Gabi Jack's Blog

The Black Box

Over the years, I’ve managed to keep in touch with some of my old college classmates and even one or two teachers, as well. We live in different countries now, so we usually exchange a quick email or, if we are lucky and have some time to spare, we chat for a while on MSN messenger.  The other night, I found one of my old teachers online. Back in the day, he used to teach Electric Power Transmission and Distribution. Now he teaches Advanced Math Methods for engineers.  We talked for a while about this new project that he’s working on and that, according to him, will dramatically improve the learning experience for the students in his class. It’s really nothing new or complicated, but it almost sounds evil.

You see, the way they teach Math in college nowadays is not precisely the way it used to be for some of us “old timers”. My friend says the students in his class use very powerful Texas Instruments calculators, that should serve as an aid in understanding and applying the different Math concepts that are exposed every week in the classroom. He wonders, however, if the learning process is actually happening in the ways it is expected, that is if the students are actually grasping the concepts, or if they are merely learning to use the calculators as a black box that will get them answers without having to think much or not at all.

With this in mind, he’s come up with the idea for the following experiment: he will simply forbid the use of such calculators during the next test they have. Only regular scientific calculators will be allowed, pretty much like those old CASIO ones we used to have back then and that nowadays, I believe, may be found inside especially marked boxes of corn flakes cereal. Pure evil, I know, but he’s actually convinced of the scientific value of his methods and has even recruited the help of a psychologist friend that will be present during the evaluation to assist him in recording and measuring the students’ reactions. Well, good luck with that! 

While I don’t agree with my friend’s methods, I think I can see his point. When you have a powerful tool in your hands, it’s sometimes easy to forget that it’s merely supposed to assist you, not to replace your knowledge and good judgment. It’s not supposed to think for you.

SolidWorks is not the exception to the rule. Here and there you are going to find little wizards designed to assist you in your job while you create or edit your part, assembly or drawing. For the most part, these are very useful tools, but you are still expected to use your best judgment.

Consider the SketchXpert, for instance. It’s designed to help you diagnose and repair relation problems in your sketches, but it won’t give you one perfect answer that will automatically solve the situation for you. In fact, what it will do is help you identify the relation or dimension that is causing trouble, but you will still need to decide over what to do, like in the following example.

In this sketch, I have deliberately applied unnecessary relations and dimensions to make it overdefined.  The SketchXpert dialog box opens, but it would appear as if the whole sketch was full of errors.  If I choose Diagnose in the dialog box, it offers me a couple of possible solutions by deleting relations or dimensions in the sketch. In the image below, solution number two involves deleting the dimension Radius5, which corresponds to the arc highlighted in green.

If I choose Manual Repair instead, what I will get is a list of all the relations and dimensions that are in conflict or have errors in the sketch, so I can manually choose those ones that I want to delete. This needs to be done with some caution and common sense; you definitely don’t want to delete dimensions or relations that are important for your design intent.

If you are unsure, you can simply suppress the relation or dimension by selecting it on the list and checking the Suppressed option at the bottom of the dialog box. This will allow you to see what would happen if you deleted that particular relation or dimension. When you are done evaluating that particular choice, you can easily unsuppressed it and go back to the list by clicking on the icon that looks like a curved arrow. In the following image, I chose to suppress the dimension of the arc that appears highlighted in green. Notice how the dimension appears in grey in the graphics area, and the sketch is now able to find a solution.

Like SketchXpert, there are many other tools and little wizards that may make your life easier or cause you a lot more trouble (COSMOSXpress, for instance), all depending on the way you use them. So, I guess my friend is up to something, after all.  We can’t allow our tools to become black boxes, no matter how powerful they are. They will do all the tedious work for us, so we don’t have to, but we’re still the ones that make the important decisions and we are still required to think.

The Left Behind

OK, I confess, I was beginning to feel a bit left behind.  A little like in Tim LaHaye’s  novel, where only a few lucky chosen ones get to be raptured and suddenly disappear from the face of the Earth, while the rest of the world is left to experience all sorts of horror and tribulations until the very end of times. Well, OK, that’s too much drama, and I wasn’t feeling that bad, but I was kind of wishing I could’ve gone to SWW this year, and not only read about it, but see it, experience it.

