3D CAD World

Over 50,000 3D CAD Tips & Tutorials. 3D CAD News by applications and CAD industry news.

Evan Yares

No more CAD workstations?

By 2 Comments

Imagine you worked in IT, in a large company, and had to put up with CAD users acting all special, because they needed big computers with lots of memory, and fancy graphics cards.  Pretty irritating, eh?

But what if you could stop buying those machines, and instead give CAD users regular-old PCs?

That’s the promise with the NVIDIA GRID.  It’s a special GPU card designed for workstation virtualization.  Put a stack of powerful servers with these cards in your data center, and your CAD users can get access to all the power they need though their regular desktop or notebook computer.  All they need is an internet connection.

Here’s the NVIDIA press release on the GRID.

displaymedia

NVIDIA GRID Unleashes Graphics For Virtualized Desktops

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Citrix Synergy — NVIDIA today announced that it is unleashing the full graphics potential of enterprise desktop virtualization with the availability of NVIDIA GRID™ vGPU™ integrated into Citrix XenDesktop 7.

NVIDIA GRID vGPU technology addresses a challenge that has grown in recent years with the rise of employees using their own notebooks and portable devices for work. These workers have increasingly relied on desktop virtualization technologies for anytime access to computing resources, but until now this was generally used for the more standard enterprise applications. Performance and compatibility constraints had made it difficult for applications such as building information management (BIM), product-lifecycle management (PLM) and video-photo editing.

Two decades ago hardware-based graphics replaced software emulation. Desktop virtualization solutions stood alone as the only modern computing form without dedicated graphics hardware. As a result, an already busy virtualized CPU limited performance and software emulation hampered application compatibility.

The situation began to improve a year ago with the introduction of the non-virtualized GPU in Citrix XenServer. But efficiency gains were limited because each user still required a dedicated GPU.

With the introduction of new HDX GPU sharing and deep compression techniques in XenDesktop 7, NVIDIA and Citrix customers can immediately take advantage of the hosted-shared form of desktop virtualization to deliver rich, graphics-intensive applications. Using the Microsoft Windows Server RDSH and XenDesktop 7 platform can enable the sharing of GPUs across multiple user sessions.

Furthermore, the combination of Citrix XenServer and NVIDIA GRID vGPU technology allows customers to efficiently share GPUs across multiple virtual machines. This allows businesses to address a broader set of users with their desktop virtualization infrastructure across a spectrum of verticals, including:

  • Architects, engineers and contractors using computer-aided design (CAD) tools, like Autodesk BIM.
  • Manufacturing businesses that want to automate the connection between product design and operations using PLM tools, like Enovia 3DLive, PTC Windchill PLM Connector and SIEMENS Teamcenter software.
  • Digital-content creation workers using video and photo editing tools, like Adobe® Photoshop® software.
  • Health-care specialists using picture archiving and communication system (PACS) applications, like GE Centricity EMR.

Citrix CEO and President Mark Templeton introduced XenDesktop 7 with NVIDIA GRID vGPU technology today in his opening keynote address at the Citrix Synergy 2013 user conference.

“With NVIDIA GRID vGPU, even the most intensive graphics applications can be delivered by XenDesktop 7,” said Bob Schultz, vice president and general manager, Desktops and Applications Group at Citrix. “Now businesses can provide their users with the performance that they expect and need for engineering, design and video applications, while centrally securing and managing valuable intellectual property and sensitive information.”

“For the first time, NVIDIA GRID vGPU gives users of virtualized desktops the performance, stability and compatibility of hardware-accelerated graphics,” said Jeff Brown, vice president and general manager of the GRID business unit at NVIDIA. “Millions of those involved in everything from product design to manufacturing to supply chain management can now enjoy the benefits of desktop and application virtualization with NVIDIA GRID vGPU technology.”

Leading Citrix Resellers Endorse NVIDIA GRID 
M7 Global Partners, a consortium of the top nine Citrix platinum-level IT providers in the U.S., announced its support for NVIDIA GRID vGPU technology. Collectively, the group reaches thousands of clients around the world. M7 customers looking to deploy visually rich applications in businesses of all sizes, healthcare settings and schools have expressed interest in the capabilities of the NVIDIA GRID vGPU.

“I’ve been selling desktop virtualization solutions for 18 years and the single greatest source of pain in that time has been customers who want to centralize the delivery of graphics-intensive applications,” said Mike Strohl, CEO of Entisys Solutions, Inc., Agile360 and founding partner of M7 Global Partners. “The NVIDIA GRID vGPU is a game changer. At Entisys and across M7 we look forward to not only holding the spear, but to being at the tip of it as we bring to market this amazing technology, which our customers have truly been asking for.”

