ECN Design Talk: Concept Design Methods for Developing Winning Products

By Admin | Published: August 11, 2011

 

"For many manufacturers, it’s new ideas that keep business vibrant and growing. Fresh approaches to design, materials, and manufacturing all lead to more competitive and profitable products. In fact, in a recent study by PTC, 81% of respondents agreed with the statement "to be successful in business, you need innovation". Furthermore, respondents said, the root of that innovation lies in concept design–the earliest representations, sketches, and mock ups of a new product".

Read the full article

Mechatronics Management (Part 1): Mechanical Aspects

April 21, 2011 | Categories: Lifecycle Insights Projects, Software Applications and Systems

 

For the past three years, I’ve headed out to Phoenix AZ for the Congress on the Future of Engineering Software to talk with numerous providers and users of engineering software. The discussions are always pretty forward-looking, almost bleeding edge instead of leading edge. In the analyst briefing on System Modeling and Analysis, which was led by Allan Behren (who goes by the twitter handle @AllanBehrens), one of the engineering IT leader for For, Richard Riff, made a statement that made my ears perk up (the following is a paraphrase).

The Ford Fusion has 142 processors in it. We no longer split up systems for development, hand them off to various teams and then integrate at the end. We actually work a lot more like a software company where we compile builds on a weekly basis. Everything is so integrated we just can’t wait until the end of development anymore.

Richard, please correct me for any misstatements I might have made above.

From my perspective, Ford isn’t alone in this stance. There is so much software, processors and electronic systems in new products today that manufacturers are having to rethink their development processes. Which brings us to an interesting question: how can enterprise systems, like PDM and PLM, best support mechatronics development? Today, it seems like there’s an increasing focus on how all of the product’s items and the artifacts that describe them should be managed in one place. But there can be quite a wide range of support capabilities that are offered.

Let’s take a look at each level and understand the advantages and benefits of each.

This series of four posts looks at the management of items, data and bills of material for mechatronic products. It is split into mechanical aspects, electrical aspect, software aspects and integrated aspects.

Managing Mechanical Aspects of the Product

For the most part, the capabilities of enterprise systems like PLM and PDM in managing mechanical items, data and BOMs is one of the most mature in the context of a mechatronic product.

Managing Assemblies of Mechanical Components

Many CAD applications use what I like to call a federated approach to building up an assembly. Each mechanical component is often represented by a single part file. Those separate part files are then placed together to form an assembly, which is a separate file also. As those individual parts and assembly files change, you run into a configuration management problem. You need to know which version and iteration of each was used on a particular date for testing, a ramp-up run on the shop floor or was sent to a supplier. Most PLM and PDM systems extract and understand these relationships between these artifacts.

Managing Design Deliverables

Also, individual deliverables such as engineering drawings are separate files. These files have direct relationships to the parts or assemblies that they represent. And the same configuration problem that exists between part and assembly files also exists with their deliverables. Most PLM and PDM systems understand and manage these relationships.

Extracting Information for the Enterprise

In addition to managing configuration issues, the information in these artifacts are extracted and used for broader enterprise purposes. The structure within the assembly is often used to generate an as-designed bill of material (BOM). Additionally, the solid models of the assemblies or parts can be extracted for visualization purposes.

Conclusions and Questions

Today’s products are increasingly mechatronic. This series of four posts take a look at different aspects of mechatronics management. From a mechanical perspective, it is important to manage the configuration issues for the relationships between parts and assemblies, items and their deliverables such as drawings and to be able to extract information from these artifacts like BOMs and visualization models for the rest of the enterprise.

Now it’s your turn to weigh in. What’s missing in terms of capabilities for the management of mechanical design? Sound off and let us know what you think.

The Best Domestic Talent Pool for Engineering?

August 30, 2011 | Categories: Engineering Careers, Engineering Management

It seems like finding the right engineering talent for your organization is never easy. There’s the STEM shortfall issue where we aren’t graduating enough engineers to fill the roles needed domestically. And even with a number of engineering roles available, organizations, as one article from EETimes suggests, are getting more picky about hiring the right engineers. Want proof? Engineer unemployment rates have spiked according to an article by NetworkWorld.

If the baby boomers do retire in waves and suddenly there aren’t enough engineering graduates, then they need to find replacements from the workforce quickly. And even if you are meticulously picky, the best way to do that is to play a volume game. That means you need a good pool of engineering talent.

