Choice of CAD and PLM software

3D Design Volume Model
,
1

Hi all

 

Currently a draftsman in a company specializing in medical instruments, we are currently conducting a study in order to develop our CAD and PLM tools. We are currently on Pro-Engineer Wildfire 3.0 (CAD) and Windchill PDMLink 9.0 (PLM).

 

Regarding the CAD software, we hesitate between Solidworks 2013 and Creo 2.0.

Regarding our needs:
- Great use of surface design.
- Our largest assemblies do not exceed 200 pieces to date (but there is a possibility that one day we will have larger assemblies).
- Design of castings and sheet metal.
- Uses (currently) of modules for structural analysis (RDM) and rheological analysis.
- Ability to import CAD files from other software and be able to use them as easily as possible.

 

When it comes to PLM software, we're hesitating with Solidworks Enterprise PDM, Windchill PDMLink 10.1, and Infor Discrete.

 

I would therefore like to have your opinions on these CAD and PLM softwares, their strengths and weaknesses, what you think of them, your possible experiences on these different softwares. I am interested in all the information you could provide me.

I hope I have been explicit enough. My question may seem irrelevant on this forum, but since there are many users of CAD software, it is very likely that I will be able to get different opinions on the matter which would be a plus for me. ;)

In advance, I thank you for your help.
See you soon.

3 Likes
2

Hello

 

Regarding the CAD part, I think solidworks is able to meet most of your needs.

Complete sheet metal and molding function, the surface functions are very intuitive, the RDM part very complete.

As for the size of your assemblies, the machine has a lot to do with it (a "very powerful" processor, ...).

 

In addition, as Felix said, SolidWorks is very good for import/export.

 

For the PLM, I also leave the floor to others...

 

Good luck for the rest of your research

 

 

 

 

1 Like
3

Hello

 

I think that everyone will defend their Parroise!!

 

for me Solidworks for the large number of users and therefore its distribution, its possibilities to add additional modules (on the other hand for a fee) and EPDM, for the management of technical data very simple to use and the possibility of working on several different sites

 

Before making a choice, we had asked for demonstrations of the different software to really get an idea of their possibilities

 

A good last training and we don't regret our choice

 

but that's just my opinion!!

1 Like
4

Hello

 

As for the surface design, even if solidworks is a good compromise between price and functionality, in my opinion Catia is still more complete but more complex and more expensive, but it's not always an obstacle.

 

Kind regards

Bastien

1 Like
5

Hello

 

Given the spectrum of ancillary features that you list (rdm, rehology, pdm), but also given the challenges you will likely encounter as part of your innovation process (technical and commercial communication, electrical design perhaps).

the DS SolidWorks range seems interesting to me.

 

In the purely functional CAD field, Creo and SolidWorks will be able to do it. Both of these software are good CAD products. The difference will not be made there.

For imports/exports, I think that the 2 do it natively.

 

The 3 questions to ask yourself are:

- what do we want to do in 3 years 

- How my design/innovation process works

- what pushes me to change

 

If you have clients, ask yourself what they are working on (Pro E is quite present in some very large groups)

If your company is developing, you will probably have to recruit, and in this case SolidWorks will make things easier for you (+ users, and overwhelming presence in the national education)

 

In both cases (ProE=> Creo  or ProE=> SW), training will be necessary if you really want to take advantage of the new technology you are going to work on. So there is no one system on which you will be up and running faster than the other.

 

Regarding PDM, the major point is whether you want a design vault for the design office, or an enterprise PLM connected to your information system. The size and duration of the project will vary greatly depending on these points. 

In case of connection with your ERP, the spec devs are often long, and not maintained over time....

 

Good research

2 Likes
6

I quite agree with Dpusel, everyone will tend to recommend the software they use I think.

I would not deviate from the rule by recommending a SolidWorks Premium (package which contains the RDM software as well as a PDM software)

For the surface I will also agree with Bastien.Vogiel, solidworks is above all a volume 3D software although it has a large number of surface functions, to see what you want to do exactly

7

 

 

Thank you all for your answers.

 

I tended to lean towards the Solidworks software for the reasons you cited.

We will organize tests on the two software very soon via the test versions in order to better understand the possibilities offered by these software (especially in terms of the surface), we are waiting to be able to attend the 2 demonstrations before starting these tests.

 

Regarding the PLM part, we want to integrate and manage all our documents that can evolve over time via a workflow system, so that it can also serve as a safe for our data, but above all that it is easy to use.

