If you think you get large sets of reference geometry you're on the right track. Use geometry sets to base your models on and don't tie sketches to other solid surfaces. Also proper use of boolean operations helped a lot.
#NX CATIA V5 TRANSLATOR HOW TO#
I found that learning sweeps and understanding how to use the spine properly solved a lot. Here are some tidbits that I found useful. Ok, this turned into not much of an answer to you.
#NX CATIA V5 TRANSLATOR SOFTWARE#
You can cut corners with constraints where other cad software will complain. We used it to create parts for injection molding for car bumper systems, including the bumper cover itself. After having worked with solidworks and creo I still long back to what I could do with catia. The employer said that they started earning money off of new employees after about two years what with the cost of licenses, training, hardware and salary. They put us (4 freshly employed) through 3 months of intense training and afterwards we'd become attached to a project as junior resource. It was my first job in cad and all I had done in 3d before was with 3dsmax and rhino for animations. I do miss elements like selection intent and middle click though! (But I don't miss some of the near-nonsensical error messages) When I used NX I was working at a company big enough to have its own CAD training team, and almost straightaway I was on a week long into to NX course so I never really struggled with the learning curve. At least with the systems where I worked, that would have caused problems if you tried to issue it to production. It's been a few years since I was using NX, but if I recall correctly there's nothing to stop you designing a part, then adding components to it. The drawback with the NX way is that it requires discipline on the part of the users. You can do that in Inventor (and I believe in Solidworks too, though I've not tried it) despite having different file types for part and assembly. Once you mind meld with it though? The power is extraordinary. Honestly, the old-school aspects of NX, and it's modularity (selection intent, explicit sketch orientation, feature selection, etc) are incredible, but makes the learning curve vertical. This is default behavior though (and what the NX folks would call "best practice"), but you can always bundle everything into a single file if you wish.
#NX CATIA V5 TRANSLATOR DOWNLOAD#
Open a single Parasolid download from McMaster or Sandvik, and NX will turn every body into a component and vomit them all over your system. My biggest gripe with NX is that it wants files all over the place. You get tremendous flexibility by not forcing users to explicitly select the kind of file they are working on, and a part can contain all sorts of data. I can be working on a part and if I decide I need to bring in another part as a component to design in-context? Not a problem. Having one file type for everything is an advantage, not a hinderance. I'm sure there are many things that would be done differently if developing NX from scratch, but which can't easily be done without breaking compatibility. One example would be a single file type for both parts and assemblies. I used to be an NX user too, and I suspect part of the reason it has its quirks is because it's evolved over such a long timeframe (Unigraphics, forerunner to NX, was released in 1975).
I'm constantly blown away by the stuff NX can do. Having said that, CATIA/NX can do things that would crush SolidWorks, and have capabilities that blow everything else out of the water. So yea, as a single user on your own, the learning resources at this class of software are utterly atrocious. For example, Daimler has their Freightliner facility here in Portland with a bunch of engineers, and a whole team (30+ people) dedicated to managing NX, Teamcenter, developing their best practices, and training their users on-demand (all as part of Daimler/Mercedes switch from CATIA to NX).
CATIA/NX shops tend to be F500 size companies and their supply chains and they don't just buy this software they have entire teams of folks dedicated to managing their CAD infrastructure and training users. They are designed for maximum capability and productivity in the hands of well-trained users. The thing is, these pieces of software are truly designed for professionals - being "easy to learn" is simply not in the mandate. learning NX was a huge pain, and while I am not a CATIA guy, I've heard it is worse to learn than NX. I came to NX from 10 years in SolidWorks, and was a Fusion user from it's very early stages. This is just the nature of CATIA/NX, which are at the upper-end of what CAD software can do.
0 kommentar(er)
