Why Inventor? [Archive]

Michael Hill

16-11-2006, 15:07

I'm just wondering why FIRST/Autodesk gives us Inventor instead of AutoCAD. AutoCAD is used MUCH more in the real world. I really can't think of a company that I've been to that uses inventor. The Air Force uses AutoCAD, Boeing Uses CATIA, Delphi uses Unigraphics, AndyMark uses SolidEdge....Other places use Pro-E. What companies DO use Inventor?

Greg Perkins

16-11-2006, 15:09

I know DEKA uses Inventor, also my old company Acu-Gage Systems used Inventor.

AndyB

16-11-2006, 15:18

Autodesk is a major sponsor and Inventor is supposed to be their program for 3-D based modeling and designing.

A lot of other companies use SolidWorks and ProE, but its not like its a bad thing for FIRST. I mean, it is rather good way for modeling. I often do find myself wishing that Inventor used CAD's system of drawing (dimensioning before you draw), but then again, so much of our work we do in robotics is dependant, hence you don't know the dimensions.

Inventor is solid, and Inventor Studio is a great way to take modeling and engineering and turn it into marketing and presenting with its rendering capabilities and animating process.

It is a branch between CAD and 3dsMAX. That is why. CAD and 3dsMAX are probably Autodesk's two largest programs used in the industry (as of my knowledge, i could be wrong). And by using inventor, you get a taste of the concepts of both.

Cory

16-11-2006, 15:22

It would be terrible if we got autoCAD instead of inventor.

Anything that isn't parametric isn't worth using for our applications, imo.

sanddrag

16-11-2006, 15:37

It would be terrible if we got autoCAD instead of inventor.

Anything that isn't parametric isn't worth using for our applications, imo.Agreed 100%. Inventor is a much more powerful and capable program in most areas. (AutoCAD does have an advantage for some things. But Microsoft Vizio could probably make up for what Inventor lacks).

I do agree with the fact that almost no one in industry has ever heard of Inventor. But, it's our job to show them. When I tell them "it's just like Solidworks" they say "oh, okay, I know what that one is"

And here's the thing, FIRST isn't about learning how to do one specific thing or how to use one specific piece of software. FIRST is about learning how to learn.

Once you learn on Invnetor, you can make the jump to any CAD system you like.

artdutra04

16-11-2006, 15:39

I'm just wondering why FIRST/Autodesk gives us Inventor instead of AutoCAD. AutoCAD is used MUCH more in the real world...AutoCAD is primarily a 2D-based drafting platform while Inventor is a 3D-based. Whether a company uses AutoCAD or Inventor is based off their needs. There are a lot of companies that use CAD software for 2D use, such as blueprints of buildings, but have no need to model complex assemblies in 3D. Sure, you can model your house in 3D, but the blueprints needed to build the house are only 2D drawings. So for some companies, why buy Inventor when all you need is AutoCAD?

On the other hand, engineering companies that design 3D components would be more likely to use a 3D-drafting program such as SolidWorks or Inventor. Sure, AutoCAD can extrude parts and such to create 3D components, but Inventor is better suited to take dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of individual components and combine them into a single assembly.

Since robotics generally involves a lot more 3D-modeling than 2D-drafting, we have Inventor. Also, the 10 licenses of Inventor given to each team are the most expensive item in our annual Kit of Parts from FIRST. If any company is donating products worth thousands of dollars to every FRC team, shouldn't we be thankful for said product? ;)

Michael Hill

16-11-2006, 15:40

Agreed 100%. Inventor is a much more powerful and capable program in most areas. (AutoCAD does have an advantage for some things. But Microsoft Vizio could probably make up for what Inventor lacks).

I do agree with the fact that almost no one in industry has ever heard of Inventor. But, it's our job to show them. When I tell them "it's just like Solidworks" they say "oh, okay, I know what that one is"

And here's the thing, FIRST isn't about learning how to do one specific thing or how to use one specific piece of software. FIRST is about learning how to learn.

Once you learn on Invnetor, you can make the jump to any CAD system you like.

That is true. Much of what I've learned from inventor has somewhat carried onto CATIA. Btw, has anyone here used CATIA? I love/hate it.

Taylor

16-11-2006, 15:47

For those schools that offer both a robotics team and the project lead the way curriculum (which I'm guessing is a rather high percentage), Inventor is used in both, and it is helpful in that the students and teachers are fluent in the program come design/build time.

Andy A.