Where is Waldo… I mean… Where Are The Engineers?

So where are the most engineers? Great question. I actually ran across that type of information when I was looking for more specific unemployment numbers. But before we dive into the statistics, the Bureau of Labor Statistics uses something called a location quotient to describe the intensity or density of a specific role’s employment in a geographic area. Here’s their definition.

The location quotient is the ratio of the area concentration of occupational employment to the national average concentration. A location quotient greater than one indicates the occupation has a higher share of employment than average, and a location quotient less than one indicates the occupation is less prevalent in the area than average.

To take a look at the statistics yourself, visit the following links:

• 17-2141 Mechanical Engineers, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2010
• 17-2071 Electrical Engineers, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2010
• 15-1133 Software Developers, Systems Software, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2010

Mechanical Engineers

Perform engineering duties in planning and designing tools, engines, machines, and other mechanically functioning equipment. Oversee installation, operation, maintenance, and repair of equipment such as centralized heat, gas, water, and steam systems.

Obviously this definition isn’t as narrow as we would like it to be in that it includes some AEC types of roles, which can vary dramatically from the ME jobs related to discrete products. But regardless it can give us some idea as to the location of these roles. And where are they at? Look at the table and map below.

Looking at the table, there aren’t too many surprises. Obviously Michigan (Auto industry) and Houston (Oil industry) come in very high. But looking at the map shocked me. The density around Michigan, Cleveland and Buffalo is incredibly high.

Electrical Engineers

Research, design, develop, test, or supervise the manufacturing and installation of electrical equipment, components, or systems for commercial, industrial, military, or scientific use. Excludes “Computer Hardware Engineers” (17-2061).

This definition is also plagued by the inclusion of electrical engineers from the AEC industry. But at least hardware engineers from the computer industry are excluded. At least that gives us a little bit clearer picture of what is going on with electrical engineers for discrete products.

Looking at this same information for electrical engineers isn’t terribly surprising either. California, Boston, New York and Washington all have high densities. But I was a little surprised by Minneapolis, Phoenix and Houston. What industries are clustered there?

Embedded Software Developers

Research, design, develop, and test operating systems-level software, compilers, and network distribution software for medical, industrial, military, communications, aerospace, business, scientific, and general computing applications. Set operational specifications and formulate and analyze software requirements. May design embedded systems software. Apply principles and techniques of computer science, engineering, and mathematical analysis.

I don’t think the description perfectly matches the development of embedded software for discrete products, but this is the closest definition I could find on the site. Here’s the density of these roles across the US.

When it comes to the relative ‘density’ of employment for embedded software developers, it’s no surprise that California, Massachusetts, Seattle (Microsoft?) and New York (IBM?) are some of the top locations. But I was a bit surprised by Washington DC (federal jobs?), Chicago, Dallas (Lockheed?) and Atlanta.

What is the Best US Location for Technical Center?

When it comes to thinking about where your R&D center (engineering office, technical center or whatever it is called) should be located, you want to make sure that you have a local pool of engineering talent to draw from. Given the prevalence of mechatronic products today, that means you’ll need mechanical engineers, electrical engineers and embedded software developers. Most organizations would prefer to have those engineers co-located too. So given all of that, what are in the US provides the best talent pool across engineering disciplines?

Looking across the numbers in this post, there are actually some consistent locations that keep popping up. Los Angeles, Boston, New York, Washington DC, Chicago and San Jose are in the top ten for all three engineering disciplines. Obviously there are many other considerations to take into account, but from an engineering talent pool perspective, that rounds it out.

Now to really get a good picture of where the best pools of engineering talent are at, much more analysis would need to be done that the little work that has been done here. Nonetheless, it makes for an interesting picture and topic for discussion.

Conclusions and Questions

There are actually a few major metropolitan areas where engineers from all three disciplines are concentrated. These can be good engineering talent pools to draw from or place a technical center. Because when the times comes when you really need new engineers, it needs to happen fast. But be advised; if you are making a decision such as this, do more analysis on these metropolitan and geographic areas in terms of concentration of engineering talent pools.