NVIDIA GRID vGPU technology is being shown in NVIDIA’s booth 303 and in the XenServer demonstration area at Citrix Synergy in Anaheim, Calif., through May 24. General availability is expected later this year. More information is available at NVIDIA GRID.

About NVIDIA GRID
The NVIDIA GRID portfolio — comprised of hardware, software and appliances — delivers GPU acceleration from data centers to any user. It includes the NVIDIA GRID VGX platform for enterprises; the NVIDIA GRID Visual Computing Appliance (VCA) for small and medium-size businesses; and the NVIDIA GRID Cloud Gaming Platform for gaming-as-a-service companies. Follow us at @NVIDIAGRID.

About NVIDIA
Since 1993, NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA) has pioneered the art and science of visual computing. The company’s technologies are transforming a world of displays into a world of interactive discovery — for everyone from gamers to scientists, and consumers to enterprise customers. More information at http://nvidianews.nvidia.com and http://blogs.nvidia.com.

MSC at 50: A CAE pioneer reinvents itself

By Leave a Comment

MSC Software founders Robert Schwendler (left) and Richard MacNeal (right), 1963
MSC Software founders Robert Schwendler (left) and Richard MacNeal (right), 1963

MSC Software is celebrating its 50th anniversary. It was literally one of the first software companies, and though its been through some changes over the years, it’s still in the business of creating tools for engineers to simulate and analyze complex systems.

Last week, I spent a couple of days with MSC, at their user conference in Irvine, California. While small in scale compared to the massive conferences put on by the big CAD companies, it was still good sized, with a solid group of attendees from a wide cross-section of major manufacturers.

My goal in attending was to get a read on the state of the company, and its products. About three and a half years ago, MSC was taken private by a private equity firm, and Dominic Gallello was brought in to be its new CEO. It was a major transition — one with no guarantees of success.

About Dominic

Dominic Gallello is a veteran of the engineering software industry. He held top management positions with Intergraph, Autodesk, Macromedia, and Graphisoft prior to taking over at MSC. To those of us who’ve also spent our careers in the industry, Dominic is a singular figure. Consider this anecdote: About 20 years ago, during one of Autodesk’s dealer meetings, there was a major power outage. Dominic happened to be on an elevator when the power went off, and was stuck for some time. After the power was restored, the story spread like wildfire: Turns out Dominic wasn’t the only person on the elevator. Also stuck was one of his direct reports — who, by the time the power came back on, had a big stack of new work to do. Dominic is a hard worker, and he demands the same of the people who work for him.

Since taking over at MSC, Dominic has substantially cut the overhead formerly associated with being a publicly held company, while simultaneously putting big money into product development. While at the user conference, a former MSC salesperson (who now works for a partner company) told me a story, from when Dominic first started with the company. Dominic had gone with the salesperson to visit a major customer, who was none too happy about the state of Patran, one of MSC’s major products. On the way back to the office, Dominic called ahead, and told one of his top managers that the customer had told him about problems in Patran, and that they needed to hire more engineers to work on it.

This focus on product quality is starting to show results, throughout MSC’s portfolio. Nastran, Marc, Patran, and Adams—all legacy products—are seeing substantial improvements. And, from my conversations at the MSC user conference, customers are pleased with the direction things are taking.

New products

In the last couple of years, MSC has made some interesting acquisitions. In 2011, they acquired Free Field Technologies, developers of Actran acoustic modeling software. In 2012, they acquired e-Xstream engineering, a company focused on multi-scale modeling of composite materials and structures. My sense is that, in both cases, the acquired companies were likely courted by other major CAE companies, but chose to join with MSC, because they felt it would lead to a better result.

MSC has also spent quite a bit of development effort on internal development. Last year, I wrote about Adams/Machinery in Design World. It continues to grow in capabilities. Soon to be released is MaterialCenter, a “materials lifecycle management system,” that keeps track of both materials and related manufacturing processes. This looks to be a major product.

The secret project 

As a condition for attending the user conference, MSC asked me to sign a non-disclosure agreement, in order to see a preview of a new technology. In truth, I don’t even know if I can tell you the code name for the project. Here’s a stastement from MSC that they will let me reprint:

“MSC introduced new game changer technology today at their 50th Anniversary User Conference in the U.S. There was no public announcement made as it is MSC’s desire to demonstrate the technologies to their customers and solicit feedback at the 20 user conferences around the world over the next few months before any public announcements. “

For those of you who are justifiably cynical about marketing hype, seeing the phrase “game changer” probably sets off alarm bells. But consider this: I’ve seen the technology. It’s real. And it’s going to be big.

