Category Archives: machinedaudiohornlens.com

Machined tweeters and mid range horns for audio complete speakers. Klipsch drop in OEM replacements for tweeters

Solid Edge for Manufacturing Series

Posted on May 16, 2013 | Leave a comment

I have decided to take a bit of a new direction regarding  MCAD specific program commentary. While I am interested in what is happening in the MCAD world I don’t have enough real hands on knowledge to talk from a user perspective on things like SolidWorks or Inventor, the two main competitors for Solid Edge. I do intend to talk about generalities and where they are heading but my real interest in these programs is not the nuts and bolts of how they work for daily users but rather where they are going and the severe problems ahead for users because of this. Problems like kernel change and forced cloud usage, corporate management that won’t be honest with users and other things like this are fair game and require no daily CAD program user abilities to reflect upon. Or the serious lack of direct editing which has been such a boon in my world with Solid Edge.

A question that comes up periodically from some SolidWorks users is just what do we Solid Edge users do with our program of choice? This in conjunction with a past post of mine requesting problem parts that had no takers made me think about why I write this blog and what purpose would I like it to serve besides being a bully pulpit for things I like or dislike.

My sole reason for getting involved with CAD programs was based upon the realization in 2003 that I needed to expand my machining capabilities beyond manually operated equipment. This led to me getting my first CNC mill, a used Haas VF3. At the time Surfcam was offering a free 2d program which was all I needed. What quickly became apparent to me was that you have to feed this CNC mill and you need parts to put in the CAM plans to do so.  Just like the genesis of CAD in the real world was for the ability to communicate to machines to manufacture objects I was now faced with the same quandary.

The path I followed was buy a machine and then you need a CAM program to utilize it. Then I discover that since so much of what I was asked to do was reverse engineering of existing parts or design new I needed a CAD program. So 2D or 3D? It never made any sense to me at this point in time (2004) to learn 2D when it was clear after research that the future of machining was going to be off of 3D shapes. Besides that a 3D part is ever so much more self explanatory and visually concise that I never hesitated to go directly into 3D modeling and bypass 2D. Lets face it, all I ever need in 2D anyway is more easily created from 3D.

And of course history based Parametric modeling has it’s own share of problems which led me to have a look at Synchronous Tech in Solid Edge just before the release of ST1. I bought Solid Edge ST1 and have been here ever since for all my parts creation or imports.

My sole use for design has been to feed the manufacture of parts either in my shop or as parts created and sent to others who have capabilities I don’t for manufacture. And in reality while many designers I fear never see the inside of a manufacturing facility the only real reason for their jobs is that it is expected that somewhere at sometime something will be made from these designs.

SO with this in mind I begin the Solid Edge for Manufacturing series. I am going to take parts I design and produce in my shop and show how  I do so with the emphasis on  parts design for manufacturing. From designing for manufacturing to designs that incorporate assemblies which allow me to cut parts and jigs for those parts from the parent part I intend to demonstrate how this shop does things with Solid Edge. In the near future the upcoming wonderful CAM goodies I can finally talk about when Solid Edge University starts up this June will be in addition to parts creation. Yeah that’s right you heard me CAM goodies on the way.

The frequency of these posts will  depend on when I think I have an interesting or different type of part to talk about so if this is of interest just be on the lookout.

 

By the way, the upcoming SEU2013 this June will be the only event like this in the history of Solid Edge where you can be there when all the pieces of the puzzle are finally put in place. Hasn’t been one like this before and there can’t be one like this later so may I recommend to the curious or the fence sitters debating going that you do so.

http://www.siemens.com/plm/solidedgeu

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Solid Edge University 2013 BE THERE

Posted on May 3, 2013 | 2 comments

Let me take a moment of your time here to just mention a few things. In many ways what I had hoped for with SE has been delayed for a few years or has never been a part of SE to begin with. There are things I can’t talk about so let me just say this. I fully expect SEU2013 to be everything I could hope for and more in every area. This year SE will have a complete foundation to really launch itself over the course of the next few years to be the next CAD king.

I have wanted this before but this time I am fully expecting it to begin. Where SEU Huntsville was exciting because the SE community was re-established and SEU 2012 Nashville saw it double in size this event in Cincinnati will eclipse anything held for SE over it’s entire history. This year SE begins a new chapter as a complete design to manufacturing ecosystem in every way and there will only be one event like this in the history of SE. There will be much bigger events in the future but this one will be the beginning of the real deal for SE and if you can possibly be there I think you will be well rewarded.

