Location: Destin, FL SolidWorks Center Console Hi Guys, I'm new to the forum and wanted to post a center console design I constructed in SolidWorks. Location: Australia I have been using solidworks and would NOT recommend it.
Yes its a great modeller and you can do anything with it but every release for the last 5 years has been full of bugs.
If you have been using 2009 Sp0, Sp1 or Sp2 you better upgrade to sp2.1 and go back and check all of your drawings.
Location: Sweden, Sodertalje Yes, a good rule is to not _ever_ touch work-related or important files with a Sp 0.x version of Solidworks! However, I find it very capable and trustable in most aspects, and the amount of bugs is not larger than in any other high-end software. Surface modeling is not that hard once one master the spline-handling in SW and it does hulls well. Guest62110524 Previous Member   so kite, could you double check a developed surface that came from say Rhino 4 or maxsurf, against SW?
Location: Sweden, Sodertalje If I understand you correct - Nope, SW don't have develop-capability. Rhino don't do them either from what I have seen, even though a Rhino-4 plug is claiming to do so. Catia is more bang for the buck, and would do a nice package if it had Icem's capabilities. One can add in Aerohydro's Multisurf or Surfaceworks to get some support for this, but I guess I never will do any other hulls than composite ones. Originally Posted by kite If I understand you correct - Nope, SW don't have develop-capability.
Kite - you can trick solidworks (and the others) to flatten any shape that has single curvature. If the plate has a strain of say 10%, then even though workshop will show the same shape as Rhino and it all looks ok, if it has this much strain then it wont pull up properly. Location: Sweden, Sodertalje alidesigner - Oh, I didn't understand that it was 2D we were talking, I were referring to 3D shape, bends in both directions. And I have been taking care of Rhino files a number of times, so I know that it can bring a lot of cost for the customers trusting in designers delivering production files from it.
Workshop et al, just allows small yards even large yards to minimise their wastage and also produce plate in kit form. Originally Posted by alidesigner I have been using solidworks and would NOT recommend it. Location: Australia Dont judge software by the person presenting it, judge it by what it can and cant do. Freeship problem » Thread Tools Show Printable Version Email this Page Display Modes Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode Search this Thread Advanced Search Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Which center console did you like best?
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. After buildig a solid experience in Solid Works for about 5 years, I took the step to design and develop a boat in Solid Works. Location: New Orleans I've just finished a project where we used Solid Works for a small (40ft) boat design.
I did the modeling of the hull and some internal structures, you could even go further and get layer by layer of glass for every exact location, this gives you most realistic center of weight, BOM of needed materials, etc. Never tried to compare it to the reality as my personal project gets hooked of to a smaller one also getting form in SW.
I really like the mass properties function for finding weight, displacement and center of gravity, but fairing 3d hull planks is a PITA. Originally Posted by ClarkT I've just finished a project where we used Solid Works for a small (40ft) boat design. The attached cabin house was done as a quick study in SW as an alternative for an existing design.
Location: MX I don't find solidworks practical to model hull surfaces, surfaces are easier to control and easier to fair on rhino or maxsurf or any other hull design software, is true that is possible to model almost any surface in solidworks but again the true control of your surface is not as the one you may have in rhino or a hull design software.
Location: Belgium (Europe) the shell method I prefer the shell method. What interests me is what you mean by ruled surface, as my problem for now is that I don't know if my shape is fair enough. Rendering of my current Moth design which will be built this winter with assistance of a fellow student.
The boat is to have the Miller system (acknowledgements to both Rich Miller and Ian Ward by the way!) and I was a bit concerned about the required distance between the front foil and the centreboard (i.e. Solidworks is very good for modelling objects with significant volume and it is excellent for designing solid or moulded parts. For structure built out of thin plate parts you are better off using a system that is tailored for that purpose (i.e. However, as far as I can tell it is best to use something like Andrew's MaxSurf to do the lofting and hydrostatics. Westley, I primarily work with aluminum and I do all my hull fairing with lines, frames, bulkheads, stringers, etc.

