inventor e/o solid works

[goccia]

It is always nice to read the "elders" of the sector.
At present with catia I can make cubes but not industrialized products
I like to take care of ag and vds aircraft structures (sports flight). from the surfaces, to the structure, to the guide (which from time to time I do).
Maybe I really need ansys and rhino?
I ask the question with this further information.

 

[The_Matrix]

I totally agree with the hunter. . .
knowledge of the cad is a "no problem".
If you know any parametric modeler, learn a new one you put 10 days, to squeeze it up to 1 month, maybe 2...
but what value does this have? No value.
if they put you in front of a mechatronic performance problem of a machine that has to double the speed or you have to decrease the costs of 30% or you have to improve the mounting time of 35% or you have to make up for a component that wears/breaks too fast... Can you explain to me how I help from a cad or another? 3% maybe? but if you can't analyze the problem or, once analyzed and understood, you don't know how to solve it, there will be no cad that helps you.

I will tell you one thing: in 15 years in siemens I will have assumed minimum 20 people... all assumed without going to see what instrument they knew... and yet in a company like my cax/plm product is what we sell not?
the criteria of choice were the ability to innovate... the desire to get into discussion... the propensity to make the cu.lo... flexibility. .
Everything else comes.
and the facts have given me great reason.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

It is always nice to read the "elders" of the sector.
At present with catia I can make cubes but not industrialized products
I like to take care of ag and vds aircraft structures (sports flight). from the surfaces, to the structure, to the guide (which from time to time I do).
Maybe I really need ansys and rhino?
I ask the question with this further information.

Good morning drop,
If you're trying to specialize in an engineering profession, ansys seems to me more focused on your needs... as a profane and ignorant of the two softwares as I am, rhino seems to me more moved towards the "style".
I also saw companies that designed ultralights with autocads, so try to search for jobs for the aerospace industry in Italy and abroad to understand what the professionalities they require.
I admire you for the ability you have to learn new software.

 

[The_Matrix]

It is always nice to read the "elders" of the sector.
At present with catia I can make cubes but not industrialized products
I like to take care of ag and vds aircraft structures (sports flight). from the surfaces, to the structure, to the guide (which from time to time I do).
Maybe I really need ansys and rhino?
I ask the question with this further information.

rhino is a surface modeler of excellent performance and low cost.
ansys is a high performance pre/post/solutore cae.
one and the other could be used in conjunction... not alternatively

 

[goccia]

I wasn't talking about alternatives. structural ansys, rhino for aerodynamics.
thanks expat reader, my will to learn made me make many progress, I hope to succeed in carrying out studies without too much difficulty despite everything. I have done and do sacrifice degrees and advance almost to the rhythm of those who are unworkable students. I can't wait to study construction science.

 

[The_Matrix]

Sorry... I read or instead of e.
I am a good couple at a cost I think it is zero, if I know well their commercial policies for universities.
in the air force, for your information:
- aircraft: catia (Nx very popular in Russian)
- engines: nx
- but ansys goes for the major.

 

[goccia]

Sorry... I read or instead of e.
I am a good couple at a cost I think it is zero, if I know well their commercial policies for universities.
in the air force, for your information:
- aircraft: catia (Nx very popular in Russian)
- engines: nx
- but ansys goes for the major.

thanks matrix, that's why I wanted to study catia v5.
I hope I can design something too a day not too far. [emoji4]

 

[Lettore espatriato]

goodsera matrix,
What did I do wrong?? )
proseguo ot.

... I will tell you one thing: I in 15 years .. will have assumed minimum 20 people. . .
...and the facts gave me great reason.

In fact, as I said to hunter and marcof, good for you and those who work for/with you. less bad that there are people who hire and invest on people.

If you know any parametric modeler, learn a new one you put 10 days, to squeeze it up to 1 month, maybe 2...

we went from 1 week to 2 months. In the meantime.
then you have to see if that company you hire is willing to wait for 2 months that you “replaced”.
If you are a professional “other” who uses cax/plm to 10%, it can be.
I don’t think the passage was so “smooth”. but they'll just be my impressions.