This was already supposed to be the case with PDMLink 9.0, but because of some problems encountered and a difficulty in getting started, many people had decided not to play the game (hence the insistence on ease of use).

 

Of course, whether for CAD or PLM software, training is to be provided to be able to really master these tools.

 

[quote] In case of connection with your ERP, the development is often long, and not maintained over time... [/quote]

 

I must admit, Olive, that I didn't quite understand that last sentence. What are DdevSpecs ?

 

In the meantime, I thank you once again for your help.

1 Like
8

Hello Doctor,

 

for my part, I use SolidWorks in my company but also know ProE so I will try to be as impartial as possible.

First of all, as you can imagine, you have to make a consistent choice between CAD and PLM. Indeed, CAD data management in a PLM can only be done correctly on software from the same publisher.

 

From a pure CAD point of view, both software are very good and will do everything you mentioned. I have a personal preference for SolidWorks for its interface that is easier to understand (especially coming from ProE). And the Enterprise PDM tool is remarkably ergonomic, although Winchill has made great progress lately on the interface side.

 

Finally, a point that has not been mentioned but that seems to me to be at least as important as the software itself is: which integrator will support you on your PLM project?

If you choose SolidWorks and EPDM, I can only recommend Axemble.

 

Hoping to have enlightened you.

 

 

3 Likes
9

Hello

 

By special development, I meant specific development, allowing to connect PDM and ERP.

We are talking about pure and hard IT development, carried out either by an IT services company, a developer from your company, or the team that set up the ERP, or those who set up the PDM.

 

Last point.

if you are a Pro E user, it is a safe bet (and I could probably be wrong) that you will be more comfortable with PTC products, on which you have years of experience, even if another solution can:

- either better meet your needs

- or be fundamentally more efficient

especially if you want to thoroughly test surface functions.

 

The risk of "testing" the 2 solutions in parallel, its real complexity, is to drive 2 cars without necessarily having the specific driving licenses, nor really the time to do real "tests" in parallel with your daily life.

 

Good luck for the rest of your journey

1 Like
10

Once again thank you for your help.

 

I did some research on my own and I therefore retrieved information about these software programs that make it possible to make the link between PLM and ERP. There is EPDM Gateway which is the solution for EPDM and  Windchill Enterprise Systems Integration which is the PTC solution, so for PDMLink. So depending on our choice of solutions (PTC or Dassault Systemes), one of the two software programs will be used to make this link with the ERP.

 

 

For Olive:

 

I don't think that having been on ProEngineer can be a guarantee of being more comfortable on Creo. Compared to the demonstration we had, the software is really nice and offers interesting options, nevertheless (but this is only my opinion) it is very close to Solidworks in its interface. There is a rather radical change. Of course, I remind you that my comparison is between ProE WF 3 and Creo 2.0, so there is still a big gap and I must admit that I don't really know what was really between the two. But if I understood correctly, it's between ProE WF 5 and Creo 1.0 that there was this big change in interface and handling.

 

Nevertheless, where I agree with you is on the use of PDMLink which will be easier for us and where we will have more points of reference. Nevertheless, we still have to see Dassault Systems' demonstration.

 

 

Concerning the testing of CAD software, it is true that we do not necessarily have the adequate "permits" to really do the tests as they should be, but I think that it will allow us to already have a good approach to the software by ourselves. This approach is like trying a car that you are not used to (to stay in the automotive metaphor), there is a time of adaptation to get to grips with the vehicle. The handling is more or less fast depending on the vehicle, knowing that both will be able to meet our expectations, so it is this handling that will be important while knowing that we will not master the softs.

In addition, these software are valid for 30 days, which gives us time to organize ourselves before downloading them and to plan some specific tests on them during these 30 days of trials (really 22 days if we remove the weekends).

 

In my opinion, the choice will be made mainly in relation to the level of PLM software, but it will also be a question of cost.

 

In any case, thank you again to all. Do not hesitate to add remarks or additional information, it can always be useful.

For my part, I will keep you informed when the choice is made and also the reason for this choice if you are interested.

11

Hello

 

I myself have used ProEngineer, Solidworks, as well as PDMWorks and Intralink.

 

In terms of CAD, I much prefer ProE, it brings much more rigour to the working method. Which I can't find today on Soliworks. The sketching tool on ProE is much faster, although Solidworks has improved a bit. Also, if you use polygon design a lot, Solidworks isn't the best at it. I advise you to stay on ProE or use CATIA.