Why Jon Hirschtick loves CAD

By 4 Comments

COFES, the Congress on the Future of Engineering Software, is “meet by the pool” kind of conference. It’s a place where you have the chance to chat with really interesting people, who are otherwise quite busy.

A few weeks ago, at COFES 2013, I sat down with Jon Hirschtick, and recorded a six minute video, where he talked about the complexities of creating great CAD software — and why he loves working in the CAD industry.

You may know that Jon and some of his friends recently founded a new CAD company, with the working name Belmont Technology (they’ll change the name to something snazzy when they get close to shipping.) In this video, I didn’t ask Jon about Belmont, for a simple reason: They’re not ready to go to market. I’d prefer to wait to see what they come up with rather than spending a lot of energy speculating. It’s just a matter of being practical: I’d rather talk about the tools you can use today, rather than those you can’t buy anytime soon. However, if you really want to give it a try, you could watch this video, and make some guesses as to what Jon and his friends are working on. (I’ll give you a clue: it’s a CAD program. Beyond that, I know nothing more.)

Alibre Software becomes Geomagic Design

By 1 Comment

Almost 2 years ago—in July, 2011—3D Systems acquired Alibre, a developer of budget 3D parametric MCAD software. It was just one of a large number of acquisitions that 3D Systems made over the last several years, and, for awhile, it appeared that Alibre was getting lost in the shuffle.

Alibre has now found a new home, and a new name. It has been folded into the 3D Systems Geomagic group, and its suite of products, formerly known as Alibre Design, is now known as Geomagic Design. Will this make a difference to the product? I think the answer is yes.

ALIBRE004m

If you look back at Alibre Design before it was acquired by 3D Systems, it was a bit of a mess. The software was functional, but suffered from inadequate investment in development. A lot of the work on the software seemed to be targeted at filling checkboxes on comparison charts. The software didn’t feel like a quality product. It may be that 3D Systems knew this before they bought Alibre, or they may have figured it out after the fact. But, no matter: with the financial stability of a new corporate parent, Alibre’s developers were able to focus on doing what needed to be done. They went back, and fixed many of the mistakes from the past, making the software much cleaner and more consistent.

The 2013 version of the software formerly known as Alibre Design, and now known as Geomagic Design, just shipped on April 17. While the list of changes in the software is 60 pages long, there are two areas of improvement that are quite significant. The first is in consistency of operation. The software feels much better thought-out in the details of operation. Menus, dialogs, and pop-ups have a consistency to them that makes using the software a lot more pleasant than it used to be. The second area is 2D drawing. It’s been cleaned-up and filled-out, so that now it’s possible to produce really high-quality drawings without undue pain.

ALIBRE002m

Let me put all this in context: It used to be that the main reason why many people would buy Alibre Design was because it was what they could afford. And, though it would get the job done, it was more irritating to use than it should have been. With this new version of Geomagic Design, you’ll get your work done easier, with more stability and less irritation, for the same bargain price—starting at $199, up to $1,999. (To be fair, even the most popular CAD systems are more irritating to use than they ought to be. But that’s another article, isn’t it?)

The development work for this release was largely completed before 3D Systems acquired Geomagic. So, to be fair, the Alibre development team should get the credit for this version. Starting now (or, actually, a month or two ago), the Alibre team will be working under John Alpine, the VP of Engineering of the new integrated software division at 3D Systems (Geomagic, Rapidform, Alibre and probably more.) Alpine is a CAD industry veteran, with serious technical and management chops. This bodes well for the future of the software.

3D Systems Geomagic www.alibre.com

Note: Yes, the images still say “Alibre,” and so does the website. The rebranding to Geomagic Studio just happened very recently, and some things aren’t done yet.

Five presentations on Model-Based Development

By Leave a Comment

Part PMIThe term “Model-Based Development” (MBD) has been around for more than a few years. So far as most CAD users can tell, it means getting rid of 2D drawings, and putting 3D-GD&T and PMI into the 3D models.

That’s probably a pretty good working definition, but it’s not really quite right. I went back to a 2010 U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command presentation, and found a more complete definition:

A 3D annotated model and its associated data elements that fully define the product definition in a manner that can be used effectively by all downstream customers in place of a traditional drawing.

