View Full Version : AutoCAD vs. Inventor
NextPerception
11-01-2007, 01:10
The way I see it is that AutoCAD is to Inventor as Dos is to WIndows XP
AutoCAD gives you more control while it may take you longer where as Inventor looks nicer and takes less time. I wanna here from fellow AutoCAD devotees and the Inventor Buffs about why you like your software better. who knows, mabye you convert me. all I know is i have never once come up against something i can draw in autoCAD's 3D enviroment and why learn a new program if the one i am using works fine. like the old saying goes, why fix what aint broke.
Rafi Ahmed
11-01-2007, 01:15
I love both programs but I would lean more toward Inventor. AutoCAD is great because you can design ANYTHING you want to and you have endless possibilities and the program doesnt make your computer lag as much as Inventor but in Inventor you can actually visualize the part or robot right in front of you and you can animate 3D movements demonstrating how the robot works or how its put together.
I love having the control over AutoCAD as you plot drawings, and the fact that _underscore is very easy to learn and adopt. I tried learning Inventor on 10 but the shock of not using _underscore was a little too much for me, and I've kinda given it up. :o
Another thing was the other day when our machinist mentor looked at one inventor image and said he didn't like the application. So...if he doesn't want to use it then I probably won't use it very much, either.
On another note, CNC mills, lathes, laser cutters, and waterjet cutters all use AutoCAD because it they are tools that work mostly in two-dimensional motions on an x-y axis.
I love having the control over AutoCAD as you plot drawings, and the fact that _underscore is very easy to learn and adopt. I tried learning Inventor on 10 but the shock of not using _underscore was a little too much for me, and I've kinda given it up. :o
Another thing was the other day when our machinist mentor looked at one inventor image and said he didn't like the application. So...if he doesn't want to use it then probably neither will I get use it very much.
On another note, CNC mills, lathes, laser cutters, and waterjet cutters all use AutoCAD because it they are tools that work mostly in two-dimensional motions on an x-y axis.
No machining tool I've seen uses AutoCAD -- rather, they typically use GCode. Such code can be written by hand or generated automatically based on drawings created in any number of CAD packages. It is true that most CAM packages can read AutoCAD's DWG format, though it is by no means the only format they'll accept.
In our lab, we use a variety of programs in conjuction with the different machines.
Our CNC mill runs on GCode generated using MasterCAM V. 9, which in turn uses DXF or DWG formatted files that I can export from Solidworks.
Our laser cutter acts similarly to a printer and so we use Microsoft's Visio as a CAD/CAM application. It allows us to draw basic shapes easily, but also can import DXF or DWG formatted files from other CAD packages.
Finally, our plasma cutter is set up to use SheetCAM to generate GCode based on DXF or DWG files.
No machining tool I've seen uses AutoCAD -- rather, they typically use GCode. Such code can be written by hand or generated automatically based on drawings created in any number of CAD packages. It is true that most CAM packages can read AutoCAD's DWG format, though it is by no means the only format they'll accept.
In our lab, we use a variety of programs in conjuction with the different machines.
Our CNC mill runs on GCode generated using MasterCAM V. 9, which in turn uses DXF or DWG formatted files that I can export from Solidworks.
Our laser cutter acts similarly to a printer and so we use Microsoft's Visio as a CAD/CAM application. It allows us to draw basic shapes easily, but also can import DXF or DWG formatted files from other CAD packages.
Finally, our plasma cutter is set up to use SheetCAM to generate GCode based on DXF or DWG files.
There are some machine tools that have native support for DXF files and can create the g-code for the part themselves, without using a CAM package.
As to the original question, I hate AutoCAD for it's lack of parametrics, liked Inventor, and love Solidworks.
Arefin Bari
11-01-2007, 01:57
Autocad - Abosolutely love using it. This is one software that I use on daily basis. Even though inventor is more user friendly, in my opinion autocad is more user friendly (I guess it really depends on the user). Tytus was the first person who got me into Autocad and he showed me few techniques. Overtime I became faster at designing things in Autocad. Since then I have been using it.
Inventor - It's a great tool when it's time to design a robot or small parts. But most of the industrial companies use Pro E or Autocad. If I have to make a small part of something that I want to show students, I use inventor. Even Though I have heard people say that inventor is VERY user friendly and one can design something in it really FAST, I think it really depends on the user and what the user is most comfortable with.
... Have knowledge in all the cad softwares possible, it helps, but use the one that you are most comfortable with.
