What do you think about Solidworks PDM?

PDM Nomenclatures
1

Hello

We have had Solidworks PDM for about 2 years and we are not satisfied with it at all.

Indeed, there are a lot of bugs, it makes the windows explorer very unstable, the navigation is slow, the performance of solidworks is very seriously reduced... Visiativ tells us that SW-PDM is not compatible with the Toolbox and MyCADtools Tools... We regret having installed this PDM which wastes a lot of time and annoys us with these permanent bugs.

We would like to know the opinion of other engineering firms about SW-PDM.

Thank you!

2

Hello

How can Visiativ say that SolidWorks PDM is not compatible with the Toolbox and MyCADtools when it is not???

We use some myCADtools (and myPDMtools) tools while we are under SW-PDM and in my old box we used the Toolbox with the same PDM.

For me, there is a problem with the configuration and/or hardware configuration, PDM is precisely there to save time in addition to securing the files, otherwise what is its point?!

I've never used SW in a company without PDM so I can't say too much but I don't find that PDM is a hindrance, on the contrary it allows you to manage versions, flows, automate certain time-consuming tasks, ...

2 Likes
3

My colleagues don't have any more problems with PDM than with any other software.
I've been using it for a while these days, I found that the accesses (display in the explorer) were a bit long but our network is not necessarily at its best and the machines are starting to date a bit.

Can you develop your configuration (SW version, PDM, server), bugs encountered, the overall structure of the network (specific CAD network or general company network)?

3 Likes
4

Hello

I'm very happy with PDM. Before, we worked with files on the company's server and the loading times were endless, but now it's going fast! In addition, the cards associated with the files save a lot of time in the design of new equipment, because the cartridges of all the drawings are updated with the new information. The workflow associated with the files is also efficient, which is what allows you to define the state (CREATION, VALID, MODIFICATIONS, OBSCOLETE). It adds a cumbersome amount because you have to archive, change the state etc, but in the end it's much more structured and you have less trouble in the long run.

In short, all this to say that I wouldn't want to go back!

Gauthik

 

2 Likes
5

Hello

There are already small prerequisites: currently we run SW2014 + EPDM 2015 on Windows 10 and it's indeed the fair of bugs and systematic crashes of the Windows explorer. At the same time it's a bit logical since neither SW2014 nor EPDM 2015 can be compatible with windows 10 since it came out after...

If you also have this kind of time lag, it may explain some of your problems. In this case, the solution is to update SW and EPDM.

A 'solution' to avoid browser bugs: work mainly with the EPDM 'search.exe' tool: this allows you to do 90% of what the explorer does with a little less risk of bugs.

Otherwise EPDM does add a good layer of heaviness (even with a basic workflow): the transitions are not automatic, there are all the breakpoints that can be annoying (but it avoids problems), the administration of EPDM is far from easy and it has (like everything SW releases...) its share of bugs. If your workflow is very complicated, that shouldn't help either.

On the other hand, the quality auditors now leave us alone (traceability of all approvals, modifications, etc.). EPDM also allows us to 'easily' go back (customer who changes his mind about a change...). It also allows us to understand "why and how" when something doesn't fit when 5 designers have worked on the assemblies: with the archiving of the different versions it is possible to know when the problem appeared on the 3D. And above all, it allows us to work remotely: we have a designer who works 300km from the company from his house and it works without too many problems (almost impossible to manage without EPDM this kind of case). We can also access what our American colleagues are doing (and vice versa) (this point was the No. 1 issue for the implementation of EPDM in our country).

Some EPDM tools also save time / quality: automatic creation of pdfs when approving plans, possibility to do tasks to create stp/igs....

If the system is slow it may also be that either the wired network connections are blah blah (gigabit is good ;-) ) , or that the SQL and archive servers are not powerful enough / not optimized (they are the ones who manage the whole system: if they don't run well it can explain a lot of things), a small SSD for local views of the stations is not expensive now and it can boost your machines if they are a bit old.

3 Likes
6

Hello

Well, everything is said or almost ... and it's the same for me, no particular heaviness due to PDM, no more crashing of the explorer than without PDM, and, as a bonus, all the advantages of a database ... so far the operating problems encountered are more often due to what happens between the keyboard and the folder than in Epdm but that's not always easy to explain ... and we've been working with it for 7/8 years...

Kind regards

7

Hello

Thank you for your answers.

I think we shouldn't confuse the features that PDM offers with the problems encountered.

Indeed, if we compare PDM to working with several people on files in a network share, indeed long live PDM.

How we use:

We are a design office of 8 positions, we work on large special machines, even complete production lines (ASM of + 20,000pcs and many external references, several draftsmen work on different parts of the same project).

 

Work flow:

The 1st workflow was set up by Visiativ and was supposed to do a lot of things (automatically generate PDFs and DXFs) but the tasks mess up randomly, the flow follows the external references so when you want to go through a revision on a part, you pass the revision on the part from which you draw the reference, and also on all the pieces that also draw refs.

Namely, we have a VERY GOOD command of the Refs.Ext, no cyclical refs and references mastered by us (they all point to a single part that contains only sketches for example), it is not our method that should be questioned. (I can argue)

As this workflow was super heavy and not functional, I took it myself to simplify it. As a result, it's better, the tasks are OK but the performance is still not there.

 

Example of problems encountered:

- Sometimes you end up being a read-only extract

- Sometimes it says "version 0 has been modified" when we are at version xxx and version 0 does not exist

- Unable to check out or archive for several reasons:

--- Missing data for the bill of materials

--- File not unique but PDM does not say which one!! Forced to search by hand. Result we easily lose 30min

- Remote desktop use with poor throughput makes PDM usage impossible (it's not slow... just it doesn't work)

- The versions and information in SW and Explorer are not always consistent.

- You can't archive by the explorer if SW is open.

- If we archive or get with SW open on a big ASM, SW opens the parts one by one in a new window, returns to the main rebuilt ASM EVERYTHING, re-opens the 2nd part on 20,000, returns to the rebuilt ASM ... We did the test, SW runs in a loop for a good half day.

The best thing to do is to kill it and do everything SW closed in the explorer and then finally launch SW.

- The messages: "Be careful, you are read-only" are unbearable! and keeps coming back

- If you launch a macro for example that closes the file with or without saving, if you are not extracted it asks you each time to register under (logical?) so in the end you cannot do a batch job without extracting and then canceling the extraction.

- There are a number of bugs with the cards, for example if the 1st sheet of a drawing does not contain a template, the card does not fill

- We have it extracted and there Pouff the file is extracted by a colleague but on his own workstation!! Forced to log in with the colleague's account to archive and then change accounts! Crazy!

-Impossible to open two different revisions at the same time!! So you can't compare the versions unless you make a tree copy with a prefix or a branch

....

I can continue the list of bugs on 3 pages without any problem and all this in my head, I can also reproduce these bugs on request on any installation of SW+PDM

- Project manager does NOT work with PDM

- Other myCAD tools like integration don't work well with PDM

I myself sent 100 screenshots and videos to visiativ + creation of 10 tickets...

 

Our configuration:

Fujitsu Server of 2018 with:

Bi-Xeon 3Ghz 64GB RAM 10k SAS disk in RAID

Workstation: I7/I9 99xxxK or Xeon between 3.70Ghz and 5.3Ghz with 64 GB RAM too + Quadro P5000 and M2 NAND hard drive.

The performance monitor on the server and on the workstations is at less than 10% almost all the time.

Everything is in gigabit on a single switch with the server which also has network cards in Teaming to further increase the bandwidth...

 

Visiativ and other companies have audited our installation and everything seems OK.

I even once reinstalled everything with a consultant from visiativ, we redid everything, went through everything with a fine-tooth comb and the result is always the same.

 

So I hear that you are satisfied, I tell myself that we have to keep looking, it may be a little stupid thing that poses all these problems.

Thank you for your feedback,

Rafael

8

Hello everyone ,

 

Personally , I wouldn't go back for anything in the world.

  • No more duplicate files
  • No more files scattered on different computers.
  • A good follow-up of the revisions
  • Possibility to find old versions without destroying everything
  • Well-organized archives and files.
  • Computer and non-handwritten validations and scanners.
  • Dates and names on all actions.
  • Ability to associate other files.
  • Clear project management
  • Cartridge and evolution notes in the maps with searchable
  • and many other things.

