Which CAD-Software

[karsten]

Hi,
iam trying to modell our 2005-frame using
catia V5. but in my opinion there must a software
which is more suitable for connecting
nodes with strucutral members. what kind of
tools do you use for the development of the
frame?

karsten

[karsten]

Hi,
iam trying to modell our 2005-frame using
catia V5. but in my opinion there must a software
which is more suitable for connecting
nodes with strucutral members. what kind of
tools do you use for the development of the
frame?

karsten

[Greg Milliken]

Hi Karsten,

Try out Alibre Design. I am confident it will work well for you. The UCSD team used it for designing their frame.

The softwate also provides collaboration to allow you to share and review the design with others located remotely, or just while your at home or on the road.

You can register at our web site at www.alibre.com (http://www.alibre.com). This is our 30-day trial but once you register send me an email at info@alibre.com and I will convert you to a full educational license to use throughout your 2005 project.

Also, any other interested in using Alibre Design on your FSAE project, please do the same and we'll get you set up.

Greg Milliken
President and CEO
Alibre, Inc.

[leclercjs]

Hey karsten,

we've always used CATIA V5 to model our car and any components that are going on the car. We basically did the chassis in the wireframe module and after apply the thickness element to make realistic the space frame. For all the other parts, it's basically all cat parts. But I'm also curious about the Alibre software, seems to be the same basics and ease of use. I can wait to try it this evening. It also seems to have a module to make exchange via Internet or something like that that you only can find with ENOVIA from Dassault. Our school has it, but only for the master degree students.

Hope it helps!!

[Vector006]

Ive used Unigraphics, CATIA V5, and SolidWorks. Of these, i would recommend SolidWorks for any FSAE team, the learning curve is better and the commands are logical. Everything you need is there, i found CATIA to be very powerful, but it has alot of crap you'll never need for designing a formula car. For a team of students who have never used a parametric CAD package, you definately want a short learning curve.

-jer

[karsten]

Hi Greg,
thanks a lot for your answer,
i`ll alibre

[ReadySetGo]

I second solidworks! We used pro/e in the beginning and it was a pain. The learning curve in solidworks is really short. You should be designing things with confidence in a couple of weeks.

[Daygo Nighthawk]

I was the main CAD guy on the UC San Diego team. Yes, I am an electrical engineer. I learned CAD on Solidworks, which is a very powerful and user-friendly package. I was fortunate enough to find a Solidworks guy, who gave me the software along with a home educational license. Previously I had only used it for some solid model/sheet metal modeling, though without any purpose except for an "ooh-ahh" 3D model for presentations.

After I joined the SAE team, Greg and the Alibre team gave us their software, which includes some good tutorials that really allow you to get used to the interfaces in the software. Included in the ability to network with your teammates for long-distance design discussions/sessions, is the ability to network with the 'Alibre Assistants', who are online during normal business hours (sometimes after hours as well). You message them online, and they will gladly help you with your problem/question within a few minutes. If it is an Alibre specific question, they will open a session or join the session to help you directly with your modeling difficulties. The assistant that helped me, gave me some pointers on how to build a spaceframe in the Alibre software when I asked him about it. After I got the hang of making and joining some tubes, I thanked him and set off on my own. He wasn't sure if it was the most efficient way to build a spaceframe in Alibre, so I received an email from him a couple hours later (after business hours), and to my suprise he emailed me about a 3 page long email of tips and most efficient methods of building and joining the tubes. I still have the email saved somewhere..

They also have Algor FEA, photo-rendering, part library (bolts, fasteners, etc,.), CAM software plug-ins.. Our team just used the solid modeling features for fitment and tube lengths, fitment angles etc,. We never had licenses for the extra plug-in versions of the software, but never had time to ask for them. We used AutoCAD and Solidworks for CAM software, since me and the machinists were already used to that software.

[karsten]

Hi,
thanks a lot guys. yours replies are
very helpfull, but unfortunately
a team-decission was made. the cad
software is catia V5r11. i have to deal
with it, although iam not convinced
that catia is best for us.

thanks a lot.

[drivetrainUW-Platt]

I am a big fan of Solidworks, I picked it up and was able to teach my self how to use it very quickly. One thing that i would like to vent about is how much I hated our required engineering graphics class. It was focused entirely on AUTOCAD, and some hand drawing techniques. I know a lot of ppl in the class had never touched a drawing program more advanced than Microsoft Paint(not trying to insult the teams that do there design report in paint http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif , but for someone like me who took autocad in highschool and is able to use both Solidworks and Autodesk Inventor, doing things like 3-D and 3 View drawings on a 2-D based program seems like such a waste of time. Why should i draw a solid object line by line and draw 3 individual views of an object when the advanced programs allow you to do this with ease.
my two cents

[Cement Legs]

I've found unigraphics quite powerfull and very easy to learn if you have any CAD experience at all AND access to the C.A.S.T. tutorial library.

[Travis Garrison]

I had been keeping clear of this one since its just an opinion poll...and I figured I'd get myself into trouble...but I've been itching to defend my favorite cad system...so here goes...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by karsten:

...unfortunately
a team-decission was made. the cad
software is catia V5r11. i have to deal
with it, although iam not convinced
that catia is best for us.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm curious as to why the decsion would disapoint you so much...

