upFront.eZine News Archives

Siemens in 2020: Solid Edge 2021 (part ii)

Issue #1,067   |  September 28, 2020

 

by Ralph Grabowski

Siemens last summer held an online launch event [replay: youtube.com/watch?v=2nZXi9YJ3o4] for Solid Edge 2021, at which it emphasized the do-it-all nature of this mid-range software. Presenter vp of R&D Dan Staples boasted that Solid Edge has "the best mechanical design in the marketplace." (Siemens had not yet held a launch event for NX.) In addition to MCAD, Mr Staples noted that Solid Edge 2021 is involved in a number of related fields (see figure 1), ones that aren't, however, quite as complete as marketing might suggest. It is Siemens as a whole that has the breadth in software offerings, with Capital electrical design for vehicles and aircraft as the most recent significant acquisition.   Figure 1: Breadth of activities performed by Solid Edge 2021   Electrical Design in Solid Edge consists primarily of designing cabinets and auto-routing wire harnesses; it doesn't actually do electrical design. Instead, it depends on importing electrical and PCB designs through TeamCenter, IDX, and DSI files. Simulation is conducted through a cutdown version of Siemens's own Simcenter. Manufacturing involves choosing tools for simulating models cut by multi-axis CAM [computer-aided manufacturing] machines, as well as AM [additive manufacturing] material selection and output checking. Technical Publications means generating interactive documents through the HTML5-enabled Share3D at https://www.share3d.com/, and PDF files; see Figure 2.   Figure 2 Exploding a 3D model for training   Data Management employs parts of TeamCenter inside Solid Edge to control drawings. Cloud-based Collaboration refers to a separate program, TeamCenter X (in beta), for sharing and viewing models on mobile devices, and using AR [augmented reality] to place them in the physical realm; see figure 3 or visit https://trials.sw.siemens.com/teamcenterx-cloud-plm/.   Figure 3: Teamcenter X placing a 3D model the real world Sub-division Modeling is the number-one feature touted by Siemens for Solid Edge 2021. It really is meant for industrial designers who make organic-looking things like the swoopy shell of a mouse or camera body. The emphasis in sub-d is not accuracy but looks. Me, I have difficulty with freeform sketching programs like Gravit, and so I find sub-d just as difficult to wrangle. Never mind. Here is how it works. You begin with a primitive, like a box or sphere, and then interactively push and pull mesh areas to get closer and closer to the shape you want. When you need greater detail, you sub-divide some meshes into smaller ones. Sharp corners are added by manipulating edges. Solid Edge includes a handy mirror function, so that anything you do on one half is replicated in the other half to create a perfectly symmetrical result. See figure 4.   Figure 4: Mirrored subdivision modeling in Solid Edge 2021 Arriving at a curvy mouse or camera body is faster with sub-d modeling than with solid modeling, but eventually the mesh needs to work with solids. Here, Siemens offers Convergent Modeling, its take on allowing disparate data to exist in a single model, including generative and reverse-engineered (3D scans) ones. Sub-d modeling is included with both the Classic and Premium versions of Solid Edge 2021, so you don't pay extra for it. Let me run down highlights for some of the other new features: Modeling. To make large assemblies faster, all parts are kept in a single assembly file. Internal relationships (like constraints) are now remembered when copying and pasting parts from one assembly to another. Frames can have gaps to allow for welds, and semi-automatically add inward or outward end-caps with optional offsets and chamfers. Nesting now optimizes parts placement on unusual shapes, like cow hides. Sheetmetal. Multiple edges receive flanges just by selecting them and then pulling, and partial flanges can be constructed. Decals lets you place images and logos, even across multiple faces.  Simulation. The 2021 release adds electronics air cooling analysis from Simcenter's FLOEFD fluid simulation module. Package Creator defines the packaging and solder points of chips. Modern chips generate a lot of heat, and so simulation in Solid Edge now handles the impacts from air flow and cooling of fans, shown as temperature curves and iso-surfaces that represent air flow direction, velocity, and temperature. See figure 5. Structural designs also can take temperature into account.   Figure 5: Iso-surface visualization of fan's cooling capacity User Interface. Adaptive UI tracks the commands with which you are working, and then guesses the next command you might need. CAD managers can take output from experienced users and give it to novice users as they learn to do specific tasks, with Solid Edge telling them the next command to employ. Parts Catalog. Siemens  licensed the Cadenas parts library to provide Solid Edge 2021 with 1,500 manufacturers' catalogs. There is a visual search function that returns results sorted by percentage likelihood of matching your request.    Q&A Q: Siemens had a sketching app on Android a few years ago, which I notice hasn't been updated in over a year. Is NX Sketch based on this technology? A: Good catch on that. We learned from CatchBook how people sketch, but NX Sketch is brand-new and is built into NX. It avoids over-constraints on sketches. Q: Is NX Share available standalone or only in NX? A: Right now, it is part of NX. It will be available standalone later this year. Q: Regarding the $100 million AAR [average recurring revenue] of Mendix: why did revenues skyrocket? A: The covid crisis is making companies wanting to build apps quickly, to work remotely. Even before, Mendix provided local capabilities, such as to Teamcenter. It grew 155% over last year. Q: What is the pricing for Teamcenter X? A: We have very competitive and attractive pricing with what's out there on the market.  Q: Is Teamcenter Share a re-badge of Solid Edge Portal? A: Absolutely not. It is built on the Mendix platform. It adds CAD knowledge to a Dropbox-like platform. Q: Will Teamcenter be replaced by Teamcenter X over time? Is this part of a roadmap to replace all desktop programs with cloud apps? A: We are not one of those vendors who go to their customers who say, "As of May 25, we will be completely SaaS [software as a service, a.k.a. cloud-only]." This is not our approach. We are modernizing products by bringing them to the cloud. Customers can make the transition, if they want to, when they are ready. We will never have to have that hard discussion with customers about them having to make a difficult transition of technologies.  Q: What market does Teamcenter X target? A: Immediately, in the mid-market. But there is interest from large customers as well. Q: How is Mendix affecting development at Siemens, and will it be an independent company? A: We learn a lot from each other. We don't forget that Mendix began with business applications, such as HR [human resources] and finance. So we can solve the complete solution across the board for customers. Q: How is your partnership with Bentley on CALM [capital asset lifecycle management] going? A: It is growing business for data management of plant design, offshore platforms, and so on. We will be doing more together, as you will hear in the coming 12-18 months. We are bringing Teamcenter product configuration to these large projects. [For an introduction to CALM, see blogs.sw.siemens.com/teamcenter/introducing-teamcenter-for-capital-asset-lifecycle-management-calm.] Q: When will authoring [design] software like NX be on the cloud? A: The cloud is a major trend, and we are looking at how to bring more of it to our customers. We are working on the authoring side, but the real strength of the cloud is on the collaboration side. So, for instance, we are bringing more collaboration to the authoring software. Q: Revenues of your division for the year? A: Siemens does not report divisional revenues [such as for Siemens Digital Industries Software], but maybe that will change in the future, like in two years. We are outgrowing our competition every quarter. Q: How is simulation, CD-Adapco doing? A: Overall it is doing well. Simulation is core to the digital twin of vehicles and plants. Our simulation revenues are equal to the revenues of the market leader [ANSYS]. That gets lost in our large portfolio of software.    What Ralph Grabowski Thinks This is an era where, it seems to me, some CAD vendors concentrate harder on collecting subscriptions from customers than improving their software. So it is good to see Siemens going all out by loading up this year's release of Solid Edge with lots of new functions.  During the launch event, the host introduced Solid Edge 2021 to us by saying, "We bring the technologies of tomorrow to our customers today." But some new features -- like sub-d modeling and electrical design -- were long needed to catch up with competitors AutoCAD and Solidworks, respectively. The improvements to fluid simulation were, I suspect, in reaction to Discovery Live fluid simulation added by PTC to Creo last year. Other new features, like the "AI"-enabled interface, are trickle-downs from earlier releases of NX. Solid Edge 2021 is expected to ship in late September. The 30-day free trial can be downloaded (after registration) from https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/store/en-us/trial/solid-edge.html. It is free for students (including self-learners) and startups (in business under three years, still under $1 million in revenues).  https://solidedge.siemens.com [This article first appeared in Design Engineering magazine and is reprinted with permission.]