The PDM has become totally indispensable for our design office.

I think that if it doesn't represent an advantage it's because either you don't need it, or it hasn't been 'adapted' to your needs and therefore useless.
The PDM makes sense when and only when you make it your own. Whether it's on the screw cycle, the data cards or the folder structure.

The only downside is that you have to think about it carefully before putting everything in it and spending a little time on it to bring it to life.

I have only one small downside: automating archiving and retrieval.

Jerome

2 Likes
9

Visiativ told us that we shouldn't use the toolbox with PDM:

------------

From: Jérémy REISCH <jeremy.reisch@visiativ.com>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 11:49 AM
At: Rafaël Allouche <allouche.r@groupe-fldi.com>
Cc: Claude RIBAGNAC <claude.ribagnac@visiativ.com>
Object: RE: Abandon Toolbox...

 

Hello

 

As we told Mr. Favrel, we have successfully deployed the SolidWorks PDM solution with many different customers. It is therefore difficult to question the product.

 

In view of the many instabilities you encounter, we have doubts on several points:

  • Network/server architecture
  • Using the Toolbox
  • The methodology of the design office

 

  1. We have ruled out, in a1st step, the IT problems following the results of the audit that was carried out at your premises.

 

  1. We believe that you have a good level of knowledge/proficiency in SolidWorks and that the methodologies you employ are correct. There are probably slight adjustments to be made to further optimize the use of SolidWorks, but it seems difficult to say that this is responsible for the instability you are experiencing.

 

  1. It should be noted that SolidWorks, like all computer software, can encounter stability problems. Some problems are clearly identified and corrected quickly by the release of a service pack by the publisher. Others are more random and difficult to reproduce. The experience of our support and consulting teams allows us to say that some functions of SolidWorks are more "sensitive" than others. That's why we sometimes advise our customers to avoid using features that are native to SolidWorks. This is the case with the Toolbox. We know that, in some cases, the Toolbox causes problems with SolidWorks and/or PDM instabilities. There are, of course, customers who use the Toolbox and don't have any problems. But we are sometimes skeptical about this module of SolidWorks and we have already given our comments to the editor.

 

We therefore want to eliminate the most sensitive risk of the problems, namely the Toolbox, in the first place, before exploring other avenues. However, it is important that you register your tickets on the myCADservices website in order to continue to investigate your problems and that you can report them to the publisher.

10

Hello

Same as we have been using since 2009 and apart from a few bugs, we will not go back to a classic server operation.

On the problems you encounter I will try to provide some answers:

 We sometimes find ourselves extracting in read-only mode : This mainly happens when the file is extracted from the explorer while it is open in SW. A few cases already had on some files but just uncheck the read-only attribute when the folder explorer window is open (save as) and it rolls.

Sometimes it says "version 0 has been modified" when we are at version xxx and version 0 does not exist : Unless I am mistaken, this happens when the synchronization with the server goes wrong (loss of communication, system latency...)

On the impossibility of extracting or archiving:

Missing BOM data: never had this problem, probably a configuration at your place

File Uniqueness: If you want to allow duplicates it is possible, otherwise normally it lists the problem files and indicates the folder in which the files with the same name are located. If it's on a variable it's likely that it doesn't display the file concerned (never tested because it is possible with us).

Different versions between SW and PDM: it happens from time to time but it's rather SW that screws up in the update of some custom properties (with PDM or without it's a pure SW bug). Apart from removing the property and putting it back, it is sometimes impossible to make a simple modification of the content.

Impossible archiving in the explorer with SW open: Normal operation, SW takes over the writing of the files. You have to archive from SW when it's opened in SW and extracted.

For large assemblies, trying to get an earlier version with SW open is just "suicidal". You have to close the assembly, get the desired version in the explorer and then open. Time saving guaranteed. There may also be SW settings to review on the behavior of references to open or not.

The message "Be careful, you are read-only" is set in SW as well as presenting the extraction window for all files as read-only.