The central concept embodied in MBD is that the 3D product model is vehicle for delivery of all the detailed product information necessary for all aspects of the product life cycle. Any number of views of the model can be composed, detailed, and annotated for specific downstream operations including codification & classification, cost analysis, producibility analysis, process planning, assembly simulation, procurement, manufacturing, quality assurance, standards compliance, and many others.

The advantages of MBD can be compelling:

  • Faster design revisions,
  • Build and test components and assemblies in a virtual environment (do-overs are no problem),
  • Infinite viewpoints and exploded views of assemblies,
  • Direct to rapid prototyping,
  • Direct to engineering analysis (stress, thermal, interference fit, tolerance stack-up, etc.),
  • Reduced manufacturing lead time and cost,
  • Automated generation and update of drawings (when drawings are needed), and
  • Generation of technical manuals directly from model data.

Of course, with all those benefits, you can’t expect it to be easy to implement. There are both technical and cultural issues that have yet to be completely ironed out.

Rather than writing a long article on MBD, it occurs to me that it might make more sense not to reinvent the wheel. Last fall, I attended the Boeing/Northrop Grumman Global Product Data Interoperability Summit, where several people who spend most of their business days working on MBD (and the related concept of Model-Based Enterprise) gave some impressive presentations on the subject.

So, I give you five presentations on MBD:

 

Bryan R. Fischer/
Phil Farcy		 Advanced Dimensional Management / Boeing How PMI and Data Modeling Standards Affect Successful Implementation of 3D MBD/MBE
Chris Garcia Anark Cost Effective Deployment of PLM & 3D MBD Data
with 3D PDF and 3D HTML
Thomas Hedberg Honeywell – Aerospace Model Based Enterprise and Enabling Quality Interoperable Data Exchange
Doug Cheney /
Tony Provencal		 ITI TranscenData MBD Interoperability Challenges and Solutions
Phil Spreier Tech Soft 3D The Future of 3D PDF

 

I found each of these presentations to be informative, and thought provoking. If, by any chance, you too find the subject interesting, and would like to learn more, I’d like to suggest attending the 3D Collaboration and Interoperability Congress, May 21-23, in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Judging by this year’s agenda, it should be well worth the trip.

Russian CAD

By 6 Comments

It’s robust and powerful, and someday, you may be using it.

For engineers and designers in the United States, Russia doesn’t often come to mind when thinking about sources of CAD software. Yet, Russia is one of the global centers for the development of advanced CAD software.

Russia’s rise to preeminence in CAD software development was spurred by the dissolution of the Soviet Union, after which many of Russia’s top minds in the physical and theoretical sciences found themselves reduced to penury. Beginning in the mid 1990s, as economic reforms allowed private investment in Russia, multinational corporations, including IBM and Intel, started to take advantage of the large pool of highly-educated scientists and mathematicians in Russia. Intel, in particular, recognized that Russia was an ideal venue for the development of mathematically intense graphics software.

One notable CAD vendor that, early on, recognized the mathematical strengths of Russian software developers was Dassault Systemes. In 1996, DS started working with the Russian Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence, and, subsequently, with Ledas, a spin-out of the institute and the AI Lab of the Institute of Informatics Systems in Novosibirsk, Siberia. DS and Ledas worked together continuously until 2011, successfully completing 11 major contracts. The components developed by Ledas as part of that relationship were incorporated into DS’s CATIA V5 and V6 CAD programs, and have, according to DS, proven their reliability and performance in a full industrial context.

While DS was one of the first CAD vendors to develop software in Russia, they were not alone for very long. By the late 1990s, Russia was on its way to becoming a major force in CAD and CAE application and component software development. There is no complete list of Russian developed CAD and CAE programs, but it’s not hard to find examples. FlowEFD, from Mentor Graphics, and FlowVision, from Capvidia, are both highly advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) programs developed in Russia (not by the same people, but by people who at least know each other.) TurboCAD, from IMSI, BricsCAD, from Bricsys, and IntelliCAD, from the IntelliCAD Technology Consortium, are all developed in Russia—as are the Open Design Alliance’s Teigha interoperability libraries, which are used by hundreds of CAD vendors around the world. Today, you’d be hard-pressed to find a significant CAD program that doesn’t include component technologies developed in Russia.

With all the success that multinational CAD companies have had with Russian software development, it’s hard not to ask, what about Russian CAD, developed for the Russian market?

It’s an interesting question, with an interesting answer. CAD development for the Russian market started in 1989, somewhat after the arrival of the PC, and somewhat before the break-up of the Soviet Union. It has been ongoing, ever since.

