PDM/PLM Question

[Panzer1970]

I got limited response from the Inventor Forum so I'll try this here? Can anyone offer any input? Thanks

original post
My company is in currently examining our current engineering practices and looking for ways to improve upon them. Currently, our methods are very poor, we are lacking clearly defined SOP's and not really practicing the ones we do have. One of the ways we hope to improve upon this is to implement a PDM package. Autodesk has afew options available which include Vault (very watered down PDM) and Product Stream. Additionally, there are several third party options available, amoung them we are considering Conisio and Cyco Team Works.

I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with any of these packages and what their thoughts were?

DesignerMike (Mechanical)
"How many people are in your group?"

Currently we have 12 people in our CAD group they include Inventor users, Autoucad users and ORcad (electrical) users.

Other information
3.0 GHz Pentium
1.5 Gb RAM
nVidia XGL 980 128 Mb Graphics Cards
OS: Windows XP
Inventor R10
Email: Lotus Notes

We currently have a very poor method of tracking revision and used on history, which are two of the item we wish to improve upon.
Thanks

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Just do a search for PDM for oodles of previous threads.

PDM - Which one? thread559-106196 is one of the better ones.


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[J-C]

Conisio was just bought by Solidworks and renamed to PDM/Works Enterprise. I would think they will still support Inventor but you never know if Autodesk may try to pull something to prevent them from doing so.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2006 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2

 

[ctopher]

We have been in talks with AutoDesk about Vault. They can't tell us if they plan on keeping it in the near future. There are no guarantees. I prefer PDMWorks.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-05)

 

[Panzer1970]

Everyone,
Thanks for your input!

ctopher:
Autodesk Vault is a database that provides version control not revision control, really it is a very watered down PDM/PLM. The only real advantage or reason for using Vault is that Vault allows for multiple user enviroment.

Inventor uses a project file that tells Inventor where to looks for files when opening an assembly or a drawing. One used to be able to set these up for mutliple users but that worked very poorly and really slowed down any performance that Inventor did had (in otherwords it sucked). Plus there was an added annoyance when someone went home for the weekend and didn't check in any of his work. When R10 was released if one tried to ultilize an old multiple user project file you got an error/message stating the support for this type of project file was going to be removed in later verisons of Inventor and that you should consider using Vault insted. So unfortunely it isn't going to go alway.

Gildashard:
CGS who owned Conisio used to own a widely used program for AutoCAD called Genius, so they knew how to intergrate with Autodesk products (according to the Conisio VAR here in the UK the CAD package mostly used with Conisio is Inventor). If Conisio is the PDM route we choose then it shouldn't cause too much concern. Unless Autodesk tries to pull something as you said.

 

[J-C]

I noticed from the Conisio website that they use "TrueDWG" for interfacing with Autocad. I believe Solidworks uses OpenDWG from the dwg alliance. The question is will Solidworks still be allowed to use the TrueDWG tools....or will Autodesk pull some kind of anti-comepetitor card.

With that said, it's not uncommon for PDMs from vairous CAD companies to support other CAD programs. It's certainly in their best interest to do so as many large companies use different cad programs and even companies that switch may still need to maintain the legacy products in the previous cad program. I know UG's Teamcenter supports several CAD programs including Solidworks.

Conisio current is listed as supporting Solidworks, Inventor, Autocad, and Solidedge.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2006 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2

 

[RawheadRex]

Hi Folks,

I just got done with PDMWorks Enterprise training a week ago at SolidWorks in Concord, MA. While there really wasn't much in the way of specifics we were led to believe that the support for Autodesk products will continue. What they were saying was basically that there are enough Conisio/Autodesk users out there to warrant what I guess one might call dual-branding. Clearly SolidWorks is going to focus on the integration with their own product but because of the existing user base they are apparently going to license the software to another entity that will market it a little more generically.

Bear in mind this is all really just a summation of 3 days worth of sidebars so the line between fact and fantasy is anything but distinct.

 

[J-C]

So how did the training go and what do you think of it compared to PDM/Works?

