Jumping on ST! Good or bad idea?

[PatCouture]

Hi

I'm the lone user of SE at my company, I'm still working happily with V20 and I'm still holding back on ST.

I'm curious to see what ST looks like but from all I'm reading here and on the UGS newsgroup I'm not sure if it's a good idea to install it.

I'm in a down period for a week or two before I start on a big project. So one side of me is saying wait for ST2 and after the project is done, while the other is saying it can not be that bad go ahead and work through it you will be fine.

So my question is this: Is it worth looking into SEST or it will just bite me in the ass?

Thanks

Patrick

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

"Patience is a virtue"
"Fools rush in ..."

Choose a small project to initiate yourself into ST mode. A big project will have enough of its own delays and problems without adding new ones unnecessarily. At the very least, wait for ST2.

I'm the lone user of SW at my company. Any problems are seen as a reflection on me ... not the software.

 

[beachcomber]

Hi Pat,
My advice would be to stick with V20 for as long as you can - as far as I can see there is nothing in V100 (ST or traditional) to make it worth changing, and if my experience this week is anything to go by the new interface will frustrate you and slow you down.


bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[beachcomber]

Have a look at my last rant on thread562-233820
If we had known what v100 was like we would not have changed (and we are still using traditional mode only)
There is nothing new, that I can find, in traditional mode.

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[PatCouture]

Thanks Beach

Before writing my post I read your comments but I was still wondering if you wanted to go back or not if you had the chance.

Now I know that you would go back to V20 if you could.

Thanks

Patrick

 

[donyoung]

Hi,

below find some excerpts from "What's new'. When not forced
to 'upgrade' stay with V20 until ST2 or even ST3 is out.

dy

=================================
V21(aka: V100, SEwST, ST):

Adopting Synchronous Technology

User interface highlights
--------------------------
Microsoft Office 2007 look and feel
Zoom slider provides easy access to zoom in and out
View styles displayed in live gallery
View orientations displayed in live gallery
Docking windows replace EdgeBar
Vertical command bar displays command options
Enhanced tooltips displayed for user interface controls
PromptBar
Customize command availability using the Quick Access toolbar
Program and environment options
Grid enhancements
Default color scheme

User assistance tools
---------------------
Self-paced training is available online
Where is user help?
Find commands quickly with Command Finder
Enhanced tooltips provide more complete information
Contextual Help
Animations
New tutorials available (some are missing, Ed.)

Draft details
-------------
Draft template name change
Custom drawing view scales
Data entry standardized for annotation break line length
Dimension edit handles in Draft
On/off button for dimension prefix
True dimensions between drawing views
View and modify block scale

Document management details
--------------------------
(not detailed, Ed.)
New in Insight Connect
New in Solid Edge Embedded Client
New in Solid Edge Structure Editor

Translator details
------------------
IDEAS V12 supported

Part and sheet metal details
----------------------------
New Scale and Twist options for swept features
Pattern occurrence handles enhanced
Template name changes

=========================

 

[beachcomber]

Don,
As I said, there's nothing new in V100 that's really useful.
In your list
The docking windows and vertical command bars are s**t.
If you have the command bar above/below the pathfinder (edge-bar) you either lose a large proportion of the pathfinder, or you end up scrolling the command bar up and down to find the command options.
I've had to put the command options window next to the pathfinder - thus losing even more of the modelling window.
The command options window could also give MORE options in the space that's used - why do I still have to click another button to get, for example, dimension text settings such as tolerance type, bracketed etc.
In select mode I get options for overlap etc - settings that were directly below the select button, and could have been placed along-side the new button.
The view zoom slider is down in the bottom right corner with the window area, fit etc.
On the main top menus the view settings for shaded, wireframe etc have a scroll button so that you can see all the options - why not increase the width a bit so that you can see them all.
With the new interface you are constantly moving from one part of the screen to another.
I always felt SE had a far superior workflow and interface to SoildWorks by virtue of the Smartstep ribbon, but now it's no different, and probably inferior.
I get the impression that the new interface has been designed by marketing people not CAD people.


bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[beachcomber]

...and you need the command finder because some of the commands are not necessarily where you think they would be.
I started to say "In your list.." but forgot to finish the sentence.
What I was going to say was there are no new modelling tools apart from the sheet metal twist/scale.
And I think the pattern parts command has a bug. Try moving the original screw to a different hole in the pattern, then see if it updates the pattern correctly.

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[donyoung]

[cite]
I get the impression that the new interface has been designed by
marketing people not CAD people.
[/cite]

I second that.