16-11-2006, 18:11

ChrisH

16-11-2006, 20:22

That is true. Much of what I've learned from inventor has somewhat carried onto CATIA. Btw, has anyone here used CATIA? I love/hate it.

I use CATIA 5 at work. It is similar enough to Inventor that I don't have problems switching back and forth, though sometimes I forget the mouse moves and try to use the F-keys instead and vice versa. CATIA is better at surfacing, but it is also a LOT more expensive. FIRST robots generally don't need more surfacing than Inventor can handle. It's not like FIRST robots have wings or anything like that.

BTW CATIA 5 is much different than CATIA 4. I assume you are using 5 since you said there was some carry over. When we switched I forgot all my 4 as quickly as possible. My time with 4 was a very traumatic experience.

MarkVH

16-11-2006, 20:44

Well I am having a strange time switching to pro/E. I keep using the hot keys from inventor.

Michael Hill

16-11-2006, 21:04

CATIA Likes to change drastically between different versions...heck even between different releases. My CATIA textbook was written for V5 R14. We are using V5 R16 and there are some noticeable differences.

sanddrag

17-11-2006, 00:32

CATIA Likes to change drastically between different versions.That's one area where Inventor excels. I can go between version 5 and 11 virtually seamlessly. Every release improves the program a little but, you can still keep on using it the way you have been for years.

CraigHickman

17-11-2006, 00:55

I also love Inventor, but would not hesitate to try other CAD softwares. The main reason I use Inventor is because it is provided, and it's a great tool for what we do.

Doug G

17-11-2006, 02:35

Sounds like some of you have experience with many different modeling programs. Besides the details of drawing and assembling, are they all similar in their ability to create iparts?

What about properties such as determine weight, moments, CG's etc?

I know I always dream of having the whole robot perfectly designed in Inventor and have it actually tell us the weight to the nearest pound, but there's just not enough time and manpower, and once the real robot starts taking shape, most of the students loose interest in their Inventor model.

ajlapp

17-11-2006, 07:57

My company uses UG and Inventor. Inventor is cheap, and in my experience offers more than enough design capability for the average user. I work between both platforms regularly and find Inventor to be quite user friendly......most concepts transfer between the two programs without much trouble.

Also, if you're dead set on Autocad......do what I do. Make your 2D layout in autocad and import it into your sketch environment.

When we do complex laser or waterjet cuts with lots of windows, I design it in Autocad....transfer it to inventor and extrude!

petek

17-11-2006, 13:18

If an engineering company that produces or deals with three dimensional objects is using AutoCAD to the exclusion of a 3d parametric software package, like Inventor or Solidworks, it isn't because AutoCAD is better.

It's because the company is made up of people who don't know how and don't want to learn how, to use Inventor or it's contemporaries. AutoCAD has a lot of institutional momentum behind it, but that doesn't mean that it is better. It's just all some companies know.

-Andy A.No criticism of your views intended, but there are some pretty good engineering companies which use AutoCAD primarily, with good results. I know some designers who can positively rip in 2D and have been for years (which is the key).

That said, people from one such company were at a project meeting where I presented an Inventor-created presentation of a mechanism's operation and I saw them exchanging raised-eyebrow looks. They are installing Inventor at their company now.

Andy Baker

17-11-2006, 13:55

Autocad* has a lot of institutional momentum behind it, but that doesn't mean that it is better. It's just all some companies know.

-Andy A.

MOMENTUM is a key thing here. Companies who are using a certain CAD program (any of them) go through much pain (aka. high costs) to switch over to another CAD program. Due to this pain, companies are resistent to change.

These high costs include user training, adaptation of current standards on legacy systems into new standards on new systems, the difficulty of reading and re-using old designs with a new system.

For a company to change over to a new CAD system, they would need to justify the costs, and realize that there are future cost savings that would outweigh these change-over expenses. If a company can get a create a business case for this changeover, then the new CAD system could be justified. For smaller companies with lower overhead costs (and less momentum), this could be easier to do. For big companies (Air Force, Delphi, GM, etc.), it would be more difficult.

AB

Tristan Lall

17-11-2006, 15:15

One other thing about 2-D vs. 3-D (parametric) CAD systems: sometimes 3-D is too much information for a given job. When you're doing finely detailed work like robot design, there are obvious advantages to fitting things precisely and designing all aspect of the part. When designing some support frame out of structural steel, that level of detail is often excessive.

