[AT] tractor hauler a pain to install headlights.

[Stephen Offiler]

To the best of my knowledge, Catia and Unigraphics NX both outpace Pro/E in
the automotive industry.

SO


On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 2:13 PM Dennis Johnson <moscowengnr at outlook.com>
wrote:

> Most larger automotive companies and engine companies use ProE cad
> programs.
> Cad programs do not cause clearance or maintenance issues. These programs
> just allow the operator to make poor designs quicker than old days with tee
> squares.
>
> Dennis
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 15, 2020, at 12:15 PM, Stephen Offiler <soffiler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
> Interesting comments on screen sizes James.  I've got a dual monitor
> setup, 27" in front of me and 21" just to the right.  When doing CAD work,
> it's mostly done on the main screen, with the smaller one containing notes,
> word processor, internet browser, calculator, useful tools along those
> lines.  But to comment on scale:  A practical problem I run into is with
> small parts.  It is a basic functionality of CAD to zoom, pan, and rotate
> the part or assembly on screen.  You can take a tiny part and fill the
> screen with it and lose appreciation for scale very quickly.
>
> SO
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:32 PM James Peck <jamesgpeck at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> When vehicles were designed on the board, they drew in 1/2 scale. You
>> could look at a drawing and relate it to reality. If you taped a drawing to
>> a wall, you could get a sense of the vehicle size.  If a designer had a
>> full size or 1/2 size CAD screen, those inaccessible places would be much
>> more noticeable. People doing 3D solid modelling sometimes have multiple
>> screens, one for each view. It would be difficult to design anything on a
>> smart phone screen. It is not much easier on a small monitor. Monitors do
>> continually get larger, just like TV screens.
>>
>> Some years ago I read some issues of a then DaimlerChrysler employee
>> newsletter. One article covered a group that real world verified that all
>> maintenance operations could be performed on a new model. If the
>> maintenance could not be performed, the group would have to design a
>> specialized tool or get a tool manufacturer to design the tool and offer it
>> for sale.
>>
>> They did all this after the vehicle had been designed and production was
>> imminent. I am guessing that moving heaven and earth would be easier than
>> getting the product design changed.
>>
>> Toyota which emphasizes production efficiency not product design may not
>> do it any differently.
>>
>> Cecil Bearden AT List member, Oklahoma farmer, and Professional Engineer (
>> crbearden at copper.net); <snap> This is the problem of designing with
>> AutoCAD and those other computer drafting programs. The designer has no
>> idea of the clearance in the finished product. <snip>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
>> http://lists.antique-tractor.com/listinfo.cgi/at-antique-tractor.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
> http://lists.antique-tractor.com/listinfo.cgi/at-antique-tractor.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
> http://lists.antique-tractor.com/listinfo.cgi/at-antique-tractor.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.antique-tractor.com/pipermail/at-antique-tractor.com/attachments/20200115/4d92f380/attachment.htm>