What software is UG?

　what software is UG? Many designers in the conversation, will mention the software UG, for, not familiar with UG software, or designers novice, UG software is a riddle-like existence. So, what is UG software? To put it simply, UG is a three-dimensional software, the following, a look at today's UG NX software introduction!

Ug

Recommended: ug4.0 software download

UG created the beginning of the name is Unigraphics, the literal meaning is unified graphics, the intrinsic meaning is to unified CAD world, as the martial arts leader.

Unigraphics CAD/CAM/CAE System provides a process based product design environment, so that product development from design to processing to truly achieve seamless integration of data, thus optimizing the enterprise's product design and manufacturing. UG-oriented process-driven technology is the key technology of virtual product development, in the environment of process-driven technology, the user's whole product and the accurate data model can keep relevant in the whole process of product development, and realize the concurrent engineering effectively.

This software not only has the strong solid modelling, surface modeling, virtual assembly and the production of engineering drawings and other design functions; Moreover, the design process can be carried out by finite element analysis, mechanism kinematics analysis, dynamic analysis and simulation, improve the reliability of the design, at the same time, can be established three-dimensional model directly generate numerical control code for product processing, Subsequent handlers support various types of CNC machine tools. In addition, it provides two development languages Ug/open Grip,ug/open API simple and easy to learn, the realization of many functions, user-friendly development of special CAD system. Specifically, the software has the following characteristics:

L) has a unified database, the real realization of the CAD/CAE/CAM and other modules without data exchange between the free switch, can implement concurrent engineering.

2 using compound modeling technology, Entity modeling, Surface modeling, wireframe modeling, display geometry modeling and parametric modeling can be integrated into one.

3) The modeling and editing methods based on features (such as hole, convex, glue, groove, chamfer, etc.) are used as solid modeling basis, and the image is intuitive, similar to the traditional design method of engineers, and can be driven by parameters.

4 The surface design is based on non-uniform rational B-spline, which can be used to produce complex curved surfaces, especially for the design of automobile shape and turbine blades.

5) Drawing function is strong, can be very convenient from three-dimensional solid model directly generated two-dimensional engineering drawings. can be in accordance with the ISO standard and GB dimensioning dimensions, shape and position tolerance and Chinese character description. And can directly to do the rotation of the entity, Step-section and axis mapping to generate a variety of cross-sectional views, to enhance the usefulness of drawing engineering drawings.

6) Taking Parasolid as the core of entity modeling, the entity modelling function is in the leading position. At present, the famous Cad/cae/cam software are used as the basis of solid modeling.

7 provides a good interface of two development tools grip (graphical INTERACTIVE programing) and Ufunc (USER FUNCTION), and through the high-level language interface, the UG graphics function and high-level language computing function tightly combined.

8 has a good user interface, most of the functions can be achieved through the icon, when the object operation, with automatic inference function, at the same time, in each operation step, there are corresponding prompts information, so that users make the right choice.

Look at these you may not feel easy to understand, may feel that some characteristics are not clear, the following as far as possible objective summary of some users have used the user experience after UG:

User Experience One:

I think the modeling of UG and ProE compared to the latter some inflexible, editing is not too flexible, for people who are not proficient in software a little problem will take half a day to solve. And not allowed to have the slightest error, can only say ProE parameters are too high. But compared with M-cam, AutoCAD three-dimensional modeling compared to simpler, more powerful functions.

UG features strong modeling, design, processing can be integrated, the early stage of analysis, simulation, can connect, this is the strongest is no other software can be compared, if you are in a factory to do modeling files. The mold partner. The processing file turns to turn out, you can think of UG is how good.

User Experience Two:

I first contact is ProE, now learning is UG, do not know is because I first learn how to break clothes or how, always feel ProE relatively simple, to modify what is easier, but for UG I feel. UG You do not need to use a large number of parameters or a large number of data to determine a feature, often this is my own why every time when sketching the always constraint conflict. Too many constraints, ProE overall function is also more powerful, but the UG file management is much better than ProE, and more convenient, and then for the moving line of the machine ... UG requirements are not so high. Compare the picture again, UG looks much more.

But I always find it hard to learn ... Maybe there are proe in the subconscious.