Either way I really wouldn't sweat it, just about any CAD system out there right now will work well enough. There are a couple of things to keep in mind though...

First off, take a look at what the major automotive and aerospace companies currently use, CATIA is used by BMW and Chrysler most notably; not to mention one helluvalot of aerospace companies use it. UG is probably a close second maybe even an equal in use. Pro-E is I'm guessing the runner up but how far back it is I have no idea. The point being that you are far more likely to get a job where Catia skills are useful than one that would put solidworks skills to use.

My second point would be that while some of this widespread use can be attributed to resitance to change, CAD systems don't become popular simply becuase they've been around for a while, they have to get the job done, and do it quickly. They are tools meant to save time, and companies like Dasault and UG can charge enormous amounts of $$ is because their products save enormous amounts of time. I can't speak to UG but Catia is far and away the most user freindly CAD system I've ever used (hands down easier for me to learn than Pro, solid works, rhino, or any of the autodesk stuff).

Lastly there is the question of flat out power. Catia comes with a lot of tools you simply won't find in many of the other CAD systems. An excellent human modeller, probably the best NC package availble anywhere (UG may be able to give it a run for its money, and I've heard of only one stand alone NC suite that in the same league), an decent integrated FEA workbench, even things like a composites workbench to help model layup sequences. All without having to do any file conversions.


The point being that Catia will do more than solidworks, give you more marketable skills, and likely be easier for most people to learn. I know the solidworks users might not agree...and I'll probalby get lynched by my new team (I'm just starting down at UW) for speaking out agains solidworks, but it had to be done http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In any case good luck with the CAD fun...

Travis Garrison

[Denny Trimble]

Note to Self:
Bring 10' of rope to class tonight...

http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Jarrod]

we are using Unigraphics, and have only really used it properly this year. The integrated FEA, assembly, CAM, all operating off one file, make life very easy, we have guys that have come from autoCAD, solidworks, solid edge, and none of them will go back to the old programs. The CAST files are great if you can get them, a few of our guys just taught themselves how to use the whole program. The simpler among had to do a one day course, now we can do just about anything we need. There is also a motion package that uses ADAMS, but we haven't had a chance to get it running yet. Not sure if it can do composites though.

[Didier Beaudoin]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by karsten:
Hi,
thanks a lot guys. yours replies are
very helpfull, but unfortunately
a team-decission was made. the cad
software is catia V5r11. i have to deal
with it, although iam not convinced
that catia is best for us.

thanks a lot. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have been using CATIA V5 for the last 3 years, and I must say I really like it. First of all, like Travis said, it is really user friendly; therefore, if you have people on the team who are not really used to CAD, they will spend less time learning the software and more time designing parts.

Also, I find the surfaces modules work really well for frame building purposes. You basically only have to enter the nodes coodinates and draw lines between them. After that, getting a .catpart frame is really easy.

I also strongly suggest you use the human modeller module, which gives an excellent idea of your car's ergonomics without the need to build a wood model or anything.

The finite elements module is also very useful. I have yet to get a course on finite elements (I'm not yet in university) but from what I know, it is pretty good and really useful to compare parts and modify them in order to obtain the strongest ones.

As Travis said also, the NC module is really complete. However, I think it is not so time efficient. Getting a good program takes a lot of time, as there are so many variables and values to fiddle with, and there are often some strange bugs.

Overall, I think CATIA is really useful for a FSAE team. Another downside though; you need a great computer to be able to make complete assemblies.

[Travis Garrison]

Didier,

what kind of NC bugs are you running into? What release are you on? I only ask becuase the only bugs I've read about (never actually experienced any besides runtime errors) have been on older releases...a new release or service pack may help...of course when its me at the helm it usually turns out to be operator error http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Travis Garrison

[Didier Beaudoin]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Travis:
Didier,

what kind of NC bugs are you running into? What release are you on? I only ask becuase the only bugs I've read about (never actually experienced any besides runtime errors) have been on older releases...a new release or service pack may help...of course when its me at the helm it usually turns out to be operator error http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Travis Garrison <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I haven't really used the NC module for a year, so I guess I was using R11 back then. I don't have precise examples of the bugs I saw, but I remember sometimes the tools positionning when simulating was really strange, and changing a distance from, for example 1.250" to 1.2495", made the problem disappear, which is kinda weird in my opinion.

[jack]

i'm with travis on catia v5r11, its just awsome. when starting out with the new car for instance, the human model was priceless. you can move the dude around in every way, you can change his percentile, and it even gives you his cg. and hey, who in f1 uses solidworks anyway?? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Mark Bacchetti]

I feel that Solidworks is an easier package to start on, however, CATIA V5 is much more powerful. The learning curve is definitely larger for CATIA. However, an open-minded Solidworks user will migrate quickly into it.

With the right CATIA modules, you can do preliminary 1D torsional analysis on your frame WITHOUT transfering data to another program. It's a great way to optimize a chassis during the design process.

FYI... MSC.Software has integrated their major CAE packages into CATIA under the SimDesigner name... Including ADAMS/Car. Unfortunately, I don't think it is part of the educational license. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif