Archive for the ‘Engineering’ Category

Brave New World  February 28th, 2011

Well, I haven’t had the time to post every day like I hoped (maybe in the future I’ll be able to), but I did come across an interesting item or two I wanted to get down. One of those is a note about our current technological ability.

During my SolidWorks studies, I found the following link: https://forum.solidworks.com/message/122353. On it, M. G. Martinez-Saez gives a powerful example of what we are now capable of—an entire power plant cooling package can be designed by ‘a couple of engineers’ in ‘four weeks.’ (Search for either of those phrases to go right to the post which is almost halfway down the page.) Included is a picture of a four-story, ten tower structure, approximately 700′ long by 60′ wide. (A typical apartment bedroom is about 10′ x 12′, to give you an idea of the scale.) He indicates our current computer programs allowed us to shave two engineers and five months from the design of that building. Absolutely amazing!

I will leave you to ponder what type of a world we want to create with this ability. We make more with less, so fewer people are involved, yet our population continues to expand. How do we get the technology to benefit everyone? It can be done, and I look forward to seeing our creativity applied to the challenge!

Deceiving Appearances  February 1st, 2011

Three days ago I hinted that SolidWorks and AutoDesk Inventor weren’t equivalent, drafting-wise. At the time, I believed a following post would say things were easier to do in Inventor. First impressions are deceiving, though.

Part of the reason for my statement was AutoCAD’s powerful drafting tools make drawing 2-D sketches quick and relatively painless. But Inventor isn’t based very much upon AutoCAD—instead, it is more of a complete rewrite, and approaches things from about the same perspective as SolidWorks.

After having played and increased my knowledge, I am finding the approach SolidWorks takes to be a little easier to grasp up-front than Inventor, but both of them have frustrating aspects, with Inventor leading the race for most frustrating at this point. For instance, if you create a cylinder, and sketch a bigger rectangle on one end, an extrusion of the new design defaults to having a hole through it unless you do some additional clicking.

In short, first impressions are often deceiving. More study, practice, and mastery are required to overcome mistaken ideas, and this rule applies to situations well beyond the drafting world. For instance, religious beliefs also fall into this category, but we’ll get to that later…

Until then, here’s wishing you the best in your own learning endeavors!

Bad hole!

Working and Learning  January 28th, 2011

I’m trying to post here more often, but the busi-ness of life keeps interfering. Not much is going on in my astronomical learnings, although a week ago I had the pleasure of talking to a Doctor of Religious studies at Southern Methodist University. He was kind enough to point out some items to address in a future edition of LATD. That must wait, though, because I need to get further into the world, and concentrate on making a few bucks to pay bills—you know how it goes!

In order to accomplish my goal, I’m brushing up on computer solid modeling to become better-rounded, skill-wise. (more…)