Going from Concept to Detailed Design

Going from SW Concept to Final Design

SolidWorks is currently researching the topic “Going from SolidWorks conceptual model to final production model.” We understand that many users create their SolidWorks model/s differently depending on what part of the design phase they are in. In other words, SolidWorks designers will often create a conceptual model knowing that, eventually when they get to creating a final production model, quite a lot of the their model features will be deleted and recreated or the entire conceptual model will be throw away. Taking this brief survey (along with many other sources of information) will provide for us a better understanding of your needs.

Thank you,

Mark Biasotti
Senior Product Specialist

Question Title

* 1. Which of the following BEST describes the industry that your company/division is engaged in?

Automotive

Aerospace/Defense

Shipbuilding

Industrial Machinery

Mold, Tool & Die

Heavy Equipment & Industrial Components

High Tech

Consumer Goods

Medical and Life Sciences

Plant & Process

Building & Construction

Business Services

Engineering Services (consulting)

other

Question Title

* 2. Per your own definition, how would you rank SolidWorks as a conceptual design tool?

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

Poor

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 3. What best describes your feeling about reusing your SolidWorks concepts in production design?

I feel pretty successful reusing much of my concept work into my final production work

It’s a 50/50 proposition in that I am able to reuse some of my concept work but need to recreate much of it.

I am unable to use most of my concept work, and have to recreate most of it for production work.

I use none of my SW conceptual work in production.

I use another CAD system for production work

I use another CAD system for concept work, and therefore I only do production work in SolidWorks.

Question Title

* 4. If it were possible to reuse/modify most or all of your SW conceptual design as your final design, how important would this be to you?

Extremely

Very

Somewhat

Don’t care

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 5. How much design time, do you estimate, of the total percentage of the product design process, is used having to rebuild your concept in the final design?

10%

25%

50%

75%

Question Title

* 6. What ratio best describes the amount of SW usage verses other methods for your conceptual design? (other could be spreadsheets/calculators, pen and paper, 2D CAD, physical mockups etc.)

100/0 SolidWorks vs. other

75/25 SolidWorks vs. other

50/50 SolidWorks vs. other

25/75 SolidWorks vs. other

0/100 SolidWorks vs. other

Question Title

* 7. Of the following statements, which one/s are closest to the reason for not using/reusing your conceptual prototype in your final design?

You built concept for speed and did not design it with the final design in mind – i.e. did not incorporate Draft or had manufacturing in mind.

You are not the author of the concept design and it’s too hard to discern the structure and design intent via the Feature Manger. Therefore it’s easier for you to just start over.

You are not the author of the concept design and you don’t trust that the concept model/s are good enough quality (best practice) for final design.

The Concept models/assemblies have gotten so large and too many features would fail if you start to modify the design into the final design

You would lose too many features (children deleted) as you modify the concept into the final design.

Because of the many dependencies (constraints, references and mates), it is simply too difficult for you to modify and reorder the structure into the final design.

The structure, and way that you build concepts, is not the same for the final design – i.e. concept is for show and final design is built for configurability and increment change.

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 8. Which of the following best describes the greatest barrier using SolidWorks concept designs for final production?

Lack of discoverability (not understand the feature structure)

Poor performance (too many features makes modification difficult)

Inflexibility of features (inability to reorder features)

Lack of accuracy for final production work ( i.e. surfacing not accurate enough)

Lack of stability (large number of features increases instability)

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 9. Rank the following capabilities that would enable you to reuse your model/s or assemblies as final designs? (1st = highest - Please try to rank only one column per row)

	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th
A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation.	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 1st	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 2nd	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 3rd	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 4th	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 5th	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 6th	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 7th	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 8th	A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. 9th
B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc.	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 1st	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 2nd	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 3rd	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 4th	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 5th	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 6th	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 7th	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 8th	B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. 9th
C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling).	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 1st	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 2nd	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 3rd	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 4th	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 5th	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 6th	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 7th	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 8th	C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). 9th
D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time.	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 1st	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 2nd	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 3rd	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 4th	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 5th	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 6th	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 7th	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 8th	D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. 9th
E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over.	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 1st	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 2nd	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 3rd	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 4th	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 5th	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 6th	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 7th	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 8th	E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. 9th
F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made.	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 1st	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 2nd	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 3rd	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 4th	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 5th	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 6th	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 7th	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 8th	F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. 9th
G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features.	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 1st	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 2nd	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 3rd	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 4th	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 5th	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 6th	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 7th	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 8th	G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. 9th
H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design.	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 1st	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 2nd	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 3rd	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 4th	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 5th	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 6th	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 7th	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 8th	H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. 9th
I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design.	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 1st	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 2nd	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 3rd	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 4th	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 5th	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 6th	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 7th	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 8th	I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. 9th

Question Title

* 10. Identify the percentage in the following areas?
(Lack of Capability - what percentage of my job I cannot get done because of this issue?)
(Lack of Productivity - how much loss in productivity do I incur because of this issue?)
(Unacceptable Level - What percentage would you assign to this issue being unacceptable?)

	Lack of Capability	Loss in Productivity	Unacceptable Level
Not understanding the part/assemby structure (i.e. Feature Manager)	Not understanding the part/assemby structure (i.e. Feature Manager) Lack of Capability menu	Not understanding the part/assemby structure (i.e. Feature Manager) Loss in Productivity menu	Not understanding the part/assemby structure (i.e. Feature Manager) Unacceptable Level menu
Unacceptable performance for large # of features	Unacceptable performance for large # of features Lack of Capability menu	Unacceptable performance for large # of features Loss in Productivity menu	Unacceptable performance for large # of features Unacceptable Level menu
Inflexibility to freely rearrange features	Inflexibility to freely rearrange features Lack of Capability menu	Inflexibility to freely rearrange features Loss in Productivity menu	Inflexibility to freely rearrange features Unacceptable Level menu
Lack of accuracy for final production	Lack of accuracy for final production Lack of Capability menu	Lack of accuracy for final production Loss in Productivity menu	Lack of accuracy for final production Unacceptable Level menu
Lack of stability when modifying large # of features	Lack of stability when modifying large # of features Lack of Capability menu	Lack of stability when modifying large # of features Loss in Productivity menu	Lack of stability when modifying large # of features Unacceptable Level menu

Question Title

* 11. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions you'd like us to know about pertaining to the subject of taking SolidWorks concepts and prototypes to production work?

Question Title

* 12. Would you like to supply us with your name and email in the event that we need to discuss this with you by phone?

First and Last Name

Email address