There is an on-going discussion about whether a history-based “move face” feature can be as effective as the Synchronous Technology Steering Wheel.
Let’s take a couple of specific examples.
1. Starting with the end of a block with rounds and an angled face. It doesn’t matter if this part is native or imported, just that the history-based move face feature is the only thing used to make the edit.
Solid Edge accomplishes the task easily. And it offers several options for the results, including changing the angles of the sides, not changing the angles of the sides, lifting the flat face up (adding sides).
BrandX with Move Face fails. It fails because of the fillet. But you could make the fillets move if you selected them, except for the angled face. The angled face forces the fillet to change during the move, so it doesn’t work.
2. Use Move Face in the context of an assembly
Solid Edge can change multiple parts in an assembly at the same time without needing complex external references between the parts.
BrandX can’t do it. BrandX could do something like move one face from one part, and then have external references from other parts in the assembly, but this requires the relationships to be set up before hand, and the relationships have to be managed.
3. Use Move Face to get a flexible result, as if you were moving underconstrained sketch entities.
Solid Edge again does this easily. You can constrain faces in Solid Edge the way you would constrain sketch entities in BrandX. You can decide to use or not use those relations on the fly.
BrandX cannot do this. Once a face is created, you have to go back to the feature definition or the sketch to change it.
4. Make a change using driving dimensions on the 3D model.
Solid Edge can do this all day.
BrandX doesn’t have any such functionality. You can place a driven dimension on the model, or a driving dimension on a 3D sketch, but no driving dimensions on the model itself.
5. And then of course are the file size and rebuild time issues. every “move face” feature you add to a history-based model leaves another feature in the tree that has to be rebuilt. 5 changes, 5 extra features in the tree and 5 extra rebuilds. SE w/ST doesn’t have this overhead. after every edit, the model is just geometry, just like it was before. The file size remains the same and Synchronous Technology doesn’t even have the concept of “rebuild time”.
The move face techniques are powerful, but they are nowhere near what Synchronous Technology brings to the table. In my former life using other software, the move face tools came to be known as something you’d use here and there if you had an imported part. On a native part, it was considered very sloppy practice, generally because it severely extended rebuild times, and was just a crutch because you couldn’t figure out how to do something the “right” way.
I’m glad now to be working with software that doesn’t force you to make decisions about edits when you first start making the model.