ug和proe比较（Comparison of UG and proe）.docVIP

ug和proe比较（Comparison of UG and proe） 1. comparison I as a professional automotive mould CAD/CAM engineer, proficient in several foreign CAD/CAM software, I think UG is mainly suitable for large cars, aircraft factory establish complex mathematical model, and PRO/E is mainly suitable for small and medium enterprises quickly establish a relatively simple mathematical model. In the more complex modeling, it is often no parameter is useful, I generally use PRO/E to start a relatively simple line frame, curved surface, and then go to UG inside the advanced surface of the establishment, chamfering. Most of the parameters have been deleted because of repeated changes to the product. The two software has its own advantages, and it should be mixed modeling to achieve the best results. When the parts are larger and more complex, the processing is done in UG, Cimatron, roughing and UG finishing. 2. comparison two Ive been using Pro/E for several years, and recently Im studying UG. Ive always felt that the two software is very close to modeling thinking (as a matter of fact, as a whole), but it may be that UG hasnt arrived home yet, and it always feels very out of place. Here are a few questions, please give your advice: (1) mixed modeling. One of the biggest features of UG is hybrid modeling, which I understand is the ability to allow for no correlation in a model. As in modeling, you can create the base points of the feature construction by moving and rotating the coordinate system. These features appear to have no correlation with previously created features without location. Because there is no coordinate system transformation in NAVIGATOR TREE (similar to the model tree in Pro/E). And as create BASIC CURVE, nor as a parametric records in NAVIGATOR TREE, for example, if I want to put a circular spline curve into is very difficult, and sometimes change does not affect the sub feature. In Pro/E, the full correlation of features is emphasized, and all features are closely rela