tlspace
 |
| 04 May 2006 12:58 AM |
|
Is there any material comparing TeamCenter and Enovia by functionality? |
|
|
|
|
COE-FORUM-USER
|
| 05 May 2006 07:45 AM |
|
Hi Shim,
You’ll find Threads talking about TC vs Enovia. But most of time, people are not objective. The choice of a PLM is crucial and can affect your company for many years. I guess the best way to respond to your question is to invite Dassault and UGS (TC) to give you a demonstration. Plus, you need to have a team of PLM specialist (independent) to analyze both products.
Good luck,
Mohamed,
|
|
|
|
|
JSTRAWN
|
| 05 May 2006 12:38 PM |
|
It all depends on what you need your VPDM system to do for your business.
One of the key questions is whether or not you support a single CAD system, or multiple. If the answer is Single CAD (or mostly single CAD), then that is a strong indicator that you should by your VPDM system from your CAD Vendor. If you support multiple CAD Systems, then this factor is less important. |
|
Jim Strawn
Cessna Aircraft Co. |
|
|
YRETTER
|
| 08 May 2006 07:58 AM |
|
As a representative of the “not objective”, I offer the following free advise: putting your Catia files in TC is not the first choice from a technical point of view. That said, since you asked there must be a reason, sometimes TC may be your choice from business point of view.
It is then your task to test TC (and any other system) under the exact conditions of your work using the worst conditions you expect (largest assembly, biggest parts, very large drawings, most complicated NC, tubing etc etc..) This is a cliche' as it gets, but is true and more so in this situation.
Best regards
Yoram Retter
IAI cad support
|
|
|
|
|
COE-FORUM-USER
|
| 09 May 2006 04:39 AM |
|
Other things that you need to consider is location, collaboration and integration. Enovia LCA has no ability to import and export data automatically to support large volumes of data moving in and out of a world-wide supplier base as is the norm these days in aerospace. And it is difficult to integrate with other legacy systems such as MRP. And we spent a lot of time and money last year getting the performance of R14 up to acceptable levels so that we could work with a single LCA database directly hosted in Montreal (we are based in Ireland) because there is no tools for keeping two LCA systems synchronized in a master/slave setup.
So, if you have a distributed supplier base, or your design teams will be distributed across the globe; or if you have lots of customised "other" systems that you need to feed from your PLM system, then in my personal opinion, you are going to run into trouble with LCA. Having said that, I can't vouch for TC, because I have never seen it. Maybe it is as bad...!
|
|
|
|
|
ROBERT JACKSON
|
| 09 May 2006 07:52 AM |
|
Gary,
> because there is no tools for keeping two LCA systems synchronized in a master/slave setup.
We have members of our team currnently looking into enovia's database replication. Did you run into trouble using database replicaton?
Robert |
|
|
|
|
COE-FORUM-USER
|
| 09 May 2006 08:06 AM |
|
In a word: Yes. We were told by DS that they would not advise or support replication at the database level, because not everything is stored in the database. And things like subscriptions and workflow triggers may not be stored in the database anyway. Furthermore, even if you did get replication working now, they would not guarantee that it would work in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
JSTRAWN
|
| 09 May 2006 09:18 AM |
|
The quote we got was "No one has ever successfully implemented multi-site".
Just as we got "No one has ever successfully migrated a VPM Database to LCA".
      |
|
Jim Strawn
Cessna Aircraft Co. |
|
|
COE-FORUM-USER
|
| 09 May 2006 11:04 AM |
|
A colleague of mine has sent me an interesting thread on another forum that you might want to take a look at:
http://www.catiav5forum.de/thread.php?postid=9690&sid=ed170be9c52efcf7bb2b8ead15877a7c#post9690 |
|
|
|
|
tlspace
|
| 09 May 2006 08:09 PM |
|
I think TCEnt and LCA has its own pros and cons.
The cons of TC are The pros of LCA , vice versa...so it's hard to say which one is more better.
and It could be more complicated when I consider digital manufacturing solutions....
Absolutely, It depends on what I want...
I'm studying to integrate TCent and Cv5 with Rich client(UGS S/W).
Sometimes I asked to myself, Is it possible that integrate cv5 and PDM(TC,LCA,etc)
satisfactoring Relational Design method and any other cv5 funtionality?....
|
|
|
|
|
ROBERT JACKSON
|
| 10 May 2006 09:08 AM |
|
Hello,
LCA has a supported application level replication. That is what we are looking at. I'm curious why this did't work for you. What issues did you have with the application replication?
Robert |
|
|
|
|
COE-FORUM-USER
|
| 18 May 2006 04:26 AM |
|
Sorry for the delay in posting. I'm not sure what you mean by application level replication. The only tools that I know of at the application level were the likes of the "WPE - workpackage exchange" tool which required labourious manual intervention to update the incoming data. Our partner base is spread out all over the world, and since Enovia doesn't like long-distance network connections We needed a way of importing hundreds of files every day, 7 days a week. Without manual intervention. We worked very closely with IBM and Dassault on this one, and the only supported way of working was a single database with remote connections. But since we are 5,000 miles away from the server this needed a lot of testing and tweaking to get to acceptable levels.
|
|
|
|
|
TECHRG
|
| 18 May 2006 10:36 AM |
|
Quote
Originally posted by: jimstrawn
The quote we got was "No one has ever successfully implemented multi-site".
Just as we got "No one has ever successfully migrated a VPM Database to LCA".
We have a VERY successful implementation of multisite - BUT we added a lot of our own customization which automates the whole process: exporting data from a sending site, transfer it to a receiving site, and then importing it. The data model and PNO at each site is the same in our configuration. We support transferring structured data such as assemblies (CATProduct) and drawings (CATDrawing) and all related info - so that the assy is guaranteed to be complete - for example all children of an assy must be transferred if the assy is transferred. We also have to gather a lot of the data/files ourselves by querying the VPM database directly...
To give you an idea of the volume of data movement - currently there are a total of 300+ transfers a day totalling approx 30-50GB
Bill Hess |
|
|
|
|
MKURUMBHATE
|
| 13 Oct 2008 01:20 AM |
|
ENOVIA replication will not pose any problem to the end user provided some things that you should keep in mind.
- Make your P&O data compatible on both the sites.
- Your customization should manage the data models on both the sites.
- from Document management perspective, if you are working with R17 and prior release then you may have some problem with your iteration management but post R17 this problem is resolved.
- Release management should be honoured.
I ran the database replication on R18 level and I am able to see all the workflow life cycles created at the lower releases....
If you posted the exact error that you are receiving then may be we can help you out.
Best Regards
Milind |
|
|
|
|