CATIA vs. PTC Mathcad

When it comes to modelling a product using multiple parts, CATIA becomes tedious. One need someone to sit with and learn with the experience from a frequent user. If switching from any other software to CATIA, it can be intimidating as learning curve is lengthy. For example, when working with complex shape in a knuckle joint, more steps are needed in part modelling. This cause part modelling lengthier and consume time more time, in comparison to SOLIDWORKS. However, CATIA is tremendously helpful in generating really complex features. Surface modelling is way easier when one know how to use it. It becomes really handy to make changes to the design later as well. The design history tree is also very well organized, which save time in later modifications

It is great for any manual calculation. You can lay it out as you would on paper, but the math is calculated instantly, similar to how it is in excel. It is superior to either method for most engineering calculations. Being able to copy-and-paste is very helpful for considering multiple scenarios. In some situations where you need to do the same calculation on an array of numbers, Excel is still faster.

Incentivized

• Surface modeling module is extremely developed and successful.
• 2D drafting module is doing the job effectively (AutoCAD is no more required).

Incentivized

• Conversion of measurement units (Imperial and Metric)
• Easy to use for writing detailed engineering worksheets
• Formulas can be written in the expanded form which facilitates verification
• Spell Checker feature is life saver.

Incentivized

• The software is pretty heavy, even with computers designed for heavy-duty loads, resulting in long wait times to load files and make changes, reducing productivity.

Incentivized

• Some of the math and text formatting aspects are a little cumbersome.
• Converting from older Matchcad versions to the newer Mathcad Prime platform could be made easier. It should be a direct import function.

Incentivized

Higher-order math, despite symbolics, become tedious and variable nomenclature isn't as forgiving as other programs. Due to it's sheet-like nature, the greater the complexity the more bothersome the screen usage becomes. But it's a trade-off between a sketchpad-like interface or lines and lines of code. Pick your poison but MathCad was our choice.

Incentivized

We got frequent updates on CATIA. There are lots of update notes. Also, there are lots of lots of videos online to solve the issues that you can stumble upon. It also has a built-in help manual, which helps occasionally. I have gotten my education through a physical class on CATIA, so there are opportunities like that as well.

Incentivized

You can create solid or 3D figures more easily and efficiently using Catia than in other programs or in specific AutoCAD. You can also create different pieces to later assemble them and thus create figures even more complex or in greater detail. In the same way, you can make 2D drawings without much complication.

Incentivized

MathCAD is easier to learn and faster to start with. It has more user-friendly interface and conventional style toolbox and GUI. It is really good for the beginners and those who are afraid of complex math.

Incentivized

• If designing large assemblies or very complex ones, especially in the aerospace industry, CATIA is the way to go.
• The graphics are really good, and the software offers many possibilities to view a design: 2D, 3D, bird's eye view...
• Controls pan zoom rotate are easy.

Incentivized

• Speeds up calculations (especially when corrections need to be made near the beginning).
• Ability to re-use old calculations as a template can save significant time.
• You can use consistent formatting for all calculations, allowing for more organized, clear calculations.

Incentivized