I’ve had it. I’m tired of being an afterthought. Just because I’m only colorblind doesn’t mean you can ignore it, SolidWorks. Actually, it’s not just SolidWorks, it’s any software that uses color coding. It would be nice if you’d think about me, and my brothers and sisters out there, when it comes to identification. Why is it so hard to come up with some symbols instead?
As I sat watching Jeremy and Mark preview 2011, I finally asked, for the umpteenth time, when SolidWorks was going to stop discriminating against us, the colorblind. They didn’t have an answer, but spent the rest of the demo hesitating every time they mentioned coloring.
So my question is this, who else is tired of those insensitive color-seeing people making all the decisions? If you’re as tired as I am, submit an enhancement request. Let SolidWorks know that we have feelings and we’re not going to stand by and be ignored.

At 10:00 tonight I’ll be on an airplane heading to the east coast. I’ll spend the weekend with family before heading to Concord to get my first real glimpse at SolidWorks 2011. The only time I’ve seen it was at SWW back in January, so it will be interesting to see what they’ve come up with.
I don’t know that I have any expectations, except for an ‘easy’ button. I’m simple that way. I don’t need a bunch of fancy bells and whistles. Just give me one that does everything and I’ll be happy.
Anyway, I’m looking forward to the next 5 days. Family, good food and a trip to Concord. Life is good.

Today, while running a simulation, I saw on Twitter that Roopinder Tara had put up a new blog post titled ‘Practicing FEA Without a License’. Naturally, I surfed on over because, well, the title described me. The gist of his post was that CAD jockeys shouldn’t be doing analysis, it should be left to PE’s.  That’s what I took away from it anyway.

Here’s my thing, I don’t necessarily disagree with him. To a point. Yes, I run analysis, but they’re based off of input from the guy who signs my checks. In previous positions, the input would come from someone at that same level. We’d discuss what needed to be included, forces, restraints, etc. But, when it came down to setting up the simulation I had to do it because I was the one who knew the software. I was the one who was hired to do it, among other things. I suspect that that is the same in many companies, as well as with resellers. Frankly, it doesn’t make sense for a reseller to hire a PE as a Sales Engineer. Seems like a waste of a couple of very important initials. So, yes, the sales engineer is going to be a CAD Jockey. No harm, no foul.

When I was working for a reseller, I never had the opportunity to demo Simulation. I’m not sure I would have wanted to, either. Not because I don’t think it’s a good product, but because it’s outside my comfort zone. I don’t know anywhere near enough about FEA to say whether its results are always dead nuts on. One of the things that Roopinder brought up in his post was how just adding an extra zero when setting up a simulation could totally hose the results. Makes sense, but I don’t think it’d be just CAD jockeys making those mistakes. To that end, adding an extra zero while doing hand calcs, would have the same effect, no?

Here’s what it boils down to for me. You don’t have to be a PE to run Simulation, but I also wouldn’t stake my reputation on the solely on the results. You have to have someone that knows FEA double-check your inputs and results. I know I do. If I mess something up, people die and I sure as hell don’t want that on my conscience.

Most people are well aware of SolidWorks up front capabilities, i.e. creating 3D models. However, there are nuggets within the basic package of SolidWorks that some are aware of. Things like SimulationXpress, FloXpress or DriveWorksXpress. You can find these tools under, strangely enough, the ‘Tools’ drop down or on the ‘Evaluate’ tab on your Command Manager.

All of the ‘Xpress’ tools are scaled down versions of the actual versions and, with the exception of DriveWorksXpress, are only for analyzing parts. What they do provide, though, is a great first-pass test of your designs. While the results shouldn’t be used exclusively to determine a part’s final version, you’ll at least be able to know that you’re headed in the right direction.

In addition to the ‘Xpress’ tools, the Evaluate tab also has in it:

• Measure Tool – Just what it sounds like; it measures stuff.
• Mass Properties – Need to know the CG? Weight? Click this.
• Sensor Tool – You can use this tool to monitor weight or a particular dimension or simulation data.
• Statistics – Want to know how long it takes your model, or a feature within the model, to rebuild? This’ll tell ya.
• Check – Quick way to find geometry errors.
• Import Diagnostics – This will be greyed out unless you’re dealing with an imported part.
• Heal Edges – Merges short faces.
• Deviation Analysis – Calculate the angle between faces.
• Zebra Stripes – Graphically shows small changes in a face.
• Curvature – Color visual of the radius of curvature (great tool if you’re not colorblind…)
• Draft Analysis – Pretty self-explanatory.
• Undercut Analysis – See above.
• Parting Line Analysis – Ditto.

