CAD advice needed

[Didier Beaudoin]

Hello-

Our team's objective for next year is to model the entire car, including every single part. I have been using CATIA V5 for a couple of years. It's a great program, but I feel it has limitations. For instance, on a single computer, I find it difficult to make a big assembly without CATIA getting so slow it is impossible to work with.

I was wondering if there was a lighter CAD program around that would enable us to model the entire thing without having to find a 50 computer network.

What about Solidworks? SolidEdge? Alibre? Inventor?

Thank you

[Didier Beaudoin]

Hello-

Our team's objective for next year is to model the entire car, including every single part. I have been using CATIA V5 for a couple of years. It's a great program, but I feel it has limitations. For instance, on a single computer, I find it difficult to make a big assembly without CATIA getting so slow it is impossible to work with.

I was wondering if there was a lighter CAD program around that would enable us to model the entire thing without having to find a 50 computer network.

What about Solidworks? SolidEdge? Alibre? Inventor?

Thank you

[Denny Trimble]

Well, let's start with your computer's specs. If you don't have at least 1GB of RAM, you're dead in the water. 2GB is better.

Next in importance for CAD is the video card. The nVidia quadro line is made for CAD, vs. their gaming cards. However, the gaming cards can be "soft-quadro'd" (thank you Russia) to unlock the professional features you'll find in the quadro cards at 3X the price.

Then, CPU speed. If you're building a new computer, Athlon64 is the way to go, yes even while running 32 bit software. Do a search for solidworks benchmark, you'll see.

Finally, it helps to have fast hard drives if you're working with huge assemblies. It can take 10 minutes to just save or open our full vehicle assembly. You can speed this up by creating a RAID0 striped array, two disks that act as one. But, don't trust it for long-term storage, the failure risk is doubled.

Software - SolidWorks will get the job done, you've seen the pictures, but it slows down exponentially with assembly size. I don't have any experience with large assemblies on other software, but I assume they all work, and I bet CATIA is among the best.

There are certain modeling tricks you can do to save file size, such as:
-Eliminate helical surfaces from your parts, SolidWorks doesn't handle them very well
-Avoid "flexible subassemblies"
-Avoid "in context" features, which make SolidWorks run around in circles
-Create subassemblies for major parts of the car, such as:
-Front Suspension
-Rear Suspension
-Engine
-Drivetrain
-Chassis

This allows you to work on reasonably-sized sections of the car at once, without opening the stuff you don't care about.

Hope that helps.

[Cement Legs]

I wonder if they ran into the same limitations when they were designing the F22 Raptor http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Who knows maybe they had more RAM http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Kidding aside, I run Unigraphics on my computer at home, of which I haven't found any limitations that would keep me from completing every morsel of our car (if I'm so motivated), with an AMD 2800, 512 RAM and a 9700 Pro video card and even with a 50 MB assembly I only get slight pause during rendering.....

Denny I would take it one step further and go RAID 5 with more than 2 disks, to increase read/write times dramatically and get the added advantage of full data recover-ability assuming no 2 disks fail at the same time.

[Wray]

We've used Pro/E Wildfire 1.0 the last 2 years. This year, we're looking into SolidWorks. The student package with COSMOS has a LOT to offer, and it's a little more user-friendly than Pro/E. I've been using SWX 2004 at work for the last month or so, and I'm beginning to see how they compare. SWX does have a lot to offer.. especially for the price!

[Marc Jaxa-Rozen]

To add to Didier's comments, I used to run CATIA on a dual MP1800+ with 1.5G of RAM and a Quadro4 900 equivalent (Ti4600). Maybe not state of the art these days but still- I think you could reasonably expect decent performance for FSAE-sized assemblies, but that definitely wasn't the case for anything above a few dozen parts. I know acceptable performance is kinda subjective, but we're talking about something only a rather masochistic Zen monk could put up with.

CATIA just strikes me as a huge bloated POS sometimes, so we'd probably like to try something a bit leaner.

