V22: Is there a volume and density workaround? Client wants total mass estimate

[JST]

As shown.

I do not trust the volume measurement, since one comes out to exactly 3ft (cube I assume) with zero cubic inches left over... this seems too exact.

So I added a random part to the assembly..... THAT gives 4 cubic feet zero cubic inches. This is obviously wrong, the added part is 1/8" plate only 2 x 4 ft.

As a check, I tried a 1 foot cube, which came out to a reasonable number. And 4 of them came to 4x that as an assembly. But my assembly is pipe, and steel rods, plates, angles, etc. THAT seems to come out wrong.

So, is there a way to obtain an accurate result with V22? Some workaround that will result in a true measurement?

 

[DavidJ]

Try switching units to inches, rather then feet and inches. On a randomly selected assembly, I get zero cubic inches - the precision seems to be lost when units set to feet & inches.

The mass figure seems to be the same regardless of length unit selected.

 

[JST]

Well, that did change the volume. There are still suspicious similarities and coincidences between parts, but I have to go with it as-is, or manually calculate the entire thing.

 

[NateLiquidGravity]

Try switching units to inches, rather then feet and inches. On a randomly selected assembly, I get zero cubic inches - the precision seems to be lost when units set to feet & inches.

The mass figure seems to be the same regardless of length unit selected.

Either way how can people trust the results.

 

[JST]

Either way how can people trust the results.

Easy, you cannot. You are going to have to make a paper and pencil estimate, to see if it even makes sense. It MIGHT be accurate, I give it 80/20 that it IS accurate.

But, as you point out, I do not KNOW that it is. I did not do a full part-by-part manual calculation and sum. It looks OK for the simple examples that I checked out, so I went with it. But I cannot swear that the fancy radio mast weight is 100% correct. I gave the number to the client, with caveats. He's OK with that.

I'm not sure I am.

This better be fixed in V23. It looks as if I will be getting more requests for the mass.

The result will be inaccurate, simply because in a welded structure of some size, there will be a fair amount of weld metal, and that is not included. The mass of bolts is included, but I did not put washers and nuts on them, because that is not needed.... "bolts" on the materials list includes a nut and washers for each, that is understood.

BTW, what is the latest on V23....? I think the release has already blown way past the original estimated date, which is fine with me if they fix all the things they need to.

 

[NateLiquidGravity]

I'd really like to see some complicated testing done to verify "physical properties" match real world physical properties for EACH release. I don't think Alibre realizes how badly things like this affect their credibility as a professional tool.

 

[JST]

................ I don't think Alibre realizes how badly things like this affect their credibility as a professional tool.

I think that "professional tool" ship sailed back in 2014 or so when 3DSystems bought it. Some of us just have not got the memo yet.

Maybe that is not so..... But there are upsides and downsides to competing with "real" programs..... the annual maintenance is high on Solidworks for a reason. (Yes I know it isn't maintenance, but really "rent".... either way you still pay)

 

[simonb65]

Maybe that is not so..... But there are upsides and downsides to competing with "real" programs..... the annual maintenance is high on Solidworks for a reason. (Yes I know it isn't maintenance, but really "rent".... either way you still pay)

Technically, I wouldn't class Alibre 'maintenance' as maintenance either as you don't get rapid or regular bug fixes, specifically covering the issues you report, during your maintenance period. It's more like a development fund that may or may not get you updates/bug resolutions in the period it's covering.

I pay 'maintenance' (some less than 25% of Alibre's) on other professional applications and get sent fixes (updated dlls, etc) a few days later ... which are then rolled into the next regular monthly or quarterly scheduled minor releases for everyone else. Not a dig, just an objective comparative observation on the subject. As I've said in the past, I'd rather just pay an annual (or whenever its needed) 'major version upgrade' fee rather than it being called 'maintenance'. I also have many applications that have the model where by you get unlimited free minor patches for the paid major release. Don't like the 'rent' model, whatever it costs ... I just never get to actually own anything perpetually, which is no good in 5-10 years time when I have to dig out an old customer contract and do an upgrade/mod only to find the tool is now dead or unavailable.

