I admire Apple and PTC for making daring moves. In the case of Apple, it's switching its desktop CPUs from desktop-optimized Intel chips to smartphone-optimized ones defined by ARM. For PTC, it is in moving its CAD software 100% to the cloud. In both cases, I think they will stumble, yet I look forward to watching the progress.
During last month's conference call with financial analysts, PTC ceo Jim Heppelmann explained the company's roadmap when it comes to cloudCAD software.
- - -
Jim Heppelmann: Let me kind of just paint the highest level picture. We think the industry is going to SaaS [software as a service]. And with Onshape we’re leading the charge. But we’d like to bring our customer base that’s on Creo [CAD] and Windchill [PLM] along for the ride.
So we’re saying, ‘What if we developed using the Atlas kernel, if you will, or architecture of Onshape--. What if we developed versions of Creo and Windchill that kind of acted a lot like Onshape in terms of being true multi-tenant, multi-user SaaS?’
But at the same time, we’re compatible, so that you could do a lift-and-shift of an on-premise deployment into the SaaS cloud?
Now that will take us a couple of years to build, to be frank, because if you’re talking about compatibility then you need pin-for-pin feature capability, right?
We’re not talking about building a new product with limited functionality. We’re really talking about full-on versions of Creo and Windchill so that you could lift [them out from] the production deployment, shift it into the SaaS cloud, and never miss a beat.
Why it’s interesting [to financial analysts] is because that lift-and-shift typically doubles the ARR [average recurring revenues, i.e. subscription income]. Because a subscription on-premise seat generally doubles in value when it becomes a subscription SaaS seat, because [the customer saves on the cost of] the servers, and the administration, and the upgrades, and lots of different things
So, I think you should model that [financially] in the back half of a five-year window, and well beyond, by the way. I think it’s something that would probably run for -- I don’t know -- it could be a decade. It will take us a while to get it going.
So I’m not counting on anything there in 2021, and probably not even anything in 2022. We've got a lot of work to do.
Design++ from Design Power combines engineering, configuration, change management, and geometry. A new link between Design++ and Tekla creates 3D building geometry in Tekla Structures: automatically-generated building models in Tekla are the result of Design++ driving Tekla. Users have access to other Tekla capabilities, such as 2D drawings and BOMs [bills of material] reports.
Epson adds 600dpi scanners to its line of large-format inkjet plotters, which will output scans to USB-attached drives, network folders, emails, as well as printing them.
The Epson SureColor C-size T3170M ($2,545; shown above) ships in January; the faster and larger D-size T5170M ($4,995) will ship more slowly in Q2 2021. Print out the details from epson.com/pro-imaging-large-format-printers.
- - -
The ETIM [electrical technical information model]classification system is a neutral standard for product data in a manufacturer-independent, media-neutral format that supports levels of geometric detail (LOG). Cadenas is adding ETIM-defined electrical BIM libraries to its PARTcommunity portal as of March, 2021. Learn more about ETIM at etim-international.com/.
- - -
M4 v4 from Cad-Schroer generates ISO piping isometrics from models made by PTC Creo Piping and PCF [piping component file] files automatically, fully-dimensioned with parts lists, cut-length lists, bend tables, and more.
After Coreform acquired exclusive commercial rights to Trelis from Sandia National Labs, it renamed it Coreform Cubit. The software pre-processes 3D models in advance of FEA [finite element analysis] and CFD [computational fluid dynamics]. Version 2020.2 adds spline-based elements, meshing collapse, parallel tetrahedral meshing with up to eight CPU cores, and more. Cubit Learn is free.
You wrote, “PTC CEO James Hepplemann noted that Onshape ... landed over 700 competitive displacements, the majority coming from SolidWorks. Dassault Systemes has 49,800 companies using Solidworks.”
There are nearly 450,000 companies globally using SolidWorks actually.
- Sam Scholes, senior account manager Go Engineer
The editor replies: Thanks for fixing the number. I had found my number somewhere on the Internet, as I wanted to put the 700-number into context.
Mr Scholes responds: You’re welcome. Losing 700 customers isn’t much in the context of 450,000 SolidWorks customers.
The editor replies: And who knows if they were displaced. It could be 700 trying it out.
Mr Scholes responds: I would suspect that is more common. People love new technology and I suspect many current SolidWorks customers have tried Onshape. But that doesn't necessarily mean they switched. When PTC acquired Onshape they had only 5,000 customers according to the press release. The adoption rate of Onshape is incredibly low.
Re: Bricsys Digital Summit 2020, Cont'd
I noticed you mentioned that Eric Keyser didnآ´t show up at Bricsys Summit. He is no longer CEO of Bricsys, since May of this year. Thank you for your newsletters, I am a regular reader of them.
- Ricardo Cruz
I read your upFront.eZine newsletter today and noticed you pointed out that Erik has not made any appearance. Erik resigned as CEO on May 8 this year. I thought you knew.
I was very surprised that a company of the size of Hexagon would not make any public announcement nor communication about the transition. Six months later, there is still no CEO replacing him, as far as I know.
- D. C.
The editor replies: Thank you for letting me know, as I had not heard that.
Re: Brian Duguid's letter on the "gap" and shared parameters
From my perspective as a fabricator, the letter made perfect sense. Critical to the process of designing and building is the application of relevant knowledge. Notably, this example utilized a technician from the steel fabricator from the start.
No currently available technology is close to being able to bridge the knowledge gap between designers and fabricators. In my experience it is very rare for people without direct experience in fabrication and building to grasp all the complexity and required knowledge.
Like you, when I saw the required download, install, sign-in, avatar, etc. sequence, I just said to myself, “No thanks.” Curious what the attendance was.
