![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:40:11 -0700, jon_banquer wrote:
On Sep 30, 7:27 pm, Le Chaud Lapin wrote: On Sep 27, 6:16 pm, Dana M. Hague d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net wrote: A fully 3D program is, IMHO, a must for any kind of design, anything else is silly. A parametric modeler, however (like SWX and many others) can be very cumbersome to use... and I've used a lot of them over the years. Yes, if the design constraints are set up correctly from the start, minor changes can be ridiculously easy... but if not, or if you don't have a clear idea of where you're going from the start, you can find yourself boxed into a corner and have to start from scratch. Personally, I prefer a pure geometry based modeler. Simple dimensional changes affecting many components may take longer, but it's far easier to make large sweeping changes if necessary, or switch to an alternate design approach. Most of my work nowadays is large machine design (though my degree is in aero engineering), for which I use KeyCreator (formerly Cadkey). Same price range as SWX, though, which I don't define as "cheap". I read all the responses and looked around the 'Net, and it seems that SolidWorks, if not what I'm looking for, is create by people who had the mindset I was looking for. But now I am confused. I thought parametric modeling was good. I program computers from time to time, and being able to change the structure of a component and have everything that depends upon it change accordingly is simply invaluable, so I cannot see why this would be bad. That's precisely the behavior I want. For example, in my miniature aircraft I envision, there is only one fuel tank, and it's cylindrical, but its radius and length are a function of several other parameters. I am guessing that, like in programming, there is an art to structuring the interdependencies so as to minimize likelihood of running into dead-end that you mention. Finally, I was really surprised to learn that parametric modeling was not fundamental in all CAD programs. I cannot imagine what it would be like to try to optimize a design without it. What do people do without parametric modeling? Tweak every single component manually during optimization phase? [I am going to give Alibre a look also.] -Le Chaud Lapin-- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Suggest you find your way ASAP to www.kubotekusa.com and view their video on direct dimension editing to see what can be done without parametrics. Such as their dimensions being their displayed Parametrics? Pretty good for aircraft & airfoil shapes, is it? Or driven features? Jon Banquer San Diego, CA http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/bl...mment-76366100 [ The real problem right now is that the major CAM systems need video done to cover their massive gap in documentation. I'm speaking of MasterCAM and Gibbscam. If you would like to read my interview and what I had to say about this problem you can read it here. http://blog.novedge.com/2007/07/an-interview-wi.html ] - clueless From that novedge.com link: [ Franco Folini UPDATE -- July 8, 2007 -- I had to close this blog post to further comments and to remove the personal attacks between Jon and some other newsgroups readers. Before the interview, I made an agreement with Jon about the style of the interview and the way to handle it. Jon didn’t respect our agreement, posting comments under fake names. Jon’s authentic and fake comments are all posted from the same IP address, 72.199.251.224. I can now see that my trust in Jon was misplaced. ] From that worldcadaccess.typepad.com link: [ QUOTEThe real problem right now is that the major CAM systems need video done to cover their massive gap in documentation. I'm speaking of MasterCAM and Gibbscam. What version of Mastercam are you talking about ? The current version has a HUGE help file with MANY MANY videos available via links inside the help file. Posted by: Mattapotamus | Jul 21, 2007 at 13:27 ] Snicker Tell us again about your aerospace shops ..... P&W & etc. .... or if you've ever actually even seen GibbsCAM or MasterCAM .... Clearly you've never actually used either. Nor any other similar system. -- Cliff |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CAD Tools For Aircraft Design | Le Chaud Lapin | Piloting | 9 | September 26th 07 01:47 PM |
Great Aircraft Ownership Tool | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 4 | January 20th 06 03:09 PM |
X-Plane for aircraft design | Ghazan Haider | Simulators | 1 | August 28th 05 09:17 AM |
Larger Cirrus Design Aircraft? | Will | Piloting | 6 | January 5th 05 02:36 PM |
Comments on new design carbon aircraft kit? | lifespeed | Home Built | 2 | December 3rd 03 03:22 PM |