 

[JST]

Technically, I wouldn't class Alibre 'maintenance' as maintenance either as you don't get rapid or regular bug fixes, specifically covering the issues you report, during your maintenance period. It's more like a development fund that may or may not get you updates/bug resolutions in the period it's covering.
...........

We HAVE gotten them, and IIRC, at least 2 or 3 for V22 so far. I don't think it is as bad as you make it seem.

And so far, I have seen one major, and a couple minor upgrades each maintenance period. That's not bad at all.

What I do not like as much is the way they are often minor ones to fix what the new release had wrong.... as opposed to being minor upgrades starting from a well-tested release version.

I may have to try a beta version next time, although it is a royal pain to do so, between having to dump the current version, and needing to work only on copies of anything you want to ever access again. I seem to find problems that others do not see.

 

[bigseb]

I may have to try a beta version next time, although it is a royal pain to do so, between having to dump the current version, and needing to work only on copies of anything you want to ever access again. I seem to find problems that others do not see.

You could always buy a second PC...

 

[JST]

You could always buy a second PC...

If Alibre wants to have me as an official beta site, I could do that. But for the moment, maybe not. I have other things to do with $1500

It's mostly a problem because I could not do any client work with the Beta, and I'd have to keep switching around. It takes about 20 minutes or so to switch versions.

 

[simonb65]

We HAVE gotten them, and IIRC, at least 2 or 3 for V22 so far. I don't think it is as bad as you make it seem.

Since v22 was released, we have had 2.5 service packs. These have addressed issues introduced by v22, not fixed or addressed the issues reported before v22!

 

[JST]

Since v22 was released, we have had 2.5 service packs. These have addressed issues introduced by v22, not fixed or addressed the issues reported before v22!

...............
What I do not like as much is the way they are often minor ones to fix what the new release had wrong.... as opposed to being minor upgrades starting from a well-tested release version.
...............

Yes, of course. However, they WERE addressed, and there WAS a major update.

It is far, far different than with 3D Systems, where even that was apparently never even in the corporate plan. And Solidworks is also far from perfect, or at least it was buggy when I last used it a number of years ago.

 

[Max]

I do not trust the volume measurement, since one comes out to exactly 3ft (cube I assume) with zero cubic inches left over... this seems too exact.

So I added a random part to the assembly..... THAT gives 4 cubic feet zero cubic inches. This is obviously wrong, the added part is 1/8" plate only 2 x 4 ft.

JST, can you send me this 2x4 plate?

 

[JST]

I can send a similar item. It is actually an assembly, the plate I put in simply to see whether the addition appeared to "pass the smell test", and when feet and inches was the dimension type, it did not.

It seems I cannot add a file to a PM..... how would you like to get it?

 

[Max]

It seems I cannot add a file to a PM..... how would you like to get it?

max@alibre.com unless it's bigger than say 15MB, in which case Dropbox - Submit files

Please submit the plate as well. Thanks!

 

[JST]

Sent

 

[evandene]

I stopped the maintenance, it doesn't make sense anymore. Using a CAD system is because we like to improve the efficiency of design. A maintenance contract should contribute the Cad system becomes better and better and make us work more efficient each time.
We conclude that the Alibre design package is not becoming more efficient to use the last 3 years, .. for that reason we stopped the maintenance contract

 

[Hunter]

Hope I don't get into trouble for this, but I use VariCAD Viewer to calculate CoG and Mass... It's a free viewer.

I use it to double-check Alibre's calculation. You can specify a "bulk" density, which is very handy.

I can't afford to get mass and CoG wrong for my designs, people may get hurt or worse.



EDIT: You have to export your design as a STEP. Also serves as a check to see if your STEP translated OK.

 

[simonb65]

Hope I don't get into trouble for this, but I use VariCAD Viewer to calculate CoG and Mass.

tut, tut, tut, shame on you!