Transition Catia to SW?

[osdecar]

Hi guys,

My name is osdecar and I am new to the forum. I have been investigating a bit about different CAD systems and I found this place. I can see the SW community here is quite active, so I think it's the right place to ask.

I have been a professional Catia user for more than 10 years, working mainly in automotive interior design (80% surfacing 20% solid modelling).

I am now trying to start my own business and I want to use legit software if possible. Catia is obviously out of my reach, but I can see SW is free for startups for the first year, and even full asking price is high but acceptable.

My question is, with my background and experience, is SW a good choice, or will I feel it limited? Will I have to spend long hours re-learning how to do stuff and change my modelling techniques? One of the things I love most about CATIA is the flexibility to create your model in your own way without being constrained by any workflow imposed by the software. When I've tried other CAD software in the past I've always felt like I couldn't do things my own way.

I don't want to spend time learning SW just to discover a few weeks months down the line that it wasn't the right choice for me.

[osdecar]

Apart from the big general question in the OP, I have a few specific questions about SW. I've tested the trial version in the SW page for a few minutes and I have a few questions straight away:

-How powerful is solid works for surfacing work?

-In Catia I constantly use Geometric Sets in order to create some internal structure to the model elements, so it's easier for me or others to navigate in the future. Is there something similar to geometricla sets in SW? Are the wireframe elements ordered or not ordered? Are the surfaces operations separated in the tree from the solid operations?

-I also like to create every different feature in a separated body and then merge all with boolean operations. How flexible is this method in SW? Are boolean operations as powerful as in Catia? (I can't see something similar to union trim, where you could trim two over extended bodies that self intersect)

-How easy is to create and manage separated bodies in SW?

-Anything similar to Catia publications that allows for a robust design in context approach?

I have many more questions, but I think these are the main ones at the moment. Thanks everyone

[bnemec]

@matt you've wrote a couple of times on surfacing in at least a couple CAD systems. Will Solid Edge Sync options be better than anything SW can offer? What about Onshape?

[HDS]

Apart from the big general question in the OP, I have a few specific questions about SW. I've tested the trial version in the SW page for a few minutes and I have a few questions straight away:

-How powerful is solid works for surfacing work?

-I also like to create every different feature in a separated body and then merge all with boolean operations. How flexible is this method in SW? Are boolean operations as powerful as in Catia? (I can't see something similar to union trim, where you could trim two over extended bodies that self intersect)

-How easy is to create and manage separated bodies in SW?

I have only used Catia to design one part.

Catia can make Class A automotive surfaces. Solidworks can technically make surfaces with G3 continuity but no Automakers use it for Class A surfaces that I know of. So it is less powerful than Catia but only you know if it is powerful enough for your job.

What you are looking for is the surface trim in solidworks. They method you describe is one of the most common for surfaces in any CAD package.

SW can easily make and manage multiple surface or solid bodies. There are several ways to do this each with their own trade offs.

[matt]

Um, I hesitate to jump into this. But...

Yes, you're going to be disappointed with SW. For a couple of reasons. First, it doesn't have the power or flexibility you are used to. And second, because it's already in decline.

Solid Edge has a better chance, because it has subd modeling, but it is even more strict about process. NX is probably also out of range for you.

You might check out this site for as comprehensive a look at SW surfacing as you're going to find anywhere for free:

https://episodes.dezignstuff.com/blog/

[SPerman]

I am currently having a crisis of conscience that may be similar to the decision you have to make.

For years I've said that I would love to have NX, but I can't justify the price. But the more time I spend doing nothing while "solidworks is busy;" The more work I lose to crashes; The more time I spend rebooting and recovering from crashes; The more time I spend jumping through hoops and coming up with work arounds for SW shortcomings; It makes me wonder if that isn't a short sighted decision.

NX and Catia may be expensive, but at the end of the day if you get more work done, and better work done, it might be the better investment.

[RichGergely]

Solidworks is probably less powerful at surfacing than a 1990s version of Catia.

But on the other hand what it does do is fairly straight forward and quick topped with reasonable analysis to interrogate.

The only 'cheap' software that would approx Catia's standard of surfacing is Rhino. After that and up the price range is Vero which is very much surface orientated.

You can add a more powerful surfacing module to solidworks (gold partner) and that will be in the region of $2000.

The biggest problem you will have is clients. If you are working with people in the automotive industry who have Catia, nine times out of ten they will want Catia files. I have come across part design jobs for automotive interiors while running my own consultancy that have been Solidworks but these were like small super car manufacturers like Noble.

It's worth noting that Catia might be still the way to go. An experienced user running his own design consultancy can charge double the hour rate of a Solidworks equivalent.

[osdecar]

Thank you very much guys, I really appreciate your comments.

Unfortunately, you mostly agree that I will be a bit disappointed, which is not what I wanted to hear, LOL.

Regarding the surfacing capabilities. I am not expecting SW to be able to produce A-class surfaces. I am not aiming on "designing" stuff, but mostly modelling, so "B-surface quality" is good enough for me. When I ask about the power of their surfacing modules I was thinking about the flexibility of the surfacing module and how easy or tedious it is to create complex surfaces with SW compared to Catia.

I've seen both SW and Solid Edge offer a 30 days free trial, so I think I will give both a go and will decide.

I've checked 3Dexperience for startups with the DSS people and still looks really expensive.

My problem at the moment is that I have only one customer, which will help me to promote my work, but won't give me too much revenue. So any investment needs to be carefully considered as this company might not fully crystallise

[TRKemp]

This is also a good resource for learning surfacing technique in solidworks - from basic to advanced. Most of the basic tutorials are free, the advanced are sold separately or as bundles throughout the year. Jan is a little heavy on the emails, but will respond to your questions personally should you have any. There's plenty of lessons that incorporate solid bodies as well.

https://learnsolidworks.com/

[jcapriotti]

@osdecar Maybe you could post some examples of the type of surfaces you create? I'm sure people here can show how the same is done in SolidWorks, Solid Edge, and Inventor since we have users of each here.

[matt]

@matt you've wrote a couple of times on surfacing in at least a couple CAD systems. Will Solid Edge Sync options be better than anything SW can offer? What about Onshape?

Solid Edge does 95% of what SolidWorks surfacing does. There are some things it does not do, especially around curves and feature controls. But on the other hand, SE has subd modeling and SW doesn't and won't. SE can loft a circle to a line (think chisel point). SW cannot do that.

I haven't done any serious surfacing in Onshape, so I can't comment on that.

Sorry if this answer is late. I just saw it.

[osdecar]

@osdecar Maybe you could post some examples of the type of surfaces you create? I'm sure people here can show how the same is done in SolidWorks, Solid Edge, and Inventor since we have users of each here.

I'm thinking about plastic parts and composite parts design.

Ranging from a small ECU bracket, to a full automotive console/dashboard structure.

Referencing CATIA again, one of the surfacing most used tools for plastic design is the "Sweep" command, which allows you, among other things, to create a surface that holds a specified draft angle along a profile.

Also, the ability to trim intersecting bodies so each feature is created separatedly.


That's what I would like to see in SW or SE.