Home

 
Image result for STATE OF THE INDUSTRY
3D CAD TODAY!

 

April 21st, 2017

1. TECH-NET, INC is Celebrating its 30th Anniversary 1987-2017! 


2. Here is some disturbing financial information on PTC and Autodesk according to Yahoo Financials. All numbers are in thousands. Yes, that is half a billion dollars!!
 

PTC Inc. (PTC)


Autodesk, Inc. (ADSK)

3. It looks like many CAD vendors are now offering a rental option. Solidworks, Creo, ZW3D and Solid Edge! All still offer perpetual options.



January 6th, 2017

There have been a few changes in the industry since April 17, 2016:

 

1. Version 2017 

Every CAD product has released a 2017 version of their product including the ones I support. Do you even look at the enhancements? Or do you just load it like an automaton and keep on working. How many of you have really reviewed the enhancements? Most have just keep on working not noticing an enhancement until it effects your operations and you become very upset. Now you have to figure out what they did.

I have a great article about the Maintenance Contract.
How to keep the suckers paying!

 

All You Wanted to Know about the Annual CAD Maintenance Contract

 

You are Not Stuck with Autodesk

 

2. The largest change in the industry has been with Onshape. 

They have eliminated the 10 private projects and all the work you do is now public and available to anyone with an account. One of the benefits was you could use Onshape like a document control system as sort of advanced blue print counter (I will have an article on that in a few weeks) but they have limited private documents to read only with a free account. Now this may change if it is shown that accessing completely released engineering documentation information may increase paid users. If large companies see the benefit they will easily opt for the reasonable cost for Onshape. Imagine what they pay for the Catia fraud. Onshape! The Party is over! Onshape needs a way to quickly monetize this operation. But as design collaboration and document control tool, the market is wide open and with no CAD development costs.

 

Why Cloud Based CAD will Fail


I think they are missing the point, there are enough CAD Pro/e clones on the market and CAD in the cloud will never be a viable option.
It is obvious that there are not many users to their unique CAD solution. Personally I found it lacking in so many ways. Their CAD system instead of adding innovation to the 3D CAD world, they tried to win over the existing dated Solidworks program user. I will guarantee that SW users will never move to Onshape. But the biggest problem is not with a marginal CAD system, it has to do with a native file format you can't save locally. A few have told me you can just export the models as a STEP. But our 3D CAD modeling problem is not with model compatibility it is the associated documentation. We need those associated information documentations (drawings) for many reasons, version history for one. Yes, there is PMI but it will never be a standard. Why MBE/MBD/PMI Will FAIL. Not that it matters, Onshape doesn't support PMI at this time. PMI is based on the native files and translation is based on the current release of those files. Who could keep the translation format up to date? (Short sighted, yes beyond belief).

Document Control:

But there were some incredible benefits to Onshape. Sadly, they only allow viewing of the professional version with the free version. If they allowed full controlled downloading they could have created the ultimate blue print counter. Which would have required a professional license by many large companies. When the PLM and MBE experiment fails, a move to a conventional based functional cloud based document control system will be established. If not Onshape something very similar will be the perfect solution.

Collaboration:

Onshape was a gift to engineering in truly unlimited functional collaboration. While in the free mode it is completely available. All of your information is accessible by anyone with an any account. Onshape could solve this problem with just offering 1 or 2 private formats. It may not generate subscription customers but there may be groups that would want complete control of this level of collaboration. Maybe at $100 per year with the hope they would move to the professional solution for collaboration only. Basing the product on only CAD design will be a loser.

TRAINING

Oops, I almost missed one of the greatest functions Onshape offers. If they keep even just the basic CAD functionality they could have the only 3D and electronic drawing training package available on the Cloud. Every school in the world would be beating a path to their door. But it is more than just the platform, they need professional training packages including basic drafting, form, fit and function design mixed with basic 3D functionality. Imagine the student could study from anywhere. Even the not so bright Apple users (Just Kidding) could access the assignments. Many could even use the program to do small projects, as long as they knew it would be an open format. No college would need expensive high end systems. The graduate students would walk in the door with good 2D and 3D design skills that would make training on the company system a much shorter learning curve.

 

The sale of Solidworks to Dassault

Sadly, Onshapes founding team really were not the innovation geniuses everyone touts, but nothing more than a few fellows that pirated Pro/e and put it on a PC and called it Solidworks. They really didn't even add any innovation. There were other system that offer much more productive features like a single model environment, direct edit functionality and integrated drawings. These features would have not even needed the creation of the complex and expansive PLM, PDM and MBE systems.

