| Author |
Message |
Paul Salvador
Guest
|
 Posted:
Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:58 pm Post subject:
CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel?
We've all read and heard the talk about SW switching from parasolid to
the acis kernel someday but,... what about the chance or why not use CAA
V5 based??
http://www.3ds.com/products-solutions/brands/CAAV5/
It seems to make future sense for SW to use CAA V5 based, no?
Or, will DS use SW only as a means for marketing acis?
...
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jon_banquer
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 07, 2005 3:43 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Paul Salvador wrote:
| Quote: | CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel?
We've all read and heard the talk about SW switching from parasolid
to
the acis kernel someday but,... what about the chance or why not use
CAA
V5 based??
http://www.3ds.com/products-solutions/brands/CAAV5/
It seems to make future sense for SW to use CAA V5 based, no?
Or, will DS use SW only as a means for marketing acis?
..
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
|
It should be obvious that DS badly needs the same kind of overall
stratagy that UGS employs.
The ACIS name is expendable.
jon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cliff
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:00 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
On 6 Jan 2005 14:43:20 -0800, "jon_banquer" <jon_banquer@yahoo.com>
wrote:
| Quote: |
Paul Salvador wrote:
CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel?
We've all read and heard the talk about SW switching from parasolid
to
the acis kernel someday but,... what about the chance or why not use
CAA
V5 based??
http://www.3ds.com/products-solutions/brands/CAAV5/
It seems to make future sense for SW to use CAA V5 based, no?
Or, will DS use SW only as a means for marketing acis?
..
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
It should be obvious that DS badly needs the same kind of overall
stratagy that UGS employs.
The ACIS name is expendable.
jon
|
No clues, eh?
--
Cliff
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:51 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Paul,
I went to the link and read some of it. I have no idea what CAA V5 is
but it looks like enough material to keep Scott Adams in business for
years. Please help a simple person understand.
The other Paul
Paul Salvador wrote:
| Quote: | CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel?
We've all read and heard the talk about SW switching from parasolid
to
the acis kernel someday but,... what about the chance or why not use
CAA
V5 based??
http://www.3ds.com/products-solutions/brands/CAAV5/
It seems to make future sense for SW to use CAA V5 based, no?
Or, will DS use SW only as a means for marketing acis?
..
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Mossberg
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:44 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Paul,
Neither I hope.
The rebuild times on Catia 5 are dismally slow, so is ACIS.
Mark
"Paul Salvador" <paul@zxys.com> wrote in message
news:a680668da3465cf3550745aed1c1ec03.36996@mygate.mailgate.org...
| Quote: | CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel?
We've all read and heard the talk about SW switching from parasolid to
the acis kernel someday but,... what about the chance or why not use CAA
V5 based??
http://www.3ds.com/products-solutions/brands/CAAV5/
It seems to make future sense for SW to use CAA V5 based, no?
Or, will DS use SW only as a means for marketing acis?
..
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Salvador
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:24 pm Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Paul,
From what I understand, it's kernel or component technology?
Scott Adams,.. as in,.. Dilbert!? 8^)
...
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Salvador
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:29 pm Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Well, I can't compare but from the past, that is probably still true?
BTW, one client I had (was working with 5K unique prismatic parts),
choose UG over Catia just because of comparable slowness issues (not
just large assembly use).
...
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Salvador
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 1:38 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
I'm not sure what version 5 release Mark saw or uses but from what I was
told, the latest V5R14 or the last few releases have been faster.
And, the client (to be fair, an ex-UG user who was looking for something
faster and had the capital to do it) I was talking with said Catia
modeling was a bit faster than SW.
BTW, UG modeling rebuilds are faster, the problem I saw with UG was the
menu structure/steps which was suppose to improve more (few steps) with
NX3.
Also, btw, from what I know about the Catia and UG world, it's a
different mind set,.. most are still not into parametric/feature based
data in the way we SW and Pro/e users are,.. and most Catia/UG users
don't like how parametric/feature based modelers limit their workflow
(get it done, hybrid approaches).
Anyhow, what's interesting is it's difficult to compare SW with them
unless the data being compared is equally parametric/feature based.
Without getting into a debate with what approach is better, it's best to
say they all have good approaches and disciplines and it can be
difficult to weigh which modeler is faster, because of the disciplines
being used.
...
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Salvador
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 1:48 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
...plus, the data that was being used is reference graphic data sets,
polymesh data sets, not the whole data file(s).
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 2:52 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
I am assuming CAA is a modeling kernal. If it is so slow how in the
world did Boeing make the 777 with it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerry Steiger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 3:09 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
"Mark Mossberg" <Poundsandspammers@biteme.net> wrote in message
news:zAnDd.7269$wZ2.6654@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
| Quote: | The rebuild times on Catia 5 are dismally slow, so is ACIS.
|
Ouch, I didn't want to hear that. We are quite close to switching to Catia,
due to our unhappiness with SW surfacing. In the demos we've seen, where
they built the basic shapes for one of our products, Catia seemed much
quicker than SW.
What is your experience? What types of parts and assemblies are you dealing
with? Are there areas we should focus on when we do the next set of
benchmarks?
Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Salvador
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 3:54 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Well, surfaces are usually represented (tessellated) using polymesh data
so you would have both in memory.
What I'm saying is there is only polymesh data and most polymesh data or
vertices are scalable to meet the graphical/visual/detail needs (or you
access other data sets).
And yes, it's a representation/approximation. Modifing the original
data is managed seperately.
UG does this as well and most 3D cad programs do this as well now, i.e.,
to reduce overhead.
Polymesh data is not that taxing on most systems/graphics cards today
and the graphics cards used back then for the 777 project would/should
have been just as good or better than what we user have now using high
end PC gfx cards.
...
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MM
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 5:11 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
Paul,
They didn't, They used Ver4 on UNIX clusters that utilized every idle CPU on
the network.
Version 4 isn't an "exact" modeler so the data is easier to handle.
Mark
"P." <kellnerp@cbd.net> wrote in message
news:1105134767.332796.270040@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | I am assuming CAA is a modeling kernal. If it is so slow how in the
world did Boeing make the 777 with it?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cliff
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 6:28 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
On 7 Jan 2005 13:52:47 -0800, "P." <kellnerp@cbd.net> wrote:
| Quote: | I am assuming CAA is a modeling kernal. If it is so slow how in the
world did Boeing make the 777 with it?
|
I doubt that they did. That's an old plane, right?
Surfaces take a lot less database space than solids
and almost all solids operations must deal with huge
sets of surfaces plus much else.
Kernels add another (at LEAST one) layer of computation as well.
--
Cliff |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cliff
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:24 am Post subject:
Re: CAA V5 based or ACIS kernel? |
|
|
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 01:48:03 +0000 (UTC), "Paul Salvador"
<paul@zxys.com> wrote:
| Quote: | ..plus, the data that was being used is reference graphic data sets,
polymesh data sets, not the whole data file(s).
|
Mesh data is usually quite copious, compared to
surfaces.
IIRC Loft surface data is at most cubic, usually fairly small
in the number of control points needed.
That, if true, would add huge bandwidth & CPU needs
(polymesh) and/or add error as polygons only approximate
surfaces.
--
Cliff |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in