When you write you quite often look for zingers or persuasive words to convey your point of view. I don’t have any this time and all I am putting here in this post is what I believe will be the future of SE and in particular the significance of SEU 2013 to this future.  I invite you to be a part of this.

http://www.siemens.com/plm/solidedgeu

2 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Dropbox Now a Pervasive Cloud Security Breach for Your Corporate Data

Posted on April 25, 2013 | 1 comment

Oleg Shilovitsky responded to my post on Intel’s position on the cloud. In his response I was a bit floored to realize what a danger employee rebellion has become and the obvious lack of security methodology at many places that would allow this to even happen. Here is an article he wrote about this.

PLM Cloud Concerns and Dropbox Reality for Engineers

As an aside here I am coming to the conclusion that with the advent of Google Glass creating a whole new category of corporate espionage potential not only will you have to prevent “Glassholes” at work you should probably terminate “Bring Your Own Devices” too. But this is a separate issue that will have to be enforced by any security conscious company. As a philosophical thing here I am appalled at the idea of Google Glass and the erosion of privacy both for people and companies this abomination represents. The jeopardy Glassholes represent in so many ways staggers the imagination. Just like street view but only on steroids and following you everywhere and anywhere you are whatever you are doing and a Glasshole is present in public in private and at the workplace. And somewhere Google has a record of everything and don’t doubt for one second that the audio and visual recording capabilities of this stuff will be used by Google when the wearer does not request it. Or a hack job from somewhere will turn it on at demand from an external source just like the one for the iPhones a while back. Just like Adobe did by enabling audio and camera recordings without asking permission to do so a while back. The singular common preventable problem here is access to external elements like the internet or cell phone networks

What I address here today is yet another reason to prohibit any design and manufacturing data access to the cloud and apparently the only method that is going to work is complete isolation from the peril the cloud represents. Look, Dropbox is a cloud thing on cloud servers and you read the fine print and they make no guarantees of security and there will be nothing to make your IP loss whole to compensate your company for it’s loss. It is just another convenience for people to use for file transfers that sadly happens to be just another shopping cart for whomsoever will and has the talent to do so. Verizon does a study on this called Data Breach Investigations Here is one http://www.verizonenterprise.com/resources/reports/rp_data-breach-investigations-report-2012_en_xg.pdf

Please note the graph on page 16.

The vast, like 98% or so, of your clear and present danger according to them is external. While they don’t break it down this specifically I would assume that employees using Dropbox and the data being hacked from Dropbox would constitute itself in the external threat category even though it’s origin was an employee. But truthfully it’s origin was that this employee had access to the cloud with your data and the only method of prevention would have been NO CLOUD ACCESS AND NO ACCESS TO ANY EXTERNAL NETWORK. I question the 98% figure as seeming to be high but have no way of doing so with knowledge so I am going to have to accept their numbers.

Add yet another way to the myriad of ways that the cloud is your enemies best friend and your competitors best expenditure of “Research and Developement” funds.

1 Comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Intel Rejects Cloud for Design and Manufacturing Data

Posted on April 18, 2013 | 17 comments

I have been writing about the fraudulent nature of the promises of any CAD (And CAM as far as that goes!) on the Cloud company for a couple of years now. My real interest began when Dassault decided they were going to gut the security of every one of their clients by forcing the use of the cloud. Or at least that was the stated intent at the time as they attempted to paint a pretty picture of how things would be for those foolish enough to buy into this. http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2011/01/41questionsaboutthecloud.html

Now I know I have discussed this at length before and I have quoted the above article before. But it bears repeating here that basically none of these questions have been directly answered by any CAD or CAM on the cloud company. I feel they know these are not solvable problems right now so rather than admit this they just won’t talk about it. Those of you in the real world outside of the corporate boardrooms might even go so far as to say deliberate deceptions would be the right term and I think so to. The idea that single threaded applications can’t work better in the cloud where there are hundreds of cores available for your use is swept under the carpet. Instead we hear the cloud is a wonderful thing and no one bothers to qualify what he says. Indeed if they were honest they would say that this CAD cloud thing is applicable to FEA and rendering only and is dependent upon your internet connection quality and has gobs of charges waiting in the back ground. That single thread is still that and what they offer does not fix this. But you can still rent hundreds of cores if you wish. And they will make sure it ends up costing you more in the long run because it is all about the money and not about you.