- Jeffrey Rowe
Thank You, Readers
Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine:
Morito Masao (Japan)
To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:
Several companies in our field of CAD offer 3D search tools. If you need a certain size of compressor or washer, then 3D-search finds ones that are similar. The idea is to find look-alikes using hints like 3D geometry, 2D sketches, photographs, dimensions, colors, classifications, and text descriptions.
Paul Powers is ceo of Physna, and he has taken a different approach to 3D search. His company's claim is that it can take 3D data from any source -- CAD, AR, VR, scans, OBJ -- and convert the file data into mathematics that describes the geometry. The company offers two products, the commercial Physna and the free Thangs.
- - -
Ralph Grabowski: What is the benefit of your algorithmic approach to 3D-search?
Paul Powers: We map the unique 3D polygonal structures of models, as well as every subpart and any direction of 3D, spatially. For instance, we know that the cap belongs to the water bottle, and where the cap resides. Our machine learning makes predictions on what the model might be called, like "bottle of water," even of the brand of water bottle based on its shape, such as Evian.
The data is stored in a MongoDB NoSQL database, and not in the models themselves.
Grabowski: How did you get the idea to use mathematics for 3D-search?
Powers: I have a background in international patent law, which uses algorithms to find stolen text, pictures, and so on, but there was none for 3D models. There is a need to know every possible relationship, like trying to find just the head of Mickey Mouse rather than the entire body (and vice versa).
Other geometric search tools rely on CAD sources and use entire models, so the cap on the water bottle would get lost. Translating into different formats to enable searching can also result in data loss.
The mathematical background comes from astrophysics, which I took for a year, just long enough to realize that the mathematics astronomers use to determine locations of stars relative to one other (e.g. using signatures and patterns specific to certain locations with the use of various data points ) could be used for 3D objects.
I never thought of using it for CAD at first, but then we were approached with a lot of use cases – over 300 so far -- and many of them involved engineers.
Grabowski: Do you have an API so that end users can use your technology?
Powers: End users can already use the functionality available in Physna’s enterprise version and in Thangs. We are also working on an API that will allow others to create additional use-cases.
Grabowski: How do you make money, and who funded you?
Powers: Through SaaS [software as a service]. We sell licenses of the enterprise version based on the number of users and number of models.
The Thangs site is free to use. It is our consumer-facing Web site that crawls the Web using our algorithm to search for 3D models. It has over a million of them now. https://www.thangs.com/
We have raised $8.9 million so far, and soon will have another announcement.
Grabowski: Where does the name Physna come from?
Powers: It comes from "physical DNA."
The user interface of the Thangs Web site
Trying Out Thangs
Thangs is a free site that lets you test out a simplified, consumer-level version of Physna’s algorithms at https://thangs.com. You can upload 3D models to search for, or to share with other people. It has over 50,000 members.
When I tried it out, I hit a point of confusion: the site offers two Upload buttons that do different things. One is for uploading models to the Thangs database, after which you and others can search for them. No search is involved.
The other Upload "button" is part of the search bar and is meant for visual searches: it's for uploading models like the one(s) you are looking for, and then Thangs is meant to return results. The files you upload through this button are not uploaded to the Thangs database, and so they are not searchable by others.
Thangs accepts file in the following formats up to 250MB each:
.3dxml
.CATPart
.dwg and .dxf
.iges and .igs
.ipt
.jt
.model
.par and .prt
.sab, .sat, and .sldprt
.step and .stp
.stl
.vda
.x_b and .x_t
.xcgm and .xml
Thangs offers unlimited storage, along with version control for collaboration, which I did not test. While the site boasts 1.1 million models, the most popular models on the site are organic mesh models more suitable to games and renderings. That’s because while the majority of models are industrial components from suppliers, they are less popular and so less obvious -- unless you search specifically for them. It searches models from users as well as publicly available ones on other sites that hold 3D models.
I tested Thangs with a 3D model of a motor from SKG Sweden, which makes models of its products available in multiple formats: STEP, Solidworks, SAT, Pro/Engineer, Parasolid, IGES, and 2D DWG.
Thangs scanning the content of a 3D model
I uploaded the model in SAT format, and then tested Thangs by uploading the same model in the other formats. Here are the results, along with the time it took to upload, scan, and search. Because of the efficiency and inefficiency of each format, file sizes ranged between 400KB and 3MB, and the polygon count between 900 and 23,000.
STEP (.step) -- 19 seconds; match found correctly
Solidworks (.sldprt) -- 9 secs; found incorrect results like a series of washers and other simple parts at other sites
SAT (.sat) -- 17 secs; match found correctly
Pro/Engineer (.prt.1) -- not accepted
Parasolid (.x_t) ---- 10 secs; found incorrect results like a series of washers and other simple parts at other sites
IGES (.igs) -- 49 secs; found no correct results but mostly found unrelated organic models at other sites, such as the left arm of a HE Barbarian.
DWG (2D views) -- I canceled the operation after waiting ten minutes for scanning to complete.
Out of the seven formats I tested, two returned correct results. Physna explains why: “The algorithm doesn’t just search for similar parts. It looks for all geometric relationships. It’s likely that these parts are able to be used inside of the part you uploaded. But Thangs is soon going to receive an enhancement that will make the meaning of these results clearer (like in Physna’s enterprise version) and show not only what is related, but exactly why, how and where.”
