showdown: SOLIDWORKS vs. INVENTOR

[negfrequency]

Ok, im taken aback that someone hasn't already triggered
a thread on this child. Point is, anyone who has the slightest
interest in CAD has a preference in which system to use.
In industry I know that these 2 are the most powerful,
and on chief delphi, it appears that Inventor is the most
popular, but anyone who is a defender of solidworks seems
to be far more in tune with it. So for the time being, i want
to hear what other people think.

I have used a number of programs like skethup, and have
even gone into a lot of depth with Solidworks, but since i
was raised on Inventor, so i was left with the ability to
utilize some of the simple tools earlier, and got a grasp on
more complex tools after realizing it was more for me.

Alright so I want a clean fight. Which one is it going to be.

[Matt Krass]

Well the Inventor bias is to be expected, we get it free every year, whereas SolidWorks has to be purchased. So only the diehard SW fans would have it. My preference is SolidWorks, a friend gave me a copy and has been keeping me updated on it. I find them both to be equally powerful but I think SolidWorks has a better interface. Inventor does have some very nice features, like the i-Factory though. I use both in conjunction thanks to SolidWorks' wide file format compatibility, but anything I do from scratch is all SolidWorks. I don't think either program is "superior" I think it deends what you're doing. Inventor has some great features but I feel SolidWorks is a simpler, faster interface.

[Ian Mackenzie]

SolidWorks by a good margin, as far as I'm concerned. For my CAD course this term, I tried Inventor, SolidWorks, and Pro/ENGINEER (well, I already knew Pro/E). I really liked the Inventor interface - looks good, nice keyboard shortcuts, iProperties, etc., but to me it just didn't seem to have as much 'meat' as SolidWorks. At least on my laptop, Inventor's rendering is all messed up (and I know of at least one other person for whom this is true), and it just doesn't seem as stable as SolidWorks.

For instance, in Inventor I tried to create a shaft in the context of an assembly by extruding from the back face of one ball bearing to the back face of another ball bearing. When I changed the distance between the ball bearings, no matter what I tried, the length of the shaft wasn't updated, which pretty much scared me off Inventor completely (anything less than full parametric modelling, as far as I'm concerned, is unacceptable). SolidWorks has no problem with this sort of modelling (although it won't do it dynamically; if I remember correctly, you do have to rebuild).

That being said, I'm no expert in Inventor, and if anyone can tell me how I SHOULD have made that shaft so that it was parametric, I'll edit this post.

EDIT: As mentioned below, it would probably be possible to create the shaft separately, and then set it up as an adaptive part. But that seems like a lot of unnecessary work compared to just designing in context, and the simple fact that Inventor allows you to easily create non-parametric geometry is, I think, a major point against it; it seems that it would be easy for me, for instance, to make a gearbox side plate that would end up being non-parametric. If I then increased the centre distance between two gears by 0.002" (i.e. to avoid binding), I wouldn't notice that the plate holes were now in the wrong place, but the drawing dimensions would all be off.

By the way, I disagree with the statement that SolidWorks and (especially) Inventor are the most powerful packages out there - for instance, Unigraphics and CATIA are both far more powerful (in terms of stuff like surfacing, manufacturing integration, etc.)

[Elgin Clock]

I will say right up front that I know only SolidWorks as far as this discussion goes.

But, in the terms of MODELING software, I love SolidWorks.

The DRAWING part of it leaves a lot to be desired, and in reality, this is the most important part of my job as a CAD operator.

I'm not a designer. I use SolidWorks personally to design 3d models of things (Lego assemblies and what not, but not at work). At work, I make parts from 2d existing drawings. For a design (modeling) software I think a software like SolidWorks, or Inventor is the way to go as opposed to plain jane AutoCAD 2d (and the horrible faking of 3d shapes).

I want to learn Inventor, just so I can see if the software is as reliable, and as inclusive as SolidWorks for MODELING.

(I also want to learn Pro/E as well, the Wildfire version specifically, but that's another story.)

But, I also want to learn Inventor to see what it does with DRAWINGS when you are ready to release products, and need a good drawing to send to the production floor that they can make real parts to, in an engineering world where no one cares what the model looks like, just as long as your dimensions are readable, and correct.

[nobrakes8]

I have inventor and solidworks on my computer, and I like solidworks better because it's more user friendly. It's also the first software that i mastered so I tend to use it more than inventor..

My old team's school system decided to invest in solidworks instead of using inventor. They did install inventor on the robotics team computers but they never used it unti this year. The kid that entered the autodesk contest for the team said that he liked SolidWorks better, but once he got used to inventor he said he didn't really mind using it either.