For macros you have to add processing to know if the files are read-only or not (you have to add a little bit of your code)

The map bugs remain to be seen, but if there are no properties in the file, there is nothing that comes up, it's all in all logical.

Whether the extraction is linked to an account is the normal operation. It's up to you to make your users aware of archiving. Were you complaining about a server when the file was opened by a colleague in writing? It's the same here, I don't see anything strange in this behavior. The bug for the time being is not on the software side

The last point is the only one that poses a problem in the operation. After SW allows you to compare two files to different versions without any problem and without having to duplicate anything. The only limitation is in the opening in an assembly of two parts to different versions (technical limitation of the tool).

I think you have a big problem with training in the use of this tool even if I admit that it is not free of bugs. But as it stands, what you mentioned is not generally so .

 

 

 

 

3 Likes
11

Hello

Thank you for taking the time to give a detailed answer.

Your conclusions point by point are generally mine from a technical-IT point of view.

On the other hand, I think that it is mainly the salespeople who sell the PDM who should have more training.

Indeed, the entire sales pitch that made us buy the PDM falls by the wayside for the reasons mentioned above.

 

In any case, I don't accept the answers "it happens from time to time" especially for a PDM.

Que l'extraction soit liée à un compte c'est le fonctionnement normal. A vous de sensibiliser vos utilisateurs à l'archivage. Vous vous plaigniez sur un serveur lorsque le fichier était ouvert par un collègue en écriture? C'est pareil ici je ne vois rien d'étrange dans ce comportement. Le bug pour le coup n'est pas côté logiciel

Uh, my name is Rafael, I'm logged in as Rafael, I have it extracted, and the part is extracted by dupond on my workstation... While dupond is not even in front of his computer... I am forced to log in as a dupond to archive, go back to Rafael and try to extract again...

The band will have to explain to me the logic behind it... Can you imagine logging into your online bank and seeing your colleague's account?

 

Pour les gros assemblage, tenter l'obtention d'une version antérieur avec SW ouvert est juste "suicidaire". Il faut fermer l'assemblage, obtenir la version voulue dans l'explorateur puis ouvrir. Gain de temps assuré. Il y a peut-être également du paramétrage SW à revoir sur le comportement des références à ouvrir ou non.

So an ASM that takes 10 minutes to open, you have to close it when you just want to get another version of one or two rooms... Then wait again for 10min of opening.

Since it's suicidal, why don't we have a little dialogue box "be careful, you're going to launch an action that will push you to suicide, do you really really want to continue?"

Also, it must be said in training...

Last point after I stop there, PDM puts the files in read-only it's good.. But for the elements of bookcases (like a hinge) that we want to be flexible, how do we do it? especially if this hinge is in several machines?

 

Les bugs de carte ça reste à voir mais si aucune propriétés dans le fichier il n'y a rien qui remonte c'est somme tout logique.

Obviously you understand what you want to understand in my words without doing any more research before answering.

Bonjour M Allouche,
 
Ce problème de feuille vide qui met en échec l'attribut $PRPSHEET est connu du support SOLIDWORKS PDM. 
Il est enregistré dans leur base sous la référence :
SPR 646783 "'$PRPSHEET' mapped drawing data card variables do not copy model properties if the first view is empty, or the first sheet does not have a view"

"Train yourself" Mr. before taking me for an incompetent.

Sincerely,

A user is cured of SW who is not in denial....

2 Likes
12

Hello, I did a big PDM (20 Draftsmen BE internal-6 ext to the site), and now a small PDM we are 3 ...

Yes there are different ways to use depending on the number of people and I have my experience as a CAD admin which helped me to solve most of the problems (yes I have been paid for more than 1 year just for administration ...)  

Summarize => you don't have to adapt PDM to your working method, but the other way around 

We find the same points and then we evolve. 

Pss all the secret is in the flows and library blockings... and I work with the toolbox in PDM

 

 

13

Allouche.r

I'm one of those who are against ePDM, because it restricts Solidworks too much, or prohibits the use of several functions, etc...

When you touch the ePDM configuration, you quickly realize that those who programmed ePDM had not grasped some of the workings (basic philosophy) of Solidworks, etc... (not the same logic, not the same language/term, etc...)

ePDM is a gas plant to implement, it consumes a lot of time for the configuration (i.e. doing the computer scientist)...