Marc Jaxa-Rozen
École Polytechnique de Montréal

[Jersey Tom]

Solidworks and Inventor both have very similar functionality. I use SW2005 at work and we have SW2004 in the design computer labs. Haven't played with Inventor since v9 beta.

SolidEdge, from what I've heard, is crappy.

When I was working on NASA payloads in Inventor it handled 100+ part assemblies surprisingly well, though SolidWorks also has a large-assembly mode and I haven't used it much recently.

What I liked about Inventor more than Solidworks is the Inventor interface is slightly more streamlined, and is hotkeyed nicely for high productivity without having to manually set a key for everything. Things are grouped a bit better IMO, for example there's only one extrude command and from there you can specify boss or cut, same with revolve, etc. Whereas Solidworks has a separate button/command for each. Less crap in your toolbars.

In addition, the SW releases seem to get more cartoony and maybe a bit too user friendly. '06 ships in June I believev.

In either case, both are good bets. Both are much more user friendly than Pro/E, and are much less expensive than CATIA or UG. Go find some resellers, get a demo, see what pricing deals you can work out.

Hope that helps

[TomF]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jersey Tom:
Both are much more user friendly than Pro/E, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ha definetly PRO-E to me is the most userunfriendly program there is. I do not mind doing something not according to it's definitions, but it should tell me more explicit. Also I would like it to be way more flexible; multiple ways to get some blended surface for instance, the program just gets me freaking frustrated.

[jonny8]

one piece of advice

DONT USE SOLID EDGE ITS SH*T!


can tell you that first hand

[Dr Claw]

*voice for solid edge*

i think SE is way better than solid works...it opens faster, saves faster, has the least clumbsy view-orientation feature that i've seen (so simple, but sooo important), and is way better at both surfacing and drafting, not to mention the combined data management that comes with it. i've never had a problem with large assemblies either (we are doing a huge ass 45 ft vehicle in it at work...and no real problems, so a formula car would be fine).

I also did the bodies for Lawrence Tech's 04 and 05 car in SE and had no problems skinning our cars, not to mention getting the data out of the computer, and into a 'plug', was a dream as well. my only complaint with solid edge is that the newer versions are looking more and more like SW....following the 'XP cartoonish icons" craze that is sweeping the software industry.

as far as straight parametric modeling, SE and SW are equal for the most part. SW has a slightly better dimensioning/sketching paradigm, but its not that hard to replicate in SE if your creative. in the end, for me, SE is a better program.

im currious though, what did solid edge do to you jonny8? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Travis Garrison]

I've got a couple of questions for you if you're planing on switching CAD systems...

Do you now or might you in the future want to do CNC programing?

What kind of FEA work do you want to do?

How detailed do you want to get with surfaces?

What kind of kinematics work do you want to do?

Do you want to be able to use an ergonomics workbench?

Have you looked at what is being used in industry? As in check out your ideal job...what do they use? Knowing a companies CAD system can help during the interview process...

Regarding large asemblies, I have noticed that SolidWorks tends to be a little easier on the machines...but I have also noticed huge differences in performance by playing with paging file size, graphics options, etc inside Catia. I can easily make a 3 ghz machine w/ a card and a gig of ram choke on a single part if I set up the options poorly....might be worth looking into your options if you haven't already.

-Travis Garrison
UW FSAE

[Jersey Tom]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Do you now or might you in the future want to do CNC programing? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dont think that play much role in terms of CAD systems. Yea UG has its own toolpath generation software but you definately pay for it, and MasterCAM has a much larger market share.

I've had no problems bringing solid models into MasterCAM from Inventor or Solidworks, though ususally I translate it to a parasolid first anyway. In any case there are a ton of converters available for many file formats, be it SW, IV, CATIA, Pro/E, or what have you.

While I'm at it though, if you want to be nice to your CNC programmers, stay away from splines in your designs. You can usually get away with using a couple of arcs, and if you do use arcs your program size will be MUCH smaller and easier to work with in general.

Or at least that's my opinion.

