FeatureWorks can't recognize more than one feature at a time.

[d***@yahoo.com]

I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in SW2005
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a time. I'm
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size, it
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes, even
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.

What's the trick? Am I missing something?

[Richard Charney]

I use 'Feature Works' too. What kind of parts are you trying to import?
Maybe I can help.

Richard

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in SW2005
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a time. I'm
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size, it
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes, even
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?

[d***@yahoo.com]

It's a simple IGES plate with a chamfered slot, four counterbored holes
and the four corners filleted. I'm really just checking out
FeatureWorks but it's not doing what I expected it to do.

If I do the auto recognition I get everything seperate in the feature
tree. I'd like the fillets to be in one feature, the chamfers in one
feature and the holes to be one feature or a pattern. I thought using
the interactive recognition mode would solve that problem for me but I
can't seem to recognize more than one chamfer or hole at a time.

I realize that I can go back after the recognition process and delete
the extra features and edit the definition of the fillets and chamfers
to include those edges. Likewise I can create the hole pattern. On this
simple part, the modifications are relatively simple, but on a larger
more complicated part it won't be this simple.

It just seems to me like FeatureWorks should be able to recognize more
than one feature at a time as it it does with fillets. What am I
missing?

Thanks for your help.

[Richard Charney]

Not exactly sure what's going on for you. Can you send me the file?

Richard

Post by d***@yahoo.com
It's a simple IGES plate with a chamfered slot, four counterbored holes
and the four corners filleted. I'm really just checking out
FeatureWorks but it's not doing what I expected it to do.
If I do the auto recognition I get everything seperate in the feature
tree. I'd like the fillets to be in one feature, the chamfers in one
feature and the holes to be one feature or a pattern. I thought using
the interactive recognition mode would solve that problem for me but I
can't seem to recognize more than one chamfer or hole at a time.
I realize that I can go back after the recognition process and delete
the extra features and edit the definition of the fillets and chamfers
to include those edges. Likewise I can create the hole pattern. On this
simple part, the modifications are relatively simple, but on a larger
more complicated part it won't be this simple.
It just seems to me like FeatureWorks should be able to recognize more
than one feature at a time as it it does with fillets. What am I
missing?
Thanks for your help.

[jon_banquer]

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in SW2005
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a time. I'm
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size, it
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes, even
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?

Yes you are...


The ability to work directly with imported geometry, should
you wish. Even when FeatureWorks does work... it often can
be a very slow tedious process

Why settle for a one trick pony approach when what one
really needs is a Swiss Army knife approach ?

VX allows you to work directly on imported non-native
geometry. Why not try VX and see how you like this approach
vs. being forced to do feature recognition.

www.vx.com


jon (Official presenter of the "Toss It!" seminar at SaladWorks
World 2006 presented by Black Dragon Heavy Industries.)

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in SW2005
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a time.

I'm

Post by d***@yahoo.com
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size, it
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes, even
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?

Yes you are...

He doesn't use it and has no clues what the subject is.

[Richard Charney]

Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?

Richard

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in SW2005
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a time.

I'm

Post by d***@yahoo.com
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size, it
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes, even
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?

Yes you are...
The ability to work directly with imported geometry, should
you wish. Even when FeatureWorks does work... it often can
be a very slow tedious process
Why settle for a one trick pony approach when what one
really needs is a Swiss Army knife approach ?
VX allows you to work directly on imported non-native
geometry. Why not try VX and see how you like this approach
vs. being forced to do feature recognition.
www.vx.com
jon (Official presenter of the "Toss It!" seminar at SaladWorks
World 2006 presented by Black Dragon Heavy Industries.)

[haulin79]

http://www.vx.com/freeeval.cfm
Being a SolidWorks user for the past 7 years, I can honestly say that
VX is a hidden gem.

[Paul Salvador]

Please, show us the designs you do?

..

Post by haulin79
http://www.vx.com/freeeval.cfm
Being a SolidWorks user for the past 7 years, I can honestly say that
VX is a hidden gem.

[haulin79]

http://www.medtronic.com/neuro/gastro/ambreflux/BRAVO.wmv

This is from a few years back i.e. not proprietary. The new stuff I am
working on cannot be released to the public yet.

Please see the above video, ALL the parts in the video shown were done
in SolidWorks. This of course was a team effort.

Post by Paul Salvador
Please, show us the designs you do?

[haulin79]

I forgot to explicitly mention that we are switching to VX.

[Paul Salvador]

So, did you do the ID of the receiver inhouse (outer shape done with
surfaces or solids, top-down/incontext/external references to the outer
surface (all parts associative) or bottom up, non-associative?) or
through the help of a outside design house (they did the outer shape)?
Loading Image...