Point Solutions, Integrated Solutions and the Granularity Value Proposition

August 1, 2011 | Categories: Software Applications and Systems

A few weeks ago, I published a software review post titled Actify Centro and Microsoft SharePoint: The 3D Mashup. In it I looked at one of Actify’s new products and offered my perspective. A few days later, Oleg Shilovitsky published a post titled 3D Mashup – Reality Check where he laid out some of his own thoughts. We didn’t clash or disagree necessarily. But he offered up some alternative solutions from some of the traditional PLM providers. Which led me to a question.

Why would someone use a point solution instead of part of an integrated suite?

In the past, we’ve had some tried and true arguments both for and against going one way or the other. But actually I, and others based on their blog posts, have seen something of a change in the thinking of how to answer that question. I thought it was worthy of a post. So let’s discuss.

The Traditional Value Proposition of Integrated Suites

If you’ve been involved with software solutions for just about any amount of time, the logic behind these arguments won’t be anything new. One of the main theoretical advantages behind integrated suites is that they work together when they come out-of-the-box. You shouldn’t need an army of IT folks to stitch them together. And that should continue as new versions of these products are released, addressing the configuration management issue for the IT ecosystem you use to support your product development projects.

Now based on my experience, and this is where I’d like feedback in comments, I don’t think this value proposition has changed that much over the past ten years. Of course, there is the specific value proposition for the initiative you are facing. PLM change management should accelerate the time to complete an ECO. Global PDM should enable more global reuse, Follow-the-Sun design strategies and supplier participation. And so on. But the value proposition that would motivate you to choose something from an integrated suite instead of a point solution is that it’s integrated. And it should work seamlessly with the rest of the suite.

The Traditional Value Proposition of Point Solutions

Alternatively, the traditional value proposition behind point solutions have long been that they were best-of-breed. The idea here is that these point solutions offer more extensive and specialized capabilities than any integrated suite ever could. The logic here is that the smaller companies offering these point solutions were more flexible and agile, enabling them to respond more quickly, with less constraint and in a more innovative fashion than the larger companies that offered integrated suites.

But if you fast forward to today, from my perspective, I don’t buy it anymore. Many of the larger software providers offer integrated solutions that are almost or just as capable as most point solutions out there today. They have made so many acquisitions as well as organically developed so many solutions that they’ve caught up. Many of these larger software providers have also subdivided themselves into smaller and more agile groups or divisions that have narrowly focused in specific industries or fields of application.

The New Value Proposition of Point Solutions

So does that mean there is no real differentiated value proposition for point solutions? Should you just go out and jump into an integrated solution? Actually, my answer is a resounding not quite yet. I’ve seen quite a bit of momentum around a concept called PLM Granularity that has its roots in technology capabilities but has legs because of concerns about people’s careers. Let me explain.

PLM Granularity

So what’s the concept here? Actually, I originally heard about this concept from Oleg. And he’s written about it time and again at his blog beyondplm.com, but the fundamental idea is that you layer on different solutions that each do something very specific and well. Basically it is the point solution approach but from an ecosystem perspective. It would include something like leaving your workgroup PDM software in place. Layer on top of that a workflow. Then add some social computing solution for collaboration. Then you can add in a project management solution. You get the idea. Leave what you have in place. Add in other point solutions where needed. And integrate them as lightly as you can.

The Motivation behind PLM Granularity

So why take an ecosystem approach with point solutions? Well, I think the answer to that question is a whole lot more about someone’s history with PLM than anything else. You see, there’s a host of people out there that have championed a PLM solution. They introduced the concept to the company. They got it purchased by an executive. They were most likely the lead in getting it deployed. And it some of those cases, it failed. Not all. But not all PLM deployments are not successful. And that’s a detriment not only to the organization but to that champion’s career.

That has led some champions as well as some executives pledge a vow to never again pursue a large long scale deployment of PLM. They’re scared of it. And in some cases rightfully so. But they’re not willing to give up on technology as an enabler of better product development. They often still believe in that. So the most palatable means forward is a granular approach. Not because it offers better capabilities or will enable the organization to necessarily do more. But because it is far less risky, both for the organization and their careers. But ultimately, this is all about backlash against the big box approach to PLM.

Conclusion and Questions

The value proposition behind integrated solutions, besides initiative specific ones, has traditionally been that they are integrated in an out-of-the-box fashion. The countering value proposition for point solutions has traditionally been that they offered better best-of-breed capabilities, but from where I sit, that advantage has faded away. The new value proposition for point solutions lies with more granular solution in the ecosystem used to support product development. And the motivation behind that lies more in minimizing risk in individual’s careers than differentiated capabilities.