And having thought about it some more today I definately lean towards Inventor in the midrange CAD catagory.

[Charlie]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jonny8:
one piece of advice

DONT USE SOLID EDGE ITS SH*T!


can tell you that first hand </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow great advice and insight. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I have limited experience with Sollidworks and Pro-E. But I have lots of Solidedge experience. I think it has its limitations as far as complexity but it is very easy to learn and easy to use. If you don't understand how parametric CAD works and get your constraints messed up, it can be a nightmare, but that goes for any of the similar programs too.

Solidedge worked great for Auburn and it did everything we needed it to. I would recommend it.

[Travis Garrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jersey Tom:


I dont think that play much role in terms of CAD systems. Yea UG has its own toolpath generation software but you definately pay for it, and MasterCAM has a much larger market share. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

MaterCAM is not exactly the best system out there...only square stock definition, uber akward interface, poor modeling ability and nothing can compare having you cam system automaticaly detect and compensate for minor tweaks to the design.

MasterCAM's market share is largely due to $ not capability...I'm not familiar with UG's CAM workbench...but catia's is far more capable, and no mater how good the conversion gets I'll still prefer no conversion.

-Travis Garrison

[Denny Trimble]

Come on Travis, you know you love FeatureCAM... http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[JConway-UofManitoba]

right off the bat, some of this is gonna sound like salesman bs, cause I hear it everyday...but please remember that I am a fellow engineer....registered as an engineer in training, I don't promise stuff that doesn't exist or overly exaggerate on things....all are facts.

I am an FSAE alum and work for the largest solidworks reseller on the west coast. Prior to that, I worked for a Pro/E reseller back in canada. (and my FSAE program used pro/e 2001 and then eventually wildfire)

right off the bat.....the largest complaint about solidworks is large assembly performance but 90% of the time the people either have settings not set properly OR they don't have enough ram (or good enough computer) OR they have terribly planned assemblies with external references..etc. most common things are people working over networks, not in large assembly mode...etc. support for 64bit processors, unlimited ram and something else is in the works. when we got nearing completion of the FSAE car in 2004, my brand new dell laptop was at its limits of ram + CPU to be able to work with the whole assembly. I don't think pro/e's ability to handle large assemblies were much better. The suggestions that are posted above are VERY good ones...follow them.

i agree with the "Cartoony" look of solidworks...but since it is the only windows native CAD package, it will become more and more like windows. pro/e looks more professional, but who cares if its hard to use. i used to call solidworks "disney cad"....but that disney'ish look, allows you to run the program with a far less superior computer than say pro/e or catia.

ease of use....I WISH i would have had solidworks to learn CAD on. pro/e has a steep learning curve. but once you are proficient, you are good at pro/e and are hard to convert. the thing with pro/e is that it has SOO many features that you just won't have time to learn how to use. solidworks will get you into the program and get you going with it. its made to look like windows so most people can get up and rolling right away cause they know basic windows functionality.

as for an extrusion can be a cut or protrusion or a surface. I also agree....I have been submitting "enhancement requests" to solidworks since I started about this.....hopefully I'll see it in a future release of solidworks.

my suggestion for a new team is to look up the vars (value added resellers) in the area. see who will give you free software (finite element and solid modelling) also, see who is willing to support you guys for free. at my university, I had a good contact with the pro/e VAR who eventually hired me on. If I had a question, he'd come down or I could ask him anytime. Also, our school taught pro/e and had someone on staff that knew the program well. Our decision is made. NOW..i am the cad contact for that team and their university is possibly moving to solidworks......hopefully I'll see them move over to solidworks.

I do not think that you can beat what solidworks gives you. In the student package, you get photorendering, animating capabilities, a toolbox of like a million fasteners, cosmos works professional (nonlinear, linear, fatigue, thermal, buckling, frequency!) and you get floworks and I think you even get MOTION which is powered by ADAMS.