No machining tool I've seen uses AutoCAD -- rather, they typically use GCode. Such code can be written by hand or generated automatically based on drawings created in any number of CAD packages. It is true that most CAM packages can read AutoCAD's DWG format, though it is by no means the only format they'll accept.so can import DXF or DWG formatted files from other CAD packages.
Sorry, that's what I meant. For laser cutters I've used LaserCamm, which comes with its own program that accepts DXF files. The CNC mills used for robot parts use FeatureCAM (at least that's what I'm told).
My main point is that all of these machines work primarily with x and y coordinate motions, where AutoCAD works very well for me. And, as Arefin mentioned above, is the application I am most familiar with.
I like solidworks for making killer assemblies and for general modelling, but for display, inventer is FAR ahead. Solidworks seems to lag on even the most powerful machines I can find.
I like solidworks for making killer assemblies and for general modelling, but for display, inventer is FAR ahead. Solidworks seems to lag on even the most powerful machines I can find.
I've found the opposite to be true, for me. Solidworks runs faster all around, compared to Inventor. Especially on startup.
Daniel Brim
11-01-2007, 02:35
I can't speak for solidworks, as I have never used it. Then again, it's not in the thread title ;)
I cannot stress how much I prefer Inventor, especially for the applications that we are using in FIRST. I have used AutoCAD outside of first (designing test fixtures), and I felt a bit limited because my designs were 3D and lacked the flexibility that sketch constraints in Inventor have. AutoCAD was just not built for assemblies, either. With that said, AutoCAD does do a lot better than some Other CAD programs (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/img/b17/b17af1cf78ae309ad1b49d1acfd3f8a3_m.jpg) than what I've used.
NextPerception
12-01-2007, 03:08
I love both programs but I would lean more toward Inventor. AutoCAD is great because you can design ANYTHING you want to and you have endless possibilities and the program doesnt make your computer lag as much as Inventor but in Inventor you can actually visualize the part or robot right in front of you and you can animate 3D movements demonstrating how the robot works or how its put together.
OH! BELIEVE ME!!! Autocad can lag! even on my home computer that is running a amd64 3200 with a quadro FX 1000 graphics card and 2 gb of memory. (i built this computer specifically to run CAD) once you get up to 27,000 KB Autocad Drawings with 2000+ 3D objects, each detailed down to the threads on the bolts and the individual links of chains, your computer will lag with AutoCAD. it can take up to 3 minutes to just load it into autoCAD not to mention the 3-5 second lag in between EVERY frame when rotating it.
JD Mather
12-01-2007, 15:11
AutoCAD is obsolete technology. Period!
AutoCAD users are a dime-a-dozen. Literally. Prepare yourself for the future by learning the next generation of tools.
http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/content/CAD238/AutoCAD_2007_Tutorials.htm
I am better at modeling with Inventor however I prefer AutoCAD. I generally use autoCAD for the geometry solving and Inventor for visualizing new ideas.
Tytus Gerrish
01-02-2007, 09:53
Like with any program people will use what they are most skilled at. and companies will use what will fit their needs. I use autocad all day at work and am congenly refered to as the "MASTER MODELER" because i can model very quivkley and know lots of tricks to get the geometry and features you want for most given projects. as such i say autocad modeling is much quicker for me than inventor. however. with inventor once the parametric parameters are steup changes beciome easer.
Like with any program people will use what they are most skilled at. and companies will use what will fit their needs. I use autocad all day at work and am congenly refered to as the "MASTER MODELER" because i can model very quivkley and know lots of tricks to get the geometry and features you want for most given projects. as such i say autocad modeling is much quicker for me than inventor. however. with inventor once the parametric parameters are steup changes beciome easer.
I disagree. I am much better at Inventor and can make most anything on there with enough time. I do not even know how to use the 3-D capabilites of AutoCAD yet I still prefer it over Inventor. Why do I prefer it? It has nothing to do with what I am better at. All that matters is the way you think and process. I prefer AutoCAD because I am more into the certainty and set numbers. However, my friends prefer Inventor because it is flexible and enjoy being able to make things without knowing dimensions.
FYI: I am known here as the "Inventor Guru".:cool:
Gherkinman
09-02-2007, 18:14
I was just intoduced to Inventor 10 in October last year and I have never used AutoCAD or any other CAD software.
I imagine that Inventor is the most "user-friendly" as was stated above, most of what I know I had to teach myself. Being a teenager I did not refer to any of those lame tutorials :p It went pretty well and I know enough to cheat the program into doing what I want it to most of the time.