I’ve said my piece. And I have no illusions that you all agree with me. But I really would like to hear your perspective.

• Do you think the value proposition for integrated solutions is still just out-of-the-box integration?
• Do you think the best-of-breed value proposition for point solutions is dated?
• Do you think the motivation behind the granularity value proposition is career oriented instead of capability oriented?

Creo 1.0: How open is Creo?

By Geoff Hedges | Published: June 13, 2011

 

Deelip.com and Evan Yares’ recent blog posts ask the same great question about Creo - How open is PTC’s Creo file format?

 

To help answer the question, Mike Campbell, DVP of Creo Product Development, recorded video answers over the last couple of months, so let’s listen to Mike clarify the points. For you skimmers, I’ve summarized the points in a short sentence, but it’s definitely take the time to watch the videos.

1. Creo uses a common data model to keep all the data used by each Creo app in synch, not a single common data file. The common model is NOT a common file format.


2. The common data model enables each Creo app to have it’s unique view


3. Parts of the common data format will be open to customers, partners, etc.

Reduce Risk with Early visibility Into Compliance

Best practices for supplier data acquisition to reduce business and compliance risk
When: On Demand, View Now!

Presenters: Aidan Turnbull, BOMCheck
Howard Heppelmann, Senior General Manager, PTC

Supplier part data collection is an increasingly complicated challenge for nearly all manufacturers today, many of whom are struggling to get the issue under control.

PTC and BOMcheck invite you to learn best practices where companies can improve data collection from your suppliers, whether you already have full material disclosure for all of your parts, or if you are only beginning to collect supplier compliance declarations.

Creo Reactions: The Unanswered Questions Answered

By Geoff Hedges | Published: June 7, 2011

 

L. Stephen Wolfe, P.E. (contributing analyst with Jon Peddie Research), recently posted some great questions regarding Creo. Here’s his 8 questions with our answers, and where possible, we’ve also included video answers from Mike Campbell, DVP of Creo product development at PTC, offering a more in-depth explanation. I’ve summarized his answers in words (for you skimmers), but you’ll want to view the complete videos for full details.

1. What will be the upgrade paths from the Creo Elements (a.k.a. Wildfire 5 M080) packages to Creo application suites?

Every Creo Elements product, package, and extension has an upgrade path to Creo, for example, a customer with Creo Elements/Pro on maintenance has the option to upgrade to Creo Parametric, a customer with the Creo Elements/Pro Foundation will have an upgrade path to a package of the corresponding Creo Parametric capabilities, and so on.  At a minimum, the upgrade to Creo offers the same product capabilities as the customer has today, and in many cases, adds new capabilities. 

As part of the release of Creo 1.0, we’ll publish a ‘product mapper’ to detail every product, package, and extension and how it maps to Creo. Mike discusses the approach to protecting a customer’s existing investment in the second part of this video FAQ.




2. How much will it cost (in both initial charges and annual maintenance fees) to upgrade each Pro/Engineer or CoCreate user?

There is a no cost upgrade for existing maintenance customers to each target Creo app, extension, or package. There are no increases in annual maintenance fees when the customer selects the no cost upgrade.

3. When will the Creo apps have all the equivalent capabilities of Pro/Engineer Wildfire 5?

PTC is committed to protecting the investment customers have already  made, and all data, working methods, and capabilities in Creo Parametric are equivalent to or deliver more than the capabilities found in Creo Elements/Pro 5 (Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire 5) today.




4. How consistent are the user interfaces across all the Creo apps?

While the Creo apps are standalone programs, they have a common look and feel for key areas. The Ribbon presentation is common across all Creo apps, and when commands are common (like File Open, and Close, for example) they are presented in the same way and in the same place.

5. Will all changes made using direct-modeling techniques be represented as dimension-driven features in Creo Parametric? Or will changes made with direct modeling have to be recreated in the parametric program?

Changes made in the direct modeling approach do not have to recreated in the parametric approach;  all changes made in the Direct Modeling app are simply represented as additional changes (features) in the model when it is viewed in the parametric modelling app.  The user of the parametric app can choose to either  accept, and incorporate these changes permanently in the model (by persisting the new features in the model), or review them and reject them entirely. 

