Anyone here a CAD operator?

meleader2 · #1 03-30-2006, 11:06 AM

I sent out a gazillion resumes and one happened to be for a CAD operator for a glass company. i haven't used CAD in 5 years and was wondering if it had really changed much/what jargon i should be throwing around.

my interview is this wednesday.

Patrick del Poker Grande · #2 03-30-2006, 11:07 AM

What software do you know?

meleader2 · #3 03-30-2006, 11:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
What software do you know?

[/ QUOTE ]

that's kind of an ambiguous question. if ur referring to CAD, i know some and feel like i could definetly pick it up if i get hired. was just feeling it out to see how much prep work i should be doing

Patrick del Poker Grande · #4 03-30-2006, 11:17 AM

I mean... what CAD software do you know - what did you think I meant? Are you on AutoCAD? Catia? Unigraphics? Ideas? Solidworks? Pro-E?

meleader2 · #5 03-30-2006, 11:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I mean... what CAD software do you know - what did you think I meant? Are you on AutoCAD? Catia? Unigraphics? Ideas? Solidworks? Pro-E?

[/ QUOTE ]

the job description said AutoCAD, and i BELIEVE that's what i used.

Patrick del Poker Grande · #6 03-30-2006, 11:23 AM

That's the most likely for what it sounds like you'll be doing. I don't see AutoCAD at all in my work (my wife sees it every once in a while), but I'm pretty sure it's gone through some changes in the last 5 years. Pretty much all the CAD/CAE packages have been going through a similar transition towards a more... Windows-y feel and a prettier interface full of all kinds of icons and new menus, but most importantly, slick graphics and pretty colors. I had a copy of AutoCAD 2000 (for no particularly good reason other than my rommate had it) back in the day and I seem to recall there being a pretty good update to the interface in that from the previous version. I'd expect the same core functionality, but probably a massively updated interface. If you were used to doing everything through keystrokes on the keyboard instead of through icons (like most people who had mastered older versions of ACAD), then I think you're going to be quite disappointed.

I'm pretty sure the more important thing is to know the stuff independent of the software - the standards, the symbols, the right text sizes, etc.

P Chippa · #7 03-30-2006, 11:29 AM

I imagine it would probably be autocad for glasswork. Autocad is one of the best and most common tools for 2d drawings. When you get into sheetmetal and machined parts, solidworks is becoming the standard from what I can tell.

Patrick del Poker Grande · #8 03-30-2006, 11:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
When you get into sheetmetal and machined parts, solidworks is becoming the standard from what I can tell.

[/ QUOTE ]
God, I hope not.

P Chippa · #9 03-30-2006, 11:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you get into sheetmetal and machined parts, solidworks is becoming the standard from what I can tell.

[/ QUOTE ]
God, I hope not.

[/ QUOTE ]

The company I work for is still pretty small. Maybe I'm seeing things from a perspective not broad enough to be accurate. The part files are usually easy enough to convert anyhow, from what I understand.

meleader2 · #10 03-30-2006, 11:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
That's the most likely for what it sounds like you'll be doing. I don't see AutoCAD at all in my work (my wife sees it every once in a while), but I'm pretty sure it's gone through some changes in the last 5 years. Pretty much all the CAD/CAE packages have been going through a similar transition towards a more... Windows-y feel and a prettier interface full of all kinds of icons and new menus, but most importantly, slick graphics and pretty colors. I had a copy of AutoCAD 2000 (for no particularly good reason other than my rommate had it) back in the day and I seem to recall there being a pretty good update to the interface in that from the previous version. I'd expect the same core functionality, but probably a massively updated interface. If you were used to doing everything through keystrokes on the keyboard instead of through icons (like most people who had mastered older versions of ACAD), then I think you're going to be quite disappointed.

I'm pretty sure the more important thing is to know the stuff independent of the software - the standards, the symbols, the right text sizes, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

alright thanks, i'll beef up on this stuff. thanks again for the info.