However, I have noticed that Inventor doesn't like it when you organize your work into sub-folders. I like to keep my computers organized but inventor has trouble finding the path names when i put parts in subfolders. This leads to many whiny pop-ups demanding pathnames whenever I try to open my project and seems like an oversight on the designer's part : /
Another problem I noticed was the frequent errors and long pauses as the program does god knows what after I tell it to perform simple funtions like contraining two objects.
Overall I think i would be much happier using a pencil and a ruler than using this program and I probably wouldn't mind investing the time to learn a more "drawing oriented" program like AutoCADF or ProE which (I'm assuming) have more of a coordinate-plot / layering interface.
Basically, I can't imagine anything being "worse" than inventor. Alas, thats what they give us and I don't have a couple grand lying around to invest in a professional CAD program.
Andrew Blair
09-02-2007, 21:28
For FIRST, Inventor is king for a variety of legitimate reasons. It's easier for new kids to pick up and learn, it's more graphic, and especially when designing new parts and ideas, it's far, far easier to spit out a new design quickly and see how it meshes with everything else, without a sketch. As Tytus said also, it's very easy to change parameters once you've set up- something far harder to do with AutoCAD. Inventor is excellent for inventing.
That said, I do feel that AutoCAD is the top dog in industry right now, because it's been around, it's integrated, and it feels better to the people currently using the program. With an experienced person using it, I do feel that you can even be quicker than Inventor on some things.
Parametric programs have become very powerful, and I do believe that much of industry will merge in time. Inventor, SolidWorks, SolidEdge, and Pro-E are quickly gaining ground, and are used extensively in mold making and tool & die work, but they have not come into some larger, more monolithic business's yet. They may not ever, because some businesses simply do not need parametric, graphic programs. For FIRST though, Inventor provides an intuitive, powerful base with which to quickly propel your ideas. AutoCAD can't do that.
Dan Zollman
10-02-2007, 00:11
I was just intoduced to Inventor 10 in October last year and I have never used AutoCAD or any other CAD software.
I imagine that Inventor is the most "user-friendly" as was stated above, most of what I know I had to teach myself. Being a teenager I did not refer to any of those lame tutorials :p It went pretty well and I know enough to cheat the program into doing what I want it to most of the time.
However, I have noticed that Inventor doesn't like it when you organize your work into sub-folders. I like to keep my computers organized but inventor has trouble finding the path names when i put parts in subfolders. This leads to many whiny pop-ups demanding pathnames whenever I try to open my project and seems like an oversight on the designer's part : /
Another problem I noticed was the frequent errors and long pauses as the program does god knows what after I tell it to perform simple funtions like contraining two objects.
I have to disagree with most of this. If you aren't willing to spend time learning the software--if you don't want to use tutorials, "figuring out" how to use it isn't going to work well--you can't judge whether Inventor is a good program.
You certainly don't need to cheat the program into doing anything in order to do what you want. If you get frequent errors, you either have a bad installation, the computer is incompatible with the software, or you're doing things wrong. I can do anything I want with Inventor and I see an error a couple times a month.
Inventor doesn't know how to constrain objects all by itself. You have to know how to properly constain parts. When you understand constraints and degrees of freedom and you do it correctly, it works smoothly and correctly.
The software is set up to handle the use of subfolders. Once parts are added to assemblies, the Design Assistant can be used to change file paths and you won't get errors.
Basically, I can't imagine anything being "worse" than inventor. Alas, thats what they give us and I don't have a couple grand lying around to invest in a professional CAD program.
Inventor is a professional CAD program.
MSPaint is "worse" than Inventor, but you don't need any tutorials in order to use it.
Elgin Clock
10-02-2007, 01:05
However, I have noticed that Inventor doesn't like it when you organize your work into sub-folders. I like to keep my computers organized but inventor has trouble finding the path names when i put parts in subfolders. This leads to many whiny pop-ups demanding pathnames whenever I try to open my project and seems like an oversight on the designer's part : /
The problem is not in the software in this instance, I'm afraid, but in what you are not telling us about HOW YOU make sub folders I have to believe.
In my profession (CAD Drafter/Designer) we have ISO standards that we have to follow that says where things are stored and how.
If I created an Assembly from parts laying on my Desktop, and then MOVE those parts, then yes, even the best software will complain about not finding my parts.
SolidWorks does it too, and any software that needs external references.
Where I work, we have set directories where we keep certain part files, and what not. If someone were to even rename every folder we have created in advance for this organizational purpose, it would definitely yell at me with some annoying errors.
The best thing I can tell someone who is starting to learn CAD and especially 3D cad with external references (ie: An assembly file that uses separate part files) is to set up an organized folder system in Windows BEFORE you start any modeling.