But Pro/e had the right buzz word: History based/Parametric design. Solidworks was going down, it could not even compete with programs such as CADKEY and IronCAD. But as they were going down a miracle happened. Dassault probably pressured by Boeing, being impressed by the success of Pro/e's successful demand on their very convoluted history based/parametric design paradigm as compared to Catia 4s superior Boolean based design. Dassault paid upward of $250 million for Solidworks. Did anyone wonder why? I have always thought it was Solidworks Pro/e history based technology to incorporate in the Boeing demanded Catia 5. Dassault brought to us the Catia 4 to Catia 5 incompatibility fiasco that cost Boeing and Airbus billions and is still causing them massive costly problems.

 

Solidworks is the worlds most popular 3D CAD solution

Ah, but Joe, Solidworks is the most popular 3D CAD program on the planet. A simple reason. This is where the Solidworks management apply some well proven genius. They used the AutoCAD "Perpetual Evaluation Marketing" program which did not include any copy protection for 10 years and it was passed around like hotcakes. Every engineering person in the industry has a copy of SW 2006. The last year of no copy protection. Not so much for SW2007!! But the die was cast.

 

Superior IronCAD moved to a 2nd Tier product

I was selling IronCAD at the time. Miles above Solidworks. It had integrated history and direct edit design (still the only package that does), a single model environment, drag and drop design from standard and custom catalogs and the often copied but never duplicated feature, part and assembly manipulator: the Triball. IronCAD also provided a documentation module that provide not only drawing capabilities, but many different documentation formats such as tech pubs, marketing promotional materials, sales presentations and a variety of other pertinent documents comparable in use to a word processor. Its ease of use was easily implemented by many different departments like purchasing, planning and manufacturing: see Leverage Your Engineering Data throughout your Organization! even for companies that use different CAD systems. Don't believe me Download a 30 day Evaluation and bring in your most complex SW assembly and start modifying parts much faster than the original SW. You can do the same for all of the popular packages, Creo, NX, Solid Edge, Inventor and Catia 4/5.

 

Why aren't we all using IronCAD?

Strict licensing (Against my protests) implemented in 1998!!

Sadly, the same thing happened to CADKEY for the same reason.

 

3. Product Rental 

Rumors abound on a SW rental option. I have yet to see a program that is based on Parasolids (Except Solid Edge) or ACIS offering this option. I think it has to do with royalties. If they do make this an option, say good by to VARs or Dealers. All large CAD companies will be selling direct. Gone are the friendly support fellows you could always depend on helping you. You will be required to have a maintenance or subscription. Yes, they do think you are that stupid.

 

4. Now to Autodesk

The jury is still out on the subscription only. My own viewpoint is it is a scam. You sell your company and your engineering information is tied to a subscription service forever? With a local system you sell the information and a compatible version of the native software is part of the sale.

 

Autodesk is a strange bird. A few customers called and discussed Fusion 360. All just stayed with my products IronCAD or ZW3D since I make the argument about the benefits of owning it.

 

But I wonder why Autodesk seem to be competing against their own products. Fusion 360 (Fully functional CAD/CAM product), Autocad Mechanical (2D/3D Wireframe, intermediate surfacing and push/pull solids) all in a functional hybrid design environment. Then Inventor a fine Pro/e clone. But all for a subscription you pay "FOREVER". Is anyone really this "STUPID"? Ooops, too rude Joe, "IGNORANT"?

 

Now Back to the Original Article.

 

This is the last in a series of articles documenting my experience with the introduction of 3D CAD into industrial/mechanical engineering. Please take some time to read them all. From board draftsman, to 3D CAD designer, to 3D CAD program dealer, to 3D CAD teacher, some of this information may surprise you. 

50 Years of Engineering

My First 17 Years or "How did we do it without 3D CAD!"

The 1980's - 3D CAD - The Beginning

The 1990's - 3D CAD/CAM Moves to the PC!!

The 2000's - The Age of 3D CAD Un-Enlightenment!


I am celebrating my 35th year in 3D CAD. If you have read about the 1980's in the above article, you will know that I was instrumental in introducing PC based 3D CADKEY to the Northwest starting with Boeing and virtually all of their suppliers. As a user and dealer of a variety of 3D CAD programs over the last 30 years, I have become much more than a professional user and salesman, I have become an enthusiast and evangelist.

