Which OEM uses what CAD 6

[HDS]

With all the talk about what Ford is going ot do now that EDS has bought IDEAS I was wonderign who used what cad packages. Here is what I know. Lets make changes and additions to come up with a complete list.

OEM | Main cad | Class A cad | other
Ford | IDEAS | |
GM | Unigraphics| |
DCX | Catia V4 | |
Toyota | Catia V4 | |
Mazda | | Imageware |
Honda | Catia V4 | |
Nissan | Ideas | |
Volvo | Catia V4 | |
Land rover| Catia V4 | |
Suburu | | |
Porsche | | |
VW | | |
Audi | | |
BMW | | |
ISUZU | | |
KIA | | |
HYUNDAI | | |
Mitsubishi| | |
SAAB | | |
Jaguar | | |
Lotus | | |
Panoz |Microstation| |
Fiat | | |
Renault | | |

 

[ivymike]

I believe that Navistar / International uses UG in their truck division, and IDEAS in their engine division. The initial artsy part of the body panel design is done in ALIAS (and on paper and in clay, of course).

 

[mloew]

HDS,

Here is what I know (or am pretty sure of):

Toyota CATIA for body, Pro/E for Powertrain.
Ford will be using CATIA for body (Class A).
Audi is part of VW group and use Pro/E for Powertrain.
GM and Ford are both experimenting with Pro/E for Powertrain and some special projects.
Porsche and PSE use CATIA.
SAAB is likely standard on UG (because of GM).
Jaguar is using I-DEAS for chassis (Because of Ford).
Volvo uses CATIA, but might be increasingly using I-DEAS (Because of Ford).


I think you will see more CAD proliferation within the automakers. Previously, they each tried to restrict themselves to one vendor for everything. This change will be due to two factors in my opinion:
1) Increasing specialization among the CAD packages (CATIA is still regarded at the best package for surfacing, Pro/E is strong for MCAD applications and the advanced functionality for Behavioral Modeling, mechanisms, etc.)
2) Interoperability among the CAD packages is increasing.

Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[HDS]

Matt
I also think they will start using more packages. Mainly because of the poor customer service you get when you standardise. Unless you are looking to upgrade to some new package the cad companies don't care about existing customers because you aren't going to leave. Also they want to keep thier costs lower by having compeating vendors.

 

[Berserk]

http://www.cadalog.com/weeknews.php

http://www.eds.com/news/news_release_template.shtml?rowid=3179

http://www-916.ibm.com/press/prnews.nsf/jan/614FB1A62CB4068785256CC5005D9BA2

http://www.line56.com/articles/default.asp?ArticleID=4398&TopicID=2

 

[RiaanH]

Here is the situation as far as I know :

VW - CATIAV4 as core ProE for Powertrain
+ Audi
+ Porsche
+ Bentley
Daimler Chrysler - CATIA V4 as core
PSA (Renault+Peugot) CATIA V4 as core
Honda - CATIA V4 as core
Hyundai - CATIA V4 as core
Suzuki - CATIA V4 as core
Mitsibushi - CATIA V4 as core
BMW - CATIA V4 as core
Daewoo - CATIA V4 as core
Isuzu - CATIA V4 as core
Proton (Lotus) - CATIA
Kia - CATIA V4 as core

FIAT group used to have CATIA V4, but now with their cooperation with GM I am not sure.
Alfa - CATIA V4 ?
Ferrari - CATIA V4 ?
Maserati - CATIA V4 ?

The same applies to some of the FORD owned companies they all used CATIA V4 but what will happen I don't know
e.g. Landrover, Volvo

GM - Unigraphics as core
Fiat - Unigraphics
Ford - Ideas as core + Some CATIA now
Nissan - Ideas
Mazda - Ideas

Toyota - Caelum as core, going CATIA V5
Daihatsu - Their own as well

Looking at above you see a pattern :
CATIA V4 vs Unigraphics/IDEAS
Dassault/IBM EDS

There are realy no other competitors than CATIA and Unigraphics as core CAD systems. Their total market share is very equal with CATIA propably leading slighlty.

