I know 100% my Noob status is still in full effect when what took me 2 hours to do in Shark would have taken me 15 minutes to do in Creo. It's very similar to learning a second or third language. Tough going...

Some progress. I am messing around with lighting, perspective and render. It will simply take time to get more familiar with it.

Thanks, UG. But I think I am close to simply calling this a learning experience. My rendition, while bright and yellow, is nowhere near the car nor are my surfaces. I think I have done enough to be very, very dangerous and not in the good way. I am still very unstable on what is really going on behind the curtain. I need to get into the "meat" of the Shark by doing complete parts/assemblies and creating drawings.

I should create final observations / questions list of what I learned and experienced making the Mustang. Soon enough.

It's a really noble effort - well done !

I think it proves there is always a way around issues

(there are issues)

I look forward to understanding the lessons you've learned - and perhaps the potholes, brick walls and game stoppers you've encountered.

If there's time, it would be great to extract examples of those sub-processes that you consider particularly problematic

Such a debate can surely improve our tools !!

As an aside - I also think it's near impossible to make a 100% successful job on a non-live project - there just isn't the right impetus

Well done Dean

Jol

Hi NT FLA
Awesome looking work!
Thanks for sharing the journey so far.

So, as a bit of a wrap up / take away from your explorations to date would you say,
Shark is a bit of a generalist, great for enthusiastic hobbyists up to small businesses that are making parts, doing presentations, preparing various workshop drawings, dealing with random files in various formats that float in off the street, that sort of thing?

And if someone asked you to punch out a panel for their Mustang, (remember you have a Computerized CNC panel punching press sitting in the back corner, just waiting idly for such a request) You "could" muscle your way through the project with shark as a one of to get the job done?

But if you are Elon Musk designing the Tesla 10 or an architect doing complex high rise architectural drawings, you are not going to be using shark.
There are other pricier option that are available out there more tailored to specific needs?

Thats the way I read Shark / Viacad products, or do you think it has more depth to it?

Edited by user Monday, February 26, 2018 8:26:26 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

MaiFy,

Thanks. Although I had to keep in mind what my Boondoggle was intended to do. That was to learn Shark by jumping into the fire. I already knew that Shark, like all other modelers, all derive themselves from Calculus books and would do the basics. I simply did something in Shark that I have done in a handful of other software so I could use contrast and comparison to help me along the way. This is why I chose to do a surface project. However, one modeling project does not make that person an expert by any stretch of the imagination in any software. So, please take my observations from that perspective. As I model and document more and more items my thoughts may change...but for now:

Shark is what I will refer to as "Old School" CAD with some new blood added into the mix. If I could time-warp back to 1987/88 and Shark was as it is today, it would have been cutting edge technology. VC/Shark reminds me of Intergraph I/EMS very, very much, which I ran from 1987-1992. Another story. But 1989/90 is when I started my Pro/E life after having been on a handful of systems previously. But, us Geezers noticed immediately how Pro/ENGINEER was the game changer in our industry. Mine happened to be automotive development. Pro/E's parametric modeling roasted every other system on the planet until Catia copied it for V5 five years later and Mike Payne left PTC to "write" SolidWorks in 1995(ish) (still don't know how he got away with it) but I digress.

On the whole, so far I see Shark as damn powerful for the price but with some glaring weak links that would make it a dangerous choice for a really intense and deep project. I am not sure it would be the software of choice for something super complex or iterative in nature. For most things that may be one or "two" off in nature...VC/Shark seems capable.

If Mr. Musk knocked on my door asking I design and engineer the next Falcon "Heavy", I would first ask him why he littered space with that horrific roadster and wait for the answer. Once that occurred, I would tell him the only way I would sign up for the project is I must be able to use Creo, Catia or NX in that order. (Sorry UGMENTALCASE). These software are the industry standard, in my opinion, for intense, long data cycle projects and are highly robust and stable...soup to nuts.

:o)

Edited by user Monday, February 26, 2018 1:00:59 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified