What are the 2D capabilities of SWX 2004? 8

[Motophile]

We are an extrusion company looking to upgrade our current CAD system (AutoCAD 2000/MDT4). At this point it comes down to Solidworks 2004 or the Inventor Series. We have extrusion profile drawings that are 100% 2D (and will NEVER need to be 3D). We draw the cross section of the extrusion, dimension it, and BOOM a production drawing is created.

My question is this...what are the 2D capabilities of SWX 2004? Not drawing generation, but straight, 100%, 2D drawing capabilities? With the Inventor series, AutoCAD 2004 is included, so that's easy to answer, but if I had to draw a 2D shape and dimension it in SWX, how easy is it? and are there polyline capabilities in SWX, as we would also need the area of the 2D shape.

Please help! I'd like to have SWX in here, but it's an uphill battle at this point.

thanks,
moto

 

[ctopher]

What's nice about SW is you do not draw in 2D, but actually create the extrusion in 3D then drag and drop onto the drawing and it draws the 2D you want. The extrusion part can be saved as many different file types and sent to machinery.

 

[Arlin]

Straight 2D 'drawing' in SWX is comparable to that of Inventor... namely, not great. The tools in SWX (and Inventor) are meant to be used for parametric 3D modeling and work very well there, but straight 2D is more burdensome (in both SWX, and IV).

We have been is a similar situation in the past and here is what we did:
1.) Get SWX
2.) Keep your copy of Acad around for legacy stuff that does not need to be converted to SWX. No need for Acad subscription or updates.
3.) ALL new stuff gets modeled and drawn in SWX. If you want some new "2D" extrusion profiles, just model the shape with a 1" thickness or so. Then just make a drawing showing the profile. This gives you the parametric power of SWX, without the need for Acad.
4.) Eventually, you may decide having all of your profiles in SWX format would be beneficial. Thus, switch your acad stuff over to SWX on an as needed basis.

 

[MadMango]

If you have no need for 3D files, what is wrong with your current CAD program (AutoCAD 2000), and what has led you to believe that SolidWorks would be a good upgrade path?

The 2D capabilities in SolidWorks by itself is very poor. But this is because SolidWorks was designed as a 3D CAD tool, not as a 2D CAD tool. In all solid modelers (including Inventor), you define a 2D sketch first, then extrude/sweep/revolve that into a 3D shape. This 3D shape is then converted to a 2D representation for drawing output.

Like the old addage goes, "Use the right tool for the right job." I could probablly field dress a boar with fingernail clippers, but it would be a PITA and take a looong time.

Ray Reynolds
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[Motophile]

Thanks for the replies! I guess I should have given a little more background...

I actually use Mechanical Desktop 4 for fabrication tooling design. The other engineer uses AutoCAD 2000 for punch (die set) design. We have two drafters that use AutoCAD 2000 for production drawings (NOT details of our designs, we engineers do our own drafting). The need for [the upgrade] is a product of the other engineer making a fairly costly error (IMHO because of the use of 2D). So...we are looking into upgrading to either 4 seats of Inventor, 4 seats of Solidworks, or 2 seats of AutoCAD and 2 seats of Solidworks. The last option has about a 5% chance of being chosen, it's basically all IV or all SWX. I am basically trying to justify going to SWX for the engineers, but I don't think the boss wants to keep legacy software for the drafters. He told me that it may be better to go with the Autodesk product since all of our work up to this point is DWG, even if we are not chosing the better software. I don't know what to think, I'm getting confused, I'm done for now!

 

[ctopher]

SWX can open DWG files with ease. Send this thread to your boss so he can get facts/ideas from others besides yourself. That's what I did and it worked.

 

[J-C]

Just because Autocad is dwg, doesn't mean Inventor reads the dwg format any better than Solidworks. Often I've heard that Solidworks reads and writes dwg better than IV does.

Your best bet is to evaluate both.

Your extrusion profiles could be easily done in 3D and documented in the 2d module. You would have the parametrics and configurations which blow Acad away in capability. You should be able to read in your existing profiles with little trouble.

You can caluclate area with the section property tool, just select the profile, no need for polylines.


Jason Capriotti
ThyssenKrupp Elevator

 

[JNR]

If you are going to use SW for tooling modelling (or Inventor for that matter) you might want to model a "standard length" of 3D extrusion and as someone put it "throw" the end view on a drawing. It would only take a few seconds longer. (BTW: Just suggesting an abitrary "standard length" for CAD purposes.)

Then you could do a lot of things real easily. You could design similar shaped extrusions of differing size automatically using design tables - and the drawings could also be automatic. Then you could design some of your dies and tooling in-context using the extrusion models. This could then be at least semi-automated also. Plus by doing this you have total integration of your data, thus avoiding manual errors.

Or not.... just a thought. The 3D world can have some hidden advantages over flatland depending on your total needs.

I was - and he did. So at least I didn't get coal.....
OK, OK, It's a reference to my holiday sig. "Be naughty - Save Santa a trip..."

 

[MechEng13]

Motophile,

I am a former SWX user, now using IV 8. The case your boss made about sticking with ADesk products for the dwg file translation doesn't hold water. SWX hands down translated .dwg files better than does IV 8. There are massive amounts of problems people are having sending IV drawings to ACad for drafting.

A second thing I would say is that the capabilities of both are similar...each has it's own advantages/disadvantages. Many users say that the IV GUI is more intuitive...I personally disagree with this but "to each thine own".

The best way to see is to get a demo of both packages and start by going through the tutorials so you understand the concept. Then start modelling some of your parts, tools, fixtures, and see which one is more comfortable for you.


I personally long for the SWX days, but for now I'd settle for a computer set up to run either.

