Monday, May 03, 2021

Model-checking 3D Prints with Riven

Issue #1,094  |  Celebrating 24 Years of CAD Reporting | 3 May 2021

 

by Ralph Grabowski

The core idea of Riven is that it corrects manufacturing problems by comparing 3D printed parts to the source CAD model. Its software lets you see defects in 3D printed parts and then make changes so that the designs are 3D-printed better the next time around.

Riven’s product is turnkey: it is software that runs in a browser and comes with 3D data management in a cloud; a turntable for rotating the printed models; and optionally includes Riven’s own 3D scanner. You can substitute certain models of other 3D scanners.

Although it was designed to diagnose parts made by any manufacturing method, the company found that early adopters tended to be ones who make sintered metal parts through metal binder-jet (MJB) printing.

The MBJ 3D printing process goes through steps shown by the figure below. The cost proportioned to each stage is roughly 10% -- 20% -- 10% -- 25% -- 35%. In red is the typical manual checking stage. Manual checking can miss defects such as warp and so result in scrap parts or failures in the field.

Typical checking of parts after 3D printing

So Riven checks parts before the process gets too expensive; see “release valves” in the figure below. It wants to solve

  • problems in getting from design to manufacturing

  • manufacturing waste; currently 25% of manufacturing is scrapped (perhaps a $3 trillion-cost, globally), with side effects of excessive shipping and labor costs

Checking 3D printed parts earlier in the process

How Riven Works

The Riven software reads data from 3D scanners from several vendors; the company provides its own Propel scanner. Data from the Propel scanner can be exported as a STEP file for use in CAD programs.

Founder James Page with Propel scanner aimed at Riven turntable

The part is placed on Riven’s turntable, about the size of a laptop. As the turntable turns, the scanner captures 3D data of the top and sides of the part in about a minute; a single viewpoint is captured in a couple of seconds. To capture the bottom surface of a part, flip it over and scan again. The software stitches the two scans together. Founder James Page says this is much faster than CMMs [coordinate measuring machines].

Once the scan is complete, you switch to the Riven.ai 3D Cloud Platform, which captures, stores, and analyzes the scan data. The software runs in browsers, and so even phones can be used to view models to collaborate remotely and solve problems in the field.

The software shows the result of the scan, and compares it with the source CAD model; it does not edit scans. Riven shows you where 3D printing may have failed by showing you several different versions of the scan:

1. The raw scan shows areas in pink as unscanned surfaces. See figure below.

2. Riven compares the scan with the CAD model:

  • Red areas — the 3D print is too large (by more than 0.5mm in the figure below) than the CAD model

  • Blue areas — too small

  • Gray areas — 0% deviation from CAD model

In the figure above, the blue shows that the fan blades warped downwards, a problem common with 3D printing. As well, the hole through the center should actually be too small, so that it can be drilled and reamed later in the production process.

3. Riven’s go/no-go gauge shows surfaces that are out by more than a specific distance, such as more than 0.5mm in the figure below.

A slider lets you dynamically change the gauge distance, as some surfaces might need a tighter tolerance. In some cases, inexact surfaces might be okay in the final product.

4. With these results in hand, you go back to the CAD program and adjust the design, like adding support collars, making the central hole smaller so that it can be drilled properly, and adding supports so that the blades do not sag during printing (shown in blue in the figure below).

5. Re-print and re-scan the redesigned part, and then go back into to the Riven software to check that there is now very little red or blue, as shown below. Holes are left correctly undersized, as indicated by pink.

Riven has one more mode: Measure mode is useful for measuring scanned parts, especially those that are hard to measure with calipers. Riven recognizes basic shapes, allowing measurements of surfaces like partial cylinders or between nearly-parallel planes. The basic shapes are colorized in the figure below.

Q&A

Q: The handout refers to Riven being useful for “NPI” but does not define what it stands for.

A: The term NPI refers to New Product Introduction. This is where designers iterate adjustments to models and manufacturing parameters to achieve acceptable parts.

 

Q: Where did the name Riven come from?