Every once in a while I see an article I consider quite powerful for the viewpoint I subscribe to regarding the cloud. Today I bring you one from Intel CIO Kim Stevenson. http://www.zdnet.com/intel-cio-kim-stevenson-on-big-data-openstack-women-in-it-7000014221/

I think it bears repeating a bit of it here.
“•Design: “Silicon design will never go out to the cloud. That’s our core IP,” said Stevenson. She added that no cloud service level agreement or chargeback would ever compensate for Intel’s intellectual property being leaked. Instead, product design runs on a high performance computing grid that’s internal.
•Manufacturing: Manufacturing is another area that won’t be put into the cloud. The information is housed in small data centers near the manufacturing site and later aggregated.”

Now I am going to ask publically of Dassault and Autodesk these questions.
If Intel can’t protect it’s data online how will you be able to do so?
If chargebacks won’t cover Intel’s proprietary information losses how can you cover CAD and manufacturing data losses for the customers you have and want to force onto the cloud?

Last but not least is why do the representatives from the top down from Dassault and Autodesk blatantly lie about and or ignore the various egregious aspects of the cloud and expect to get a free pass on this? Now I say they lie deliberately and with intent as I refuse to believe that all these things I find in public domain as news they are unaware of. Deliberate omission of information is after all a method of lying isn’t it? And they do refuse to make whole anyone using the cloud and their software from any damages that result. Read the TOS for Fusion 360 as an example. What is left is for CAD and CAM customers to start considering the integrity with which their CAD software suppliers are treating them. If you are using Dassault or Autodesk products and they force you to the cloud in any way to use their products they quite clearly have contempt for you as a customer and only see you as chattel dollar signs. If you are contemplating using ANY CAD or CAM program that forces your data to the cloud from anyone you are in jeapordy. I mention Dassault and Autodesk because their actions to force users into an insecure paradigm for whatever reason causes them to lead the charge here.

As a fine example of corporate deception and double speaking I present Autodesk’s Fusion 360 TOS. In particular pay attention to sections 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 and it tells you all you need to know of the integrity of Autodesk and how they will stand behind their customers. This is the current version from 3/13/13
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=21310328
For Dassault we have http://www.3ds.com/terms-of-use/ While I did not spend a whole lot of time digging I could find nothing on Mechanical Conceptual and I suppose this is because it is not out there yet for the public. But in any case pay attention to the weasel words in section 9. I am sure you will find them amusing as I did.

Is it any wonder with the integrity of the cloud service offering companies that Intel does not want their intellectual properties or their manufacturing data to reside there? I find these comments from Intel CIO Kim Stevenson to be incredibly revealing and directly damning against Dassault and Autodesk from an unimpeachable source they can’t contradict. The lawyers that Dassault and Autodesk employ agree totally with Kim Stevenson and thus these onerous evasions of responsibility from them to any customer who uses cloud based whatever from these guys.

An interesting commentary I read recently stated that when us old fuddy-duddy users who still believed in things like autonomy and personal control over our affairs, data and destiny were replaced by the young guys who were so electronically connected in every area of their lives and could care less about fuddy-duddy concerns this cloud would work. Work for who dare I ask? Somehow I think that when even these superior mentality uber-connected cutting edge near cyborg wannabes get screwed enough by these cloud companies they to will reject this mess. Nothing like a little real life medicine to cure naivety I always said and thus will die the current equivalent of the Dot Com frauds of the late 90’s.

Look people, in particular those of you with Dassault or Autodesk or considering them or any other CAD CAM company that would force you to the cloud. Can you afford to deal with companies that treat your lifeblood with such disdain? Intel clearly thinks not and so should you in my opinion.

17 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Solid Edge SHOULD be the Best Software You Hear of.

Posted on April 8, 2013 | 2 comments

Reading today a post http://ontheedge.dezignstuff.com/is-solid-edge-the-best-cad-program-youve-never-heard-of/1044 over at Matt’s “On The Edge” blog about SE. I was writing a reply there when I realized that it should be a post here on my blog as it was becoming way to long to be a reply at his. This perception that persists with SE and dumb or no marketing exists because the actions of UGS and then Siemens/SE have made it so. I am writing this as I see it by the way and I am judging this situation based upon what I have seen for six years and the reasons I have heard for this. This was not an idea that just happened out of thin air but rather it is the result of either malign or benign neglect from UGS treating the red headed step child like the bad kid who should not be seen or heard. After they absorbed the Synchronous tech from SE into NX that the NX guys did not come up with. And then after that marketing departments that do I don’t know what but whatever it is they do it has not been effective. Anyway here is my “reply”.