My years as a board designer have given me all of the design tools to become very proficient in both engineering design and graphic creation with the 3D CAD system.

Current and Past Projects

I pay close attention to all of the current 3D CAD news.

I am going to start this article where my last one left off -2010


2010 – Knock, Knock! Anyone Home in the 3D CAD world?

One day I was doing some feature comparisons for my ZW3D products as compared to Solidworks for some marketing since they are very similar products. As I perused through Solidworks 2010 features on their website I saw this:

Direct Model Geometry Modification! – What?

I have been pushing the direct edit functionality of my programs for over a decade. That was one function that I would point out that Solidworks and the other Pro/E clones lacked. So you can imagine my surprise when I saw this.

I showed this to my CAD Vendors and they also didn't know that this function was available. I never heard about it anywhere, not from any of my Solidworks friends. I pointed out this weakness quite often in many articles and promotions offering our products as direct edit
add-ons.

Direct Editing Relief For Solidworks and Catia 5

I was very enthused.

Enthused?? What the heck are you talking about, Joe? This is your competition. Like I have said, I have been pointing out the high level of incompatibility of the Pro/E clones and pushing the integration of direct editing for over a decade. IronCAD, KeyCreator and ZW3D were my tools of choice. All had direct edit, IronCAD and ZW3D had integrated history and direct edit functionality that provided much more flexibility than KeyCreator that was a direct editing only package.

28 Years of 3D CAD Incompatibility

Next Generation 3D CAD Technology Applied!

Here is an example of IronCAD's direct editing:

 

Here is a shelled shape. We select the face and with a right mouse click with select move. The Tri-ball comes up to manipulate the face. We are going to rotate the selected face 15 degrees. We had the shell function in the history and shows that the shell did get updated.

Imagine working without worrying about design intent. You have the freedom of incredible conceptual history design with the flexibility to directly edit the part when the design requires it.

Here is what Solidworks says about Direct Model Edit:

"SOLIDWORKS 3D CAD software gives designers simple ways to quickly create and adjust 3D model geometry using direct model editing. Simply click on the model geometry and move it, speeding up design, saving time and development costs, and increasing productivity."

Solidworks was now totally compatible with my 3D CAD programs or any other 3D CAD programs. The was what I had been waiting for. We could now pass models back and forth and we could use any system that had directed edit functionality. Total 3D CAD compatibility. We could now focus on standardizing, at least, on the 3D modeling.

I had a friend with a SW2010 and he let my play with it. I was a bit shocked that you really had to look for the toolbar. It was a bit obscure. But when I got it up and running I found it was quite robust. I did notice something strange, that it added a step in the history. It didn’t bother me at the time since I was just testing the functionality on an imported file. I was satisfied that it could do the job. I was a bit surprised that the Solidworks users seemed not to be aware of this functionality and spawned this article.

Solidworks Users are "NOT" Stupid! 

But there seemed to be one problem. Adding a step with each face modification as a step to the history seems to be problematic.

There is this young engineer that I often get into heated debates about on a variety of subjects, many are related to Solidworks since he is an expert. I was asking why the Solidworks users were not using direct editing in their design process. I didn’t think much of the step created in the history every time a face was altered. He explained that this creates huge problems with the history and could not be extensively used.  I found out that you could not combine the history and just work directly with the part as I can with IronCAD.

I even suggested he export a parasolid and bring it back in and start direct editing it. He shuddered at the thought and the discussion stopped there. I took a bit of time to review this situation with the other popular Pro/E clones and the same problem existed. After writing a few articles like the following one I have come to the conclusions that direct edit functionality cannot be effectively combined with the history design in the Pro/E clones and that the industry may have to look to new products like Solidworks Conceptual Design to standardize the 3D modeling process thereby hugely increasing compatibility. We should be able to model in any system and toss the models back and forth.

Universal 3D CAD Compatibility is Here!! Sadly, not yet!!


Inventor

I took a sales/tech managers job with a company that was selling the Autodesk Manufacturing solution. We were going to focus on Inventor 2012. I took some time to learn Inventor. It was very easy to learn. They have great tutorials that teach you top down design and I found it a very nice program, even though being just another Pro/E clone.

I noticed that they included Fusion. This was their direct edit product. At the time it was a standalone program. It had a link to Inventor. I was really interested in how it worked with Inventor. Inventor was the only Pro/E clone I got all the way to assembly and drawing. Even though I was a dealer for Pro/E, Solidworks and Solid Edge I never got beyond the modeling. Just modeling in these package was very painful and very unproductive as compared to what I was using.

