Ellipsis

Inventor Publisher Mobile Viewer for Android

Be careful what you ask for because you just might get it. That's usually reserved for something bad, right? King Midas type bad. But was he really that bad, dude just wanted some cool threads is all. A fashion statement if you will and what is more of a fashion statement today than the mobile device or tablet that we all flaunt around. It's the modern day pocket watch with unlimited access to information.

As you know, we've given a lot of love to the iOS folks for a while and the Capulet's of this story were waltzing around with their iPads gloriously sharing all the wonderful designs, and interactive 3D instructions. Meanwhile the Montague's having sworn off all things Apple were in a dire state of discontent, feeling left out of the fray slinging Bad Birds at stone castles at an attempt to destroy all the swine population of their digital realms.

But alas! Ok... I'll stop now, this was starting to go way off the deep end here. Honestly my phone vibrated and snapped me back to reality. It's here Android Fans!

Click here to download the Inventor Publisher Mobile Viewer for your Android devices. 

Want a little sneak peek at what it looks like? Justin Hoey and I ran out to my place one evening, grabbed one of my sons and put this little ditty together. Check it out:

 

Now, you two kids get along. See, we're a fan of all your social status devices... errr, I mean mobile devices.

-Rob

People. Process. Technology.

How many of you have been a part of a failed technology implementation? The dreaded #FAIL ? Mice were thrown in disgust, the technology labeled as the biggest POS ever conceived. Well intended people loosing their jobs & reputation, levying the blame for ushering in the technical failure. Becoming the scapegoat of such an abysmal failure it is now used as a point of reference for all things bearing a potential risk to fail? Been there or know of someone, maybe a company that carries the ugly scars of the fight to get new technology in place?

I know I'm treading rough waters here. Hell, I'm the target for many a sling and arrow. So what's your reaction when I lay down something like this:

"There is a greater than 66% chance that the cause of the failure had nothing to do with the technology."

I'm feeling a little chippy today so let me add to that... I don't care if the technology didn't work from day one. Blue screened immediately after install, broke after the first part it turned, or fell off the truck and smashed before it could be put online - either way there is still a 66% chance that the technology will fail. 

Let me turn this around a little more positively. Lets say that the next piece of design technology doesn't use a mouse or its interface. It uses a piece of DNA from each designer, plugs into your ear as an ear bud and literally becomes more of a bio mechanical extension of you. All you have to do is visualize your design and it simply starts to work. Still 66% chance of failure.

Point made? You see I'm taking note from our awesome political system here in the US - you only get people's attention if you promote the most extreme ideas on both sides of the aisle. Sensationalism here folks, put your calculators down boys, the above examples were opinions formed only from the dozens of voices in my head, not an actual scientific poll. (margin of error still +- 1 or 2 points).

People. Process. Technology. The trinity of successful technology implementations the world over. Any successful implementation of any technology (software, hardware, machines, etc) can tie its success to attention paid in equal parts to the people involved, processes analyzed and updated, so that both the people and processes can collectively take full advantage of the new technology. Look at the big brain on Rob, eh?

So lets go back three or four streams of consciousness, way back at the first question. How many of you were a part of the big #FAIL? And lets be honest with each other - was it really the technology that failed? Really? Did it have anything to do with trying to use the technology the same way you used the old one? DId you update your standards and process documents to account for changes in workflows, capacity, and throughput of the new technology? 

I hear this thing all the time in this line of business of course. Hey, we have this customer down the road who is unhappy with XYZ CAD, lets go turn them into an ABC CAD customer. Yeah! Then we'll be able to get them to say how unhappy they were with XYZ CAD and as a result anyone that reads it will never buy XYZ CAD, they will buy ABC CAD instead! Yeah! Rinse, lather repeat this with all the CAD vendors - we've all done it and unfortunately for the engineering and design community in general its all a bunch of crap.

That customer will fail at the next implementation of CAD just the same as you did the first go around and for the same reasons - none of which have anything to do with the technology. Of course we all have our strengths and weaknesses - Works has a hell of a lot of people that uses it. Edge has a nice sheet metal tool set. You'll have a hard time finding something that Creo can't model. Inventor is crazy easy to use and deploy. Example A in to Slot B, you get my point. There are very smart people, incredibly successful companies out there and they all use one of them (mentioned or not) right? 

So what makes a failed deployment of XYZ CAD at one company a resounding success at another? Update your People and Process first, then implement new Technology. You will see a greater chance of success.

Am I wrong here guys?
-Rob 

Rob Get's an Intern

Oh the possibilities! Until I read over our HR policy. Apparently I can't have my intern get my coffee, my dry cleaning, do all the day to day monotonous things I have to do including what I have him work on. I have to give this guy a real project. Phftsht! Whatever! That's not how my internship went, man kids these days are soft.