These are just some of the more not-so-hidden nuggets that are in SolidWorks. Often times, tools like these are stumbled upon as they aren’t generally taught (outside of the ‘Xpress’ tools) in any of the training courses. What tools have you stumbled across?

Yeah, yeah, boring title, I know. I was pretty limited in my options here, y’know? I suppose I could have gone for some long, convoluted title, but why? I’m mean, when all is said and done, you’re here now aren’t ya?

SolidWorks has put out a great self-study guide, but I’m a bit late to the party as far as reviewing it. Rob Rodriguez, Gabi Jack and Deepak Gupta have all done reviews, but I’ll add my 1/2 cent as well.

This 511 page, 35 chapter manual, including a Tips and Tricks chapter, is the perfect manual if you want to learn how to create animations in SolidWorks. Complete with a DVD that contains all the files you’ll need to complete the lessons within. It’s obvious that the anonymous authors did their due diligence in writing this book, as well as thinking about the intended audience. Each chapter contains easy to understand steps that slowly build upon each other. Chapter one explains, in detail, all the various interfaces within the Motion Manager so you, the audience, will understand all the terminology as it’s used in the rest of the manual. Using a liberal amount of images, the user is walked through each step necessary to create everything from a simple animation to a large assembly animation.

If animation is, or is going to become, a part of your workload, you’d be doing yourself a favor making the investment in this book, available for $89.95 in the SolidWorks Store or from your VAR.

First, I should ask if you’ve heard of Mechanical Mashup. No? It’s another one of Ben Eadie’s ideas, he of SolidMentor and SolidJott fame. Mechanical Mashup is for the DIY’ers out there. From their ‘About’ page:

This site is for you if….

-If you own something that you can’t wait for it to break so you can open it up to see how it works.
-If you see something like a studio light for $500.00 and know immediately how to make it for under $50.00
-If you would rather spend 5 hours making something you can buy for $10; just for the experience.
-If every time your friends see you they ask “what crazy thing are you making now?”.
-If everyone else sees a pile of garbage and you see a motor, some scrap material and the perfect stuff for something else you just haven’t thought of yet.
-If your garage only sees a car when you are doing work on it
-If you could get away with not handing out candy at Halloween and people would still come to see your place.

You should check it out. Not only is the stuff they do pretty cool, but they’re running a contest with the winner getting a 3D Print of something they, the winner, designed. If you have an idea, but no way to design it, Ben will cough up 8 hours of his time (and with the Canadian dollar being fairly strong, that’s a good deal). Details for the contest are here. You’ll have to listen to Ben’s Canadian accent, sans subtitles, but you should be ok.

I’ve been busy lately, super busy. I figure I’m averaging almost 60 hours per week here at my new job. Why you might ask? Because of the crap I’ve been trying to polish.

I was brought in to replace a couple of engineers who just weren’t getting things done and, it turns out, what they were getting done wasn’t done right. I think the thing that bothers me most is that they were both AE’s in the past. (I shudder when I think of the damage they might have caused.) I’ve seen under-defined sketches, boss-extrudes to fill cut-extrudes, parts with features that have been suppressed for no apparent reason. This is stuff that was going to be sent out for quote or manufacture/machining. The drawings that had been created were no better. In looking at them, I seriously doubt either engineer had much experience, if any, with manufacturing or production. Don’t even get me started on the part naming and numbering convention…what a cluster that is.

Anyone who has been using SolidWorks for any length of time knows that there are half a dozen different ways to get from A to B. Often you’ll hear there’s no “wrong way” to do it. I’m here to tell you that there is, in fact, a wrong way to do it. Sorry, but it’s the truth. While it’s one thing to haphazardly model parts up during an R&D phase, you need to start thinking about machining, manufacturing, assembly, etc at some point during the design phase. If you don’t, you end up with the crap that I inherited.

