Jump to content

Has anyone used Alibre


GWS

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

GWS,

Have you visited their site? They like to compare themselves to Solidworks, though features I suspect are not as plentiful. But if you don't need all the other stuff Solidworks has then why not try it? Get the demo, contact them and find out. I'm currently looking at Alibre because of its comparison to Solidworks and much cheaper price tag. If all goes well, the free version may be all that we need (HS with basic engineering course).

Anyway, have heard both positive and negative, but negative tends to be more about features it does not have compared to Solidworks. Most people say that it's worth the price tag,

though.

Alibre claims that the following companies are using it:

Abbott Laboratories

Alcoa

Allied Power Products Inc

American Airlines

ARC Technologies

ArvinMeritor

Avistar, Inc.

Battelle

Bechtel

Bombardier

Boyd Lighting Co

BWXT-Y12 Technical Services

Technical Services

Calsonic-Kansei

Carrier Corporation

Caterpillar

EG&G Defense Materials, Inc. - URS Corporation

ExxonMobile

Fabrico

Huyett

General Dynamics

General Electric Corporate Research

General Mills

Honeywell

IBM

JPL - Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Kelowna Flightcraft

Kennametal

Keystone Applied Technology

Laird Technologies

Lytron

Methode Electronics

MSI

NASA

Naval Air Warfare Center ( NAWCWD ) and Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC)

Northrop Grumman

Pfizer

Pratt & Whitney

Praxair

SAIC

Sandia National Laboratories

ShopBot Tools Inc.

Siemens

SouthWest Research Institute

Tamko

Tripar, Inc.

Whirlpool

Wyle Laboratories Inc.

Some big names. I don't know you, but seeing names like this clearly indicates that the product has merit. Anyway, it's easier for me. I'm only looking for software that will introduce engineering comcepts/practices to HS students, not for professional purposes.

Anyone else?

Edited by Richard Perrine
Link to comment

Since posting this I have been looking at the 30 day demo which was very interesting. It appears to be very similar in its ways to Solidworks and as the price seemed very favourable I have also bought the standard version.

I haven't explored the more advanced modelling side yet but I was able to create a mechanism and 'proof' it's mechanical movements fairly easily. The tutorials are also very useful.

There is lofting and more 'creative' 3D operations and, what is called, 3D sketching which I haven't got to yet but from what I have seen Alibre Design does fill a gap for mechanical design for a very affordable price. I would say it's worth taking a stab.

I also imported an IGES file from VW which worked very well indeed.

I'll keep you posted.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

I have never used Alibre, but attended a large Model Engineering Expo, and Alibre seems to be the choice of software for modelmakers.

The people that were using Alibre even upgraded from the free version to the paid version.

The work includes models to make castings for steam engines, as well as CNC parts.

Vectorworks would be the choice of many, many, more people, if a little more effort and attention would be given to the mechanical section.

I recieved an email for Top Ten Tricks in Vectorworks, and Mechanical was not one of the 4 Products offered.

Larry

Edited by Larry B.
Link to comment

I must say I agree that the mechanical part of VW does seem to have a lot less attention paid to it and if it was brought up to a more modern standard there would probably be a great deal more interest in it and be more widely used, which can only be a good thing for increasing the size of the customer base.

Link to comment

Yeah, i'm always receiving email from the local VW distributor offering loads of traniing opportunities, non of which include Machine Designs as an option in the list.

VW needs to catch up at least with those cheaper CAD pacages that already offer greater dedicated MD type tools. With more to offer mechtechs, VW could clean up . . . . .

:)

Link to comment

That, Guy, has been my fear for far too many years. Considering how little really changes in MD with each version update. But, it's an income, however small, it's still an income.

AND, i'd really hate to have to learn yet another package GUI.

:)

;)

Edited by AndiACD
Link to comment
AND, i'd really hate to have to learn yet another package GUI.

That is now the main reason for us still being with VW MD. When the opportunity comes VW will be phased out.

