Solidworks / Alibre Observations

[wfpelletier]

Re: SolidWorks/Alibre Observations

In an earlier post on this thread, I explained where I thought Alibre had significant shortcomings compared to SolidWorks. These are things I think Alibre does better than SolidWorks:

1. I think Alibre makes much better use of the mouse than SolidWorks does. I really like the way I can use my 'wheeled' mouse to pan, zoom, and rotate my way around a part or assembly model. I find that in SolidWorks, I am constantly clicking on the icons in the toolbar for these same functions. Alibre does this far better than SolidWorks!

2. I like the 'view reference geometry' feature in the right-click menu when working in assembly models in Alibre. (I don't know if SolidWorks has added this feature since the 2003 version, but if they haven't, they definitely should!)

3. Even though I think a few others may disagree, I prefer the way parts in assemblies can be moved and rotated in Alibre over the same functions in SolidWorks. I like the way Alibre shows the coordinate axis directions, and makes it very easy to move and rotate parts in specific directions. I notice a few people have posted that they like the way SolidWorks does the move and rotate operations, but I personally hope
Alibre leaves these functions alone!

4. And most of all, I like the price of Alibre vs. the price of SolidWorks. This is probably the single biggest reason that I bought Alibre. In particular, the 'Professional' version of Alibre has many functions (the repository being the most important one to me) that SolidWorks only has for much more money. I am still especially astounded that Alibre gives away the 'XPress' version of its software. In my opinion, this was the single greatest thing they ever did for the CAD community, besides the creation of Alibre itself.

I look forward to reading the observations of others regarding how Alibre compares to other softwares. I also look forward to seeing how Alibre grows in the future.

wfpelletier

 

[Gaspar]

Re:

Moving right along........

3. With AD, mouse wheel zoom occurs about the center of the current screen. As such when one zooms in, when you zoom in the reverse of that, the part stays centered from the previous zoom. In SW, for what ever reason, this centering does not happen. It appears that the zoom recenters and the part sort of zig - zags out of sight. This is one of these observations that one might have to see to understand what I am talking about.

4. Rotating after a zoom, with SW, when you zoom in on a part and then rotate, the center of the rotation is with respect to the current screen. This allows you to zoom in tight, say on a corner of a part, and then rotate without the part moving relative to a rotation point outside of the current view window causing the detail you want to see quickly moving out of sight - as is the case with AD!

...

Bill,

As it was said by Miles, what you describe in point 3 has been requested as an enhacement to AD. It was referred to as "cursor centered zooming" and it is soooooooooooooooo much better than screen centered zooming once you get used to it.

About point 4, I just can't understand why Alibre handles rotation as it does, it honestly just doesn't make sense to me. I just can't find any logic around having to save rotation points. It is like if you had to walk out of the car and sign a log book every time you turned around a corner.

I really (really really really) wish Alibre would include these two features: Cursor centered zooming and screen centered rotation.

Worst thing is that I think our cherished developers could do that over a coffee break.

Edit: I had written "card" instead of "car".

 

[jwknecht]

Re:

7. SW can replace components in an assy. Can't do this with AD.

You can do it, but not with a direct command. With the Assy closed, move the part that you want to be replaced somewhere such that it won't be found (if you are using Repositories, then move it to another repository), or if you are sure trash it.

Then, open the Assy. When it opens it will prompt you that it cannot find such and such part and ask you to replace it. Browse to the part that you want and hit the replace button.

 

[Gaspar]

Hello John,

Another way to achieve this if you have the repository is to open the new part (the one that will replace the old part) and do a save as on top of the old part. Unlike other software, Alibre will allow you to save on top of the other file as a new version.

You may want to create a copy of the old part before overwriting it and also, because the overwrite operation was handled as a new version of the old part, you can always go back to the way it was before the "overwrite".

 

[indesign]

I simply rename my old part that I wish to replace before opening the assembly. I would like the option however to do this while Alibre is open and it is in the enhancement requests.