For Example, a robot could have a folder for hardware, chassis parts, arm parts, grabbers, ramps, and what not.
I have been using TRUE 3D Modeling softwares for 5 years now (Not Autocad's fake version of 3D using wireframes and what not, but softwares like Autocad Mechanical Desktop, Inventor, SolidWorks, and Pro-E.)
The biggest gripe I hear at work from the new 3D modeling users is that when they make parts, they forget to put something where it is supposed to go in the directory structure, realize it a week down the road, go to move it and all of a sudden now their assembly files yell at them for not being able to find the parts.
I wonder why. :p
And I agree 100% with what worldbringer said about Inventor being a professional CAD system. Search Careerbuilder, or Monster.com for CAD Jobs and see what softwares you see come up and the salaries for each. The more "professional" the software, the higher the pay rate. Programs like AutoCAD Inventor, and SolidWorks are at the low end of Professional CAD Softwares, that's true, but they are no MS Paint. Programs like Pro-Engineer Wildfire, Catia, and others are high end.
The true power and "professionalism" in a sotware lies not in what the print looks like at the end of the day, but what Engineering tools are available within the software. When GM makes the fully 3D model of your car, they probably use something similar to Catia, which has stress analyzation tools, and also many more Engineering tools built in.
Yes, for you SolidWorks users out there who are following along with me, even more high end than COSMOS.
Global companies do not use MS Paint to make a CAD Drawing, but it could suffice for a simple sketch to get an idea across, and that's about it. (And yes, I'll admit, I did that before at work for a quick and VERY dirty job.)
While my background in 3D is mostly in SolidWorks and I complained about the differences when attempting to help the students this year as to the intuitiveness of Inventor, it was not a complaint about now unpowerful the system was, but what I was used to as far as SolidWorks went..
If I was hired at a company, as a Drafter, and I was told to make actual drawings in MS Paint, I would deny that position right away, cause it's more trouble than it's worth and isn't that professional and would look like a joke on a resume'.
They shouldn't have a need for a CAD operator if they are using MS Paint.
Anyone can draw something in MS Paint. You may as well just use a napkin, or a piece of notebook paper, or as the machinist at my place calls that approach, AutoPAD. :rolleyes:
kramarczyk
10-02-2007, 08:57
For reference GM uses NX (formerly unigraphics) which allows users to combine both parametric and direct modeling techniques as they see fit. It does combine, as speculated, a variety of embedded engineering tools including motion & a couple of varieties of strength analysis. Some of the tools are part of the base NX package, others, like the basic FEA package are third party softwares that retain full associativity with the base moodel. Designspace by Ansys is used for upfront analysis (order of magnitude results) by introductory users. It is very similar to the Inventor FEA, probably because it is made by the same people. There are even some homegrown tools that are created for specific things like driveline planning, suspension set-up, and occupant packaging.
One thing thing I have noticed is that for most people learning the second software is far more difficult than the first and they forever prefer the one they learned first. (I'm generalizing here, no flames required.) People seem to learn either direct modeling or parametrics first and then try to learn the other for thier second package and have difficulties because they are, well, different. Then they try to bin the packages into better or worse categories instead of acknowledging that they are just different and suited to different things.
In general, direct models, like AutoCAD ,allow you to get the first pass done quicker than parametrics, like inventor (especially if the used tried to capture 'design intent'). However, parametrics will generally get you to the second draft faster if the design intent remains consistent. If the design intent changes, through a major geometry change, then direct modeling probably goes back to winning.
It's all about knowing you process :ahh: , designing it to your best benefit, and picking software that supports it.
JD Mather
10-02-2007, 09:33
Programs like AutoCAD Inventor, ...
The true power and "professionalism"...
...isn't that professional and would look like a joke on a resume'.
The correct name for the software is Autodesk Inventor.
AutoCAD is a completely different program. I suspect most of the head hunters on Monster don't know this distinction either.
J.D. Mather
Autodesk Inventor Certified Expert
Certified SolidWorks Expert
Not too bad at AutoCAD.
http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/content/CAD238/AutoCAD_2007_Tutorials.htm
I would like to note that what is and isn't professional is strictly dependent on who is judging. I personally believe that it just means that it is used in a real business setting. So, Inventor does qualify in my opinion. However, I would like to note that, though I do not know ProE. I do think it is amazing the wide variety of tests that can be ran on a part that seem to be missing in most other forms of CAD. Anyone know whether either Inventor or AutoCAD can test hydrodynamics, aerodynamics....?
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.