Ansys SpaceClaim vs. Autodesk MeshMixer

I will highly recommend Ansys SpaceClaim, or in fact any Ansys to my colleague because of its wide spread acceptability around the globe and around the different industries. Thus, the results provided by Ansys simulation tools, given the proper boundary conditions are properly simulated, are highly reliable. Also, learning to utilize Ansys tools in the engineering design activities also helps in career advancements.

Incentivized

Autodesk MeshMixer is best for repairing STL files and basic modifications toward 3D printing. It is excellent for hollowing out models and adding escape holes for SLA printing or lost-wax casting. Its CSG (Boolean) functions to combine different meshes are good too and seldom cause the program to crash. There is even an integrated algorithm to optimize the layout of multiple files on a print bed in case of small-batch production. Autodesk MeshMixer's sculpting tools are there yet limited and there are a few better alternatives. Best of all, it is completely free.

• It efficiently divide/split the surface into multiple fragments as per the user's requirements which helps in easy application of loads and boundary conditions.
• It helps in reducing the model complexity with it's efficient defeaturing options in order to reduce the model complexity.
• It also helps in making quick model changes as per the simulation results in order to improve the design and thus helps in quick FEA of the improvised design.

Incentivized

• Auto-repair function works fast, and if it does not completely cover all problem areas, manual fixes will work 99.5% of the time.
• Remeshing algorithm is fairly slow but does a wonderful job in creating meshes with homogeneous or adaptive triangulation.
• It contains a comprehensive set of tools to optimize and prepare STL files for 3D printing, such as hollowing and support generation.

• With time, Ansys SpaceClaim has evolved so much in its functionality and Ansys has added so many useful and complex features into it, but most of the team member are not aware about those features.
• For the newly added features and improvement in legacy features, Ansys can try adding training videos to better aware the engineers about their evolving features.
• Apart from that, I don't find anything disadvantageous about SpaceClaim.

Incentivized

• The remeshing tool needs to be faster, as in some cases it takes up to a day of waiting time.
• The sculpting tools need the addition of a proper brush for creating sharp creases and ridges.
• The standard shape library is rather limited. It would be nice to have this connected to online repositories such as Thingiverse, MyMiniFactory, or Cults3D.

As a Mechanical Design Engineer working in and designing heavy structures for battery packs and chargers, I use Ansys SpaceClaim, day in and day out regularly as whenever the design team forwards the CAD model to FEA team, FEA team optimizes the model in SpaceClaim only, and to do so, design team also helps them in Ansys SpaceClaim

Incentivized

For the FEA analysis, PTC Creo, which is a CAD modelling software has inbuilt FEA simulation tool called as Creo Simulate which we generally use a very quick FEA on smaller parts. But when the geometry is very complex and we need to simplify it before the simulation, then we use Ansys SpaceClaim to simplify the model and then use Ansys Mechanical for structural simulation.

Incentivized

Using Blender for STL file preparation is like swatting a mosquito with a wrecking ball, plus its boolean functionalities can be glitchy. ZBrushCoreMini proved too limiting as a sculpting tool, but so did Autodesk MeshMixer, so I am sticking to Sculptris. Materialise Magics and Netfabb are somewhat better at STL file repair and offer more advanced functionalities. But Magics does not remesh as well and Autodesk MeshMixer is far more compact and faster than Netfabb, so remains my weapon of choice.

• Ansys SpaceClaim helps in easy modelling different types of design and different iterations of design which in turns helps in designing a cost effective products thereby saving a lot of material and production cost.
• Because of the easiness in modelling, changing and modifying the design and then running the simulation over it, the design team is able to test and every concept, which I turn helps in producing an efficient and cost effective design.

Incentivized

• It speeds up projects by streamlining the CAD-to-3D-printing workflow
• As an advanced user, I have written a few tutorials about it as well