I am converted from Pro/e and have looked at catia, inventor, alibre....etc. I know where my vote goes for full out functionality, especially for people that have to learn and produce at the same time. look at sales and growth, solidworks over took pro/e like 2 years ago and is the innovator in the market. (the feature tree that you see in every program, was developped by solidworks!)

and i'll leave it with this...I have seen solidworks 2k6....(here comes the salesman thing....but like I said, I'm a fellow engineer and know how the software gets used...so it isn't a sales pitch) but one of the things that has been added will revolutionize CAD. especially with respect to something that affects all of us FSAE'ers.

if there are more q's about solidworks/cosmos works...let me know. anyone on the west coast, hit me with an e-mail and we can "talk" face to face if you want.

[GTmule]

"but one of the things that has been added will revolutionize CAD. especially with respect to something that affects all of us FSAE'ers."

hmmmmm, I'm guessing either better support of tubing structures, body/surface/composites type stuff.

As the the original question, solidworks, Handsdown.

I've got an entire car (more complex than FSAE) modelled in Sw, and it's slow, but I have a ton of bad references, too many mates, and haven't messed with settings at all. It can be slow, but not TOO painfully so.

[GTmule]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GTmule:
"but one of the things that has been added will revolutionize CAD. especially with respect to something that affects all of us FSAE'ers."

hmmmmm, I'm guessing either better support of tubing structures, or body/surface/composites type stuff.

As the the original question, solidworks, Handsdown.

I've got an entire car (more complex than FSAE) modelled in Sw, and it's slow, but I have a ton of bad references, too many mates, and haven't messed with settings at all. It can be slow, but not TOO painfully so. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Jersey Tom]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">MaterCAM is not exactly the best system out there...only square stock definition, uber akward interface, poor modeling ability and nothing can compare having you cam system automaticaly detect and compensate for minor tweaks to the design.

MasterCAM's market share is largely due to $ not capability...I'm not familiar with UG's CAM workbench...but catia's is far more capable, and no mater how good the conversion gets I'll still prefer no conversion. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm. Well I wouldn't use a CAM system for modelling anyway. I'll admit though the Mastercam 9.x core is so damn old. Its a DOS interface for cryin out loud. Mastercam X will be sweet I'm hoping, with its migration to the Windows kernel.

I wouldn't say its an awkward interface. Its different, yes. But within a week its right at your fingertips.

You can definately define cylindrical stock (even in Mill), at least in toolpath verification, which is the only place I use stock data. And you can tweak your geometry and regenerate the toolpath at the click of a button.

But before I sound like a reseller instead of a student, all I know is while until Mastercam X comes out it is lagging behind Surfcam et all in terms of interface, its still a very powerful package. And since a large market share of the CAD industry does not include an integrated CAM system, it is used pretty widely.

I wish our school or where I work had the cash to migrate to Unigraphics or CATIA. What makes their CAM systems so amazing?

[jonny8]

Dr CLaw,

We have designed and assembled our car in solid edge and although it has not been hurrendous it has been a pain. Myself and others have used solidworks and just feel its easier to pickup and more intuitive; saying that we have not worked on huge assemblies so do not know if it would slow down loads. Solid Edge is not bad, the feeling is that there are better programs out there. True though, the benefit is that your comp does not have to be that powerful to run it.

[Denny Trimble]

The main advantage I've heard the Catia guys talk about with CAM is that it's integrated into your model file, so if you change any dimensions, you don't have to re-program your toolpaths.

[Mike Cook]

Does anyone use IDEAS? We have been using it for the last two years and I have been quite impressed. I haven't had the chance to use other cad programs however, so I have nothing to compare to.

[Travis Garrison]

Denny's got it...that one thing makes a big difference.

The square stock thing is a big deal to me as well. Cylindrical doesn't really count, what I find I need sometimes is to be able to model EXACTLY what my stock looks like. For example if I'm going to machine some casting or purchased part...in catia I can do that. Then model my tool, tool holder, even the entire mill if I need to, and have the software let me know if I'm going to crash something.

