What's your most desired enhancement? 3

[SilasH]

If you could add one functionality to SolidWorks, what would you do? Maybe it's something that's incorporated in an add-in like SolidMap, but you'd like to see fully integrated. The majority of my work isn't creating designs (or if so, they usually aren't complex), but presenting them, at first with PhotoWorks, and now with Animator some. It really, really bothers me that Animator can't do transparency with PhotoWorks materials. Maybe if I understood the intricacies of the rendering process, there's some reason why it can't be done, but as it is, it just bothers me. What really gets under your skin?

 

[Heckler]

It's not like ACAD where it can be installed just about anywhere/anyhow.

I would like to install ACAD on my sons Leapster L-Max™ Learning Game System

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SWx 2007 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
XP Pro SP2.0 P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

(In reference to David Beckham) "He can't kick with his left foot, he can't tackle, he can't head the ball and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that, he's all right." -- George Best

 

[SolidCreative]

I want the ability to create a mirror with full parametric features. Also, I want the ability to create copys or instances of a part as fast as it was in mechanical desktop.

 

[Razberryjones]

Omitting Rhetoric, I've used SW every day, all day, for seven years. Perhaps you are correct in suggesting the need for a career change. And Prozac, for that matter. I simply agree with everyone else, 1. Don't add anything new, until you fix everything that no longer works properly, or does not work at all. 2. Photoworks, as Animator, as they stand now, are for all practical purposes useless and need to be vastly improved upon.

Cheers.

 

[ctopher]

Razberryjones,
I disagree with "Photoworks, as Animator" being useless.
I have used them to win major military programs. If you know how to use them (like anything else), you can do great things with them.
Rob, I hope you don't mind showing him this link ...

http://www.robrodriguez.com/

Chris
SolidWorks 06 5.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 02-10-07)

 

[Mono77A]

The enhancement that would transform my use would be 'save as' previous version, even if newer release features were dumb, it would save sooo much grief eg waiting for a stable sp - no longer an issue, or the big deal it is now... I delay because I cant afford for mission critical projects to be compromised. Sharing files with other companies on different versions, and having different projects on different versions , no longer issues.

I know there will be 101 naysayers to this .. too hard to code, other CAD doesn't, use dumb X_T format. etc, BUT I think a more realistic reason not to is ecconomics - Solidworks wants our subs and wants us ALL onto the latest release. And for those who say its impossible to do - heck, as an engineer thats what I do each day, making stuff that wasn't here yesterday, and what WAS regarded as impossible.

 

[TheTick]

The ability to create a cut sweep using a solid (instead of 2d profile) that follows a path so you can easily replicate cuts that are made with 4 and 5 axis milling machines, something that is almost impossible to do at the moment.

Not a SW issue. This represents the outer frontiers of geometry. There are PhD's working on this with little progress.

The mathematics for a true swept solid have not been invented. There are programs that do this by iteration and approximation (i.e. most CAM programs).

Honesty may be the best policy, but insanity is a better defense.

http://www.EsoxRepublic.com

-SolidWorks API VB programming help

 

[eyai]

What is SolidMap?

I saw few picked it here?

I looked at the site and it's only $695.

Did any one try it?


Thanks

 

[Theophilus]

There was something that ProE uses--that I could really use in all my ID stuff--conics (just remembered the term). It's sort of a quarter ellipse, but you can control the amplitude of the tangency controls to bend the curve as you need--very nice, and much more variety than pure ellipsoid shapes.

As it is, I can fake it with splines, but the fine control is simply not there for curve control. For instance, if I have several conic sections lined up to use as loft profiles, I have no way of making sure the resulting surface won't have dents or bumps in it with my spline method--with the conics, I can use similar tangency settings for each profile (from what I understand) to get a much more consistent surface.



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

eyai ...

http://www.solidmap.com/webinar.html

http://www.solidmap.com/download trial.htm

 

[TheTick]

Theo

Why not use the partial ellipse instead of splines? You don't have eccentricity control, but the root conic geometry is there.

I agree about using conics for loft sections when possible (i.e. no curvature inflections). Use of a conic absolutely prevents curvature inflection in any given 2D section.

Honesty may be the best policy, but insanity is a better defense.

http://www.EsoxRepublic.com

-SolidWorks API VB programming help

 

[mncad]

TheTick,

I have actually recieved emails from SW showing the swept solids and the work they have done so far. It looks to me like they are fairly close to getting it. I'm not saying it will be exact, it doesn't need to be. Just something like a CAM package that would get me very close without having to create a ton of geometry that isn't creating the right geometry, just something that kind of sort of looks right but really isn't at all.

mncad

 

[Theophilus]

What I was getting with partial ellipses was not the same sort of curve as my client's conics--I imported his curves (IGES) and traced them (sort of) with splines to reproduce some geometry quickly. The partial ellipses could not successfully match the conic curves--so I'm thinking the conics are not true elliptical curves, but something else (which is why I must HAVE the PRECIOUS!).