While I still don’t know if I’ll be able to afford SWW next year (you never know when your piggy bank will go on a diet), I don’t feel so bad now that I learned about the SWUGN Technical Summits for this year.  This is something that I definitely can afford!  It’s only one day of training and networking, and only $40 per person, plus travel expenses, of course, because in my case I would have to go to Los Angeles. Well, this sounds like a very good opportunity to use some of those frequent flyer miles that my hubby has been accumulating from all those trips to Asia. It’s no SWW, I know, but according to the website, the presenters are experts in their fields and there’s a bit of everything in there, so it seems like a great opportunity to learn.  Come December, I’m so there!

Thinking 3D

I got it! After all this time, I think I finally got it, and I’m finally thinking 3D. I’m also finally grasping the concept of design intent. I’m finally thinking in terms of parts and components and how these interact together, and how their interactions may change. I’m finally thinking parametrically! And the best of all is I’m doing all that before I even attempt to begin sketching anything!

And what a difference it makes! Once I add a bit of common sense and a dash of design intent into the mix, the job actually gets easier and even faster. Fully defining sketches has also become much easier. It’s funny, but once my preoccupation about this particular shifted from merely fully defining the sketch to applying dimensions and relations in a way that it responds to change according to my design intent, then everything else seemed to fall into place: fully defining the sketch happened almost naturally.

First of all, I realized that I had to stop and think about what I was trying to model. How is the object manufactured in real life? How is it supposed to work? Will it be assembled together with other parts to create a final product? If so, how is it supposed to interact with those other parts? What is likely to change and what should remain constant throughout those changes?

Second, in order to successfully model a part, I had to “break it down” into smaller pieces that, when put together, would merge and create the shapes and features that  I needed in my solid model. Sort  of like this:

This helps me decide what SolidWorks tools and features I should use to model each of those individual pieces. In this very simplified case, I only needed to use Extrude and Extrude-Cut in order to create this part, but there will be times when other features will do, or I may even discover that I can model it as a surface and then thicken it to a solid.

I also needed to examine the part and envision how it would look like and its position with respect to the three main planes: Top, Front and Right. In other words, what goes where? This would usually also help me decide if l needed to create extra planes, like in the following part, where Plane1 was created at an angle of 135 °.

 

It also helps to center and reference sketches from the origin. It not only makes it easier to fully define the sketch, but it’s also useful when mirroring and creating patterns as well.

Hmmm, I think I’m making lots of progress after all!

SolidWorks Time Machine

One of my favorite things about SolidWorks is the Feature Manager design tree, or The Time Machine, as my little son calls it.  It may not seem like a big deal to some, but for me it has become one of the best learning aids I have found so far. Why? Well, simply because it contains all the information about the model history: the sketches, relations between the different entities, what features and how they were created, equations, etc.   Thanks to the Feature Manager, I can “go back in time” and see, step by step, how a model was made, simply by rolling it back all the way to the beginning, and then rolling down feature by feature. I can also edit features and sketches and see the geometry and options that were selected in order to achieve a particular result. In this image, for instance, you can see how I rolled back the model to just after the first feature, Revolve 1. Notice how Cut-Extrude1 and Sweep1 appear as if they had been suppressed, and in the graphics window appears the model as it was when Revolve1 was the only feature created.

But trying to decipher the history of a model was a bit confusing at first, to tell the truth. The features in the design tree aren’t necessarily displayed in the same order they were originally created. Besides the fact that SolidWorks allows you to reorder features in the design tree, thus changing the history of the model,   most features (like extrude, revolve, sweep, etc.) consume the sketches they were created from. This means that the sketch is now displayed under the feature, in whatever order it was created, even if the sketch itself was created much earlier in the history of the model.