Sponsor: Okino Graphics == 3D CAD & DCC Conversion for MAXON's Cinema-4D Animation System == Okino (Toronto) and MAXON (Germany) celebrate 20 years of supporting MCAD data visualization through Okino's PolyTrans-for-Cinema-4D conversion software. MAXON's Cinema-4D is one of the world's most used and respected animation systems for MCAD data visualization. Okino's PolyTrans software transforms ultra-massive 3D datasets into highly-refined models for fast, efficient, and optimized animation creation. All conversions are 'Load & Go,' with no model rebuilding necessary. Popular CAD data sources include SolidWorks, ProE/Creo, Inventor, AutoCAD, Revit, Navisworks, DGN, IGES, STEP, Parasolid, and JT. DCC data sources are Cinema-4D, 3ds Max, Maya, FBX/Collada, and many more. Perfected over three decades, we know 3D data translation intimately, providing you with highly personalized solutions, education, and communication. Contact CTO Robert Lansdale at [email protected]  http://www.okino.com

And in Other News

Here are some of the articles posted on the WorldCAD Access blog recently: Addressing the problems of digital twins   Google, Stalker   ZwSoft Cuts Prices and Raises Prices   My First Software Manual -- 1981   VM on Linux in ChomeOS -- too slow for me

Letters to the Editor

Congrats on covering CAD for 35 years. I was working at Colorado State University at the time and remember it well. I hope you continue your work for many more years.      – Terry Wohlers, president     Wohlers Associates, Inc.   Re: Open Design Alliance DevCon 2020 I tried using IFC when using the educational version of Tekla. I wanted to go between Inventor and Tekla, one way or the other. Could not be done. I tried it with other CAD software and found it could not be done. The reason is because of the extensive amount of time and energy that goes into telling the IFC converter all the data for each and every structural part, if at all available in the software itself, and if it is the same in the other software. I quickly discovered that there is no IFC standard per IFC standard! And if you let the software do the metadata exchange for you, it'll screw you every time. If you can manage to work your way through the process, you’ll be so exhausted by the time you’re done, that it makes the process untenable. My limited experience says that “details in BIM are too low for CAM” is a low estimate. I’ve found that “details in BIM are too low for most of the fabrication and construction involved”. The reason is because the fab shops can’t get sufficient dimensions off BIM drawings to “cut and fit.” That is, if the drawings done right, which is nearly never, due to the cost-cutting which hires novices to make the drawings. That lack of sufficient BIM dimensional info is why they farm out the structural to structural detailers, the reinforced concrete to concrete detailers, the miscellaneous steel to steel detailers, the plumbing and piping to specialists, the machining... Thanx for your ‘invigorating’ reporting!     – Chris Cadman The editor replies: The problem is that IFC was never meant to handle architectural data exchange. It was invented in 1994 by Autodesk with Release 13 to deal with data stored in custom (user-defined) objects, made possible by the then-new objectARX API. BuildingSmart is working at making it work. Martyn Day, editor of the British AEC Magazine, has been pounding on the lack of the BIM-construction link. Autodesk spent a billion dollars to join the already-crowded construction monitoring software market, instead of on the BIM-CAM link that would have given them a leg up over competitors.   Mr Cadman responds: At least ODA hasn’t sat on their thumbs with AutoCAD. Maybe if Autodesk worked up a translation app that exchanges data between their various 3D software, we’d have our solution already. One has to wonder where all the subscription $ goes, considering the little they do to substantially improve their software year after year. The editor replies: Autodesk has a 3D translator meant primarily for MCAD but does not work with AEC.   *4806