In the case of the HE Barbarian left arm, Physna says, “The results aren’t technically incorrect because a false positive isn’t mathematically possible, as the algorithm searches for geometric relationships, not just similar models. What you’re seeing is a partial match (some portion of the geometry is the same between the parts). The reason these results don’t make much sense is that Thangs uses a simplified version of Physna’s algorithms. We’re in the process of updating the algorithms, which include weighting to remove these results that aren’t helpful.”
For the failed DWG search, Physna reports that “2D<>3D search is not yet supported in Thangs. DWG isn’t a 3D file format, so while you can save the model in Thangs, the 3D<>3D search algorithm won’t work on it.”
In summary, Physna told me, “Thangs doesn’t yet contain the full algorithm set available in the enterprise version. as it uses a simplified version of Physna’s algorithms. We’re in the process of updating the algorithms. Thangs also doesn’t yet normalize the models to the same extent Physna’s enterprise version does. That is why you’re seeing differences between file types.”
MachineWorks releases Polygonica 3.0 SDK [software development kit], its component library for polygon mesh modeling with automatic determination of best-fit tolerance and zone-based remeshing.
CCE is pre-announcing Review Room, an add-on to its EnSuite Cloud online file viewer that will use peer-to-peer connections to review CAD files, and so avoid storing your proprietary files on remote third-party servers (aka ‘the cloud’). “This has never been done before,” says the company. It’s due to be released in a few weeks, so sign up through cadcam-e.com/EnSuite-Cloud/index.aspx.
- - -
Also in pre-announcing mode is Siemens for the next release of NX coming out in December, with the highlight feature being MBD [model-based definitions]. It automates rules-based PMI [product and manufacturing information] through a software advisor that checks data. A demo video is posted at blogs.sw.siemens.com/nx-design/the-all-new-model-based-definition-is-coming-soon/.
- - -
Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:
For some reason I stopped getting the newsletter around the beginning of October. When I tried to resubscribe I received a strange web page. In any event I would like to keep receiving the newsletter if possible.
- Mike
The editor replies: I switched my mass email provider from MailChimp (much too expensive for a free newsletter!) to SubStack, and so the old subscribe link no longer works. I will add you to the mailing list manually, and you can catch up on back issues at www.upfrontezine.com.
- - -
I only just noticed, but you might want to remind subscribers to check their Junk or Spam folders if they seemingly are no longer getting upFront.eZine in their Inbox. Speaking from experience.
- Jim
Re: Readers Respond to Revit's Shared Parameters
Nice to see the great response to the Revit Shared Parameter exchange you published. Sometimes I think my suggestions just come from a very jaded place. The stress of managing BIM ended my career, which I may be not-so-secretly bitter about.
- Dave Edwards Dave Edwards Consulting
The editor replies: Some aspects of technology work great, but other areas are desperately bad, and so I fully appreciate you bringing them up!
- - -
The issue with multiple sets of different BIM systems is without question a huge problem. My company is mostly involved in the Catia world for aerospace. That said, this same problem happened to aerospace many years ago. A perfect example of it is described in intuitivestories.com/airbus_and_trillion_dollar_engineering_error.html -- a trillion-dollar Airbus problem.
Here is how Boeing and Airbus -- the two largest airplane manufacturers in the world -- addressed the problem.
Boeing -- works under the AS9100 guidelines. As part of the guidelines, there is a specific AS9102 “First Article Inspection Report” form that must be submitted whenever you generate CAD data. Folks like inspectionxpert.com/fai/as9102 are common in this industry.
These processes have, of course, trickled down to most of their suppliers. Both Inspection Expert and Q-Checker are $10,000 products. With software this expensive, this should give you an idea of how serious this problem has become. We at CAD/CAM Services now offer checking with these software products as a service to customers who have no interest in spending so much on checking software just to make a part. And of course, we have to provide not just the reporting, but the fixing of that part or assembly to pass inspection.
Until BIM requires a version of something like this checking/certification program, BIM will continue to be a logistics nightmare. Stay safe.
- Scott Shuppert, president CAD/CAM Services
The editor replies: I think that buildingSmart and IFCs are supposed to (eventually) be the solution, but I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future. MCAD benefits from having giant manufacturing firms who can dictate standards. Building construction is far too dis-integrated for one standard to have a chance of ruling. When it comes to input from BIM vendors, Autodesk doesn't seem interested enough, and Nemetschek, while interested, is at this point not big enough.
Mr Shuppert replies: And therein lies the problem. Which is also why we, as a CAD service bureau, shy away from BIM work. It is pretty hard to make everybody happy.
Thank You, Readers
Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine:
Vectorworks (large company donation): “We greatly appreciate your continued support.”
To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:
Two years ago, Bricsys introduced Blockify, a command that converts identical 2D entities into one block with one click. This is useful for imported drawings and ones that were poorly drawn in two ways: makes drawing file sizes smaller, and makes them easier to edit: changing one block changes all instances of it in the drawing, like replacing all chairs in a drawing at once.
BricsCAD V21 automatically adds 2D and 3D constraints to make blocks parametric, and creates associative arrays when the modeler finds repetitive patterns of 2D entities. These can be edited in the BEdit environment, and seems to solve the painful problem of trying to figure out how to add parametrics to (dynamic) blocks.
Any parameter can now be geometry-driven. For instance, change the size of any part of a chair, and all connected items change appropriately.
Drawing Optimization
The new Optimize command fixes drawings by closing gaps and forcing lines horizontal/vertical/45-degrees within tolerances. This is handy for imported point clouds, which tend to have come up with lines that are rather shaky. As you change settings in the Optimize’s dialog box, the drawing updates in real time to show you which entities will be affected.
Deciding which lines get to be straightened-out
The Simplify command reduces the number of vertices in overly-verticed polylines, such from 350,000 to 450 vertices in the demo we were shown.
