Catia models supplied to a UG/NX shop 1

[Kasey7]

We've been using UG/NX for the better part of a decade in our shop. Sadly not to it's potential, but that's another story.

Lately we have been looking for new customers, and a few are ready to work with us provided we acquire some Catia seats.
Until now, most of our customers have not supplied solid models to work with, but even when they did the drawings were what governed.
The new customers use Catia and do not supply drawings; at least not of any quality other than strictly for reference. In any event, in this instance the solid models governs.

I understand that the industry is heading that way, and I understand the logic. Drawings are, after all, an extra step since a model has been created in advance of a drawing, usually in-context, and drawings can often be mis-interpreted.
I've also read about the big shake-ups within the big boys out there (Fiat/Chrysler for example). But the difference in maintaining design and communication uniformity within large multi-nation companies and a small job shop with a few Catia customers are pretty extreme. Being forced to acquire Catia seats in a small company, especially in this economy, is a bitter pill to swallow.

Has anyone else had to deal with a similar situation?
In the end, has having multiple CAD environments in your small companies been a blessing or a curse?

 

[looslib]

Unless your customer is requiring a CATIA proprietary electronic file back, there is no need to acquire a seat of CATIA. Ask the customer to supply a STEP model instead of the native CATIA model. This will allow you to import it into NX and use it for your needs (mold/fixture design, if I read your posts right).

Multiple CAD systems are a nightmare in small companies becasue they don't get used frequently, except the primary one. You forget commands, think the command is right, but it is for the system, etc.



"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[Kasey7]

The requirement is from the customer. The data flow should be one way; we will only be supplying physical parts back to them, no electronic files (hmm, except maybe an insepction report).
We already have two CAD/CAM systems in house (NX & MasterCAM), so we definately do not want a third.
My understanding is that we can use whatever CAD/CAM system we want to process the part, but in order the verify the final part our CMM's require Catia seats to use their model as a reference, or I guess more accurately a master, for final inspection. Any translations during inspection are not permitted.

 

[edgray]

UG can frequently read native Catia .CATparts. If you do not have to send them any CAD data I cannot see why you would need Catia. This may require the purchase of translator package.

In the worst case you might need to use an outside translation service, since it sounds like that is all you would be using your seat of Catia for anyway.

What data forms does your CMM software read?

 

[Kasey7]

"What data forms does your CMM software read?"

I have no idea edgray. My understading of the situation, limited as it is, is that the finished part must be inspected using a CMM, their model, and Catia between the two.

 

[cstreet]

Watch out for PLM data that may be contained in the Catia model.
I have seen many times when this data will not be imported to UG (NX4).

 

[edgray]

Who will be doing the CMM work?

If you then I reccomen that you learn as much about this part as you can first. Your CMM supplier may be able to help out.

If some one else i don't see it as your problem. just pass the Catia model on to the people doing the CMM work.

 

[Kasey7]

The final inspection is done in-house with our own CMM (all are from Mitutoyo). I'm a process-planner, not an inspector; though I usually supply most of the in-process inspection drawings. I'm sure at least two inspectors will get training to use Catia with the CMM.

The whole point of this thread was just to get a sense if other small shops were being required to purchase expensive CAD software to satisfy new customers. Resources for CAD/CAM software often take a back seat to production hardware, training moreso. This forum alone has been a God-send for those of us with no formal training.

It just seems like battle lines are being drawn between Catia and UG (are there others?), and users are being forced to take sides, or use both and perhaps become overwhelmed.
I don't understand how in this day and age, with computers as powerful as they are, that it's not feasible to have models accurately translated from one system to another.
I'm surprised there hasn't been an international body that establishes standards for solid models as well as PLM communication that CAD/CAM developers must adhere to. I thought (naively) JT data format was supposed to address that, but I see it's developed by Siemens.

 

[Jaydenn]

So, to be clear, You are NOT getting any drawings?

If this is the case, that means your supplier will likely be using catia's FD&T (Functional Dimensioning and Tolerancing).
Simply put, all the dimensions, tolerances, notes and design criteria will be embeded into the Cat part. Similar to NX's "PMI".