You don't see much of CATIA V5 mentioned in there. The reason I think is that Dassault is not going to get money by converting their V4 customers to V5. Instead they have directed their development resources in other areas than Automotive. One of their main focus areas for development of V5 was into shipbuilding, you will see a lot of modules in the V5 product portfolio for shipbuilding. (The new generation fast attack submarines was designed on CATIA)

The Toyota move to CATIA V5 is being planned to take 3-4 Years.

I disagree with the previous statements that the OEM's will start going for a range of CAD products. I believe the opposite is true. The Eldorado/Utopia of automotive design is to have a fully parametric car. You double click on the wheelbase distance and change it to get a longer car, the powertrain, all panels, interior of the car changes auto. The press tools for the panels changes, all jigs and fixtures changes, whole assembly line design change automatically and you have a new car in 3 months. This will not be possible if an OEM has three different CAD systems.
OK this is going to take a while to get to this ideal point, but we are on the way there. How do you think Chrysler is capable of bringing their prototypes so fast to the market (Viper, PT cruiser etc.) They design their prototypes fully on CATIA, got all the data then just press the manufacture button ;-)

The same thing applies to Mercedes, how do you think they are able to bring so many new and exciting vehicles to the market. These guys does almost everything on one CAD system (CATIA V4), body, powertrain, manufacturing plant etc. The hot thing at the moment is to have a complete virtual car, and for new models just to morph the existing designs.

What a mouthfull, I'll give you some rest now

Kind regards
Riaan

 

[mloew]

Riaan,

Thank you for your post. I think your point on the desirability of a fully parametric environment for vehicle development is valid, but it has not been demonstrated in that way. The architecture to make a vehicle truly parametric all the way down to the smallest significant part would be a nightmare to construct. I think they can come as close as is practical now. You do not need your powertrain development, for example, tied to the cosmetic skin. There is no developmental value to integrate those development functions in a CAE environment. Engines and transmissions must also be developed to serve several platforms (and perhaps several companies outside of the direct ownership of a parent company) to such a degree that the CAD system used for development can be a unique system. For most of the automakers, the powertrain divisions are actually unique corporate identities.

Ford has never used (to the best of my knowledge) I-DEAS for the outer cosmetic surfaces. It seems clear from the conversations I have had with people in the know, that CATIA will be replacing CDRS for this function. Chassis will continue with what will eventually become EDS NX (now on the I-DEAS platform) and there seems to be some experimentation with Pro/E for powertrain.

I remain convinced that the situation will be quite fluid in the future.

Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[HDS]

Riaan
Thanks for the great list.

I have to agree with Matt about the parametrics. That would only work at the very basic level. Once you get diffrent departments and lots and lots of different people in there it would be a nightmare to manage. Just think of the PDM aspecets. Changing one dimension could cause 100 unintended ECNS.

The indiviual parts and assemblies should be parametric but independent.

 

[TheTick]

The industry doesn not really consider Harley-Davidson to be automotive, but they use Pro/E. I've noticed a distinct lack of Pro/E in serious automotive design. I believe there are good reasons for this.

Good and evil: wrap them up and disguise it as people.

 

[RCDLtd]

One system that hasn't had a mention so far is ICEM Surf and that, at least in Europe, seems to be the insdustry leader for A Class surface work.

Even the big Catia users such as BMW, Volvo, Mercedes, VW, Peugeot and Landrover use ICEM for their Class A (exterior, if not interior) as well as the OEMs whose main systems are the parametric solid modellers such as Ford and GM and their subsidiaries.

I noticed the comment about Mazda using Imageware for Class A, I new they had run an extensive trial on Imageware however I think they now use ICEM.

The other system that is used by most European OEMs is Alias Studiotools for Studio support, all of the above do as well as Nissan.

 

[totov]

PSA (Renault+Peugot)


PSA is Peugeot and Citroen
Renault is another brand

They use Catia V4 and V5