MasterCAM is fine for probably 99% of what FSAE teams do...but at my last job I got to do some 5 axis work in MasterCAM and then in Catia and Catia easily pays for itself in time saved and crashes avoided.

I'm pretty sure Catia is DIRT cheap for educational purposes....so don't brush it off as too expensive until you've got a quote in hand...then ask for a donation http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In any case I'm just a huge CATIA fan and I'll get obnoxious about it whenever its brought up http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I think it's flat out got the best interface out there, the CAM package is quite respectable, it's FEA package is pretty userfreidly and powerful, it has an excellent human modeler, it has a kinematics package that I wish I knew more about...and one heckuvalot of companies use Catia which makes it a substaintialy more marketable skill than SW, SE, Inventor, IDEAS, etc...For that last reason alone I personaly would try to limit my choices to UG, Pro-E or Catia...

-Travis Garrison

[Jersey Tom]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I'm pretty sure Catia is DIRT cheap for educational purposes....so don't brush it off as too expensive until you've got a quote in hand...then ask for a donation Smile </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm. I'll look into it.

[Cement Legs]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Travis:

...For that last reason alone I personaly would try to limit my choices to UG, Pro-E or Catia...

-Travis Garrison </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I would agree. Well put Travis.

[Jarrod]

I have only used Unigraphics seriously (now NX3), having used a little AutoCAD and Solid Edge previously. The integrated F.E, CAM, drafting and motion make life a lot easier, and there are also human modelling packages and studio surfacing, but we have never had to purchase any of our licenses (we have been fortunate enough to have a sponsorship deal) so i can't comment on price. Everything is parametric, so if you change a model it is very simple to just update, and regenerate toolpaths, F.E meshes, drafts, motion parts etc at the click of a button. Solid Edge can do most of what UG can do, and the newest versions of UG, (NX3 and onwards, no longer called unigraphics) are combining functions from IDEAS, and Solid Edge into Unigraphics. I think Ideas has two more releases before it is fully absorbed into NX.
A lot of smaller companies in Australia use Solid Edge, because it can do most of what the bigger programs can at a lower price, and there are FE and CAM add ins available.

[Kirk Feldkamp]

In college I learned to use both Pro-E and Solidworks. Now at Honeywell I've learned to use CatiaV5, and let me tell you... it the hands down best solid modeling package out of the three! It is also a testament to its simplicity that I was able to become mostly proficient in Catia in less than a month. The add on utilities are great to have too. I regularly use generative shape design to do stuff (castings of turbocharger wheels and housings) that would be rediculous in Pro-E, and completely not possible in Solidworks. And if your team has some special need, Catia will have the add on to do it.

On an employment note, I think most of the major companies in the U.S. use Catia now.

-Kirk

[Jersey Tom]

Wow I have to admit CATIA looks dead sexy and pretty mighty. I'd love to learn it and get some more leverage in the job market.

And student liscenses are DIRT cheap, $100 a seat! .... if your university already has a liscensing deal. Which we don't. We have 60 liscenses of SolidWorks and some amount of full COSMOS liscenses, which I'm sure was a decent investment.

Gonna have to look into this some more.

Edit -

Might be worth mentioning, our former senior design engineer at my real job recently moved on to Lockheed Martin. 10 years experience in space life science research payload design and integration, and assorted stuff before that. He's a huge Inventor fan, natural progression since he had worked so much in AutoCAD before. Good engineer. Anyway, for what its worth..

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The two seats of CATIA they aquired for our program cost $--,--- total (edited out, almost 6 digits though), and from what I've seen, I'm not impressed. These high end systems handle surfaces much better than the mid-range modellers, like SW and IV, but that gap is closing. I brought my PC with IV9 beta to work one week because we couldn't get the CATIA guy to work fast enough to make our deadlines and everyone here was just blown away with what I was doing, especially when I told them the top end IV package costs around $8,500. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[TTU Phantom]

alright, certified draftsman here...

inventor... pro.


the sketching system is by far the most superb of any solid modeling system, hands down. it is a direct port from the autocad functions that we've all gornw up with, and it easliy pulls in dwg and dfx files. there are also translator programs to make it easier to port to other 3d systems.

but here is the nicest part...