User Experience Three:

I as a professional automotive body mold CAD/CAM engineer, proficient in several CAD/CAM software, I think UG is mainly suitable for large cars, aircraft plant to establish complex digital models, and pro/e is mainly suitable for small and medium-sized enterprises to quickly establish a relatively simple digital model.

When modeling is more complex, often any parameter is useless, I generally use pro/e to establish a simpler wireframe, surface, and then go to UG inside the establishment of advanced surface, chamfer. Most of the parameters have been deleted because the product has been repeatedly changed. The two kinds of software have their own advantages, they should be mixed modeling to achieve the best results. Parts larger, more complex time, processing generally with UG do a number of models, Cimatron do rough machining, UG finishing.

User Experience Four:

I have been using pro/e for several years and have recently been learning ug. I have always felt that the two software modeling approach is very close (in fact, this is indeed the case), but it may be UG has not been home for the sake of the total feeling that a lot of places are very not fit. The following a few questions, please expert advice:

1. About mixed modeling.

One of the biggest features of UG is hybrid modeling, which I understand is that there is no correlation feature in a model. As in the modeling process, you can create the base point of the feature structure by moving and rotating the coordinate system. These features seem to have no location dependencies with previously created features. Because navigator trees (like the model tree in pro/e) do not have a record of coordinate system transformations. Also, as with basic CURVE, there is no record of a parameterized feature in Navigator tree, for example, if I want to change an arc curve to a spline curve, it is very difficult, and sometimes the change does not affect the change of the sub feature. In pro/e, the whole relativity of feature is emphasized, and all the characters have strict parent-child relationship according to the Order of creation and reference. Modifications to the parent feature must be reflected on the child feature. I have asked about this question in Shanghai, eds UG Technical engineer, they said that the full relevance can be said to be a double-edged sword, for experienced designers, design changes will be very convenient, and for inexperienced designers, it is very easy to modify the error can not be generated, at this time the hybrid modeling is more applicable.

2, about Datum point.

The datum point in pro/e is a very powerful feature, and all reference points are fully related and change as the parent features change. In UG, in many cases, the dots are irrelevant. For example, select the midpoint of one side of a cuboid to make reference to another feature. When the length of the cuboid is enlarged, the position of the midpoint is not changed with the change of the length of the side, and the feature position does not change, so the design intention cannot be reflected in real time. (may also be my ug way too shallow, not master)

3, about curve and sketch.

All sketched sections in pro/e are parameterized dimension-driven, while in UG only sketch sections are parameterized, while curve are nonparametric features. I do not know whether my understanding is correct? I used to read a UG book (Quark's), the above surface modelling example, the curve is constructed with curve, like spline curves are constructed by inputting intermediate control points, I think it can be very difficult to modify the model by modifying curve. In addition, in UG, it is not possible to allow sketch in the pro/e.

4, surface modelling aspect.

Many people say that the UG surface function is very powerful, compared with pro/e (2000 version), I think it is true. UG not only provides a richer surface construction tool, but also can control the precision and shape of the surface by some other parameters (relatively few in pro/e). In addition, the UG surface analysis tools are also very rich.

5, about the interface.

pro/e Although there is a Windows "face", but it is actually ported from the UNIX operating system of a DOS program, the Windows file type link does not support the launch pro/e is actually executing a proe2000.bat batch file. And based on the security of UNIX, the multiple save on a file will produce several versions of the same file, which is very different from UG. In pro/e, a working path is a very important concept for an assembly, and if you do not set the search path in Config.pro, the parts in the Assembly will fail when they are not in the work path, because opening the assembly means assembling all the subassembly and parts into memory, The program cannot find the part without the search path setting. In UG it does not seem to be the same, open an assembly can sometimes take the partially load method, so that the system resources will occupy less.

6, about the operation.

In UG, many of the normalized features (similar to the point-and-drop features in pro/e) are finely divided, such as pocket, slot, which is equivalent to merging several pro/e features into one. But in the pro/e more is the sketch characteristic, perhaps does not have the UG modelling efficiency to be high, but has the greater flexibility. For example, in UG if you want to change a round hole to square hole can be very difficult, because this is two different characteristics, and in the pro/e, but it is very easy things.

