PTC's CoCreate Webinar

OK, so here we are in PTC's Webinar this morning on how CoCreate's explicit modeling is better than direct modeling [from other CAD vendors].

The primary argument seems to be that CoCreate is 15 years old, and thus more mature. Left out is that KeyCreator (CADKEY) is 25 years old.

Not only a superior concept design tool, FEA prep tool, or data interop tool, but also a complete modeler for machine design, plastic parts, sheet metal, castings, surfaces, cabling, and simultaneous interactions with parts and assemblies.

The direct editing found in competitors is called "immature."

Now doing a demo of creating a simple part. Now intersecting the simple part with a more complex part created earlier. 

When creating a shell, the removed portion can be kept as a separate part. There is no parent-child by default, but you can select both parts to create a temporary relationship. Showing mirrored sketching, where anything sketched on one side is automatically copied on the other side. Now using the sketch from one part to punch holes in the second part (no need to move parts due to the temp relationship.)

CoCreate can handle very large models, because history is not retained, cutting file size by 60-80% compared with a history modeler (Pro/E left unmentioned).

Another sign of CoCreate's maturity over competitors is the amount of built-in analysis software, such as FEA, Advanced Mechanica, surface analysis, physical simulation and animation, interference checking, geometry checking, healing, sheet metal manufacturability, and virtual prototyping (would that be PTC's name for "digital prototyping"?).

Now demo'ing deflection analysis of a sheet metal part.

CoCreate doing sheetmetal deformation analysis. (Click for larger image.)

All of the analysis is done inside CoCreate, calling it "validating the design."

Showing how CoCreate can do clash detection while in cutaway mode (see figure).

(Click for larger image.)

Now saying that CoCreate's explicit modeling includes direct editing and direct modeling. How does that differ? Direct editing is just interactive dragging of faces and portions of parts. Now dragging a face connected to chamfers; the chamfers are highlighted in green and CoCreate does not adjust them.

Using CoPilot to define locations through geometric references. CoPilot is the circular gadget shown below.

 

There is an undo, but it is like Word: the undo history is lost when you exit the file. Thus, you cannot undo later, as with history-based modeling.

Like the plug-ins from LEDAS, CoCreate can include dimension-driven modification, parametric with variables, and geometric relations (constraints). Now showing constraints, etc. Relation Sets control parameters, like a circular pattern (array) and its radius. These sorts of parameters can be added to imported IGES files, etc. (Not new: in there since 1996, and in AutoCAD since 2009.)

Includes documentation capabilities: 2D drawings, tolerances, rendering, export, CMM, etc. Fully associative between drawing and model, plus color coding to show changes.

60,000 commercial users. 130,000 downloads of free PE edition (What happened to the 1,000,000 number?)

of course, PTC doesn't want to you to just buy CoCreate. We're being shown the full PTC line of software. www.ptc.com/go/explicit

Q&A

Q: If part is mounted on a surface, and move the part, does the mate also move?

A: Yes, you can have a mate relationship, or else window box the two.

Q: Coexisting with a parametric environment? When is Cocreate better, when is Pro/E better?

A: CoCreate is better for initial design, and then import into Pro/E. CoCreate is also good for making last minute design changes.

Oops, the telephone line just broke down... And they're back...

Q: Is your intent to have Pro/E users switch to CoCreate, since CoCreate seems quite complete?

A: No, no, no. There is a fork in the road, need to decide on which based on your business's processes.

Comments

[Jaosn]

There is something to be said about KeyCreator and CoCreate being the pioneers of explicit modeling.

Hats of to CADKEY/KeyCreator for sticking to their vision!

[Paul Hamilton]

Ralph,

Thanks for the great summary. Let me know if you have any other questions. Explicit Modeling has gained a lot of momentum in the market during the last year and it is fun being a part of it.

Regarding the comment about Kubotek’s 25 years of explicit/direct modeling. I understood that while CADKEY had 2D design and surface modeling during the 80s and 90s, it wasn’t untll Kubotek introducted KeyCreator in 2004, that the company introduced broader direct modeling capabilities, that post dates CoCreate by a decade. Maybe someone from Kubotek can correct me if I'm wrong.

It’s great to see lots of interest in explicit modeling and have several of the CAD vendors, and their customers, validate the explicit modeling approach.

Paul

[Jeff Waters]

I liked the clash detection and kinematics.

The "Mechanica" FEA seems to be calling an external MSC.nastran instance... not the P-elements of PTCs Mechanica (the original Rasna crew). Seems a bit odd.

I did not get a satisfactory answer to "what's the difference between Direct Modeling and Explicit Moderling" or "why is CoCreate better than other Direct Modelers" or "why would someone choose CoCreate instead of Pro/E." And, I was led to believe that the 1st two were the major reason for the webinar...

[Ralph Grabowski]

Jeff:

You are right on the "what's the difference between explicit and direct modeling?" question. I didn't hear an answer to that, explicitly. Implicitly, however, it appears that PTC views direct modeling/editing to be a subset of explicit modeling.

[Greg]

@Jeff,

The references to Advanced Mechanica simulation do indeed mean Mechanica. This is a new capability - perform the geometric modeling in CoCreate and do all the FEA in Mechanica, whilst keeping the geometry associated. This gives users access to more advanced FE capabilities (contact, hyperelasticity, large displacement analysis...)

Additionally, the embedded FEA for static stress/thermal does use an embedded MSC Nastran solver.

Hope this clears it up!

[Jeff Waters]

@Greg Thanks. Ah, so it's not really Mechanica (as found in Pro/E) with P elements. It's more standard H-elements in MSC.Nastran. I'm curious if you could share the rationale behind that (though totally understand if you can not).

[Jon Banquer]

I really like what PTC is doing with CoCreate and how they are marketing it. In my mind they have easily become the market leaders for direct / explicit modeling.

While everyone is focused on what were are calling direct modeling this week I'm a lot more interested to see if PTC is going to find an independent CAM company to provide a CAM solution that runs inside of CoCreate. Pro/Engineer actually has this as Open Mind's Hypermill runs inside of Pro/Engineer. I would love to see Open Mind's Hypermill run inside of CoCreate.

Until PTC finds a way to get independent CAM companies to create CAM programs that run inside of CoCreate small machining job shops won't get the kind of benefit from CoCreate that they they really need from fully integrated CADCAM.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
www.jonbanquer.wordpress.com

[Libby Fink]

Ralph, to answer your question about what happened to the 1 million number vs. 130k downloads of CoCreate Personal Edition, there were 130k + downloads but the product has been STARTED over 1M times. We found this to be a significant figure because it indicates the value of the product to the customer, meaning they are actually working with it. Pure download numbers are not real indicators of the way a product is received by the user. Curiosity, download, trash. We found it interesting to communicate the 1M number to show that the product is valued by the customer and is in use.