The CopyGuided command was added last year, and this year V21 adds MoveGuided, which heals related entities when, say, a door moved in a wall or a window is removed.
The Third Discipline: Civil Engineering
Once Bricsys established independence for its general CAD program, it branched out into verticals, specifically ones involving architectural and sheet metal design, with significant nods to 2D and 3D mechanical drawings. Over the last decade, Bricsys used advances in one area (say BIM) to advance other areas, such as in mechanical CAD. The leapfrogging is possible because Bricsys programs a single CAD package; it's much harder, for instance, for a Dassault to add a Catia function to a Solidworks.
Last year, Bricsys branched to another discipline, civil engineering. Well, it's not the broad range of civil engineering activities I know from my university days, but a narrower focus on terrain modeling and roadway design. Or, as Bricsys calls it, “visually-correct linear infrastructure modeling.”
This year's release allows users to map a 2D satellite photo onto a clipped 3D TIN (terrain) file, and then model in 3D on top of it. For roadway design, V21 adds spirals (needed for horizontal road curves) and parabolas (for vertical road curves). The new accuracy factor forces profiles to match existing groups, followed by optional manual edits with grips or with the Properties panel to manipulate stations, grades, elevations, and so on. There still is no input criteria, which for roads is design speed, which determines horizontal and vertical curvatures.
Cross-sections being applied to bridges and roadways
A “corridor” is a 3D cross-section that defines the elements of road and bridges (see figure above). BricsCAD can apply multiple corridor templates to make the road change along its length, such from road to bridge. There is no design analysis for pavements or bridge strengths.
V21 defines slopes for cuts and fills (embankments). Cuts and fills update automatically as users use grips to move the alignment horizontally and vertically. Missing is cut-and-fill balancing, which minimizes earth haulage and then adjusts the alignment to match.
Third-party developers provide some of the missing elements.
Point Cloud Processing
Two releases ago, Bricsys added the ability to import point cloud data, albeit indirectly. It converts common formats (.ptx, .pts, .las, and .rcp) in the background to its project format .vrm (Virtual Reality Model), which points to folders containing the point cloud files stored in an optimized format, .bpt (Bricsys Point Tree).
In V21, BricsCAD Lite can view point clouds added to drawings by a higher license. A new point cloud processing engine uses background processing and multi-threading to manipulate and navigate point clouds faster. Cropped sections of point clouds can be exported to .pts files.
These days, the tough task is turning the scatteredness of point clouds into the precision of 3D geometry. Those who lived through the raster-to-vector transformations of the late 1980s understand the challenge well. In v21, Bricsys takes the first step in generating 2D floor plans from point clouds through the new DetectFloor command. This is followed by the Optimize command to smooth out converted vector lines.
Point cloud data being converted to rooms
Other new point cloud-related commands do the following tasks:
Fit planar surface geometry to flat areas of point clouds
Fit lines to sections of point clouds
Generate volume sections on a floor-by-floor basis (regions of points with similar z coordinates)
BubbleViewer is a separate app running alongside BricsCAD for walking through point cloud scenes. You specify a variety of colorizations: there's natural colors, naturally, along with directional colors, (red and green are horizontal, blue is vertical -- same as the UCS icon), or showing distances from cloud points to your viewpoint. The idea is that you use the viewer to identify walls, thickness of walls and slabs, and so on.
Finally, there is a new VR Viewer for looking at 3D models directly. It reads the aforementioned VRM files.
Viewing a point cloud through the new VR viewing function in BricsCAD
BIM
Bricsys BIM product owner Tiemen Strobbe showed us what's new in his company's building information modeling add-on. Some 80% of BIM work is repetitive, according to Bricsys, and so the company is working on automating the steps. Semi-automation tools include QuickBuilding, Bimify, and Propagate. Mr Strobbe mentioned also using LISP and Python to automate design tasks and data visualization.
Of the three, the addition new to V21 is QuickBuilding. It converts 3D spaces and solids into BIM models with specified story heights. This is the initial implementation, os users can expect enhancements over time.
Copying and pasting geometry is improved through the Propagate and CopyGuided commands using the context of the drawing to paste the geometry correctly, such as lining up with walls. Related to this is the Bimify and AutoMatch combo of commands for automating the placement of repetitive elements.
Drawing Composition
BIM programs like BricsCAD do nearly all design work in 3D, but in the end it's 2D construction drawings that are still needed on-site. There are two ways to make these drawings: flatten 3D models or slice 2D views through them. No matter how it's done, the production of drawings is tedious (well, it's pretty exciting the first few times you do it), so there is a push by numerous CAD programs towards the semi-automation of drawings. BricsCAD V21 offers its version of automated 2D drawing generation, including tag placement and drawing styles, through its Project Browser.
Two-D views are stored in separate drawings, which are linked to the project model through sheet sets. Views are arranged automatically through Sheetset Setup, with them generated as a background process. When users reduce the number of views on a sheet, BricsCAD adds more sheets automatically to accommodate the overflow. Hundreds of sheets can be generated in minutes, according to Bricsys, although we did not see this in the demo.
More interesting to me was V21’s ability to link drawing representations to entity properties. The example we saw showed fire ratings of walls with appropriate colors. (See figure below) This is done through the new Drawing Composition panel, which also defines tags, such as for fire doors.
Fire ratings color coded into a generated drawing
Automatic design checking was mentioned, but not expanded upon. As construction detailing like dimensioning is still manual, this is to be added in the future.