As an illustration of what was mentioned above, in the following images, notice how the sketches are not displayed in the right order in which they were created. In Sweep1, the two sketches are displayed in the order in which they were selected when creating the sweep, so it would appear as if Sketch3 was created before Sketch2. Furthermore, in the second image, Cut-Extrude1 has been moved from the bottom of the tree to just in between Revolve1 and Sweep1,  making it look as if both, Cut-Extrude1 and Sketch4, had been created earlier when, in fact, they were created last in the history of the model.

                                        

Things can get really confusing in large design trees, especially if the features have been renamed.

Although I still believe the design tree to be one of the best and most useful things I have found in SolidWorks, many times I do wish there was an optional way to display the design tree differently, so it would reflect the real chronological history of the model. I think such design tree would make it a lot easier to understand how the different sketches and features in the model are related to each other. It would be nice, but while there isn’t any (at least not without playing complicated tricks with the rollback bar), I’ll keep practicing my editing techniques. I think I’m getting the hang of it!

Just A Bit Envious

How I wish I could have gone to SolidWorks World this year! Anne Yust was ever so kind to show me a few pictures of last year’s event (thanks Anne!) and it looks like it was awesome. I can only imagine how much better this year will be! I must confess I’m a bit envious of other bloggers in the Blog Squad, but also grateful that most of them will be posting news daily, so that those of us who couldn’t make it there this year can still read about it, see pictures, listen to podcasts and even enjoy video clips of some of the events, as promised by Ben Eadie, who said he would take a camera and film “Stump The Chump” to share with everyone. Can’t wait to see that!

Maybe I’ll be able to make it to next year’s SWW, and perhaps by then I’ll also be ready to become a certified professional (CSWP), just like several others that have taken the test while attending SWW in the past. This year, however, my goal is to take the CSWA test. I’ll probably have to do it online, though. I’m preparing for it right now, while still learning many new things about SolidWorks. 

In the meantime, I’ll keep an eye on the news about this year’s SWW.

Marketing 101

Well, you’ll find them everywhere in the forums year after year: users that point out bugs and problems present in practically every version of SolidWorks. Users that have found that some of the new functionality offered doesn’t really work or doesn’t satisfy their needs. For the rest of us, it may seem hard to understand where they are coming from, until we stumble across one of the same bugs or problem areas they warned us about.

Many of us are not likely to need all the tools and functionality available in SolidWorks, we are likely to stick to a few common tools and features that work just fine and satisfy our needs, at least for now. It is other users, those that require the “added bonus” tools for the kind of design they do (like mold design, sheet metal, etc.), that are more likely to identify the bugs and problems present in the software when they arise. In his blog, Matt Lombard explains this situation much better than I could possibly do.

It was hard for me to understand how it could be possible that those bugs and problems could make it to the final release of the software and/or continue to be present in subsequent versions, so I asked my husband, who works as Director of Product Marketing in a non-CAD related company (his company designs and manufactures chips that make things like Blu-ray players possible) to explain a few things to me.  First of all, he told me  about the 80-20 rule. It simply means that as a company, you can’t be everything for everybody. You basically satisfy the needs of at least 80% of your customers, and you better keep your biggest and best customers inside that 80%.

When I asked him about what takes priority, adding new functionality or repairing existing bugs, he told me that it all depends. Basically, it depends on how many customers are really affected by the bug, how relevant it is, and who the customer is. In other words, they may hear you clearer if your name is SONY, than if you are some little company in the middle of nowhere that  doesn’t really buy big amounts from them. He also explained to me about the need to stay ahead of the competition by releasing new products (chips) on a regular schedule. This would explain why new software is released every year, instead of every other year or so.

But how do they decide what new features to add to their next version of a chip and what they can really do without? Well, this is where it gets a bit complicated, because, as he explained to me, they need to keep track of where the market is going, what their competitors are doing, what the investors think, and, last but not least, what their customers want and need.

I believe that SolidWorks, as a corporation, also values the opinion of the customer, the user of the software, and that’s why it is important to voice that opinion through requests for enhancements or changes, that should not be interpreted as mere complaints or rants against the software, but as constructive criticism. After all, if we never say a thing, how will they know if our needs are being met or not? We share the same goal, I think: a better, more reliable product.

