Autodesk Inventor

[#1]

There used to be model challenges that some of the more experienced forum members would offer for others to try and solve.  I can't recall what the metrics were; time, maybe.  A similar problem-solving challenge to both Inventor and SW users might be interesting, but who would judge the results and how to guard against a problem carefully-crafted to be more amenable to IV over SW or vise-versa?  A cute idea that is wholly impractical, I suppose.

[#2]

---

Cadmanto wrote:

  It is only fair if you are to clearly access this rivalry.

---

Of course anyone with significant experience in something as complex as MCAD software will favor their experience over their inexperience.

Without verifiable, scientifically testable data - it is all a lot of hot air. 

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=313471

*by scientifically testable - I mean professionals in both softwares could sit at a table and through demonstration support their positions.  I would wager that most of the people that appear here or on SWx sites favoring SWx or Inventor without substantiation that I can out-perform them in either program as judged by peers in either program.  My opinion is that the programs are essentially identical for all usual intents and purposes for which MCAD software is used.

[#3]

JD,

I would dissagree with you on the statement that  " the programs are essentially identical for all usual intents and purposes". Being a SW user for 5 years and an Iv user for almost 1 year now I would say that there is definately a different thought process behind how to accomplish the same tasks with the two different programs. At the present, much to my chagrin, I have to admit that I greatly prefer the Solid-doesn't-Works thought process, but that is as suggested before because I am much more familiar with it. That being said, I would say that the two programs are comperable in what they are able to accomplish given a trained opperator. There are many things that are easyer in one program or the other so being identical is not the right term but comperable is a better fit.

     I am sure if I continue to visit this forum and learn your posts I will some day become as adept with Inventor as currently with SW and be able to accomplish the tasks in a simmular time frame.

WIth that being said:

I still hate LODs

I wish I could link balloons on all sheets of a drawing to the BOM on the first sheet

I wish I could directly change the density of a part to match the measured weight

I wish the new sketches did not select a new coordinate system based on the sketch face

I wish when I made a Ifactory and part I could get the part to update in the assembly some how

.......

jim

[#4]

---

JimSteinmeyer wrote:

I wish I could directly change the density of a part to match the measured weight

---

Just override the weight instead then, which will calculate the density for you. If you want to change the density because you have other parts of the same material that you haven't weighed, then just change the density in the material library to that value, so it updates for all parts.

[#5]

Often we will have an assembly (tire and wheel for example) that are modeled as one component but obviously it incorperates 2 materials. Or we will have a CAD print for a vendor's item that we want to model a guick component from to hold the space but we may not have an accurate shell thickkness for, or it could also be a composit. We know the weight of the assembled product so It would be quick to take the model weight and density and extropolate a correct density to have the correct weight. but it would be for only the one model and not correct for a material.

I haven't found out how to overide the weight yet, but as that is possible I will continue to explore how to do that.

Thank you

Jim

P.S. any suggestions on my other wishes?

[#6]

Jim-

have you tried looking into making the rim and the wheel two seperate solid bodies?  I believe then that you could have the rim say Alum and the wheel rubber.

MES

[#7]

Yes, that is an option. Unfortunately I have many leagicy models that would need to be redone. I also used the tire/wheel as an easy example of one of many types of purchased assemblies that we install in models for place holders where being able to find the correct balance of our product would also be very desireable.

I also wanted to say that while I currently greatly prefer SW, I am using my home $500 HP laptop to run Inventer at work and am having no problems other than being slightly slow. I have SW loaded as well but would not even consider making the same models as the computer would not be able to handle it.

Thank you

Jim

[#8]

I understand, I was only suggesting it because most users ignore this tool which I consider to be extreemly helpful in many situations.

[#9]

There is a little thing know as Cognitive Dissonance which in simple terms means that a person will make any excuse and ignore details in order to justify their decision.   A person that uses one brand of software will often ignore good features in another because they want to think that they are using the best one, and they will also ignore bad features in their own software and accept lengthy work arounds for the same reason.

Is is too difficult to say any one is better than the other as a general statement, but in speciic tasks its easier.  For example

The gear generator makes inventor better for modelling gears,

SW extensive mate options make it better for mating parts in some cases eg width mate,

SW has the ability to dimension an arc length in a sketch, Inv doesnt.

SW has multi body sheet metal, Inv doesnt

SW has better assembly mirroring where mates are involved.

SW extrude has an offset distance from the start plane, inv doesnt.

SW lets you assign a drawing scale to a sheet, Inv doesnt.

SW has thin option in extrudes and sweeps, inv doesnt

My list is SW biased because these are some of the things that I miss, but for others who dont care about those things they will argue that inv is better based on what they model.

So the best way to tell is to consider what you need to do and then see what tools are available.  And the reality is that for many people, Alibre, Ironcad or Spaceclaim would be a cheaper option that's just as good.

The majority of SW users will argue its the best just as the majority of Inv users will say Inv is the best.  So cognitive dissonance makes asking which is best in any forum as valid as watching a couple of 10 year olds have the GMH vs Ford debate based on which one their dad drives.

For me, for what I do, I dont like using either of them and am about to start a trial of Spaceclaim.

[#10]

I'd like to pack and go a part and drawing, rename them,make changes to the part and have the drawing automatically update.

Takes about 2 seconds in SW.

Is this possible in inventor?