[wokke]

Hi All,

not so long ago I started at a furniture designstudio. They use sketchup for most of there designs (wood) and biesseworks for the cncmachine.

Today I showed my boss Solidworks and he got interested. I believe SW can automate the design and the production process better then the way they work now. He is looking into automation of the studio: Barcode printing, generating BOMs, CAM, ...

My questions:

Is it a good idea to bring Solidworks into a company that's specialized in furniture design; custom/art stuff, no high production values?

Is there a way for Solidworks to work direcly with the Biesse-cnc or Biesseworks? (CAM-modules?)

I know I have a lot of questions, I hope you guys can help me looking for some answers.

Sorry for the my English, I hope you understand me

Cheers

[Deltic_Engine]

SolidWorks is GREAT for small manufacturers.
It still has the best user interface in the industry.
It has 3D export to DWG, DXF, SAT, ACIS, IGES, Parasolid, Step, etc. built-in.

You can also convert SolidWorks 3D files to 2D by using the "Make Drawing from Part" command.
From there you can export the files to 2D-versions of DWG, DXF, etc.

Most any toolpath programming program should be able to import dxf files at least.

Keep in mind that truely large manufacturers usually end up with
Pro/Engineer, HP SolidDesigner or other high-end CAD systems.
Certainly NOT because they are more productive, but because the
clueless engineering managers get sold on PDM (Product Data Management)
and 'collaborative' features that in the end, are hardly ever implimented.

I've seen it time and again, They buy Pro/E assuming that their people will
have the spare time to keep the PDM features filled-in and updated, but in reality
most Designers & Engineers are too pressed with deadlines to keep all those
bells & whistles updated enough to be truely useful downstream.
In some Aerospace and Medical companies yes, but in most engineering
environments implementing PDM just ends up being lost time.
Organizational theory is one thing. Human nature is another.

A few years ago I even contributed to getting our company another "Hot" 3D software
(in addition to SolidWorks) "Varimatrix" that was at the time a much more capable
surfacing program than SolidWorks and already had a CAM
plugin that was associative (Updates of the CAD Model updated the Toolpaths).
Big mistake. A year later SolidWorks updated
their surfacing features to the point where we did not want to bother
with using the new "high-end" CAD system. it's interface was just not
as intuitive. - SolidWorks was faster for 97% of the things we needed to do.

If you want sheer productivity, nothing beats SolidWorks.
If you are on a tight budget, there are cheaper programs, but keep in mind
that Solidworks is already VERY cheap compared to Pro/E and many others.

SECRET: Although SolidWorks does not advertise the fact, 'ONE' seat of SolidWorks
actually includes TWO licenses. The second one is the "Home Office" license.
So when you buy 1 seat of SolidWorks you are actually buying 2.

[highspeedmazak]

What does the new solidworks version cost?

[DareBee]

Around 4500 plus 1000 yearly maintenance.
Base version.

I would buy office though. Maybe for furniture the extras are of no value?

[cam1]

Hi:I started to use SolidWorks in release 2005. I wouldn't bother with the $1000/yr. maintenance.
Here's why: Since day 1 I never had any bugs or issues with the software, I upgraded our dept. to 2007 only because I wanted to get the Designer FEA add-in,and to purchase some additional seats.If you like to install a newer version every year, get all the paths setup etc., and deal with all the new release bugs then sign up for maintenance, otherwise just enjoy. It's OK when you just have 1 seat, but if you are running 4 standalone seats it gets tiresome to constantly be fiddling with good (great) eneough.Yes, I know they make enhancements every year, but for us it did everything we needed it for (aircraft engine Test&Evaluation equipment) as of 2006.

regards

[DareBee]

A company like us has to use subscriptions.

1) I disagree with Cam, there are WAY too many bugs (2001 plus was good - 04 was really bad) most SW releases are rushed out the door and they usually aren't properly sorted till SP4 or 5.

2) I need to be able to use my customers files and SW is not backwards compatible.

We all have different needs.

[JerryFlyGuy]

Ditto for Darebee, I've yet to find a software company who puts out 'perfect' code on sp0 and solidworks is no exception. This issue has been addressed at SW world but may take some time to be fully realised... great software none the less. Been driving it since 2002.

[jmcglynn]

IMO not being on maintenance is false economy.

[cam1]

Here's my point, it's not about the money :
If my software works flawlessly, and I have no issues with file exchanging (with SolidWorks I can use the feature manager to read newer versions of SW, that customers convert into Parasolids format) then why should I upgrade?
99% of my customers are running either Catia, UG or Pro-E,so I'm not in their league anyways. I've never had an issue with file exchange, nor does anybody complain about the finished product, or the file formats.
For me it boils down to if it aint broke, and it does everything you require, why fix it? Have you guys experienced alot of problems with the software?

regards

[jmcglynn]

I guess it depends on what you're doing with it.