A: The word Riven refers to a divide or split, something being “riven apart.” We see the divide between physical parts and digital data as critical to bridge, so to reduce a significant amount of waste in manufacturing. We want to own that with our name.

 

Q: What is the accuracy of the system?

A: Repeatability is 10 microns, accuracy is 50 microns (0.0008" and 0.002" respectively).

 

Q: How are hidden areas scanned?

A: The scanner sees about 45 degrees into a hole; you can reposition the part to get all the way through short holes. For longer holes, you either cut the part in half, or else fill the volume with silicon and scan that. As well, Riven can take data from other scanners [that specialize in holes].

 

Q: What are the largest and smallest sizes that can be scanned?

A: As small as a dime and as big as a lunchbox, roughly 0.2" to 12".

 

Q: Are reference faces offered?

A: They are on our roadmap.

 

Q: Can the go/no-go areas be varied on different sections of a part?

A: We are looking into that. In the meantime, the slider lets you move the threshold for one area of the part, then for another area.

 

Q: Are there limitations on surface finishes that can be scanned?

A: Most parts can be scanned, but chrome-plated, transparent, black parts should be covered with a scanning spray. A new sublimating spray called AESUB goes on and then disappears on its own, leaving no residue. This makes it easy to scan parts that previously were challenging.

 

Q: Does Riven read tolerances from Solidworks models?

A: Today, you set the tolerance range in Riven. In the future, we might work with MBE [tolerances defined in model-based engineering tags].

 

Q: How do you handle large parts?

A: You do multiple poses; the system will know they are all of the same part. It might have difficulty with perfectly symmetric parts, like spheres, so you should place markings on them.

 

Q: How secure is your browser-based system,?

A: We are built on AWS [Amazon Web services] and use the best protocols to keep data secure. We have some aerospace and defense customers, who are satisfied with our security. We encrypt all the data in our system, both at rest and in transit.

 

Q: What is the cost?

A: The subscription is $4,500 a year with the sensor and software that can be used by up to ten people. The 3D models and annotations can be shared with an unlimited number of viewers.

An annual subscription will cost your team less than a couple of round trip tickets to China.

https://riven.ai

 

And in Other News

CAD to Cloud takes 3D models — parts, assemblies, and drawings — from Solidworks and uploads them to an Onshape account. It handles tasks like simultaneous editing, change tracking, and markups.

The software is currently free and in beta. www.cadtocloud.com

- - -

Open Design Alliance updates its free Open IFC Viewer to v2.3:

  • Measure distances along IFC models, and snap to the nearest vertex

  • Save IFC models as interactive 3D PDF files, and snapshot images as raster files

  • Display models with anti-aliasing and ground shadows

  • Spin the view cube for easier 3D navigation

Download the viewer for Windows or MacOS from openifcviewer.com.

- - -

AirShaper introduces Aerodynamic Shape Optimization to generate sensitivity maps of an object’s surface in two simulations, and then morph the shape of the object automatically. The result is drag reduction in fewer iterations.

Pricing starts at $50 per simulation and $6,000 per optimization. Learn more at airshaper.com.

- - -

Mensch und Maschine Software reports that Q1 revenues of its software were up 8%, but that revenues from its Autodesk reselling biz are down 14% so far in 2021.

Total Q1 revenues for the German firm are the equivalent of US$87 million. Monica Schnitger has the details for you at schnitgercorp.com/?p=18216.

- - -

Here is a post that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Letters to the Editor

Re: Q&A From Onshape’s User Conference

Your comments on Onshape are acceptable, except for one detail. Maybe 1% of the CAD world uses it. I am not saying it is terrible or poor software. But it all comes back to the marketplace.

As a service bureau, should we (or really, could we) support that 1% of the market? Or provide services for that 80/20% rule (Catia, NX, Creo, Solidworks, and yes, some Autodesk)?  The point is we cannot. 

We are building a large-scale power reactor system for a client now. They did their prototypes in Onshape. What are we going to use for design work? Solidworks. Then after Phase I of the design, we move into Ansys and Comsul for simulation. The company has zero interest in bringing the final design back into Onshape when completed .

