Topic: 3D Usage ? ?

[Jim Yadon]

eeewwww... bugs.

Yeah, we get a fair bit of those with the apps available for us as well. I just keep pushing the wagon along when the mule won't pull it up the hill during the really custom stuff. Fortunately, this new stuff that MV has is coming along quickly enough that by the end of next year, I'll be able to run 90-95% of my products through it with a minimum of fuss. At least until some designer comes up with another $20 mil. project that is all compound radius work again. then I'll be needing to fall back on the old school again.

I keep dreaming though. Hang in there Mick.

[Kerry]

< .. snip .. >  Then there's the bugs...

and the differing standards in each country,
and the vagaries of architects ,
and the inconsistancy of engineers regarding connection design,
and the specific requirements of individual fabricators,

etc, etc.

[JDMather]

I know I'm probably asking for it by posing this question...

...what's wrong with AutoCAD's 3d? Is was good enough for programming the Battle scene at Helm's Deep and as I recall it was also used for sequences in the new King Kong (Discreet).

AutoCAD is obsolete technology for anyone serious about 3D(virtual)-2D-3D(real world) round trip art-to-part. 

http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/content/CAD238/AutoCAD_2007_Tutorials.htm

[Jim Yadon]

But are those other solutions as pliable?

[LE]

What is the best package to produce a 100% set of CD drawings for an architectural project?

- Anyone here, have gone or done it from a full 3D package?
- What level of detail?

Thanks.

[CADaver]

AutoCAD is obsolete technology for anyone serious about 3D(virtual)-2D-3D(real world) round trip art-to-part. 

Gee, I'm sure glad I didn't know that before I started doing so 5-6 years ago.

[CADaver]

[SDETERS]

Nice very nice.  But when I look at this I see alot of circles squares routed in 3D  Very nice for autocad

But how long did it take you to do this?  Maybe in a true 3D package this would have taken half the time.  Assuming proficiency in the 3D software. 

Also how do you export this file out for other people to view?  If the person does not have autocad how do they view this fie?

[t-bear]

Ahhh Shane....you stuck your foot in it now... LOL
Tell me, in "the other" packages, how do you create a cylinder?  With a circle, right?  Same with any other geometric shape.  I've used Inventor, and played with Solid works.  To do a piping iso you still need to start with circles and lines.............
I doubt that your estimate of half the time would stand up either.  If you are VERY good, you might beat me, but not by much.  And by the time you get through constraining all those circles and squares, I'll be done.  About the only place the parametrics will be faster is in 3D to 2D sheet conversion, and while they are FASTER, the ability to create some views/details is limited. 
Remember, this is just one old mans opinion...........LOL

[CADaver]

Nice very nice.  But when I look at this I see alot of circles squares routed in 3D  Very nice for autocad

thanks, that's about half the model data, and if you're only seeing circles and squares you not looking close.  Of course you can't see the embedded data either that allows us to do material control, iso generation, and piece tracking.

But how long did it take you to do this?  Maybe in a true 3D package this would have taken half the time.  Assuming proficiency in the 3D software. 

Could be, but our competitors are using so called "TRUE 3D" packages and are constatntly losing their bids to us.  They're laying off while we're hiring, so I don't think they are any faster than we are.

Also how do you export this file out for other people to view?  If the person does not have autocad how do they view this fie?

Probably the same way you would with a "TRUE 3D" package (whatever that is).  Right now we're supplying the finished models (along with the drawings) to the client at completion.  During the design/construction phases we use PDF's and DWF's to share drawing data with the rest of the contractors.  Been working pretty well that way for several years.

[SDETERS]

I  use I-Deas 3D modeling package from UGS

We do mechanical stuff like Die castings and gears Powder metal and lost foam die castings

"Tell me, in "the other" packages, how do you create a cylinder?"

It has how you get to 3D cylinder  and put the tapers or the Helix the cylinder is rotating or folowing.

Yes a cylinder is a cylinder.  One can extrude, sweep, "loft"  variational sweep and or revolve. 

"I doubt that your estimate of half the time would stand up either."

I disagree. Maybe the first initial start up and the first start of the  design but once changes start coming in and modifications start happening the big 3D packages Put Autocad to shame. There is a feature called a history tree how people build these parts.  This keeps track of all the extrudes and revolves and what not it takes to make a part.  This is the most effective way to change, modify, move and constrain per your design intent.  In assembly mode one can constain parts to each other so if you make a part shorter all of the other parts will move with it.  My favorite argument is if you move something .5 of an inch you have to modify or move all your piping.  In big 3D packages this can all be automated.

