Home  > Collaboration > Discussion Forum > Active Discussions

Welcome to the COE Discussion Forum! 

 

To participate in the discussion forum, you must be logged in to the website.  If you forget your login information, please contact COE Headquarters at coe@coe.org or (800) 263-2255.

If you are new to the COE Discussion Forum and would like to participate, please register.
Register Today
COE 2009 Annual PLM Conference & TechniFair

COE DISCUSSION FORUM
Forums > COE Forums > CATIA V5
Subject: 3D ONLY (NO 2D)

You are not authorized to post a reply.   
Author Messages
bistosh

04 Dec 2008 01:49 PM

I would like to understand what are the problems you encountered when you switched to 3D only (no 2D drawings). Maybe you could outline disadvantages and major issues you had when you switched.

Does it take less time? (some people say it takes the same time because of the 3D dimensioning and notes)

Do you dimension all parts? Is it the same amount of dimensioning you would use on the 2D drawing?

How is your quality department measure and inspect the parts with no 2D drawings.

What happens when you want to represent the raw material along with the formed part?

Do you have a good methodology in terms of representing reference, purchased, or standard parts in the tree?

Please add your questions and comments.

Thanks a lot for your time,

 Adrian
GWALKER

05 Dec 2008 08:04 AM
We implemented Model Based Definition, MBD, four years ago, starting with R12. There were significant issues with the FTA module in R12 which have been resolved by the time we got to R17. It has required a significant overhaul of our internal processes. Some of the issues;

1) The model is now the master requiring changes in IT how data is managed, no longer a paper copy of data.
2) Every person who reviews model data has to have a certified workstation/laptop including those persons on the shop floor.
3) Reduced dimensioning has saved $$ in Engineering.
4) LOTAR issues have not been completely resolved.
5) More parts are inspected using CMM.
6) Additional code developed to enable FAI without drawings
7) Large effort to get suppliers onside.
8) Larger WAN bandwidth required.
bistosh

08 Dec 2008 09:24 AM
Thanks GWALKER.
I guess besides you and I no one has migrated to MBD only.
GWALKER

08 Dec 2008 09:30 AM
Not true, Boeing, Cessna, Gulfstream, etc have all done substancial work in MBD.
DPavon

10 Dec 2008 05:53 AM
Alstom Transport Brazil has made a pilot project to implement MBD last year, but it failed. Main reasons:
1 - Big $$ to implement IT infrastructure in Quality, Shopfloor, Tender and Analisys departments
2 - Big resistance of the chosen supplier in abandon 2D (in our case, AutoCad files)
3 - Internal big resistance in abandon 2D and use FTA.

Embraer also uses large amounts of MBD.
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Forums > COE Forums > CATIA V5 > 3D ONLY (NO 2D)


ActiveForums 3.6

    

401 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60611-4267 | (312) 321-5153 | (800) COE-CALL (U.S.)