There have been, over the course of years, MCAD systems that shook up the way we think design ought to be done. They made an impact, changed our way of working -- and then failed. Here are three such examples:
Alibre: The First Cloud MCAD
Alibre proved that MCAD could run on a remote server and be displayed over the Internet on a local computer. Today we call this "CAD on the cloud."
 Figure 1: Packaging for the original desktop version of Alibre Design (2002)
Why It Failed. The online version of Alibre failed because in 2000 the Internet was just too slow. The program was rewritten as a desktop program (see figure 1), and remains as such to this day. The company was eventually acquired by 3D Systems, and then bought back by employees when 3D Systems had to downsize. The new Alibre LLC includes Geomagic Design.
How It Recovered. Alibre staff decided to target the maker market, and had multiple editions of the software ranging in price from free to about $2,000 -- half that of typical mid-market MCAD price. In addition, they kept up an energetic marketing program, including much hype in advance of the the launch of the "secret" X-CAD program.
https://www.alibre.com/
XCAD: The First Cheap MCAD
XCAD was launched at a jaw-dropping price of $500 in an era when MCAD was supposed to cost $2,000 or even $20,000 a seat. (See figure 2.) Xitron Software, the company behind XCAD, made the eyebrow-raising claim that it would sell a million copies -- at a time when 100,000 was considered a r-e-a-l-l-y big number.
 Figure 2: Packaging for the original release of XCAD (1994)
Why It Failed. The company could not update the software quickly enough. Nevertheless, it pioneered the idea that MCAD software could cost a trivial amount, like $500 or even $0, and that a vendor could sell a million copies. (Note that there are many other unrelated systems also named "XCAD," such as the free program briefly known as Alibre X-CAD.)
How It Recovered. It didn't. Last I heard (but that was quite some time ago), XCAD was still sold locally in its home of Taiwan, and now Xitron does not seem to exist at all.
TriSpectives: The First Interactive MCAD
When 3D/eye launched TriSpectives Professional in 1995 (also at $500), the brand-new MCAD software introduced us to interactivity, such as dragging-and-dropping 3D parts (“IntelliShapes”) from libraries (“catalogs”) onto models, complete with geometric snaps (“mates”). See figure 3. It had 3D Illustration to generate 2D drawings of 3D models that remember they are 3D. SmartRender adjusted rendering modes to maintain speed. The TriBall cursor (“manipulator”) interactively positioned edited solids -- all standard in CAD today.
 Figure 3: The original packaging for TriSpectives (1995)
To draw a hole with other MCAD packages of the time, you would need to draw a circle on a face, extrude the circle to make it a cylinder, and then subtract the cylinder from the part. With TriSpectives, however, you just dragged a hole onto a part. Done. TriSpectives presented such radical ease-of-use that a reviewer proclaimed the new program to be "the Pro/E killer."
All this ran on a computer that needed a 33MHz CPU, 16MB of RAM, and 25MB of space on the hard drive – specs that are 100x - 1000x less than what today’s CAD programs demand.
Why It Failed. But TriSpectives was the one that ended up being killed, while Pro/Engineer flourished. Sales failed to match the hype. Furthermore, I'd argue that that much interactivity was mind-blowing to staid engineers. CAD was, after all, supposed to be difficult to master, and not be as easy as MS Paint.
Following the collapse of 3D/eye, TriSpectives was split into parts: Autodesk bought some of the technology, while the MCAD program was rebranded as IronCAD by Visionary Design Systems. Later it was owned for a year by Alventive, and then spun off as IronCAD LLC.
How it Recovered. VDS changed the marketing from a fun-to-use program to a serious CAD program, with Soviet-style branding (see figure 4), and raised the price from a fun-to-use $500 to a serious $4,000 -- along with editions that cost as little as free. It has continued to innovate with functions that are not found in any other MCAD program, such as having a dual-kernel modeler (ACIS and Parasolid)..
Figure 4: Cover page from the IronCAD manual, bound in an aluminum binder (1999) Today, IronCAD LLC develops the software out of Atlanta, Georgia and collaborates with CAXA in China through an extended development team. CAXA,f or example, provides IronCAD LLC with products like Draft, which is similar to AutoCAD Mechanical. http://www.iconcad.com[A version of this article appeared previously in Design Engineering magazine.]
|
|
MOBILE CAD for Android and iOS ARES Touch offers 150+ CAD features to read, modify, and annotate DWG drawings on tablets and smartphones. Visit www.graebert.com/arestouch to learn more.Viewing and measuring features of ARES Touch are FREE for all users. ARES subscribers gain premium features like editing and photo annotation. Get a free 30-day trial of ARES Touch's premium features when you activate your free trial of ARES Commander at www.graebert.com/arescommander |
|
Re: Solid Edge ST10 Converges Modeling
SpaceClaim is much better by having integrated Polygonica, which belongs to MachineWorks. Their DLLs sit in more and more CAD tools, enabling them to do sort of hybrid modeling. Its not truly hybrid, but a good way to start with some sophisticated STL handling.