Many places use a combination of 2-D and 3-D software, as necessary, in order to try to balance the needs of a given project.

jacob07

17-11-2006, 15:32

I know my team uses UG and we love it. Its the upgraded a lot version of solid edge. We have designed the past 4 years robots on it.

JD Mather

21-11-2006, 13:26

Sounds like some of you have experience with many different modeling programs. Besides the details of drawing and assembling, are they all similar in their ability to create ipart

For me geometry is geometry. CAD programs are all alike. There are 225 industry professionals registered for my Inventor class at AU and there is another full class running at the same time slot. http://www.autodeskevents.com/au2006/index.cfm?site=manufacturing&mainsite=faculty&speakerID=9948&filter=K

I see the transistion from AutoCAD to Inventor (or SolidWorks) to be similar to the transition from the drawing board to CAD. If I were preparing for the future I think I would want to be learning the next generation tools.

Here are some similar tutorials that might be useful in comparing CAD programs.
http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/content/CAD238/AutoCAD_2007_Tutorials.htm
http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/content/DSG322/inventor_surface_tutorials.htm
http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/content/DSG322/SolidWorks_surface_tutorials.htm

David Guzman

21-11-2006, 14:24

Our sponsor Sonny's The Car Wash Factory (http://sonnysdirect.com/) uses Inventor for everything.

They have HUGE assemblies of their car washers, not to mention replacement parts for all other companies. Their data base contains over 100,000 Inventor parts. :ahh: Not to mention weldments and exploded drawings. :ahh:

Being able to change once piece and have it automatically change on your assemblies and prints is just something amazing.

Rickertsen2

22-11-2006, 13:51

I love inventor but it has always seemed a bit immature. With every new version it comes closer and closer to its SolidWorks/CATIA/Whatever cousins, buts its just not quite there yet. I expect that as inventor matures and more companies make the switch from 2d to 3d it will gain much more popularity. I have high hopes

FourPenguins

23-11-2006, 08:36

I see AutoCAD as a drawing tool and Inventor as design tool. Inventor's ability to line things up, pattern things, and solve trig has saved me many pencil erasers. In AutoCAD, you need to know most of these things before you even start drawing. AutoCAD's fine for getting your ideas down, but only if you know your idea before you go to software. With Inventor, you can skip paper and go straight to the computer and start playing around with ideas. It'll line everything up for you and you can check your numbers and fix accordingly.

Also, I think that Inventor's much more intuitive to a beginner. Anyone who can machine can grasp Inventor because most of its features work the same way their machine-shop counterparts do.

To me, the only reason that the industry hasn't completely moved to Inventor/ProE/SolidWorks or another 3D modeler is tradition and lack of experience with the new products. I'm glad that AutoDesk gives us Inventor because I can't imagine doing what I do (or learning to do it so quickly) with AutoCAD.

Henry Anthony

27-11-2006, 11:04

Michael,

FYI, Inventor includes AutoCAD Mechanical as well if that's what you prefer to design with. Don't forget that there is an award for Inventor in the competitions. I think that's motivation enough to use Inventor.

A few years back, an engineering mentor - who does AutoCAD in his sleep - wanted to teach the team AutoCAD. I came in and demonstrated parametric and associative features and how idws imported dimensions automatically and he said, "Do it in Inventor". It was not a tough sell.

Also, one of the difficulties companies encounter in switching from AutoCAD to Inventor, or any 3d program, is vendors. They need to be up to speed as well.

M. Mellott

07-12-2006, 02:42

I've been using all sorts of CAD programs for the last 15 or so years, mostly for 3D design of components and assemblies, including AutoCAD, UG, CATIA, I-DEAS, etc.

Inventor is an excellent design tool...easy to learn, and (most importantly) easy to TEACH. When I first joined with FIRST, I thought they were nuts to try to teach high school students CAD. In my experience, getting a new employee to become proficient in the the more advanced CAD systems (UG, CATIA) can take 6 months or more...and these are adults with degrees! To see kids pick up Inventor and be able to make simple models from a napkin drawing within a couple days, then be able to produce accurate working drawings within a week or two for the Build team to manufacture parts...that's impressive.

Yes, Inventor is not nearly as complex as some of the high end systems, and you can't do some things that those systems can, but we do not really need that kind of capability 98% of the time. Once you learn the basics of 3D construction (sketch, extrude, rotate, unite, subtract), these are the same concepts that every 3D CAD system uses...they just use different terminology from one system to another.