So I did a design in Fusion. I was a good direct edit package easy to learn and use. I brought the Fusion file into Inventor. It was a live link. I even modified the part in Inventor.  I created an AID (Associated Information Document) previously incorrectly called the “2D Drawing”. Any changes in Fusion or Inventor were reflected in the AID. I found the AID module very well designed. There were a few small bugs but Fusion was still in Beta. I have heard that they have now folded Fusion inside Inventor. I think I have even seen some Boolean shapes.

We were the first name in a list of NW dealers on the Autodesk website so we were getting lots of calls. But all of the calls were for AutoCAD. Against the wishes of the VAR manager I decide to take another look at Autocad. I was quite shocked, it had good intermediate surfacing and push/pull solid modeling. I was quickly up and running with those two functions, but I just could not get past the idiosyncratic 2D operation. This was not your fathers, ooops grandfathers Autocad.

I was sent to a one week course on their new “Suites”. We were in the “Product Design Suite” Group. This was quite bizarre they bundled the oddest bunch of programs together. Besides Inventor, Autocad and Fusion, they included programs like Alias and 3ds Max, these are not casual user programs. There are many experts that base their professional career on these programs. They had a thing called Mud Box that seemed to be some creature creating software, very weird. It seemed like they created these suites only to get rid of some of the slow moving products.

It was an odd experience. They are a total marketing company. Autodesk has the best software money can buy.

That job didn’t last long. It is a bit tough to work for someone after being your own boss for so many years. I left and continued to sell IronCAD and ZW3d and providing engineering services.


3D CAD Hybrid Modeling

In 1998 The CADKEY Design Suite was released. It may have been the most complete hybrid modeling system ever devised. It was based on a wireframe modeler working in a 3D environment. It was easy to integrate the surfacing, solid modeling and finally history based parametric design. We had levels to differentiate our parts and assemblies. Levels also could be used as somewhat of a history manager. It also had integrated drawings. You could do easily do single person projects in one file. Sadly, this amazing, highly productive concept disappeared when they moved to KeyCreator.

The Pro/E clones are attempting to provide hybrid modeling. But the Pro/e design process does not offer the necessary base for this to happen. It is a dated paradigm and we are slowly watching it reach the end of its product cycle. It only adds somewhat disassociated modules as we have talked about with the attempt to incorporated direct editing in Solidworks.

Only one product integrates all of the features that I described in the CADKEY Design Suite. That is ZW3D. It has all of what I described above and more. It offers a much higher level of history, direct edit, surfacing, sheet metal design, reverse engineering plus many more automated features. It also offers a much more up to date and more friendly user interface.

The Ultimate 3D CAD System

The only way that the current companies can provide this level of hybrid modeling is by introducing new products. Solidworks seems to be the only one moving toward this with the introduction of Solidworks Conceptual Design. Sadly, they are not making it readily available to their user base by pricing it at a subscription price of $2,988.00 per year. It is hard for me to understand why they didn't make this a part of their Catia 5 system. It uses the same solid modeling kernel and at this time Catia 5 is the only popular system that has no direct edit functionality which is causing huge problems with the design of their new airplane, the 787.

Below I describe Onshape. Sadly, they paid no attention to hybrid modeling and brought out nothing more than another Pro/E clone at least in the basic modeling.

CLOUD COMPUTING

There wasn’t much new in the industry for a few years.

Then Autodesk released Fusion 360. They had a good trial period and I played with it. I found it a bit convoluted and not straight forward. It was called a cloud program, I guess because all of your files reside on a remote server. But it truly is not a true Cloud based program, you have to download a small portion of the program that uses your hardware. My free trial ended and I lost interest.


Onshape! A View from the Clouds

Then we started hearing rumors about the founders of Solidworks designing a new 3D CAD program.

I was friends with many of the early PC based 3D CAD Pioneers. Bob Bean, owner of Baystate Technology, creator of Draftpak and owner of CADKEY asked if I would show the team at Onshape IronCAD. I gave them a demonstration. IronCAD is by far the world's most innovative and best conceptual design 3D CAD system.

Five Functions that Increase 3D CAD Productivity!!

We were not sure what they were going to create. But finally they released the beta of Onshape. They were allowing people to sign up for the beta. I was right there. This was a true Cloud Based program. You just signed on and you were working. Windows or Apple! It was Incredible.