BTW, I agree, SW is getting worse and worse per release and I understand
why you would change to something else but I don't see how VX is going
to solve your problems, that is another can of worms?
And, I'm not trying to slame VX, I just don't see how VX is going to
solve your problems,.. unless you are going to also use CAM?
But, then again, frustration (which I understand) will do this?
Otherwise, what are the top 2-3 reasons for changing to VX over SW?

Thanks.

Post by haulin79
http://www.medtronic.com/neuro/gastro/ambreflux/BRAVO.wmv
This is from a few years back i.e. not proprietary. The new stuff I am
working on cannot be released to the public yet.
Please see the above video, ALL the parts in the video shown were done
in SolidWorks. This of course was a team effort.

Post by Paul Salvador
Please, show us the designs you do?

[haulin79]

I agree, all software has worms. The best software for a particular
application would have less of them in the primary modules of usage.

I guess after a few months of using VX, I'll be able to tell you if I
have the desire to go back to SolidWorks.

As for the Medtronic receiver, I was not involved with that aspect of
the design. My main job was engineering of the transponder pill and
production fixtures.

Main reasons for switching to VX:
1. Surfacing
2. Robust Core and Cavity design

[Paul Salvador]

Well, am I wrong to assume the receiver is the most complex surface
model and assembly or is the pill?
It seems to me, the order of complexity would be the receiver,
deployment mechanism and the pill?
So, may I ask again, who designed the receiver and if not, will they
also stop using SW and start using VX?
Or, is the other people involved with designed the receiver no longer
involved with your designs and everything will now be done internally?

Thanks.

Post by haulin79
I agree, all software has worms. The best software for a particular
application would have less of them in the primary modules of usage.
I guess after a few months of using VX, I'll be able to tell you if I
have the desire to go back to SolidWorks.
As for the Medtronic receiver, I was not involved with that aspect of
the design. My main job was engineering of the transponder pill and
production fixtures.
1. Surfacing
2. Robust Core and Cavity design

[Paul Salvador]

Well, am I wrong to assume the receiver is the most complex surface
model and assembly or is the pill?
It seems to me, the order of complexity would be the receiver,
deployment mechanism and the pill?
So, may I ask again, who designed the receiver and if not, will they
also stop using SW and start using VX?
Or, are the other people involved with designing the receiver (in SW) no
longer
involved with your designs and everything will now be done internally
using VX?

And, is the need to make core/cavities because you will also be
machining the designs internally using VX?

Thanks.

Post by haulin79
I agree, all software has worms. The best software for a particular
application would have less of them in the primary modules of usage.
I guess after a few months of using VX, I'll be able to tell you if I
have the desire to go back to SolidWorks.
As for the Medtronic receiver, I was not involved with that aspect of
the design. My main job was engineering of the transponder pill and
production fixtures.
1. Surfacing
2. Robust Core and Cavity design

[haulin79]

DHL just delivered my copy of VX yesterday. Being a long time
Solidworks user, I'll let you all know if I regret switching to VX. It
sould take me a couple of months to do a few real projects to make a
firm conclusion.

Paul,
The only portion of the Medtronic device that used surfaces is the
receiver. Both the pill and deployment system used simple solids and
fillets.

We will not be doing machining of core and cavities in-house. A few
months back, I sat with a SolidWorks applications engineer for 2 hours
and he was not able to shell a cavity successfully for a simple
surfaced part for me. That's when I began to realize I may need to
seriously search for another CAD package.

[Dezignstuff]

Post by haulin79
I sat with a SolidWorks applications engineer for 2 hours
and he was not able to shell a cavity successfully for a simple
surfaced part for me.

Reseller application engineers are trained to be able to run scripted demos
without making mistakes, answer some popular tech support questions, and go
through the examples in the training books. There really isn't anything
preparing them to use or troubleshoot more advanced functionality. If you
look at where the official SolidWorks training materials leave off, there
is a whole lot of complex modeling territory which is simply not covered.
Unless you happened on some one who had real world complex
shapes/surfacing/mold development experience, I wouldn't expect much that
isn't included in a demo or training script.

Resellers are all about grinding out mass produced "solutions". They
usually don't get too involved with applications on the fringes. Not that
mold design is fringe work, but it certainly has a lower $/effort ratio
from their point of view.

My point is that I wouldn't necessarily base my judgment of what SolidWorks
can do on what a reseller application engineer can do.

This is part of the reason for starting a new organization to help people
with problems beyone where resellers are willing or able to go.

The website is still under development, but check it out and see if you
could use any of the services offered.

www.dezignstuff.com

Dezignstuff

[Paul Salvador]

Ok, but, may I ask again, who designed the receiver and if not, will
they
also stop using SW and start using VX?
Or, are the other people involved with designing the receiver (in SW) no
longer involved with your designs (external design group?) and
everything will now be done internally
using VX (because your company does not know how to do surfacing in SW)?

And, yeah, let us know how it goes?

Also, could you share the simple file which could not be shelled (was it
a native SW file or import?) so we in the newsgroup can take a look (our
I'll sign a nda if need be?)