Revit Editing
The hot topic these days is the importing and editing Revit files outside of Autodesk-supplied software, through an initiative of the Open Design Alliance. Here BricsCAD is no different: it imports RVT (Revit models) and RFA (Revit symbols) files as underlays or converted to editable entities, including importing selected entities from the Revit file.
V21 uses the Bimify command to turn imported (dumb) geometry into BIM elements by detecting what entities probably are, such as walls and slabs.
There was a whole whack of more info given to us on architectural modeling, but at this point I was getting cross-eyed from data overload. This two-part article is, after all, already close to three thousand words long.
I did perk up when version control was mentioned. How to have multiple users work on a single BIM model? With V21, Bricsys implemented GIT-based version control in which users check out a file locally from a server. It downloads only portions of models, and works online and offline. Currently in beta.
Mechanical Assembly Design
Bricsys mechanical product owner Dmitry Ushakov talked to us what is new on the mechanical side of BricsCAD. He showed us how V21 can convert a 3D solid model to sheet metal parts in under four minutes. “No one else can do this,” he said.
What’s new in V21’s sheet metal capabilities
With the online session getting close to four hours long, I found myself taking fewer and fewer notes. Sorry! You can read the entire what’s-new list for BricsCAD V21 at bricsys.com/common/releasenotes.jsp and view the summit online at youtu.be/VnxrUoffY7k.
What Ralph Grabowski Thinks
A Bricsys new-release event is assuredly an exercise in feature overload, but in a good way: you know the folks at the company take their software and customers seriously. Despite the cornucopia, I noticed a few things missing.
There was no mention of generative design, which is okay, because it appears to be losing its luster as users go from “Wow! A million different designs!” to “Oh no, a million different ugly designs.”
CEO Erik de Keyser did not make an appearance.
Two years after being acquired by Sweden's Hexagon, there are no new links to Hexagon software other than one announced a year ago with Leica (for importing scanned point clouds). The Scan-to-BIM consortium announced last year by HOK, Leica, and Bricsys hasn’t gained more members.
Hexagon offers a half-dozen (or more — it’s hard to count) analysis and CAM programs. Perhaps next year we will see links to analyze and output products designed in BricsCAD.
In the end, I consider Bricsys’ reliance on a single file format its strength, but its limited links to external programs something that needs to be addressed.
== 3D Data Translation Software Tailored to Solve Your Problems ==
Education and awareness make for flawless, error-free, and numerically-correct MCAD conversions!
Okino's PolyTrans|CAD software solves complex, demanding 3D conversion problems by transforming CAD and DCC datasets into highly optimized and efficient files for all common downstream 3D programs and authoring packages. Our staff ensures that each Okino solution fits your conversion problems 'like a glove', including useful discussions on how to source the best 3D datasets.
Popular CAD data sources we support 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.
Design Master’s 11th annual BIM and MEP survey is now on. The survey starts at surveymonkey.com/r/DCBXXKF. Questions include the use of collision detection and BIM itself in your office. You can read the results of the surveys from other years here: designmaster.biz/blog/2019/12/mep-bim-2019-survey-results/. One of the surprising results is that over the last decade, BIM appears to be used less, rather than more.
- - -
Like all other CAD vendors, CadLine Kft is holding their ArchLine.XP user conference online. It runs for three days, beginning Nov 24. Unlike all other CAD vendors, presentations at ArchLine.XP Expo will be held in eleven languages. Sign up at archlinexp.com/events
- - -
“Maybe ten years ago, innovation was all about electrifying mechanical systems. Today, it seems to rely on material science: what can we create that's lighter, stronger, conductive, responsive, or in some other way unique, as a product differentiator?” asks Monica Schnitger in talking about Siemens’ acquisition of Clugi of The Netherlands, which will add computational chemistry for multi-scale simulations. Price was not announced. Details at schnitgercorp.com/2020/11/02/siemens-adds-computational-chemistry-modeling-to-simcenter/.
Letters to the Editor
Re: Readers Respond to Revit's Shared Parameters
Some interesting discussions about the gap between BIM as a design tool and what is required with regard to modeling for manufacturing / fabrication / construction.
You are right that this gap exists, that it is the cause of significant commercial and process inefficiencies, and that it isn’t much helped by some of the technology platforms that are widely used (in my case, in the AEC environment).
My view, however, is that this is largely driven by disconnection in business relationships, not by technological issues. I can give an example: it is common in my field of construction for a designer to generate drawings and/or BIM models as an end-product, and for these to form an input for construction and fabrication teams. Steelwork fabricators, who have used 3D CAD and CAM platforms for many years, sometimes take the designer’s model and adapt it, but it’s still more common for them to build their own model, fit for their own purposes.
This is partly driven by contractual liabilities (nobody wants to be responsible for data that is not their business), and partly by self-interest. The fabricator is interested in things such as plate-cutting, weld distortion, and precamber, where they need to adapt their model to suit working methods over which they have power. The designer does not.
We have on at least one occasion broken free from this, and it was successful and rewarding. For the design of a pedestrian bridge on the Ordsall Chord project (Manchester UK), we (the structural engineers) created a digital model which specified the structure in full, including every single weld, nut, and bolt. For the first time in the UK, that was enough. We did not produce any of the normal design drawings. This process saved a month off the design delivery program, and also measurably reduced design costs; this is not just the designer’s claim, the contractor confirmed to us that these savings were real.
Architectural render of the completed Ordsall Chord
How was this possible? Firstly, we used the same software that the steel fabricator uses (Tekla Structures) instead of what we were using for most of our other designs on the project (Bentley AECOSim). This ensured they would get the level of detail they needed, in the format most useful to them. Secondly, the fabricator’s own modeling technicians helped us prepare the model. This gave the end users confidence in the quality of the model content, so that they could use it as the direct basis for any further (non-design) elements they needed to add.