Siemens in 2020: New Initiatives (part i)

Issue #1,066   |  September 21, 2020

 

by Ralph Grabowski   Siemens has a perspective unique among MCAD software firms: it's the only one operating as a manufacturer. Other big MCAD vendors, like Autodesk and PTC, have presentation centers in which they show manufacturing at tiny scales, but Siemens is a manufacturing behemoth that last year made CAD$115 billion -- 20x more than its largest CAD software competitor, Dassault Systemes. The CAD division at Siemens is unique also in that we never know for sure what its name is. Today, it's Siemens Digital Industries Software. Before, it was Siemens PLM Software, earlier Siemens PLM Systems, and before that Unigraphics and EDS. The high-end NX CAD software got its new name following the merging of Unigraphics and I-DEAS. Only its mid-range Solid Edge CAD program kept its name constant throughout the decades. NX and Solid Edge were birthed by the oldest CAD companies in history. Unigraphics began in 1969 as "Uniapt" CAM software from United Computing. The same year, Intergraph launched as a CAD-oriented mapping company. Solid Edge is the result of a 1995 experiment in building next-gen software, but it didn't fit Intergraph's product line, so no one was surprised when Intergraph sold Solid Edge to Unigraphics after just three years. NX and Solid Edge arrived at Siemens through the German company's 2007 acquisition of Unigraphics.   The Future Is the Cloud -- Perhaps Siemens is the largest CAD vendor to resist today's notion that design software must run on the cloud, a position that is in direct contrast to competitors who find customers still clinging to desktops irritating. For Siemens Digital Industries Software CEO Tony Hemmelgarn, design belongs on the desktop -- end of story. "We will never have to have that hard discussion with customers about them having to make a difficult transition of technologies [from desktop to cloud]," he said. What does belong in the cloud is collaboration, and so Siemens is working at making its popular Teamcenter collaborative software run on the cloud, under the name of  Teamcenter X. You can see how this makes sense: engineers have powerful desktop systems running NX, collaborating with each other and fieldworkers through the cloud. When it comes to the cloud, Siemens offers unusual flexibility. You can have software hosted by Siemens (on Amazon), on private or local cloud providers, on your premise, at the edge, and hybrids thereof. No one else offers this.   You Pay Your Way Siemens insists customers should have a choice in how to pay for software, whether through permanent licenses or by subscription. Mr Hemmelgarn says he is surprised at how many of his competitors have forced customers onto subscriptions.  Despite his declaration, the company is nevertheless pushing forward with software that can only be paid for by subscription. It turns out that CAD vendors who go to the cloud have no choice in the matter, because software that runs non-stop on the cloud has to be paid for non-stop to cloud providers like Amazon, and so customers also have to pay non-stop. Siemens emphasized the cloud over desktop-bound software during July's presentation to the CAD press. While NX was mentioned often by customer testimonials, Solid Edge and simulation division CD-Adapco got no attention at all. Never mind that Siemens' simulation division makes as much as market leader ANSYS ($1.5 billion last year) and more than all of PTC.   Siemens' Future is Mendix If we understand nothing else about the future for Siemens, it's that it is based on Mendix. This platform with the unusual name has an unusual history: it began as a cloud-based visual programming service for business applications, like human resources and scheduling. Two years ago, Siemens bought it for CAD$950 million, and then applied it to CAD. We can think of Mendix as a combination of Autodesk's Forge API and PTC's Onshape/Atlas platform. It has a three-fold role at Siemens: A set of software for running businesses An API [application programming interface] for customers to customize The underlying technology that powers all cloud apps for Siemens "We are launching a lot of applications based on Mendix," said senior vp of Business Strategy and Marketing Brenda Discher, formerly of Autodesk marketing.    What Ralph Grabowski Thinks Siemens places the emphases on the right areas. Design belongs on the desktop;  subscriptions ought to be optional; automatic upgrades are pausable; collaboration should be hostable anywhere. These are policies that reassure customers that their future with Siemens is a stable one.  https://solidedge.siemens.com - - - Next Week: You get a look at what is new in Solid Edge 2021, plus an extended Q&A with executives from Siemens. [This article first appeared in Design Engineering magazine and is reprinted with permission.]   