 

[lcguias]

Hi,

How is the speed if you compare SW and Alibre?.

In one of the post it was mentioned that Alibre slows down at assy around 150 parts.
In my experience you can see a speed reduction starting with 50parts and this is only in 3D.
In 2D I don't believe that you can make a drawing of an assy with 150 parts.

Maybe is only my computer

Dan

 

[Mibe]

SW is a bit more efficient when it comes to 2D drawings (at this point) but you should definately be able to create 2D Drawings 1500 components or more. As I write this I'm testing a 1800 component assembly

If it slows down radically there is usually one of two things that is the problem:
1. Two or more components in the assembly are colliding
2. One or more part files have errors, usually imported ones.This causes serious errors when drawings are created, but it's not always visible, it's just annoying since it takes forever to create views. Make sure to always "check part" when importing neutral cad files.

 

[Gaspar]

Mibe,

Spilling wisdom around here again huh?

Could you expand somehow on both points (colliding and imported parts with errors)?

Thanks in advance

 

[Mibe]

Not sure if it's wisdom, but these are things I've noticed...

Collision:
This seem to make Alibre "confused" when drawing views are created, it takes some time to generate views of "negative masses" (the voids that occur when two solids collide). This was also a big problem for SolidWorks in the past but perhaps it's fixed there?

Faulty parts:
This is a really sneaky one. If a part is imported (IGES for example) and then used in an assembly the error is inherited. If the faulty part is a component that is used on many locations (screw etc) the error is almost logaritmic in it's behavior. For example, a quite simple assembly with 200 parts can take 10 minutes or more to generate, if 10 of the parts are instances of a faulty IGES-file. Every extra view created then takes 5-10 minutes!

If that file is exchanged with a correct file (STEP) it takes 30 seconds to create the drawing and 5-10 seconds for each Detail- or broken view. The difference is so obvious that I have tested this on several assemblies and they all give the same result!

Ok, let's hear it - I PROMISE THAT I ALWAYS WILL CHECK IMPORTED PARTS AND CHECK FOR COLLISIONS BEFORE CREATING A DRAWING!

 

[Gaspar]

I do 8)

(I'm standing with a hand on my heart)

 

[leeave96]

Some of the obversations I post may be duplicated from earlier ones. Sometimes it is on purpose to emphasis the merit - or lack there of for the software's particular function.

Today:

1. REPOSITORY!!!!!!!! If you don't have some sort of system in place to keep stuff checked-in/out, there is potential for trouble! Repository is a nice feature to rename parts and move them around.

2. When editing patterns in SW, in addition to the normal menu of options, there is an additional dialog present on the graphics screen that shows, for example in a linear pattern, the number and spacing. Very nice.

3. Not sure how AD does this, but in SW, the plotted line widths are with respect to the line width for a given type of line. For example center line is thin, part geometry is normal and section lines are thick. These settings also drive what you see on the screen - sooooooo, if you have a crowded part, the normal and thick lines really make the screen crowded. I like my screen to show nice thin/crisp lines - regardless of the line weight and then print the line widths at their desired pen thicknesses.

4. AD has a nice feature in that if you pick a linear edge and a circle you are presented with a dialog to pick circle center, tangent, etc on the fly. SW requires more button clicks to get the same - this is a pain.

5. Decimal precision: SW = 8, AD = 6. I'm not sure what this means in terms of model accuracy, but it use to be a big deal in my old UG days. I think at that time, UG = 18. 6 is easier to remember....

6. SW will display a sketch radius as a diameter. I'm not sure AD will.

Bill

 

[moyesboy]

"6. SW will display a sketch radius as a diameter. I'm not sure AD will"

AD initially displays all incomplete circles as a radius. However you can then change the property of the radius so the dim displays the diameter (likewise complete circles always give a diameter and you can change the display to radius afterward).

Now Unfortunately changing this property does not change the entry in the equation editor (that I prefer to call the variables list).
So you dimension an arc and get 8mm you get a value of R=8 in the equation editor.
You change the property to diameter and the dim now shows 16mm.
Later you want to create an equation using this diameter value and scroll up and down the eq editor and D=16 is nowhere to be found because the associated variable is actually R=8 still!