SE will be used in many an area. Each area has specific
needs that is some functions are used frequently others
seldom or not at all. The advantage of the present style
is: the toolbars could be populated individually or one
could just rearrange the functions on them and even creating
of new toolbars was possible.
So when working on something all toolbars incl. the EdgeBar
could be closed except those that are needed. That leaves
ample space for the construction and the remaing toolbars
could be placed at a convenient place.
That's all gone with the new UI. Furtheron SE now looks
like SW and possible INV (next version) and even Pro/E
will propably get it with WF5 (at present only when working
on a draft, WF5 is still in beta so there is hope ...)

BC:

pattern: are you running ST/MP1? The pattern did change from 3-point
back to 2-Point creation with MP2. Without MP2 the first
sketchline to define a rectangular pattern will define
the X-Axis ...

dy

 

[Gemnoc]

I've read a comment in the UGS forums that said to skip MP2 and go to MP3, which came out about ten days ago.

I installed SEwST this week, but I kept V20 on my computer. I've spent less than an hour on it so far, but I'm really bummed out about how the ribbon bar is poorly thought out.

An example: in the View tab, you have the view styles icons. But you only see 6 of them, in two rows of three. To see the 7th, which is "Outline with drop shadow", you have to use a side scrollbar. (see attached cropped screenshot)

I know that this view style is not really critical, but I mean, how could they think putting a mini-scrollbar for one stupid icon is good interface design? I could make a long list of ridiculous things like that, and I spent less than an hour on the software. How much time did they waste on this Ribbon bar anyway?!?

I've said it before, I just can't understand how they could think that an interface designed for a business suite (and by a company not exactly renowned for creativity and user-friendly interface design!) could be good for CAD software as well. And why everybody in the CAD business is jumping on that train?!?

I picked SE almost 2 years ago because of its workflow, uncluttered interface, like the smartstep ribbon bar. Now it's all gone, with no possibility of customizing. I know that the quick access bar will be improved in ST2, but come on, this is not the same as what we had prior to ST.

With Synchronous Technology far from being useable for who knows how long, with traditional modeling probably being put aside with all R&D going to ST, I'm beginning to wonder if I did the right choice with SE... :-\

 

[beachcomber]

Don,
I'm talking about patterning a part in an assembly, all in traditional mode.
Last week I modified a part that had a single hole in it for mounting a bracket which was secured by a single screw.
In the part I created a new set of 4 holes and deleted the old hole. I know I could have just modified the original hole to be 4 holes, but that didn't fit in with what I was doing at the time.
In the assembly I re-defined the constraints of the screw to one of the new hole positions, then patterned it to the 4 holes.
The pattern was created in the wrong directions, so none of the other screws lined up with the holes.
To get them correct I had to re-constrain the original screw to the diagonally opposite hole.
I thought this might be an error caused by the new version on an older V20 file so I tested it out on new files.
For this I created a simple sheet-metal plate with 4 holes (again a user defined pattern - if I have 8 holes or less I will do them all in one go as it's just one feature then)
I then put this into a new assembly and added a screw constrained to one of the holes, then patterned it and everything was OK.
However, when I re-constrained the screw to a different hole the pattern was thrown out of position. I also found that I sometimes couldn't get back into the pattern command steps to re-define it - I had to close SE and start it again.
We have had this problem on different files, and on different workstations.
Gemnoc - thanks for adding that jpg - it shows nicely the rediculous vertical scroll bars on the Views and Styles sections, and the different icon sizes.

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[donyoung]

BC,

the change to the pattern function pertains to both
either done in the part or as sketch in an assembly
(trad. mode 3-Point vs. 2-Point). It does not affect
the UDP.

Maybe I did not copy the whole procedure correctly
but I think it's WAD.
So you created 'user defined pattern (UDP)' within
the part. Then constrained the screw to one of the
holes. When doing the pattern you have to specify
a reference feature which will become the reference
point for the pattern to be applied. When you
inadvertedly did not specify the hole that contains
the screw the pattern will not match the holes.
Maybe a simple sample that does show the behaviour
could help to understand.

dy

 

[beachcomber]

Don,
Attached 3 simple files.

http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=59984d87-abc4-4235-848d-494b59f9a770&file=Asm1.asm

http://files.engineering.com/getfil...-4443-82ce-6042fbbfde6b&file=Sheet_Metal3.psm

http://files.engineering.com/getfil...&file=Screw_Hex_M6x20_Steel_Grade_8.8_EZP.par

Move the original screw to the opposite corner hole of the pattern, then redefine the pattern origin to the same hole.