..

Post by haulin79
DHL just delivered my copy of VX yesterday. Being a long time
Solidworks user, I'll let you all know if I regret switching to VX. It
sould take me a couple of months to do a few real projects to make a
firm conclusion.
Paul,
The only portion of the Medtronic device that used surfaces is the
receiver. Both the pill and deployment system used simple solids and
fillets.
We will not be doing machining of core and cavities in-house. A few
months back, I sat with a SolidWorks applications engineer for 2 hours
and he was not able to shell a cavity successfully for a simple
surfaced part for me. That's when I began to realize I may need to
seriously search for another CAD package.

[Cliff]

Post by haulin79
DHL just delivered my copy of VX yesterday. Being a long time
Solidworks user, I'll let you all know if I regret switching to VX. It
sould take me a couple of months to do a few real projects to make a
firm conclusion.
Paul,
The only portion of the Medtronic device that used surfaces is the
receiver. Both the pill and deployment system used simple solids and
fillets.
We will not be doing machining of core and cavities in-house. A few
months back, I sat with a SolidWorks applications engineer for 2 hours
and he was not able to shell a cavity successfully for a simple
surfaced part for me. That's when I began to realize I may need to
seriously search for another CAD package.

Are you just sending paper prints out?

[Cliff]

Post by haulin79
A few
months back, I sat with a SolidWorks applications engineer for 2 hours
and he was not able to shell a cavity successfully for a simple
surfaced part for me. That's when I began to realize I may need to
seriously search for another CAD package.

So you are not actually an expert user yourself?
What have you been using for the last few months?
Before that?

[haulin79]

Anybody that claims to be an expert is not.

The more you know, the more you realize you don't know.

[jon_banquer]

Post by Paul Salvador
So, did you do the ID of the receiver inhouse (outer shape done with
surfaces or solids, top-down/incontext/external references to the outer
surface (all parts associative) or bottom up, non-associative?) or
through the help of a outside design house (they did the outer

shape)?

Post by Paul Salvador
http://www.zxys.com/misc/medtronic_bravo_receiver.png
BTW, I agree, SW is getting worse and worse per release and I

understand

Post by Paul Salvador
why you would change to something else but I don't see how VX is going
to solve your problems, that is another can of worms?
And, I'm not trying to slame VX, I just don't see how VX is going to
solve your problems,.. unless you are going to also use CAM?
But, then again, frustration (which I understand) will do this?
Otherwise, what are the top 2-3 reasons for changing to VX over SW?
Thanks.

Post by haulin79
http://www.medtronic.com/neuro/gastro/ambreflux/BRAVO.wmv
This is from a few years back i.e. not proprietary. The new stuff I am
working on cannot be released to the public yet.
Please see the above video, ALL the parts in the video shown were done
in SolidWorks. This of course was a team effort.

Post by Paul Salvador
Please, show us the designs you do?

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"And, I'm not trying to slame VX, I just don't see how VX is going to
solve your problems,.. unless you are going to also use CAM?"

Pretty easy for me to see why.

1. VX's integration of surface and solid tools blows
SolidWorks out of the water. VX *is* what seamless, unified,
hybrid modeling should be... a concept quite foreign to
long time Pro/E users and SolidWorks users but not to
Unigrahpics users.

2. VX's ability to work directly on non-native imported
geometry.

What I question is how well VX handles larger assemblies with lots
of external references. VX's spends a lot of time in their
training manuals explaining how the VX database is object
oriented and very sophisticated.... how this actually
works, I don't know because at the moment I don't work with
very large assemblies. My guess would be it's better than
SolidWorks because VX is coded much better and this becomes
evident very quickly when using VX. VX's market is for
people who need a complete modeling solution... something
that SolidWorks clearly *IS NOT* !

Based on the above, I would guess that Pro/E, UG and Catia are
much better with large assemblies but it's just a guess.

Perhaps SolidEdge's new large assembly technology would also
be better.... all just a guess but if VX was great with
massive assemblies I think they would mention it and they
don't.

jon



Need arrangements for woodwinds ?

www.earlbanquer.com

[Cliff]

NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.164.145.85

Kinkos, Inc. FON-1067749632866191 (NET-63-164-145-0-1)

Pretty easy for me to see why.

Let's think about this.
IF you actually had a computer to run
your touted demos on you'd not need to
post your ads from Kinko's, would you?

And to even get them you'd need a network connection,
such as a phone line too, right?

And IF you actually worked in one of those claimed
small machine shops or did any design SOMEONE would
have a computer SOMEPLACE, right? Which, unless you
were deeply on their s*** list you could probably
use after or before work, right?
Oops ...

Does this explain why you keep asking OTHERS how
things like VX work?
Or why you COULD NOT respond on your touted claims
of fixing IGES files (Mitch sent you one to fix, right? Which
you could not "fix" ......)

You've been just caught totally clueless again, right?