You know that Nemetschek development focuses on other disciplines when a improved stair tool is touted as an improved VW MD feature :-/.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

I have recently been thinking about this very subject. It would certainly seem like we have become the 'poor cousin' these day's, I guess the money's in Architects not Engineers. Bit rich when we have to pay the same update price though ...

For me at this stage changing apps would be a mission, although not an impossibility, it would be not only having to learn a new interface but having to change the core of our manufacturing process. I've been using MiniCad/VW since V2, when a basic understanding of matrix maths was an advantage placing coordinates in 3d space! The manual had a really cool wireframe model of a spacecraft on the cover from what I can remember. That app saved someone a fortune, we were building microwave bridges from drawings provided at the time. In my enthusiasm I modeled it (what can I say, I was young) and found the drawings weren't even close. These things had to fit between 2 existing structures. The design engineer had never even seen 2d CAD was so impressed I spent the next couple of years modeling those things.

Anyway, I digress. I have been looking at a few other apps including Inventor and Pro-Engineer. It comes down to this ...

The single most important feature of VW for our manufacturing process is the database. All our machines are built from the ground up as 3d models, each component linked to a record format, be that purchased/fabricate/laser/machine etc ... Mining this information drives the rest of the process. Although the interface is rather antiquated used in conjunction with spreadsheets I feel this is the real 'hidden feature' of VW. Even better now it's 2way, using the spreadsheet to control the drawing ... Perhaps they can have a good look at the BIM stuff and see if it can be adapted to something useful to MD? I'm assuming it draws on the built-in database ...

With 2010 the modeling capabilities offer pretty much everything I need (as VW always has, at the time). One glaring omission would have to be the lack of a 3d ruler, they could call it caliper tool? I realise an architect would never have the use for a measurement unfortunately for engineers our stuff actually has to fit. And it could be a 'feature' of MD ... The ability to snap and create in ISO views is brilliant, great implementation. It used to be so tedious flipping from one 2d view to the next to draw and place objects. And being able to work 'through' layers has made drawing organisation a breeze. I think as far as modeling goes we are at the very least up with the pack.

We certainly seem well behind the curve when it comes to dimensioned drawings I'm afraid. Although I'm always suspicious of claims of 'Automatic drawing creation' the dream would be nice. Having said that, these day's our requirement for dimensioned 2d drawings have dropped significantly since we now pass all our machining/cutting requirements as models. most of our suppliers use Pro-engineer or Inventor or similar to produce CNC data.

Most of the dimensioned drawings we do now are for assembly, which brings me to my latest pet want. 3d dimensioning! We spend a LOT of time producing 3d Assembly drawings manually at the moment but it is worth it. So much easier to convey information, the time it saves in having to go over drawings with the 'assembly technicians' alone is worth it. Now if there was a 3d dimensioning tool ... The other tool we have needed for a long time is one which mines the object for data, so when I click on say, a threaded hole, it puts that info (thread size/tapping drill) on the drawing! And if I click the tool on a drilled hole it tells me-!!! This tool should work on all parametric objects as they all contain the relevant data ... sheesh! Having to burrow down through a multitude of addition/subtractions etc to copy a snippet of info soon gets boring ... and when its from a viewport on a sheet layer ... !!!

I think there is a very good niche for VW as THE modeling tool for engineering. With AutoCad apparently coming to the Mac the platform will get a whole new legitimacy in engineering and I would think it won't be long before we see some of the other major engineering software titles appearing on the Mac.

Don't worry about CNC/CAM or unfolding, leave all that to high end packages, keep and even improve the model transfer abilities. This has become a real breeze with the new Parasolid core I must say.

Put some real work into the database/spreadsheet interface and we could see VW as the core of many modern design/manufacture sites

While some of the menu 'tools' are cute they need to be more relevant to modern design, come on, who in all honesty has designed a cam in the last 30 years, plc's relegated them to a few very specific applications a long time ago. Perhaps that could be replaced with a 3d auto-run plumbing tool for pneumatic/hydraulic/piping lines?

