Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
We are usually only creating IdeaStation posts on behalf of a customer. This was suggested to me over an email so I added this to make it easier for the customer.
It is a funny thing when the customers voice their opinions about what new features they do or do not care about. We do a lot of user testing to find out what people are looking for in the product and what they do not see value in. Most of the time we have the correct data but sometimes we are surprised to hear that features we find important are not that important to the customers. Even though I created this post for a customer, the idea is not to push my desires for the product direction in the customer space. We see that this is a highly voted idea and are looking into this. Believe me though, PM's (Product Managers) know what features need to be included and internally we are always asking PM's for more additions to the products than the customers ask for. We all, internal and external, ask PM's for more and they know this is important to customers. We are working on more of the core improvements/enhancements to In-CAD. We have a lot of great plans for the product and hope to start sharing these new features on the beta site within a few months to collect customer feedback.
For future note, please add specifics in the IdeaStation posts to support why this feature is important to you. What problems do these posted ideas solve for your business? What additions to a basic request (like this one) are necessary for you to be successful? We can't put in all of the ideas because that would skew customer perception and we would be doing exactly what you just commented on. We need you to tell us why this is important to you and your business.
We are researching mid-plane mesh creation. We are not allowed to promise anything (dates, features, etc.) so stay tuned. For now, you can vote for it here. Midplane
this idea has been here for more than three years and is the second most voted one in In-CAD idea station (valid by now). And it is still UNDER REVIEW...?
Let's put it this way: If Autodesk wants people to take its Nastran product seriously, then it must bring it up to the level of a serious FE analysis tool (such as Ansys or Abaqus). Without HEX (brick) element, plane stress/strain quadrilateral element (including incompatible mode formulation), among other things, Nastran InCAD will remain comparable to Solidworks simulation. That is to say, not a serious FE analysis product!
The fact that the CHEXA is probably available to the solver (which they acquired) but not through the In-CAD pre-processor is annoying and should be changed ASAP.
Autodesk discontinued Algor (aka Simulation Mechanical) which was a very useful FEA tool (beyond anything currently available within portfolio) and they aquired NEi Nastran, which was used by many industry pre and post processors (FEMAP among others) and that even had explicit solver incorporated (are people at Autodesk aware of the benefits of having both implicit and explicit solvers under the same roof)! Very little of that technology is currently available through In-CAD, which is currently below par. NEi had CHEXA, so the element is already there.
I wish they could release some sort of a road map for their product improvement. It's been two years since they had indicated they would incorporate Plane stress/strain elements, and still nothing! Given, as you guys have pointed out, that capabilities already exist within Nastran (NEi in this case), and Autodesk having acquired Algor, one would think they should be able to leverage the pre-post codes of Algor and develop appropriate interface InCAD). There is great potential here, sad that it is not being harnessed. I was thinking about using this to teach my FEA courses, but not with the current limitations.
With Simulation Mechanical gone, just what is Autodesk waiting for? Or should users try to figure out how to do the pre- and postprocessing with a third party application and then use the solver as a command line tool?
I sure hope that is not what Autodesk is aiming for. Please beef up NINCAD.
A customer coming from Simulation Mechanical trying to adopt Nastran In-CAD as a substitute to it just had a "colorfoul" reaction to the fact that brick meshs are missing.
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")