In that case, there really is only a couple paths: (and flat out, Solidworks isn't the best for this kind of thing)
If the volume of work is serious, invest in systems. This is rare, but sometimes necessary.
In many cases, invest in one that is very adept at non-native data. There are a couple pretty good ones out there. KeyCreator is actually quite good for manufacturing related tasks. For more involved tasks, NX is great on the higher end, but not cheap. That one offers all possible model paradigms too.
Parametric, history based.
Parametric, non history based (synchronous)
Direct Modeling, with history
Direct modeling, no history.
It can do the job period. But, isn't cheap.
Collaborations often default to who has the most restrictive environment, or priority in requirements and the other members deal, or there is some time spent integrating design work across systems.
Intent is difficult to preserve in this scenario. Often, there will end up being an owner of that.
BTW: Subscription licenses can get someone through a collaboration at a very significantly reduced cost.
That's the option I would use myself, given I didn't have access to a sufficiently capable system. Do it, export non native, drawings, reference geometry, etc... Express detail intent in Excel + 2D drawings. Basically make a reconstruction kit for the future and call it good.
Also export native files on the off chance a resubscription makes sense. It can, depending.
Over the years, I've accumulated a lot of understanding of basic geometry and means and ways to work on STEP, Parasolid, Surfaces, Solids, drawings, etc... Paid off many times.
Edit: The other skill to seek is being able to use basic tools where needed. Advanced modelers have a good and bad aspect to them. Every time someone clicks one of the advanced function buttons, a lot of money will eventually be spent. So don't click those buttons! The resulting designs are likely cheaper and manufacturable in more ways, all of which is an advantage.
I can tell you some names you would recognize did great product design on basic licenses. Doing this in very robust software is different than doing it in something lower tier. People have a lot of options when the basic capability is robust, offering all the modeling paradigms. People may want it and have reasons, but do they really need it? No is the right answer more than we may realize.
In short, role flexibility is expensive, or requires having made an investment in a highly technical, niche skill set.
Limiting that can actually save money, depending on what software is in play.
There won't be great answers very soon either. There are some efforts in progress right now. Half a decade to a decade from now, this chat may be different!
In that case, there really is only a couple paths: (and flat out, Solidworks isn't the best for this kind of thing)
If the volume of work is serious, invest in systems. This is rare, but sometimes necessary.
In many cases, invest in one that is very adept at non-native data. There are a couple pretty good ones out there. KeyCreator is actually quite good for manufacturing related tasks. For more involved tasks, NX is great on the higher end, but not cheap. That one offers all possible model paradigms too.
Parametric, history based.
Parametric, non history based (synchronous)
Direct Modeling, with history
Direct modeling, no history.
It can do the job period. But, isn't cheap.
Collaborations often default to who has the most restrictive environment, or priority in requirements and the other members deal, or there is some time spent integrating design work across systems.
Intent is difficult to preserve in this scenario. Often, there will end up being an owner of that.
BTW: Subscription licenses can get someone through a collaboration at a very significantly reduced cost.
That's the option I would use myself, given I didn't have access to a sufficiently capable system. Do it, export non native, drawings, reference geometry, etc... Express detail intent in Excel + 2D drawings. Basically make a reconstruction kit for the future and call it good.
Also export native files on the off chance a resubscription makes sense. It can, depending.
Over the years, I've accumulated a lot of understanding of basic geometry and means and ways to work on STEP, Parasolid, Surfaces, Solids, drawings, etc... Paid off many times.
Edit: The other skill to seek is being able to use basic tools where needed. Advanced modelers have a good and bad aspect to them. Every time someone clicks one of the advanced function buttons, a lot of money will eventually be spent. So don't click those buttons! The resulting designs are likely cheaper and manufacturable in more ways, all of which is an advantage.
I can tell you some names you would recognize did great product design on basic licenses. Doing this in very robust software is different than doing it in something lower tier. People have a lot of options when the basic capability is robust, offering all the modeling paradigms. People may want it and have reasons, but do they really need it? No is the right answer more than we may realize.
In short, role flexibility is expensive, or requires having made an investment in a highly technical, niche skill set.
Limiting that can actually save money, depending on what software is in play.
There won't be great answers very soon either. There are some efforts in progress right now. Half a decade to a decade from now, this chat may be different!