Comments on: Back to basics: Multi-CAD and PLM

By: olegshilovitsky

olegshilovitsky — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:37:11 +0000

Yoann, Thanks for the link. In my view, STEP is the most mature standard in CAD/PLM space and retain good potential for the future. Best, Oleg

By: Yoann Maingon - Prodeos

Yoann Maingon - Prodeos — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:27:02 +0000

Hi Oleg,

just to say that we are working on that problem, using STEP (AP214) as plm-cad data-model. You can take a look at the project on that page: http://www.plmlab.fr/index.php?page=stepinn

Regards,
Yoann Maingon – Prodeos

By: olegshilovitsky

olegshilovitsky — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:43:43 +0000

Dear Mr. UGURLU, Thanks for your questions! When I’m saying “no files”, the main point is CAD system is not relying on file system storage, but directly bundled to PLM application server with PLM storage. What normally CAD system saves on disk (in files) is a combination of geometry files, tessellated files and additional information like assembly, etc. to combine all together. I case of PLM application server, the storage of this information can be optimized and access to pieces of information can be also optimized. I hope, I answered on your question. Best Regards, Oleg.

By: olegshilovitsky

olegshilovitsky — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:28:04 +0000

Matt, Agree with you. CAD/PDM bundles solve problems of CAD data management much better, but loose cross-domain capabilities. This is a place where PLM, BPM, BI and other types of cross domain solutions can come and provide value. Take a look on this – http://plmtwine.com/2009/01/09/which-technology-can-convert-multiple-pdms-into-a-single-plm/. Best, Oleg

By: Okay UGURLU

Okay UGURLU — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:30:11 +0000

Hi Mr. Oleg – I’m new in PLM world so, I’m sorry for some basic questions about your post:

Assembly files may be managed by tesellated files of parts coming from different CAD origins. SIEMENS PLM have such a solutioın for MultiCAD. Beyond the native CAD assembly file, it has a database object which stores list of parts and transformation matrix of the tesellated files. Without CAD, any user may re-arrange the assembly components within PLM interface…

Do you metion a similar concept when you say “No CAD files”? If not so, could you describe it by a simple example?

Regards

By: Matt Bromley

Matt Bromley — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:43:41 +0000

Oleg – I’m looking forward to your post on (3). However the challenge I see with the CAD/PDM bundles is lack of interoperability between domains. This I see as one of the current challenges, aligning and collaborating between the different domains. The ability to solve this problem then leads to some really interesting areas in future product development – true virtual product realization and simulation, technology repartition etc across domains. This challenges are very deep as no PLM vendor has “myCAD” for CAx, there are not even best in class CAx/PDM in many instances and CAx CAx interoperability has always problematic. I don’t currently see elegant solution to all these problems, maybe your option (3) will help, although I agree increased CAx is a good first step.

By: olegshilovitsky

olegshilovitsky — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:21:13 +0000

Paolo, I think you are pointed on a very old problem of interoperability, but positioned it from the content standpoint. Back few years ago, we saw CAD companies were holding strong ownership on CAD formats and data. I think today, issue of CAD interoperability disqualified by a need to re-use CAx data. For the last 3-5 years, we’ve seen few very successful tools allowing you to take 3D information downstream. Now, the next step, will be understanding how to re-use and re-purpose CAx data. Personally, I don’t think PLM backbones will play a significant role in this process. My believe is that cloud-option and internet based technologies will play a key role in energizing of this process and finding right solution. However, I see steps of closer connection between CAD and PLM backbones as a very positive. It will allow to remove existing “proprietary format” barriers. Thanks for your comment! Best, Oleg

By: Paolo Zotti

Paolo Zotti — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:28:43 +0000

Oleg,

with PLM systems becoming more and more the “single source of information” for distributed and flexible enterprises, managing (and not only storing) 3D information from multiple systems has become an imperative, as well as managing ECAD data and software.

I think the new frontier is where PLM technology helps engineers re-use and repurpose in one CAx (CAD, CAE, CAM) tool data that originated in another CAx tool. To relaize this, you need fundamental capabilities both in the PLM backbone and in the CAx tools, but when they both work in sync a lot can be achieved.

By: olegshilovitsky

olegshilovitsky — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:35:34 +0000

Claudio, Thank you for your comment! From your standpoint, what are major limitations of CAD/PLM bundled systems? Is it technology? Absence of office automation? Web technology? Best, Oleg

By: Claudio

Claudio — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:25:54 +0000

I think the producer of CAD + PLM systems today have major limitations and a limited market.
My experience is related to the sale of a PLM solution is unrelated to a CAD product that supports the same functionality with tools such as Catia, Pro / E, NX, etc.Il happened? The technology! At the time I had no problem in winning with the producers of CAD. Customers are attracted to innovative, modern and close to the tools of office automation or web-experience. This will become the future also for technical applications, I apologize for my English!