Yeah I don’t know about marketing for Solid Edge. From the days of 2005 when the SE yearly events were killed and this Velocity thing happened I just don’t get it. If you remember with ST1 all that was really mentioned was this amorphous undefined Velocity thing. Truth of the matter is that it should have been SOLID EDGE and the Velocity family because all those add-ons had no reason for existence without a robust CAD design program for them to run on. ATTENTION, for those of you in Rio Lindo PLM PDM blah-blah-blah have no reason to exist without CAD program output! ST1 had a brief mention in places but the ads, such as they were being few and far between were for mostly this amorphous Velocity thing. It reminded me of that dumb “purple pill” ad from years ago where they talked about the pill and never said what it did. And it led directly to Roopinder’s famous “Solid Edge– the Best MCAD Program You Won’t Buy” article.

http://cadinsider.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/06/solid_edge_the_.html

A little later nothing has changed and this article by Deelip.

http://www.deelip.com/?p=2697

I am told by various people that there is a huge cultural mindset problem that propagates the idea of things as they have been are best as it protects my fiefdom or turf. Now I am not there behind closed doors to really speak authoritatively on this so I am relying on what I have been told. This is the group that was inherited from UGS days prior to when they were bought out by Siemens. Why in the world this should be I don’t know as it ought to be clear to any of these foot draggers that if SE sells like it should and there is a unified and cohesive SUSTAINED effort to promote SE all will profit. Siemens makes more money and so do users as larger market share draws more work opportunities. I know shops nearby that have to buy SW only because their largest customers use SW and it is a condition to get their work that you have a current seat of SW. Market share in so many ways drives opportunity for all involved and I don’t see any real enthusiasm or concerted relevant efforts up to this point in time from Solid Edge marketing to change this.

Now I thought two years ago SE was going to do the aggressive promotion thing but after a brief period of excitement we had Local Motors as the only real offshoot other than the establishment of the Solid Edge user conventions which have been a real success. We had a series of user “Summits” one year but not the next. Now I want to say this about the University events. This is a key building block towards creating an energized user community. It has been done right from top to bottom and I look for double the attendance this year over last year again. As for Local Motors I have been told that it has generated a lot of interest in SE and I have no way of judging the validity of that claim. I do know that every actual professional SE user I know could care less about it so evidently it was meant to appeal to someone besides professional CAD users. Ah, people like maybe SW and Inventor users dare I say will probably feel the same way. Professional users want to know how it can improve their problems at work and bottom lines for their businesses. They are by and large not interested in crowd sourcing where the value of their output is significantly diminished. They have this odd notion that they should be paid for what they do and have no interest in things like Local Motors.

I believe that what will be the fastest way for SE to grow market share is to appeal directly to current users of other CAD programs with evidence of how SE will improve their day and bottom line. Once professional users are making the switch and larger market share is gained for SE you will see academics and the rest teach it more and promote it more. After all help wanted postings ARE the best engine to create interest in your product. Or so I think but then I am not an advertising executive so what do I know.

What I am choosing to believe with some evidence I know of is that after all these years there will FINALLY be a cohesive and serious effort to promote SE this year. I think the beginning of this in the public eye will be SEU13 this June in Cincinnati. I fully expect more integrated aps for SE and the Synchronous side of SE will be fully mature in every area. I see already some significant incentives offered for those who might switch from other programs and this is a big deal. Discounts help get a lot of people off the fence quickly. I am very excited about the upcoming release of SE ST6 based on some things I hear and things under NDA I can’t talk about. At this time I think the only possible way for this release to not be an epic event in the history of SE will be for the past mindset to stifle quality efforts at getting the word out. ALL the pieces of the software puzzle will be here in this one so the only reason for failure will fall directly upon corporate marketing and promotion. Dan Staples and the Solid Edge staff in Huntsville have done their job with excellence and now let us see if those other departments can do the same.

I get to say this because I am not a part of Siemens or SE I am just a user and I can’t lose my job over this. I certainly don’t know what all is constraining the marketing of SE. But from where this user sits if Marketing can’t do any better than the recent past with SE after all the good stuff coming up in ST6 and it were me that had to answer for it I would be putting on big boots and kicking some rear ends into gear where ever and how ever I could. SE can still be snatched from the jaws of victory by stupid marketing and turf protection or whatever it is that has so capably stifled SE in the past. I am certain that market share for SE is growing and I hope that this is not used by the marketing department to justify their efforts because whatever the growth rate is it should be double that or more and it is the exclusive failure to get the word out in ways that count to the real world that is, I believe, to blame.