But it’s not been easy. The largest CAD vendor in Russia is Autodesk, and their biggest selling—or more accurately, most popular—product is AutoCAD. In Russia, for many years, the biggest competition for domestic CAD vendors came from pirated copies of AutoCAD.

From the perspective of an engineer in the United States, there are at least three really interesting Russian CAD companies, with products that are in the same league as those from companies with more familiar names. They’re companies you should know about, not only because their products are good, but, because, as organizations, they’re battle-tested. They’ve proven that, even while enduring economic and political upheavals, they can innovate, and deliver high-quality products that can handle tough problems.

KOMPAS
Founded in 1989 by Alexander Golikov and Tatiana Yankina, ASCON was one of the first CAD developers in Russia and the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) countries. Over the years, it’s grown to become the largest native Russian CAD/PLM company, with 550 employees, of which 200 are in research and software development.

ASCON’s flagship products are KOMPAS-3D and KOMPAS-Graphic, 3D and 2D CAD programs, respectively, that compete in the mainstream market.

Rendered-Engine
Photorealistic rendering of an engine, showing FEA mesh, created with ASCON KOMPAS

KOMPAS-3D and KOMPAS-Graphic both use ASCON’s internally developed C3D geometric modeling kernel. Rather than being patched together, they have been designed, from the beginning, to provide a unified 2D/3D solution, supporting a wide range of modeling methodologies. In 3D, this includes solid modeling, and sculpted surface modeling, using explicit, parametric, or variational direct modeling methods. That last method—variational direct modeling (VDM)—is based on solver technology developed by Ledas, and now owned by Bricsys, which has been integrated into the C3D kernel. It is distinguished in supporting smart editing and reparameterization of models, irrespective of whether they were originally created in KOMPAS.

While KOMPAS includes a full feature set in its standard form, ASCON offers a large number of optional components, including steel structure design, 3D piping, kinematic simulation, mechanism design, photorealistic rendering, mold and die design, and quite a bit more.

To give you a sense of KOMPAS’s capabilities, it’s used by more than 7000 industrial and engineering organizations in Russia and abroad, and finds application in a wide range of disciplines, including machinery, automotive, electronics, shipbuilding, atomic energy, aerospace, defense, plant design, civil engineering, and architecture.

KOMPAS has a reputation for solid reliability, and excellent interoperability. With the inclusion of variational direct modeling, it’s likely to be quite capable in hybrid workflows, where you need to work with CAD data from multiple sources.

CATIA
CATIA was used to model the airframe of the MiG-29K, but ASCON KOMPAS-3D was used to design its life-support system. The assembly includes 350 parts.

T-FLEX
In the late 1980s, seven graduate students of the Moscow State Technological University “Stankin” started working together, with the goal of creating a parametric CAD software package for industry. By 1989, they had a usable piece of software, and they started providing it to Russian manufacturers at no charge. In 1992, they officially registered Top Systems Ltd.

Their CAD product, T-FLEX, has been continuously developed through the years, and has evolved into an exceptionally capable system, supporting unified operations for all types of documents and entities, including drawings, assembly drawings, solids, surfaces, parts, parts with multiple solid bodies, assembly models, sheet metal, and bill of materials.

People who are familiar with the CAD market point to Pro/Engineer as the first parametric feature-based 3D solid modeling CAD system. Most CAD systems that have come since have pretty much copied the Pro/E approach, using a similar form of history-based parametrics. At first glance, T-FLEX seems also to be following this approach. But only at first glance.

Parametrics are at the core of T-FLEX. Any thing in T-FLEX can be related to anything else. Variables can be assigned at any time for component names, visibility, material, or any numeric or text attribute of any entity. They can then be processed with any algebraic or logical expression to control the behavior of the design. Parameters can be calculated from graphic dependencies, using, for example, measure and distance functions. Parameter values can be dynamically selected from internal tables, or external Excel, database, or other types of files, depending on the conditions of other parameters. This capability is used by T-FLEX to create parametric library elements.

wheel lifter
T-FLEX is right at home working with highly parametric complex assemblies.

T-FLEX lets you create parametric 2D drawings from scratch, with no limit on the number of constrained 2D entities. T-FLEX parametric sketches (for 3D operations) immediately update to any changes, regardless of their source. T-FLEX includes fully parametric drawing documentation, including dimensions, tolerances, text, and drawing notes. You can create parametric 2D assemblies by inserting parametric 2D components with complex parametric relations. And you can create fully parametric 3D assemblies.

