Solidworks / Alibre Observations

[jwknecht]

That is interesting to hear that SW handles similar assys and drawings much faster than Alibre. I am working on cleaning up an Alibre project that I did a few months ago in version 8. I can tell you that version 9 is not any faster. If anything, it is slower. I am really getting frustrated with the waiting on this project. Fortunetly, the majority of my projects don't have the same issue.

Perhaps if SW has found the secret to speed, Alibre will follow suite soon.

 

[jwknecht]

Re:

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.

In Alibre, if you want the changes to apply to certain configurations, you make sure that the configurations that you want to apply the changes to are "unlocked." Then, you apply the changes. The changes will affect the active configuration, as well as any unlocked configuration. You can lock or unlock by type too.

 

[garethconner]

John,

Thanks for the tip, that's good to hear.

 

[leeave96]

More stuff:

1. Convert a sketch line to a reference line in SW, click the line, find the dialog, click a check mark. AD, just right click and pick convert to reference.

2. I like how in AD you can apply units of measure to the document or system or both.

3. I like the method of how AD allows one to place a plane tangent to a cylinder.

4. I imported a parasolid file into SW. Two edges were touching (it was a sheet metal part), for what ever reason, I couldn't get SW to unbend the part or rip the edges and trying to sketch/cut a gap wouldn't work either. Sooooo, I exported it out as an ACIS file to AD, fixed the problem, back into SW and I am going again.

*** WARNING, DRAFTING AHEAD ****

I am starting to do some heavy drafting in AD and will be over the next month or so. Have not really used AD in drafting much yet, but I have read a lot of stuff here about it. I'll be giving my observations as to drafting between SW & AD.

Bill

 

[Terry Pea]

AD vs SW

Bill,

Along with Gaspar, I want to thank you for the effort you put into your comparisons. Please keep it up.

I've been using SW since version 97 and now am using 2004. I've also been using Pro/E since version 4 and am now using WildFire-2. I have used Mechanical Desktop since V1 and SolidDesigner when it was ME-30 (I worked at HP where and when it was created). I have only recently started using AD. This is all just to give you my reference point.

That said, I will just try to help you do better, at least with SW. I've read the first three pages (of 5) posts regarding these feature comparisons and had to note some of these "clues" for you. I know some readers have responded to some items, so I hope this isn't too redundant...

You had stated;
AD is easier to find mates than SW. SW buries them in folders within the part assy tree.
Also stated that, it's hard to see what's mated to what.

In SW, the constraints are shown at the bottom of the list in the explorer window of the assembly you are working on. And their names can be changed in either SW or AD. However, in SW the names are shown followed (within parenthesis) the names of the two parts being constrained. I think this is a strong plus for identifying what's attached to what.

You stated;
Renaming a plane, etc in SW is harder. You have to carefully double click on it and hope you don't launch yourself into editing the mate. With AD, you just right click and rename.

In SW, pick the plane (right-hand) and hit F2 (left-hand). This is Windows compliance for renaming. It's actually pretty easy. You can use it in Microsoft Explorer, on your desktop, or just about anywhere MS controls the filename.

You wrote;
AD has vertical and horizontal sketch constraints for center points. I don't think AD has this. (I guess you meant you don't think SW has it.)

SW does have vertical and horizontal constraining. In SW sketcher, pick two points and both of those constraints will appear as selectable, along with the anchor icon (fix) and merge.

You mentioned there are too many icons.
If you click on Views, click the Tollbars fly-out and click on Customize, you can add or remove whatever icons you want/don't want. You can also get there by clicking Tools and Customize. AD is not so customizable that I'm aware. In Customize, under the Toolbars tab, you can also disable the large icons (the ones with all the text). Generally speaking, only the toolbars that you need for the mode you're in will be present. Example, you don't see sketch tools when you're assembling.

You were hoping to see a symmetry constraint in SW.
It's there, but you don't see the proper constraints until the proper elements are picked. Example; to center two circles about a centerline, first pick the circle you want as the finished position, then pick the other circle and a centerline (aka ref line in AD). The symmetrical constraint will now be present. Once picked, the second circle will snap to position.

Your note;
The AD hole tool is easier to use and add multible holes at one time than SW.

To position the AD holes in X/Y axis, you have to go to the sketcher and dimension them. The same with SW, but when there, just add points for additional holes.

Enough for now. I will keep reading the blog and try to respond to some items. AD is certainly the best bang for the buck.

Again, THANKS and KEEP IT UP!
-Terry
Monterey, CA

 

[indesign]

BTW: AD can add or delete holes while in the sketcher as well. Just add a point and there it is.

 

[Gaspar]

Nice input Terry,

Thanks to you as well as Bill for taking the time to share this info!

 

[leeave96]

Well, the drafting effort is going a bit slow on both SW and the AD front so I haven't had much to post, but........

After a bit of drafting tonight and over the past few scattered days, I have some stuff.

Unlike modeling where in a lot of areas AD is as good or better than SW, I'm not finding that trend in drafting. Though very good, AD needs a lot of work - not something new in discussion on these forums - I'm just now starting to experience it. As such most of my drafting remarks, for now, seem to give the nod to SW in the drafting dept, but not all.

1. The repository is very nice in AD. Many times I create parts under names that I change later if I use them. Repository really makes keeping everything in sinc. Example, "bracket" might become PT-001 - Bracket. Easy to change in AD. More difficult in SW.

2. Centers! SW allows you to pick multiple holes and add centers marks that are connected. Can't find this in AD.

3. Can't find a way to add multiple leaders to notes in AD. I am pretty sure SW can do this.

4. AD is very slow to prehighlight some drafting pics.

5. SW appears to have more detail view options.

As I use both programs, I can't put enough emphasis on the need for AD to make picking stuff on drawings as similar to SW as possible. Reason is that it would make it MUCH easier to justify AD as a companion to SW from a marketing standpoint.