2 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

The Absurdity of Linkedin Endorsements

Posted on April 8, 2013 | 5 comments

I get occasional emails which state that I have been endorsed for skills from LinkedIn. Now not many show up in my about me because I suppose I don’t reply or reciprocate or approve or something. So I click on the latest endorsement today and it does not show up either but I am asked to approve the list of people that show up for skills. I have to say that many of them I don’t personally know and I don’t have a clue as to what most of them can really can do. Others I do know and could easily endorse them and it would have meaning because I have personal experience with them that would bequeath credibility to the endorsement.

However it has become a game with entirely to many individuals running around collecting endorsements and way to many endorsements being given as a simple courtesy to those who endorsed you even though many times no one knows what the other can truly do. Now as proof of this I offer two situations I am familiar with. I have received endorsements for machining and design and CAD and CAM and manufacturing skills. From people who know me through my blog or by reputation even though only a few of these have actually seen anything I have done and can speak truthfully about skill levels. And that presumes that they have the knowledge in that particular discipline they endorse me for so that the endorsement would be valid.

Then we have this guy. Jon Banquer is proof to me of how frivolous LinkedIn endorsements have become. Go look at his Skills and Expertise list and there are gobs of endorsements from all over the map from people who have never seen his work in any way. They have never seen any evidence the company he claims to own is real. No files no work, just nothing. But yet lots of endorsements and I dare say the majority happened because he endorsed others. Reciprocity is the polite LinkedIn thing to do after all.

So we have the professional equivalent of Facebook’s “Farmville” where social networks are created and driven so that some how some way it can be monetized in the future. With Farmville I remember my wife playing it and then one day in order to have a really cool farm you had to start buying things. I laughed and call me silly if you want but I have prohibited my family from posting things about me and pictures of me there. There is serious data mining going on with Facebook and continuous chicanery with your personal information because they HAVE to make money and your personal data is how they will do it. Everything you put there is for sale. Now LinkedIn is I believe going through the same process and working on developing large user networks. Ones that may have very little basis in truth in some cases but it does connect dots and it does get large groups of people in the system for future monetization. A little more profit potential than Farmville per user because in many cases the individuals at LinkedIn are professionals of some sort and therefore presumably in a place of influence for who buys or uses what. A list for sale to advertisers and sales types would be another way of stating it.

Sad thing is that so much of the stuff in endorsements is bogus that it is of itself revealing of the monetizing principle which has replace true value as people scramble to recreate the wealth the web can represent. Just like the unproven models with the dot com bust that fleeced many of money today I believe we see the replacement of dot com fraud. It is social whatever where getting numbers is king and where getting as an investor true verifiable data is next to impossible. An amusing offshoot of this is click fraud companies who create bogus clicks. Or Google pulling shenanigans with word search and rank to benefit themselves. Or the fabulous wealth of Facebook’s initial public offering without proof it could earn that kind of money.

So we have LinkedIn looking for ways to make their social network grow using less than honest measure to do so. LinkedIn is a valuable resource for finding people in some ways in that they do provide a network of connections that can be very beneficial. Sadly it is becoming less valuable over time as they introduce silly things like endorsements that are not verified in any way shape or form.

So to all of you who have sent me endorsements. Even though I know some of you personally and I know you have skills I just don’t bother participating because of the prevalence of endorsement fraud. Does not mean I don’t appreciate endorsements but I never solicit for them and I won’t reciprocate and now you know why.

It kind of reminds me of the Japan Tsunami videos. First you had the original video and author and then tons of people who would plagiarize them just to get view number counts however they could. Or Grabcad where models show up done by one and subsequently claimed as being done by others who wish to look like CAD gurus and get points or whatever someone thinks they gain by claiming what is not theirs to be theirs. Or Jon Banquer CADCAM’s premier troll who collects them to look authoritative but can’t provide any files or finished work for public or peer review.

Sorry LinkedIn but you have flopped on this one and it is costing you credibility even though it will over time probably help you pay bills.