[Tristan Lall]

Ian and I had a portion of this discussion a few days ago. At that point, I was recalling vague rememberances of the good and bad things in both packages. But just this past week, I was using SolidWorks (2005 SP5), and remembered just why I prefer SolidWorks over Inventor, but still don't love either.

One caveat; maybe this has all been improved in the latest versions. It's expensive, even for a business, to have the latest versions of these packages, so I'm necessarily and perpetually behind the times.

In essence, it comes down to the features. Inventor ships with the basic sketch-and-model capabilities, but like Ian said, the parametric options aren't the best, and trying to program mathematical relations between assembly members isn't very well supported. SolidWorks, on the other hand, has much better support for these things. In fact, SolidWorks also supports more advanced feature creation than Inventor, and uses a more straightforward interface to accomplish it. The left-side menu has the options conveniently arrayed, while Inventor throws up dialogue boxes* which are inconsistent in form, and often don't clearly express what's going on.

SolidWorks also does a better job in the sketcher with guessing constraints, and adding them. I hate the way that Inventor won't make most things constrained, unless you force it to (several mouse clicks later). I still prefer Pro/ENGINEER 2001's sketcher, though; despite it being a huge resource hog, it guesses geometry and adds weak constraints and dimensions, which are enough to fully constrain the sketch. Actually, I don't like the way that Inventor and SolidWorks don't insist upon fully constrained and dimensioned features—being a bit of a pedant, I'm constantly annoyed with CAD models which allow parts and features to float around, unconstrained. (Unless, of course, it's a motion analysis.)

Inventor's sheetmetal mode annoys me, though. It's awful. When working on the design for 188's most recent robot, we tried briefly to do it in Inventor (because that's what the people with whom I was working knew best). The trouble was, even when using perfectly correct bends, with reasonable radii, reasonable stock thickness and only a few internal cutouts, Inventor refused to generate a flat pattern that was suitable for laser cutting. Chunks were missing. That's totally unacceptable in a design package, since from a manufacturing perspective, a geometrically accurate flat pattern is absolutely vital to actually making the part. Pro/E 2001 had no problems whatsoever with doing the same thing; we used that instead.

When you have to CAD things as part of your day job, you get to appreciate the little things in the interface which make it run smoothly. In fact, my biggest objection to SolidWorks isn't a big deal functionally, but it's a persistent annoyance: when using the "Add/Edit Mates" function, there's seemingly no logic to the way it uses the "Confirm" button (i.e. the checkmark); sometimes, when you confirm an edit to a valid mate, it keeps you editing the same mate, until you hit "Cancel" (the X). (That means that "Confirm" really means "Apply".) Other times, like when creating a mate from scratch, "Confirm" means "OK", because it moves onto the next mate. But these behaviours are both inconsistent with the usual "Confirm" behaviour—which is "OK" to the entire mode, not just the one selection (so you would go back to the main part or assembly tree). It's confusing, and non-intuitive.

Actually, despite its quirks and its own grevious UI problems, I still like Pro/E 2001 for modelling and assemblies. It's powerful, and what I'm used to. But I've got to try Pro/E Wildfire 3, eventually.

For drawings, though, anything but Pro/E 2001 suits me fine! (Without Pro/DETAIL, Pro/E 2001 is distressingly bad in drafting mode. It takes at least twice as long to do the same things as Inventor or SolidWorks—in terms of time consumed, it's no better than AutoCAD, in fact, despite the fact that the geometry is already there for you!)

The bottom line here is that SolidWorks and Inventor aren't nearly on the same level as CATIA or Unigraphics, in terms of their applicability to industry. SolidWorks (properly optioned out) is challenging a standard copy of Pro/E more and more these days, but then again, Pro/E, with the more expensive options, challenges UG and CATIA. Inventor just simply doesn't have the advanced capabilities of any of these things, or possesses them at a vastly inferior level (e.g. mechanical FEA, thermal FEA, kinematic/dynamic analysis, straight-to-NC-machining output, PDM, data conversion, etc.). It's a lightweight package, and is correspondingly unpopular in the engineering industry, except in sectors where low cost is the only requirement. Look for it to gain acceptance in the design of fixturing and equipment (which are relatively simple), before it progresses (several revisions from now) to parts with complex geometry and large assemblies.

Basically, if you have the choice of SolidWorks or Inventor, choose SolidWorks. But give a basic edition of Pro/E a look, if it's within budget (and if Wildfire 3 turns out alright...which, judging by recent history is no certainty).

*Modal ones! Of all the stupid things they could to to the UI, modal dialogues—where you can't shift the focus to another window—are right up there.

