[editor] With this article I reach back to consider some of the contradictions of sketching in a history-based system. If history isn’t necessary for sketches, why should it be needed for other constructions? Parts of this have been edited to fit with current realities, it was originally published 3 years ago.[editor]
Synchronous Technology and Best Practice
I’m someone who has written a fair number of “Best Practice” lists. My CAD Administration book in particular was full of recommendations for everything from installing software to surfacing design. People assume that a best practice list is really a…
Reusing data in parts and assemblies
The re-use of data is one of those huge time savers that we talk about a lot. Doing things faster is great, of course, but the fastest way to do something is to not do it at all, or to…
Design is NOT a Linear Process
Those of you who have been working in design for more than a couple of years, and I’d assume that’s most of you, already know that design is not a linear process. You may start in one place, and jump…
History AND Direct?
I assume I’m talking to all the smart kids in class. Just because you’re engineers and designers, well, all that math and science weeded out the rest, right? And of course I assume that as the smart kids in class,…
What Tools Do You Really Need from CAD?
A lot of people are finding themselves in the position of looking for a new CAD package these days. The market is stirring itself up, there are new offerings, and the old offerings are just that – old. Not that…
I posted on Resilient Modeling less than a year ago, after Solid Edge University 2013. Dick Gebhard is the main guy behind this idea. He has constructed it such that it’s mainly CAD-neutral, but it turns out that it works best in Synchronous Technology. The concept does work well with history-based systems, in fact, its intended to make your history-based models more usable.
[editor]: This was a post written five years ago about the possibility of using familiar parametric design ideas with history-free models. Here I’m trying to get my head around the idea, and trying to introduce readers to the concept that maybe history-based modeling isn’t the only game in town.
[editor]: It’s interesting to go back and view points along the evolution of my conversion from history-based mogul to history-free supporter. When you read this, it’s important to remember that it was written in 2011. At that time I was heavily involved in organic surface development using a tool that was in my opinion completely unsuited to that type of design. Still, companies contracted me to do the work. I think this type of tool is still needed in product development today, as evidenced by the spirited courting of Tsplines by multiple players.
Part 2 is all about the role that the technology played in my switch. Going from a skeptic to a supporter seems like a big jump, but if I explain this right, it will be obvious. The functional differences to me are compelling, especially for the kind of work that the largest group of mid-range CAD users do – machine design, which uses primarily prismatic shapes.
I get contacted every now and then by people or companies doing research before buying a new CAD package.They are interested in the story of a prominent user changing camps. Since I took down the Dezignstuff blog, most of the story that took me from SolidWorks posterboy to Solid Edge employee has been lost. I just want to have the real story on the record and available to those who are curious.
Kim was reading the Facebook page for one of our local tv stations, and they were reporting a local story where some junior and high schools were getting 3D printers for the kids. The printers were quite reasonable at $1600 each, and they were getting about $20k worth of them to spread around the district. I’m not a Facebook kind of guy, but I do have an account that I rarely use. In this situation, I decided to break my Facebook silence and weigh in on the topic.
I’m going through some of my old Dezignstuff blog posts and republishing some of the less embarrassing ones. It’s fun to watch my point of view evolve over time. I might edit some of them here and there. For those of you out there who are going through the discovery of history-free CAD, some of the ideas in these posts might feel familiar to you.
If I say “China” to a person who is involved in manufacturing or design in the US, the reaction generally isn’t positive. It’s not a political reaction, it’s the reaction of someone afraid that his livelihood is going to be exported.
This is a follow up report from the web event led by Design World which I announced in an earlier blog post.
There must have been some last minute changes in the Design World Direct Vs History debate, because Autodesk didn’t have a representative participate. Chad Jackson instead rounded out the panel in the role of industry wonk. So we had Chad, Dan Staples, and Brian Thompson from PTC.