5 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , ,

Solid Works Users, Send Me Your Problem Files

Posted on March 25, 2013 | 8 comments

typical Solid Works fail

I have mentioned this and no one has taken this seriously yet so I am going to try again. I am looking for MCAD files from Solid Works users that fall into the following categories. Problems creating it in SW, problem with editing or families of parts in SW and last but not least imports that fail in SW. It is my intent to create videos utilizing these files and demonstrating how it can be done with data imported as dumb solids from Solid Works in Solid Edge. I have always felt that there is nothing better than using actual parts to work with over canned demos all slick and polished from Siemens. So my mission, and I hope some of you will be so kind as to oblige me, is to get files from you so I can create some videos.

HEY, worst case scenario is that if it is of interest to you, you can see how someone else using a different program solves the same problems you face. Please leave a reply here and I will get back to you with contact information.

Here is a specific example of what I am talking about. This part was sent to me by a member of the Huntsville Solid Edge User Group. For some reason I can’t fathom he is still strictly an ordered user in ST4. He had a lot of trouble with an imported step file and here I show him how to repair this using Synchronous in ST5. Basically like many history based or ordered users he eventually ended up rebuilding the part after fiddling with it for some time. Now I mention that this was not repairable in ordered in the video clip but I suppose it could be if one fiddled long enough or knew the cool tricks for doing so. My attempts there to get this done in ordered were brief and I went to Synchronous rather quickly where I knew I would not have to fool around. I do all my parts in Synchronous as it is just to quick and reliable for me to consider ordered or traditional history based stuff anymore. And to be honest here I have to sit down and remember just how to inflict the pain of straight ordered modeling upon myself and I spend little time doing so. There apparently are some real benefits to combining the two at times although I have never had a need to do so.

8 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Five Free Spots Reserved for Qualified Solid Works Users at SEU 2013

Posted on March 22, 2013 | Leave a comment

OK folks the count down for ST6 is going quickly and at this end I am getting excited about what is coming. Of course there are the things some of us get to see and can’t talk about which of course makes the wait worse for us. We get to see the new toys or hear about them and then have to wait. Sometimes I think ignorance is bliss and maybe would be preferable to you can look but you can’t touch. Anyway that is the way it goes.

Solid Works is by any number metric the largest 3D MCAD modeler out there. They have become a part of a company that does not understand how the success of SW was part of a plan that listened to users and interacted with them. Today it is top down chaos with one thing said one month along with promises only to see a diametrically opposed statement soon after and failures to deliver promised software or all this cloud goodness everyone is supposed to be in awe of. Naturally in a vacuum like this there will be something that comes along to fill it.

I prefer to think this over the next few years will be Solid Edge and while SW is not going away it’s market share will be severely cut. When technology advances as profoundly as it has with the implementation of Synchronous Technology in SE it is only a matter of time before clear advantages with direct editing will prove itself to doubters and there stands SW with nothing to offer.

Now part of the master plan for SE to acquire SW users is to make the change as painless as possible and in light of that I will copy what Dan Staples sent to me this morning.

“”We will waive the conference fee for the first five qualified individuals to sign up to participate in a one hour usability session. Qualifications: A minimum of two years using Solid Works in a production environment; no more than two hours prior hands-on experience with Solid Edge”

I will be adding information on who you contact for this but you guys over on the SW side of the fence who are interested have an opportunity here to attend SEU 2013 for free. Now I assume that since this was not specified you are responsible for lodging and travel. This is a chance to see exactly what the program is all about and meet the people employed with Siemens.

I believe that ST6 is when all the pieces of the puzzle will come together for SE and soon we will be looking at SW users and saying “you to will be assimilated” and many of you will. Better ways of doing things with methodology that can work with files from anywhere and not watch your stuff blow up all the time is a compelling argument to switch from the tired things you know and can work with to a far more productive way.

I also have an offer to SW users. I would like you to send me a problem file you have along with an explanation of why it fails in SW. It can be one you have created or one you have imported that you can’t easily work on and I want to make some videos showing how SE would work on the same part. I find there is nothing that beats working on someone’s problem part to show just exactly why your way is much more efficient. SO, five go to SEU2013 for free and send in your files and get some insight into a better way for free. Now on this parts file thing. Remember I am a guy that does design build for machinery, just like 90% or so of the MCAD world I would guess. You send me some sort of byzantine plastic tail light housing that in all likelihood is beyond my skill level I will try to find someone who can work on it. But for the 90% of you who do the same kind of work I do bring it on. Post a reply here and I will get you the contact info for the parts files.