I get the efforts of Onshape and BricsCAD. But it is very hard to support the 1% marketplace.
            - Scott Shuppert
            CAD/CAM Services

The editor replies: The latest number suggested by PTC is that they have perhaps 13,000 paying Onshape users. I think that PTC will phase out Onshape as a commercial product, and it might do the same in education. It does not make sense for PTC to promote software to schools when it is incompatible with Creo; the former employs the Parasolid kernel, while the latter the Granite kernel.

As for BricsCAD, it is remarkable software that out-AutoCADs AutoCAD but with numbers (in the range of 300,000) that after nearly 20 years of development are small enough to puzzle me.

 

Re: A Contractor’s View of BIM

Some brief comments on parts i and ii and the letters about part i.

1. The not-fully stated issue is this: Who has the knowledge to put all relevant and correct information into the BIM? Mr. Stachoni proposes putting the model in the hands of the GC [general contractor], but the knowledge is not there. Most of it is diffused among the subcontractors and trade associations and vendors in a combination of printed codes and manuals and a lot of experienced brains. GCs stay in business by shifting risk of error to subs.

2. Dave Edwards is right on in contrasting upper management and the guys in the back of the room. Tech sales people always focus on the benefits of a new technology and downplay or ignore the implementation costs. Probably the majority of the observable benefits of BIM have come from IPD [integrated project delivery].

3. Jess Davis grasps the differences between “normal” manufacturing and construction. The core difference is that the latter is continually building complex prototypes and starting with architects who are paid little to design, and are almost as much artists as engineers.

4. Matt Stachoni’s idea of GCs fully owning and coordinating the BIM is intriguing, but I wonder if anyone has tried it? IPD gets part way there. I would be very interested to read write-ups of such an experiment from the perspectives of many participants.
            - Leo Schlosberg

 

Re: Understanding the Divide

Brilliant book, thanks.
            - Tom Foster (via WorldCAD Access)
            Space and Light

 

Notable Quotable

“Please make a note of your password so you can change it when our data gets breached.”
     - Management Speak (@managerspeak on Twitter)

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine.:

  • OzCAD Pty, Australia: “Thanks for your efforts Ralph.”

  • Uwe Redmer, Germany: “Thanks for your well researched comments.”

 

To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

 

*4733

 

 

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A | | Comments (0)

Monday, April 26, 2021

Q&A From Onshape's User Conference (part iii of iii)

Issue #1,093  |  The Business of CAD  |  26 April 2021

 

 

The first Onshape software conference took place online last month, and I transcribed many of the questions asked by users and answered by PTC staff.

- - -

Q: Does Onshape use parallelism in the cloud, and if so, when?

A: This is one of the big promises of the cloud. We use it in some places. Updating lots of parts in an assembly simultaneously causes Onshape to do it on multiple geometry servers. We plan to use parallelism for more things, like engineering design studies.

There are aspects of CAD that are inherently serial. Regeneration itself is inherently serial, for the most part. We cannot regenerate certain features until we have regenerated other features before them. We rent the Amazon machines with the highest single-thread performance.

 

Q: Might you be able to share how Atlas works with Onshape?

A: A lot of how Onshape data is structured is the foundation of Atlas’s data model. Atlas uses a lot of the same code we do at our end.

There are going to be parts of Atlas that are not currently part of Onshape, to develop an ecosystem of applications that do more than what Onshape currently has. That is where a lot of the effort is currently going in building it out.

 

Q: What details can you tell us about the future of FeatureScript?

A: FeatureScript is not the only mechanism for automation of Onshape. It is very specifically tailored to Part Studio and in other things it works well. But it is not necessarily the best thing for scripting in all systems.

For that, we have API [application programming interface] capabilities that we are improving, especially in light of Atlas development. The expansion of these API capabilities will make a really convenient system for automating things, like ECAD [electrical design] and rendering simulation.

 

Q: How do you decide which functions to add to Onshape next?

