Topic: To 3D or Not to 3D?

[ChrisSolid]

I have a 30 day evaluation copy of Mechanical -haven't really tried it yet, but have started looking through the manual pdf. But here's my dilemma:
I've been bombarded lately with all the virtues of doing mechanical design in 3D (namely thru Inventor, or maybe Solidworks). But, of course all the virtues being laid out are mostly from those who would profit from the sale of these apps. Now I find myself looking at this 2d package that seems to have been a fairly large programming project for the folks at AutoDesk - But AutoDesk ALSO promotes Inventor. If you read all the Inventor hype, you come away with the idea that 3d is the way to go. Its the wave of the future, blah, blah, etc. So then why go further with the development of a 2D package like Mechanical? It would seem that an argument for Mechanical would be an argument AGAINST Inventor. Is AutoDesk literally "burning its candle at both ends"?? I would just like to hear some others' thoughts on this. For what it's worth, my personal feeling about 3d is that, although I find it more fun than 2D, I still believe that in many cases, it's not as efficient from a time issue. I'm thinking that this could be the reason for the existence of Mechanical. Again, this would seem to be an argument against 3D designing. What do you think?

[MP]

I've not used the Mechanical product, but we've been modeling our projects in 3D with AutoCAD (some with vanilla AutoCAD, some via in house applications, some via 3rd party applications like Bentley AutoPLANT, MultiSTEEL yada) for about 16 years. For our work, Oil & Gas Engineering it simply isn't practical to do things solely in 2D -- for us that would be inefficient.

At the risk of sounding cliche, I don't think it's the future -- I think it's "now".

But to close, it would largely depend upon your industry and the type and scale of projects your participate on.

/ramble.

[SDETERS]

3D is the standard period.  And it is only going to get better from here on.

All of the new students coming out of college is only going to know 3D.  Little 2D is taught my impression

3D is really powerfull.  After your 3D is done you can send it our analysis to see if the part is strong enough?  FEA Work  Flow analysis!  Thermal Analise vibration.  It is how far you want to go to make sure your design stands a chance at working before even cutting and or ordering steel.

[pmvliet]

I'm no expert, but I believe Inventor is 1) it's own platform not a vertical of autocad. 2) it's a program for making solid parts (widgets). I'm not exactly sure what Mechanical is, but I believe it is built upon Autodesk (a vertical).

Just like ADT and Revit, Autodesk is providing several solutions. Remember that they are in the business to make money. They are not going to shot themselves in the foot by eliminating mechanical or ADT because **they** think that 3D is all that should be used now. If the majority of buyers/users are not ready to take that leap, they are going to provide something for at least a little while...

Pieter

[t-bear]

AutoCAD Mechanical ... or AutoCAD Mechanical Desktop?  Two entirely different animals.  Mechanical is a 2D proggy....vanilla with "extras".  MDT is a cross-over from Van-CAD to Inventor.  IF a-desk sold MDT separate from "Inventor Suite" I'd be using it today.  More powerful than vanilla for 3D work without having to completely "re-learn" a drafting proggy.  very much like van-cad so the change-over would be easier....
Inventor is another ball-game entirelly.............constraints alone need a whole course to learn.  The look/feel of Inventor is counter-intuitive to someone brought up on ACAD.   If it's all you've ever known, like the "kids" out there, it's easy.  You don't have to UN- learn years of ingrained habit.  Shane has been head-banging us "old-timers" in another thread "can't teach an old dog......"   That's OK......his time will come.  Someday HE'll be the "old fart" . LOL
I believe 3D is the future AND the present.  No arguement there.  Have you seen 2K7???  Great new 3D capabilities in vanilla CAD.  Built especially for us "old farts"...............thanks Autodesk.  (I can't believe I just said that!)

[SDETERS]

I have the most respect for everybody on this Forum  Old or young   LOL  And the good sense of humor.

But there is a reason why Autodesk is going the way they are.   3D is now

We are phasing out Autocad at this time

But One will have to know how to detail the 3D models that get made into 2D drawings. 2D drawings are not going away anytime soon.  So there is a need for knowing 2D.

3D is only way to go in my book.  When I first started working at my Job all I knew was Autocad 2d.  I loved it.  I thought the 3D guys was full of dung.  But when I started learning the 3D system I-Deas I started singing a different tune.  IT was so easy to create 2D views 2D sections.  Using constraints and making relationships between parts.  Keeping assemblies up to date BOM construction was way to easy.  Now there is stuff like PLM Product Lifcycle management that keeps all your data flowing.