Earlier today, I received an email about a new and exciting opportunity that is being prepared by SolidWorks and that is called SolidWorks Real Insights community. This is an elite group of about 300 engineering design professionals who serve as virtual advisors, helping to shape the future of CAD. This is the perfect opportunity to really make a difference, to voice those needs and help make sure they are met. You may have heard or will probably hear about it real soon through your user group. If you think you may be able to make a valuable contribution, I encourage you to apply for membership. There’s an online questionnaire you will have to fill out, but all your information is kept confidential. If you are invited to join after filling out this qualifying questionnaire, you'll be asked to contribute your thoughts on-line via surveys, discussions and chats. Ask your user group leader about it, and if you haven’t joined a user group yet, well, what are you waiting for? Go to the SolidWorks User Group Network and find a group for you today!

Inspiring the Future

I often marvel at how computers and the internet are making it so much easier than ever to learn, even when you really can’t find the time to do it the old-fashioned way, in a classroom setting, with a real life teacher and a fixed schedule.  However, even with all this flexibility for learning, one thing remains the same: you still need to find a consistent and sufficient amount of time to study and practice in order to be successful. I find that if I don’t review and practice daily, I tend to forget, and getting back on track the next time takes me even longer. This is one of those areas where I can’t help feeling tremendously frustrated at times.

As I mentioned before, I’m an engineer, but I’m also a mother. Of course, until recently, neither one of my sons even knew I was also an engineer, or at least that I used to be one in a previous life, that is. “What’s a ninjaneer, mom?”, my little one would ask, looking at me as if at a being from a different planet. “Aha!”, his older brother would exclaim, “That explains all those weird books and why you make me enter the Science Fair at school every year!”. Both of them think engineers are great, and that it’s wonderful that mommy wants to be an engineer again, but they have no idea of all the time and effort that it requires from mommy to achieve that goal. And well, I don’t really expect them to. They are only children, after all!

My youngest son is only four, which means that, when he’s not in preschool or in childcare for a couple of hours, while I attend a class, he’s always with me. This creates a bit of conflict when it comes to carving the time that I need every day to study and practice. It can be a real source of frustration, like at those times when it takes me two days to finish one tutorial, or read through a few pages in a book, or finish one online lesson that was supposed to last 30 minutes. Because you can only do so much at night without turning into a member of the zombie mob, too tired to think, those are the times when I wonder if I’m really getting anywhere near my goal of updating my skills and finding a job. The truth is that I am, only not as fast as I would like. In this, I think, men have always had an unfair advantage, although I must confess that I’ve met a few dads here and there that work from home and face similar situations when school is out or when the kids are sick, and they can’t find affordable or reliable childcare in such short notice.

But don’t get me wrong, please! Sharing this effort with my kids isn’t always a source of frustration. In fact, the neatest thing has happened as a result: my own kids have become excited about Science and Technology, and ask all kinds of questions about it, especially about SolidWorks. Why SolidWorks in particular? Well, it may be because both my kids are into computers or because it is really very attractive for visual learners, such as them. My four year old, for instance, loves to see parts going through the “time machine”, which is how he calls it whenever I use the rollback bar to examine the way in which parts were modeled. My eight year old is intrigued by the ways in which solids and surfaces are created from simple sketches, and is often daring me to reproduce every day household objects and pieces of his Lego blocks and K’nex. For a couple of weeks, he even pestered me, asking me for a chance to use SolidWorks himself! I ended up getting Cosmic Blobs for him, instead, and told him it was SolidWorks for children. He knows it isn’t really, but he likes it anyway. He tells me he may become an engineer when he grows up.

Seeing how attractive SolidWorks is for my children and their friends, it isn’t a surprise for me to see it used as an aid for teaching theoretical concepts in Science, Engineering and Technology to students in middle school, high school, vocational and college level. I think it’s a great idea that can help both teachers and students, especially in those areas that are often hard to envision, like 3D geometry and calculus, forces and stress, mechanisms, etc. There’s a whole curriculum available at the SolidWorks Education Home Page, in case you are interested. If you are an educator, you can even submit your own lesson!