As a CAD package I was not impressed. There was virtually no innovation. But then I realized these were the folks that brought us, Solidworks, the first PC based Pro/E clone. Solidworks was nothing more than a poor mans copy of Pro/E on the PC. They actually never stepped out of that paradigm or they purposely designed the program that way for the existing Solidworks and other Pro/E clone users to feel at home. Onshape will never match the incredible 3D CAD conceptual design capabilities of IronCAD or come close to the superb hybrid modeling of ZW3D.

But it was miles above Fusion 360. It was very straight forward and easy to use. As far as it being in the sketch, sketch, constrain, constrain world this is a pretty good package. The direct editing was very straight forward and well thought through. One of the more productive features is that you can do complete projects in one document. Many have found it just to slow to be a professional design package.

I did go back to Fusion 360 to make sure I didn't miss anything. I had done it before and my license expired, but after the release of Onshape they made it more accessible. This did not make Autodesk management happy. I will get into this later.

But we want to control our documentation locally.

The problem with cloud based CAD systems is that they have no transferable native file format or a way to work with it off line. What you design stays on the cloud. You have to export the model in a neutral format. Onshape is the only program that writes a native Solidworks file. I do not know if it exports the history. I would pass on this program as my only design tool for that purpose only. We want to be in complete control of our documents locally.

But the CAD is one small part of Onshape. It is by far the very best collaboration and document control tool. This is the future of document control.

You can upload any file to Onshape. A native 3D CAD file, a neutral 3D CAD file, an excel, word, pdf, image, ANY FILE.

This may make you ask:

What is the engineering deliverable today?

The native or neutral model and a PDF or a PMI, sent by email?

I will tell you Mr. Murphy is having a field day.

Here is what you can do in Onshape. You just log on, Windows or Apple, and there is the model in 3D for you to review and/or modify. Documentation? All the documentation and revision history you want just sits there ready to be accessed. You can lock it down to any level of access you want. Access can be easily controlled by a group of document control admin people. Oops, goodbye PLM experts.

This process can be completely standardize and be superior to the yet unmatched standard drawing system.

You still do all of your 3D CAD work locally on your native CAD system and use Onshape only for your engineering documentation. Using the native 3D CAD file as the engineering deliverable has already failed, but the lack of applicable knowledge has not allowed the powers that be to realize it.

Beyond document control, Onshape offers a high level of collaboration. You can use it for design review, checking, analysis, also access to the model itself for marketing, sales, purchasing, tech pubs, etc. Engineering, itself, would look here first for the released engineering information then move to the native CAD system to modify or create new parts and products. This could hugely simplify the demands on the native PDM system.

We may not design in Onshape but it will standardize our document control and collaboration.

Everyone needs an Onshape account to become familiar with this concept and help define the future. It is the perfect 3D CAD training tool. I can't imagine all of the colleges not adopting it for their standard 3D CAD tool with its incredible easy access. They would not even have to contact Onshape. Just Log on!!

Get an Onshape account today and search for "Redback Spyder".

Onshape is free for the first 10 projects. After that your projects are moved to the public area. It is very reasonable at $100 per month for unlimited projects. I can see all small and medium sized companies utilizing Onshape for document control and access. All you would need is one paid license. Access would be by free accounts. Large companies would probably hire Onshape to devise a not so public cloud system. It is the perfect system even surpassing the simple archaic drawing system, that PLM has failed to match.

The release of Onshape was not appreciated by one fellow.

You have to read Autodesks CEO, Carl Bass article "Setting the Record Straight". I was shocked that he would expose his fear of Onshape so blatantly. Should the current popular CAD systems be worried about Onshape? I have worked with Boeing and Catia for over 30 years. Dassault is responsible for keeping Boeing one of the most ignorant and isolated manufacturing companies. Their lack of interoperability is beyond belief. Onshape would instantly offer Boeing a new level of operation and compatibility being able to directly import native Catia models. But, sadly, I am sure that Dassault will not let them see the benefits and more than likely sabotage any grass root efforts to utilize Onshape. They will probably offer an overly costly and complex cloud system "See we have the Cloud, too!" Boeing management won’t even question it, with BCS saying "There is nothing to see here, please move on". The 3D CAD vendors that believe their only claim to fame is their PLM capabilities may find themselves out in the cold. And the sooner the better.

With standardization comes simplification!

The funny thing about Carl's letter is that it came out the same day Onshape was released.

