@@Rich10000 nope. They are not. Top-down approach you start with general design outlines that came from requirements (customer/ engineering / marketing), previous versions and you have associative features linking with downstream parts. Like in PTC Creo you have "Skeletons". Design in assembly you are, basically, designing taking advantage of making use of neighbor parts. Copying surfaces, making use of offset of those adjacent parts, etc.
Fair enough. To me this software looks to have too many menus and hidden features I'm a fan of fusion which is totally different. Do you get that impression also?
@@Rich10000 the high end 3D CADs (which is not the case of Solid Edge or Fusion, which are understood as mid-range) do have many features and options within and most of them are outcome of customers requests. In this parametric 3D CAD universe, you need to have the possibilty to adjust to many type of design requests. For instance, Class-A surfaces (or G3-surfsce continuity) are not easy to merge then or even adding rounds to it. More also, sheet metal parts, that have differet corner relief types. 10 years ago, I have heard that NX had already 45 million code lines. Imagine today !!! 3D Parametric CAD, in enterprise level, are not only 3D Drawing, but is a base to other "disciplines" like: 2D associative drawings, CAM, physics simulation (CAE), manufacturing work process, Augmented reality, Training handbooks, Sales catalog with photorrealistic rendering. These interactions make users exchange demands and, now and then, may find a limitation and thus unfold to an enhancement request to 3D CAD vendor.
It looks more like design in assembly context rather than Top-down approach
They're the same
@@Rich10000 nope. They are not. Top-down approach you start with general design outlines that came from requirements (customer/ engineering / marketing), previous versions and you have associative features linking with downstream parts. Like in PTC Creo you have "Skeletons".
Design in assembly you are, basically, designing taking advantage of making use of neighbor parts. Copying surfaces, making use of offset of those adjacent parts, etc.
Fair enough. To me this software looks to have too many menus and hidden features I'm a fan of fusion which is totally different. Do you get that impression also?
@@Rich10000 the high end 3D CADs (which is not the case of Solid Edge or Fusion, which are understood as mid-range) do have many features and options within and most of them are outcome of customers requests. In this parametric 3D CAD universe, you need to have the possibilty to adjust to many type of design requests. For instance, Class-A surfaces (or G3-surfsce continuity) are not easy to merge then or even adding rounds to it. More also, sheet metal parts, that have differet corner relief types. 10 years ago, I have heard that NX had already 45 million code lines. Imagine today !!! 3D Parametric CAD, in enterprise level, are not only 3D Drawing, but is a base to other "disciplines" like: 2D associative drawings, CAM, physics simulation (CAE), manufacturing work process, Augmented reality, Training handbooks, Sales catalog with photorrealistic rendering. These interactions make users exchange demands and, now and then, may find a limitation and thus unfold to an enhancement request to 3D CAD vendor.
Please allow the mutlti-body sheet metal part design method to utilize different sheet metal thicknesses in one part file.