As a start, the flexibility of T-FLEX parametrics allows you to explicitly add design intent to 3D models and assemblies, rather than relying on the implicit intent in their construction history. An obvious use of this flexibility is to create families-of-parts. But the logical extension to this is much more interesting: with T-FLEX parametrics, it’s possible to implement mass-customization systems, such as assemble-to-order, configure-to-order, and engineer-to-order. It’s even possible to use T-FLEX as an Internet engine in these applications.

T-FLEX includes an impressive set of capabilities beyond parametrics. It supports integrated surface and solid modeling, and direct editing with retained history. It includes extensive detailing and annotation tools including PMI (Product and Manufacturing Information.) Associative bill of materials (BOM) and integrated sheet metal design are included standard, as are a broad set of import/export CAD data translators.

Top Systems offers a substantial number of optional modules for T-FLEX, including mold design, Finite Element Analysis, motion simulation, weldment design and documentation, dynamics, and CAM.

nanoCAD
Spend some time looking at nanoCAD, and you’ll probably come to the conclusion that it’s not particularly exotic, for a CAD program. Its user interface looks not too dissimilar to AutoCAD. Its command set is rather like AutoCAD too. It reads and writes AutoCAD compatible DWG files. And it has an API that’s rather like AutoCAD’s as well.

There are only two things that really set nanoCAD apart. First is that it’s a really well-crafted program. There’s nothing slap-dash about it. Second is that it’s free, for commercial, educational, or other purposes, as an individual or corporate user.

nanoCAD looks a lot like AutoCAD. The resemblance is not unintentional.
nanoCAD looks a lot like AutoCAD. The resemblance is intentional.

The obvious question to ask is how Nanosoft, the developers of nanoCAD, can get away with giving this program away. The answer is that their main business is CAD application development, for various industries. They charge for those applications, which they build on nanoCAD. They give nanoCAD away.

As an aside, you might wonder why the developers at Nanosoft didn’t just license IntelliCAD, or some other AutoCAD compatible program. While they probably won’t say this out loud, the answer becomes evident when you use nanoCAD. As I said before, it’s a really well-crafted program.

If a software developer is going to build CAD applications, the obvious platform to choose is AutoCAD. Except, of course, for the fact that it’s expensive. Trading genuine AutoCAD for an AutoCAD clone (which is cheaper, but of unknown quality) might seem like a reasonable choice for most CAD developers. But there are a very few software developers out there who have both the experience and the skill to be able to build a serious CAD program from scratch, and do it better than most of their competitors. Though I can’t prove it, I believe that’s the case with the developers at Nanosoft.

Did I mention that it’s a really well-crafted program?

If you need an AutoCAD compatible program (and many engineers and designers need one from time to time), nanoCAD is a sweet choice.

Reprint Info>>

ASCON
www.ascon.net

Top Systems
www.tflex.com

Nanosoft
www.nanocad.com

Ledas
www.ledas.com

UPDATE: More interesting things continue to happen in the Russian CAD market.  Starting this week, on April 11, key participants from ASCON, Top Systems, Fidesys, and Ledas will be attending COFES: The Congress on the Future of Engineering Software, in Scottsdale, AZ. I’m pleased to say that I’ll be there with them.

Bertrand Sicot: Seriously, we’re not going to mess up SolidWorks.

By 6 Comments

please_stand_byA few days ago, SolidWorks CEO Bertrand Sicot posted a blog, reiterating yet again that, no, they’re not going to mess with the SolidWorks program that so many people count on. Just as since it was first written, it will continue to use Parasolid as its geometric modeling kernel.

While I think it’s healthy for SolidWorks to periodically remind its customers that it still loves them, in this case, the message was made a little bit more urgent, as Dassault Systemes head Bernard Charles had been a bit overly enthusiastic at a customer meeting last year, and made a statement that pretty much sounded like DS was going to ditch Parasolid. OK — it was more than “pretty much.”

So, record set straight: SolidWorks Mechanical CAD (the name they’re now using for the existing  SolidWorks product) will continue to use the Parasolid kernel. There is no plan to change the kernel. They will continue to develop and improve SolidWorks Mechanical CAD, and have no end-of-life plan for it. They’re not going to do anything to alienate their largest customer base.

That is all.

We now return you to your previously scheduled programming.

 

Jennifer Herron on managing mass properties in CAD assemblies

By 2 Comments

There are times when you really need to know the mass properties of a design, before you build it.

In this Design World editorial Webinar, Jennifer Herron discusses best practices in managing mass properties in CAD assemblies.