• Sometimes you need to take that super cool part and recreate it so that it doesn’t contain a slew of unnecessary features.
• Sometimes you need to redo the end condition on those holes as “up to next” so that your hole callout doesn’t say a depth of 6.375″ when the part is only 2″ thick.
• Sometimes, while you’re fixing that end condition, you need to add the other half of the holes (instead of mirroring) so that your hole callout recognizes that there are actually 12 holes and not only 6.
• Sometimes you need to not remove features that have been linked externally to other parts, or at least remember to delete the damn link so that a part doesn’t open with a bunch of friggin’ x’s!
• Sometimes you need to remove your head from your a…

Listen, just because you think you’re the ultimate CAD jockey doesn’t mean that you are. Do you take the time to think about how that totally awesome part is going to be made? Have you thought about the machinist or mold-maker? If you don’t do your own drawings, have you made your design intent clear enough that your drafter is going to get it? Hell, do you get it?

I realize that what I came across here may only happen once in a while, but even that’s too much. How much forethought would it take to design parts, even in the R&D phase, that, in the end, will work for everyone downstream that needs them? Yes, I realize that parts are extremely fluid during the R&D phase but they do start to solidify.

Something else to consider: when naming parts try to not be a complete tool about it. Naming a part “Intake Bushing, Rev A – Final – Final – Final” does nothing for my confidence that the part is actually the final one. Worse yet is having said part in two different folders where the older one reports to the assembly and not the newer one (based on last saved status). It’s enough to drive a grown man to cry.

What this all boils down to is this: Put some thought into the big picture rather than focusing only on your little part of it. It’ll make for happy people all around.

If you watch College football, you’ve seen their products. If you’re a Chargers fan, you’ve seen their products. Bengals or Packers? Yup, you too. DJO, Inc. designs and produces state-of-the-art knee braces, among other things. 90% of NCAA Division I teams use them. Shawn Merriman, Mark Tauscher, Chad Clifton and Carson Palmer use them. What’s my point here you ask? DJO uses SolidWorks to design their products. Actually, they do more than just design with SolidWorks, they do all their surfacing, rendering and analysis with SolidWorks too. They create a wide array of braces, some of which I’ve used. That’s even more to the point for me. I love finding out that something I’m using, or have used, was created in SolidWorks.

Do you know about the Dynamic Mirror tool in SolidWorks? No? Well, stick around and I’ll show you.

The Dynamic Mirror tool is a sketch tool that allows you to dynamically mirror (duh) as you’re sketching. To use it, you first have to find it as it’s won’t be on your sketch toolbar, or ‘S’ key menu, by default. Hit your ‘S’ key, RMB on the menu and select customize. Go to the ‘Commands’ tab and select ‘Sketch’. There you’ll see the Dynamic Mirror icon:

Just drag and drop it to either the ‘S’ menu or to the sketch toolbar.

Now that you’ve got the button, let’s talk about using it. It’s quite simple, actually. Just like the regular ‘Mirror Entities’ command, you’ll need a centerline. It can either be a sketch, or an existing edge. Simply highlight it and click on the ‘Dynamic Mirror’ button. Start sketching and with each click of your mouse you’ll see a mirrored entity of what you just sketched. While you can, in fact, sketch on both sides of your centerline, you’ll want to stick to one side or the other to prevent overlapping geometry. Once you’ve finished with whatever you wanted to mirror, you can turn off the dynamics but clicking on the button again.

Dynamic Mirror is a great way to quickly, and easily, create symmetric sketches.

I’m constantly amazed at the stuff that’s designed in SolidWorks, or 3D-CAD in general. The layers of complexity, the swoopy surfaces, the level of detail; it all amazes and awes me. Then there’s the “everyday” stuff that it never even crossed my mind that it was designed, period.

How about this, from Crayola:

Yup, your kids’ markers may have been designed by 3D mechanical design software.

Then there’s this offering from Hamilton-Beach:

For you hunters out there, Federal Cartridge is in on it, too:

See those lights in the Nashville Symphony Concert Hall? Yup, SolidWorks:

What’s my point to all this? It’s two-fold, actually. One, the next time you look at something maybe you’ll wonder a bit about who/what/how when it comes to designs of every day items. The second point, and this is directed more towards the beginners, is take those everyday items and reverse engineer them. It’s one of the best ways to learn SolidWorks.