All of the teams use other CAD systems in addition to Maxsurf for detailed appendage design, Finite Element Analysis and general design, and Solidworks is one of the most widely used, however Maxsurf remains the dominant system for actual development of AC hull shapes.
Originally Posted by Andrew Mason Oneworld used Maxsurf for their hull design, as did Alinghi, Team NZ and most of the other teams.
Location: Cape Town SW as design tool We are at present building a radius chine design by Dudley Dix.
Originally Posted by alumar We are at present building a radius chine design by Dudley Dix.
I appreciate your encouragement, it's nice knowing your enjoy using sw, and I'm amazed that you could model an entire boat without any training or experience. When I last imported a 3D Autocad drawing into Solidworks, my zero thickness Hull surfaces, all become 2D flat surfaces and the frames remained 3d objects. Location: Sweden Iges You have to convert the dwg file into a Iges file.
I work for a aluminum boat building company and we just puchased Solidworks 2004 in the hopes that it could give us a competitive edge. SW isn't as good at producing crazy organic shapes like a human face, in which case you'd want to use something like Rhino.
The best part though is the ability (IF the model is built correctly) to create parametric features, such as hull frames that will update if you alter the original hull shape. You can model hulls in Solidworks, I've done it a couple of times, but it's much better to originate them in something like Maxsurf which is easier and gives you the all important hydrostatic data to feedback into your design as it evolves. During the summer of 2008, I completed a short contract with Seabotix Ltd., a leading manufacturer of small but very capable ROV systems. I also provided advice on Solidworks 3D model organization, document management (revision control & accurate BOM generation), and best engineering practices using Solidworks. Location: argentina Hydrofoil exercise to validate CFD analysis This is intended for newbies in CFD (like me). Location: Port Gamble, Washington, USA If you want to validate your ability to do a CFD model, I suggest starting with a configuration for which experimental data exist. If you can reproduce the results for a simple straight foil, then you can move on to L foils. I'm using SolidWorks FlowSimulation, the only CFD tool I have access to, it's an external analysis, automatic grid is set to his maximum (8).
Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria) I have used the Cosmos FlowSimulation (now SW Floworks) some 8-9 years ago, and though I don't remember all the details of it, I do recall that it wasn't giving much control and choices to the user. Now, if the mesh is what is visible in this pic: , then it is absolutely insufficient for any serious analysis. You need to run some simulations of known cases first, as Tom Speer said, in order to compare the reliability of the numerical outputs from your CFD.
Location: Finland Have you already done a simple 2D CFD simulation of an airfoil? Originally Posted by Joakim Have you already done a simple 2D CFD simulation of an airfoil?
I think it is best to use the same software you are going to use for 3D, but just use it for 2D while learning. Your foil is surface piercing, and Flowsim does not do free surface, so you cannot expect very good results even if you had something to validate against. A good friend of mine is considering purchasing this program for a project he is working on, so we would appreciate any feedback about it. Mikko, I use to think that mirroring is a good assumption for standard (almost vertical) daggerboards and rudders under a relatively big almost-planar hull.
Here are my outcomes with a partially refined cartesian grid all around the horizontal branch of the L foil.
Location: Finland Your resolution on the horisontal wing is sufficient now, but you should use more on the vertical part too. It is seriously sophisticated, their new hull model is a quantum leap above max-surf et al. Not saying this is always the case, but I make some cash out of the fact that it do happen.
It also allows 'designers' to calculate the amount of plate require for a job without ever having to leave the office. I must say regarding surface handling there are much better solutions, as for instance Uni Graphics, but at a whole different price level.
You might consider leaving out the 2nd centreboard case and save some weight unless you are convinced of the best location for it - see the current thread in the forum about foiler design (as im sure you already have). Yesterday I read the thread you mentioned, found a lot of interesting things posted there and came to a similar conclusion.
It is not a hull design program and you would be better off using one of the dedicated hull design programs for that function.
Without any training and no experience with any other drawing program I managed to model the entire boat, thus allowing for (manual) calculation of stability, weight etc. The training we got was pretty good, but even so it took me a while to get my head round things. In fact you can do this in SW as well, but it involves splitting the hull into two parts at the waterline, and then measuring the volumes etc of the underwater section - which is cumbersome and time consuming.

Attached is a 3D file of an hydrofoil, the idea is to calculate and compare results from different sources, given some predefined conditions. It is too rough, and hence misses all the important things which are happening close to the foil surface.
Right now, without prior benchmark testing, I wouldn't feel too confident about the numbers you got. FlowSimulation is pretty the same old tool you describe, computational grid can be refined manually but I didn't reach that point yet. Speer is certainly in a better position to evaluate your numbers and compare them with real-life data. EasyCFD is a very well-made, easy to use and flexible low-cost tool, although with limited choice of turbulence models. You can use it as a verification tool for CFD, but you won't learn anything about grids, turbulence models etc.
You should refine the initial mesh closer to the foil, and also use a local initial mesh, with more pronounced refinement. It uses wall functions to model the boundary layer close to the model, so you won't need nearly as dense a bodymesh as with many traditional codes. Then you can get rid of the conventional case when you switch to foils - or are you planning to use different foils and positions depending on conditions? We do a preliminary structural design system (named Workshop) for plate vessels and we link this to ShipConstructor for detailed design. I think it is easier to do as much as possible in one program for example to make sure that all parts fit to one another. Someday I hope to get some experience using that program, after reading information on it, some time ago, it was my first choice. I thought any hull plating in Solidworks has to have thickness otherwise, its a surface that can't be used to calculate weight.
The mesh type was fixed and the resolution was roughly controlled with a slider, with no further info. My hope is someone else run this analysis using stronger tools like Aqua or OpenFoam in order to see where I'm standing. I am not saying that it is not possible, just that one should be cautious before trusting it. It's good enough for preliminary work, especially for blunt bodies (like vehicles), but not so good for lifting bodies when lots of separation is present.
I agree with Tom that you should validate with some experimental results, not against another CFD result.
Unfortunately, xflr5 can't create 3D bodies of arbitrary shape and has no import capabilities.
These 'newer' yards want an idiot proof construction to bridge the huge gap in their lack of understanding, they just want a simple jigsaw puzzle and complain when it doesn't fit, computer says so type of attitude! As such these 'designers' need some frame of reference that their hull shape and hence plate can be formed. ShipConstructor works within Autocad and is specifically set up for doing steel and aluminum vessels.
TouchCAD also does all major weight and center of gravity calculations and compile it in a worksheet (all parts have their individual weight or weight per area unit property). I certainly got my money's worth from our guys, and on a few occasions they have gone away and worked out how to do something, to show me. Speer, that was my first attempt, in fact I searched for T foils (mainly from Moths) but couldn't find any CFD analysis, so decided to make my own move. It is difficult to find the 3D file in wich each analysis is based on, that's why I published my own file. A simple 3D tool which can be used for quick analysis of cases like this one is XFLR5, which is open-source by the way. Hence I'm trying to minimize them setting the foil vertical and well submerged, with 0? AoA on the horizontal plane. That's a case where free-surface effects should be terrific, hence I can't model it with FS. For those who are interested in the software used: The hull has been designed with Hullform 6 whereas the rendering has been produced using SolidWorks and the use of the VRML-output feature of Hullform 9. The built in unfolding feature allows me to unfold just about any shape and automatically send it to the Unfold view where I can compile a complete panel layout and optimize the use of material without loosing the dynamic link to the 3D model or any of its rather extensive parametric unfolding features (automatic X-Y coordinate measurements, panel and point numbering, alingment marks, overlaps etc.).
So after a year and a half I can now create some pretty interesting shapes and have just designed an intricate deck layout matched to a hull, with curves in all sorts of directions.
The way it was made, it was a scarcely useful software except for a rough check that the flow will go in the right direction inside a 3-way valve or similar. When you have learned how to do it accurately for a simple 2D case, you have a chance of getting good results for the real case in a 3D simulation. TouchCAD does all this in a single unit and with no limitation to the number of panles that can be used.

Boat manufacturer sarasota fl 2014
Boat rentals in st petersburg florida jobs
Aluminum boat kits canada prices