The project and processes used on that occasion are described in detail in our paper (icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/full/10.1680/jbren.16.00012) freely available online. The technology to do things better is already here: what is required is the boldness to forge new, more collaborative contractual relationships in industries that lack vertical integration. The improvements in quality and the real financial savings that can result need to be set against the inevitable obstacles such as overly-restrictive digital standards compliance, to allow these obstacles to be set aside.
Brian Duguid, technical director Practice Leader for Bridges and Civil Structures, Mott MacDonald
Thank You, Readers
Thank you to readers donating towards the operation of upFront.eZine:
Randall McSwain: “Thank you Ralph, for your continued work with the upFront.eZine.”
Alex Kunz of A. G. Kunz LLC (small company donation): “Thank you for the continued insights & perspective.”
To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:
Issue #1,073 | 9 November 2020 | The Business of CAD
by Ralph Grabowski
The problem in covering Bricsys' annual conference each year is the overwhelming amount information broadcast to attendees. Whereas some CAD vendors introduce a very few new functions each year, the much smaller Bricsys corporation generates hundreds of changes for its lone software program that handles general, mechanical, civil, and architectural drawings and models.
In other years, the info deluge was spread over two days; this year, over four hours. So, I'll report on a bunch of things that were announced, but not everything. You can view the recording at youtu.be/VnxrUoffY7k. For the official what's-new list, see the 31-page-long bricsys.com/common/releasenotes.jsp, which is updated with each point release.
Some 2,900 people watched the live event, about 6x more than attended in-person events of earlier years. Unlike many other CAD firms, Bricsys always runs their software demos live, with no pre-recorded interactions with the software.
Product specialist Chi-Yan demo’ing BricsCAD live with 2D and 3D mice
Global Licensing
Bricsys has a new tag line, “Connecting people and companies that transform CAD, BIM, and mechanical design of today.” The company always has emphasized its unified approach in using a single CAD program with a single file format in which to store drawings and models. The only translation customers need to perform is on files coming from non-DWG CAD programs.
This year, the emphasis in the keynote was on the global nature of their software licenses. This is an issue, because some CAD vendors limit use of the software to the country in which the license was purchased.
Chief operating officer Mark van den Bergh reminded us that BricsCAD does not have named-user licenses, nor does it limit license use to single countries, nor does it force customers onto subscriptions. “One license for planet earth,” said Mr van den Bergh. As well, an office license can be used at home.
A testimonial from Mazda spoke of the company’s appreciation for global licenses. “The fact that we can use the same licenses overseas is definitely a factor.” BricsCAD is used by Mazda for drawings of production lines, and the company expects to move BricsCAD from 2D to 3D.
BricsCAD in use at Mazda
Rejiggered BricsCAD Lineup
"Sometimes 2D is more powerful, sometimes 3D is more powerful," Mr van den Bergh said, introducing the rejiggered software lineup.
BricsCAD Lite ($560) replaces BricsCAD Standard, and is at the low end with 2D-only drafting. Lite includes open LISP, which Bricsys says is 5x to 100x faster than other versions of LISP. Lite has advanced tech like machine learning with targets, but lacks BRX and other APIs, and so it is limited as to which third-party add-ons it can run.
BricsCAD Pro ($960) combines the previous BricsCAD Pro and Platinum editions to offer full 2D/3D direct modeling with 2D/3D parametrics. It is the base needed on which to run Mechanical ($1,700) to assemblies, to access the Communicator ($500) file translator, and/or the BIM module ($1,800). Prices are for perpetual licenses and are in US$.
Differences between BricsCAD Pro and BricsCAD Mechanical
BricsCAD Ultimate ($2,000) carries on from before, combining all of Bricsys’ software in a single package.
BricsCAD Shape (free) for 3D modeling is still included with any BricsCAD download, even after the 30-day trial ends.
All interact with 24/7, the company's subscription-based online collaboration platform.
BricsCAD Cloud moves from being free in BricsCAD to being available only to customers who purchase an annual subscription. This is not surprising, given that CAD vendors don’t get to rent space on cloud servers for free.
Bricsys Collective is the new name for third-party add-ons, of which 350 are available through the online store.
What's New in BricsCAD V21
Some new features in the 21st release of BricsCAD are catch-ups with competitors, while other new functions leapfrog ahead of pretty much any other competitor.
Some of the catch-up commands include the SetByLayer command for changing any property of objects on layers. LayTrans maps layers in imported drawings to office standards. Three-D meshes can have their smoothness adjusted from 0 (none) to 5 (maximum), and can edit individual vertices and edges. CombineText groups single-line text into Mtext; properties of imported ArcText can be edited.
Other new functions are clever. History is recorded per-entity in the Properties panel, so you can go back to change your mind about changes to specific entities.
Copy Array places multiple copies at once as an array.
Importing SKP files turns SketchUp meshes into blocks so that they can be manipulated more easily; as well, SketchUp materials are imported and so can be used by BricsCAD.
Meshes from a SketchUp model imported as blocks, with attached materials
Externally-referenced drawings (xrefs) load in the background. When a drawing has many xrefs, you see them displayed one at a time as they load, as you work on other things.
Direct Modeling
Fillets and chamfers in direct modeling can have variable-radii curves and multi-angle chamfers. The manipulator lets us edit the curves and angles interactively.
Hold down Ctrl to push or pull during PushPull command. PushPull now works with constrained objects, such as interactively changing the size of a plate with several holes.