6. Are there direct edits that will cause parametric features previously created to fail?

No. All changes made via a direct modeling approach can be captured within the parametric model without a failure.

7. What changes to the company’s Windchill PDM or Intralink software will be required to support Creo?

Creo 1.0 apps are compatible with Windchill 9.1 M062 and 10.0.

8. How much retraining will be required to use Creo?

For existing users of Creo Elements/Pro (formerly Pro/ENGINEER), they should think of this upgrade as they would have a significant release of Pro/ENGINEER in the past.  Many companies are planning ½ to 1 day training.

Improve Environmental Performance

Going Green and Staying Green
Product Development with Compliance and Sustainability in Mind
When: On- Demand, view now!

Presenters:Daniel Krauss, Analyst, Forrester ResearchHoward Heppelmann, Senior General Manager, PTC

To stay ahead and remain competitive, top manufacturers are embracing DfE strategies and processes, enabling them to more effectively and efficiently improve the environmental performance of their products.
In this webcast, learn best practices for implementing a DfE strategy, while you gain an understanding of:

• The importance of Design for Environment (DfE)
• What factors are driving DfE initiatives
• Manufacturers readiness for DfE
• How to identify a best-in-class solution to implement a DfE strategy

In one minute or so: How is Creo different from other vendors’ offerings?

By Geoff Hedges | Published: April 20, 2011

 

It seems like every vendor offers a direct modeling option with their parametric solutions. In this group of video responses to your most frequently asked questions, Mike Campbell, Divisional Vice President of Creo Product Development, explains how we serve the non-parametric user as well. We’ve summarized his answers in just a few words (for you skimmers), but you’ll want to view the complete videos for details.

 Q. How does Creo compare to products from other vendors who offers multiple CAD approaches?
“We serve the non-parametric user as well as the parametric user. We have solutions for those who are overserved by parametric modelers.”


Q. Will I need to install every Creo 1.0 app?
“Each app is standalone.”


Q. Is the Creo 1.0 UI new?
“Yes.”

RoHS2 Compliance: Is your Company Ready?

When: On Demand, view now!
Presenters: Aidan Turnbull, BOMCheck
Kelly St. Andre, Director Product Management, PTC

Today’s latest and most significant compliance challenge is the planned update to RoHS, which mandates that producers of certain electrical and electronic equipment may not place products on the European market that contain six “banned” substances.

What are the costs of non-compliance? Recalls, brand damage, expensive redesigns, and scrapped parts—for starters. The stakes are high – with potentially millions in revenue at risk. To satisfy these regulations, manufacturers must provide regulators with detailed reports demonstrating product compliance, while keeping up with frequent changes in product designs, parts, suppliers, and the regulations themselves.

In this webcast, PTC and BOMcheck explain how companies can mitigate risk and ensure product compliance -- not just for the RoHS update – but whenever new government regulations are implemented.

Lifecycle Insights: Modeling with Creo- Diving into the Details

By Admin | Published: July 12, 2011


“It seems like 2011 is bound to be the year of CAD. There are numerous updates by so many software providers in terms of introducing new capabilities to their CAD applications. And none may be more anticipated than PTC’s Creo due to their publicly stated goal to revolutionize the CAD industry. Well, a year later, PTC pulled the sheets off Creo in Las Vegas at PlanetPTC Live. And what follows is my take on a few specific scenarios that matter with respect to mechanical geometric modeling.”

Read article

Reduce Product Costs and Improve Product Margins

Addressing Cost Challenges during Product Development When: On- Demand, view now!
Presenter: Jim Sweeney, Senior Product Management Director, PTC

Product cost is of great importance, but few companies are able to measure it throughout the entire product development process. The result: the Engineering team continually makes design decisions with little visibility into cost, which means more expensive product designs and missed cost targets at product launch.

This webinar shows you best practices for performing cost analysis during product development, and how PTC’s new Windchill Cost software provides an effective solution.

Learn About:

• Launching products at or under target cost
• Rolling up product cost for different configurations of the BOM, using different cost models
• Providing cost visibility to the entire product development team
• Trade-off analysis of cost and other product dimensions, such as environmental performance

In one minute or so: More answers about breakthrough technologies (Part 11)

By Geoff Hedges | Published: April 6, 2011

 

We talk about several breakthrough technologies in Creo. In this group of video responses to your most frequently asked questions, Mike Campbell, Divisional Vice President of Creo Product Development, tells us more about the technologies and the new Creo user interface. We’ve summarized his answers in just a few words (for you skimmers), but you’ll want to view the complete videos for details.

