Mechanical Desktop (basics). I have been able to use it since too on and off.....Mechanical Desktop is just so 'in tune' with how my mind works sometimes.

I have run demo's of these 'new' modellers like Solidworks and SolidEdge etc, but as you say, fag packet rough sketches and fannying around with the geometry is just alien to me. They are virtually all the same in this regard.
I think that the Inventor Series could be good for us because it still contains the trusty and powerful MDT (& Powerpack) and Acad tools, mechanical and Inventor for when it develops so we have a proper option to use what suits best - 2d/3d or whatever over a transitional period and have the facility there if it is needed.

We too do automotive press tooling, and I suppose the likes of Solidworks and Inventor are just not 'in tune' to this sector of engineering yet. I have yet to be proved wrong.........

The management are not sure about what they want to do in future, design in 2d or 3d, although they now realise that technology has moved on and it *IS* possible to design press tools in a 3d environment. (They didnt belive it could possibly be done till about 6 months ago!)

Our system is so basic, the thing that scares everybody else to death (especially the older guys) is the vast power of a package like Autocad etc and that they couldnt cope. However, I reckon we could reduce time by over 20% just if we switched to AcadLT!!!.

They have had a quick look at a few different systems and liked Inventor because to the non previous autocad user and non 3d draughter (like them) they were actually able to draw something up fairly easily.

I am convinced 3d solid/surface hybrid with proper sheetmetal functionality is the only way forward, the trouble is I have yet to be impressed in the 'Tooling' aspect/nature of the work by ANY of the likes of Solidworks/SolidEdge etc....that goes for inventor too so far. Yeah, yeah it can hold 80,000 parts etc etc, were not that interested in all that garbage.

We never get nearer to sorting this lot out. Mechanical Desktop is my favourite so far, it has so much power and I reckon its what we need (par sheetmetal, but we usually dont really use all that much of it anyway), however I am not that blinkered to consider recommending something else.

We must be losing money hand over fist on our current software, but we still 'get by' with it via shortcuts, so things still drift along as they are. If there was something inbetween MDT and Inventor from Autodesk we'd be laughing. Autocad is still the master at all aspects of 2d draughting and annotation etc I reckon, yet Inventor etc cant do everything we would like.
Why do folk thing autocad is so vast? because all those 'small features' options are so often a godsend and requested by users.....

I shall have to delve even deeper into this lot I reckon!!!!!!.

Thanks again,

Sirius.

 

[DetroitPickles]

I agree with Jack. and you too Sirius. I used to sell MDT 2.0 and 3.0, and when I first "demoed" Inventor, I was not impressed. Of course, I wasn't too impressed with MDT 2.0 either.

So, since I am using Solidworks now, I think it is better, but Pro/E is still better than SW to me. I get arguments over these issues all the time. Actually, I've gottne those arguments for the last 5 years.

So to answer your original topic title (and not having played with the latest Inventor), I am currently using my version of Inventor to hold my trash can down to the floor. It is resting comfortably right beside one of it's stable mates, AutoCAD 13....

Mr. Pickles

 

Had to smile at 'DetroitPickles' pithy remarks.
Yes, if you can sell the Price/Performance comparison 'Upstairs', Pro-E is not a bad way to go.
Maybe throw Catia v5 into the argument, and the Bean Crunchers will come around.

Inventor has a lot of potential - but (to me) suffers from forcing me to work the way some Code Guru believes I should work. The hidden shift'n'then right click menu system is probably ingeneous - but I just want to draw.

Long familiarity with AutoCAD (since v2.11) allows me to get this out of MDT6, and almost forget that I am using a Computer.
The Fagpacket sketch routine is common to most 'modern' software - makes anyone capable of a vague idea get a working proposition eventually.
Seen a demo, but never used SolidEdge, so I cannot comment.
But, the more I use SolidWorks, the more I like it.

Have you looked into Think-3 or I-Deas?
If we are to believe the Vendor, you can 'Talk' Think-3 into doing your design.
(Shape of things to come: "Computer! 3-up Progressive Draw Die for this convoluted object please. Thank You!&quot.

Ford appear to have widely adopted I-Deas, can't fault the Stampings I've seen from it, though some of the Designers were less than imaginative.

Some CAM packages have a very useful CAD front end.
At least one competitor uses Surfcam to this end - with good effect.

One package that impressed me - though the cost left me cold, was Visio. It might be worth looking into for you.
It is a dedicated Tool & Die product that offers seamless modules from quickie 'Concept/Costing' for the Sales Dept., to CAD>CAM for the 'Toolies'.

Losing money in Design because ...
That's an old familiar refrain, rather like the Deskdriver who answered my rude remarks about how the !! do you expect to build $250k worth of Tooling in 10 weeks with your guys?
"Its my job to administrate - how the Toolies get it made is their problem!"
Jack Hoke.

 

[Sirius]

Cheers Jack, I've looked at Visio website - *very* interesting (price in UK Pounds??). Interface doesnt look very slick though (as AcadMDT or Inventor etc), but it's geared up for tooling design though. If its big bux, then its out of the question - they expect us to do work like on a top end system for the software equivalent price of a diet coke!!.