Ok, so now it's back to that tutorial I left half-way done...

What a bargain!

While browsing around SolidMentor, I came across a couple of links to some really affordable online engineering training resources that are worth checking out. One of them is  i.get.it, the world’s most comprehensive online engineering training resource, where, among other courses in the catalog, I found a SolidWorks Premium Training Bundle with 68 courses, plus assessments, selling for $395. If you are on a budget, like me, you'll find that amount reasonable when compared to the thousands you would probably  have to pay at an authorized training center.

The second resource worth looking at is Inspirtech, with hundreds of courses that are also extremely affordable, easy to use and  easy to understand for beginners. Plus, a special offer for students involved in the SAE Collegiate Design Competitions: Inspirtech is offering FREE training to the students in the teams! How cool is that?

I've got the Underdefined Blues

Sometimes, in my efforts to learn SolidWorks, I feel a bit like a child who is eager to play baseball for the very first time. The child doesn’t care much about spending time learning to run the bases, swing the bat or how to figure out whether the ball is inside the strike zone or not. The child only wants to skip to the fun part of the game, the part where he or she hits the ball out of the field and everybody runs home. Well, something similar happened to me when working with sketches versus solid features.

Working with sketches is a new concept for me. In AutoCAD, I was used to creating 2D drawings by placing lines, circles, and any other entity, in the exact size and location where I wanted them to be, right from the beginning. In SolidWorks, however, I simply place the entities first and then define the sketch by applying dimensions and relations. In other words, I’m sketching with parametrics. This is really a powerful concept that took me a while to understand and that still confuses me at times. It is powerful because the sketches are at the core of the most common features that will be used to create the model, because we can change them according to our needs (by the use of equations and design tables, for instance), and because, if properly defined, they should maintain their relationships through those changes. This all sounds really great, but that’s precisely where I stumbled.

While working through the first tutorials and trying to come up with my own models copied from pictures in books or inspired by simple objects around me, I quickly learned to avoid the overdefined sketches, dangling relations and unsolvable geometries, but what about the underdefined sketch? Since most of the time, SolidWorks will allow you to create a model using an underdefined sketch, I didn’t think it was that important. It was until later, while working with configurations and design tables that  I had one of those “Aha!” moments, and it finally dawned on me that it does make a big difference whether you fully define a sketch or not. As an example, take a look at my underdefined model from one of the tutorials.

This is a very simple part with three sketches. Sketch 2, the underdefined sketch, is a circle that is supposed to be placed in the center of one of the faces of the Box. However, the position of Sketch 2 is not fully defined. It appears to be placed right where it should be for this particular instance, but watch what happened when I tried to create different configurations of the same part by means of a design table.

Yikes! What happened here? Why would it fail to create a fillet? Now look at this other configuration.

   

Why do you think this happened? Well, let’s take a look at the design table.

As you can see, the design table was supposed to create several configurations by changing the dimensions of the rectangle (Sketch 1) used to make the Box, as well as the diameter of the circle (Sketch 2) used to create the Knob, then, it was supposed to apply fillets to the outside corners or the Box. However, since Sketch 2 was underdefined, it failed to maintain the relationships with the other entities in the model and even caused the fillet on the second configuration to fail. In other words, it didn’t always end up in the center of the Box’s front face when the dimensions were modified, and that alone affected the whole part.

This example may not seem like a big deal because there aren’t many sketches involved and it’s easy to spot and correct the error. Now think about a similar situation, only this time picture a very complicated part where several of the sketches involved in creating features are left underdefined. Not the same, huh?

Right after this, I vowed to always do my best in order to fully define a sketch before using it to create a model. But I found out this is easier said than done, especially when repairing those sketches already created. Many times, after applying all the dimensions and relations I could possibly think of, there were still a few blue entities left. Even worse, at times, trying to fully define my sketch would actually make it overdefined! Relations are not easy for me.

