CAD Program

Mark Hunt flyintexan at houston.rr.com
Sun Mar 27 09:04:54 AKST 2005 

I use Solid Edge (via work) and it's capabilities are on par with Solid 
Works.  Assemblies can be very large and still load quickly.  Everything is 
parametric and sketching is also very intuitive.  I can also drive profiles 
by use of a spreadsheet (airfoils) which allows me to do alot of iterations 
in a short time.  Of course, like Solid Works, it is relatively expensive 
per seat.

Another one I have tried briefly is called Alibre.  It seems nearly as 
capable as Solid Edge and Solid Works at about half the cost.

http://www.geocities.com/markhunt_2000/seimage


-Mark


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at comcast.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: CAD Program


> here's my 2 cents after experimenting with a few.  I designed the 
> AeroSlave Aries was done on Autocad 3d.  Surfacing was a pain and blending 
> surfaces was nearly impossible.  Working in the tool was slow and 
> difficult and I had to use a hand calculator a lot to find locations for 
> things.  It did a terrible job of validating a design (ensuring 
> constraints).  Then we hired a guy to work in ProE.  It is great for a lot 
> of things and is super expensive and out of the reach of the home guy.  It 
> could not do the kind of blends we use in airplanes with much flexibilty. 
> It would restrict our constraints. It produced pretty planes, but not the 
> one we had in mind.  After some research we found solidWorks.  It is 
> easier to use, does blends well, and has 3D and surfacing.  In fact its 3D 
> tool imports autocad files and lets you work in 2D if needed.  It costs 
> less and has a pretty good user interface.  We could freehand outlines and 
> have them blend into the surfaces.  Much easier to design blended bodies 
> with this tool.
>
> --Lance
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Joe Lachowski" <jlachow at hotmail.com>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 6:46 PM
> Subject: Re: CAD Program
>
>
>> Troy, we use Pro/E in the Army, as well.  Many of our contractors do, as 
>> well. It is not $500K per seat. I think it is more on the order of a 
>> couple thou or less.  The software also has an annual maintenance cost 
>> typically about 10% of the total cost of whatever package one has. Whats 
>> even better about ProE is that you can make an  STL file and use it to 
>> make a solid model on a number of Rapid Prototyping systems. I happen to 
>> have control over two SLA's and one FDM. You can make farely accurate 
>> plugs or molds with it for your models<g>. I believe I've actually seen 
>> that PC based package on ebay in the past. Pro/E is one of those packages 
>> that if you don't use it you lose it.
>>
>> JL
>>
>>>From: "Troy A. Newman" <troy_newman at msn.com>
>>>Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org
>>>To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>>>Subject: Re: CAD Program
>>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:08:45 -0700
>>>
>>>I went a class on Pro Engineer a few years ago. At the time company (PTC)
>>>was touting that the 777 was designed exclusively with Pro E. Also that
>>>General Motors used Pro E and its add-ins for vehicle design.
>>>
>>>For those that don't know Pro E is a modeling program. Instead of  using
>>>drawings the parts are modeled. Once they are modeled then you can export 
>>>to
>>>a drawing very simply and can look at any view or any scale. This is a 
>>>very
>>>powerful tool. It goes beyond 3D CAD. There are many things that you can 
>>>do
>>>with Pro-engineer and its ad-ins from Heat load calcs on electronic
>>>components, to actual mechanical analysis in what they call Mechanica. 
>>>You
>>>can have the modeling program actually calculate the size and mass of a
>>>counter balance needed on a crankshaft of a single cylinder model engine. 
>>>I
>>>know because we did that one in the class.
>>>
>>>PTC the company that sells Pro-E also provides a free or used to provide 
>>>a
>>>free version that is much toned down....called Pro-Desktop Express. Its a
>>>little more complicated to used but there are books out there that can 
>>>help
>>>you.
>>>
>>>From what I understand PTC doesn't really sell Pro-E its a leased 
>>>program.
>>>and it goes for about 500K a seat. This depends on what kinds of add ins 
>>>you
>>>need and also provides 24/7 Customer support. I understand that this is a
>>>NASA type budget and we are not building spacecraft.
>>>
>>>The free version is very versatile for our needs as modelers. I have been
>>>using it for a couple years now. I still have AutoCAD 14 and fall back on 
>>>it
>>>if I want a simple drawing...ProE and Pro-Desktop requires you to 
>>>actually
>>>model the part. Its a bit more to play with a  sketch.
>>>
>>>One thing that Pro-desktop does really well is give you an idea about 
>>>wing
>>>sections....You can create objects that have your airfoil cross sections 
>>>at
>>>both ends then just connect the dots to create a solid wing that will
>>>actually be a model of your wing. You can then check its relative 
>>>stiffness
>>>and vary parameters like chord at the root of the airfoil and compare the
>>>stiffness of the two versions. You can then create what they call a cut 
>>>for
>>>your ailerons or elevators and you can see how these change the stiffness 
>>>of
>>>the wing section. Its a very powerful tool and its free just need to 
>>>learn a
>>>little about making it work.
>>>
>>>Another thing you can do is create a fuse and a wing..then determine 
>>>where
>>>you want the CG locations and with some parameters it will place the wing 
>>>in
>>>the right location for you. If you change a sweep angle or a taper ratio 
>>>or
>>>even span....the program can automatically move the wing to the proper
>>>location based on your original criteria. Again as I said very very