And in Other News The following posts appeared on the WorldCAD Access blog during the summer: Expect Creo-on-the-cloud in a few years   German station furnishings for AllPlan   Nanosoft ships 3D DWG editor nanoCAD Pro 20   Report: Autodesk ignored Revit concerns in 2014   ITC releases IntelliCAD 10.0 to members - - - Vectorworks ships its namesake software, Vectorworks 2021, with a new Project Sharing server and multi-threaded Vectorworks Graphics Module cache that offers up to 5x faster file loading. https://www.vectorworks.net - - - Bentley Systems files for a third time to do an IPO [initial public offering], in which its Class B shares will be made available to the public starting at $17-$19. The valuable Class A shares, owned by the founders, are not being offered. Analysis of what this means through Monica Schnitger at schnitgercorp.com/2020/09/10/bentleys-s-1-shines-a-light-on-how-private-companies-grow-with-engineers-in-charge/. Letters to the Editor I just fired up my old copy of Generic CADD to do some drafting and realized my memory is not as good as I thought it was in using it. This [Inside Generic CADD ebook] will come in handy to refresh my brain cells.     – J. G. The editor replies: I am glad to hear it helps. I notice that I produced the book first in the print version in 1993. - - - I've been reading your blog on and off for the last few months--I have a lot to learn from your technical knowledge. Thanks for being so passionate about CAD software,     – Clifton Harness   Re: Architecture firms to Autodesk: We're no longer happy with Revit For Autodesk, Revit became the Perfect Storm. With the grip on the DWG file format waning, another strategy had to be put into place. They did it with Revit: Government contracts mandating its use A file format not backwards-compatible And a subscription model.  I know BIM is a "process," but I saw many contracts which essentially stated the application was not mandated, but the deliverables had to be in RVT format. BIM by its very nature requires an open file exchange format, tools for data exchange, and collaboration. When that didn't happen, the only thing left was the single-source option.  This needed to be an industry-wide effort, as MIDI was in the music industry. Even in the earliest days, we could see there was so much which needed to be standardized to make the  dream of BIM a reality, but it never happened (even using a single source). It could still be done but a lot of money and time has already been spent and I'm afraid "the horse has left the barn." No one listened then, maybe they're listening now.      – Dave Edwards     Dave Edwards Consulting - - - There are more professional CAD and BIM software products to consider these days than waaayyyy overpriced Autodesk products. I've never understood why larger practices and some individuals don't explore the market to recognize this fact and thus end up being VANILLA-CAD users and out of pocket. Instead of this tenuous lobbying, just change your CAD HB-pencil!  List of alternative CAD/BIM products than Autodesk: 4MSA IDEA - Architectural Design (IntelliCAD)  AutoDesSys - Form-Z  Bentley - Architecture  Bricsys – BricsCAD / BricsCAD BIM  Cadline Network Ltd – ArchLine-Xp & LT (light) version  CadLogic - Draft it Architectural  CADSoft - Envisioneer  Chief Architect  DataCAD LLC – Software for AEC Professionals  Elecosoft – Arcon Evo Visual Building Premium FreeCAD Arch Xeometric – EliteCad Architecture  Gehry Technologies - Digital Project Designer  Graphisoft - ArchiCAD  IMSI/Design – TurboCAD Professional  NanoSoft - NanoCad Construction  Nemetschek - Allplan Architecture  Nemetschek - Vectorworks Architect  ProgeSoft – ProgeCAD Architecture  Robert McNeel & Associates - Rhino 3D + VisualARQ  Softtech – Spirit Pro  Trimble – SketchUp Pro  ZWSOFT - ZWCAD Pro     – Clayton Taylor     Trotman & Taylor Architectural Consultants, England The editor replies: The problem lies in the file format. Once a model is in Revit, it is not effortless to move it to another system. IFC helps, but is not perfect; full RVT support from ODA is a year away.   Thank You, Readers Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine: Robert G Findlay, Australia Gijs Willem Sloof of Talenting Investments, The Netherlands (two donations) To support upFront.eZine through PayPal, then the suggested amounts are these: $25 for individuals > paypal.me/upfrontezine/25 $150 for small companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/150 $750 for for large companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/750 Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and the account of [email protected]. Or mail a cheque (US$ or CDN$ only, please) to upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd., 34486 Donlyn Avenue, Abbotsford BC, V2S 4W7, Canada.