Doing demos at Kinkos? Pay by the minute ..... or is it
a fringe for working there (driving a truck, copier
demos, .... )?

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
1. VX's integration of surface and solid tools blows
SolidWorks out of the water. VX *is* what seamless, unified,
hybrid modeling should be...

Not 3dinkies any more? LOL .....

Post by jon_banquer
a concept quite foreign to
long time Pro/E users and SolidWorks users but not to
Unigrahpics users.

Something else you've never used and probably never even
seen. Unless you want to count Pro-E & SW ...... which would
make three ... at least.

[Paul Salvador]

Post by jon_banquer
"And, I'm not trying to slame VX, I just don't see how VX is going to
solve your problems,.. unless you are going to also use CAM?"
Pretty easy for me to see why.

Well, your response may not clear to all of us?
So I'll add,.. VX is non-modal and has CAM integration, that is the
clear difference, imho.
And, most older ex-CadKey, MDT and UG users will relate to this
non-modal enviroment?
For those users, with this mindset, methodology and workflow, I would
say, VX is the way to go!
What's nice is they offer, like some other hybrid modelers (like UG who
finally got up to speed with parametrics and more defined workflows) ,
is they offer different modes for different workflows.
But I'll personally state this, I was "never" forced with working with a
workflow in Pro/e, I could always break the relationships and work with
dumb data, and, SW is/has been very similar but still lacks (as
standard, third party, one freebie is avialable) direct topology
manipulation.
How VX shows a difference here is they are able to work with dumb data
and constraint the data on the fly. Where as, Pro/e and SW, in some
cases curves and surfaces need some modification to access it as a local
feature (a few more mouse clicks, not a big issue imho).
But I say recently because more manipulation tools have reduced the
steps to a few less mouse clicks or more direct on the fly
association/manipulation.

Post by jon_banquer
1. VX's integration of surface and solid tools blows
SolidWorks out of the water. VX *is* what seamless, unified,
hybrid modeling should be... a concept quite foreign to
long time Pro/E users and SolidWorks users but not to
Unigrahpics users.
2. VX's ability to work directly on non-native imported
geometry.

How so, examples?
The concept is not at all foreign to me but I understand the need if I
were someone who needed more tools for manipulation and used CAM, but I
don't.
I think I helped clear some of this up by showing you the tools which
are available for data import, repair and manipulation at cadchat?
From what I see so far, even though I like VX (and did like it in the
past) and I think it seems to fit your wants but it does not fit my
needs from what I still see. I continue to see it more as a machinist
tool.
Their demo is getting better and the online demos and help is
impressive, it should help them?

Post by jon_banquer
What I question is how well VX handles larger assemblies with lots
of external references. VX's spends a lot of time in their
training manuals explaining how the VX database is object
oriented and very sophisticated.... how this actually
works, I don't know because at the moment I don't work with
very large assemblies. My guess would be it's better than
SolidWorks because VX is coded much better and this becomes
evident very quickly when using VX. VX's market is for
people who need a complete modeling solution... something
that SolidWorks clearly *IS NOT* !

Not sure about the assemby capability, have not delved into yet.
How you can make a subjective "blows away" or "better" statement is not
clear.
VX maybe coded perfectly but that does not translate into
factual/relatable data for us to understand/compare.
That is, you would want factual data if someone made statements that SW
is better and blows away VX, no?

Post by jon_banquer
Based on the above, I would guess that Pro/E, UG and Catia are
much better with large assemblies but it's just a guess.

I don't know yet.
I could guess/assume based on what I've seen so far that Pro/e and UG
are still better but that is not fair, I don't have the data to
show/compare.
Again, VX strengths are with direct manipulation of imported data so I
would guess/assume assembly modeling and drafting will not be their
strong areas?
SW, imho, sucks (very slow) at top-down and large assembly!
But then again, one would think that VX Corp would/should be
testing/comparing SW against VX to show how much better, no?

Post by jon_banquer
Perhaps SolidEdge's new large assembly technology would also
be better.... all just a guess but if VX was great with
massive assemblies I think they would mention it and they
don't.
jon

I have no idea but know what SE has claimed in the past (typical
marketing, like most mcad companies, not always accurate and with no
comparison data)
From their mktg brochures and reading some info on it, it seems to be
something a SE user will see as new but something other programs have
had for quite some time.
All the best to them, SE and UG seem to be complimenting eachother quite
well.

(btw, I look forward to seeing your models from Bottle Bob's images and
the other models you have done in VX!?)

..

[jon_banquer]

Post by Paul Salvador

Post by jon_banquer
"And, I'm not trying to slame VX, I just don't see how VX is going to
solve your problems,.. unless you are going to also use CAM?"
Pretty easy for me to see why.