Q. What are the breakthrough technologies?
“The patent-able technologies behind the apps, like AnyBOM Assembly, which will show up in Creo 2.0, and AnyMode Modeling, which will drive Creo 1.0 apps.”


Q. How is AnyMode Modeling enabled in Creo?
“A common data model underlies Creo, with each app presenting that data through a different lens.”


Q. Is the Creo 1.0 User Interface new?
“yes.”

Understanding Product Development Trade-Offs

Developing Products with Cost, Compliance and Sustainability in Mind
When: On- Demand, view now!
Presenters: Jim Brown, President, Tech-Clarity
Serge Romano, Director of Client Services, PTC

Do you need to design innovative, market-leading products, while ensuring environmental compliance and sustainability?

You are not alone. PTC and Tech-Clarity show you how leading companies are now improving business performance by designing compliance, cost and sustainability into their product designs—from the outset.

You will:

• Survey data from engineering, environmental compliance, and sustainability leaders from over 100 manufacturers
• Understand the challenges manufacturers face in making design tradeoffs early in product development
• View insightful interviews from a leading software company and an innovative consumer electronics company, who now build compliance, sustainability, and cost into their design processes
• See proven solutions are using to help product developers balance these competing requirements to achieve optimal profitability

In one minute or so: Creo 1.0 apps and extensions (Part 10)

By Geoff Hedges | Published: March 29, 2011

 

What’s the difference between an extension and an app? In this group of video responses to your most frequently asked questions, Mike Campbell, Divisional Vice President of Creo Product Development, explains the differences, what you can expect from extensions, and what apps look like in the Creo 1.0 release. We’ve summarized his answers in just a few words (for you skimmers), but you’ll want to view the complete videos for details.

Q. What’s an app? What’s an extension in Creo 1.0?
“Apps are standalone products. Extensions enhance apps.”


Q. What apps can I expect in Creo 1.0?
“Parametric, Direct, Simulate, Layout, Visualization, Illustrate, View MCAD, View ECAD, and Sketch.”


Q. What happens to my Pro/ENGINEER extensions?
“Most will continue on as apps for Creo Parametric, for now.”

Meet the Mathcad Users: Tom Marshall, USA

By Bettina Giemsa | Published: August 24, 2011

 

We had recently introduced a new promotion  where we ask our Mathcad users who are on Twitter, to spread the link of the Mathcad Prime 1.0 tryout by re-tweeting a short message . In turn, we add everyone who participates in this initiative, to a designated Twitter list. Once on the list, they automatically take part in a monthly prize draw. We just introduced it in June and our first lucky winner was Tom Marshall, from Dallas , TX . It turns out, he indeed deserves the title “Mathcad Enthusiast”, as he was excited to hear from us and happy to share some of his experiences.

I asked him a couple of questions – Enjoy reading!

Tom, what do you do for a living?

I actually have three jobs.  I have a software development company, am a partner in an imaging company, and manage software development for a third.

Tom at work

I have operated a software consultancy since 1997 in which I develop custom software, manage software projects, and help clients solve difficult problems in digital workflows.  My clients include a wide range of companies including small photo studios, a national school photography franchise, Fuji Film, Kodak, Epson, and even government agencies.

I serve as Technology Manager for a large imaging company (Pounds Labs Inc. ) where I manage software development and the technical systems in the company. In this position, I design and write software used to render and composite digital images in an automated workflow containing millions of images.

I am also a partner in DigitalEdge Imaging Inc. which is a company that provides unique photographic products for professional photographers. Our primary product is a composite image consisting of five photographs of a child.

The backgrounds are removed from the images and then the image of the subject is placed into a background which is color coordinated with the subject’s clothing. This all happens automatically in proprietary software I designed and wrote.

When did you first use Mathcad and what version do you use now?

I first started with version 3 of Mathcad on a Mac. I’ve stuck with Mathcad ever since. I currently use version  14.0 and I’m eager to upgrade to the current version .  

What other calculation products have you used and why do you prefer Mathcad?