BricsCAD introduced L- and T-connections in an earlier release. If you have a bunch of pipes, valves, and Ts connected and you move one, the others move/stretch to compensate. V21 offers hotkeys to switch between connected and disconnected moves. Added to V21 is the ability to rotate connected elements
Pipes interactively being moved from where they intersect a column
We saw a demo of the roof of a building being rotated. When disconnected, the trusses and walls stayed in place. With a connected rotation, the trusses moved along with the roof, while the walls stretched automatically to meet the roof line. V21 also adds real-time previews of these movements.
Roof being rotated with connections turned off
- - -
Next week we have for you part 2 of the Bricsys Design Summit 2020, covering updates to its civil engineering, mechanical design, and BIM modules.
And in Other News
PTC plans to release Creo 7.0 in the coming months, featuring the first Atlas-based add-on — cloud-based Generative Design Extension (GDX) using technology from the Frustum acquisition; GDX works also with Onshape. Other Atlas add-ons could take five to ten years to appear, such as a cloud-based version of Creo.
PTC CEO James Hepplemann noted that Onshape revenues grew 80% year-over-year, and “landed over 700 competitive displacements, the majority coming from SolidWorks.” Dassault Systemes has 49,800 companies using Solidworks.
PTC’s 2020 revenues were $1.46 billion, up 17% from the year before; next year, it expects to take in $1.55 - $1.6 billion. The company, however, sits on $1.0 billion in debt. www.ptc.com
- - -
3D Systems is unloading all of its subtractive CAM software, selling Cimatron and GibbsCAM to the SigmaTEK Systems division of Battery Ventures for $65 million. Six years ago, 3D Systems paid $97 million to acquire Cimatron-GibbsCAM.
- - -
This reminds me when we used colors in CAD to specify plotter pen numbers: In KeyCreator MfgCAD 2021, face colors on 3D models become MBD [model-based definitions] data to signify manufacturing tolerances and hole types.
Is there anyone providing CAD software that will work in a parallel computing environment?
- Roger Roberts, president-retired Mid-West CAD, Inc.
The editor replies: Some CAD vendors have implemented some basic functions in parallel computing, such as loading files and performing renderings, but none have the full CAD package, nor is it likely this will ever occur.
- - -
Hope you are surviving well during these crazy times! I was intrigued to see a guest editorial in your newsletter. What is the process to submit a guest editorial?
- A. S.
The editor replies: “Guest editorial” refers to any article not written by me. They are usually ones with specialized topics that I think are of interest to my readers.
Thank You, Readers
Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine:
1SET Design Pty Ltd
Novedge LLC (small company donation)
To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:
Issue #1,072 | 2 November 1020 | The Business of CAD
I work in the food service design industry. We design commercial food service facilities for restaurants, schools, hotels, and so on. Back in the 1980s, a group of forward-thinking food service designers developed a layering standard for AutoCAD, which we still use. Having a standard made our lives much easier.
There are over 400 manufacturers in our industry. A food service designer may use equipment from dozens of manufacturers in a kitchen design. We simply don’t have the time to edit Revit families from all these sources to work together in our Revit projects. So we applied the same thinking to Revit, and food service designers have been using a common Revit Shared Parameter file since 2010.
Our Shared Parameter file covers all the utilities that one may find in a kitchen: gas, water supply, voltages, drainage, and so on. By and large, it has been working very well. Now our group has expanded to develop these standards for international food service design. I’ll keep you posted on our progress.
- Truman Donoho Foodservice Equipment Symbols
- - -
I don’t see how you can have BIM-to-CAM when there is insufficient resolution/fidelity in the BIM to start with. It’s easy to degrade resolution, but how do you add it?
- Robin Capper New Zealand
The editor replies: The idea is to have CAM-level details in the BIM model, which I think is referred to as LOD 5 (level of detail 5). This is the level at which screws are modeled.
The problem is how to get to LOD 5, as lighter models already overwhelm BIM hardware and software systems. So this is the gap that exists between doing the design and being able to manufacture it.
Martyn Day of AEC Magazine wrote about the BIM-can't-CAM problem, but I can't find that article; sorry! Traditional BIM vendors are making enough money from selling regular BIM that they haven't bothered fixing the CAM part. Autodesk, which went overboard on buying construction management software, doesn't have a way to get from Revit to the construction site. Bricsys proposes adding intimate details through "AI," where the software predicts the details needed, and then adds them automatically.
Mr Capper responds: I think the real issue is that BIM is often more ‘design intent’ than actually constructible. I thought Autodesk’s Quantum concept, demo’ed at AU a few years ago, was an interesting approach to that.
The detail modeler, say curtain wall fabricator, just pulled critical control points from the architect's model (live, and refreshed at agreed-to intervals) and served back as a lightweight placeholder. Seems to have ‘gone dark’; I wonder if it was abandoned or retreated into secret development?
The editor replies: It was abandoned after several years of development. It was known as Project Quantum and was specific to AEC. Autodesk is replacing it with the all-encompassing Project Plasma, and apparently will announce more at Autodesk University later this year.
The discussion of Revit and BIM are very interesting, even though it's totally different world than the mechanical one that I inhabit.
Occasionally, I read things that make me realize that the building construction world is intensely striving to achieve the level of documentation that is considered completely normal and routine in the manufacturing world. The problem is that they have to do it for a "product" that is more complex in terms of the number of different parts involved (generally) and, instead of being built in a single factory, with all components purchased by a single purchasing department, there are many, many companies involved, each with their own systems of part numbering, naming, modeling, purchasing, warehousing, issuing, inventorying, and accounting.
So they can look to the manufacturing world for some guidance, but no manufacturing system is going to stretch to fit the construction of a large building by fifty subcontractors.
