Autocad vs solidworks series#

This one here is a glass i drew and used the Kitchen scene in SW. The way the images on the walls are mapped can be defined a few ways but the images on these can be whatever you choose. The scene you see here is comprised of 4 walls, floor and ceiling all linked(even though you dont see all of them). Well solidworks has a few ways of defining an environment. I used Acad for many years and the only time I open it back up is either for this forum, or to double check files ive exported to send off to a third party. If you have to work only in 2d there is really no need to get into something like Solidworks but it can certainly handle the task. If you have experience with Visual Basic this is an extremely helpful tool when dealing with automation. Creating macros is as easy as pressing the record button then going on your way. How complex you get will depend on your experience with Excel but the functionality is all built in. The user interface can be as simple as entering numbers in a spreadsheet or as complex as using excel custom views, visual styles, data validation as well as the developer options that can make use of activeX controls. from there you can create new configurations or simply edit that one.

You can draw a part, create a design table and it will create the spreadsheet in excel to control the drawing. If you are proficient at excel you can do nearly anything and its very well integrated. No Lisp routines but SW Design Tables are a great way to put a lot of functionality into SW. Understanding macros/vba isnt needed but can be very useful. You can import blocks from acad, create them mid sketch in SW or any number of other options along the way.

Ive converted 4 lines into individual blocks in a sketch to play with linkage ratios. Solidworks makes use of Blocks, dynamic blocks no less. I'm an AutoCAD guy though, and biased towards sticking with what I already know. (I haven't personally tried AutoCAD 2010 yet, so I don't know how well that's been implemented) meaning I could now model both ways, I guess. Parametric modelling and constraints were pretty damn cool, though AutoCAD has now started doing that too with release 2010. I was impressed by Solidworks, personally coming from a long history of relying on AutoCAD. (Autocad lost a lot of points on that a few years back, but works well with 3ds MAX) Aside from that, Solidworks for 3d parts, assemblies, and exploded assemblies.įabricator compatibility = Never had a problem with either, though we commonly had to export Solidwork files into DXF (AutoCAD) format, which required an add-on.Ĭustomise commands and routines by yourself = AutoCADĬompatibility with other rendering / 3d programs = SolidWorks.

I'd still prefer AutoCAD for that type of thing. Architecturally though, AutoCAD is a clear winner of 2d.ģd = Never seen a building and Site rendered in Solidworks, and I'm unaware if that's possible. That's worth it's weight in gold if you know all the settings regarding metal stretching, and need to do that kind of thing. Parts and assemblies of parts or documentation illustrations = Solidworks (hands down)Ģd = both are good within their respective frameworks, though in Solidworks you can 'unwrap' a 3d sheet metal object to get a flat part drawing from it, complete with releif cuts. They hired a guy that could use it, and were pleased with the results, however the company itself failed at that time, and I went back to AutoCAD at another job. The company I was with wanted to switch to Solidworks.

Autocad vs solidworks series#

just learned enough to handle a series of tasks that needed handling. I've used both, though not a lot of Solidworks.