Jennifer is the owner of Action Engineering, a company that specializes in the promotion, process development and standardization of 3D CAD Model Based Design. With over 16 years of experience creating and building complex hardware systems for the aerospace and defense industry, her experience runs the gamut from flight hardware mechanisms to spacecraft layout and configuration. She is an expert in multiple CAD packages, which she uses along with her practical design experience to hone standards and processes that optimize the ROI of CAD systems. In addition to her involvement developing many flight satellite systems, Jennifer has designed military robot platforms and holds a patent for a snake propulsion mechanism.

2D conceptual design, 50 years later

By 2 Comments

ivan_picMany years ago, an MIT graduate student named Ivan created a 2D conceptual design program that allowed users to interactively sketch out their ideas, and by applying constraints and dimensions to the sketch, have the computer calculate the ideal solution for their design. He never even tried to commercialize his program, because, at the time, computers that could run it were way too expensive.

hirschtickSome time later, a new MIT graduate named Jon founded a software company to develop a similar 2D conceptual design program. He too found that the time wasn’t right for the product, and he ended up selling his company to a larger competitor.

Fortunately, both of these MIT graduates did go on to have some successes in their careers. Ivan Sutherland went on to invent many of the fundamental technologies in computer graphics, and, in the process, won the Turing Award, the Von Neumann Medal, and the Kyoto Prize, among other honors. Jon Hirschtick went on to found SolidWorks Corporation, and while he didn’t win as many awards, he did transform the the MCAD market, and made a lot of friends while doing it.

What’s interesting to me is that Ivan Sutherland’s program, called Sketchpad, was shown publicly in 1963. Jon Hirschtick’s program, called Design View, came along about 25 years later, in 1988. And here we are, yet another 25 years later. Where is today’s Sketchpad? Where is today’s DesignView?

The simple answer is that you can find the most well-known successor programs to SketchPad and DesignView embedded within nearly every parametric MCAD system on the market, in the form of a “sketcher.”

But the sketchers in MCAD systems are limited. Most are designed solely for defining geometry as a starting point for 3D modeling. If you want to design a bridge truss (as you could with Sketchpad), or a complex linkage mechanism (as you could with DesignView), you might not be happy with how hard those things are to do with an MCAD sketcher.

ShyamalThough many engineers and designers use Excel for conceptual design, that’s not really a very good solution either. (Too easy to create embedded errors that can’t be easily found.) Another option is math software, such as MathCAD, Maple, Mathematica, or MatLab. But these are a bit “heavy” for graphically oriented conceptual designs. What engineers and designers need is something very much like Sketchpad or DesignView—something like a spreadsheet for graphics.

Enter Shyamal Roy. He too is a bit of an old-timer in the industry, having founded his first CAD company, Supercads, in 1981. (Like Ivan and Jon, his first product was a bit before its time.) In 1995, he founded Geomate Company, to create just the product I’ve been talking about: a spreadsheet for graphics.

TurboCalc, Geomate’s most popular product, combines sketching, calculation, and optimization. It’s useful for an incredibly diverse range of problems. To get a sense of it, take a few minutes, and watch this video (narrated by Shyamal himself):

To me, there are several things that make TurboCalc really interesting. First is that it actually works. It’s a rock-solid program that does what it says it will. Second is that it’s not at all hard to learn to use—Whether you’re a CAD guru or not. And third, it is just ridiculously inexpensive. Its retail price is $199, but it is on sale now at $99, if you order through this URL.

Shyamal can get away with selling TurboCalc at this price because he owns the company (no shareholders to worry about), the program is mature and fully capable (it doesn’t require large investments for development), and it is well-designed enough that support costs are almost nil (even though he provides support for free.)

But none of that really addresses the question of whether you need a program like TurboCalc. So, to help you determine that, here is the critical question: do you design mechanical things?

If your answer is yes, then you should buy a copy of TurboCalc.  It will more than pay for itself the first time you use it to solve a design or engineering problem.

Geomate Company   inventbetter.com

 

 

How real people use CAD: Shane McKenna

By 3 Comments

In the CAD world, there are all kinds. Some people just use CAD as part of their job—in the same way as they use Word, Excel, or Outlook.  Others become power users, investing themselves in becoming experts at using one or more of the mainstream or high-end CAD systems. Then, there are the CAD hackers. People who see computer programs as raw material, to be used and abused in whatever ways are necessary to achieve their creative vision.

Shane McKenna is a CAD hacker. He doesn’t believe in following the rules, or using his software tools in the way that their creators envisioned. Here, he talks about his process, and how he uses tools.