ANSYS... inventor 9 pro comes with a basic ansys built fea. it beats cosmos (the version inside solidworks) because it offers more options as far as force loads and distro across your part (including moments, gravity loads, and bearing loads). this functionality also has a direct export to ansys function. on my personal machine i run ansys 9 workbench as well as multi-physics and inventor 9 pro... everything works phenominal together.


i say inventor... hands down.

[Jersey Tom]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">it is a direct port from the autocad functions that we've all gornw up with </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well not all of us...mechanical design in AutoCAD is a bit before my time

Haha just messin with ya.

Still beats me why we migrated to SW from IV. We had a site liscense, could install as many copies as we wanted for some yearly amount of money, without the current floating-liscense system we have now.

Oh well. The powers that be...

[rjwoods77]

turbotwig,

so that means you can get us a solid model of a gt12. Hey, thats real cool buddy. When can we expect it? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

By the way, where could one pick up an educational version of Catia and for how much? Is it pronounce "kay-sha" or "ka-tee-ahh"?

One of the reasons i like soldiwroks is because evryone has it if they have 3d. It used to be inventor by everyone here in upstate ny uses soldiworks now. If anything requires complicated 3d surfacing(molds, plastics designs) they use pro/e. I personally hate pro-e but it is really powerfull compared to solidworks but I dont know how it compares with UG or catia.

I really dig solidworks because it is easy to use, very popular, and in that packaged student release for 150 bucks that has full solidworks and full cosmos stuuf, it is perty much unbeatable.

One a side note, my model has every last piece in it, almost everything is associated to something else, evrything down to the rod ends are fully articulated and i dont really have any problems with it. I guess it is all in how you model stuff. Making configurations and lightweight parts makes life alot easier. This is all running off a dell dimension 8400 that i bought.

[Jersey Tom]

If your school has a liscensing deal set up with the CATIA folks (pronounced CAT-ee-uh), you can get an educational version for $100 from engineering.com

If not (my situation), well I dunno. But it would be cool if someone did.

[rjwoods77]

Kind of goofy put i really like programs that spend time of the GUI. I really got annoyed at pro-e on their sketcher because it was hard to see whta was going on in the sketch, the words and numbers looked cheezy, etc. It really just makes things easier to work with if you dont have to double take everything you are working on.

[Carbaholic]

There are a lot of strong-opinioned posts in here, but I don't know if any of them have really answered the original question.

I use CATIA V5, so I am definitely Biased, and will tell you how great I think it is. The important thing, however, is to determine what your needs are and find the CAD system that best fits those needs.

Eric

[Didier Beaudoin]

Thanks for all the replies. I think that since I have quite a bit of experience in CATIA, I'll stick with it. I've never tried to play in the settings, so maybe I can find something that helps with big assemblies. Does anyone know how to set up CATIA to make it go faster?

Also, I've had a course on the CNC programming module and it's pretty good. In fact it's way better than the other method I've used, which is manual programming... http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Carbaholic]

The Main thing that makes it slow is Graphics, so playing with the graphics settings will help, and simply hiding parts that you don't need to look at will help.

[Mark Bacchetti]

Here are a couple tricks to make CATIA go faster...

Software tricks:
1. Right click on whatever shortcut to CATIA you use and in the "Target" text box add " c" at the end of the line. This will tell CATIA not to load a new CATPart on startup.
2. Make sure you have no floating toolbars in your model workspace. I have heard from developers that floating toolbars will slow things down a bit (at least during startup).
3.In Tools&gt;Options, you can change all of your rendering options to make your models a bit faster.
4. Don't open CATIA with ANY other programs.

Unfortunately, these software tricks really do not do much for CATIA on a slow computer. You really need to purchase a fast CPU, a fast harddrive, LOTS of RAM, and a good workstation video card.