Oh yeah, don't forget that once you add all the fancy design packages to UG or CATIA, you're looking at $15,000 to $50,000+...for ONE SEAT (I'll pause while you pick up your jaws off the floor). For the money, you can't beat Inventor for 3D design.

Ryan Dognaux

07-12-2006, 10:41

I learned Inventor back in high school and now have had two classes in CATIA here at Purdue. Both were similar and I made a pretty easy transition into CATIA, so much that I think I prefer it now over Inventor. But I haven't forgotten my roots - Inventor is a great tool that taught me a lot of the basics. Autodesk is an amazing sponsor for donating it year after year. One thing I've learned though is that if you can work one parametric modeler, you can work them all. Given the time to learn the interface, you can do the same things in most of them. It's all just personal preference and what the company has decided to use to fit their needs.

Qbranch

08-12-2006, 17:06

I'll just throw this out there...

SolidWorks (http://www.solidworks.com/) anyone? its a huge part of the cad market and its used all over the place... not to mention its parametric, handles odd-shaped surfaces well, and if your making parts that are going to be moulded it takes very little time to make moulds.

Also, unlike inventor, when you make a gearbox or put belts on things it's not necessary to define any ratios between rotating parts of an assembly... solidworks just knows the gears move because of the individual teeth colliding, then throw in that it does gravity in assemblies, and has both individual part stress analysis as well as whole assembly stress analysis... don't about you but thats just cool! :yikes:

-Q

EricH

08-12-2006, 19:07

I know I always dream of having the whole robot perfectly designed in Inventor and have it actually tell us the weight to the nearest pound, ...So do I. To the nearest pound, that is. Every time I try the weight thing in Inventor, it gives a number on the part. This is all well and good, until I try an assembly. Then it always under-estimates for me, so I go back through and take the weights it gives for each part and add them up. I'm usually about 10% over its estimate. Ouch. Other than that it's nice.

FourPenguins

10-12-2006, 10:57

So do I. To the nearest pound, that is. Every time I try the weight thing in Inventor, it gives a number on the part. This is all well and good, until I try an assembly. Then it always under-estimates for me, so I go back through and take the weights it gives for each part and add them up. I'm usually about 10% over its estimate. Ouch. Other than that it's nice.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what cost team 1251 (TechTigers) their shooter last year. They designed around Inventor's weight estimates and ended up over...
(I may be wrong on this so if any Tigers wanna correct me, feel free.)

JD Mather

10-12-2006, 11:49

I'll just throw this out there...
SolidWorks (http://www.solidworks.com/)
Also, unlike inventor, when you make a gearbox... it's not necessary to define any ratios between rotating parts of an assembly... solidworks just knows the gears move because of the individual teeth colliding
-Q

I guess you aren't familiar with Inventor Contact sets. The ratio method is actually far less processor intensive than contact solving which becomes readily apparent in large and/or complex assemblies.

then throw in that it does gravity.. ..stress analysis... don't about you but thats just cool! :yikes:
-Q
Inventor Dynamic Simulation is pretty cool too. Just throw in gravity, define your forces...
http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/Dynamic_Simulaton_whitepaper.pdf
http://engineersrule.org

ellenchisa

10-12-2006, 15:40

Additionally, it seems that many colleges (maybe I'm wrong, I'm mostly only familiar with Olin and UMichigan) use solidworks.

As long as there are going to be many different CAD packages, it's likely that you'll have to learn a different one eventually. Getting used to transitioning between them as a result of using inventor in FIRST (Although my team used UG, and only a little inventor for learning), and then learning another program later helps prepare you more for the job market, in addition to the benefit of being able to manipulate multiple software packages.

(Also, solidworks has a pretty cool add-in called "cosmos motion" that can simulate interactions and forces.)

Mike Hvorecny

28-12-2006, 14:52

Why would i use inventor over other drafting programs? because it's easy and fun. I've used AutoCAD and the environment is just not the same. with inventor i can whip up 2d representations, quick sketches, illustrations for ideas, finished products, and exploded views of assemblies... in several minutes - if i have everything i need. it helps that i enjoy doing it, too. :)

sometimes i even put down my PS2 controller and make stuff in inventor...

Michael Hill

28-12-2006, 15:42

Yoda88

30-12-2006, 14:02

This may have just been my team, but when we got our copy of Inventor, it included a copy of AutoCad Mechanical. If Inventor is such a bad program, just use the copy AutoCad that was given out. and for some of us (the mechanically inclined portion) inventor is a much easier program to use. being able to start with a block and add and remove material just like you were actually machining them.