CAD Visionary Speaks His Mind

Yes, You are entirely right, but what to expect when even giants like Microsoft dont employ professional programers and much less qualified System analysts and Systems Engineers?

If I would be making such program, all menu entries would be grouped by function, i.e. line drawing routines in one corner, solids in another, mesh in next and animation in last. Then, to design anything, one can draw clasic way or use solids and grouping them, using logicall operations on them, smoothing them, shelling them and so on, then for finer adjustment turning them to meshes and editing them.......

Even during composing with solids, materials could be specified, i.e. steel, copper, aluminium, glass, even wood (like they made airoplanes in WW II), paper, plastic, cloth, laque, rubber and so on, which could automatically assign to any element its naturall color, qualities and weakneses..... which would all be used in simulation later.

Then, parts could be grouped by functions, i.e. axles, cogs, plates, screws, etc.etc.

Each part would have mechanicall properties inherent to function, i.e. axle would have rotation as function, ax of rotation, direction of rotation, speed of rotation, while from material it would get weight, inertia, tensile strenght, hardness, etc. etc.

Devices constructed could also be grouped by function, i.e. airoplanes, motors, electromotors and generators, opticall or radio devices, boats, radiators.....

Each group should have "naturally" attached environmental properties and forces that could be applied, such as fluids for airoplanes, boats or heating/cooling systems, gravity (with exceptions like orbiting space stations or other null gee environments), electric and electronic devices electricall and electromagnetic properties, and so on.

Also, for body should be defined what surface is and if it is outer or inner surface (i.e. if we have closed thermos bottle or light bulb, or airoplane wing, only outside surface is under influence of fluids motion or thermal circulation, or receiving impacts, and so on.

Then, by constructing any device, it should be easy to test it, and one just have to have means to tweak inputs of system and measure output, even see it in animation, if device could turn (like windmill under influence of gas fluids more commonly known as wind, or boat in water, wentilator/propeler, turbine, motors) or move its parts..

Since measurement instruments with scales and hands sould also be simulated (as lower order devices), once completed as objects, they could be used and reused ad infinitum, and so could be any other standard element of machines, specially if they are defined and drawn according to specification sheets, so for instance, one universall analog measurement analog ot electronic scale device could be made, and just by changing scale description, measurement units, size or any naturall attribute that diferentiate one measurement device from others, one could fast have proper device to measure results of some other device which it produce in its work, right?

All an engineer should do is to connect >>output<< of device to >>input<< of measuring instrument, and results would be displayed in perfectly naturall way.....

Yes, it could be done, and I was planing this even 20 years ago, but computers were not yet able to do it, nor there was software for rendering and animation available, except to film production efects using contemporary supercomputers........

Still, it seems there is no organized lead to make thing go in right direction, or people with vision cannot understand computers and programers cannot see things as visionary see them......

I am in unique situation, being Systems Engineer in Information Technology and programmer, inventor and son of inventor, raised among machines and devices, and having IQ of 2.14 in logic thinking :-))

I have one little problem (beside big financiall ones) and I wonder if someone could help: I would like to find CAD/CAE program with built in simulation capability that is multidomain, i.e. fluid motion, thermal, opticall, mechanicall, magnetic, electromagnetic and electric........

Closest thing I have found is SimulationX (there is couple of others, too), at least according to advertisement on WEB, but trial version look pretty badly cripled or they advertise just their wish list.........

I have planed to make such program myself, but for this I have to hire physicist and unfortunately I did not accrued enough funds for that as yet......

Also, what I see is that people making such programs go entirely wrong way, asking user to input formulas that apply, instead to decide which formulas are applicable from design itself, how I would make it.........

Good program like this that would work my way would be mighty helpful to every engineer, and I could make routine for superoptimization if everything is described by parameters accesible with program!

That would surely mean less "per aspera" and more "ad Astra" for any engineer, and specially for inventors like me!

If anybody is allready working on such program, we could cooperate, or if anyone use good program with such capabilities, please let me know!

Financiall support for inventors would also be good idea, specially if fund would be made from investments of coleagues engineers, where one share would equal one $ or Euro (which seems to be more stable than $), and inventors would get loans to develop their inventions, after board of most capable engineers rewiev their idea for feasibility and if necesary give objections if they think this could not work. That way engineers would support other engineers that are creative and capable of inventing new things, if great Tesla did not have had financiall support from Mr. Westinghouse, perhaps today would be no computers to speak of, save maybe mechanicall ones....

Inventors would be obligated to return the loan even if unsucessful (which would be unlikely if board of Engineers fund would believe something is feasible) so fund would not diminish, and if sucessfull, (which means if production and marketing has started) they would be obligated to pay fund royalty of 10% of profit they would make...

This money would be divided on all shareholders in proportion to sum they invested in fund, and it would be real money, not shares that change value up and down.....

Whoever need money could retract part of that person's shares in the fund, and fund would be exactly that much smaller while value of shares would remain constant.

Since shares would in reality be money, that could be kept in the bank and would behave as ordinary savings, so nobody would lose any money, even loans to inventors would have same interes rate as fund itself, to prevent loss of value because of eventuall inflation.........

If for instance, Mr. Gates would be member of such fund and invest some milions in range of his donations for charity, that would just make him more rich, but would be imnense help for inventors and therefore for human society in generall, much more than simple >>give to be spent<< charity that is not realy helping as people do nothing to change their circumstances....

Marijan Pollak, IT SE/SA 1st Class, Instructor and Team Leader

Republic of Croatia, Europe

__________________