[AT] tractor hauler a pain to install headlights.

[Stephen Offiler]

Mostly it's because they design for minimum component cost plus minimum
assembly labor cost, period.  That's what management tells them to do,
whether or not they grew up with greasy fingernails and rebuild engines on
weekends, or if they live in their parents' basement and play video games
the other 16 hours of the day.

SO

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 11:38 PM Cecil Bearden <crbearden at copper.net> wrote:

> There is less than a 1/4 in between the bumper and the grill.  If there
> was another 1/4in, I could slip a 1/4in  universal socket with a long
> extension and get the grill out.   Part of this is due to the cad
> programs.  The other part is very few engineers have any clue as to how to
> repair the vehicle they are designing...   I guess it could be attributed
> to the absence of high school shop classes........  When I get the barn
> cleaned out and my 4post lift in there, I will get it raised up and change
> the lights.
>
> Cecil
> On 1/15/2020 9:40 PM, Dennis Johnson wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> You might be right for autos. My experience was Paccar (KW, Pete, etc),
> International, CAT, used ProE. Schlumberger and Boeing also used ProE.
> Things may have changed the last few years.
>
> Dennis
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 15, 2020, at 1:27 PM, Stephen Offiler <soffiler at gmail.com>
> <soffiler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
> http://lists.antique-tractor.com/listinfo.cgi/at-antique-tractor.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing listAT at lists.antique-tractor.comhttp://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/20200116/7af9bf41/attachment.htm>