I dont believe the hype of Solidworx though, yeah it looks like it could be good, but Ive heard its add on after add on and..... theres too much 'bulling yourself up' from that stable too and it looks a bit like a false smile sometimes.....(leaves it there!).

Solid Edge didnt really impress me that much, although I may have been using it wrong seeing as Im a novice, and the forum on here for it is all hassle and questions how to get 'around' something!.

Catia is too expensive for us, ProE is waaaaaayyyyyyyyyy too over the top for our requirements. Think3d looks impressive, I even hear its got an 'autocad' mode to help people ease thier way into it so there may be some investigation to do there. Although we will all feel right plebs chatting to our machines if we got that add on!!!!! . I stutter (honest), so I may get a few to many features drawn than I really wanted .

TopSolid by Missler looks alright too (who? you ask!) take a look for yourselves, but theres literally thousands of packages like this cropping up - all boasting to have the
'fastest', 'easiest', 'best', 'integration' and all the rest of it. Its so confusing.

We are by no means rushing into any decision, but (in my opinion) we need to get something sorted otherwise we would be 'looking into it' forever. I want to escape the nightmare of this pathetically dumb 'design' package we use I suppose, just having boundary hatch, polylines, associative hatch/dims and area calcs would be pure heaven!.


Personally, MechDesktop6 (ie Inventor Series 5.3 deal) looks the best value for money by a long way and it will do probably everthing a company of our size needs (par associative CNC'ing and wiring - although theres integrated systems for this like as in Solidworks). Its very customisable too. When Inventor picks itself up on surface design, I suppose we could switch to that although Im not yet convinced of proper file exchange with Acad. I hear theres a feature identifier for inventor which parametric-ises acis models though (?) and special OLE functionality with MDT inside Inventor.

Perhaps Solidworks is worth another look though, I just couldnt get into it first time round - Even after a bit of use I was just clicking at things thinking 'what do I do now?'!! I suppose I need a good old fashioned 'command prompt'LOL - that is still a good idea I reckon.

Its just a nightmare choosing basicly. The company wants to spend as little as possible, doesnt know if they want to stay 2d or not, all the PC's are over 7 years old and need upgrading etc.
We've run time limited demo disks (like Inventor did) on our one computer which has the 'new' windows interface of Windows 98se!!!!!!!!!!! and a whole 64mb pentium 1 to play with!!!.

"Yeah, look at how it can save us time like automatically filleting a corner without trimming all those bloody surfaces back - just wait 3 hours though whilst the machine churns and grinds away" heheheh .


Anyway, Im keeping my eyes and ears continuously open.

Thanks again for your input,

Sirius

 

[DetroitPickles]

Seriously, ALL these packages are GREAT. They also all have bad things about them. Depends on what you want, and what you do, and where you want to be, etc.

Example...Surfacing. Inventor not so good as SolidWorks, which isn't as good as Think-3, which isn't as good as Pro/E's or Catia's package. Are you building widgets or car bodies?

Ease of use? They are all easy if you know the terms used in 3D. Extrude, Constrain, Shell, etc. But I have heard and seen that just because you have used AutoCAD for years, doesn't necessarily mean you can use Inventor. Some people with AutoCAD experience prefer SolidWorks because of it's ease. I think it is easy to use, but it gets tricky when you want to API the thing...

Ohhh, and if you haven't looked, or don't do anything too complicated, you can download PTC's (they make Pro/E) latest Pro Desktop Express version for FREE. Yup...FREE. In case you wondered, look on

http://www.ptc.com

It isn't great and is a bit harder to learn, but it works....

Mr. Pickles

 

[sstrik]

It seems to be an advantage to learning Inventor if you have never used AutoCAD before. When I went on the training course for this package, the people having the most trouble coming to grips with the software were those that had been using AutoCAD for a long time (5-10 years).

A case of "you must unlearn what you have learned".

 

[BBJT]

sstrik,
This is true with any 3D software. I trained people on SolidWorks for two years and found that the people with no or little AutoCAD or any 2D package experience were the people that pick up on SolidWorks the quickest. I helped high school students with their robot competition and was amazed at how fast they picked up on 3D modeling. One of the companies, the company that I work for know, sends their interns through training. They also seem to pick up on 3D modeling very quickly. If you are not set in your ways learning is easier. Noticed that I kept saying 3D modeling and not SolidWorks. Even through I am a diehard SolidWorks fan 3D is 3D. They all seemed to do most of what you need. The hard part is determining who does your nitch better. BBJT CSWP

 

[sstrik]

BBJT,

I would certainly fit into the category of little or no 2D or 3D experience. Inventor is the first package that I have learned to use, and I seemed to pick it up very quickly. From the little knowledge I have of SolidWorks (played with a demo version), I would expect that I would have found the learning experience to be very similar.

I had an experience with trying to learn Mathematica after using MathCAD for about 3 years or so during my Uni Degree. I just could not get my mind around doing things a different way. Nearly failed the subject because of it.

SStrik