Well, your response may not clear to all of us?
So I'll add,.. VX is non-modal and has CAM integration, that is the
clear difference, imho.
And, most older ex-CadKey, MDT and UG users will relate to this
non-modal enviroment?
For those users, with this mindset, methodology and workflow, I would
say, VX is the way to go!
What's nice is they offer, like some other hybrid modelers (like UG who
finally got up to speed with parametrics and more defined workflows) ,
is they offer different modes for different workflows.
But I'll personally state this, I was "never" forced with working with a
workflow in Pro/e, I could always break the relationships and work with
dumb data, and, SW is/has been very similar but still lacks (as
standard, third party, one freebie is avialable) direct topology
manipulation.
How VX shows a difference here is they are able to work with dumb data
and constraint the data on the fly. Where as, Pro/e and SW, in some
cases curves and surfaces need some modification to access it as a local
feature (a few more mouse clicks, not a big issue imho).
But I say recently because more manipulation tools have reduced the
steps to a few less mouse clicks or more direct on the fly
association/manipulation.

Post by jon_banquer
1. VX's integration of surface and solid tools blows
SolidWorks out of the water. VX *is* what seamless, unified,
hybrid modeling should be... a concept quite foreign to
long time Pro/E users and SolidWorks users but not to
Unigrahpics users.
2. VX's ability to work directly on non-native imported
geometry.

How so, examples?
The concept is not at all foreign to me but I understand the need if I
were someone who needed more tools for manipulation and used CAM, but I
don't.
I think I helped clear some of this up by showing you the tools which
are available for data import, repair and manipulation at cadchat?
From what I see so far, even though I like VX (and did like it in the
past) and I think it seems to fit your wants but it does not fit my
needs from what I still see. I continue to see it more as a

machinist

Post by Paul Salvador
tool.
Their demo is getting better and the online demos and help is
impressive, it should help them?

Post by jon_banquer
What I question is how well VX handles larger assemblies with lots
of external references. VX's spends a lot of time in their
training manuals explaining how the VX database is object
oriented and very sophisticated.... how this actually
works, I don't know because at the moment I don't work with
very large assemblies. My guess would be it's better than
SolidWorks because VX is coded much better and this becomes
evident very quickly when using VX. VX's market is for
people who need a complete modeling solution... something
that SolidWorks clearly *IS NOT* !

Not sure about the assemby capability, have not delved into yet.
How you can make a subjective "blows away" or "better" statement is not
clear.
VX maybe coded perfectly but that does not translate into
factual/relatable data for us to understand/compare.
That is, you would want factual data if someone made statements that SW
is better and blows away VX, no?

Post by jon_banquer
Based on the above, I would guess that Pro/E, UG and Catia are
much better with large assemblies but it's just a guess.

I don't know yet.
I could guess/assume based on what I've seen so far that Pro/e and UG
are still better but that is not fair, I don't have the data to
show/compare.
Again, VX strengths are with direct manipulation of imported data so I
would guess/assume assembly modeling and drafting will not be their
strong areas?
SW, imho, sucks (very slow) at top-down and large assembly!
But then again, one would think that VX Corp would/should be
testing/comparing SW against VX to show how much better, no?

Post by jon_banquer
Perhaps SolidEdge's new large assembly technology would also
be better.... all just a guess but if VX was great with
massive assemblies I think they would mention it and they
don't.
jon

I have no idea but know what SE has claimed in the past (typical
marketing, like most mcad companies, not always accurate and with no
comparison data)
From their mktg brochures and reading some info on it, it seems to be
something a SE user will see as new but something other programs have
had for quite some time.
All the best to them, SE and UG seem to be complimenting eachother quite
well.
(btw, I look forward to seeing your models from Bottle Bob's images and
the other models you have done in VX!?)
..
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

I'm going to try and answer this in several parts.

Post by Paul Salvador
And, most older ex-CadKey, MDT and UG users will relate to this
non-modal enviroment?

My VX AE (who values his privacy) has a Cadkey background. Also a
SolidEdge background. AFAIC I personally hate anything that's modal
especially in a CAM program.

Post by Paul Salvador
For those users, with this mindset, methodology and workflow, I would
say, VX is the way to go!

VX is the way to go if one wants powerful surface and solid tools that
work reliably and in a consistent manner. VX is the way to go when you
want one company to control both CAD and CAM. VX is the way to go when
you want a company who has more experience with hybrid modeling than
SolidWorks does. VX is the way to go when you want the product you buy
to have total control over it's kernel. VX is the way to go when you
need a company that understands what job shops / mold shops /
progressive die shops really need and focuses on that market. VX is the
product that comes closest to the way I think interaction with a
CAD/CAM system should be... this is a very personal thing... I just
like how VX interacts with a user better. VX is how I think a CAD/CAM
system should work. I thoroughly enjoy using it... so far. I have not
pushed VX's limits yet but I hope to in the coming weeks / months. If I
break it I will be more than happy to say where I think VX needs work,
just like I'm going to do in this post in an area you brought up.