Aerospace and Auto industries are bitching a lot about CATIA's speed so DS knows its a problem. Hopefully R15/R16 will start addressing that problem a bit more.

-Mark
Cal Poly Pomona

[Bubba]

I have experience with Pro E, CATIA, IDEAS, SW 03,04,05, AutoCAD, and UG NX2. I can't go into great detail, but I work with models of certain cast parts for every major car manufacturer. Needless to say, I do alot of translating from one format to the next. CATIA V4 and V5 are the most commonly used in this industry, followed by UG, and IDEAS (obviously Ford). SolidWorks and ProE is rarely seen, and other packages are practically non-existant except for third-party translators and patch creators such as 'Magics.'

Despite all of that, I am choosing SolidWorks 2005 for our team because for most modelling and manufacturing work that we do, it is more than capable. For the hardware we have, SW runs efficiently. It is also by far the easiest for new-comers to learn. As for analysis, don't use Cosmos, especially not Cosmos Express if you can avoid it. My FEA experience is limited to IDEA's, but hopefully I will have time to pick up on a new package.

There is no black and white answers for what software packages teams should use. I'm merely adding my 2 cents to add to the apparent trend.

[Denny Trimble]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bubba:
As for analysis, don't use Cosmos, especially not Cosmos Express if you can avoid it. My FEA experience is limited to IDEA's... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why do you say not to use COSMOS? I understand Cosmos Express (free with SW) is very limited, but the Cosmos/Works package ($6k commercial price) has been very useful for us.

If you don't learn how to apply loads and restraints intelligently, or how make sure your mesh is good, you can screw up in any FEA package.

The only things we don't use Cosmos/Works for are the frame (we use beam elements in Algor or Ansys) and composites (we use Ansys). It's very quick and easy to do design iterations when the FEA program is linked to the CAD program. No need for file exports and imports, and re-definition of loads, constraints, and materials. Just change the model, rebuild, remesh, re-run, and record the results.

I don't have extensive experience in any other FEA packages, but please enlighten me with the shortcomings you see in Cosmos/Works.

[Dr Claw]

They didnt like cosmos at TRW...it was mainly for designers, or preliminary FEA type things. there was also a list of studys that you could, and couldnt do. for the ones that you couldnt, you had to send it to the FEA department. of course, there was also an FEA dept. that wanted to keep their jobs, so who really knows.

I personaly dont like cosmos either, as there is something to be said about all the shiny bells and whistles that cosmos and SW has, compared against their track record of features that get introduced with new releases, and then dont work for 3 years....case in point, anbody ever use dome, or shape in SW? they just dont work in any practical way http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. im just skeptical of most of what they cram into SW..its also a source of my preference to SE as well.

slight rant, but i've used, and been paid by both for going on 6 years now.

[rjwoods77]

Just because you dont use soemthing doesnt mean you should question it worth. "I dont need to learn this because I am never going to use it". We all have said that at one time or another. Fact is you do end up using sometime if you have to use if for something. Alot of SW newer "flashy unusable" features are for plastics design, mold design ,etc. They dont go throught the trouble just to make it flashy because people will buy it. It all has uses for different things. I guess pro-e is complete dog shit because it has a billion things in there menus to use that never get used. Your saying the same thing. Its used, just not for amature modeling like we do in formula. I say amature because I have worked with guys that did that very complicated shit that I was always scared of. Stuff that made me go "oh.... thats what that is for."

[MikeWaggoner at UW]

The new version of ANSYS has a Solidworks (SW) plugin, so modeling/switching is a lot quicker now. This is word of mouth from guys in industry I know.

I like having everything truly integrated, like Cosmos/SW, or Catia/Catia FEA/Catia NC. I think Catia is a little better choice since you can do NC easily, and adjust your part etc. The FEA has a couple more features than Cosmos also.

I found it really helpful in Catia NC to have my part and stock drawn exactly, and then being able to make dummy parts and having it avoid them to hit them separately, so I could do them later.