>>>powerful.
>>>
>>>  You might look into it...If you are looking for something really good. 
>>> Not
>>>always the easiest path to your goal...but a very good product. And its 
>>>Free
>>>or used to be free not sure if it still is. I have been using it for a 
>>>few
>>>years now.
>>>
>>>Troy Newman
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Bill Glaze" <billglaze at triad.rr.com>
>>>To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>>>Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 1:13 PM
>>>Subject: Re: CAD Program
>>>
>>>
>>> > Jerry:
>>> > Many thanks for your reply.  I was disappointed about AutoCad in that 
>>> > it
>>> > was great for topograph maps, and great for drafting, (after all, 
>>> > that's
>>> > what it calls itself) yet wouldn't do this simple wire drawing
>>> > requirement of mine.  I'm keeping your communication and will be 
>>> > looking
>>> > into your link when I get a moment.  Actually, I'm pretty interested.
>>> > It's common knowledge that the B-777 was designed without a single 
>>> > paper
>>> > drawing, .(or so the legend goes; don't see how) but I doubt that 
>>> > Boeing
>>> > was using a $3500 Cadd program, either.  I've heard of programs where
>>> > the program developer had a software engineer set up a desk in the
>>> > client's office for on-site help of the most immediate kind.  Wish I
>>> > could afford to have someone do that for me!
>>> >
>>> > Bill Glaze
>>> >
>>> > Jerry Budd wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Bill,
>>> > >
>>> > > I don't know first hand because I've never tried it but considering
>>> > > who all is using it I can't imagine it wouldn't.  Ashlar has a much
>>> > > higher end product called Cobalt that does all of what Graphite does
>>> > > plus the high end solid modelling functions, but it's way more $$$
>>> > > (nearly $4k).  On the other hand it compares favorably with ProE 
>>> > > which
>>> > > is ~$20k.
>>> > >
>>> > > All of the Ashlar products are available for a fully functional two
>>> > > week trial via download here:
>>> > >
>>> > > http://www.ashlar.com/demo/index.shtml
>>> > >
>>> > > You might consider downloading Graphite, importing your old CAD file
>>> > > from AutoCad and trying it.
>>> > >
>>> > > I think the important thing to consider is this.  There are a lot of
>>> > > CAD programs available out there with a lot of capability that are
>>> > > downright CHEAP (some are shareware/free).  Most of them are quite
>>> > > difficult to use and require a significant learning curve to be able
>>> > > to do anything of value at all.  I have found it better to pay a
>>> > > little bit of $ to have a CAD tool that has almost no learning curve
>>> > > at all as I frequently go months at a time without using the
>>> > > software.  When I go back to use it after a layoff it only takes a 
>>> > > few
>>> > > minutes (I mean single digit here) to be back up and working. It's
>>> > > that easy.
>>> > >
>>> > > I currently use an old version of Ashlar DrawingBoard on my Mac that 
>>> > > I
>>> > > bought 8 or 9 years ago (still runs fine on OS 10.3.8 under 
>>> > > Classic).
>>> > > I downloaded the trial version of Graphite for OS X last night and 
>>> > > it
>>> > > has the same intuitive interface.  The main reason I'm thinking of
>>> > > upgrading is to pick up the ability to import/export a much greater
>>> > > variety of file formats than what DrawingBoard handles. Being full 
>>> > > OS
>>> > > X native is a plus also.  BTW - FWIW, all of the Ashlar products are
>>> > > offered for both Windoz and Mac.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thx, Jerry
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >> Jerry:
>>> > >> Can you take intermediate cuts with it, and it will come up with an
>>> > >> inference of the station?  that was my main complaint with Autocad
>>> > >> Bill Glaze
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Jerry Budd wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >>> Ashlar Graphite, far and away the easiest CAD program out there
>>> > >>> (important for CAD neophytes like me), it's a direct descendant of
>>> > >>> Ashlar Vellum.  The learning curve with it is about a half hour
>>> > >>> long. Once you use it you won't want to touch anything else.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> It's also fully capable, Scaled Composites used it to design
>>> > >>> SpaceShipOne and White Knight.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> It is a little pricey but there are several upgrade discounts
>>> > >>> available, depending on what software you currently own, where you
>>> > >>> work, etc.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> http://www.ashlar.com/products/graphite.html
>>> > >>>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > =================================================
>>> > To access the email archives for this list, go to
>>> > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>>> > To be removed from this list, go to 
>>> > http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>>> > and follow the instructions.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>=================================================
>>>To access the email archives for this list, go to
>>>http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>>>To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>>>and follow the instructions.
>>>
>>
>>
>> =================================================
>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> and follow the instructions.
>>
>> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the 
>> list.
>>
>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>
> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the 
> list.
> 

=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.

List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list