...
knowledge of the cad is a "no problem".
...but what value does this have? No value.
. all assumed without going to see what instrument they knew... and yet in a company like my cax/plm product is what we sell not?
the criteria of choice were the ability to innovate... the desire to get into discussion... the propensity to make the cu.lo... flexibility. .

I continue to repeat that I did not say that an ignorant (like me!!) can design a part of airplane only because it manages to use a cax/plm.
then:
selling or making a product is something different from using it. frequently, especially in the software sector, the most experienced and those reporting defects/improvements/etc. are the users themselves.
If you are looking for those who have worked for competition, so much earned.
If you are looking for who to program in vba, what language should you know?
If you are looking for a class model in icem, what program will you have to know?
If you are looking for an aerospace designer, which programs will you choose?

a question. agreed at least on the fact that in Italy we are too accustomed to knowing (or trying) doing everything, while abroad are more specialized on individual, specific, activities?

 

[Lettore espatriato]

... I have done and make great sacrifices and advance almost to the rhythm of those who are unworkable students. ....

deserves even more my most sincere congratulations. :4425:

 

[marcof]

Good evening, Marcof,
therefore the fact of "declaring to use and know catia" means that it is automatically able to be productive from the first day that will open solidworks after a "full immersion" of 5 days?

Of course that declaring to use catia does not mean to be productive after 5 days of course sun another parametric cad, and in fact I did not write it. . .
I wrote that knowing how to use the cad is the last of the problems of an engineer looking for work and honestly I do not believe that an engineer with the
that proves to have two "complaints" of generous size can be discarded only because it knows inventor instead of solidworks or vice versa. It seems to me that for a mechanical engineering student to care half the path of studies if learning inv rather than swx or any other cad is entirely useless.

I believe that the vertical skills like those of the specialist of the design of the wheel rather than the doors or the motor gondolas of a aircraft are skills that do not acquire safely outside the companies reading a manual or attending some timely course but are inside the companies that of those skills they use for decades, so the problem is not to know the commands of the cad but to know how it is done, how it is designed and how it is

I think it's different to "reach to make a cube" and "industrialize a product" .

I think so. to make the cube just know the cad commands, to industrialize that cube the cad commands could not serve anything if you do not know exactly what to do, in practice, to produce that cube.

 

[goccia]

It's not about concern.
In my case, in the rare free moments, I like to draw and build hobbistic or familiar utility objects with a cad and I would like to do it now, have fun therefore, with a sw that could be useful in future private profession. I say private because I know him a little and he's very familiar now.
Moreover, having seen that sw for example allows the study of cinematics in 2d could perhaps serve me in applied mechanics.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

Good morning marcof,

I link a discussion here on the forum, always related to the choices of a cad "departure", where the last intervention of painaz center what is my thinking:
http://www.cad3d.it/forum1/threads/40853-quale-programma-imparare/page2in particular where "... a technician first of all is a technician, then an operator who translates with a specific cad what he has in his head."

Of course that declaring to use catia does not mean to be productive after 5 days of course sun another parametric cad, and in fact I did not write it. . .

If you think of solidworks, after how much a person is productive, that is, how does painaz say, do you know how to use "goods"? 2 weeks, 2 months or 6 months?

....
I do not believe that an engineer who proves to have two "complaints" of generous dimensions can be discarded only because he knows inventor instead of solidworks or vice versa. .

I agree. but if the engineers with the "countercosis" are 2 ? "equal" characteristics "human" and "technical", one inventor, the other solidworks ? you have solidworks. Choice?

...
for a mechanical engineering student to worry half the path of studies if learning inv rather than swx or any other cad is completely useless... .

if you want to make aircraft structures and Western players use caia, choosing solidworks you preclude, however, something. How much? It depends, but at a time when what you can perform is a degree or specialization and work in the university team, throwing away the 5 or 10% chance doesn't seem smart.

