SolidWorks Legion

Engineering related societies

The following is a list of professional societies related to the mechanical engineering field. These groups either have some sort of certification process or are responsible for the control of various commonly used standards. If other societies should be added to this list, please feel free to comment with their information, or email me directly.

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
ASTM International (formerly American Society for Testing and Materials)
International Organization for Standardation (ISO)
National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE)
Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE)
SAE International (formerly Society of Automotive Engineers)
Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI)

SolidWorks 2010 Rollouts season

A lot of VARs are planning some pretty cool events to rollout SolidWorks 2010. I would recommend checking with your VAR if you haven’t already been contacted by them about their offerings. Here’s a couple of examples:

In the San Francisco Bay Area, Hawkridge Systems has several planned events, one of which is at the Hiller Aviation Museum. There are many other events around California and in Nevada, Oregon, Canada, etc.

GoEngineering has several morning-long sessions available in a variety of cities.

Then there’s 3D Vision Technologies and their webinar schedule starting this week.

SolidWorks 2010: Minor tweaks II

SolidWorks 2010 has made some minor tweaks to the control users have over balloons.

In an assembly, when the user inserts a balloon, they can set it to follow the item numbering of a selected BOM under Balloon text (an added option for that field).
The user can now add quantities to balloons. These quantities are parametric so they update automatically as the quantity changes for the associated parts used within the assembly. This was talked about in one of my SolidWorks World 2009 articles.
One thing that has bugged me about SolidWorks for a long time is the fact that balloon size is determined by font size. Finally, balloon size can now be set using an actual numeric value (such as .50″). This can be a general setting in Tools>Options…>Document Properties>Annotation>Balloons. Individual balloon sizes can also be directly customized via it Balloon PropertyManager.

Standard Views without Zoom-to-fit

When using Standard Views in SolidWorks, the resulting view of the model is normally Zoom to fit. This is regardless to the zoom level of the current view. So, if I’m zoomed in to look at a specific feature a very long part, when I change from Front View to Rear View, the model will be resized to fit to screen. This might be unexpected in some cases, as it requires extra steps to return to the area where I was working on the model.

With newer versions of SolidWorks, there is an alternative. A toggle setting is available under Tools>Options…>System Options>View. Unselect the Zoom to fit when changing to standard views option.

The only draw back is that this toggle is buried deep within the Options window. This makes the task of dynamically using this functionality difficult. Otherwise, this is a great function.

Zoom to fit when changing to standard views

Controlled Radius

It’s been many years since ASME Y14.5M-1994 introduced the controlled radius symbol. Yet, we will still frequent find individuals in the industry who have never seen the symbol, nor know what it is. The symbol is CR.

It’s been many years since ASME Y14.5M-1994 introduced the controlled radius symbol. Yet, we will still frequent find individuals in the industry who have never seen the symbol, nor know what it is. The symbol is CR. Really, a controlled radius is actually just a radius that is a fair curve, with no reversals. I’ve not read ASME Y14.5-1982 in a very long time, but I believe this is actually similar to the original definition of a plain ol’ radius from the older standard.

Since ASME Y14.5M-1994, a simple radius has no fair or reversal limitation. As long as the arc of the radius feature’s profile falls within the tolerance zone, it is considered acceptable. These are represented by R.

So much time has gone by since the introduction of CR, I am left wondering why so many people have never seen it. The reason CR was created, as it seems, was to allow engineers to specify a radius without the need for it to be fair or non-reversed. This is good for breaking edges or filling corners. A CR would be more useful when fit and/or function is important, such as guiding features. In this way, the added expense of a creating a fair and non-reversed curve would only be employed when it is necessary for function.

Future of Enterprise PDM

In a recent article, I expressed concerns about the current state of PDM, especially for SolidWorks. There were particular questions posed regarding the long term outlook for Enterprise PDM. The concern is that Dassault Systemes’ plan for PDM solutions may be different than SolidWorks Corp. If that is the case, the Enterprise PDM may not be viable long term solution.

My worries where not allayed in a recent presentation by Noam Ktalav of Dassault Systemes (DS). He was asked about where Enterprise PDM fits into the DS product offerings. His answer didn’t fully address the question. Instead, he talked about Enovia and its scalability. Needless to say, official word regarding Enterprise PDM from DS is very mixed.

Jeff Ray offers insight on this topic

This prompted me to contact SolidWorks Corp for a clearer picture, as least from their perspective. Jeff Ray, CEO of SolidWorks Corp, was able to provide some interesting insights. He exclaimed that statements from DS about Enterprise PDM are mixed. Ray did offer hope that something is being done about this.

[There is a] very intensive effort between SolidWorks and Enovia for a clear road map.

SolidWorks Corp is working hard to lay out a clear plan for its customers. Ray discussed the need for a long term strategy. SolidWorks Corp does not want to force a decision on customers that may eventually lead to a dead end. This would bad for SolidWorks Corp, bad for reputation of individuals who relied on the solutions offered by SolidWorks Corp, and bad for the companies that implemented those solutions. Instead, Ray declared,

We need to give people a scalable answer.

Ray then stated that he wants to optimize the user experience and “hide the plumbing” of the software. He doesn’t want to let technology get in the way of the user experience. He elaborated that users shouldn’t have to be IT experts or even require extensive reliance upon IT departments just to manage their data.

So, a solution that will address Enterprise PDM’s place in the DS universe is coming. As to the when and in what form? Answers will be forthcoming soon.

And what of SolidWorks Workgroups PDM?

During my interview with Ray, I also asked about SolidWorks Workgroups PDM (aka PDMWorks). He clarified that development of the application has hit the limits of the technology behind it. It is not worth the effort to continue to extensively develop the application further. He stated that SolidWorks Corp will continue to support Workgroups PDM and any customers that choose to use it, but that the limitations of the application need to be clearly explained.