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[donyoung]

BC,

I don't know what you mean with ' ... then redefine the
pattern origin'.
The pattern is of type 'user defined pattern (UDP)' because
it's made of holes rather than cutouts. An UDP has no refrence
point, it is defined at assembly time.
Thus you can insert the screw into any hole. When you invoke
the pattern function make sure to select for the reference
feature that holes the screw is put into. Now a reference
point is defined for the patterned screws. Move the the screw
to a differnet location will move the pattern accordingly.
Because the geometric information of the pattern itself
did not change the pattern will be recreated but now starting
at the repositioned screw
In your example
- the screw is put into the upper left hole
- specifying this hole as ref. feature will create
the pattern as expected

When you now move the screw to the diagonal hole the ref.
point will move as well. Now the pattern will be created
to the right and upward from that screw which is not what
you want but is according to the book.
Deleting the wrong pattern and recreate it and specify
the 'new' hole/screw as reference feature will create the pattern
as expected.
BTW: It works exactly the same in V20.

When using a linear pattern and using a patterned cutout
then be warned that there is a bug in V100 in that the pattern
gets shifted when the selected reference feature is not the
patterned cutout.

dy

 

[donyoung]

/Edit

got the picture
when the screw is moved you can't change the ref. feature
via 'Edit Definition'. Pressing the button has no effect.
That for sure is a bug.

dy

 

[beachcomber]

Thanks for confirming that Don - does it do the same when you create your own parts?
I can change the reference feature but it still throws the pattern the wrong way.
I have found that the pattern-parts command is very inconsistent - sometimes I can get back into the steps, sometimes not.

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[donyoung]

BC,

I've made a small test case on my own. First it makes
no difference whether using part or sheetmetal.
Placing 2 x 2 holes in the part and later on pattern
a screw I've observed the following:

- reference feature is that hole the screw is put into
- the patterned screws coincide with the holes
- 'Edit Definition' and specifying a different hole
has no effect other than I can't use the 'Edit Definition
after that any longer. This is a bug.

- reference feature is NOT that hole the screw is put into
- the patterned screws do not coincide with the holes
the pattern geometry is OK, however. That behaviour is
WAD (V100/V20)
- 'Edit Definition' will not work in this case. As already
said: pressing the button will do nothing and is a bug.
- only way to correct is to delete the pattern and start
over.
- patterned screws are OK
- moving the screw that is located at the reference feature
to a different postion within the UDP will move the UDP
to that point and thus the pattern will not coincide
with the holes. That behaviour is WAD (V100/V20)
- 'Edit Definition' will not work in this case. As already
said: pressing the button will do nothing and is a bug.
- only way to correct is to delete the pattern and start
over.

BTW: using your sample and for the reference feature selecting
always the hole the screw is put into the pattern will be
correct. I can put the screw into any hole of the UDP

dy

 

[beachcomber]

Don,
My colleague has just got this result !!

http://files.engineering.com/getfil...-ad2f-402e-be0f-ee83df04a520&file=Se-crap.JPG

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[donyoung]

that could be easily recreated (even in V20):
- insert the screw into the leftmost hole
- specify for the reference feature the unoccupied
middle hole

QED --> WAD

dy

 

[lapuser]

For what it's worth. I use for my tough parts the old cad system I have and am far more familiar with and as time permits and ability improves migate parts over to SEwST. Maybe my work is different than all of yours but I keep finding new things in ST that allow me to edit parts to adjust rapidly to [for instance a different air cylinder] ongoing parts developement or change. I have an 12" x 36.5" x 1" plate of aluminum for instance that has 18 holes in it. When I wanted to set the moving parts off center by one inch I pick the features and move them one inch and don't rebuild reconstruct squat. In VX for sure or I assume traditional SE this is not possible. I imported in SE a complete assembly the other day with a rod end on another cylinder that would colide with a movable bracket. In VX, and I assume SE traditional I would have to go back to the part history tree and re edit and regen the whole thing again. In SEwST I just edited the part in place with no hassle. It was confusing to find the commands for this but once I did what a time saver. I really recommend the online learn at your own pace tutorials for those of you who have not used them, it will help considerably. I really like the power to change parts I find here and perhaps I am lucky in that I knew I was in for a learning curve here coming from another cad program and was not a long time user of SE that felt like they were just messing around with my program. VERY happy to be here even with the warts that are here and expect a lot to go away soon.