Siemens NX is a good software and I like it. However, learning resources in internet are few compared to other similar software like SW or Autodesk or Ansys. Siemens need to encourage his/her experts to produce more learning videos on youtube, to attract the new members/engineers.
@Paul Bevan of course, he is under your supervision. If you say otherwise the blame is in you. Not a neutral opinion from you. A millionaire company producing robotic stream audio doesn’t looks well(and hear well). Microphones are cheap, and the quality if recording should be better.
Geometry with broken links, implicit links in sketches... This is terrible! Does anyone use modeling like that in the industry? Could you release the next video with modeling closer to industry standards? P.S. NX is a great CAD tool, but with alot of not applicable capabilities in real projects.
@@farvezfarook3422 I know and I use it too. But I told about modeling style in video above. In many companies things like non-associative geometry links, implicit links in sketches etc. are forbidden. Because model becomes uncontrollable with it.
@@stealth-350 concentrate on designing what you need faster than the competition, focus on better part design, less cost, higher strength, less material, lower part count, easier assembly - if you worry too much about the exactness of applying constraints to cover all possible change situations in the future you will be building in restrictions to innovative design and you will be a slow designer. That's my opinion. I understand models may need altering by someone else down the road - but there will be no road if too much time is spent on perfect constraints.
@Paul Bevan with respect to your student and wishing him a successful career, I think it would be a good tone, for example, to hide non-associatively related geometry in a feature group or use normal WAVE-linked elements to show that this demonstration is a part of a serious project. About my P.S... For example, in many companies where I worked, it was deprecated to use the sheet metal module, sketches or assembly constraints. Because of the violation of the so-called concept of stable design. For example, many features from sheet metal have implicit direction and positioning elements (which are usually based on sketches). Because of this, the behavior of such elements is usually unpredictable when rebuilding the model due, for example, to the changed geometry of the reference parts. It was often easier to completely rebuild a problematic model than to try to fix all the errors in it. Therefore, even in aviation design companies, in products with a large number of sheet material parts, such parts were usually modeled by surfaces. With all the inconveniences, such a model structure was more stable and predictable. Similar claims to sketches. The absence of the possibility of explicit control over the limitations of the sketch makes the behavior of the geometry unpredictable when, for example, the position or orientation of the sketch changes due to some geometry changes that appeared earlier in the history of the model. Especially if the sketch uses related geometry from other elements of the part or assembly (as in the video). Instead, you have to use elements such as curves obtained by the intersection of bodies or surfaces, etc. This dramatically increases the number of operations in the model and complicates the process, but makes the model more predictable and manageable during rebuilds. And if any errors suddenly appear in the model after rebuilding, it is easier to identify and correct them. Rather than trying to fix the collapsed sketch on which the whole model is built. Assembly constraints has similar problems. Due to the fact that parts are connected to each other by assembly constraints by specific edges, faces, etc., and not by mutual position, when rebuilding the geometry of parts, their position in the assembly becomes unpredictable. Therefore, most often all the parts in the assembly are built in a common absolute coordinate system and are either not connected to each other at all, or some kind of control structure is used that controls the position of the parts of the entire assembly. Something like that.
This video did not imply anything industry standards, except a mere representation of how one can use the tool. Do you want to share with us a flawless NX design channel/s?
Awesome tutorial! Thank you!
That was awesome and informative video... Thanks for the tutorial sir
Best 3D software ever.
Bad image and sound in this video.
@Paul Bevan ok. not for me.
siemens nx is my favorite software . I like to work on it.
Siemens NX is a good software and I like it. However, learning resources in internet are few compared to other similar software like SW or Autodesk or Ansys. Siemens need to encourage his/her experts to produce more learning videos on youtube, to attract the new members/engineers.
Just record your audio with iphone earbuds and then paste the sound into your video editor. Your audio is not clear.
@Paul Bevan of course, he is under your supervision. If you say otherwise the blame is in you. Not a neutral opinion from you. A millionaire company producing robotic stream audio doesn’t looks well(and hear well). Microphones are cheap, and the quality if recording should be better.
Geometry with broken links, implicit links in sketches... This is terrible!
Does anyone use modeling like that in the industry? Could you release the next video with modeling closer to industry standards?
P.S. NX is a great CAD tool, but with alot of not applicable capabilities in real projects.
Really?
Lot of automobile companies are using Nx
@@farvezfarook3422 I know and I use it too. But I told about modeling style in video above. In many companies things like non-associative geometry links, implicit links in sketches etc. are forbidden. Because model becomes uncontrollable with it.
@@stealth-350 concentrate on designing what you need faster than the competition, focus on better part design, less cost, higher strength, less material, lower part count, easier assembly - if you worry too much about the exactness of applying constraints to cover all possible change situations in the future you will be building in restrictions to innovative design and you will be a slow designer. That's my opinion. I understand models may need altering by someone else down the road - but there will be no road if too much time is spent on perfect constraints.
@Paul Bevan with respect to your student and wishing him a successful career, I think it would be a good tone, for example, to hide non-associatively related geometry in a feature group or use normal WAVE-linked elements to show that this demonstration is a part of a serious project.
About my P.S...
For example, in many companies where I worked, it was deprecated to use the sheet metal module, sketches or assembly constraints. Because of the violation of the so-called concept of stable design.
For example, many features from sheet metal have implicit direction and positioning elements (which are usually based on sketches). Because of this, the behavior of such elements is usually unpredictable when rebuilding the model due, for example, to the changed geometry of the reference parts. It was often easier to completely rebuild a problematic model than to try to fix all the errors in it. Therefore, even in aviation design companies, in products with a large number of sheet material parts, such parts were usually modeled by surfaces. With all the inconveniences, such a model structure was more stable and predictable.
Similar claims to sketches. The absence of the possibility of explicit control over the limitations of the sketch makes the behavior of the geometry unpredictable when, for example, the position or orientation of the sketch changes due to some geometry changes that appeared earlier in the history of the model. Especially if the sketch uses related geometry from other elements of the part or assembly (as in the video). Instead, you have to use elements such as curves obtained by the intersection of bodies or surfaces, etc. This dramatically increases the number of operations in the model and complicates the process, but makes the model more predictable and manageable during rebuilds. And if any errors suddenly appear in the model after rebuilding, it is easier to identify and correct them. Rather than trying to fix the collapsed sketch on which the whole model is built.
Assembly constraints has similar problems. Due to the fact that parts are connected to each other by assembly constraints by specific edges, faces, etc., and not by mutual position, when rebuilding the geometry of parts, their position in the assembly becomes unpredictable. Therefore, most often all the parts in the assembly are built in a common absolute coordinate system and are either not connected to each other at all, or some kind of control structure is used that controls the position of the parts of the entire assembly.
Something like that.
This video did not imply anything industry standards, except a mere representation of how one can use the tool. Do you want to share with us a flawless NX design channel/s?