*4823

 

Open Design Alliance: DevCon 2020

Issue #1,065 | Celebrating 35 Years in CAD | September 14, 2020

 

From the Editor It was this month in 1985 that I began writing about computer-aided design, as CADalyst magazine hired me to be their new technical editor. Now it's 35 years later, and thanks to you amazing readers, I'm still reporting on our favorite software.      - Ralph Grabowski   Open Design Alliance DevCon 2020 Compiled by Ralph Grabowski We were supposed to be in Munich for this event, but then coronavirus ruined the trip. The Open Design Alliance’s DevCon 2020 was, as a result, online, just like other CAD software conferences this year. In ODA president Neil Peterson overview of the industry, he noted that this is a down year for BIM [building information modeling], but then expects it to grow by an annual average of 14.5% through to 2025. Some of the issues (pro and con) that define the market are the many design programs available, multiple data formats, a growing number of stakeholders, and the biggest problem of all: the gap between design tools and offsite prefabrication, as details in BIM are too low for CAM [computer-aided manufacturing]. The ODA wants to make BIM (and other aspects of CAD) transparent: to view, publish, collaborate, exchange data, and manipulate data openly. (See figure 1.) The idea of an open standard created by industry stands in contrast to those proprietary formats preferred by software vendors. ODA backs up its slogan "transparent BIM" with SDKs [software development kits] named BIMrv (for Revit) and BIMnv (for Navisworks). Figure 1: The technology stack from Open Design Alliance (all images sourced from DevCon prsentations)   ODA + bSI + OGS Last year, ODA partnered with buildingSmart International (bSI) to provide the SDKs for the IFC [industry foundation classes] format used by the BIM industry to exchange data. This year, ODA inked an agreement with Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC); the two are exploring how they might work together. I assume ODA will make SDKs for OGC.  There has always been an obvious link between CAD and GIS [geographic information systems]; indeed, that is how Intergraph got its start in 1969. As long ago as 2007 GIS-CAD became “3D information management,” because more than just CAD data works with GIS, such as BIM. (See figure 2.) And so OGC agreed this year to work with ODA.  Figure 2: The sorts of things handled by OGC   This Year’s IFC v4.3 IFC v4.3 includes more of the built environment, while two dozen object types have been deprecated or replaced by new schema. Built environment means physical structures, such as roads, canals, and shopping centers. (See figure 3.) IFC schema have to be proved by actual implementation before they can be approved as ISO standards, and so for 4.3 this is happening through a number of railroad and road organizations in North America and Europe.   Figure 3: The built environments supported by IFC 4.3 The nomenclature has changed: bSI replaced the x in version numbers with ., so the old (and confusing) 4x3 is now 4.3.   The Future IFC 5 IFC version 5 will be more efficient and less confusing. More efficient, because IFC data will become available in a larger number of file formats, such as adding XML, OWL, JSON, HDF5, and so on to the current STEP; UML [unified modeling language] will be the primary format. HDF5 [hierarchical data format] in particular offers smaller file sizes and faster load times due to compression and structure; see ogc.org/standards/HDF5. (See figure 4.) We talked about HDFs in upFront.eZine #1,058.   Figure 4: The advantages to using HDF5 with IFC Less confusing, because right now model view definitions (MVD) allow software vendors to cherry-pick parts of IFC to implement in their software; the idea was that they wouldn't need to implement the entire standard, which is huge. But if an IFC file is exported according to one MVD, and the recipient software package is written to another MVD, then confusion reigns when there is insufficient overlap between the two MVDs. MVDs will change in the future. The replacement will be IDS [information delivery system] in which the vendor says what information is needed from an IFC file. The new information delivery standard of IFC 5 means there will be a single IFC base for all programs for long-term . The root of IFC will have fewer updates for stability (every three to five years) with entity definitions having more frequent ones to keep current (every one to three years). IFC will be publicly available on GitHub. The ODA demo’ed using IFC files in HDF5 format. Their IFC viewer for Windows and MacOS supports the newest IFC versions. It does all the tasks we expect of viewers today, such as sections, but now also displays shadows and handles collision detection. It exports the IFC model to PDF. Anyone can download it fro free from openifcviewer.com   SDKs for Revit and Navisworks The ODA supports Revit file formats up to today's RVT 2021 (see figure 5).   Figure 5: The capabilities of ODA's BIimRv API   During the online conference, we saw some of the new functions being made available from the ODA: Several kinds of sectioning (see figure 6) Color-filled 2D plans based on function User worksets, which isolate grouped elements by name Conditional load/unloads that save can 1GB RAM, on average Figure 5: Sectioning of Revit models by BimRv   While the ODA’s BimRv SDK reads and displays Revit files, the big deal (and tougher job) is creating RVT files, which also means being able to edit them. This is still under development. The ODA has a road map to show which functions will be released over the next sixteen months. (See figure 7.) Creation functions include curves, custom parameters, connectors, materials, view-based elements (sheets), forms, families, Boolean operations, and openings.   Figure 7: Roadmap from ODA for BimRv We also saw the progress being made with Navisworks compatibility, which for Autodesk is a kind of universal file format on the AEC side. See figure 8 for the roadmap.   Figure 8: Roadmap from ODA for BIMnv Bricsys told us how it uses the ODA’s SDKs for DWG, civil, BIM, and mechanical components. As of v21 BricsCAD will import RVT files, not just IFCs as in earlier releases. RVT elements are translated into native geometry, which for BricsCAD means DWG format. The translated elements can then be directly modeled, sectioned, and edited – and saved as DWG files for use in other software. (See figure 9.)   Figure 9: BricsCAD v21 with RVT-format model BricsCAD v21 will place RVT files as underlays, which means they can be seen as references, but are not editable. Specific entities, such as walls, can be imported from the underlay, I think they said. BricsCAD 21 is due to ship by the end of October, 2020.   Q&A Ralph Grabowski: I did not catch the line by Mr Ouellette about IFC. Does he think IFC can handle all forms of data (like DFM, digital twins) -- or not? If not, then what is the alternative to accessing that data? Jeffrey Ouellette: The simple answer would be the use of linked data methodologies. bSI is exploring the use of IfcOWL, as well as implementations of JSON / IfcJSON to make it easier to link to other data sources and exchange them on a transactional basis. Grabowski: I am not sure we heard exactly what is ODA doing with OGC? Neil Peterson: We are looking at cooperation in a similar manner to the cooperation between ODA and bSI, where ODA would provide implementations for certain OGC standards. For example, CityGML has been discussed as a possible first project. Fabio: Regarding Civil SDK, how much of API has been migrated to .Net? Is this SDK the same as AutoCAD Civil SDK? Ivan: Currently, we wrapped all Civil into a public API. The API is the same as the C++ ODA Civil SDK. John: The main point is I notice that the library seems more granular now.  