You will NEED a solution to get all of this information. One solution is to buy Catia.

Another solution might be the "Enovia DMU viewer".

Quote:
Intuitive, flexible and easy to use, ENOVIA DMU V5 can also be installed as a low-end viewer to address the requirements of the occasional or non-CAD users for visualization and navigation of 3D digital products, with immediate return on investment. Technical information of all types, from 2D to 3D, scanned images and text, to FD&T and other data, is made available throughout the extended enterprise, supporting downstream activities such as manufacturing, sourcing, shop floor planning, technical publications and purchasing – reducing development time and costs.

http://www.3ds.com/company/regional-spotlights/northamerica/v5-solutions/enovia-dmu/

It will allow to see the model, interogate dimensions, and view the FD&T. It might be just what you need.

J

NX 6.0.5.3

 

[Kasey7]

That's right, no drawings. Well... that's not quite true, but the drawings supplied are for reference only to make a quote, and frankly are a mess. Most look like screen captures.

We have the Enovia DMU viewer, but I don't think it can communicate with a CMM. Again, the latest requirement is that the CMM must get its data directly from the customer model.

 

[Jaydenn]

Alright.
Well in that case, what you need is a "Direct CAD interface" for your CMM.

These are different for each CMM, but most CMM software that is semi-current will support this.

You simpy get the Catia model from your supplier, and the CMM Direct cad interface will open the model. No fuss, no muss (no translators!!!).

If your supplier insist that NO TRANSLATIONS be used, this is simply the only option.

Depending on your CMM's current capabilities, you may need a software update. And the Direct Cad Interfaces are almost always an extra cost item.

J

NX 6.0.5.3

 

[JHTH]

Jaydenn,

We are talking to CMM vendors at the moment and what you describe above is exactly what they are saying to us, so by the sound of it, this is the way to go.

Jon

Jon Hackett
Taylor Hobson Ltd. (

http://www.taylor-hobson.com)

 

[markrief]

I think it's fair for your cutomer to require you to read Catia files, but in the modern age of CAD, that does not require having Catia seats. I would get the requirement clarified with your customer.

At worst case, you may have to demonstrate that you can read their Catia files and use them for CAM or CMM, but you shouldn't need a Catia seat to do that.

Mark Rief
Product Manager
Siemens PLM

 

[JurgenKreisel]

We currently have a seat of Catia along with 15 seats of UG NX 6.0.5.3.

We are going thru an audit for Boeing where we need to take a Catia file which includes points on the surfaces and translate this file into UG (using iges or step).Then we measure these points back to the surfaces. If the measured distance shows no deviation then the computer and the software are certified.
This same process happens for our CMM department which must take and iges/step file from UG (created from the original Catia file) and translate it into their software. They too must measure the points to the surface. If the deviation is zero then this computer and software is certified. This must be done each time the software or hardware changes. This way you know that the translation process works and is accurate.
So I would say that if you could perform a similar procedure then your customer should be satisfied and you would not require a seat of Catia.

Regards
Jurgen

 

[Kasey7]

Interesting solution Jurgen. I'll pass that along to my manager and see what he thinks.

Thanks.

 

[Rob_N]

Working in a small job shop myself, we are in a similar position. Though when things where good, we did run multi-cad. I ran UG and my boss ran Catia V5. It was just the 2 of us. Though for almost 2 years now I've been on my own, I just use the Catia seat as a translator.


The problem with using translators in Catia v5 is this. Customers put material specs and other information like inspection points and datums in the tree, those things do not get exported out.

We have been off maintenance for awhile now on all of our software, so the bean counters are already upset about the cost of getting back on maintenance... It's almost the cost of new licenses.
I was told that we are just going to get solidworks and solidedge because they are generics and will work fine for us... I have tried to explain to them that is not true; but we shall see.

 

[KevinDeSmet]

Isn't Catia mandatory maintenance?

Certified SolidWorks Professional