...
to make the cube just know the cad commands, to industrialize that cube the cad commands could not serve anything if you do not know exactly what to do, in practice, to produce that cube.

on one side you have a non-industrialized cube made to cad, in your head you have a beautiful industrialized cube. Who turns it into "eating" for machine tools?

 

[cacciatorino]

I remind you that for moral, intellectual, ethical, philosophical issues etc. there is the ot area, here we possibly remain in the technical field.

thanks to all participants.

 

[goccia]

Thinking about prampolini videos would tell me a year. .[emoji4]

 

[re_solidworks]

to answer the discussion, in the absence of references, I would learn solidworks because it has the following advantages regarding inventor:

1- greater power in the management of large assemblies
2- greater functionality in sheet management
3- well supports topdown modeling based on skeletons
4- has a welding module that, although limited to specific software, is functional, simple and better than that of inventor
5- interface better in collaboration with third-party analysis systems
6- model surfaces (which not only serve to make style, often serve to make special sheets)

do not mark the single trivial function that can be easily radiated, but in what I wrote inventor it has heavy gaps and difficult to radiate.

I think that for the training of a cad they serve several months. I say it based on my experience, I trained several people with solidworks and it takes time. if a technician is particularly awake in 2-3 months of exclusive use of the new system surely arrives at a good point, if we talk about a person "in the average" time rises from 6 to 12 months.
I speak of an in-depth knowledge of the cad, in all its parts, including the various methods of working to radiate trunks and operating limits of the cad, etc.
definitely to learn how to model simple geometries in bottom up mode takes less time, I would say a couple of weeks, but it is very reductive if you use a parametric.

 

[goccia]

very interesting thanks. It would serve the other voice, a mod inventor.
I still think the main thing is: sw spread in Italy (I don't think I can go abroad), exchangeability/migration (or as calls), ease of execution, license cost.

 

[re_solidworks]

very interesting thanks. It would serve the other voice, a mod inventor.
I still think the main thing is: sw spread in Italy (I don't think I can go abroad), exchangeability/migration (or as calls), ease of execution, license cost.

the spread of the software goes a bit to zone and to sector, it is not easy to guess so blindly. inventor is easier to learn from self-taught, the interface is more intuitive and when you break up with the mouse arrow on a command you even get a small animation that shows you the use of the command. inventor has not only defects compared to solidworks. For example, the command derives from inventor (very comfortable) does not have a corresponding and equally functional command in solidworks. I do not think it is productive and solidworks. I work on my own and when I have to deliver paper I use the tool that gives me the best result in the shortest possible time, if the cost of licenses is sustainable.
I don't know now, but the cost of licenses is equivalent, but autodesk from "more stuff". if we talk about the licenses "top" (premium for solidworks and product design suite ultimate for autodesk) autodesk includes many renowned packages such as autocad mechanical, autocad electrical, 3dstudiomax, mudbox, etc...

the choice may not be simple, depends on what you want. I prefer to have a performing modeling tool available and for what I do, in the way I do swx is the best compromise.

swx gives you less with the same money, but it allows you to stop maintenance, even for a few years. in autodesk it is not possible to stop maintenance, if you stop it you can no longer return to less than return campaigns.

 

[cacciatorino]

to answer the discussion, in the absence of references, I would learn solidworks because it has the following advantages regarding inventor:

1- greater power in the management of large assemblies
2- greater functionality in sheet management
3- well supports topdown modeling based on skeletons
4- has a welding module that, although limited to specific software, is functional, simple and better than that of inventor
5- interface better in collaboration with third-party analysis systems
6- model surfaces (which not only serve to make style, often serve to make special sheets)

do not mark the single trivial function that can be easily radiated, but in what I wrote inventor it has heavy gaps and difficult to radiate.