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2006 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2

 

[foxbat1979]

We use Solidworks along with a PDM software package called DBWorks, by an italian company called Mechworks. As it is, they also have a version for Autodesk Inventor called DBInventor.
It may be worth looking into.

During our selection process for a new CAD/PDM package we almost instantly dropped Autodesk Vault because it did not fit our needs (at all).

I do not know about Conisio and Cyco Team Works.

Sr. Design Engineer
Solidworks 2006/DBWorks 2006 user
Special electric motors & centrifugal fans

 

[RawheadRex]

Gildashard,

It's fair to say that PDMWorks and Conisio/PDMWorks Enterprise are based on different technologies. PDMWE uses a database where PDMW does not. Personally I think that by using the PDMWorks brand name in the Enterprise product might be a bit misleading in the short term as I think it implies a somewhat easier upgrade path to folks that might be at a point where they need to move up to something like PDMWE. At this point in the game upgrading really seems like it will be more intensive process than folks might think. The other thing is that some of the terminology in Conisio/PDMW Enterprise can be confusing when compared to PDMWorks. I can see that perhaps causing a few hiccups.

Having said all though that I hope it doesn't sound like I'm knocking the new kid on the block. That is not my intention at all. I would say that given the acquisition was so very recent I have to believe that over time we're going to see the two platforms begin to appear more kindred. But at the same time these guys are probably going to serve 2 different kinds of customers so functionally they're obviously going to be different.

So what do I think? I think that right now it seems clear that they're 2 different animals. That's not bad it's just how it is. So to rate Conision/PDMWorks Enterprise I can only compare it with another product that I had the misfortune to do battle with, SmarTeam. In that light (and only having just over 3 days of exposure), I think that Conisio is a more user-friendly piece of software. The proof will come as it is implemented.

PDMWorks was a decent piece of software that SolidWorks has improved upon quite nicely (IMO) since acquiring it. I am guessing that we'll see similar improvements to Conisio/PDMWE as long as they maintain the same philosophy of putting out useful easy-to-implement and easy-to-use and productive software.



Chris Gervais
Application Engineeer
CADD Edge

 

[CajunCAD91]

You should also look into Synergis Adept

http://www.synergis-adept.com/

I was looking into PDM software and it appeared that Synergis & Cyco had the best packages for the money. I also looked into Agile & SofTech ProductCenter (bigger investment - more features).

http://www.agile.com/plm/index.asp

http://www.softech.com/index.php

One piece of advice I got over and over was to have procedures prior to starting a PDM/PLM deployment. In order for PDM/PLM to work, you have to know what & how to do things. If you try to implement PDM/PLM to solve a lack of procedures & discipline your iimplementation is more likely to fail. After an initial failure it will be more difficult to get assistance for a second try.

Louis

 

[Panzer1970]

"One piece of advice I got over and over was to have procedures prior to starting a PDM/PLM deployment. In order for PDM/PLM to work, you have to know what & how to do things. If you try to implement PDM/PLM to solve a lack of procedures & discipline your iimplementation is more likely to fail. After an initial failure it will be more difficult to get assistance for a second try."


I attended a seminar on Eng Doc Control and Configuration MGT. It was taught by Frank Watts who is the leading authority (by most) on the subject. That is one of the item he did emphasized.


"I was looking into PDM software and it appeared that Synergis & Cyco had the best packages for the money. I also looked into Agile & SofTech ProductCenter (bigger investment - more features)."


What did you end up using? The research I had done stated that the Cyco Products were not too user friendly and that they hindered production.

 

[CajunCAD91]

My PDM/PLM initiative got canned. We ended up having our ERP software (Made2Manage) customized to allow us to hyperlink to documents. We did not get vaulting or revision control.

Our company has been acquired by BakerHughes so we are getting ready to start the PDM/PLM initiative all over again. We will be looking for software compatible with SolidWorks & SAP.

See thread559-106196 for the previous discussion I started in 10/2004.

Louis