Sergey: You can get an idea of the optional modules that you can skip from docs.opendesign.com/td/tdrawings_libraries.html John: Is there still an ActiveX install? Sergey: Yes. It's still supported Ralph Grabowski: Is the Android ODA viewer for anyone, or just members of ODA? Alexander Federov: This application is for the ODA members, as a sample of using our Visualize SDK under the Android platform. John: What are the main differences between Drawing vs. Visualize SDKs? Alexander Federov: Visualize SDK is for the rendering of the different kinds of the data. It is not connected with some specific format. But strictly speaking, since Drawings SDK uses Visualize SDK for rendering contents of the DWG files, it is possible to transfer data to DWG first, and then render it with Visualize SDK as a contents of the DWG database. But such a transformation is sometimes not possible or efficient. Fabio: Is it possible to use .Net C# to integrate all stacks (DWG SDK, Visualize, Publish) in order to develop cross-platform -- Windows, Mac, and mobile (IOS and Android)? Alexander Borobikov: We provide wrappers for C++ code. Wrappers are generated for a large set pf SDKs: Drawings SDK, Visualize SDK, Publish SDK. But for now our wrappers are Windows-only. Guido: Does Visualize support huge point cloud data that might not fit into memory? Alexander Federov: Yes. We have the RCS [Re Cap source]-based point cloud object, which allows the use of LOD [levels of detail] for the huge point cloud data. Yesterday [at the conference], there was a demonstration of such a technique. It will be possible to see the recordings of yesterday's presentation and find some details about it.  Guido: Do you have any plans to support AR [augmented reality] or VR [virtual reality] in Visualize? Alexander Federov: We created a VR sample two years ago. But it was frozen since then. We have a plan to reanimate activity with it next year. With AR, no plans yet. Ben: Will recordings of these presentations be available later? Alexander Borobikov: We will upload the materials to our Youtube channel, so they will be available.   What Ralph Grabowski Thinks The importance of the Open Design Alliance is that it sets the pace for other CAD systems. In this way it is like the firms that produce kernels: numerous CAD systems depend on the capabilities delivered by updates to kernels, and likewise on the ODA. Fortunately for members, the ODA sees DWG as more than just a file format, and so over the last decade has created a framework for application development around DWG. With its APIs and SDKs, members can create software like 2D/3D CAD programs that handle solids, custom file viewers of multiple file formats, PDF import/export, revisioning, and so on – for software running on desktop computers, Web browsers, and mobile devices. (See figure 10.)   Figure 10: Mobile version of DWG viewer and its capabilities Perhaps the key to the ODA’s success is that it is a member-owned non-profit, ensuring long-term support. Being member-owned means that members determine the direction of development; being non-profit means that it does not need to satisfy a Wall Streetian demand for higher profits that comes at the expense of customer needs. www.opendesign.com And in Other News The following posts appeared on the WorldCAD Access blog during the summer: RetroCAD is hip   Top Systems updates T-Flex CAD for 2020   The big release from C3D Labs for 2020   What statistics can tell us about SARS-CoV-2 test results   Europeans Examine Non-European BIM Vendors' Sales Practices Letters to the Editor I miss your Quotable Notables. I thought the irony was great.      - Paul Bertram The editor replies: It became, frankly, hard work for me to hunt down a steady supply for each week. I am glad that you liked them. If you want similar irony, follow @managerspeak on Twitter. Here is one of his aphorisms: "90% of success is showing up. We’re going to have to do that on Zoom for a while." Here is a bonus one, to be filed under 'Spin Doctor of the Moment':       "This account was incorrectly actioned. This has been reversed and the account has been reinstated."        - Twitter   Re: Spaceclaim Success  It's hard to say how successful Spaceclaim's marketing was. And my experience is that nobody knows about Spaceclaim outside the CAD-nerd echo chamber -- and actually most CAD users have no clue what direct modeling is.  So if nobody knows about Spaceclaim, and it was not successful in terms of selling many seats, then can we say that their marketing was successful?     - Istvan Csanady, CEO     Shapr3D The editor replies: They certainly gained mindshare, fostered the push in mainstream MCAD to emphasize direct modeling, and then disappeared from the CAD-nerd echo chamber with their acquisition by Ansys.   Re: Nobody owns 3dconnexion Nice detective work. Thanks!      - Greg Morehouse (via WorldCAD Access)     New Zealand - - - This is in response to this guy’s complaint, “Their unwillingness to offer any sort of help to repair or replace my far superior Performance MX mouse with a failing left-click button.” Tell him he may be able to open the mouse, and then buy a replacement switch from DigiKey. I’ve done that to my mouse before, so maybe it’s possible for him? Doing so requires minimal mechanical and soldering skills.      - Chris Cadman - - - Commenting on 3Dconnexion/Logitech, I ran across this last month. They are indeed separate from Logitech. I was surprised. See the last post in this forum topic: 3dconnexion.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=35706     -Brian Cranston, CAD Administrator     LSI Industries The editor replies: Yah, there is a lot of confusion on this. 3dconnexion could help by making it clearer on their Web site.   Re: Dassault Systemes vs Solidworks, Part II This is really a great eye-opening article. I use Solidworks every day at work. Though cloud-based has its benefits, I live in an area that sometimes has a poor internet connection. I rely on this software to get my job done and to get accurate and high-quality production drawings for our production facility.  If Solidworks starts getting phased out to introduce a new system, it will cost us years of learning and hard work to get our drawings where they are. Thank you for the eye opening article. I will be keeping closer tabs on this and will think towards what our future may look like in the Solidworks and 3D design world. Thank you so much for this article.      - Josh Hixon      Duluth Tree Service Pros   Re: RetroCAD Is Hip Ah, those where the days! Nth Engine's birds-eye view was the thing I missed most when switching to Matrox graphics cards.  I also remember the fiddling with jumpers / rocker switches on network cards, graphic cards and other ISA cards to get them to use different IRQ, DMA en I/O addresses. And particularly to optimize the I/O space so QEMM [Quarterdeck Expanded Memory Manager] could make the most of upper memory. Oh, well.     - Simon Weel (via WorldCAD Access)     The Netherlands The editor replies: AutoCAD for a time also had a bird's-eye view (DsViewer command, expired in 2012), but I never found it particularly useful as it tended to be small, so as not take up much screen real estate (see figure below, credit cadforum.cz). If, back then, I could have afforded two monitors (they tended to be around $1,500 each in the 1990s), then a bird's eye view in one monitor might have been pretty nifty.   Bird's-eye view window at left Thank You, Readers Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine: Bricsys (small corporate donation) Dave Edwards Consulting To support upFront.eZine through PayPal, then the suggested amounts are these: $25 for individuals > paypal.me/upfrontezine/25 $150 for small companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/150 $750 for for large companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/750 Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and the account of [email protected]. Or mail a cheque (US$ or CDN$ only, please) to upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd., 34486 Donlyn Avenue, Abbotsford BC, V2S 4W7, Canada.