A few times, I used the Fully Defined Sketch tool, and was actually successful. Other times even that wouldn’t work, the tool would display a message saying that my sketch was still underdefined, and would suggest a few ways to fully define it. Although I continue to struggle, I’ve noticed I have better chances to achieve my goal of correctly applying dimensions and relations for a fully defined sketch when I keep the Automatic Relations option on all the time, and when I think carefully about the model and how I want it to react to changes I (or others) may decide to make in the future. I wonder if I’m the only one who has a hard time with this!

Getting Started

Deciding that you need or want to learn something new is the easy part. Next, you have to figure out a way to do it. If you are a college student, SolidWorks may be already offered to you as part of the curriculum.  But college is not the only place to learn SolidWorks, there are many resources available: books, tutorials, video and online classes, training centers and community colleges, on-site training at work,  blogs, websites, and on-line discussion forums,  to name a few. 

I didn’t have a big budget, so  for me, the small workshops and “Introduction to SolidWorks” classes that are often offered at community colleges and that are still among the reasonably priced, seemed like  a good place to start. That kind of training, however, is extremely brief and basic, it’s a mere introduction. Lucky for me, SolidWorks  has a student edition available, and for an insignificant fraction of the price of the retail version. True, the license lasts only two years, but I figured that was plenty of time to do some serious learning. After all, what better way to learn than by getting as much practice time as possible? By having access to SolidWorks beyond the walls of a classroom or training center, I can practice as much as I want to and learn at my own pace.

I found it extremely helpful that SolidWorks includes interactive help files and a few on-line tutorials to help you get started. It also provides you with useful tips, and a brief description of what each of the icons in the toolbars are for, that appears every time you put your cursor on top of them.   I went through the tutorials and also tried a few sample video lessons offered by The Solid Professor. This is a great resource, but it can be a bit pricey.

I decided now I needed to go “deeper”, so I went and got myself a few good books:   “SolidWorks 2007 Bible”,  by Matt Lombard (excellent book),  the “Official Certified SolidWorks Associate CSWA Exam Guide”, by David and Marie Planchard (it’s perfect for practice),  “Engineering Analysis with COSMOSWorks Professional 2007”, by Paul M. Kurowski,  and  “Analysis of Machine Elements using COSMOSWorks 2007”, by John R. Steffen,  to begin with.

Much to my delight, I’ve also found that there’s loads of information on-line. In particular, I  like to visit the  SolidWorks Discussion Forums. It’s a huge site with dozens of forums, each of them about a different category related to SolidWorks. It’s always very active, full of experienced users willing to give you a hand with any problem or doubt you may have. Even during those times when I’m not exactly in need to ask a question, I can still learn a lot by reading other people’s questions and what the more experienced ones have to say.

Another favorite is the Solid Mentor, that includes news, forums, links to websites, blogs, and podcasts related to SolidWorks. Take some time to visit the SolidWorks users blogs, as they are often full of very valuable information.  Another place to go whenever I need some quick help is the SolidWorks Tips and Things. I  have a few folders full of sample files that I’ve downloaded from the 3D Content Central. Mike J. Wilson’s SolidWorks Techniques is another awesome website where I like to go for samples. I learn a lot by carefully examining parts and assemblies that were created by others. Mike also has some terrific examples of the use of equations and macros to simulate animation, and while I’m still not very familiar with macros for SolidWorks, it’s fun to watch.

So, that’s pretty much what I’ve been doing so far. I’m finding a few stumbling rocks along my way that I’ll tell you about some other time, but for the most part,  I’m having lots of fun and learning even more.

Welcome!

First of all, I want to thank Richard Doyle for giving me this great opportunity to blog for SolidWorks, and Patrick Cook for helping me set up the  blog  and  get  started.  I’m really new to this blogging thing, so I feel a bit nervous and excited, all at the same time.

OK, now to the part where I tell you what this blog is all about.  Until recently, SolidWorks  was something completely unknown to me. While in college, back in 1991, I was introduced to CADAM, as part of my Engineering Drawing class.  Teaching us CADAM, however, was more like a neat thing that would make our college look like it was ready  for the 21^st  century and give us something to brag about, but the reality was that back then, in Mexico, the possibilities of actually using CADAM (or any other CAD) at work were pretty slim, or so we thought. 