"About the only place the parametrics will be faster is in 3D to 2D sheet conversion, and while they are FASTER, the ability to create some views/details is limited. 
Remember, this is just one old mans opinion...........LOL"

In our 3D software we can make any cross section views detail views or what ever you want.   

In big packages one can share data between "real" 3D systems (LOL) with formats like STEP  IGES JT

CADaver

How often do you change this model or drawing after you are done with it?

How much of this model can be used for other projects?

Can you use like a common coupling or screw and move it where you want it?  Move it from project to project?

Like the beams do you draw the new beam every time if the length changes?  Or is a modification from the first beam you did?

Are all new projects a new clean blank screen start?

Also how do you do your analysis on your 3D models?  HOw do you know your design is strong enough FEA?  HOw do you know your Flows are what they should be CFD?

With 3D packages you can do this type of analysis!  Autocad you just model it in 3D and hope it is strong enough and hope the fluid flow how it should.?





Final comment I guess you can not teach an old dog new tricks.  LOL J/K

[CADaver]

In our 3D software we can make any cross section views detail views or what ever you want.   

we do the same in plain ol' AutoCAD

How often do you change this model or drawing after you are done with it?

hourly, daily, minute by minute.  These things aren't "done" til' oil becomes gasoline.  What you're seeing in that model is a dozen different XREF's

How much of this model can be used for other projects?

whatever isn't proprietary.  The entire assembly is a one-off custom facility, however the individual components are basic models.

Can you use like a common coupling or screw and move it where you want it?  Move it from project to project?

certainly

Like the beams do you draw the new beam every time if the length changes?  Or is a modification from the first beam you did?

a couple of lisp function to modify the xscale, or translate the part/assembly change the member shape or whatever. But even without the customization, there's never a need to rebuild the beam from scratch unless the member size changes.

Are all new projects a new clean blank screen start?

mostly, but entry for most assemblies is parametric.  tell it how many bents of rack at how many levels and member sizes and spacings and it's built.  Or input the FEA data output from RISA, and it builds itself.

Also how do you do your analysis on your 3D models?  How do you know your design is strong enough FEA?  How do you know your Flows are what they should be CFD?

FEA is RISA, Process is Caesar, E&I is INtools.

Autocad you just model it in 3D and hope it is strong enough and hope the fluid flow how it should.?

only if you don't know how to do it right.

Final comment I guess you can not teach an old dog new tricks. 

oh i can pick up a lot of new tricks, I lust have no need to drop a bundle on new software to do it.
Those who say it can't be done are a constant source of amusement to those of us doing it anyway.

[Jim Yadon]

Well put CADaver. Especially that last line. I've been dealing for years with nay sayers in the 3d realm. While AutoCAD isn't the most simplified or pefect CAD to work in 3d. It is by far the most customizable, flexible and open. I cannot find a packeage that allows me to use the many different types of data sources that I do to pull my information together, use the drawing file itself as a databse when the info is stored with the model parts and still customize the package to fit what ever job I am doing or what ever company I am doing the work for and still share that data without spending 50-100,000 dollars a seat. My CAD installation cost a few grand and the engineering software I use, while basic because I am not in the same type of engineering fields as most of you, cost about a bit over 10k for a seat. At 5 seats we get an open license to have as amany installs as we want. So please. Unless your yet another mathemetician trying tout that his own version of modeling software that can hold a candle to the big picture that the evil empire of AutoDesk has brought us all to, bust loose with some real meat and/or a link to a better alternative. Don't offer us 'candy' and then try to pull us into the van.

[Kerry]

Here's a thought ...

How about some of the members who haven't posted < much or at all > have a vote and post a comment.

It would be good to  hear from you. ... really !
< ... >

anyone ? ?

[Dinosaur]

OK, I will elaborate a bit on my earlier post.  My work is almost exclusively the surveying, platting and construction plans for residential subdivisions.  As such, I have no application for true 3d, even in the slightly misnamed Civil 3D except for the one in umpteen years project sign I described previously.  Although Civil 3D does create an actual 3D model as opposed to the 3d face produced by previous offerings, this model is not only warped usually by a factor of 5 or 10, it is also never really shown in any documents except as a top plan view.  It would be possible to render it for an attractive part of a cover sheet but there is seldom room for such or excess budget for that matter.  A true sectional view of the model would not be appropriate because of the meandering course of the portrayed utilities or roadway as the exact horizontal lengths must be maintained.  We are therefore left with using a 2D representation of the model rather than a true 3d view of our profiles and cross sections that are actually the vertical calculations for the design surface and utilities.