Just kidding! Back away from the HR complaint. I actually have an awesome project for him to work on and one that he has already jumped all over. We have a great high school summer internship program here in the Lake Oswego office. I stress the Lake O office because we don't do it in all of our locations. There is one HUGE caveat for being considered part of the high school internship program here - you have to be an active member of a FIRST Robotics team here in the Portland, OR area. Why? Just meet a FIRST student and you will know in seconds how energetic and focused these kids can be when they are tasked with something.

So, of course one of my jobs here at The 'Desk is to do a little evangelism. You know, product awareness, a tutorial here and there, customer visits and all that stuff you guys keep watching on my YouTube channel. Anyway, last year I was asked to take a larger role in our Autodesk Oregon FIRST Regional, and the lead up to it. As part of that I participated in both mentor training and student training on how to use Autodesk Inventor as part of their FRC challenge. 

What came out of that was clear. First, you can't scale that. Second, you can't teach anybody much of anything in a couple hours except for what it "could" do if I had more time to train you on how to do it. This is where my intern came in to play. Dude is the type of kid that you want your kids to be when they reach high school. Super smart, self starter, selfless, and a few bonus points from this old football player - he's the team's leading tackler at linebacker.

So this was my guidance from him this morning: We want to create an Autodesk FIRST Robotics learning program created by FIRST students, for FIRST students, on how to utilize Autodesk design tools to solve the unique challenges presented via the FRC challenge. Tall order for a college grad, let alone an incoming high school senior. But I have the utmost confidence in his ability to exceed my expectations. He's already working out the storyboard and coming up with ideas that we haven't thought of yet.

So, if you have any advice / thoughts around what you would like to see included in this program now is your chance to chime in and give him some guidance. Follow him on Twitter @NatetheIntern he'll be posting up his thoughts on his project, insights into FRC and how design tools can be used in the competition, working for me... [grin]

So give him a follow, feel free to give him some thoughts on what you think FRC students need to know about using design tools during the FRC competition.

-Rob

 

NEW Autodesk OTJ with Dynamic Structures

If I could sum up how a single company can design and manufacture the worlds largest telescopes, extremely unique bridge designs, and some of the most thrilling amusement park rides from the same group of engineers, designers, and manufacturing teams; it would be a focus on fundamentals.

It's easy to get wrapped up in an insignificant detail when you haven't solved for the entire equation. That's the perspective that I walked away with after meeting the team at Dynamic Structures. You know... these guys:

 

Dynamic Structures have been using Autodesk Inventor for a long time and really worked with us on making areas of the product better over the years. And if you want to talk about large assemblies... these guys wrote the book on it. No, really they have a book on it. When they were having issues back in the earlier days of Inventor with their huge assemblies, our man Luc Groulx rolled up his sleeves and worked tirelessly with the DS team to documents both the required workflows for large assembly management as well as the technology requirement that we needed to address on our end. This level of partnership with our customers is something that we put an extremely high value on and as such I wanted to go meet the guys (and gals) first hand.

The OTJ film shoots are a two day thing. Day one I go around and try to get to know the team by following the data around. It's a really good way of getting the full impact of our design tools at work and more than anything try and get the folks that I will be interviewing on camera comfortable with what we are going to talk about. What struck me was that while I was in Canada, I didn't talk to two people with the same accent. Dynamic Structures has probably the most diverse team in a single building that I have ever had the opportunity to meet.

The highlight of the trip was for me to sit down with Dave Halliday, President of Dynamic Structures. Dave was recently awarded The Order of Canada for his work in astronomy. Now without getting all sentimental (and please Mr. Halliday don't take this wrong), I enjoyed our conversation to the same level I enjoy sitting down with my grandfather and just listening to life experiences and how they can take you down a path that you could have never thought possible. It's definitely the most candid interview I had a chance to do with anyone, let alone a national icon when it comes to Canadian astronomy. His approach to solving unique design challenges is what has made Dynamic Structures such a successful company, and I think we captured his fundamental approach in our interview.

Give it a look, let me know what you guys think and how you utilize simulation tools to solve your unique challenges:

 

-Rob

 

Manufacturing Toolbox

Alright, I can guess what you are thinking about LT products. And I have heard a variety of jabs at what the LT stands for. But, if you aren't up to speed, you may be floored at what Autodesk Inventor LT 2012 brings to the table.

via manufacturingtoolbox.typepad.com

Check it out guys! Loren just launched his new blog, adding more insight and expertise, commentary, and discussion. Please welcome Loren, subscribe to his feed, Twitter, and YouTube.

-Rob