I have used Mathematica and MATLAB as well as several smaller packages. I still use both Mathematica and Mathcad today. Mathcad is my primary go-to tool. It’s best for me as I work out a problem or develop a workflow because it is so visible. It works like I think. I don’t have to translate the math into another language to use it. I just enter it just as I would write it on paper or my chalkboard. That is a huge productivity issue for me since it means I can focus on the product and not the tool.

What do you like best about Mathcad, how does it help you get your job done, what is the most beneficial to you in Mathcad for your specific tasks?

Since I work primarily in the field of software development, I am sensitive to the design of the user interface in the programs I use. What I like best about Mathcad, is that the user interface quickly disappears from my mind as I work. I find it to be intuitive and easy to learn and teach.

The best part though, is that Mathcad hides behind the math. Whenever I work in Mathcad, the math is always on center stage. Not the program. The math exists in a visible form, just the way I think of it. I don’t have to force things into a matrix or other format that the program needs, or remember obscure keyboard shortcuts to enter it. I just think about the problem on which I’m working, and Mathcad keeps up with the math.

Another big productivity boost I get from using Mathcad, is that it does the documentation for me. Since I am able to work in accepted mathematical notation in Mathcad, my worksheets become a major part of my project documents. I always add notes in my worksheets, explaining what is happening and why I’m doing things a specific way.

I also note where constants and other data come from and why it is used. This is helpful to me when I return to these worksheets later on, and it’s helpful to others on the project who may need that information for implementation but may not understand the math.

Do you have any tips you would like to share with other users, any best practices, any learnings from your long-time Mathcad experience?

I often use Mathcad for signal processing applications. I have found it is valuable to create my worksheets as discrete units that perform a single function whenever possible. The result is that I have a huge library of worksheets that I can quickly link together to perform custom, complex operations.

One of my Mathcad Best Practices is to include plenty of notes in my worksheets. The extensive notes serve several purposes. First, they help me work through a problem in a logical manner. They also provide documentation right at the most appropriate place. And they serve as good reminders of how something works and why I took a certain approach.

Can you share a sample worksheet with us?

I am tempted to provide a fancy complex worksheet that would be impressive looking and show off lots of features. But instead, I’m going to give you a simple worksheet that illustrates why I am such a faithful user of Mathcad. This is an example of how I use Mathcad in my daily work.  I made this little worksheet recently while on the phone with a client. The goal was to determine if they should increase the number of render engines (software tools to construct digital images in preparation for printing) to keep up with a new printer they were adding to the workflow.

Instead of creating a lengthy analysis project, I simply opened Mathcad while I had the client on the phone, asked a few questions and was able to build a simple worksheet that provided enough information for my client to make a decision. This wasn’t the type of problem that required an exhaustive study, or even a particularly accurate answer. I just needed a quick estimate and I could do that easily with Mathcad because it works like I think – visually.

Sample worksheet

You can download the worksheet here.

Thank you, Tom, for telling us your Mathcad story!

In one minute or so: What kind of learning curve can I expect? (part 9)

By Geoff Hedges | Published: March 4, 2011

 

We say that Creo will make product development work easier for users in every role. But a few of you have asked more pointedly about the learning curve Creo users can expect. In this group of videos, Mike Campbell, Divisional Vice President of Creo Product Development, and volunteers who saw and worked with Creo 1.0, detail what it will take to learn the new suite, whether you should put off the transition, and why you should consider moving to Creo 1.0. We’ve summarized their answers in just a few words (for you skimmers), but you’ll want to view the complete videos for details.

Q. There’s a new User Interface with Creo 1.0 – how much time will it take me to become familiar with it?
“Many companies are planning ½ to 1 day training.”


Q. Is Creo 1.0 worth upgrading to? Should I wait for Creo 2.0?
“Creo 1.0 is a major release with 2-years worth of new extensions, functionality, modules. Creo 1.0 is a full release and we encourage you to take a look at it.”


Q. What do users say about Creo 1.0?
“Creo is a great benefit to our company … reducing design times”

Engineering and Glasswing Butterflies

August 23rd, 2011 | By Josh Mings

How could engineering and butterflies go together? So many beautiful ways really. You may remember the Glasswing butterfly challenge we put together with the PlanetPTC Community a few weeks ago. Here are the results.

Glasswing Butterfly. Image Source: Wikipedia

This was a fun, spur of the moment competition between the two communities. A simple challenge inspired by a great article on Glasswings and Engineering by Bettina Giemsa, who ended up organizing the challenge on the PlanetPTC side. We’ve meet some people along the way and definitely plan to have more challenges like this in the future.