If it's just to enable using SolidCAM for example, then you may not need to upgrade. It sounds like you're mostly working on other folks parts.

I've been using SW for a couple of years and it keeps getting better, I wouldn't want to miss out on the improvements. The 2008 release is pretty slick, very nice to work in. I'm using it to do design work, and to run SolidCAM. I'm also starting to make more use of surfacing in my designs, which has gotten a lot better in the past few releases.

Here's my point, it's not about the money :
If my software works flawlessly, and I have no issues with file exchanging (with SolidWorks I can use the feature manager to read newer versions of SW, that customers convert into Parasolids format) then why should I upgrade?
99% of my customers are running either Catia, UG or Pro-E,so I'm not in their league anyways. I've never had an issue with file exchange, nor does anybody complain about the finished product, or the file formats.
For me it boils down to if it aint broke, and it does everything you require, why fix it? Have you guys experienced alot of problems with the software?

regards

[cam1]

Hi: Ditto, I'm also running SolidCam with Solidworks '07. Nice combo, bulletproof, get's my jobs done easily. A colleague of mine also runs the same combo, and does alot of engraving. He is disapointed that SolidCam's latest release no longer allows test to be selected with a single click. He's decided to stick with the same combination as I.

cheers

[JerryFlyGuy]

It is for sure dependant on what you are trying to accomplish w/ the software. Software as a whole is constantly improving and I like to stay as much w/ the game as I can while not being on the 'bleeding edge' of the technology. I typically wait from Sp01 or later to come out before I upgrade to ANY new software [solidworks included]. I like to be able to import current version parts in their native form vs as an IGES/step/ or Psolid as they are imported as 'dumb' parts with no inteligent features. For me, this is usually a time saving event because the parts I get in to machine usually need some form of changes done to them to enable to either be machined, or assembled etc.. Having to do these steps on a 'dumb' part generally is more difficult than one w/ all of it's features intact. The fact that I deal w/ alot of organic shapes also impacts this [vs sqr or regular shaped parts]. To each their own.

As to lots of problems w/ the software? I've had some, generally when you start to push the spectrum w/ the new features issues can arise, nothing that isn't insurmountable but more a pain in the butt until it's fixed in a new SP. I've found maybe a 1/2 dozen of these over the last 2-3 yrs. To date, only a couple of them are still 'at large'. You'd only get into these issues if you are a bit off the beaten path as a SW user. ie; if you built a 200+ parts weldment and then tried to use user driven part numbers inside the weldment which are then used to drive the drawing and the BOM [cutlist] in the drawing.. in 2007 is caused a fair number of issues.. on 08' it's fixed.. [well after Sp01] Anyway, I wouldn't say there are 'lots' of problems.. but a few which can annoy at times.. all have their 'work arounds'. All in all I'm very happy w/ each new addition which comes out.. [08' embeded parts in Assm's is AWESOME.. after sp3.0]

FWIW

[cam1]

Jerry: Have you tried the Feature Manager in SW, it will convert most if not all of the modelinto features and sketches,etc especially if you ask for A Parasolids format. I've use it a number of times to convert legacy files that were in a neutral format. I think Feature Manager is an add-in in SW Office Pro and Office Premium. For the work that we do (Top down design), it works very well.

regards

[JerryFlyGuy]

Ya I've used FeatureWorks and it can work fairly well for regularly shaped parts. The down side is that the model does not come back in w/ the design intent intact. Meaning if you had a pattern of holes which were referenced off one particular hole and the rest of the pattern HAD to be driven from that one hole, Featureworks wouldn't nesc pick up on that or do the feature tree w/ that in mind.. It also doesn't do top down parts from a master assembly very well either.. or at least that I've tried [a year or two ago] as again it doesn't bring in the design intent of the model.

Lastly, Featureworks is nearly useless w/ organic parts, not that I'm unhappy about that, I never expected it to be, hence the preference for the native file in it's current version.

Featureworks MO is simply to assist where no other option is available to the user, it's not intended to replace using the actual file where that is possible.

FWIW

Jerry

[DareBee]

Most of my machine designs MOVE and mechanically interact with each other.
Featureworks won't even begin to touch an assembly like this.

Single machined parts or static assemblies are no problem for featureworks (but then again, if this was what I did primarily I would likely be using Alibre instead and save myself a few bucks).

I do have 1 downfall to being current.
I sometimes come across a customer who is not current and then I have to send THEM dumb solids. This is less frequent than the other way around would be.