Most of the furniture I built using 2D CAD. To be honest, while 3D CAD is powerful, I can draw and project it out in my head for all the sides, faster than I can fiddle out the panel details in a 3D platform. I have tried many times to bend the time curve with 3D tools, but I still end up going back to my simple little $40 DeltaCAD program to draw it up. Time tested projected drawing techniques, used back in the days of the drafting table and T-square, are still faster for me.

McKennaIf I am doing a lot of interlocking joints such as boxed corners, mortise and tenon, or shaped joints, then I will build it in 3D to insure fit before cutting. One of the issues is that a CNC router cut panel leaves material in the kerf. Wood compresses and springs back when cut. That spring-back amount varies by feed rate, spindle speed, grain direction, and type of wood or panel that you are cutting. You have to design out this spring back, and simply changing your offset in your tool path program is not sufficient for most of my applications. To avoid re-cutting parts, I do this kerf compensation in the design phase, and check for it in the 3D model at all the joints. This takes a lot of time, test cuts, and fiddling with offsets in part mating. The payoff is my fit is exceptional, often not perceptible, even with close scrutiny. It is not uncommon for me to spend a week to 10 days just on the fit in the design phase on a complex piece. I have a sign up in my shop, “Perfect is close enough.”

As and artist and designer, my primary skill is vision, and as far back as I can recall I could see an object in 3D, and rotate it in my head. This spacial awareness is mostly innate for me, but obviously honed with practice. Once I have a design concept in my mind, I begin to flush it out with hand sketching, hand sculpting, and 2D or 3D software. I don’t use the software to see what something is going to look like: I try to get the software to shape what I already see.

Sailing shipAs far as CAD/CAM, I go through my bag of tricks and choose the one that works best to work out the shape. Many times I don’t have an known path, and I have to figure out how to get to the end result with what I have, or what I can create as a tool. The ship bed was a challenge to program the base shape. I could not get the software choices I had at the time to make the shape I wanted, so I designed and built a laser line scanning system to scan a hand sculpted 1/8th scale model. The system was crude, but it allowed me to create the shape I wanted. ArtCAM has the ability to create a surface from a grey scale raster image. So I have used Photoshop to create a shaded image then used ArtCAM to model a relief panel. The carved rearing horse doors are an example of this. I used hand sketched topography, scanned into Photoshop to create a level map of about 12 depth layers. The result gave me a quick way to hog out most of the material from the doors so that I could go in and hand carve the final shape and details. I did that project in record time, under a super tight 1 week deadline. (Another carver had dropped the ball, and they came to me last minute). That method can only work if you understand the shape. In my case, I grew up around horses and have owned many. If asked to do the same kind of project with elephants, I might choose a different way, since I would have to study the shapes more, and figure out how to compress the relief for their shape. Possibly sculpting the relief in clay and scanning it, so that I could add and take away until it felt right.


Sometimes my process can be decidedly “redneck,” like hot gluing up a bunch of layers of acoustic ceiling tiles, and grinding away the shape. It is what I had in arms reach, and in 20 min, I had a fiberglass mold. I will use cardboard, chicken wire, duct tape, or whatever I have laying around to make a shape. The scanner does not care what it is, only the shape counts.

I design longboards, and none of my software is perfect for creating the subtle shape changes for the deck molds. I use SolidWorks to create multiple shapes, then use ArtCAM to morph the shapes together. Maybe there is a way to get to the exact shape I want with just one program, but I have not found it yet. Software does not have to be spendy or have a bajillion features to get used by me. I used SketchUp to design a production machine for processing large volumes of urethane film. I engineered the machine, and built it in less than a week, which got my client a huge contract. I often use SketchUp when I need it fast, and it is all in-house work. I don’t need polished drawings to build my own design. I used it to design a large project for another shop, and it turned out perfect even if the drawings didn’t have all the polish of SolidWorks or AutoCAD drawings.

McKenna

My method is constant experimentation with all my tools, and being willing to see it through, no matter how long it takes to figure out. In the long run, you learn how to use your software in ways and combinations unique to your projects. You gain skills that translate to other problem solving areas, and you step outside the box. My goal has never been to perfect a method. If I did that, I would falter from boredom alone. My goal is to accomplish the work, learn, and improve. A perfect result is far more satisfying to me than having the perfect tool.

Shane shared a list of the tools he uses for his artistic work (he also does more conventional engineering work.) Quite a mashup:

So, what are your favorite CAD/CAM hacker tools?