And the true initial alien hybrid modeling tool is FREEFORM PLUS, as it adds sub-D to CAD, surfacing, meshes and voxels. Looking forward to all that multi representation modeling.
- Gerd Schwaderer, Business Development Metrology
Volume Graphics, Germany
The editor replies: With Ansys owning SpaceClaim, we don't hear much about it anymore. Thank you for updating us.
- - -
You touch briefly on MathCAD. There is a workalike program out there that is almost as good, but is free. The program is called SMath Studio. You should look into it. There's lots of support for this program, including the engineering community, and it corrects for proper units.
MathCAD used to be a reasonably priced product, but since PTC has taken over the firm the cost has skyrocketed and the service, IMHO, has diminished. Now they have gone the way of the rental firms.
- Dik Coates, P.Eng.
Canada
The editor replies: I've never needed MathCAD or SMath Studio professionally, but probably would've back in university when the main feature of my TI-58 calculator was its ability to calculate 3x3 matrices.
Mr Coates responds: Had an old TI-59 about 40 years back. It was programmable and had little magnetic strips [for storing programs]. I wrote a program for composite steel beams and used it for the design of the upper floor of the Cornwall Centre in Regina. Way back when!
- - -
I work with AutoCAD, but still miss Actrix. Do you still have the software? I used to work with it with excellent results (mostly diagrams and small electrical and machine layouts). According to your experience, which software will do the job, and that will be similar to Actrix
- Guillermo Garza
The editor replies: I still have it as I provide a service to people who need their Actrix files translated to DXF. Have you tried Visio?
- - -
You wrote, "Or we could use scanners to do it more quickly." Please allow me to chime in with my experience in using scanners.
The role of scanning is its ability to capture data that can't be hand-measured or is otherwise very difficult to measure. Scanning doesn't speed up the process in most cases, but instead, adds more work to the process! The added work occurs at the point in the process where the point cloud gets converted into a mesh. The mesh is cleaned up and processed so the data can be used in a CAD program. The key here is having the right software that bridges the gap between the mesh model and the CAD model.
In most cases, the right software costs at least $15,000. Who is willing to spend that kind of money on software that performs only about 15% of the workload that you have been doing all these years for around $5,000? I believe the main reason why scanner processing software is so expensive is because most scanning is done by the defense, entertainment and& automotive accessories industries.
If it were not for them, the prices of scanners and software would undoubtedly be much lower (IMO, probably around $1,000 - $4,000). Take the David 3D scanner software and hardware, for example. I bought the software for about $400, added a used tripod and accessories, got a used HD projector and Web cam and am close to making a very accurate SLS scanner for under $700!
Bottom line: mesh processing software is the key to using scan data in CAD. The lower level software packages are useless. Even the pricy mesh-editing software won't do. You need that CAD link to get the job done. Otherwise, you are stuck with a lonewolf mesh that you can't do anything with in the real world of parametric solids modeling and drawing creation.
The only market that I've found in which this mesh editing software is partly useful is CNC machining (and the loudly touted 3D printing market, which is a joke!). But even with CNC machining you must have a toolpath generator, which costs a LOT of $ on top of the mesh editing software.
All of this knowledge is the kind that you will not acquire until after you buy and begin using scanner hardware and software. And so my conclusion is that scanning is not all it's cracked-up to be. It's a lot of added work, and it costs way more than regular CAD.
That's my 2 cents, for what it's worth.
- Chris
|
|
Should you wish to support upFront.eZine through PayPal, then the suggested amounts are like these:
Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.comand the account of [email protected].
Or mail a cheque (US$ or CDN$ only, please) to upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd., 34486 Donlyn Avenue, Abbotsford BC, V2S 4W7, Canada.
|
|
"Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme for graphics cards manufacturers to sell more GPUs. Think of all the beautiful VR, AR, and rendered environments we are missing out on!"
- Martyn Day via Twitter
@martynday |
|
|
|
Comments