A: It is a juggling act. On the one had, we have things we think are important to do; on the other hand, we have a finite set of developers.

The most important thing is [to implement] whatever is blocking our existing customers from doing their work. Next priority are functions that will help us get new customers.

While doing that, we have to keep investing in performance, fixing bugs, and code infrastructure. We make sure we leave some room for risk-taking, functions customers are not necessarily asking for. Summer interns let us have more bang-for-the-buck features.

 

Q: How can I optimize Onshape’s performance?

A: Performance is a really complicated topic [for server-based CAD programs]. For instance, ISPs can route you to a server not closest to you, which increases latency. Some of the factors that the user has control over are their network and hardware:

  • Onshape can use two discrete GPUs in a computer; check that onshape.com/setup knows this

  • Follow Onshape’s best practices for modeling, such as avoiding giant assemblies, like a car as one part in Studio; avoid long drive chains.

 

Q: Does OnShape pull in Solidworks Simulation data?

A: You cannot pull in Solidworks simulation data, unless it comes in the form of video or pictures.

 

Q: Do direct editing tools work on tessellated geometry?

A: Tessellated data comes in as a bunch of triangles. You can delete triangles, and then use the surfacing tool to smooth over sections.

 

Q: Any option to bring in PCB data?

A: We would bring in printed circuit board(PCB) data just as solid mechanical geometry [today]. We are working on ECAD with one of our acquisitions.

 

Q: What other file formats can Onshape import?

A: We can bring in files from Unigraphics [sic], Creo, those standard big-name CAD types. You can also bring in non-CAD data, like images. The help system lists the things you can bring in.

 

Q: What is the benefit of using Cassini over just doing the import yourself?

A: Custom properties are brought in automatically. Assemblies with many shared components have components brought in just once.

 

Q. Can I connect Onshape to my PDM [product data management] system, which is connected to Solidworks?

A: No, but it might be possible with Cassini.

 

Q: Are there any tools to edit DXFs or DWGs?

A: ARES Kudo in Onshape is read-only; to edit, you have to purchase it from the app store.

 

Q: Is there a best way to get [imported] assemblies into working shape?

A: If no movement is required, the easiest way is highlight the whole thing and use a group mate. In Onshape, all assemblies are considered flexible. If there is some movement [needed], then you have to get into mates.

 

Q: How can we manage our standard content libraries?

A: Onshape has its own standard content library, but you do not have a lot of ability to customize it: you can put in your own part numbers, descriptions. There is a request to make it more customizable.

For your parts library, make a folder, share it with the whole company, and then put each part in its own document.

 

Q: Do we have to import our own commercial parts, or do you have parts suppliers?

A: You would have to import them. If you download them, choose a ParaSolid format (like Solidworks), because that is the kernel we are built on.

 

Q: Do you use Git for change control?

A: We use Git for developing our software, but wrote our own change control for models.

 

Q: Is simulation being driven by Ansys Discovery Live [used by PTC’s Creo]?

A: No, not Ansys Live. We are not planning on talking about the tech behind our simulation, but we have something that is very efficient and accurate, and will scale well in the cloud.

 

What Ralph Grabowski Thinks

PTC is betting its future on Atlas, something the company has admitted in another venue that might take as long as a decade to complete, while costing customers 2x higher subscription fees.

Here’s the But: the design side of CAD isn’t moving wholesale to the cloud, as some players in the CAD industry seem to be finding. Not only is it really hard to put it there, but customers aren’t even particularly keen on the concept. Cloud is useful primarily for ancillary operations like collaboration, PLM, and many-cored calculations.

We could suppose that PTC bought Onshape for the technology, not the MCAD. Onshape will, in my opinion, stay at the low-end, paving the way for Creo to become sufficiently cloud-enabled, by which point PTC may even have lost interest in Onshape, given that Creo and Onshape use incompatible kernels.

- - -

Looking back to part i: Update on Onshape; PTC Visualizes the Gig Economy; Jon Hirschtick’s Keynote; How Onshape Works

Last week in part ii: Onshape for Solidworks Users; The Future of Onshape

To watch the archive of the online conference, register at events1.social27.com/onshapelive21/home.