Hey, I'd also love to have swept solid geometry.



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[rfus]

Jeff,

As you know, A conic is the intersection of a plane and a cone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conic_section

. The result can create a circle, ellipse, parabola, or hyperbola, which are easily sketched. The amplitude and tangency can be controlled with centerlines and dimensions. So if this can already be done in SW wouln't an enhancement request be like asking them to make it easier and pretty.

I don't really find to many things that I can't find a work around for in 2007. In the time I would gripe about something I usally can just push through and get it done. There are some oddities that do drive me nuts, but I haven't thought about bringing a gun to work (rasberry). I'm kind of a one man show with a bunch of EE's and software developers, which has its positives and negatives. When something comes out wrong and calls for ECO's there is no one to share the blame with.

I would request improvements in drawing layer properties and make working with layers more powerful.

I'm excited for what they are calling instant 3d, push and pull geometry as well as live section manipulation. This shows that things are going to have a more open architechture feel. I always think its funny when people say they don't use surfaces or do surfacing. Solids are surfaces, just packaged into macros, so i'm wondering if you can grab a face and drag it on a solid, and also do it if you did a delete face, made a surface body, and could still drag the face in or out. This would show that they are closing this percieved gap between surfaces and solids.

http://cadinsider.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/02/solidworks_2008.html

RFUS

 

[Theophilus]

rfus, that's a good point about the conic. And I can certainly find work-arounds for this stuff (since SW is so flexible). However, the conic feature as it is in ProE does not require me to make up my mind whether I need a parabola, ellipsoid, etc. I can simply create a curve and then bend it where it "looks cool" (technical industrial design jargon). I don't need to get stuck in either a parabola (sketch element) OR a partial ellipse (other sketch element). I can get either one if I know what I need before seeing it (not likely in most cases), but as soon as I hit the extents of either, I need to start over with a new curve--not good, if I already have my surface lofted/swept.

So it's an enhancement that could be done with a work-around. However, flexibility and time-savings are what the software needs to be all about. I should be spending less time/thought on the software and more on my creation (according to [Jon Hirschtick?] during the SW 2007 release I went to).



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[rfus]

BTW...The title of this thread is very similar to the subject line on a lot of the spam I get.

 

[Theophilus]

HA! Mine too--and they tend not to spell as well in the spam.



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[lumenharold]

Hey, good one Jeff! Star for you. I forgot about the occasional need to generate a conic. Once in a while I need a conic surface for a hyperbolic/parabolic reflector. For now I use OptisWorks but if the curve needs to be changed I have to make a new part (it generates a spline sketch of fixed points after I've entered a couple variables).

Harold
SW2007 SP2.2 OPW2007 SP0.0

http://www.lumenflow.com

 

[rfus]

Mcad and TheTick,

I commonly use 5 axis cutting strategies where I post using RTCP (Rotation Tool Center Point). My tooling strategies are usually developed by keeping my tool normal to a ref surface while following a pattern or path. I can then apply a lead/lean to the path and it will all post out based on RTCP.

I have found I can emulate these cuts in solidworks by using curve driven patterns with an alignment method of tangent to curve and a face normal. I can send the profile of this cutter down the path with this same method. A lofted cut can then be created using these profiles with the path. Here is a very simple example of this in 2007.

http://www.box.net/public/g70qn3fa6a

For more complex stuff on models I'll use face curves, filled surfaces, and all kinds of guide curves, rotations on temp axix... but for the most part, curve dirvens with loft cuts make this somwhat possible.

RFUS

I agree its on the limits of computational geometery, but I think there are ways to make lofted cuts that emulate 5 axis cutting.

 

[rikonen]

fix the utilities function so comparing features by volume works. 100% failure rate in doing this and every file I have sent to the VAR they have the same results. A direct quote from my VAR " that's a simple part, I can't believe it won't do it! " It's been reported to SW and is put on a list for considering a fix. I updated to SW professional for this function and it hasn't worked for me yet. disapointing but I like everything that SW has to offer and though I'm still learning the ropes I find something new every week that wow's me about it.

 

[rfus]

Jeff,

Tonight at the MSWUG (Maine SolidWorks User Group) someone said they wished that SW could show the foci of an ellipse. One of the VAR's said, well, we'll have to make and ER. This post jumped right into my mind. I piped in and said, just because solidworks doesn't give you the point doesn't men that you cant create it with two centerlines and a relation.

I was gonna do a write-up for the guy who asked the question, but with a quick search I found a VAR that did a writeup on it. There were two guys from here at the meeting and I don't think that they knew they had this writeup on finding the focus of an ellipse. scroll down a bit.

http://www.capinc.com/pages/support/tips_sketching.cfm

RFUS