Autodesk Inventor vs. ETAP PS

Autodesk Inventor is a great tool for students and faculty for engineering areas that don't require great precision or development of more thorough scientific results. Is you are conducting research, or deal with very intricate and complex systems I would recommend a more robust platform that complies more to industry standards.

Incentivized

ETAP is highly recommended for evaluating static conditions in electrical power systems, whether in high or medium complexity networks. For example, study of load flow, analysis of frequency harmonics.

On the other hand, I would not recommend ETAP for the simulation of highly complex control systems that require a dynamic analysis of the variables.

• The program is very good at simplicity. Each of the buttons, menus, and options has an explanation of exactly what the feature does, and even a more advanced description if you desire to learn more about what each one does.
• Autodesk Inventor is a very fast program. Everything renders extremely quickly and there are no delays when examining a 3D model, part, or assembly. This is especially useful when giving a presentation about a product or design, and you need to be able to show a concept to an audience in real time.
• The software has an extremely accurate simulation feature that lets users do stress analysis on a 3D model. It can calculate precisely where the stress concentrations are going to be in a particular model and even give you an accurate depiction of where the part could likely fracture and/or fracture during loading.

Incentivized

• Excellent facility for the design of electrical systems, since it has multiple options and configuration.
• Truly intuitive, it is easy to adapt to the user interface, so the learning curve is very fast.
• It offers a wide variety of electrical studies that can be carried out, therefore it is very versatile for multiple applications.

• Inventor demonstrates a lack of fluidity in the process of transferring data between programs.
• Inventor shows some lack of sophistication that certain features that are readily available in other design software packages are limited in use in Inventor.
• Inventor can often have difficulty in creating models that show true color, as in blacks can come out as dark grays in certain renders, even when the material and appearance settings are the same from part to part.

Incentivized

• Perhaps the interface is somewhat confusing the first time you use the program.
• It offers a wide configuration, which can be overwhelming.
• Sometimes the program can freeze depending on the size of the electrical grid that is being simulated. This also depends on the software requirements.

Inventor continues to meet our enterprise needs. I don't see a need to change unless we change our business model significantly.

Incentivized

It’s easy and very good for mechanical design

Incentivized

ETAP PS is really easy to use. When recreating the power system to be simulated, it is easy to obtain a result close to reality due to the multiple components offered in the interface. As for the electrical studies available, they are simple to execute and require really little configuration to make them work, always offering a wide variety of options to adjust the program to the simulation of the desired condition.

I'm giving the overall support rating a 5 only because I rarely have to use it. Trying to find the answer on the help pages hardly ever helps me because any problem I have is usually too deep for what the help offers. Given the popularity of Autodesk, I have always been able to find an answer online after doing enough looking!

Incentivized

Sometimes when the program crashes for a random reason, it is difficult to find a direct solution to the problem. I think better documentation is needed for this type of case. Still, more and more people are sharing their work on the web, making it easier to orient yourself when these issues occur.

I got the training during college, so mostly i learned on my own

Incentivized

When it comes to solid modeling, the bad choices died out years ago. So we looked at the total ecosystem and chose Autodesk Inventor because of the integration with Nastran, HSM (machining), Autodesk CFD, MoldFlow, and AutoCAD. This means our legacy data (2D) is still a valid part of our design methodologies going forward, and we have the full breadth of engineering tools at our disposal. Other solutions in this space have similar offerings but not nearly as potent of a portfolio in total. It's worth saying that we do not consider Inventor in the same space as CATIA or NX, but that the entire Autodesk portfolio (e.g. Alias, PowerMill, etc) includes a total toolset that exceeds these industry giants.

Incentivized

Simulink allows to analyze and simulate different variables with respect to time in an electric power system, but it is more focused on visual programming On the other hand, ETAP is better designed for static simulation of power systems, offering options and studies in a very more direct and easier to execute.

• Working on a project designed with Inventor provides a modular design platform that can quickly be configured or changed as required. This allows for the quick turn around time for the design and revision of drawings.
• We've used Inventor over the years (since 2013) and the updates and newly released versions of Inventor do not require re-training or restrict use.
• Autodesk follows an intuitive approach and users or designers who have worked on other design platforms like SolidWorks can transition easily to Inventor.

Incentivized

• Improves the reliability of the electrical system.
• Study of the system operations, allowing a better adjustment of the facilities that are in production.
• Provides results that allow you to select solutions for energy saving.