These are my two software comparisons, probably because I am more familiar with pro/e, I personally think that if the design does not have too many surface modeling, the use of pro/e will be more flexible. Of course, if you want to compose the surface, UG may be better.

Need to explain, my knowledge of UG is not deep, some of the above views are not correct place, I also hope to communicate with you, thank you!

User Experience Five:

1, one of the biggest features of UG is the hybrid modeling

2, can control the correlation by the way of the constraint. UG18 SKETCH in the relevant points, is parameterized, points can also be labeled size!

3, the Taiwan version of the book is suspected, but also illustrates the model of another method of fraught.

One thing to be clear, for the curve structure of the surface and the entity, modify the curve as can make the entity or surface changes!

4, the surface is needless to say!

5, UG is also a workstation transplant over. The interface is relatively friendly.

UG file format only PRT, can contain engineering drawings and processing all information!

6, UG in the round hole into holes (the other is the same) is very simple things, redefine the characteristics of the use of the line can be!

User Experience Six:

Talk about the format of the conversion! UG Core parasolid is generally above the three-dimensional software are supported only ProE adhere to the simplest! Most of the processing software is Mastercam,proe only through the original iges or step.

User Experience Seven:

Let me also say two words:

1, it should be said that the comprehensive ability of UG is very powerful: from product design to mold design to processing to analysis to almost all-encompassing;

2, pro emphasis is simply the whole related product design, appears to be a bit of force single potential thin;

3, as for which is better, in fact, to see how far we can use, for most users I believe that both software can complete the functions we require;

4, if the requirements of versatile, then of course, the preferred UG, if the single do product design can be but must learn to concentrate not simple to say which software good key is how much you can use it to do how many things!

5, from the beginner's point of view, my personal opinion is the introduction of UG and self-study can be quicker to start!

6, GUI interface, function can be remembered icon, at a glance, and now the UG data are also many!

User Experience Eight:

Learn mold design, UG is the first choice, mold standard parts have, a simple set of molds, 5-minute mold, 5-minute mold embryo, and then mounted thimble and other standard parts, cloth waterway, 30 minutes to fix, but you have to have the actual experience of mold design is good.

User Experience Nine:

Support with UG, because the ProE of the module is indeed not compared to UG. I have used ProE for two years, with UG a year, please advise more.

User Experience Ten:

UG for hybrid modeling, can be local parameterization (of course, fully parameterized more no problem), for model update benefit.

PTC for fully parameterized, edit update small design (home appliances) can, large (aircraft, car), an update does not crash, its refresh time will affect the designer's ideas.

User Experience 11:

PRO/E is very market-oriented, want to be AutoCAD occupy China CAD market, in foreign countries there is a software IntelliCAD, the software is no better than AutoCAD, I heard that many functions than AutoCAD also strong, but because of the development of domestic piracy, and Autodesk Company's advanced mind, thus AutoCAD quickly occupy the domestic market, which is rarely seen in other countries, PRO/E also learned the practice of AutoCAD, let piracy occupy the Chinese market, will be more people, enterprises also recognized, so gradually will form a scale effect.

There is a rule in the market the best is not necessarily the most used, Windows operating system is not the best, but the most, especially that broken 98. In order to help UG company better against PTC, is not recommended more pirated some UG?

Also with the UG company is also old stupid, why not write Chinese cast and document it, so that the expansion of the UG market will play a certain role.

User Experience 12:

I was going to talk about UG and pro/e, but think about it, on the actual use of everyone, is almost the same, but each have their own use habits. Since 96 I began to contact and use UG, 98 began with pro/e, now UG and pro/e in my work in the same position, the best two software can complement each other. For me personally, pro/e in favor of design, UG more strong, in all aspects can be handy, for some messy face ah, line ah, change mold ah, change design ah, ug use or more smooth, at least at any time to remove parameters, reduce the feature tree. PRO/E also has the advantage in the assembly design aspect, the sketch function is not UG can compare, therefore, looks at the personal custom.

See so many believe that all of these software in all have a general understanding of it! In fact, the user's personal use habits accounted for a large number of factors.