 

On the other hand, PDMWorks is much easier to use than PDMLink. It doesn't even require training, while with 2 days of training by PTC I still didn't know Intralink... (In 2008) I thought they would have improved since then, but I see that this is the reason why you have to change...

 

So let's see if a CATIA and PDM Works solution would be compatible, it would be a good compromise.

 

Good luck

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

@sunn

 

Going from Pro E to Catia in an SME, or how to sink a design office in 1 lesson, especially if you integrate the PDM part.

Because in this case it's Enovia necessarily:

- its budget X 3 (at least) compared to Windchild or E-PDM,

- at least, a training phase X 2

- a long-term increase in skills for non-CATIA experts.

- 5 to 10 days of PDM deployment per workstation if you want to do something that stands up

- nothing to link PDM and ERP developed from the ground up to my knowledge

 

Catia is indeed THE reference in 3D CAD,.... if you design planes, cargo ships, cars.

 

I am not an expert in CAD deployment, but I therefore do not understand the recommendation given the imperatives listed by "The Doctor"

However, I remain very open and interested in the debate,

and the arguments in favour of Catia on this particular issue.

 

Kind regards

 

2 Likes
13

Hello

 

Unfortunately, I answer very late... Sorry. After 15 years of CAD+PLM, I give you my experience.

 

For the parish, every man for himself, it is possible!  We can also have a relatively objective opinion on the problems.

First, if you have to do advanced surface on a recurring basis, take a good look at Creo. Have tests done on your complex surface parts, set them up  and you'll see. Ask to see ISDX... And then for the problems of surface drafts too, on plastic.

Salomon, Maped, Petzl who have these problems use Creo. Or else it's Catia!

On the other hand, for recruitment for example, SW is simply well above, given the national education policy on this subject.

And SW is an excellent product that has assets to showcase, especially its affordability.

Pay attention to some reviews on old uses like "in 2007, it was rotten". There are 6 years of development between! On the sheet metal side, rdm, assembly it's kifkif.

For PLM, it's more complex. This can be a decision criterion: whether CAD dictates, or PLM.

But choose from the same publisher!!!!! It's far too painful to multiply the number of interlocutors who risk in addition to passing the buck! It's not me, it's PLM, it's not me, it's CAD... It is sometimes unsolvable.

The two PLMs are equal and are excellently made.

So CREO 2+windchill, or SW + enterprise PDM couple, this is the overall choice to make according to my experience.

 

In any case, I don't think you'll make a catastrophic choice!

 

Do not hesitate to contact me, if you wish

 

Francois

1 Like
14

Hello

 

We have been using Inventor for several years. Overall it's a good CAD software

with a high-performance sheet metal module. However, our field of activity is increasingly oriented towards structures and/or the combination of structure + mechanics.

After several steps and demonstrations, we acquired a Créo 2 license.

 

We are currently training on Creo2. And there, big disappointment for the whole part of the drawing. It is really a disaster if you have to make plans or files of

High quality plan.

The text editor is old and not very efficient.

The configuration of the quotation is not very efficient and leaves little initiative.

The making of the sections is not dynamic as in Solidworks or Inventor.

Detail zooms are not dynamic, etc, etc.

The realization of high-performance dynamic cartridges is very low.

We really have the feeling that this is an area that is completely absent at PTC.

In my opinion, it is imperative to ask for a demonstration on the drawings of your parts

according to your standards and/or work habits.

This is an area that we had perhaps addressed during the consultations, thinking that it was at the level of Solidworks or Inventor. Big mistake...

For surface design, Créo2 is a good Soft, certainly less intuitive than the other two, but can be more rigorous.

For the sheet metal module, here too, Creo2 is very far from the possibilities offered by Inventor or Solidworks.

As always, demonstrations never reveal weaknesses or shortcomings.

So be careful, take the time to ask for a comparison based on your projects

by comparing the entire process from design to the creation of the plan files

if necessary.

 

Good luck.

 

15

Hello

I join the discussion.

I'm a mechanical developer under Pro-E + Widchill. 4 - 5 years ago in my company I actively participated in the comparison between SW and Pro-E. Our goal at the time was to improve our development from a time and quality point of view. The fact that we also have a trained population was part of the choice.

 

I think everyone here has noticed the differences between the two CAD software.

 

I wanted to intervene to put my finger on a point that has not yet been mentioned: history.

We didn't switch to SW because we wanted to continue to evolve our parts + assemblies + draw. There is no miracle bridge that reshapes our history.

So be careful with your history....