Need SW but..

We use AutoCAD for our in-house design and it is sufficient for all in-house
needs.
About 2-5% of the larger potential customers are starting to ask for 3D
files of our equipment but buying SW and keeping the subscription current is
expensive for our small business.
Can annual subscriptions be skipped and still upgrade every couple of years
or are we locked out with annual support.

TIA

Joe Agro
Sales & Engineering
AutoDrill
www.AutoDrill.com

 

You will be in the upgrade trap because your potential customers will
send or want the latest release files. You cannot save past versions
with a new version.

You can skip annual subscriptions, but when you do you will have to pay
an additional fee when you renew. SW has changed policies on this so I
would check with a VAR to see what the current policy is.

 

I looked at your products on your web site, and as a designer of 4
decades, I can tell you for certain that once you start using 3D, that
you will wonder why you did not do it earlier. That is just the way it
works.

I've used AutoCAD and other 2D programs, but 2D, like my Hermes
mechanical typewriter are now quickly being relegated to "20th Century
technology" status. I did not restrict myself to one particular vendor
when picking 3D but bought and tried 5-6 packages until I found the one
which which appeared easiest to use to get good quick results without a
long learning curve. That was SolidWorks for me.

In addition to everything else, Adobe has released Acrobat 3D which
allows the newer v7 pdf files to contain 3D objects in them that the
customers can rotate and move around. They can contain sectioned
models when required.

Once the standard 3D components are in your system, the creation of new
"models" is often done in minutes by creating either a new assembly of
standard parts or a new configuration of parts in an existing assembly,
without the need to create everything from scratch.

It takes a bit of an open mind to realize that the world is moving on
fast forward, and realize that the likes of SMC and lots of motor, and
other component manufacturers are routinely supplying 3D models of
their products ready to use in your assembly layouts, making your job
easier.

Finding a good VAR and a SolidWorks Certified Professional who has
experience helping companies plan for 3D would help greatly in
understanding how to implement 3D as a company wide system.

Contacting someone like Matt Lombard < http://www.dezignstuff.com/> in
Staunton, VA for an hour or two of consulting time would open a lot of
doors quickly in realizing what you might do in 3D, and the extent of
time, costs, training, accessory software packages & hardware required.

In a new implementation of 3D where you have the same component used in
many different products, the design of how you manage part files, bills
of material, assembly files and product models can make the difference
between being very efficient and quick and having problems. Matt has
extensive experience in these issues, as do a lot of other SWCP experts
which your local VAR works with for customers.

Of course AutoCAD's people would automatically have an opinion that
their 3D is best, but I suggest that might be a biased opinion.
SolidWorks hasn't reached almost 500,000 seats worldwide in about 10
years by being a slouch product.

Bo

 

You might want to take a look at Alibre, it's developing quite well.
The latest version even has configurations. The free Xpress version
plus an additional module might be all you need.
http://www.alibre.com/
http://www.alibre.com/xpress/software/alibre-design-xpress.asp
http://www.alibre.com/products/features.asp

 

I did not explain our situation completely. Our drawings only go one way...
out to the customer. Yes, I realize that if it was coming in opening files
from newer versions would be a problem.
We also sell basically two models and do actual design only every couple of
years. The two models have been the majority of our design the last 7
years. Our many drawings sent to customers represent placement of our
models in there work environment.
If we skip upgrades how much of a penalty do we face when we do upgrade
every couple of releases?

 

Are you aware that with Autodesk Inventor you get AutoCAD for "free".
I think for your application Inventor and SolidWorks are essentially
identical.

 

With SW you get DWGEditor for free. Works the same as AutoCAD, but
nicer. See the review of Cadopia in Cadalyst.

 

Anyone who makes a 3D decision based on opinions, is violating the
number 1 rule of evaluating software: Learn First!

Particularly for a company with multiple seats, I think one good, and
adaptive person ought to learn the programs being considered, well
enough to be able to describe the companies work in each of the
software programs, such that major differnences can be highlighted.

It only takes about 2-3 days of intensive study and practice with the
SolidWorks tutorial followed by another couple days of practice on your
own parts to get the idea of the basic feel and capability of the
standard types of work done in SolidWorks. Another week can generate a
couple of significant assemblies. Couple some direct knowledge with a
capable consultant on the issues of implementation and an engineering
system, and then a company can make a rational decision.

What gets me riled a bit is the concept of believing a salesman and his
3D CAD demo and then ordering a bunch of seats for a company.

Bo

 

I think even that is an over simplification, Bo. Starting with no knowledge of
3D design software; if the software has any depth (for the sake of argument
let's say Inventor is the shallow end of the pool) or design efforts involve
more than bottom up design of small (for argument's sake; 1000 part instances)
assemblies of structural steel shapes it takes many months, even years, of use
and / or thousands in training to define the limits of any given software's
capabilities for a given application.

I think if someone were to study the inefficiency and cost of achieving 3D
"maturity" on a global scale it would be mind boggling. More and more I think
that hiring a vendor neutral consultant group to evaluate and demonstrate
specifics as may be applicable makes good long term sense vs.years of wandering
in the forest, lugging legacy data from one level to the next. (Consider, too,
that "some" developers use forced migration within their own product lines to
generate revenue.)

 

I agree I was simplifying, but in this case Drillman specified he has a
limited product line and the self powered drill units are the type of
assemblies with maybe 50-100 parts in them. I looked at his rather
functional, prismatic based sheet metal and machined and purchased
parts and it seemed like they could get a handle on SolidWorks in that
environment fairly quickly, particularly if they have some professional
guidance.

I would hate to have to deal with moving 1000 piece assemblies into a
CAD program as a first step in establishing a 3D CAD system in a
company. That would be a nightmare.

Bo

 

D.M.

Sounds to me like maybe your customers want 3D data so they can just drop it
into an assembly of their own (as opposed to modeling it). This has become
pretty much S.O.P. proceedure for the industry as a whole. Chances are (damn
likeley really) that most (if not all) of your customers will be using 3D
tools at some time in the near future. There're just to many advantages to
it for mechanical design. Downloadable 3D parts and assemblies save "ALOT"
of time ($$$$$) for your customers.

As for myself, I'll choose the vendor who offers the solid model (all other
things being equal) than the one's that don't.

Regards

Mark

 

"take the garbage out, dear"

It cost us an extra $500 when we dropped support and then later bought it
again. That was this year and SolidWorks doesn't seem to change prices much.

What kind of product are you making? You might find Alibre would work as
well as SolidWorks if you have fairly simple geometry. (I have no idea how
Alibre handles large assemblies, but it seems to work well for "simple"
geometry and used to be pretty inexpensive.)

Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems