How do you rate yourself in ProE

[alkokabani]

Hi,

How does one gauge his/her level of experience using ProE?

Any input/comments are greatly appreciated.

Thank you!
Edited by: alkokabani

 

[Jacoolo]

First what comes to my mind is the comparison to structure of matter.

There are many steps in the meantime and then You approach atom structure. I feel, I am personaly close to this, and for a long time I was confident there is nothing more. But, take a look, quarks are there. Never ending process of learning

 

[[-Skint-]]

I have worked with many pro-e users in the past as I am sure most of us have, and many of these pro-e users claim to be professional users based on thier skills. We know ofcourse that many of them are not. Bad habbits are a problem and I am sure Bart will agree that only training and further education will get rid of those.


When you can take any object nomatter how complex and build a safe and secure model, which can be altered without pro-e dying on you, then you can call yourself a professional pro-e user. Everything below that I guess is tough to gauge, especially considering that each user has his/her own way of achieving things. I was once told by a pro-e guru, that " Aslong as you reach your goal and your design intent in there, there is no right or wrong way to pro-e". He was right to some extend... but there can be no underestimating the impoartance of correct sequence in the model build stages... Some would argue this is down to the engineer rather than pro-e knowledge... butit all counts.


Are you going for a job or something and wondering if You are capable etc ? Its a good question!

 

[alkokabani]

Thank you both for your input. I was just wondering.

cheers

 

[Jacoolo]

< http-equiv="Content-" content="text/; charset=utf-8">< name="ProgId" content="Word.">< name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">< name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11">



Suppose that is not what You were expecting, not that accurate?

well, that is the attitude of people with experience and knowledge.
More You know, less confident you will be to claim You are capable to take every demand, because You know the risk.
Less You know, more You feel confident because You are not aware of all mechanics behind. That is strictly visible in the managemnent.

Do You know people which push them self hard to climb high in company structures with a great experience background?
I knew none. Why? Becasue when You are experienced You are aware of risk, and You do not want to screw it up. But those wko know nothing, are not bothering of this. Result - usually You are up to solve their failures.

 

[design-engine]

Its hard to use a rate system for Pro/E users. One user does drawings and never touches models. Another user is a lite modeler however uses Mechanica often. Another over uses curves and surfaces and makes a mess out of surfacing but is killer at mechanism. Then there are those that are killer at everything and their secret may be that they simply learn fast.

Contract agencies ask us to rate users often and use the hours schema ...

2000 hours in a year * how many years you use Pro/E - all the paper pushing = hours on Pro/E

This above method is how most of the contract agencies seam to like explaining your skill set to hiring managers.
Edited by: design-engine

 

[jblanck]

To me it breaks done to two questions.


How wide?


How deep?


How wide: Pro-E covers a broad range of uses: part design, assembly design, drawings, sheetmetal, mechanism, mechanica, surfacing etc. (Check out the list of forums here at MCAD Central)


How deep: How well do you know each of the topics listed above? As others have mentioned, the job often dictates that I focus on a few of these areas but I try to branch out and get training (or train myself) on those areas I don't normally use day to day.


Frankly, work would be too boring for me if I didn't try to stretch myself this way.

 

[audctrl]

To me usingPro/E is more an art form. There are infinitely many ways to create the same thing. 10 people might do it 10 different ways. There are so many ways to define a good user, but in the end it is a matter of opinion. Some of the things I look for is design intent, consistancy between similar models and parent child relationships. Choosing stable references really reduces the amount of time spent changing a model.


Like DE commented on the hours schema, maybe those agencies should also track how many hours the user spent in "Resolve Mode"

 

[design-engine]

"Its not how fast you model something but how fast you change it twenty times" - bart brejcha

using Pro/E is much like an art form....Only art does not usually follow a specific process. Once art becomes a process then we call that design.

Resolve mode has been resolved for wildfire 5.0... anyone play w/ that much?
Edited by: design-engine

 

[[-Skint-]]

Resolve mode has been resolved for wildfire 5.0... anyone play w/ that much?

I have not been rubbish enough yet to have a failure

to resolve.

 

[magnusod]

I had one casted part where a small change, removing a square hole on the edge, caused a lot of failures. As I hadn't made it from the start it's always time consuming to find the reason and usually I use supress, supress, supress.....and then starts investigating on the backup model or on a copy_original.prt

I was curious how it behaved in WF5 and it was amazing how smooth it went. Since it's not regenerating failed features and changes the feature name to red colored text on failed features it's very easy to get a quick overview. Change the first failed feature and...wham...you get almost instant feedback of all the features that will regenerate again.

To me this is a huge time saving and an improvement I've been waiting for since almost starting using ProE.