Post by Paul Salvador
I continue to see it more as a machinist tool.

I disagree. VX's CAD side has a lot more development money into it....
a lot more ! I feel that modal CAD/CAM systems are the wrong way to go
in a machining job shop where speed and change are a way of life...
this is one of the big problems with SolidWorks heavy (almost
exclusive) reliance on FeatureWorks.... it's SLOW !!!

On the CAM side, non modal and the ability to handle change at any
stage, is what set a product like SmartCAM apart from all others...
SmartCAM *was better thought out*, SmartCAM gave the user more control.
By exposing it's database of elements, SmartCAM allowed one to change
anything at anytime. SmartCAM was not modal in anyway. After not seeing
development for years SmartCAM's approach is still unique ! It's dated
in many ways but it still has a beauty to it, much like I feel VX has.

Like you want specifics... I want them also. I will acknowledge you
have provided specifics in the past on other products. I would like to
hear them from you on VX. I'm sure others would also benefit from
someone who uses / has used Pro/E, SolidWorks and MDT.

Post by Paul Salvador
Their demo is getting better and the online demos and help is
impressive, it should help them?

The help and tutorial files provided by VX are extensive but they badly
need updating. Advanced surfacing is not covered in the way I feel it
should be. One of the nice things about Pro/E or SolidWorks is that
books and other forms of tutorials are available from independents.
This is not the case with VX and VX needs to get up to speed in this
area... quickly.

I'm actually thinking of buying a tutorial book on Pro/E Wildfire
because I think I maybe able to transfer what I learn about Pro/E
Wildfire to VX and this may help where documentation on VX fails to
deliver. Further it will allow me to make the kind of direct
comparisons that I enjoy making. I fail to see where it would hurt.

Let me be clear: VX has made a very good effort with documentation...
their documentation just needs to be updated in some areas and VX's
advanced surfacing needs much better coverage. IMO, documentation is a
major problem for all CAD/CAM companies. VX does better than most but
it's not good enough.

Post by Paul Salvador
SW, HMO, sucks (very slow) at top-down and large assembly!
But then again, one would think that VX Corp would/should be
testing/comparing SW against VX to show how much better, no?

I think so but VX does not see SolidWorks as the market they really
focus on at the moment. I wish they would change this stratagy and
start doing more head to head and kicking some ass. The next market I
think VX will focus on is the progressive die market.... as most
progressive die shops are still using 2D AutoCAD.

I don't know anyone in VX's marketing department. Only real contact I
have is with my VX A.E. and it's limited.

I have not been over to CADChat, yet.

jon

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
AFAIC I personally hate anything that's modal
especially in a CAM program.

Try using one someday.
Then find out what the word means.

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
My VX AE (who values his privacy) has a Cadkey background.

IOW not to be associated with you or a newbie.

[Cliff]

Post by Paul Salvador
VX is the way to go

Does 3dinkies know that you've dumped them?

How was their party?

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
One of the nice things about Pro/E or SolidWorks is that
books and other forms of tutorials are available from independents.
This is not the case with VX and VX needs to get up to speed in this
area... quickly.

Use legal software & they have support & manuals & training <GG>.

[Cliff]

documentation on VX fails to deliver.

You need to learn to read.

[haulin79]

What does non-modal and modal mean?
Thanks!

[Cliff]

Post by haulin79
What does non-modal and modal mean?

Just that jb has new buzzwords.

HTH

[jon_banquer]

Post by Richard Charney
Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?
Richard

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in SW2005
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a time.

I'm

Post by d***@yahoo.com
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size, it
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes, even
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?

Yes you are...
The ability to work directly with imported geometry, should
you wish. Even when FeatureWorks does work... it often can
be a very slow tedious process
Why settle for a one trick pony approach when what one
really needs is a Swiss Army knife approach ?
VX allows you to work directly on imported non-native
geometry. Why not try VX and see how you like this approach
vs. being forced to do feature recognition.
www.vx.com
jon (Official presenter of the "Toss It!" seminar at SaladWorks
World 2006 presented by Black Dragon Heavy Industries.)

Richard,

Post by Richard Charney
Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?

VX works *directly* on imported geometry. You can add
constraints to that geometry, if you so desire, and create
"smart" models from "dumb"imported non-native geometry.

You can download and try VX here:

www.vx.com

If you have any questions on VX, I've been posted here or in
alt.machines.cnc for at least the last 8 years. There are
now 3 regulars in alt.machines.cnc that use VX.

You can also use the CADChat Forum for VX that I asked for and
received:

www.cadchat.com


jon

[Richard Charney]

Jon, will it also run under Mandrake Linux 10.1? That's what I'm currently
using for an OS.

Post by d***@yahoo.com

Post by Richard Charney
Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?
Richard

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in

SW2005

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a

time.

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer
I'm

Post by d***@yahoo.com
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size,

it

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes,

even

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?