 

And in Other News

IMSI Design celebrates its upcoming 30th year with the release of TurboCAD 2021:

  • Constraint animations show ranges of motion issues

  • 2D-edit mode turns off 3D objects and related tools

  • Apply to Pattern applies solid operations to all elements in a pattern (array)

  • Imprints can use 2D contours from inserted blocks

TurboCAD is available with permanent and subscription licenses starting at $70. Download the 15-day trial version from turbocad.com/content/free-trials.

- - -

Nemetschek ALLPLAN 2021 automates recurring processes, such as converting cutouts to voids, applying rules to rebars, and placing PythonParts from Allplan Bridge accurately.

Get more details at allplan.com/products/allplan-2021/features.

- - -

CIMdata holds a free educational “2021: PLM Status & Trends” Webinar on 13 May at 11:00 a.m. EDT to report on results from its recent global PLM Status & Trends research. Learn more about the Webinar contents and register through cimdata.com/en/education/educational-webinars/webinar-2021-plm-status-trends.

- - -

Vectorworks revealed that the native Apple M1 version of Vectorworks software will be ready in September, but it may lack some ancillary items, such as SketchUp import because it requires SketchUp to also run on M1.

No Vectorworks app is planned for iPad or other iOS devices due to the huge difference in platform capabilities. For more on Vectorworks’ future plans, see forum.vectorworks.net/index.php?/topic/77760-2021-public-roadmap.

- - -

Plex-Earth ports its aerial and satellite imagery from AutoCAD to BricsCAD ($299/year and up). Place CAD models in maps like Google Earth, or place maps in CAD drawings.

Recent, historical, and high-quality imagery and terrain data are accessed from Maxar, Airbus, Nearmap, Hexagon, and Google. Free trial for either CAD package from plexearth.com/free-trial.

- - -

Here is one of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Letters to the Editor

If you’ve already seen the new Solidworks forum you can quit reading this email. If you haven’t seen it check out the latest way Dassault Systemes has antagonized Solidworks users.

I clicked on a Solidworks Google search and got nothing but one forum post with a little Coming Soon tag. I signed up for the new board (you can’t view the site without signing up) and still couldn’t find an answer, because only 2020 forum posts have been moved to the new system. They’re working on 2019 and older but it takes time. They should’ve done that before they moved to the new system. I need to find a different forum.

Here is background on a forum user focus group meeting with Dassault: cadforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=3760. You should be able to view it without logging in.

I enjoy reading the weekly eZine. Keep up the good work.
            - Andrew

 

Re: More Notes from OnShape's First User Conference

I wonder how many failed startups would exist if no “free money” was available to them via banking and investors? Nothing like a rigged game filled with dreamers who produce little to nothing of value for the world!

Excellent Notable Quotable!
            - Chris Cadman

The editor replies: There is so much cash sloshing around these days, and so with interest rates below 1%, investors are desperate to invest for better returns somewhere, anywhere. Hence the crazy prices in houses, the too-high stock market, and the billions ploughed by venture capital funds into firms with any idea: the long lists of new investments posted by techcrunch.com each day is unimaginable!

 

Notable Quotable

“Don’t be fooled by fashionable subjects. Do whatever you like, if it’s really what you want to do.”
     - Isamu Akasaki, winner, Nobel prize for inventing the “impossible” blue LED

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

*4735

 

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A, Software, Travel | | Comments (0)

Monday, March 22, 2021

Q&A With the Inventor of Catia, part ii

Issue #1,088  |  The Business of CAD  |  22 March 2021

 

Francis Bernard interviewed by David Levin

For the upcoming 40th anniversary of Dassault Systèmes, we offer part ii of an interview with Francis Bernard, co-founder of the company. He was interviewed by David Levin, co-founder of LEDAS Group, which develops software for CAD vendors.

- - -

Levin: How did the idea come about to establish a separate company? It seems to me that a very new company would not be able to organize an effective global marketing strategy of a very new product?