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

A Conversation With Karsten Newbury, Senior VP and GM of Solid Edge

Posted on March 5, 2013 | 2 comments

I like to read about design software and the companies that produce and use it. Software consumes a far larger part of my life than I ever dreamed it would ten years ago when I got involved with software for machining and then design. Even if it is not software I use I still believe that knowing what is going on elsewhere serves both my academic interest in general and my desire to keep current on best practices. Over time there are issues that draw my attention and they have become a sort of litmus test for me as to where a company is headed depending on how they answer certain questions or indeed choose to ignore the same.

On occasion I talk to Karsten and recently while doing so asked him if he would be willing to answer some questions that would subsequently be posted on Solidedging. He agreed and here is the conversation we had. As an aside let me mention this. I have known Karsten for about three and a half years now. The things he says today are the things he has been saying and it is remarkably consistent for both the plans for the software and the philosophy behind the decisions that drive the softwares direction. There is a clear direction and a well defined set of goals and I have seen no deviation from these for this time frame. It is good to be where the only changes coming down the pike are those which improve your productivity.

How did Solid Edge fit into Siemens decision to buy UGS back in 2007?
One of the key reasons Siemens bought UGS from a Solid Edge point of view is to offer even better productivity solutions to our customers. Siemens had been the leader in manufacturing, UGS was a leader in design and PLM, so together we would not only cover a broader toolset for our customers, but we would also be in a position to optimize the full value chain, from design to manufacturing.

Explain the 10 year plan philosophy of Siemens as it relates to Solid Edge.
Siemens will not sacrifice long-term strategy for short-term benefit. It’s really that simple. Quarterly financial performance is important, but our long-term strategy governs our actions. For example, we take great pride in future-proof architecture, where we ensure that our customers’ investment is stable over long time frames, and they don’t have to worry about us changing architecture on them every few years. That sounds easy, but is really hard to do. But it’s also the right thing to do for our customers and a key part of our culture. After all, we are a large manufacturer/consumer of our PLM products ourselves, and know what it means to use and implement them.

Are there any intentions for Solid Edge to go to or use the cloud?
First, anybody can host software and it’s been around for a while. Customers can certainly already pick their “platform of choice” to run their systems. Having said that, as a customer you can decide to host Solid Edge if you want to, but we are not putting Solid Edge/CAD in the cloud. Our CAD innovation focus is on productivity tools, such as synchronous technology, that help our customers design and engineer better.

Will there be any kernel changes in the future for Solid Edge away from Parasolid?
Siemens develops and markets Parasolid and other core components in an open, “level playing field” environment. Parasolid is the best kernel in the industry with over 3mln seats sold and a vibrant technology partner ecosystem. It’s stable, strong, and we keep enhancing it. Our products including NX and Solid Edge are built on the same kernel/components. It gives our customers stability and interoperability across our toolset that nobody else in the industry can offer. We have no intention of changing this strategy or the kernel.

What are your goals for SE as a CAD program and as a basis for a part of a complete manufacturing ecosystem?
Today synchronous technology already is market leading in helping customers accelerate design, make faster revisions and better reuse data. We will continue to push innovation in Solid Edge, both in the product and customer interaction processes to help our users design and engineer better.
I already mentioned the importance of manufacturing for Siemens: We are a manufacturing company and our solutions are tailored to help other manufacturers be successful. You will see us continue to evolve our manufacturing footprint. For Solid Edge ST6 you can expect further enhancements to our manufacturing ecosystem. Think of Solid Edge as a platform for design, simulation, workgroup data management, manufacturing, and at the same time with full integration into our Teamcenter platform for Enterprise PLM.

Do you have any other thoughts?
If you need CAD and haven’t already checked out Solid Edge with synchronous technology, have a look! Go to our free trial at http://www.solidedge.com and/or join us at our annual Solid Edge event “Solid Edge University” in June this year. We have a great product, a really passionate team, and you can join our strongly growing community of “Edgers” that have a passion for design and being successful.

2 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Solid Edge Media and Academic Efforts Need Serious Revamp

Posted on February 14, 2013 | 13 comments

You never quite know what to expect when you attend an event and sometimes the purpose of the event is only related to the thing that impresses you the most as you leave for better or worse. Sometime back I attended the Surfcam V6 rollout at the Barber Sports Museum. During one of the Truemill demonstrations the speaker asked how many there used Truemill. There were around 75 attendees and the vast majority were current users. THREE held their hands up and two were from the same company. I was absolutely floored at how such a powerful tool was studiously ignored by such a high percentage of users. Users who in many cases already owned the Truemill add on as a part of their CAM package but for whatever reason elected not to use something that could easily double their productivity and save on consumables to boot. It was almost like a certain level of capabilities and profit were sufficient and there was no desire to improve. The speaker was a bit shocked too and mentioned that they had failed to educate users and prove the benefits to them.