On that note...both programs are resource intensive...you cannot effectively run either on a box that has been runnning ACAD for 3-5 years....You need horsepower...1.5GHZ processor or more, 1 gig of ram, and a High end video card...preferably Nvidia Quadro series.

HTH,


Alan M. Etzkorn
Product Engineer
Nixon Tool Co.

http://www.nixontool.com

 

[ctopher]

I agree with MechEng13 (aka Alan) 100%!

 

[Adrian2]

Dear Motophile;

Whether you decide to use Inventor or Solidworks you will still have to commit yourself to a different way of working with drawings than you do now.

My best freind uses Inventor 8 to design progressive dies and thinks it's wonderful, translation problems notwihstanding. He can do interference checks, see punch die clearances and even animate entire dies to check for proper operation. But he has devoted a lot of time and energy to learning how to use the software properly. It works for him.

I use solidworks 2004 and do quite a bit of work using customers legacy autocad drawings from version 13 thru 2000. There is absolutely no problem importing these drawings into Solidworks and modifying them.

Version 2004 has incorporated many user requested features such as rotate, scale and move commands that are directly related to their 2D Autocad counterparts. You wont find polylines but I think the power of parametric sketches alone will make you happy. You also wont have to worry about dimstyles and scale factors as much. So much that you had to adjust manually in autocad is now done automatically.

The important thing to bear in mind is that a significant investment in time and money is required to properly use the software. The cost of the licences is only half of what you might expect to spend in total. The 4-5 day training provided by the vendors is in no way sufficient to properly prepare you to import all your legacy 2D work and make use of it in either Inventor or Solidworks.

Try bringing in 1 seat of Solidworks or Inventor as a pilot program. Do the drawing conversions on some of your drawings and get a decent vendor who is willing to work the bugs out. It will take several months. Be prepared for autocad users to complain, howl and moan. At the end of the succesfully documented trial move decisevely to total conversion to the desired software. Get rid of autocad and desktop products so no one can go back to using them.

The are great benefits to 3D software but you do have to work hard to make sure they are realized.

Best Regards

Adrian Dunevein
aaadrafting.com

 

[Motophile]

Thanks for all of the help! I've got some info to take upstars now.

Adrian,
It's funny...AutoCAD users complain, howl, and moan. I still get the 2D'ers doing the same when ever I talk about them moving to 3D. (I'm the only one that uses it here)

 

[ctopher]

excuse me for butting in, but 2D ACAD user that complain, howl, and moan about 3D are not real CAD users and will never get any better than they are. Sorry, just my 2 cents.

 

[MechEng13]

ctopher,

Had to give you a star for that one. My last job had guys like that. Refused to believe that 3d could do for them what 2d was doing, CADKey in this case. When I started there, the department had over 50 gages that had been requested by Quality to design and have built. A year and a half later we averaged 2 open gage requests at any given time. I was doing most of them in SWX and just flying with them. Doing exactly what he said he couldn't see swx being able to do.



Alan M. Etzkorn
Product Engineer
Nixon Tool Co.

http://www.nixontool.com

 

[SBaugh]

Sounds like some of you are not happy with the Drawings in SW. I can understand that. But what I saw this weekend on SW05 (Which I'm not sure if I can Comment on or not So till I know, I won't be giving specifics) Drawings in SW05 I think are going to be awesome and I don't see a reason for someone not to use SW as there 2D tool too.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376

 

[Motophile]

Please keep in mind, I was asking about the real 2D drawing capabilities of Solidworks (the same type of work most of us started doing with AutoCAD a long time ago). I realize that 3D programs have "2D" detailing capability, but that's not what I'm after. The main question will be "why do I need to extrude the 2D geometry when it's the 2D geometry that I need". THAT will be the hard sell for those who don't understand how the software works.

This is a very complex situation, as it is not easy for software companies, whose sales are based on "migrating to 3D", to offer their help in a truly 2D realm.

Either way, I WANT NEW SOFTWARE!!!! [sorry]

 

[ctopher]

Maybe pencil/paper is the way to go...it's cheaper.

 

[JNR]

I think that all the disparaging remarks here about 2D are unfounded and uncalled for, guys. Motophile was very upfront about what he meant by 2D (and why) and obviously understands very well that he was referring to good old flatland and not 2D drafting of 3D objects. Granted we have given him some ideas which may change his basis for only requiring 2D. But based on the more limited set of tools, techniques and capabilities he was aware of at the start of this thread, his assessment of only needing 2D was valid.

BTW: There are still applications where old fashioned 2D is a valid choice (not too many I agree). And a good 2D drafting CAD system is definitely better than paper and pencil for a host of reasons other than the pencil or keyboard pushing.

So let's not take what look like cheap shots when people ask valid question and have applied good logical thought to them to the best of their current ability. Especially when they are asking us to help educate them and fill in the additional information they are unaware of.

Having said that, when people ask dumb (I mean really dumb) and biased questions based on totally emotional observations, well I can't blame anyone for getting a bit outspoken.....

I was - and he did. So at least I didn't get coal.....
OK, OK, It's a reference to my holiday sig. "Be naughty - Save Santa a trip..."

 

[automationbabe]

Good point JNR. There are times I wish I was using ACAD again for things that end up being hogs in SWX, but with our applications, I wouldn't trade.

 

[macPT]

I've been working with 3D CAD from more than 10 years (OH NO!!! Is telling us that again!), starting with Pro/E, and now with SW.

BUT... and there's allways a but, there are simple drawings, seckthes, schematics and studies that would be more difficult and a waste of time and resourses if done in 3D. For those cases we use AutoCad.

And if you are really doing exclusively 2D (and I bet there are many companies in this situation) there is no point in using 3D.

Regards