The first Catia IBM flyer

Bernard: Without the partnership with IBM, we would not have established the Dassault Systemes company. It was the key decision factor.

IBM was really like a dream for us: they had 80% of the hardware business at a worldwide level; they already had the experience and organization to sell CAD/CAM software with Cadam; and they were ready to invest significantly in human resources, because each Catia sale generated ten times the hardware revenue for IBM. Revenue from each Catia software sale was shared 50/50 between Dassault Systemes and IBM.

1988, Francis Bernard Dassault Systemes CEO

 

Levin: What were the biggest challenges for the company as it grew from 20 to 100 people, and then from 100 to 500 people?

Bernard: The biggest challenges were to hire, train, and manage people according to six macro-processes that we decided to implement:

  1. Plan: Vision and strategy definition and optimization

  2. Define: Product management to address all markets (aero, auto, and so on)

  3. Implement: Product development using hardware and software of the time

  4. Sell: Marketing and sales in close cooperation with IBM

  5. Team: Ecosystem management with technical partners and IBM

  6. Customer Service: Customer loyalty through a strong maintenance process with IBM

We never faced a financial threat because revenues grew quite well and so we were profitable from the beginning.

 

Levin: Did you invent the company’s management processes or did you adopt them from Dassault Aviation?

Bernard: At the end of the 1980s, when we were more than 200 people, we contracted with consultants specialized in human resources management (not from IBM), to help us implement a clear company vision, along with a strategy (both technical and commercial) to implement the vision, and an execution system to execute the strategy and motivate our people.

On the other hand, we learned from IBM how to manage the software maintenance organization and process, as well as the definition of the pricing policy.

 

Levin: Obviously, the marketing power of IBM has very much helped you to gain customers such as Honda, Mercedes, BMW, and Boeing. Did demonstrations of Catia speak for itself, or did you have more personal methods of convincing major customers?

Bernard: IBM was in fact not involved with the very first customers, as I explained above [in part i].

I got personally in touch and met the executives in charge of CAD/CAM at Honda, Mercedes, and BMW to present and demonstrate Catia. The quality of these discussions generated the conviction at Dassault Aviation that Catia had good business potential.

This generated a lot of motivation for my team and me, and it was a catalyst to convince IBM that we could be a good partner for selling more computers! These three customers (and a few others, such as Grumman Aerospace in USA and SAFRAN in France) were direct customers to Dassault Systemes and became IBM customers only a few years later.

Boeing is a different story. This was a very long battle to win, because my biggest competitor was an internally developed 3D CAD software package. And here the power and credibility of IBM together with our experience in airplane design at Dassault Aviation was essential.

I remember a question from the Boeing CEO when I met him in Seattle: “Please tell us how we can design an airplane in 3D,” and then his comment when he decided for Catia in 1986: “I selected Catia because I am confident in you, but I buy it from IBM because I cannot take the risk in implementing a major business transformation with too small a partner.”

Francis Bernard and Charles Edelstenne (at left) with Boeing Group Directors

Levin: How did you manage the balance between the need to satisfy customers and your own vision of the optimal (with respect to business) development of the software?

Bernard: This is called “product management.” The process of product management is to collect and analyze all of the requirements generated by customers and prospects, to look at the competition, to support the development of IT, and to invent opportunities that are not yet visible to the market.

These inputs are the source of new deliveries of functions, based on the optimization of the revenue potential. As a matter of fact, product management is measured by success on the market.

At Dassault Systemes, each new software delivery is identified by a version number and a release number, VxRy. A new version number means that significant improvements were implemented in the structure of the software, most times to support major hardware developments, which makes it impossible to be fully compatible with the previous version.

Of course, tools are delivered to migrate the data from one version to the next. We announce a new version every five to ten years to support changes in hardware, from mainframes to Unix workstations and then to PCs.

By contrast, a new release of a given version is always fully compatible with the previous release. In other words, V5R8 is fully compatible with V5R7.

To manage the release process properly and to generate confidence in the sales team as well as from customers, it is essential to be time-driven. Therefore we delivered a new release around May and October each year.