 

[leeave96]

As I come-up to speed on SW, lots of things I have found to date are being repeated, as such, differences are beginning to slow as will the frequency of my posts.

More stuff:

1. It seems like SW is so busy trying to predict your next move, that sometimes it launches new menus that prevent you from clicking on something else for a different action. Soooo, loose your train of thought, hit the escape a couple of times and back to work.

2. Initial drawing view placement is confusing. AD is MUCH better.

3. SW will allow a pick for a dimension at a midpoint of a edge - I think this is what I remember!

4. SW sketch will allow one to drag an arc into a closed circle and dimension the sketch as a diameter. I haven't been able to get AD to do this.

5. AD is much easier at adding additional drawing sheets.

6. Back in my old UG days, one of the biggest gripes from new users was the incridible amount of menus (read functionality) and it took training to get it right. Lots of stuff was not logical or out front in your face to find when you were trying to make geometry. In my veiw, this is now the case with SW. So many menus! AD is much cleaner and simpler - sort of like SW use to be.

More later,
Bill

 

[leeave96]

More stuff!

1. SW makes it very easy to move a sketch to another plane. Haven't tried this with AD, so I don't know how they compare.

2. When you zoom in on a sketch with AD and the sketch dimension is off screen, you can click on the leader of the dimension and the skech dimension dialog will pop to where the mouse arrow is. SW doesn't do this - soooo, it's zoom out, change the dim and zoom in.

3. I like the way when you exit editing a part in the context of an assembly that you can just hit the save button in AD. AD allows you to save all assemblies up the tree while you save the part at one time. SW is confusing to me on this. It appears that you have to pick between the assembly or the part being edited to save.

4. For reasons I cannot figure - yet after you create a part in SW and then later edit one of the sketches, when you go to add a dimension, there is no dimension dialog that you can set the dimension value. This is present in AD.

5. I have observed and reported that it seems my line weight and icons are large in SW vs on the same machine AD. I cured this problem for AD by cranking-up to the max the resolution on my screen settings. There ought to be an optional WYSIWYG to print disconnect.

More later,
Bill

 

[garethconner]

Interesting discussion, I have switched over to SW for all new work but just recently used Alibre to edit some older files that I haven't translated into SW.

A couple of things to add (my apologies if some of these have already been mentioned):

1. Speed when sketcing. SW, on my machine with similar designs, is an order of magnitude faster when editing/creating sketches in context of medium-sized assemblies (100 - 200 parts). In fact, I'm writing this message while waiting for Alibre to update sketch dimensions while editing in context.

2. Speed when drawing. SW handles 2d drawings much faster than Alibre. Views are generated within seconds (if not instantly). Where some of my drawings in Alibre take minutes to regenerate.

3. Axes. I miss having the 'world' axes. Alibre has not only the default planes, but also the default x,y,z reference axes. I don't know why (or perhaps I've missed it) SW only starts new parts with the default world planes. A small nuissance, but it seems like almost every sketch requires that I draw construction lines from the origin constrained vertical & horizontal. In Alibre I can just reference the default axes in a sketch.

4. Repository. Though it took some getting used to, I find the Alibre repository is still much more convenient and intuitive than PDMWorks in SW.

5. E-Drawings. The SW eDrawings plug-in is a lot slicker than ModelPress. In particular, I like that you can generate an EXE that has the viewer and drawing embedded. Also you can package drawing sheets and model views in the same single file. I don't remember ModelPress capable of these things.

6. Smart components. The library parts in SW toolbox are very nice. You can drag and drop bolts etc. into a model and they will snap and mate into holes appropriately.

7. Configurations. In SW, when you edit a dimension or mate you can select to apply the edit to specfic configuration or to all configs. I haven't gotten very deep into Alibre's config tools, but I don't see a way to apply mate & dimension edits to all configs (or a selection of configs). Which means there's a lot of bouncing back and forth between configurations supressing/unsupressing/editing dimensions if you want to apply a change to all (or a selection) configurations.

