This is a bit of a sore spot with me. The choice of going with the XOX
engine was made for presumably good reasons, but geometry importing has long
been an issue. While I can say that it has improved significantly, it’s by
no means perfect, and while I don’t expect perfection, I do expect better
than it’s current incarnation keeping in mind that we have to pay for a
Connection tool to get the current level of performance. One could argue
that without any of the add-on tools, the geometry importing is woefully
inadequate. As Adam points out, none of these choices were made by us, and
we shouldn’t be forced to pay yet again for something that should have
worked in the first place.
I think it would be fair if we could trade in the Connection tool for DM,
since it can export anf files. I’ve already complained to my ASD about this,
so this is just me venting.
I’m better now :)
John Ceko P. Eng.
HUSKY Injection Molding Systems
Index Advanced Engineering
560 Queen St. S.
Bolton, Ontario, Canada, L7E 5S5
Tel. (905) 951-5000 ext. 3347
Fax (905) 951-5365
Email: jceko_at_husky.ca
-----Original Message-----
From: Shinbrot, Adam [mailto:adam.shinbrot_at_zimmer.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 11:20 AM
To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
>I still don’t see this as a TECS issue. Improvements
>have been and are being made to solid modeling in ANSYS
>and reported bugs get fixed. Significant additional >functionality
Eric,
I would respectfully disagree. I would argue that ANSYS has offered geometry
import capability. The fact is, though, that it *does not work*, much of the
time. You could call an improvement in this capability "significant
additional functionality", or you could call it "fixing what was broken".
The fact that ANSYS has found it necessary to invent a whole new paradigm
(DM) to make the import of CAD gemetry successful *is not my fault*! The
fact is, we have been paying extra already for this functionality, via the
parasolid interface. The day ANSYS offers us a refund for this flawed
interface is the day I will be happy asking management to shell out
additional money for DM.
********************************
Adam Shinbrot
Zimmer Spine
Tel.: 952.830.6324 Fax: 952.837.6924
adam.shinbrot_at_zimmer.com
********************************
"I’ve been Zimmered!"
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Miller [mailto:eric.miller_at_padtinc.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:41 AM
To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
Herbert,
I still don’t see this as a TECS issue. Improvements
have been and are being made to solid modeling in ANSYS
and reported bugs get fixed. Significant additional functionality
just doesn’t fall into maintenance, especially when a royalty is
involved.
There is no reason to count of faith to make sure ANSYS doesn’t
just repackage stuff. There are 80,000 users world wide watching
their every move. The stink raised over DM, which is not repackaging
or an attempt to pull a sales trick, is an example of how strongly
the user community watches these things. In addition, those of
us who are on the advisory committee are pretty blunt.
Anyhow, my $0.02 (what is that in euros these days?
Eric
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Miller
Director: Support,
Training & Development
Phoenix Analysis &
Design Technologies
(480) 813-4884, x103
www.padtinc.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Liu, Herbert (Bolton) [mailto:hliu_at_husky.ca]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 8:12 AM
To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
Bogdan, Eric,
I appreciate your comments about the geometry engine compatibility, issues
of parasolids kernal and royalty. It is more complicated than I originally
thought. However, one question remains in my mind, the choice of buying a
software package and keep paying TECS may not be as economical as it sound.
In theory, the customers should always able to get the latest and greatest
from ANSYS. But we have to put a faith on ANSYS that it won’t re-package its
newly development works and sell as brand new products.
With all of these, the "tokens" fee structure offered by MSC does sound
really attractive. Does anyone know if ANSYS will offer similar option ?
Regards,
Herbert Liu P.Eng.
CAE Team Leader - Dev. Engineering
Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Miller [mailto:eric.miller_at_padtinc.com]
Sent: December 18, 2003 9:16 AM
To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
I’m going to back Bogdan up here.
As much as I like a good conspiracy theory, especially if
we can put blame on "evil suit wearing types," I am lucky enough to have
been in the heat of discussions on this topic with ANSYS, Inc. managers and
developers.
Trust me, if there was any feasible way to fix the geometry engine in the
ANSYS product someone would have done it. I don’t think it is appropriate
to go into the details but several of us dug real deep and asked a lot of
sharp, pointy questions and came to the conclusion that a tool like
DesignModeler is really the only way to get modern CAD capability available
to the ANSYS user. The nice thing about DM is that you can use it with
ANSYS as well as Workbench products.
That leaves the issue of cost. Bottom line: the reason why it is so useful
and robust is that it is built on the Parasolids kernal. EDS gets a royalty.
If ANSYS gave it away with every seat then they would bay a royalty for
every one. So either they jack up
the price of ANSYS seats or make it an incremental cost.
I’ve grown fond of this tool, although we are pushing hard for some changes
to the GUI. If you want to see some of the things you can do with it, check
out our article in "the Focus" about it:
http://www.padtinc.com/epubs/focus/common/focus.asp?I=21&P=article1.htm
Please note: I made an error in the article. At one time you could create
components in DM that carried over to ANSYS. That didn’t make this release
because of some other issues so we have to wait till 8.1 for that.
Eric
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Miller
Director: Support,
Training & Development
Phoenix Analysis &
Design Technologies
(480) 813-4884, x103
www.padtinc.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bogdan Balasa [mailto:bbalasa_at_cambric.ro]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 12:15 AM
To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
The new Design Modeler is the former AGP with a new name and a few
developments. It is a long discussion, but the actual ANSYS geometry engine
is rather old (XOX if my memory do not fail me) and lack performance. This
new is a parametric based geometry engine, and the plans were that in finite
amount of time it will replace the actual one. The same geometry engine
(AGP) is used for all WorkBench products, and using them you cannot avoid
noticing the ease in importing complex geometries directly from various CAD.
Personally I do not think that the new developments in AGP (or Design
Modeler) can be implemented in the old geometry engine.
Regards.
Bogdan Balasa
Cambric Corporation
110 Business Park Drive
Draper, Utah 84020
USA
---------------------------------
E-mail: bbalasa_at_cambric.ro,
bbalasa_at_cambric.com
WEB: www.cambric.com
Phone: 801 816 8922
> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
> to
whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please delete it from your system and notify the
sender identified above by e-mail.
>
-----Original Message-----
From: xansys-bounces_at_xansys.org [mailto:xansys-bounces_at_xansys.org]On
Behalf Of Liu, Herbert (Bolton)
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 10:08 PM
To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
This sounds like another creative way ANSYS uses to generate sales. Instead
of implementing improvements to existing products we already paid, they ONLY
put it in a "new and better" product. Time to call my broker to get few more
ANSYS shares.
Regards,
Herbert Liu P.Eng.
CAE Team Leader - Dev. Engineering
Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd.
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Liddle [mailto:xansys_at_tynecomp.co.uk]
Sent: December 17, 2003 12:36 PM
To: xansys_at_xansys.org
Subject: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
Just a passing observation. I’ve recently acquired a license for ANSYS
Design Modeller (DM) and whilst I’m right at the bottom of the learning
curve, I have noticed that in a couple of cases it has imported geometry,
received in IGES format, without problem whilst classic ANSYS failed on both
occasions. The ability for DM to write an ANF file means that I can then
bring the geometry into classic ANSYS.
--Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services, 27 Garforth Close, Cramlington,Northumberland, England, NE23 6EW.Phone: 01670-712624. Web site: <http://www.tynecomp.co.uk>.