It may happen that a customer requests an enhancement not planned for a future release, or our development takes too long for the customer. In such cases, we enter into negotiation. Should the enhancement request have sufficient business potential, we may accelerate its development and require the customer to fund up to 50% of the development cost, with Dassault Systemes keeping full ownership rights of the enhancement developed.

If the enhancement does not have sufficient business potential (usually because it is specific to the customer), then we may develop the enhancement under a standard service contract funded 100% by the customer, who keeps the ownership rights to the enhancement.

 

Levin: Could you mention several people who were especially close to you during your Catia and Dassault Systemes years?

Bernard: This is a difficult question, because everybody contributed in some way. But let me give you some names. The key members of the initial team at Dassault Aviation and at the beginning of Dassault Systemes were

  • Dominique Calmels as my Technical Director until 1990. (He passed away in 2017.)

  • Didier Boucier as a key technical specialist who was a major actor in the development of Catia. (He retired in 2019.)

Then at Dassault Systemes there was

  • Charles Edelstenne, Dassault Systemes board chairman, a clever businessman and one of the ten richest men in France. (He was also a former CEO of Dassault Aviation and is now president of Dassault Group.)

  • Thibault de Tersant, who joined Dassault Systemes in 1986 as financial director, an excellent negotiator of acquisitions and support of large customers, as well as the management of pricing.

  • Bernard Charles, who joined Dassault Systemes in 1984, who became technical director in 199, and then CEO in 1995. An ambitious leader with a very large ego.

I do not like Charles Edelstenne and Bernard Charles from a human point of view, but I respect their significant contributions.

The Dassault Systèmes’ management team in 1987: Francis Bernard, seated; standing in the foreground (on the left): Dominique Calmel; at the back (left to right): Bernard Charlès, Bernard Vermersh, Bruno Latchague, Philippe Forestier, and Jean-Michel Morin

 

Levin: What are some key reasons for the success of Dassault Systemes?

Bernard: Let me give you a high-level summary:

  1. To be at the right place at the right time; this was the luck or the opportunity that we realized only years later, in that we took advantage of the IT revolution, the Cold War, Dassault Aviation, then globalization

  2. To invent a major transformation with a long-term vision: “3D for all”; this was more than just inventing a gadget, it was the 2D-to-3D revolution thanks to IT

  3. To make the right strategic decisions: the creation of a Dassault Systèmes independent of Dassault Aviation; the IBM partnership; the strong ecosystem of partners; partnerships with customers; and well-targeted acquisitions

  4. To set up a robust management and execution system

 

Levin: What are five of the most important milestones during your time at Dassault Aviation and Dassault Systemes?

Bernard: This is a difficult question to answer, because there were dozens of important events. Here are five:

1967: My decision to join the aerodynamics department where the IT was initiated

1968: My first CAD software, which created and smoothed curves, which became part of the initial Catia release ten years later

1977: The start of Catia development

1981: The launch of DS’s partnership with IBM

1986: Landing Boeing as a customer

 

Levin: What do you consider to be the most interesting CAD trend you observed during the last decade?

I am not very much involved anymore, but I do see two major trends:

  • The development of the IT platform on the cloud

  • The beginning of the implementation of PLM concepts in the medical domain: a numerical definition of the human body; analysis and simulation of its functions; maintenance and correction of deficiencies; and so on.

 

Levin: Do you agree that CAD has become less important in the contemporary IT world? Perhaps there are not enough ambitious challenges for CAD to address now.

Bernard: I believe that it is like a concept of layers: more and more, CAD will become a de facto set of basic functions. Applications using these basic functions will be the visible part of a system.

 

Levin: The role of AI in CAD software is still quite limited, especially compared to other areas. Do you expect a breakthrough here?

Bernard: Yes. As I briefly described earlier, CAD may become an invisible layer below the AI layer.

 

Levin: What do you think about cloud-based CAD modeling? Will it replace traditional CAD on the desktop, or will it remain a niche solution for students and small businesses?