Glasswing butterflies

You really must read more about this amazing creature whose binomial name is Greta Oto. The users on GrabCAD and PlanetPTC certainly had some great inspiration. A few things to note about the challenge.

• GrabCAD users stayed with the glasswing butterfly theme.
• PlanetPTC Community users experimented with an overall butterfly theme.
• The number of submissions and submitting individuals was about equal.
• PlanetPTC users used PTC products. GrabCAD users used their choice of CAD products.

Entries on both side were just incredible with many fine examples that matched the beauty you would see in a flower garden of Central America. With all the entries received, we have selected four – two from the GrabCAD users and two from the PlanetTC Users. Here are our favorites:

GrabCAD Users

A highly detailed image of a Glasswing butterfly modeled and rendered in KeyCreator by Dave Cancilier

This Glasswing butterfly model done in SolidWorks and rendered in Houdini was created by David Thomas

PlanetPTC Users

This beauty was created in Creo Parametric 1.0 and rendered in KeyShot by Tim McLellan

PlanetPTC Community member Anthony Mahynski created this butterfly in Creo Elements/Pro 5.0

To view all submissions for each community, just visit the PlanetPTC photoalbum and the GrabCAD Library.

 

Which one is YOUR favorite?

Do you have a favorite? We’d love to hear which ones you like or what other ideas you might have for a challenge between communities. Thanks again to the PlanetPTC community and to Bettina Giemsa and Dan Marotta for organizing things on their side! Until next time!

In one minute or so: How disruptive is this going to be? (part 8)

By Geoff Hedges | Published: February 24, 2011

 

Creo is an exciting breakthrough in the CAD industry, but for established PTC users, concerns arise about how the technology might impact existing data. In this group of videos, Mike Campbell, Divisional Vice President of Creo Product Development, answers questions about just how much disruption you can expect. We’ve summarized his answers in just a few words (for you skimmers), but you’ll want to view the complete videos for details.

Q. What type of effort do existing users of Creo Elements/Pro (formerly Pro/ENGINEER) need to plan to upgrade?
“Think of this upgrade as you would have a significant release of Pro/ENGINEER in the past.”


Q. Can I migrate models and drawings from Creo Elements/Pro to Creo 1.0?
“All previous versions of Pro/ENGINEER will be Creo compatible. No conversion necessary.”


Q. Will I lose any existing product capabilities when I upgrade from Pro/ENGINEER and Creo Elements/Pro to Creo 1.0?
“In general, no.”


Q. I’ve customized my UI, how will those customizations be handled in Creo 1.0?
“If you’ve customized menu bars, added buttons, etc., you’ll need to rebuild those customizations for the new ribbon-based UI.”


Q. Will Creo 1.0 support the same platforms and configurations as Creo Elements/Pro?
“By and large yes. Creo 1.0 will support Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7.”

Follow the Russian Creo Blog and Add Your Comments and Opinions

by Elena Krasnikova

Take a look at the Russian Creo blog on the PlanetPTC community. Here you can take part in what the community is saying about Creo 1.0. We encourage you to follow the blog, invite your customers to join and add your own comments and opinions. Go to the link.

In one minute or so: What do you mean by “unlocking” value? (part 7)

By Geoff Hedges | Published: February 17, 2011

 

Ever since we started talking about Creo, we’ve said that it unlocks value, teamwork, creativity. What’s that mean? In this group of videos, Jim Heppelmann, PTC President and CEO, explains—in less than a minute per question.

Q. What Creo technologies help unlock creativity across the company?
“AnyRole Apps and AnyMode Modeling.”

Q. What are the business benefits of unlocking creativity?
“By encouraging 1.Iinnovation. 2. Faster time to market. 3. Higher quality.”

Q. How can Creo help unlock teamwork?
“By simplifying the technology for the entire team.”

Q. How can Creo help unlock efficiency in manufacturing?
“Less time wasted when everyone can interact with product data.”


Q. How can Creo help unlock value in manufacturing?
“By 1. Providing effective collaboration tools, 2. Helping find problems earlier, and 3. Helping teams reuse rich information.”

Q. How does unlocking value help the bottom line?
“You get better products, more market share, and revenue growth, among other advantages.”