SWW09: CAD Management Bootcamp

At four hours, Greg Jonkowski’s CAD Management Bootcamp is a major presentation that is too large (long) to fit into the regular SolidWorks World days.  It is full of information about computers (server and workstation), data security and safety, graphics cards, OS’s, and what some would consider controversial advice. 

Greg discussed the benefits of properly managing the workplace CAD environment.  When it comes to establishing or improving the CAD environment, he suggests it is good to always critical. 

  • There is always room for improvement. 
  • Focus on allowing engineering to actually engineer. 
  • Simplify processes to improve efficiency. 
  • If some “improvement” makes the task harder, the project will fail. 
  • He also suggests that CAD management means that stakeholders are involve in the processes.

At most organizations, there is usually one or two SolidWorks power users.  Greg makes it clear that these individuals should be recognized and utilitized for there skill set.  These individuals can also be leveraged to implement mentoring programs to help others become stronger SolidWorks users. 

Many other points were comprehensivesy covered to provide a good level of detail regarding issues that a CAD Manager may encounter.

“Urban legends” 

He covered many topics.  However, of note is his two more controversial recommendations regarding computers and installation. 

He made it clear that anti-virus software should be used and that it should not be deactivated when installing SolidWorks or its add-ons.  I know many sources contradict this.  However, this appears to be the company-line from SolidWorks Corp now.  It should be noted that he made this statement very clearly and authoritatively, yet caveatted his comments with unelaborated “I don’t knows” and “problem with one anti-virus”.  I found this to be frustrating.

The other comment that might turn some heads is his stern statement to not use the /3GB switch to give applications access to more of the computer’s RAM.  There are risks associated with using the /3GB switch.  As he puts it, using this switch is “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.   Instead of using this switch, Greg recommends simply upgrading to Vista and 64-bit computer systems.  I say “simply” with sarcasm.  In the current economic environment, advice like this is a bit unrealistic for many.  There is a balance that must be reached, where the risks have to be weighted against the advantages. 

Ok, I still haven’t eaten.  I seriously am going to get some lunch now.

SWW09: Sunday lines

One advantage to arriving at SolidWorks World on Sunday is the short lines for registration.  I will dutifully document the lines tomorrow to establish a contrast. 

Short Lines

Granted, there is no free breakfast or lunch, but registration is open until 7:00PM, so arriving in the afternoon or evening will actually save time and let one rest up for the full day of activities on Monday.

SolidWorks World 2009, Pre-day and the pre-preday

There are officially four days for SolidWorks World 2009, Sunday through Monday; though, sometimes Sunday is sort of considered a pre-day even though its called “Day 1“.   However, activity begins even before Sunday.   I guess Saturday can be called the pre-preday.

Saturday fun

My Saturday was mostly spent flying from San Jose, CA to Orlando, FL, with a layover.  I met up with Alex the SolidWorks Geek in our Houston stop.   This is his first, and my second SolidWorks World.   We made it to the Swan & Dolphin resort in Orlando just in time to catch the tail-end of a secret meeting.  After that, many of us Twitters converged at the lobby bar for some drinks for a tweetup.   It was great meeting up with a lot of the bloggers and consummate SolidWorks users from around the country.

Sunday so far

So, Saturday was indeed a very long day.   Though I prolly should have a hang-over right now, I don’t (never really get those).   My Sunday started bright and early with attendance to some focus groups for SolidWorks sheet metal functionality at 8:30AM and drawings at 10:00AM.  These are sessions where SolidWorks users from various industries meet up with SolidWorks employees in face to face open discussions.   The fact that these sessions happen is a sure sign that (despite the appearance otherwise sometimes) SolidWorks does put forth significant effort to improve their software based on customer input.   These focus groups are good because users give first hand accounts about how they are using the software, including their likes, like-to-haves, frustrations and such.   I may go into specific details about these focus groups later.

It’s lunch time now.  I hunger.

SolidWorks World 2009 here I come

It’s one day before my trip to Florida begins.  Actually, it’s almost exactly 24 hours, as my flight takes off around 6:00am or so tomorrow.  Am I excited?  A bit.  Am I worried?  A bit.  Why?  Well, as soon as I’m off the plane, I have my first schedule event (for which I will be an hour late since getting from the MCO to the Swan and Dolphin is no skip across the pond).  Then right after that event comes another that will likely stretch my day out well into jet-lag zone; then I hafta get up early on Sunday because that is when convention really begins!  Maybe I’ll get some sleep Sunday night?