More later,
Bill

 

[leeave96]

More stuff:

1. SW has scroll bars for vertical and horizontal for simple panning. Sometimes that is handy, AD doesn't have it.

2. It is much easier to dimension to a point on a part (vs an edge) in SW than AD. Lots of times in AD, I have to insert a point and then dimension to that.

3. I've read a lot of posts about AD's speed within drafting and I am now starting to have some parts that are sloooow.

4. Multiple leaders from a note or weld symbol. SW has it, AD doesn't.

5. On the upside, I haven't had a part yet that I cannot dimension

Bill

 

[leeave96]

Well, I haven’t put much up here with respect to observations between AD and SW in the drafting category over the last month and this should be my last post on this thread.

Reason:

While there is much similarities between SW and AD on the part and assembly modeling front, AD lags far behind of SW on the drafting front. However, this is not to say that AD has a bad drafting package – it is, IMHO, very good. All parts and assemblies I have modeled thus far, I have been able to detail with AD. I think the difference between the two programs is more one of maturity than anything else. That maturity means there are lots of additional drafting functionality and convenience than the basic task of making dimensions. Center lines, hole tables, quick and direct ease of dimension and text modification come to mind. My guess is that AD will catch-up with SW in a few releases and still be a fraction of the price.

In closing, my feeling is that AD is still a better bang for the buck than SW, including drafting.

Just my thoughts!

Bill

 

[flyboydave]

Re:

More stuff:

2. It is much easier to dimension to a point on a part (vs an edge) in SW than AD. Lots of times in AD, I have to insert a point and then dimension to that.

Bill

And while it is still another workaround, there's another way I use instead of inserting a point. I think it's faster because you don't have to change from the dimension tool to the point tool, then back again - just dimension any line that has the desired point as one of its endpoints. This will create a point automatically, then dimension to the point and you can delete the original dimension, all without leaving the dimension tool mode.

 

[flyboydave]

Re:

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

Repository - SW has one too, it's called PDMWorks. It rocks, but it's almost $2000 by itself.

No comments on 2-4 or 6, I agree with you.

But as for 5, decimal precision. What you're describing is not actually the precision of the design model. What you're describing is the default number of decimals displayed. SW allows up to 8 display decimal places, Alibre 6, like you say. The actual number of decimal places stored in the design data goes out much further than that. I'm thinking it's something like 12 or 16 decimal places in ACIS. I'm not sure about Parasolid in SW, but I think it's something comparable. When you sketch a random length line in either of them, and place a dimension on the line - before you enter a value you will see many more decimal places. Alibre will display 12 decimal places, SW will show 8. Why they don't let you use the full number of decimals for a display number I don't know, but I think SW actually has more they're just not showing you.

 

[akolb]

Performance SolidWorks vs. Alibre

Hi All,

Same as in the "Hardware" Forum:

http://www.alibre.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8&start=18

Andy

 

[normanvannorden]

pogative points

Ive been working with the latest versions SW for 2 years now this is my second week working with alibre.

I still find SW better but i think its a matter of getting used to.

Both programs have there positive and negative points.

 

[indesign]

Yep...but for the cost you would think SW would have a whole lot more positives. :shock:

 

[markhas]

Re:

Yep...but for the cost you would think SW would have a whole lot more positives. :shock:

One reason SW cost so much and requires high mantaince fees is to support the local resellers and all the beer and pizza party's they use to intice customer employees to attendend and be duped into thinking they are getting a bargain on the only show in town. This antiquated business format may well be surpassed by Millikin's new approach to selling AD. I do believe he will continue to improve AD and become a leader in the market with a top level product.

Well Gregg's approach is not so new, it's a pretty well accepted post 2001 stock market bubble business concept, and fits the downsizing of the GNP.

 

[indesign]

Re:

One reason SW cost so much and requires high mantaince fees is to support the local resellers and all the beer and pizza party's they use to intice customer employees to attendend and be duped into thinking they are getting a bargain on the only show in town. This antiquated business format may well be surpassed by Millikin's new approach to selling AD. I do believe he will continue to improve AD and become a leader in the market with a top level product.

Now there is a person I can agree with! :wink:

As a person who was working under some of those high dollar, party throwing, money wasting, drunken stuper signing salesmen (not refering to SW BTW), I can personally agree with your statement.

 

[Barry]

I'm sorry to say but I find SW much more convenient than Alibre. Well ok it's for me just like Norman just my second week working with it but I miss some functions that make your life a whole lot easier, like snap. The sheetmetal function in SW works for me also easier, but I'll give it a try for the next few months.

 

[MilesH]

Well, it would be embarrassing for Solidworks if it wasn't more convenient after all these years and all the money invested

 

[wfpelletier]

Re:

Yep...but for the cost you would think SW would have a whole lot more positives. :shock:

I have been using SolidWorks 2003 at my workplace, and Alibre Design Professional at home. As much as I like Alibre (after all, I did buy it with my own money), I have to say that SolidWorks does indeed have 'a whole lot more positives' for its cost. In past postings on this thread, I did list what I thought to be the most important advantages SolidWorks has over Alibre. But I have to say, if I ever had the time and energy to list all of the ways I thought SolidWorks was better than Alibre, I could easily fill many pages. I firmly believe that for the cost of Alibre, there is no better software for mechanical design out there. However, I am nowhere near the point where I would ever want to replace even my 'old' version of SolidWorks with the latest version of Alibre at my workplace.

wfpelletier