As I mentioned I have had a look at a few packages, if I were to change Pro-Engineer would be my choice. It's very good and has some nice stuff in it however at twice the price of VW, for the entry level, it hasn't quite swayed me at this stage. Inventor looks like a rabbit warren designed with AutoCad to me, lots of very in depth stuff if you stand up and salute 3 times on one foot facing east ...

I've written this to hopefully discuss this with others in the same field and get their opinions and views. I would also like to hear how others are using VW MD.

As a long time VW user I am interested in seeing VW into the future and I think one of the best ways is for us as the end users to discuss what we do and don't need. I would also like to see comment from some of those involved in the MD package from Nemetscek, a full and frank discussion can only benefit us all.

Kim

Link to comment

Kim, you're a genius! i've not chuckled so much reading this forum in a long time. Thank you. :)

having said that, I agree with most of your sugeastions, but I would like more of a CNC aware/capable aspect to VW MD. Maybe the cam tool is a little surpased, but someone still uses it. i also would like to see EAP and Fillet/Chamfer Tools a little less tied and more able to allow us to do what we all expect from them.

My biggest thumbs up to your requests goes to the need for input from those involved at the "Direction" level on the NNA side of the discusions. Why are they so reluctant to give us feedback on MD?

Thanx again.

;)

Link to comment

Hi Andy? ... I thought quite a bit about CNC capabilities. I think with CAM it's best to leave the setup to the operator, they know the machine and available tooling and just what works best really, give them a good CAM app and magic will happen. We farm all our machining, cutting and folding out to select companies so we send them exported models then they can do the path generation on whatever system works best for their equipment. A lot of the top end apps run on the Parasolud core so transfer really is seamless ... I spent a bit of time playing with CNC lathes and machining-centres and I'll tell you what, pretty much the most impressive thing I've ever saw a lathe do was when we ran a file sent in from outside. Yeah yeah mate it's all good-to-go mate, I ran it several times on the simulator mate, of course if my judgement had been better I would have run it simulation mode first on the lathe but it was lunch and this guy really wanted his part ... Thank christ it was lunch break! I swear that 1200 of ?200 4340 was still going up when it went through the end of the workshop. Actually the really impressive part was the veins in the bosses neck when he came out of his office from that end of the workshop, but that's a whole 'nother story ...

Got to agree with you regarding the Fillet/chamfering. Better now we can at least get back into the original geometry but I'm really glad I don't get into mould design!

Thinking about the feed-back side, it's probably because they are engineers too, which reminded me of an old joke ... How can you tell an extrovert engineer? ... He looks at YOUR feet ...

Kim

Link to comment

Until recently I had pretty much standardised on IGES for both Import and Export. It seems to be one of the more ubiquitous formats and most of the part suppliers seem to support it with their models. I'm a bit naughty like that, if 2 suppliers offer a comparable component I usually pick the one with 3d models ... I've recently started sending Parasolid export models to our Laser cutter/CNC break-die guy's, they use Pro-Engineer, and so far they have been perfect ...

Link to comment

Cutting/folding is usually straight forward. I send the model they send back a flat cut plan and a 3d with a couple of basic dimensions for me to ok. I agree with machining though, lot's of hard copy ... The main trick I've found is to make sure you keep you modeling to the spec's of the machine tool. By that I mean ensure fold radii suit material/tooling, split any cuts for complex folds if you want them done a specific way. And with machined components ensure tool geometry is considered ... Which brings me quite nicely back to your point of being more CNC aware ... things like the shaft tool, which was an absolute pain on my old G5 but quite nice on this new machine, should pass surface finish data, material etc etc ... And when you set a bearing journal it could offer fit, corner radius & turning element clearance ... yes, I see where you are going now ... MD could export this data as a txt file which can be passed to the CAM operator ... Couple of other things with the shaft tool. It really needs to be interactive with the model so as you change parameters you can see the model update and the other being, come on guys, let me put a bore through my shaft ... We need a single bore/hole/thread tool, which could ostensibly be the same as the shaft tool only pass internal tolerance data rather than external ... ?

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...