Virtual Sharps – What do you call them?

What do you call it when you dimension to the intersection of two lines that don’t come to a point? Virtual Sharps?

In the past, I’ve settled on using the phrase “TO V.S.” after dimensions when they attach to virtual sharps. I’ve seen this type of notation used elsewhere. Another abbreviation I’ve come across is TSC, which I assume stands for Theoretical Sharp Corner. I think that might be older terminology.

Personally, I used to prefer the shorter “VS” because it feels like a more commonly understood term. That said, none of this really matters since the standards don’t specify what’s “proper.” For example, ASME Y14.5-2009 uses the term Point Location but doesn’t provide any identification symbols or abbreviations for this concept.

SOLIDWORKS, on the other hand, generously offers a variety of marks to identify virtual sharps. The main problem? These markers are often so small on certain drawing scales or radii that they’re nearly impossible to see without magnification. Another issue is that none of these marks are defined in any standards. And, honestly, a third problem is the hidden nature of the functionality.

You have to know how to create a virtual sharp mark—there’s no dedicated button or icon for it. It’s a short sequence of steps that you’d never guess without guidance. Here’s how it’s done in a drawing:

  1. Select the two object lines that intersect in space.
  2. Use the Point sketch tool.

How is anyone supposed to intuitively figure out that you need to use the Point sketch tool for this? Seriously. But hey, at least SOLIDWORKS provides some method. That’s more than can be said for the standards.

I guess my question is: What are others doing to identify dimensions that reference virtual sharps?

Anyway, here’s an updated article about Virtual Sharps.

Challenges in Transitioning from 2D to 3D

The CAD industry is so far along now that the discussion for many is no longer 2D CAD vs 3D CAD, but methodologies within the 3D CAD (such as direct modelling vs history modelling).  However, the adaption of 3D CAD applications such as SolidWorks is still on-going.  Many companies are still using 2D CAD applications.  Why does it take so long for many companies to make the transition when the benefits of 3D CAD seem to be so apparent?

I think Jeff Ray, CEO of DS SolidWorks Corp, properly identified this problem in an interview for the recent article CAD Tools: Breaking Barriers by Linda L. Bell (NASA Tech Briefs, Jan 2009 issue).  In part, he states that when a company considers making the transition to 3D CAD “the pain of change has to be less than the pain of the status quo.”  3D CAD still needs to be easy to access and use.  It also needs to be robust enough to be a design tool for those users that demand more from their applications.  On speaking about how SolidWorks has answered the need to make this transition easier, Ray states, “our last two releases have included a new user interface [where] the workflow predicts which tools the users will need and makes them readily available.”

Even still, there are many challenges to making the transition.  These involve learning a whole new way of working.  For example, when one draws a square, it doesn’t stay a square.  It can become a cube, rectagular rod or a plate.  It can also become a recess or square hole in another feature. 

Once one gets a grasp on these concepts, setting up the new 3D CAD software to work within the company’s documentation system can seem even more challenging.  This is one area that seems to missed (or at least not implemented fully) by many of the 3D CAD applications.  Having the ability to make drawings isn’t the end of it.  Communication with PLM’s and ERP’s is just as important in many companies. 

As my friend Chris MacCormack has recently pointed out, management of the 3D CAD files themselves must also be addressed.  With one or two users, this matter solves itself with simple use of folders.  However, as departments expand and companies grow, solutions for the raising difficulties change.  Of course, this must also be addressed with 2D CAD applications, but it is a much more complex matter with 3D CAD applications.

Most of us first address these issues with wide-eyed innocence. Upon going through this once, that becomes innocence lost.  To consider the transition from 2D CAD to 3D CAD, all of the above must be taken into consideration, and actually other issues too.  To improperly paraphrase Uncle Ben, with the great power enjoyed with the use of 3D CAD comes great responsibility in how it is used.

Now, it is understood that 3D CAD applications are not useful to all CAD users.  But if the field is mechanical engineering, it is very likely 3D CAD going to be worth the transition from 2D.