The first speaker at our user group meeting in Huntsville began speaking on Synchronous Tech and asked who all was using it there. Out of 21 actual users in attendance there I was the only one to hold my hand up. Now the really sad thing is that once we began the round table the use of ST was the primary topic of interest with Tips and Tricks a close second.

This leads me to what I wish to discuss and that is the failure of the promotional and Academic outreach side of Solid Edge. I don’t have a clue as to what in the world goes on in the minds of those who are in charge of this but for only one user out of a group of motivated users who chose to spend their own time to attend because they are interested in the software they use to be a user of ST is not acceptable. This is the premier element of Solid Edge and it is the true competitive advantage to both Siemens in gaining market share and SE users who become tremendously more productive by using it. HOW in the world is this not actively pushed by VARS and Siemens is beyond me. Where are the well trained individuals who will call on various customers and arrange to have demos at the place of use to show both management and users of the profound benefits. I do mean profound. I sat there thinking of how crippled user output was because no one had sat down with them and SHOWN them what ST truly means as a liberating tool for CAD creation.

Now one of the reasons for non adoption was ‘my professor teaches us only in Ordered”. I have to admit my jaw dropped on this one and I can’t imagine a teacher who would not teach the best capabilities of the software to his students nor could I believe that Siemens had not checked in to see what the teaching staff was teaching only three miles away from the headquarters. Look, whoever is reading this let me fill you in on something. These students were HUNGRY for ST when they actually saw it being used for the first time. How in the world has this been allowed to happen? As a part of grants or academic site licenses Siemens needs to police what is being done with their products. It appalled me that here were students who were selectively being taught and the best parts were never discussed.

Of course the litany of comments from users about how hard it is to get their companies to switch over and we never have time and all the stuff we as users are familiar with. These are valid reasons. Now why are they valid? Because management has not been sufficiently exposed to the power of Synchronous they labor on in the idea that we already know ordered and we don’t need the headache of change. Kind of like we are happy because we have X% of profit and productivity and as long as we don’t know those metrics could be much better we will stay with what we are comfortable with. I daresay that not one serious effort has been made to have management sit down with Siemens after Siemens does a case study for them to prove the power to improve design time by adopting a new way. From families of parts to imported parts to edits that always happen over the life of a part and Siemens evidently has nothing going on to compel change through proof of efficiency using customer parts to prove this by.

I love to sit down with and Inventor or SolidWorks users and editing their parts in my program faster than they can and I mean by many times faster. There is no more compelling thing than proof and I just can’t grasp how this most powerful and compelling thing is not blasted out by Siemens at every possible opportunity. For my money SE is just flat out the best mid range MCAD program in the world and I spent money out of my own pocket as proof of this.

I am a perfect example of how Siemens should be doing this. Back in 2008 I am shopping for good MCAD and the choices have been narrowed down to Solid Works and Solid Edge. I have attended two demo days with SW at this point in time in Nashville. I had attended nothing for SE because, well because there was nothing then to attend. However, I get a call one day from a guy with a company that used to be the VAR for the Huntsville area. He describes ST1 and called me down there to have a look. This is what I saw. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bk5-1sZ6cY My mind took one look at this principle of direct editing and I could see so many ways this was what I had been looking for without knowing what I was looking for. BUT IT TOOK SOMEONE WHO COMPELLED ME AND USED MY PART TO PROVE HIS POINT TO ME. No canned demo by some sales jock showing the same tired official Siemens polished presentations but a user who took my part and proved the principle of ST to me in a way I could not ignore.

Solid Edge is the best midrange MCAD program in the world. There are things that will be here for ST6 that will eliminate any other software as a contender for utilitarian value king.

You guys need to kick someone in the butt and get them on the ball where the dissemination of the value of Solid Edge is concerned or you can still produce the best MCAD program in the world but still be second or third place in market share. If it were me I would be less patient with mediocre efforts and the apparent corporate satisfaction with the status quo.

Dave Ault signing off shaking his head in disbelief over how this can be allowed to continue. Throw this stupid Loco Motors thing in the dustbin and get real.

13 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,