The Iterative Process of Learning

As I move beyond the very basics and into more complex topics in solid modeling, I often find myself going back to review what I learned previously. Many times,  the newly acquired knowledge helps me make sense of what was learned previously. Other times,  I discover that I overlooked something, simply because at that time I didn’t understand enough to figure out what I could do with it. Either way, I’m finding that my learning process is somewhat iterative.  I learn some basics, apply them, learn something new and then I go back to review or explore more about what was previously learned, this gives me new understanding  and helps me move on to the next topic.

Take the extruded boss feature, for example.  What I first learned about it was that I could create a solid body by extruding a sketch  in a direction normal to the sketch plane.  More often than not, my starting condition would be at the sketch plane and only occasionally I would use an offset distance from the sketch plane.  I would use only one direction, with end condition usually blind or midplane. But there are so many other options available!  I didn’t realize this until I saw it done  as part of a tutorial about some other topic. Then I went back to explore this feature more thoroughly.

If I create a plane at an angle, for instance, like Plane 1 in the following image,

and I choose the end condition to be  up to that plane, I can create something different than the usual box.

If, on the other hand, I choose my start condition to be Plane 1, and don’t modify anything about the direction of extrusion, I end up with something like this. The extruded body is actually created using the projection of Sketch1 on Plane 1, but the direction of the extrude continues to be normal to the Top plane.

I can always change the direction of extrusion by choosing a plane or face that is normal to it. In this case, I choose Plane 1.

I can create a Thin Extrude feature instead and choose the start  condition at an offset distance from the sketch plane.

Depending on my choices for options, and using the same sketch and plane, I can even end up with something like this.

Sometimes  I do feel a bit frustrated that I keep going back to  things that I thought I had completely learned already, but I must admit that it’s not really a regression. I’m actually learning more each time! Still, I wonder if anyone has ever reached a point when they can say: “OK, now I completely know this. I’ve totally mastered SolidWorks”. Or, maybe, just maybe,  it is more or less the same way for everyone else: a somewhat iterative process of learning and re-learning, discovering, reviewing, and getting a bit more and more understanding each time.  I wonder.

Comments

[Steve Calvert]

Nice post, Gabi. The only thing wrong with making a shape like you have done (one might say out of the norm) is that it is a little more difficult to figure out from some one elses point of view what the design intent is/was.

Steve

[Mike]

Gabi,

After using Solidworks for 7 years now, I still think I know less than 75% of what it has to offer. One of the best, and worst things about Solidworks is that if there is one way to do something, there are 100 ways to do it. No one way is right or wrong. I'm just glad that we are given options to do things in different ways, so we can get comfortable with our processes.

Mike

[Gabi]

Steve,

There was no design intent here. It was merely intended as an example of what happens by choosing different options in the dialog box.

[Devon T. Sowell]

Hi Gabi-

Great article.

Many years ago, I was taught this when using SolidWorks;

Try to build the Part in SolidWorks as if you were building a real Part (I work mostly with Machined Parts).

Just like Steve Calvert, a power user, says; It's all about Design Intent. A robust SolidWorks Model is one where the Design Intent is obvious and it's important Features are easily changed.

Cheers,
Devon

[Devon T. Sowell]

Hi Gabi-

Another Tip is to become familar with CNC Machining and the software applications, such as MasterCam, that support controlled machining.

Many of my Parts do not have Drawings. I send the 3D models to the machine shop. So, the SolidWorks Part file needs to be created so the CNC software can easily recognize Features, such as fillets, chamfers and counterbores.

Cheers,
Devon

[Gabi]

Thank you, Devon! CNC is something I'm certainly not familiar with. My college had a CNC robot, but it was only for the use of the students in the manufacturing area, and I was in the "other" area. Every day I would sit down right next to that robot, but only because I worked at the same lab, assisting one of the professors with his DPIV research. I wrote the code for his in C++. Never used CNC at work either. Someone told me about MasterCam and I investigated their training options. Not bad, really. What do you think about SolidCam? I downloaded a demo from them, but haven't had time to really check it out so far.

[Steve Calvert]

Gabi, it is neat that you can do all that stuff and I like the fact that I and others can see many different ways to do things just by thinking out of the box. We all become better designers and modelers by coming to sites like your and Devon's to see things done differently. I know you didn't make it to SWW08 but there was a pretty good session by Ed Eaton and Phil Sluder were they took two different approaches to a design problem. One based on how an Engineer might do it and the other based on how an Industrial Designer might do it.

I, for one, love to come to sites like your because I know I'll probably see something I've never tried before.

Steve