COMPARISON OF SolidWorks & Pro-E

ProE and SolidWorks are two of the most popular 3D modeling applications used in the industry today. Both have very similar tools and use the same tools in slightly different ways to create 3D models.

ProEngineer was created prior to SolidWorks and was pioneering in the range of tools it brought. It became the most prominent 3D modeling software in the late 1990's. Engineers were finally able to view a part and rotate it on the screen. This created a rush for others to try to mock this ability. ProE, being the first, did have a lot of features that needed to mature over a period of time, just like AutoCAD and other 2D programs when they first came out. The software was very graphics intensive and required a lot of the computer's resources, which resulted in a slow and sometimes difficult to operate interface. Also the original set up then involved sub-windows on the right side of the screen.

ProEngineer evolved and a lot of the features were upgraded, and a lot of the bugs were fixed. The software focused on performance and building upon what they already had.

A group of engineers, however, believed that some inherent problems with the ProEngineer existed and were not likely to be improved. This led them to develop SolidWorks.

The primary difference between SolidWorks and ProE is truly the interface. The main focus of SolidWorks was to try to make the tools more intuitive and user friendly. SolidWorks focused on functionality and efficiency. As both applications progressed, each in their own direction, they became further distinct and unique.

Other 3D modeling software appeared, too. These included I-DEAS, Unigraphics (now called Siemens PLM NX), AutoCAD, and CATIA. SolidWorks seemed to be the low-cost solution and was readily adopted by the industry.

If you are interested in user friendly and more intuitive applications, then SolidWorks is the way to go. It is useful for simple, straightforward parts. SolidWorks has a much easier interface and has quicker tools, while ProEngineer has more complex tools and custom sub-programs that can be applied.

Cost wise, SolidWorks is clearly the winner and is generally preferred by businesses. Larger Both have really advanced engineering and helped to move us forward into the 21st century. What used to take years to design in 2D and all the various amounts of checking that needed to be done is now very simple and straightforward with these modern 3D tools. Automobiles, airplanes, large industrial machinery, and all sorts of mechanical engineering applications have all benefited from the advent of 3D design.

TECHNOTRADE7 A Bank Square Market, Model Town Lahore-Pakistan

Tel: 92-42-35832403 Fax: 92-42-3583246 Email: sales@technotrade.com.pkWeb: www.technotrade.com.pk

Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/mechanical/articles/12050.aspx#ixzz1EmR8Tdju

Mark Biasotti, IDEO’s top mechanical CAD expert, is one of the rare individuals who works extensively with both Pro/Engineer and SolidWorks. IDEO, a subsidiary of Steelcase Inc., is one of the top U.S. industrial design firms. So when Biasotti talks about differences between CAD systems, we listen. He provided much of the observations and analysis for this article.

Stylish consumer products are characterized by smoothly flowing lines accented by distinctive features. Such shapes typically are not created solely from analytical surfaces, such as planes and cylinders, which characterize machine elements. Instead they are crafted using b-spline curves and surfaces that give designers the freedom to create virtually any form. The free-form surfaces are combined to make a closed body, which is then converted to a solid model.

Both Pro/E and SolidWorks can construct 2D sketch profiles using splines and analytic geometry such as lines, arcs, and conic sections. Both also can construct curves through three-dimensional reference points that are either fixed in space or attached to existing part edges or vertices

SolidWorks can build 3D curves using what it calls a 3dsketch. This type of sketch is in some ways more versatile than Pro/E’s ability to draw curves thru points because users can combine both analytical entities and splines into a single feature. SolidWorks users also can dimension and constrain three-D sketches in ways that Wildfire users can't. Both Pro/E and SolidWorks can convert sketch entities to a single composite curve. This feature is important for advanced surfaces because the edges that define them must be smooth and free of multiple sketch segments.

SolidWorks does this better than Wildfire because it can convert a two-D or three-D sketch composed of multiple entities using its Fit Spline function. Unlike Wildfire, SolidWorks lets users control the deviation tolerance between the fitted curve and the original entities. This capacity gives SolidWorks the ability to skip over small gaps in the underlying geometry.

Boundary surfaces

Boundary surfaces are the surface features most commonly used for creating complex shapes, according to Biasotti. As their name implies, these surfaces are constructed between three or four bounding curves in space. Competent systems enable designers to add interim curves between the bounding curves to influence the surface shape.

TECHNOTRADE7 A Bank Square Market, Model Town Lahore-Pakistan

Tel: 92-42-35832403 Fax: 92-42-3583246 Email: sales@technotrade.com.pkWeb: www.technotrade.com.pk

A SolidWorks lofted surface is defined by two profiles, which may be planar or three-D curves. To control the shape of all four boundaries, guide curves may be added on the two edges not defined by the profiles.