I have come to enjoy SW slick feel and fancy options. However, the thing that originally drove me to SW was the speed issue. I was spending too many nights in the wee hours waiting for Alibre to generate a drawing, or watching an assembly struggle to update after a dimension was edited. Today, all of that was reinforced while editing an old assembly and the process crawled along. I'm still keeping my Alibre maintenance fees up to date, because if Alibre gets a big boost in speed one of these days I feel confident that I could live without SW extra features. However, as a small business owner that has to play a lot of different roles I can't afford to sit around and wait for my CAD software.

 

[Gaspar]

Great input Gareth. Thanks a lot.

Just one dumb question. I assume you're comparing apples to apples. I mean, the designs you're dealing with in Alibre and SW are sufficiently alike as to make a fair speed comparison?

 

[garethconner]

Hi Gaspar,

Good question. They are similar assemblies, but not identical. Roughly same part count/type of construction. One of these days I'll have to recreate one of my Alibre assemblies in SW so that I can see a true apples to apples comparison.

I'm in the middle of a fairly large project (well, large for me) in SW and it is handling it very well. It's a 32' diameter turntable (donut-style so the center is open) with several hundred components. The assembly is very responsive and I can edit parts in-context without a noticeable speed hit.

By comparison, last year when building a triple drum lineshaft hoist the Alibre assembly got to the point that it would take a minute or two to edit a sketch dimension & drawing files were talking 1/2 hour to generate. I haven't opened that file yet in AD 9 to see how it behaves, so it may have improved.

 

[garethconner]

One more thing...

Weldments. In SW there is a weldment part that is very handy for modeling structural frames. The entire 'assembly' of welded members is contained in a single part document. From that part, cutlists can be automatically generated with profile (angle, tubing, etc.), length, and angle at each end of the tube. The guys on the floor appreciate having a drawing with the cutlist already generated

The framing is placed in reference to sketches (either 2d or 3d), and you locate how the framing should be aligned with the sketch. You can reference key points in the profile and align those with the sketch path. After all the framing is placed, you use a 'trim/extend' tool to cut the ends of the tubing flush with faces of other structural members or coped to the profile (such as round tubing strucutures with coped joints). SW comes with a bunch of pre-made profiles which you can add to since the profiles are just 2d sketches saved as part files.

I don't remember anything similar in Alibre, but please let me know if this is an oversight.

 

[sbenzie]

Re:

I have come to enjoy SW slick feel and fancy options. However, the thing that originally drove me to SW was the speed issue. I was spending too many nights in the wee hours waiting for Alibre to generate a drawing, or watching an assembly struggle to update after a dimension was edited. Today, all of that was reinforced while editing an old assembly and the process crawled along. I'm still keeping my Alibre maintenance fees up to date, because if Alibre gets a big boost in speed one of these days I feel confident that I could live without SW extra features. However, as a small business owner that has to play a lot of different roles I can't afford to sit around and wait for my CAD software.

What gareth says here is exactly my love, hate relasionship with Alibre. I really like the easy of use and the thoughtful way Alibre is laid out, but the speed issue [and sometimes figuring the work arounds] can be painful for us working in a commerical enviroment.

We are sticking with it, but the frustration does raise it's head @ times :roll:

 

[dgstoll]

Re:

One more thing...

Weldments. In SW there is a weldment part that is very handy for modeling structural frames. The entire 'assembly' of welded members is contained in a single part document. From that part, cutlists can be automatically generated with profile (angle, tubing, etc.), length, and angle at each end of the tube. The guys on the floor appreciate having a drawing with the cutlist already generated

I hope Alibre pays some serious attention to weldments. we just had a SW demo and it was very impressive. I am trying Alibre in a fab shop enviroment will probably use acad for final dimenioning due to the 0'-xx" issue. Going around changing dim properties for dims under 12" is a waste of time...

daveS