*4,835

 

Readers Respond: "We're No Longer Happy with Revit"

Issue #1,064   |  August 31, 2020

 

Moderated by Ralph Grabowski

Ever since 17 architectural firms wrote a letter of protest to AutoCAD ceo Andrew Anagnost regarding the status of Revit, reaction has been on-going. More architectural firms signed the letter. Our readers wrote lots of letters to the editor. More industry watchers gave their unique points of view on the problem faced by Autodesk, such as these ones: What do you do when your customers revolt, publicly? by Monica Schnitger An Unhappy Marriage — Autodesk Revit users unite around open letter by Anthony Frausto-Robledo   Letter to Anagnost gains country representation by Ralph Grabowski   Open letter from Revit customers opens old wounds between Autodesk and its customers by Kathleen Maher Europeans Examine BIM Vendors' Sales Practices by Ralph Grabowski   Autodesk responds to Revit users; I give it a C+ by Monica Schnitger   Report: Autodesk ignored Revit concerns in 2014 by Ralph Grabowski   Letters to the Editor Your article "Architecture firms to Autodesk: We're no longer happy with Revit" was very interesting, and emphasized some of the pain points we all suffer from being so tightly tied to the Revit platform.  It reminded me of a comment I wrote (a long, long time ago, in 2007) for the article "What Needs to be Fixed in AutoCAD" where I outlined about three dozen things that were just dumb about the program that I used just about every day since 1987. In a comment to your recent article "Autodesk at 2020," I wrote (after a lengthy diatribe of explaining what's great about Revit) that "I could spend at least another hour talking about what’s wrong with Revit and how to fix it."     - Matt Stachoni, BIM Manager     Tutor Perini / Parsons, JV - - - Your review of the status (and future) of Revit was fantastic, and at the same time sad. Autodesk seems to be suffering from shareholder paralysis, but I'm not an expert. It seems like frustration with product roadmaps and customer needs never ends. I also liked your mention of customers maintaining their own development teams for customization. I loved working in that capacity years ago, but the opportunities in the defense world seemed bleak to me, and the compensation just doesn't compare with mainstream IT work.  Keep up the outstanding work that you do! I haven't worked in the CAD industry in quite a few years, but I still enjoy reading your articles and reviews.     - David Stein The editor replies: I explain to non-CAD users that Revit is like my previous car: 20 years old, liable to breakdowns, and costly to maintain. - - - It is interesting -- in a sort of watching-a-train-wreck way -- to see Autodesk failing to deliver on keeping up its core business. But more curious to me is how this seems to suddenly be happening in a number of industries. USA automakers are flailing around with electric vehicles, while Tesla seems to have mastered them. A similar thing is true of hybrids: Toyota succeeded where no USA manufacturer even seemed to make an effort. Boeing is facing major internal problems in a similar manner. We have Intel's spectacular failure in not keeping up with TSMC on a technical manufacturing level, and its numerous security issues. I remember that when Andy Grove was head of Intel, he was almost paranoid about staying ahead of the game technically. His mantra was that you had to be your own competition, always bettering your products before the competition did. What we are seeing perhaps, is that these large corporations became management-heavy and thought they could coast on near-monopolies forever, forgetting that being heavy on management almost always means being deficient in innovation.     - Steve Schuller The editor replies: You seem to have it correct. When Jim Collins examined how mighty corporations fell, it mostly was due to hubris: 'Now that we are successful in one area, we can be successful in any area!' - - - I’ll be paying my annual AutoCAD maintenance fee (CDN$985) this week, which will be the last time I financially support Autodesk. I’ve had my own copy since 1993, and prior to then, when I ran the CAD department at Wang Australia, since 1985 at which time there was a specific version for the Wang PC.  Out of curiosity I asked the dealer what the annual subscription costs -- CDN$2,200! Apart from blind greed, I don’t understand what the thinking is behind Autodesk’s subscription fee. Surely they must realize that there will be many like me who will happily use their perpetual license and/or switch to BricsCAD or another program.       - Dairobi Paul - - - It seems like an association of companies with obvious profit interest is trying to cut expenses. How is this different to what we doing everyday going to the supermarket? Do we have control over the price of potatoes? or trendy avocados?  Let me highlight something from personal experience. I had a boss that wanted to automate everything and make modular construction, because he realized on the benefit he could have from cutting construction costs by pre-fabricating. A classic BIM approach. Now, what he did not realize at the beginning is that he'd have to increase significantly the design inversion in hours and tools enabling the task. When he did it was too late for two reasons: he didn't bring right specialists able to predesign, and he didn't use the right tools. Those tools are expensive. All good tools are expensive, especially if are digital in this increasingly digitalised word. So he admitted that Autodesk flows would have work when bankrupting. He made is choice. I do not get why the obsession with Autodesk here.  Second point. What happened to my ex-boss is happening at an industry level. Everything is digitalizing and there is a huge investment from software companies supporting that change. But don't get confused here, software companies are addressing industry needs -- not the opposite way)  So, when this ECIF is proposing that paper are actually not understanding the same that my ex-boss missed, that the inversion is balancing towards design stages and pre-construction stages. That's the whole point of BIM, and some construction firms are missing the point because they have significantly less benefits rather than more expenses that, of course, are justified by the investment made by not only Autodesk but others too. I'm a fan of Bentley for example.  