The article noted that "The Shared Parameter GUID ensures each Shared Parameter in existence has its own unique 32-bit identifier number, which is the only thing Revit really cares about with any parameter you create."
This is called a "part number" in my world. And I have occasionally had to explain and convince small manufacturers that it's important to assign a unique number to every component they make. I can only imagine how hard it would be to convince everyone involved in a large building project, from the architect to the electrician, that having consistent names for things is essential.
Thanks for your continued insights into this world.
- Jess Davis, president Davis Precision Design, Inc.
The editor replies: You hit the nail on the head, to borrow a phrase from construction. As someone once put it, think of assembling an Boeing 747, but in a muddy field miles from the factory, and each one plane being made with a different set of plans.
The BIM software world has, in the last year, just started to notice that they have a great problem in failing to connect with construction, except experimentally. It is all well and good for industry critics to complain that construction has only progressed 1% in efficiency over the last couple of decades, but there can be no automation when there is no data to input into the automation.
Mr Davis responds: It's kind of fun to explain manufacturing to a carpenter.
"Yeah, that 2x4 you just cut and nailed in place? See, we would have a drawing for that."
"Why would I need a drawing to cut that?"
"Oh, you wouldn't cut it. A supplier would cut it, and you'd just have to find it in those two semi-loads of pallets that got unloaded during the last rainstorm. It'll be marked with a cardboard tag."
The editor replies: ROTFL
- - -
Dave has an elegant solution to the parameter mess, although it would require some admin. Bizarrely, it is implemented for some items in that old, non-BIM product called AutoCAD Architecture, that in some ways is more sophisticated at managing BIM standards.
Revit has a similar concept in its CAD export maps (object keys to layer names), but AutoCAD Architecture's Layer Key system addresses the same problem. The list of AEC Objects is consistent, but there is no standardization across the industry for layers.
So an object 'DOOR' can be mapped to 'A-Door' in one key, or '32-Door' or 'Bld_Door' or whatever you assign in the different keys. Open a generic file; hit Remap; all the layers and properties update; start work. This means you have one template, one parameter in the library, potentially serving hundreds of client standards.
Using a key to build names has massive advantages, with the only real disadvantage of having to administer the keys:
It enforces company standards by allowing users to only select pre-set values when naming content. For Revit, imagine when creating parameters (to use Matt's example) you could only choose ‘Width’ as part of the parameter name, because the BIM standard has set it . This eliminates creative naming or typos ("witdth").
It would allow mapping of multiple values to your standard, so my ‘FurnLength = Desk Width | Width of desk | witdth’ in ‘foreign’ content or linked files. As an aside I only have Length (X), Depth (Y) and Height (Z) but no ‘Width’ in my shared parameters as I found this avoids confusion. If you want to have a ‘Width,’ it has to update the relevant X, Y, or Z shared parameter used for tracking object volumes. I can do that with our content, but not any foreign stuff.
It would allow you to have per-project or client Key Tables. If they are consistent with naming (and often they are consistently different), just link the content, apply the map, done.
I would not like a parameter creation standard or mapping key to control everything, but it should be able to manage consistent information crucial to information sharing and basic data entry (Width, not widTH, Witdh etc). In some ways the shared parameters do that, but still depend on users complying with a standard while making them!
The other thing is, and sorely lacking in Revit, Layer Keys -- like every other AEC Object, Display, Material and Property Set (Parameters) -- have both Style and Instance GUIDs and can be updated (from a standards file) automatically or with a prompt on first access, or manually any time. If the BIM Manager updates a key to reflect a client’s requirements or a change in standards, then every project will acquire that update when it’s next edited. So I wish Revit had that!
I even have found using Schedule Keys (combinations of parameters tied to a single selectable key value) for things like rooms, area, and space properties works very well in a Revit Project, but is challenging to standardize across multiple projects, even with third party tools.
For instance, I have a master Schedule Key in my Standards project, update it (add a value, or change some of the existing key sub-parameters), but then update the same key schedule in existing projects. It’s a basic requirement in using BIM for lifecycle management, not just build and run.
- Robin Caper
- - -
Another excellent eZine from my man Ralph! A reader wrote, “What I proposed (many, many years ago) was a Linked Parameter Mapping Table.”
That’s a ‘no-brainer’! Any idiot could see that as the only solution for a changing world. I’ve said as much to Autodesk in the past, but my wishlist suggestions always fell on deaf bureaucratic-guarded investor pocketbooks.
It’s too late to fix the screw-up of data in the CAD world. The only way it will get fixed is if we impose upon ourselves a global CAD dictatorship! Cheers,
- Chris Cadman
The editor replies: Data exchange is a problem that stays problematic, even as brilliant programmers find solutions.
And in Other News
Hexagon reported total Q3 revenues of €940 million (US$1.1 billion) — flat both on organic and constant currency bases from a year ago, following five quarters of declines. Despite this, the company has so far this year made ten acquisitions, including a third line of CAM [computer-aided manufacturing] software through last week’s purchase of ESPRIT owner DP Technology.
Contact Software releases its PLM software Elements v15.5 as an LTS [long term support] edition, so that customers will receive support for years to come.
OnScale Solve’s cloud engineering simulation platform offers multi-physics solvers. The current version has mechanical, thermal, and coupled thermal-mechanical analyses; in the future, the site plans to add dynamic mechanical, nonlinear mechanics, thermal-fluid, fluid-structure interactions, and acoustic analysis.
The company is offering free private accounts to anyone of 500 core-hours/year. The software runs on its own at onscale.com, as well as inside Onshape.
- - -
Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:
Recent Comments