I don't understand that statement. Are pen or pencil drawings only useful if
the part is built? Of course not. CAD is simply a way to document and
design. In concept no different than pen/paper. A CAD drawing can help
determine if a part should be built at all. For my uw-housing design I first
made a model of my camcorder with all it's associated parts (monitor,
battery pack etc.). Using that I could measure how large my case would have
to be. I could easily move things around and see how it affected other
components. I suppose I could have simply started building but I'm glad I
planned properly and built only once.
If you have integrated CAD/CAM then you move way beyond that. When we add
Computer Aided Prototyping we're really talking progress.
To each their own I guess. Perhaps the mechanical designs tackled by ERPS
are not complicated enough to warrant anything beyond pen/paper. I've had no
exposure to them so I have no way to judge that. I'm surprised at the
resistance to tools widely in use throughout the engineering community
though. It's not like it's a fad or radical to use CAD.
Sander
> But (and forgive me while I show my ignorance, but I have an
> untested assumption here) doesn't a CAD part have to be built for the
> CAD work to be useful?
>
> -R
>
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