So what are we talking about here? You do not want the avocado? Take the donut. Let's see for how long you'll benefit from it.      - Fernando Gonzalez (via WorldCAD Access) - - - You wrote, "Architectural firms in England and Australia, some of whom work globally, had standardized on Revit, partly due to government mandating it for its own projects." This is not true. They did not mandate Revit; they mandated BIM. They are very different things. Revit does not equal BIM. Revit is software. BIM is a process.      - BIMFluff (via WorldCAD Access) - - - I have been saying this for two decades, as you know: the only way to get Autodesk to listen is to become an Autodesk shareholder; to Autodesk's upper management, paying users are just cows to be milked. Any customer who buys more than ten seats of an Autodesk software product should also get in the habit of buying stock in that company. If each of the signatories to that open letter had 10,000 shares of Autodesk in their corporate stock portfolio, they could join forces to threaten to vote out upper management with much more authority and effectiveness. The bonus is that when customers own stock in the products that they themselves use, they are getting a discount on the products in the form of stock dividends and increased share value. Change can even be pushed by regular users, if they work together. Buying a few shares each month, 100,000 aggravated users would control a major chunk of the company after just two or three years. Then they could demand real improvements. Thanks as always for your diligent reporting.     - Peter Lawton,  LEED AP       AEI | Affiliated Engineers, Inc.   The editor replies: Autodesk has 221 million outstanding shares. I believe that when someone has 7% of the shares (at a cost currently of $3.7 billion), he can have one seat on their board of directors.   Mr Lawton responds: Yes, I understand that share prices are now 10x what they were when I was talking about this in the early 2000s, but it is also true that in those days, crowdsourcing was much less developed.  Today the effort would require sophisticated crowdsourcing infrastructure, and the involvement of many people: 100,000 to 250,000 frustrated Autodesk customers would need to pool resources to purchase many shares each month, for at least a couple of years, before a strong position would be realized. Then, if we can get some of the large A/E/C firms to buy up blocks of stock, for their corporate portfolios, things speed up.  Their investing philosophy would have to be different than with other investments. For example, one improvement that corporate users might like would be reducing the release cycle to every 4 years, so Autodesk profits would fall, (along with the stock value), but the A/E/C company's profits might rise, because IT changes and software training would be reduced. Also, if Autodesk gets wind of such an effort seriously undertaken, they might be more inclined to listen up. - - - Excellent read! It’s what I’ve been saying about Autodesk since-- well, forever. If you want to know what Autodesk's been up to for the past decade, just follow the money. But that’ll take some digging, and probably creative accounting as well!     - Chris Cadman The editor replies: The effort to displace Autodesk is a rare event that's occurred only twice before, that I know of. There was a (failed) effort in the 1990s to replace DXF (then the de facto exchange format among desktop CAD), and then the successful Project Phoenix, which resulted in IntelliCAD and the explosion in alternatives to AutoCAD. Mr Cadman responds: I can only hope for this rare event to trigger an explosion in Autodesk's customer base, away from them to alternative BIM software.  - - - I could have told them this ten years ago. Revit came from the stable of PTC's Pro/ENGINEER, perhaps the least flexible parametric modeler at the time. Users familiar with Autodesk products over time know they have never had a 'vision'. Revit's founders played the market well tho.      - Keith Jackson (via WorldCAD Access)   Sponsor: Okino Graphics == Converting 3D CAD & DCC to Virtual/ Augmented Reality ==   With the explosive growth of VR/AR, the ultra-massive 3D datasets produced by CAD and DCC programs need efficient conversion to the popular Unity and Unreal development platforms. Okino of Toronto is the long-time provider of the PolyTrans|CAD translator, which easily handles the interactive datasets required by VR and AR for Microsoft HoloLens, HTC VIVE, Oculus Rift, Meta, and other VR headsets.   PolyTrans provides you with Massive dataset handling Node compression Adaptive CAD tessellation Intelligent polygon reduction  Popular CAD data sources include SolidWorks, ProE/Creo, Inventor, AutoCAD, Revit, Navisworks, DGN, IGES, STEP, Parasolid, and JT. DCC data sources are Cinema-4D, 3ds Max, Maya, FBX/Collada, and many more. Perfected over three decades, we know 3D data translation intimately, providing you with highly personalized solutions, education, and communication. Contact CTO Robert Lansdale at [email protected]  http://www.okino.com Thank You, Readers Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine: Kevin Jacobs  Julian Miranda, Spain To support upFront.eZine through PayPal, then the suggested amounts are these: $25 for individuals > paypal.me/upfrontezine/25 $150 for small companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/150 $750 for for large companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/750 Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and the account of [email protected]. Or mail a cheque (US$ or CDN$ only, please) to upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd., 34486 Donlyn Avenue, Abbotsford BC, V2S 4W7, Canada.

*4847