Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: "Mark Mossberg" <Poundsandspammers@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 01:50:05 GMT
Ken,
Kinda figured you did know, just a terminology thing.
I just know that I've never had a problem saving recent Solidworks files
into any older kernal file,,,yet.
Don't know about ACIS, but parasolid really only uses two types surfaces,
analytic, and algorithmic. Analytic covers several sub types, planar,
revolved, etc., and algorithmic covers the rest including most fillets. This
basic surface math hasn't changed much (if at all) over the years. What has
changed are the kernal level functions used to manipulate them.
Mark
"Ken" <k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:44fef783$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mark,older
I know what SAT/Parasolid file formats are. I know the specific
modelers feature history is removed and that the result is a native rep of
the internally stored B-rep model. My point is, if an app using Parasolid
V18 saves a X_T file out to an earlier version, the risk is that some
geometry may have to be approximated or completely removed due to the
inability of an earlier Parasolid version to support it. The same is true
for ShapeManager as well as ACIS based products.
And "Neutral" was not what I wanted to use. I was looking for something
that meant translationless.
Being that they are geometry kernel models, there is no translation when
sending them to another app using the same kernel (unless it is a much
version). So it is more of a geometry "exchange". In fact, apps based onto
the same kernel can often times directly open another apps files and get
it's geometry by directly reading the Parasolid stream from the file, andit
is fast as there is no conversion.information.
Ken
"Mark Mossberg" <Poundsandspammers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:CKrLg.8286$yO7.6913@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ken,
Neither .sat (ACIS) or .x_b/t (Parasolid) carry over feature
descriptions.They aren't neutral formats, they are kernal level geometry
versionAll they contain is B-rep information, faces, vertices, boundary curves,
etc. You end up with a dumb solid.
Solidworks can read parasolid back to version 8, and acis back to
software1.6. This seems to be the rule rather than the exception with CAD
Shapemanagerthese days. The only system that I know of that won't read older kernal
level files is U.G.. And they may have changed of late.
There will come a time when it may be an issue for I.V. though. I don't
think reading older versions comes for free. There must be at least a
minimal amount of coding necessary to maintain it.
Mark
"ken" <goaway@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:edl7u7$2uh$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The fact that Inventor reads/writes ACIS V7 files does no good when therest
of the industry is using ACIS V15. So if Autodesk developed
(V7),beyond the capabilities that existed when they took the source code
performand Spatial developed ACIS beyond the capabilities of V7, then any appusing
a newer version of ACIS and the current version of Inventor must
oramodel.
conversion to render the internally stored model back to a V7 format
What do you think happens with any features that required the newerversion
to exist??? That is not a neutral geometry transfer!.files.
Ken
"MM" <markm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:aOnLg.6178$tU.1117@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ken,
Actually, Inventor will read and write standard ACIS version 7 .sat
We have a vendor in the U.K. that's using it.
We also have a new client that's currently using Solid Edge, they're
switching over to Solidworks. Not because of capability, but because
everyone they deal with uses Solidworks.
Mark
"ken" <goaway@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:edhcvu$qvb$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
That's no choice! That's like saying "choose between the Cadillac
athe
KIA". UGS Solid Edge V19 and SolidWorks 2006 is a choice. Both on
ofstable
and capable modeling kernel (Parasolid from UGS), both use a state
forthe
art 2D/3D constraint manager (D-cubed from UGS), and both backed by
companies/personnel who have been involved with 3D mechanical CAD
whichmore
than 2 decades.
Inventor employs a modified version of the ACIS modeling kernel
Information)is
directnot
used in any mid-high end CAD software. They are now responsible for
their
own development and do not have an open data model, so their is no
publishedmodel transfer format such as their is with Parasolid (X_T, X_B).Inventor
is behind both Solid Edge and SolidWorks in maturity, and their
unopenedsales are a farce as they now bundle it with ACAD and most of thethey
seats
claim to have sold are still sitting on a customers shelf in an
box. Just ask if Inventor has PMI (Product Manufacturing
choiceProductcapability which allows annotation of a 3D model per ASME Y14.41
Data Definition. Both Solid Edge V19 and SolidWorks 2006 do!
Ken
<jas.randhawa007@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1157366734.802873.3690@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
hi,
i need to buy a 3d software for solid modelling. i have a
softwarebetween solidworks2006 & inventor11. so plz advise as to which
i should buy. also plz give some points to support your opinion.
.
- References:
- solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: jas . randhawa007
- Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: ken
- Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: MM
- Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: ken
- Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: Mark Mossberg
- Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- From: Ken
- solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- Prev by Date: Re: Part, Gate & Runner Analysis
- Next by Date: Re: Scale assembly
- Previous by thread: Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- Next by thread: Re: solidworks2006 vs inventor11
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|