better inventor or solidworks?

[re_solidworks]

I will not want to say that you can use all the high-level slopes, perhaps I have been misunderstood.Of course there will be a cad with which you feel more facilitated, brought compared to others, but to me it happens often that I have to change cad from one moment to another and as long as you work only on one for 2/3 months you will get used to that and go like a sph

hi davide, no problem. I only make a great effort to move from one to another and when I read people who use many I feel a nullity :36_1_4:
Unfortunately for the complexity of the work that I carry out daily I have to go to the bottom, I make complex machines and I have to demand the maximum from the cad to arrive in acceptable times.
so much to make an example I can not afford to design in bottom up because at the first request of modification on a structure of minimum 30,000 components would be a blood bath.
the management of external references and skeletons is quite different from one cad to another and becomes a puzzle to want to use many at high level,
I'm surprised at the tables and I'm going to see myself an inventor and if, just to understand.
I tell you I'm surprised because I made many tables with a thirty-five views (I finished the alphabet and swx started using double letters in the labels) without problems. They open me in seconds and are very manageable.
I find all the commands I need, I asked a couple (we will see what they will do) but I think it's very complete.

 

[davide75]

for the boards I refer to the fact that they are very fast to quote and to use.for inventor and if I refer to the fact that they are simpler than others and according to me they can study at the bottom of both, I can certainly not compare them to pro/e.
for the heaviness of the obvious tables that if you make machines with 30000 pieces maybe the two above-mentioned cads should not be taken in soderation and you have to go on another band.
Hi.

p.s.
do not feel a null above all if you make machines with 30000 components when from me for now we arrive you and no to 1000-1500

 

[michele81]

p.s.
do not feel a null above all if you make machines with 30000 components when from me for now we arrive you and no to 1000-1500[/QUOTE]I agree, we also work to the maximum on the 3000-4000 details and to the first project made with pro-e (usually we use sw) we put a lot more time to get results just comparable. I trust that with the next things improve. ..faced and overcome the setting problems then should be easier (at least I hope)
switching from software to software can be indispensable but it is definitely not simple...:wink:

 

[Hole]

if I can help, I used if until v18, sw 2007 and currently I am working with inventor.
the worst of the three, hamè, is really inventor. The only thing I think positive about this programme is that it has a table that is certainly higher than the other two. but before putting the pieces into the table you have to model them. . .

 

[stefanobruno]

if I can help, I used if until v18, sw 2007 and currently I am working with inventor.
the worst of the three, hamè, is really inventor. The only thing I think positive about this programme is that it has a table that is certainly higher than the other two. but before putting the pieces into the table you have to model them. . .

If the modeling of se and sw, which I do not know, is better than that of inventor, then they must be super-perfacilious!
If you then meet again, already from the beginning of the use of inventor, a greater ease in the table, then I prefer to keep my dear inv. 2009/2010.

Bye.

 

[davide75]

opinions as you see discordant.It is obvious that cmq the cad should be chosen according to what you do and to your needs. Of course that every cad will have strengths or not compared to the others but cmq always keep in mind what you will have to do.poi to learn it is only matter of time using it constantly.
Hi.

@hole

I do not say that the modeling of if and sw is not easy but also that of inv is very simple. Obviously there are some finesses that perhaps inv does not have yet. Then I repeat that in my opinion the putting into the table of if is better than inv also because it has more functions than inv still does not possess.

 

[myface]

I think you'll have deduced that the only thing you can really do to direct a choice is to try them.

 

[MauroM]

if I can help, I used if until v18, sw 2007 and currently I am working with inventor.
the worst of the three, hamè, is really inventor. The only thing I think positive about this programme is that it has a table that is certainly higher than the other two. but before putting the pieces into the table you have to model them. . .

just to understand..., I used only and exclusively inventor so I don't know the "beauties" of the other two, when you have a little time let me make some real examples on what inv is worse (let me lose the surfaces).:smile:
Thank you.

 

[davide75]

Well I can tell you a trivial thing that is the asymmetric extrusion that inv does not have or at least has it but you always have to give two surfaces or reference plans, while in others you can simply put the numerical wills.inv has the pack&go as sw but does not have it if.poi there are other things but how do you list them all? ?

 

[maxopus]

... "let's lose the surfaces," is something that for itself admits a serious lack.
surfaces are not a "fighettini" thing, they are an indispensable modeling tool for many sectors.
a cad that lacks this, will be discarded by all the companies or technical studies that make use of it (and are not few).

 

[Focus]

Inv has the pack&go as sw but does not have it if.

this function if you find it in the revision manager and it is not called like that.


Hi.

 

[davide75]

e come si chiama??

 

[Focus]

It doesn't have a specific name, it's one of the many functions you can do with rm.

Hi.

 

[davide75]

I ask why I never found it!!! and so I would like to know where it is and what procedure I have to use.

 

[cacciatorino]

I ask why I never found it!!! and so I would like to know where it is and what procedure I have to use.

right click on the file that interests you, then "open with revision manager" (at least this with v18).

at that point you open the rm screen with your file. just follow the menus or guide to understand the operations to be done.

 

[davide75]

ok I try to give us a look.I usually use rm to replace or rename files.but is the command archive??? or better can you tell me the correct procedure please? ?

 

[cacciatorino]

ok I try to give us a look.I usually use rm to replace or rename files.but is the command archive??? or better can you tell me the correct procedure please? ?

if you do a search on the solid edge forum you find several discussion in which you describe using rm.

Bye.

 

[re_solidworks]

... "let's lose the surfaces," is something that for itself admits a serious lack.
surfaces are not a "fighettini" thing, they are an indispensable modeling tool for many sectors.
a cad that lacks this, will be discarded by all the companies or technical studies that make use of it (and are not few).

I find it very useful also in mechanical modeling / carpentry. often use to create sheet metal templates that cannot be obtained in other ways or to copy faces of a 3d skeleton.

 

[MauroM]

... "let's lose the surfaces," is something that for itself admits a serious lack.
surfaces are not a "fighettini" thing, they are an indispensable modeling tool for many sectors.
a cad that lacks this, will be discarded by all the companies or technical studies that make use of it (and are not few).

I agree, the fact is that I don't use the surfaces. I asked hole to let me know where he thinks the cows are and if he had answered me on the surfaces, he wouldn't have satisfied my curiosity. All here.

 

[marcof]

I agree, the fact is that I don't use the surfaces. I asked hole to let me know where he thinks the cows are and if he had answered me on the surfaces, he wouldn't have satisfied my curiosity. All here.

don't you use them because you don't have them or you don't use them because you make simple mechanical modeling?
surfaces also serve to shape solids.