Shortly after that, I got myself a volunteer job as a drafter for a small contractor whose main business was to service sugar factories all over the country. We did everything  the old-fashioned way, or at least we used to, until one fateful day when the owner  got talked into updating his business by an old friend. That’s how our office got new computers, printers and something else: AutoCAD R10 and a plotter. The reseller sent over a guy who was supposed to train three of us (the owner of the company included) and, in only one week, teach us everything we needed to know about AutoCAD. Our teacher was actually an architect, who didn’t really have that much experience with the software and didn’t understand our needs at all. Well, my boss got frustrated really quickly, and decided his time was better used in other ways.  The other engineer and I finished the whole week of training only to realize that it wasn’t nearly enough, that we were, in fact, far away from putting AutoCAD to good use and making it productive for the business. AutoCAD seemed more like a neat new toy rather than the powerful tool it was supposed to be.

The engineers at work felt that it was just too complicated for them to try to learn AutoCAD. For them, it felt like asking them to simply forget about all what they thought they knew and start all over again. They decided they were too old and too busy for that, and they weren’t even sure if it was worth it at all. Since I was still a college student, it was decided that I would be the one dealing with AutoCAD. After all, I had plenty of time to sit down, read the books, go through the tutorials, and see if it could be of any use at all. I was not about to walk away from a perfect opportunity to learn something new and for free! With time, however, other companies began updating as well. Even the Mexican sugar industry, as reluctant to change as it is, began embracing the new technology and requesting it from contractors. By the time I graduated from college, in 1996, CAD was no longer a neat toy, it was a necessity, and my boss and the other engineers at work  finally realized that and began to learn. That experience taught me the need to embrace change at all times, even if it seems scary, to look forward to it, because you won’t be able to avoid it for long, and, actually, change can be good.  I continued to work for the same company, until I got married and left the country in 1999.

When I arrived with my husband to my new residence in California,  I experienced first -hand  the kind of frustration and discouragement my boss and co-worker must have felt when challenged to learn something so incredibly new such as  AutoCAD.  I quickly realized that what I had learned back in my country was not going to be enough to land a  job here in  Silicon Valley -- I needed to update myself.  Our first baby, however, decided to arrive before my work permit did, and so, considering  the high cost of living and the outrageous cost of childcare in this area, we decided that it was cheaper for us and better for the baby if I took a break and stayed home, and that’s how I ended up opening this big parenthesis in my career and taking a long break to raise a family. 

Fast forwarding to 2007.  I’ve decided the break is over, it is now time to update, take a few classes, freshen up on a few old skills and learn some new ones that will, hopefully, help me find my way back.  That’s how I decided to learn SolidWorks. I noticed it was often required by potential employers, and so I became curious about it.  What I discovered was more than I expected, it was something I had never seen or experienced before: solid modeling. 

SolidWorks is a powerful tool, it’s fun, it’s exciting, it’s highly addictive, but it can also be very challenging, and even frustrating, for those of us who are used to 2D drawing and have no previous experience in solid modeling. There’s a lot to learn, and there are many resources available to do it. For some of us, some resources may work better than others, or may be more or less affordable, depending on our circumstances. Perhaps, you are one of those who find it easier to learn inside the structure of a classroom. Personally, I prefer to learn at my own pace, to learn by doing rather than just watching, and to take as much time as needed to really understand how it works, get deep into it, experiment, and ask questions to those more experienced than me. But, perhaps, you are in a situation where you don’t really have that much time and you need to learn by yesterday.   Whatever your circumstances, your style and preferences, it doesn’t really matter, as long as you don’t allow yourself to get discouraged and never stop learning. This blog is dedicated to the process of learning SolidWorks from the perspective of someone who is, well, just beginning. Please, feel free to share your own experiences, comments and suggestions, always in a positive and encouraging way, of course. We can all learn from each other.