I also think there is more to drafting and design than just being 2D and 3D.  It is keeping all of your documentation with the Drawing and or 3D model in one place where everybody can get to it.  LIke quotes, Bids,  standards, Eng Changes and what not.   I do not know where everything will go but the ride should be fun.  SO when I get to be an old Fart I can look back and say when I was kid I remeber we used CRT to do our Models with!!!!

Thanks

Shane

[CADaver]

But One will have to know how to detail the 3D models that get made into 2D drawings. 2D drawings are not going away anytime soon.  So there is a need for knowing 2D.

I have no idea what you're talking about here.  I, personally, have been doing drawings from 3D models for the last 10 or so years without using 2D.

[SDETERS]

Exactly  you make your 3D model then you have a drawing that is dimensioned from your 3D model correct?  So When you print your drawing you are printing a 2D version of your 3D model.  Is this more clear? 

[CADaver]

Exactly  you make your 3D model then you have a drawing that is dimensioned from your 3D model correct?  So When you print your drawing you are printing a 2D version of your 3D model.  Is this more clear? 

Correct, but where is the explanation of your comment about "So there is a need for knowing 2D."?  Are just talking about annotation or what?

Here's my point, many software build a 3D model, then "cut" 2D views of the model for annotation.  In reality the annotation is divorced from the true model.  IMMHO, that's a very bad idea.  We annotate the model (or rather an XREF of the model) instead so that annotations accurately reflects the model.

[Jim Yadon]

Exactly  you make your 3D model then you have a drawing that is dimensioned from your 3D model correct?  So When you print your drawing you are printing a 2D version of your 3D model.  Is this more clear? 

Well SDETERS... having done a bit of investigation AND having had a look at 2k7, I only have one thing to say... you'd be more likely see Taco Bell win a global conflict of epic proportions than see me abandon AutoCAD anytime soon. Regardless of what you nay-say about it.

[SDETERS]

I am not nay saying Autocad.  It works for your individual needs.  That is great. 

When I talk about there is no need to know 2D anymore.  I stuck a foot in my mouth. 2D dimensioning and detailing is not going away?  What I was meaning drafting in 2D is going away.  With I have saw in Acad 7 there is no reason not to start modeling 3D. 

As I see it there is 2 different ways of dimensioning and or GD&t your 3D model

One way
Take your 3D model process it in to  2D views and sections and then dimension it.  These views are tied to 3D model so if Model changes the views automatically update.  These views are driven by the 3D model

Other way
Take your 3D model apply your dimensions and GD&T directly to the 3D model.  This is called 3D annotation.  The standard for this is ASME Y14.4-41-2003 Digital Product Definition Data Practices.

So if you want to know exactly what feature or surface defines say Datum A all one has to do is highlight that datum letter and the surface highlights and shows you what datum A is.  This is far more clear than doing this on a 2D print. 

[Jim Yadon]

I am not nay saying Autocad.  It works for your individual needs.  That is great. 

When I talk about there is no need to know 2D anymore.  I stuck a foot in my mouth. 2D dimensioning and detailing is not going away?  What I was meaning drafting in 2D is going away.  With I have saw in Acad 7 there is no reason not to start modeling 3D. 

As I see it there is 2 different ways of dimensioning and or GD&t your 3D model

One way
Take your 3D model process it in to  2D views and sections and then dimension it.  These views are tied to 3D model so if Model changes the views automatically update.  These views are driven by the 3D model

Other way
Take your 3D model apply your dimensions and GD&T directly to the 3D model.  This is called 3D annotation.  The standard for this is ASME Y14.4-41-2003 Digital Product Definition Data Practices.

So if you want to know exactly what feature or surface defines say Datum A all one has to do is highlight that datum letter and the surface highlights and shows you what datum A is.  This is far more clear than doing this on a 2D print. 

I agree with you completely on the dimensioning of models. It has been and as far I can tell, remains, the Achilles heal of AutoCAD. I haven't completed my review of 2007 yet. With the progress they've made, just between 2005 & 2007, they may finally be coming around. Or they may finally just be getting the programmers that can deliver what we need. For what it is and where it started, I am excited to think that my boys may actually be able to do true virtual modeling, in every definition of the words, by the time they reach where I am.

I appreciate your candor SDETERS and I apologize if I offended you with my 'nay-sayer' remark. That was more of a reference to the folks who lurk about that are content to just sit and grumble about what they have not rather than get involved and contribute to solutions. My Uncle always said, "you're either part of the problem or part of the solution."

[SDETERS]

This is all good information. 

Do not worry about offending me.  I do not get offended that often. 

I always wanted to be part of the solution and get the information out to everybody and give people a completely different point of view.

In Autocad 2007 is there going to be STEP and IGES file translators? 

Thanks

Shane