Yes you are...
The ability to work directly with imported geometry, should
you wish. Even when FeatureWorks does work... it often can
be a very slow tedious process
Why settle for a one trick pony approach when what one
really needs is a Swiss Army knife approach ?
VX allows you to work directly on imported non-native
geometry. Why not try VX and see how you like this approach
vs. being forced to do feature recognition.
www.vx.com
jon (Official presenter of the "Toss It!" seminar at SaladWorks
World 2006 presented by Black Dragon Heavy Industries.)

Richard,

Post by Richard Charney
Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?

VX works *directly* on imported geometry. You can add
constraints to that geometry, if you so desire, and create
"smart" models from "dumb"imported non-native geometry.
www.vx.com
If you have any questions on VX, I've been posted here or in
alt.machines.cnc for at least the last 8 years. There are
now 3 regulars in alt.machines.cnc that use VX.
You can also use the CADChat Forum for VX that I asked for and
www.cadchat.com
jon

[jon_banquer]

Post by Richard Charney
Jon, will it also run under Mandrake Linux 10.1? That's what I'm currently
using for an OS.

Post by d***@yahoo.com

Post by Richard Charney
Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?
Richard

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
I am using FeatureWorks to build features in imported parts in

SW2005

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
but I'm having trouble recognizing more than one feature at a

time.

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer
I'm

Post by d***@yahoo.com
using Interactive Recognition mode for various reasons. I can pick
multiple fillets that are the same radius and it recognizes them,
however when I try to recognize 2 chamfers that are the same size,

it

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
fails. I must select them 1 at a time. The same goes for holes,

even

Post by Richard Charney

Post by jon_banquer

Post by d***@yahoo.com
though they are the same size, I must select them 1 at a time.
What's the trick? Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?

Yes you are...
The ability to work directly with imported geometry, should
you wish. Even when FeatureWorks does work... it often can
be a very slow tedious process
Why settle for a one trick pony approach when what one
really needs is a Swiss Army knife approach ?
VX allows you to work directly on imported non-native
geometry. Why not try VX and see how you like this approach
vs. being forced to do feature recognition.
www.vx.com
jon (Official presenter of the "Toss It!" seminar at SaladWorks
World 2006 presented by Black Dragon Heavy Industries.)

Richard,

Post by Richard Charney
Does this VX really work like that? How can I try it out?

VX works *directly* on imported geometry. You can add
constraints to that geometry, if you so desire, and create
"smart" models from "dumb"imported non-native geometry.
www.vx.com
If you have any questions on VX, I've been posted here or in
alt.machines.cnc for at least the last 8 years. There are
now 3 regulars in alt.machines.cnc that use VX.
You can also use the CADChat Forum for VX that I asked for and
www.cadchat.com
jon

Richard,

"Jon, will it also run under Mandrake Linux 10.1? That's what I'm
currently using for an OS."

I don't believe VX supports Unix environments anymore. Perhaps one
reason is that on the CAM side VX, like most everyone else, uses the
MachineWorks component.

http://www.machineworks.com/mw_part001.htm

jon

[jon_banquer]

Richard,

I did a little more checking and MachineWorks now claims to support
Unix environments.

http://www.machineworks.com/mw_dev090.htm

Perhaps a small company like VX feels it would be to expensive and to
difficult to support both platforms especially because VX seems to be
sold mainly to small and mid-size companies most of whom run Windows
XP.

VX is *just beginning to learn how to market* and they seem to be
making good progress. For years they just developed for one large
client.

http://www.vx.com/background.cfm

"Founded in 1985, VX provides design-through-manufacturing solutions to
help companies speed time-to-market, increase profitability and gain a
sustainable, competitive advantage. Formed by a group of talented
mechanical and software engineers headed by Mark Vorwaller, their
vision was to develop highly functional, highly productive and
extremely accurate software tools to serve the needs of both design
engineers and manufacturers.

Originally known as Control Automation Inc. (CAI), the company entered
into a four-year joint development agreement with NKK Corp. of Japan
and introduced the industry's first hybrid solid/surface/wireframe
CAD/CAM system in 1991. In 1994, the company became known as
Varimetrix, deriving its name from "variational geometry" and
"parametric technology" to reflect the two key components of VX's
core technology. Also that year, a long-term partnership was formed
with South Korean-based Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. to develop and
produce an advanced CAD/CAM system for Samsung's internal product
development.

The result was VX CAD/CAM™, an advanced, integrated CAD/CAM solution
that delivered powerful and affordable, three-dimensional hybrid
modeling capabilities to the desktop. In March 1999, VX CAD/CAM was
released and made available commercially, featuring assembly-centric
wireframe, surface and solid modeling with drafting, manufacturing and
rendering built in. In April 2000, Shin Nippon Koki (SNK) of Osaka,
Japan, invested $20 million in VX to sell, market and distribute its
products globally. In 2001, Varimetrix was shortened to VX, with a new
logo and brand, to further drive the sales and marketing of its
enterprise-level products globally. VX CAD/CAM™

VX technology is built on an exclusive, high-performance engine, the VX
kernel, that delivers sophisticated 3D hybrid modeling capabilities and
provides interoperability with emerging process management and
engineering tools. Some of the world's leading manufacturers already
rely on VX CAD/CAM software to drive the design, engineering and
manufacturing of their innovative products.