[negfrequency]

Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie

For instance, in Inventor I tried to create a shaft in the context of an assembly by extruding from the back face of one ball bearing to the back face of another ball bearing. When I changed the distance between the ball bearings, no matter what I tried, the length of the shaft wasn't updated, which pretty much scared me off Inventor completely (anything less than full parametric modelling, as far as I'm concerned, is unacceptable).

Actually, inventor does offer adaptive parts in assemblies. When you open a part file, extrusions and even sketches can be set to "adaptable" when you right click on them. When constraining them in the assemblies they'll adapt to fit your design. theres a tutorial on it too.

[Mike Martus]

From a teaching angle....Solidworks is very easy to get the new learner up and running.

I have 10 seats of the software in my classroom. If a student gets up to speed I move them to Catia ( same family ) a more powerful software that is used in industry.

There are grants to get Solidworks for the classroom at low or no cost. Check out the post in this forum.

[negfrequency]

Originally Posted by Mike Martus

From a teaching angle....Solidworks is very easy to get the new learner up and running.
I have 10 seats of the software in my classroom. If a student gets up to speed I move them to Catia ( same family ) a more powerful software that is used in industry.

i have heard of catia and seen some videos on it and it looks pretty amazing. They can be found on the dassault systemes competition page. It looks like its more for conceptual design. Inner and more exterior detail can be done with solidworks interface/ inventor. However, haveing away to bring up a concept in several minutes is a extremely useful thing to be able to do, and i have been working to get a copy.

Our school teaches inventor, but i think it is more because it is what Project Lead the Way supports, and therefore we get it cheaper since our school has the 5 course program.

From what i have seen so far on this forum, Inventor is less user friendly, but they offer the same opportunities over time with the user. Solidworks i know is cheaper on the market too.

[Andy A.]

VTC, my college, primarily uses Autodesk products, due to the institution that is AutoCAD among the architect types (who make up a huge portion of the students here). So we have a copy of virtually every single Autodesk product on every computer here at a flat rate. So it's economical for the college to stick with Inventor when they are already paying for it with the precious AutoCAD.

Recently, there was a big student push for Solidworks training (rioting almost). In New England, getting a job with out any Solidworks experience was getting very difficult. Inventor simply is not used in any industry setting around here. Solidworks, Pro/E and Catia have the lions share of acceptance, and Inventor is losing more every year. We where all getting scared of the possibilty of losing a job to someone less capabil but with the right program in their resume. Eventually, the school ponied up the money for 10 seats of Solidworks. No one was qualified to teach it, so we've only been playing with it and doing a lot of Inventor/Solidworks comparisons.

So far, the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. I have both Inventor and a student edition of Solidworks running on my computer, and my preference is undoubtedly for SW.

Simply put, SW runs with fewer crashes, does a better job of anticipating my next step and blows Inventor out of the water with finite analysis capabilities (real time collision detection in an assembly! Brilliant!). I'll never do another assignment that requires face draft in Inventor again.

-Andy A.

It seems that in my experience with Inventor that real time collision in assemblies is actually simple to do, as long as you know what you're doing.

Inventor seems to be harder to learn, but once you learn it you can move quite quickly with it. Solidworks is simpler to learn, but once you get it, the only thing that speeds you up is how quickly you scroll and click.

[negfrequency]

Originally Posted by 114ManualLabor

It seems that in my experience with Inventor that real time collision in assemblies is actually simple to do, as long as you know what you're doing.

Inventor seems to be harder to learn, but once you learn it you can move quite quickly with it. Solidworks is simpler to learn, but once you get it, the only thing that speeds you up is how quickly you scroll and click.

From what i have seen i have to agree with that 100%. the depth of Inventor is continuously growing, but the complexity that results from it makes it hard sometimes. Ive been using inventor for a long time now and im still trying to make sense of some of its tools. Plus with the new versions continually coming, its awfully hard to keep up with. So i think that if your already "on the hump" you can ride it and if not, suffer the consequences or shoot for solidworks

[ICE MAN]

Personally I love inventor. the controls are some what similar to auto cad and I learned how to do auto cad when I was about 13 so I am quite familiar with how it works. since inventor has some of the basic functions of auto cad inventor is just plain easier for me to use. I know that eventually I will have to learn how to use solid works because it is industry standard, but for the time being I'll just use inventor.

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by negfrequency

Ok, im taken aback that someone hasn't already triggered a thread on this child.

Oh they haven't? http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=38873

Mods, do we need a merge?

It's funny, the threads have the exact same poll results right now.

[negfrequency]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Oh they haven't?
Mods, do we need a merge?

if you can merge, go for it man. I think it is great to get all this compariative info on both programs, and pro/e for that matter. There are some great systems out there that i have been trying to play around with a lot more because of this.
Still looking for a solid copy of Catia though......