The salespeople are there to make people believe that this is the miracle solution, and that everything works well, as on their demo.

And also to sell maintenance, knowing that now bugs reported during the year are not even fixed "year+x",

gone are the days when a Solidworks SP5 stood for stability-productivity BE, now even with SP5s, users are more and more often acting as beta-testers...

Solidworks already includes tools for working with several people on projects, without ePDM...

As well as renaming/moving functions without losing links, and without third-party paying tools...

The few positive points to ePDM for me are the advanced network/user management, access rights, and workflow...

all the rest of ePDM = trash can

Allouche.r I sent you a more detailed pm.

Finally, we must put into perspective the number of users registered on this forum, and those really active.

I would like to have the real figures, because despite thousands of users, there are only a few dozen active...

1 Like
14

Hello

I am also one of the supporters of EPDM for all the reasons mentioned above, even if it is clear that there are problems, some of which have been going on for years but which obviously have no solutions.

When acquiring EPDM it is presented as a miracle solution by the reseller, and even if the consultants who come to do the installation offer a whole lot of solutions it is never perfect on the 1st try. This is an element that must evolve over time, sometimes with one's working method.

For example in my case, despite a PDM set up more than 4 years ago now in our company I spend about 1/2 per month minimum making improvements or correcting problems. But the first 6 months were almost one day a week.
Luckily I had already experienced an EPDM implementation in my previous work (I had 2 times the admin training and it is not too much), which allowed me to actively participate in the implementation and to avoid reproducing the mistakes I saw in the past.

In view of some of the problems you have mentioned, I think that the administration side has been left aside due to lack of time or resources.

 

4 Likes
15

Thank you for your answers.

Yes, I do think that by making well-thought-out Flows while remaining simple and taking the time to configure well + regular administration (so very time-consuming) you get a useful PDM.

Sales people should therefore insist on the fact that you need admins who dedicate time to it (which I do in the end).

On the other hand, so far in this post we have discussed Features a lot but not many Bugs. Solidworks is already very, very buggy, I don't think anyone can deny it, and PDM is too (a little less so). As a result, the two handsets are still not very stable.

I think that the fact that we deliver a "Kill Solidworks Process" and "PDM Restart" utility shows that we need it. Rare are the software that comes with utilities for killers...

Finally, the incompatibility of PDM with MyCADtools is also quite proven but is not official (e.g. project manager)

 

 

1 Like
16

Hello

Yes, I do think that by making well-thought-out Flows while remaining simple and taking the time to configure well + regular administration (so very time-consuming) you get a useful PDM. ==> that's undeniable and yes it's time-consuming ...

Sales people should therefore insist on the fact that you need admins who dedicate time to it (which I do in the end). ==> Yes but as a commercial argument it's not very convincing except the goal of salespeople is to sell ...

On the other hand, so far in this post we have discussed Features a lot but not many Bugs. Solidworks is already very, very buggy, I don't think anyone can deny it, and PDM is too (a little less so). As a result, the two handsets are still not very stable. ==> Uh, I don't really agree here, we probably don't have the same constraints and ways of working but I have a feeling of stability in Solidworks and in Epdm ...

I think that the fact that we deliver a "Kill Solidworks Process" and "PDM Restart" utility shows that we need it. Rare are the software that comes with utilities for killers... ==> well if I've already seen the old CAD software I was working on which came with a utility called "sdkill.exe". And then, to my knowledge, the "Kill Solidworks Process" and "PDM Restart" utilities are not utilities provided by the Solidworks and Epdm editor and are generally only improved tools avoiding opening the task manager and performing a "task end" on the current process...

Finally, the incompatibility of PDM with MyCADtools is also quite proven but is not official (e.g. project manager) ==> it is not up to Epdm to adapt to MyCadTools tools but the opposite (they are not the same editors) and this is apparently not the choice that has been made on these tools even if some of them are compatible provided that all the files to be processed are in the local cache, the MyCadTools tools rely on the Solidworks APIs but not on the Epdm APIs.

Kind regards

3 Likes