With the introduction of VX CAD/CAM, VX extends enterprise-level
mechanical design and engineering capabilities to the desktop-at a
fraction of the cost of comparable systems. VX's fully-integrated
CAD/CAM environment provides an intuitive user interface, advanced 3D
modeling and the open, powerful VX kernel, needed to rapidly develop
high-quality products.

VX is privately held. In addition to Shin Nippon Koki (SNK, Osaka,
Japan), a privately held, major machining systems supplier affiliated
with Daiwa Can Co., Nissan Machine Co. and Nippon Steel Corp, VX's
investor partners have included Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

With global headquarters in Palm Bay, Fla., VX maintains sales and
marketing offices worldwide and can be accessed on the Web at
www.vx.com."


jon

[Richard Charney]

Ok, thanks anyway. But, I guess I'll have to go with using VariCAD. Since
it's the only solid modeler that I've been able to find that will run under
on Linux.

Don't worry guys, I'm still using Solidworks at work and love it. I just
need something, like VariCAD, to use at home that runs on my Linux Laptop.

Richard



"jon_banquer" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:***@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Richard,

I did a little more checking and MachineWorks now claims to support
Unix environments.

http://www.machineworks.com/mw_dev090.htm

Perhaps a small company like VX feels it would be to expensive and to
difficult to support both platforms especially because VX seems to be
sold mainly to small and mid-size companies most of whom run Windows
XP.

VX is *just beginning to learn how to market* and they seem to be
making good progress. For years they just developed for one large
client.

http://www.vx.com/background.cfm

"Founded in 1985, VX provides design-through-manufacturing solutions to
help companies speed time-to-market, increase profitability and gain a
sustainable, competitive advantage. Formed by a group of talented
mechanical and software engineers headed by Mark Vorwaller, their
vision was to develop highly functional, highly productive and
extremely accurate software tools to serve the needs of both design
engineers and manufacturers.

Originally known as Control Automation Inc. (CAI), the company entered
into a four-year joint development agreement with NKK Corp. of Japan
and introduced the industry's first hybrid solid/surface/wireframe
CAD/CAM system in 1991. In 1994, the company became known as
Varimetrix, deriving its name from "variational geometry" and
"parametric technology" to reflect the two key components of VX's
core technology. Also that year, a long-term partnership was formed
with South Korean-based Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. to develop and
produce an advanced CAD/CAM system for Samsung's internal product
development.

The result was VX CAD/CAMT, an advanced, integrated CAD/CAM solution
that delivered powerful and affordable, three-dimensional hybrid
modeling capabilities to the desktop. In March 1999, VX CAD/CAM was
released and made available commercially, featuring assembly-centric
wireframe, surface and solid modeling with drafting, manufacturing and
rendering built in. In April 2000, Shin Nippon Koki (SNK) of Osaka,
Japan, invested $20 million in VX to sell, market and distribute its
products globally. In 2001, Varimetrix was shortened to VX, with a new
logo and brand, to further drive the sales and marketing of its
enterprise-level products globally. VX CAD/CAMT

VX technology is built on an exclusive, high-performance engine, the VX
kernel, that delivers sophisticated 3D hybrid modeling capabilities and
provides interoperability with emerging process management and
engineering tools. Some of the world's leading manufacturers already
rely on VX CAD/CAM software to drive the design, engineering and
manufacturing of their innovative products.

With the introduction of VX CAD/CAM, VX extends enterprise-level
mechanical design and engineering capabilities to the desktop-at a
fraction of the cost of comparable systems. VX's fully-integrated
CAD/CAM environment provides an intuitive user interface, advanced 3D
modeling and the open, powerful VX kernel, needed to rapidly develop
high-quality products.

VX is privately held. In addition to Shin Nippon Koki (SNK, Osaka,
Japan), a privately held, major machining systems supplier affiliated
with Daiwa Can Co., Nissan Machine Co. and Nippon Steel Corp, VX's
investor partners have included Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

With global headquarters in Palm Bay, Fla., VX maintains sales and
marketing offices worldwide and can be accessed on the Web at
www.vx.com."


jon

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
on the CAM side VX, like most everyone else, uses the
MachineWorks component

So, contary to most of what you posted, they did not
write it themselves.

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
If you have any questions on VX, I've been posted here or in
alt.machines.cnc for at least the last 8 years.

Not that he could answer any of them, except to copy ads
& blurbs.

Imagine that ... "8 years" of being clueless ... it's been
rough.