Swept surfaces

Swept surfaces are another commonly used feature in industrial design. Sweeps resemble lofted surfaces with guide curves, except only one profile is swept along a trajectory.

SolidWorks also has the ability to control swept surfaces and solids with guide curves, giving it a capability similar to Pro/E’s Variable Section Sweep. An unlimited number of guides can be used with the path and profile. SolidWorks has diagnostics for determining where the sweep fails along the path, a valuable tool for anyone using this feature.

A very useful tool in SolidWorks that does not have an exact Pro-E equivalent is the “Fill” tool. In this photo, a two-sided edge is patched using the SolidWorks Fill tool. Typically, this would be considered bad modeling practice to create a surface on a two or three part boundary due to the degenerate conditions where the boundaries meet. A four part boundary trimmed back is a better approach, but SW lets you create reasonably good geometry from bad modeling practices using the fill tool. It really is like a “magic wand” when you see the things it can accomplish.

I also mentioned some other favorite tools I like to use, such as the Indent and Deform (curve-to-curve) tool, and Boundary Surface has mostly replaced Loft as one of my favorite surfacing tools. However, there are situations where using a Loft or Sweep are simply the best tools for the task. We did not cover the “fill” tool to the detail as we would have wished for due to the competition centered on modeling a refrigerator handle and a water pitcher with dog ears. What do you think of Design Engine’s summary on the results? Comments can be posted on the MCAD Central forums , Core77 forum , or on this blog as long as it is not SPAM.

The last image contains the Bicycle seat modeled using four part boundaries, which is the best modeling method and is preferred among Pro-E users with surfacing experience. I hope this post was useful and informative.

EXAMPLE:

I've used them both and I really feel that SW is far better choice for most medium size design / manufacturing companies for its simple and quick design capability. I heard many comments that Pro/E is better for handling a large assembly but I've never had any problem with designing large assemblies (about 500 parts) in SW. Our company is about 300 people industrial PC design firm and we've been using SW for last 3 years

TECHNOTRADE7 A Bank Square Market, Model Town Lahore-Pakistan

Tel: 92-42-35832403 Fax: 92-42-3583246 Email: sales@technotrade.com.pkWeb: www.technotrade.com.pk

Pro/E vs. SolidWorks — a working comparison

Product Development Technologies (PDT), a full-service, award-winning product development firm headquartered in Lake Zurich, IL, is known as one of the largest users of Pro/ENGINEER (a 3D CAD parametric feature solid modeling software) in the world of product consulting. With 50 licenses, 80+ users, and more than a million hours of Pro/E experience collectively among its team, the company has truly earned that reputation. In recent years, however, PDT has had more clients requesting databases created by Pro/E’s competitor, SolidWorks, as their end deliverable, and so the company has grown its SolidWorks expertise to meet that need.

With a great deal of confusion in the market about the relative strengths of each of these CAD software packages, three PDT mechanical engineers were willing to sit down and share their experiences and compare the two side by side. Bjorn is a Pro/E expert from PDT’s Chicago office, Steve a SolidWorks master from Lake Zurich, and Stanislav is the company’s switch-hitter for both teams, working from PDT Ukraine.

For a candy bar cell phone, for example, there’s a battery door that comes off. When the battery door is put on there, it needs to be smooth and integrated and exactly matching up with the back surface of that cell phone. If you can create all that geometry in one location and have it shared into the housing and the battery door, you can guarantee that the housing matches the battery door and that they’re all based off of one thing. In SolidWorks, you can do that, but it’s almost rudimentary compared to the way Pro/E handles it.

Steve: SolidWorks will carry surfaces, planes, solid geometry, and axis. It won’t let you share curves, but the work around is instead of a curve, you extrude a millimeter surface.

TECHNOTRADE7 A Bank Square Market, Model Town Lahore-Pakistan

Tel: 92-42-35832403 Fax: 92-42-3583246 Email: sales@technotrade.com.pkWeb: www.technotrade.com.pk

Steve: You’re right … there are issues with lofts and sweeps, but SolidWorks TRIES to make things work. In Pro/E, you just get errors. I like that at least an attempt is made even if you do end up with some funky surfaces at first.

Stanislav: Pro/E is complicated but it allows you to do any geometry you want in it; you just have to know how to do it. I actually think SolidWorks is strong in solid features and surfaces but weak in drafts and rounds.

TECHNOTRADE7 A Bank Square Market, Model Town Lahore-Pakistan

Tel: 92-42-35832403 Fax: 92-42-3583246 Email: sales@technotrade.com.pkWeb: www.technotrade.com.pk