Upgrade to Autodesk Inventor 3d from Autocad 14 2D?

[Tim Hancock]

The special machine design and build company I work for has asked me to look into upgrading from our old Acad14 to a 3d system such as Solidworks or Autodesk Inventor. We have 8 years worth of Autocad dwgs on our server and I am guessing Autodesk's Inventor might be a good idea as supposedly it allows us to still utilize our old "legacy" dwgs into new jobs fairly painlessly. Inventor also seems like it would be easier for myself and the other two mechanical engineers to learn. We do not have the luxury of going to school to learn the new software as we are all very busy with current and near future work.

Any thoughts from others who have been thru this switch from mostly 2D to mostly 3D?

[TerryBPP]

I work daily with AutoDesk 2005 but not much use for the 3D features. I do know that AutoDesk will allow you to open and use any older versions of CAD. Shouldn't be a problem updating.

[island911]

Solidworks has all sorts of transition tools.. .for moving people from Autocad products. (even a dwg editor --does everything autocad does)

However, it can be a handful. Learning, how to build robust models, from the books and tutorials is s-l-o-w. Your engineers can however learn from existing models. That is, being feature based geometry, you can learn a lot, quickly, by just stepping through the feature trees of various models.

I've been using the product for a decade now. They have a very mature product, with some great seamless ad-ons (FEA, mold-flow . . .)

[Tim Hancock]

I am going to an Inventor/Acad 2007 seminar next week, that should help with the research. I have plyed with Solidworks a little, but it seems kind of tedious for drawing complete one off machines. I am going to watch a webcast tomorrow afternoon highlighting Solidworks latest version. The thing we are most interested in, is how easy it might be to draw everything once instead of creating 3 views in 2D, then after detailing or vice versa having to break/trim lines so as to have hidden lines properly dealt with in final assembly drawings. Animation and FEA are not something we care about as these custom machines typically have short lead times and must be designed and built in much less time than new mass produced products typically are.

This is not going to be a fun transition.

[David]

I've used AutoCAD for many years. Currently I'm using AutoCAD and Mechanical Desktop 2002. When I started using the MD which is the precurser to Inventor, I had to take a few day course. The concepts were VERY different. The basic 2D part was the same but then when you go to 3D it becomes parametric and everything you do is different. I can't imagine Inventer is much easier than MD. If you're only doing 2D, what is Inventor supposed to improve for you?

[Tim Hancock]

Originally posted by 125shifter
I've used AutoCAD for many years. Currently I'm using AutoCAD and Mechanical Desktop 2002. When I started using the MD which is the precurser to Inventor, I had to take a few day course. The concepts were VERY different. The basic 2D part was the same but then when you go to 3D it becomes parametric and everything you do is different. I can't imagine Inventer is much easier than MD. If you're only doing 2D, what is Inventor supposed to improve for you?

I have done some basic 3D work using Acad 14's solid modeler extension.

The new owner of our company is hoping that designing in 3D, will eventually speed up the process. Having the ability to draw a part once, then "magically" turning it into a 2d dimensioned shop print, then plopping onto an assy drawing that can be plotted with lines being hid automatically sounds intrigueing to him. Having previously done some limited 3D along with trying auto dimensioning add-ons in 2D, I told him that in reality this "new" software will probably not be as "magical" as he is hoping for.

But what the he11, he is paying me to look into it and he is prepared to buy us all new computers (which will be nice as my Pelican surfer.... I mean work computer, is running Windows 98 ).

[5axis]

I spend a significant amount of my time fixing 3D models from our own designers, UG and Pro E. I have had decent luck with things coming in from outside, native to solid works. Or it could be our designers
It's not really fun maching stuff when it's is missing geometry, things get noisy.

[kach22i]

Tim, and others - I am very interested in what you guys find out.

I am an architect using AutoCad LT 2002 with a Tookit Max overlay (for X-cliping).

I am interested in upgrading in a few years to a program, which will allow me to do some complex 3D curves, not just for fancy stairs but also for my hobby �hovercraft�, and their complex and curvy hovercraft skirts.

The attached pictures show what I'm up against. Started with scale (paper, foram and clay) models and built some templates rushing into some form fitting in field. Not accurate, not easy, and may not even be symmetrical once installed.



I hope to have the rear bag skirt finished today, and install the front drape.

The old temporary template skirt actually worked quite well on a frozen Gun Lake in Michigan this winter. Now it's just garbage.

[BGCarrera32]

Tim- you have an e-mail from me...

[Tim Hancock]

Thanks BG, I may be giving you a call to discuss further.

[jim72911t]

Once you transition to 3D you will wonder how you ever accomplished anything with 2D. It is actually easier and faster(for me) to create a 3D drawing and then extract various views for dimensioning, etc. Another benefit of 3D is that it allows you to do interference checks etc. on the computer without having to actually make a part.

5axis is right about having to fix drawings that are poorly done. In my experience, these are usually the result of 2D drawings incorrectly converted to 3D by designers who fail to understand the importance of a perfect model. A perfect model will have no geometry flaws and will lend itself easily to manufacture.

The learning curve for 3D may be a bit steep at first, but well worth it.

BTW, I have been using Cadkey (now Keycreator) for something like 15 years, and highly recommend the software. I have a copy of Solidworks I need to install on a spare machine at home, but my applications don't necessarily require parametric modeling.

I have never been a fan of AutoCad; I've always found it a bit clunky to use.

Jim

[Tim Hancock]

After a long conference call late this afternoon with a local reseller and the other engineers at our company, the boss decided to order some seats of Solidworks. Thanks to all for the advice.

[island911]

Good choice.

[5axis]

Originally posted by jim72911t

these are usually the result of 2D drawings incorrectly converted to 3D by designers who fail to understand the importance of a perfect model. A perfect model will have no geometry flaws and will lend itself easily to manufacture.

Jim

Funny thing, these are all 3d solids from the start and they still eff them up. It's really cool to see the automated EDM system.
From part file to, electrode extraction to, trode manufacture, to automated trode loading and CNC edm programing and burning in one step. It's very cool when it works right, which is never, so far. But the demo is really sweet

The models need to be "water tight" and that almost never happens. And if it is "water tight" something elses is usually fkd anyway. So goes the mold biz.

[MattKellett]

Tim - great choice. I can tell you that working with CNC ,solidworks and ProE are the best files to receive for machining.

Matt

[5axis]

Originally posted by Tim Hancock
I
"magically" turning it into a 2d dimensioned shop print, then plopping onto an assy drawing that can be plotted with lines being hid automatically sounds intrigueing to him.

Get a seat for your shop guys too. We are a paperless shop in a technical sense. I can call up any component and see how/where it goes. This minimises the the print reading quizz/ errors that can be major "S- can the block" problems.
A good cad cam system can make shop life much easier for everyone.