However, if your school has shitty CAD labs, or you computer sucks, SW is better because it's relatively quick on a slow computer(three legged horse, instead of dead horse) compared to Catia.

One gripe I have about SW is that it does weird shit on some part exports. Try making an egg shape part through rotation, and then exporting it via IGES and STEP. The surface is broken up. It also adds extra lines sometimes.

[Dr Claw]

well, for all that i've done in SW, there is truth to what i said. its also not a "dont need to learn this because im not going to use it", its a "lets learn this.....wait, this feature doesnt ever work, or is sooooo touchy that its not even worth USING". it doesnt seem to work until 3-4 releases down the line too.

but anyways, flashy and solidworks go hand in hand. the local reseller came through last year trying to get an exclusive CAD contract with formula and tried to brag about their spaceframe suite. you should have seen how easy you could gusset square tube to square square (because there is a flat face..). i asked them if you could gusset round to round because thats what we use and he waffled all over the place. i got all sorts of excuses http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Travis Garrison]

Sorry to re-hash a dead thread, but I stumbled upon this .pdf that reviews some suggested settings for Catia V5 and I figured it might help Didier setup catia a little better...

http://www.engineering.com/content/COPS/pdf/june/v5_options.pdf

Its from the puget sound catia operators group...

-Travis Garrison
UW FSAE

[Didier Beaudoin]

Thanks Travis, I'll try that tomorrow!

[Didier Beaudoin]

Talking about CATIA, I've had a rather annoying bug for a while. When I try to make a drawing and I want to do it in inches, no matter what units I choose in the options, everything comes up in millimeters. The inches work fine in drafting. Does anyone have an idea?

[jerry_jacob]

Getting back to the question of modeling an entire car in CATIA...
Based on my experience in Pro/E all you have to do is drop the quality of the model (that is display quality) in the display settings. There must be a similar option in CATIA. You dont need very high shading and edge quality algorithms to be running.
The model should not appear very poor and things should move and rotate fairly fast.
There are other options if this does not work for you.

[Carbaholic]

What Release are you using? The bugs change from release to release http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Eric

[Wulfgang]

Catia...the best solid modeling package...

OK, now that I've stopped laughing, Catia v4 is a complete joke but it's probably only still around because DCX hasn't made the switch to v5 yet and v5 is about as un-user-friendly a package as I have seen. The learning curve is much, much steeper than with NX because it lacks the intuitiveness.

It also lacks the horsepower of NX in a myriad of ways.

I have used v4 & v5 (and I-Deas) and they aren't even in the same league as UG NX or NX2 for pure solid modeling. And anyone who has had extensive experience on both systems would completely agree (as all of my friends who have, do).

If that's not enough, Dassault Systems is a French company which is reason enough to dislike it.

Catia...the best solid modeler....hahahahahaha...snarf...hehehehehe...a-hem....a-hem....Aaaaanyway.....

[Keith C]

If you want to work in the automotive or aerospace industry, I suggest using CATIA V5.

The student price for CATIA is pretty low, so the sometimes prohibitively high price of CATIA isn't a factor for an FSAE team.

[nathan s]

We have used I-deas for several years. It is the most powerful program I have ever worked with. Granted, it is not the easiest program to work with. Most people who despise it, don't have a CAD background, and therefore have worlds of trouble learning to use it. You can do FEA, CAM, and animation with it. The only problem that we really ran into is that it doesn't like drawing a tube-frame chassis very much. At least, it didn't like the way we were drawing it last year.

None of this matters any more, because I-deas will no longer exist after v11. It is evolving into a program called NX, which is supposed to be more drawing oriented. I-deas and Solid Edge are sister companies, and are, therefore, becoming more alike. I am not sure of how well you can go between the two though.

We are currently trying to decide between Solid Edge and NX, but I think we will have access to both.

[nathan s]

On a side note, some people might like to know that I-deas is developed by 6 or 7 people up in Cinncinati. Just thought that was pretty cool. Also, Solid Edge is developed here in Huntsville.