Setting the Record Straight

By Carl Bass, Autodesk President and CEO


The Age of Rental CAD Software.

Autodesk will now only rent you their software.

Here is what one fellows comment in a posting on this article:

 “The New Pricing Policy by Autodesk”

Jeff says:

“I'm very ok with this. As a small business owner just starting out, it would be incredibly hard for me to cough up the money to buy AutoCAD. A small monthly fee suits me very well.

My response:

“Jeff, you make a good point. But your data is now locked to a system you have to pay a monthly fee to access forever. Everyone knows that all CAD systems do not offer backward compatibility. It would probably be safer to finance a perpetual package. That is also one of the problem with CAD on the cloud, there is no native file format that you can save locally.”

Here is another comment in response to Jeff’s comment.

R. K says:

“Jeff, you make an excellent point, the rental system is good, for some people. I believe the major source of backlash is that now we are all required to go rental. Why not offer a choice?”

My response:

“R.K. Why don't they offer a choice? Once you get on board you now have "no choice" but to stay on board. They just took "your" choice away! Sadly, since the licenses of the past are not transferable you again have "no choice" if you want to use AutoCAD or any other Autodesk product.”

"The Pro/e clone CAD system has basically run its course on innovation. Autodesk and soon the other major players have nowhere else to turn to keep the cash flowing. They have moved far past the point of concern for the user.”

“I assume most will settle with their current version. We used to have to upgrade due to the latest version due to lack of compatibility with earlier operating systems. But I think Windows 10 will around for a very long time.”

So there you go. Renting CAD software in a nutshell.  

Added 7-29-16

I have noticed that only CAD systems that own the solid modeling kernel are offering subscriptions only or rental options. Autodesk Product, Solid Edge and ZW3D are the only ones I know of. Probably has something to do with the royalties due to ACIS or Parasolids.

How many will buy into this fraud. Many will be like Jeff and not think this through. But many will turn to 3D CAD systems that still offer the perpetual or subscription solution. It will probably be the smaller 3D CAD companies that are a bit more streamlined in nature yet offer highly productive, professional and compatible 3D CAD systems. The large 3D CAD vendors have a huge overhead. It will not be easy to down size. Many heads will roll before they will face this fact. Forcing their customers to rent their software will not save them.

I predict PTC will go first. It is just becoming too fragmented to succeed and it is easily replaceable. But Catia, by far the worst 3D CAD system and the easiest to replace, will have a bit of a longer run, since Boeing’s engineering is controlled by BCS (Boeing Computer Services) and Dassault PLM. Virtually all of the aircraft companies have standardized on Catia 5 because of Boeing, no not Catia 6 (Another fiasco). The current aircraft industry illustrates the failure of not having a good 3D CAD modeling standard that offers complete compatibility.

But we have to ask this question:

Can we have a 3D CAD modeling standard?

Not as long at the industry is controlled by a myriad of incompatible 3D CAD companies. Each trying to keep themselves relevant, even after realizing that their 3D CAD paradigm is long past any innovation. You just can't add another wheel to a car to make it more efficient!

We need the manufacturing companies, colleges and relevant industry associations to get out from under the thumb of the current 3D CAD companies and start looking at the standardization of the industry. Sadly, there is not one "single" point where this idea can be formed, and from what I see, there are none with the required applicable knowledge to form it.

I have many articles focused on solving this problem. Here are a couple of my favorite and more popular articles.

The Worst to Best 3D CAD System and Why

 

So What "HAS" Gone Wrong with Engineering?

I think that more or less brings us up to date. I will be adding more comments on the state of 3D CAD and the industry to this site as the news comes out.


Please feel free to stop by our website below for a variety of articles on the State of our Industry, interesting articles on 3D CAD Productivity and a few of our projects!

 

Viewpoints on Today's 3D CAD and Engineering Industry


TECH-NET Engineering Services!

We sell and support IronCAD and ZW3D Products and provide engineering services throughout the USA and Canada!

If you are interested in adding professional hybrid modeling capabilities or looking for a new solution to increase your productivity, feel free to give me a call to answer any questions, just to chat or an on-line presentation of our products.

Joe Brouwer
206-842-0360
  

HOME | ABOUT | PRODUCTS | SEMINARS | TRAINING | TECH-NET NEWS
TECH-NET ASSOCIATES | RENDERING OF THE MONTH | CAD•CAM SERVICES
HARDWARE | TECH TIPS | EMPLOYMENT | CONTACT