I think that for the training of a cad they serve several months. I say it based on my experience, I trained several people with solidworks and it takes time. if a technician is particularly awake in 2-3 months of exclusive use of the new system surely arrives at a good point, if we talk about a person "in the average" time rises from 6 to 12 months.
I speak of an in-depth knowledge of the cad, in all its parts, including the various methods of working to radiate trunks and operating limits of the cad, etc.
definitely to learn how to model simple geometries in bottom up mode takes less time, I would say a couple of weeks, but it is very reductive if you use a parametric.

very interesting thanks. It would serve the other voice, a mod inventor.
I still think the main thing is: sw spread in Italy (I don't think I can go abroad), exchangeability/migration (or as calls), ease of execution, license cost.

Are you not going a bit? I didn't know if the initial question was:

1) What I should learn to be hired more easily
or
2) Which cad should I buy for my future free-professional activity or for the company that I will merge

in case 1) the cad is an objective data and not a factor of choice from the assumption, for which aspects such as performance, cost, ease of use etc are totally indifferent.

 

[marcof]

Good morning marcof,

I link a discussion here on the forum, always related to the choices of a cad "departure", where the last intervention of painaz center what is my thinking:http://www.cad3d.it/forum1/threads/40853-quale-programma-imparare/page2in particular where "... a technician first of all is a technician, then an operator who translates with a specific cad what he has in his head."
If you think of solidworks, after how much a person is productive, that is, how does painaz say, do you know how to use "goods"? 2 weeks, 2 months or 6 months?
I agree. but if the engineers with the "countercosis" are 2 ? "equal" characteristics "human" and "technical", one inventor, the other solidworks ? you have solidworks. Choice?
if you want to make aircraft structures and Western players use caia, choosing solidworks you preclude, however, something. How much? It depends, but at a time when what you can perform is a degree or specialization and work in the university team, throwing away the 5 or 10% chance doesn't seem smart.
on one side you have a non-industrialized cube made to cad, in your head you have a beautiful industrialized cube. Who turns it into "eating" for machine tools?

A lot of what you write I share, but I don't understand where you're going to hide. the question of drop, which lost the discussion, was very simple: better for inv or swx work outlets? to a question like this mail from a person who is still studying the most sensible answer would be to draw a lot, because unless you can read the future in the coffee funds there is no chance to know in advance what will be the working opportunities that will meet between two or three years. Since he's a student, he'd probably better try them out a little bit instead of choosing one or two and then be hired where they might use a third.
I repeat that in this phase worry about the cad is how to put the color problem of the curtains of a house still to be built: are little more than pineapple flights
If, on the other hand, drop has the goal of going to work at a well-defined company will do well to learn the cad that in that company they use, it was also the cad given in homage with the washing of detergents.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

Good evening, Marcof,

....
If, on the other hand, drop has the goal of going to work at a well-defined company will do well to learn the cad that in that company they use, it was also the cad given in homage with the washing of detergents.

1000% straquoton with double deadly jump screwed backwards.

It is true that the company is the last choice in chronological order, but by the way you will have to concentrate the efforts to follow the "path" that leads to that.
because studying and deepening (example) alias if you do mechanical engineering, can surely be useful for personal culture, but will have, hardly, professional outlets in the aerospace motors or automatic machines.
So, if drop is interested, then, to work in the automatic machines sector in Italy, what to choose between inventor and solidworks?

the most widespread in Italy in the automatic machine industry. simple.

mini ot
It's just been said that the cad was not a direct element in choosing a company.
I just tried to explain that, in my opinion, it's not always like this.
on 500 people who can look for a large company, 30-40 are very specific positions, from universities and very specific university paths. If you want to enter as a mechanical engineer for the remaining research you have to pass, probably, through less "achievement" professionalism and that have to do daily with the cad/cae/plm tool and the more you get prepared at that point, the better it is.
end mini ot

ultra ot

....
is like porsi the problem of the color of the curtains of a house still to be built: are little more than pineapple flights

the curtains ok. but, you tried to sell a house painted in purple ? minimum you devalue the cost to bring it back to the color that pleases who buys it.
fine ultra ot