Bernard: I believe that the cloud is just a new platform, making it easier to integrate and to communicate. It will probably not replace the desktop, but will become a complementary option for most customers.

 

Levin: Sometimes it seems to me that MCAD, in its classic meaning for manufacturing, is to some extent already exhausted. It is very effective, but any great new thing can hardly be done. If so, there could be two ways in particular for progress in business and technology: (1) CAD + real artificial intelligence, and (2) expansion of technology to new domains, such as medicine and finance. What do you think of this?

Bernard: Yes, AI will become a major part of the future.

Yes, new domains like medicine will be addressed; Dassault Systemes acquired recently Medidata in USA to go in such a direction. Finance, I am not sure because it is not at all related to shapes and physical/chemical simulations and it is already addressed by CRM and ERP applications.

And never forget: it is basically impossible to predict a development in technology more than ten years in advance. I like the quote from Henri Ford (1863-1947): “If I’d asked customers what they wanted, they would have said ‘a faster horse’.”

 

Levin: What are the criteria for a CEO to quit the position? What do you think is the difference in success and time limitations for keeping a top position as the CEO of a company and the president of a country?

Bernard: Any CEO will be replaced, because he is retiring, or he is not productive enough, or he is in conflict with the shareholders or the employees, or he wants to quit for another position, or ultimately he dies. The question is to manage this process with no negative impact, and, if possible, a positive impact on the company, the employees, and the shareholders.

In my case, there had been a kind of agreement between Charles Edelstenne (board director), Bernard Charles (technical director), and myself as CEO. Bernard Charles was younger than me by 18 years, more ambitious (a killer), and more motivated than me to manage the exponential growth of the company.

I am not an ambitious killer; I am just passionate to work for and with people and customers all around the world. Charles Edelstenne arbitrated an agreement to transfer the CEO position to Bernard Charles and to let me address new markets at the time and emerging countries. (See my earlier response on Russia). The process went quickly and smoothly, without any frustration or trouble.

The success criteria for a CEO is to meet the company’s objectives in terms of revenues; for the president of a country, it is to be re-elected.

The limitation for a CEO is the company’s performance; for a president, it is the support of the chambers and the electors. Of course, I mean this for a democracy that is like a company in which the customers are the electors! The more a state looks like a dictatorship, the more it looks like a company with no customers!

 

Levin: As an advisor and a member of the board, you have contacts with a lot of companies and startups. Which are the most interesting to you?

Bernard: I have contacts only with startups in the digital domain with B2B [business to business] solutions. This is related to my past experience with Dassault Systemes, CAD, and PLM. But you must recognize that Dassault Systemes was not a startup but outsourced from Dassault Aviation. As long as we had Dassault Aviation as a reference, a good motivated team, and the IBM partnership, the risk was limited.

When I look at a startup, I verify the vision (a statement with a clear objective) and the product (what is the value to the customer? is it a must-have solution?) with the early customers, the competition, the team (is the leader heading a reasonable management structure?), and the ecosystem. In our complex environment, a startup without technical and/or sales partners has nearly no chance to succeed.

[This article first appeared in isicad, and is reprinted with permission. The interview has been shortened from its initial form.]

 

And in Other News

Open Design Alliance launches its Strategic Interoperability Group (SIG) to extend interoperability through member-led initiatives that could include file formats (other than those already supported, like DWG), digital twins, and scan-to-BIM.

Existing SIGs [special interest group] already handle ADT and RVT. “More than 60 companies now use ODA Revit support in of their software,” reports Randall Newton. https://www.opendesign.com/sig

- - -

ARCHLINE.XP 2021 is now available and offers real-time elevations and sections, schedules with images, rule-based filters, certain kinds of automated dimensions, and push/pull for 3D conceptual modeling. Get video overviews of what’s new through archlinexp.com/webinars.

- - -

Siemens updates Simcenter STAR-CCM+2021.1 to open simulation files in read-only mode, thus not using up a license. Surrogate Models predict the performance of thousands of variations. Engineers can sketch complex circuits with the new Electric Circuit Editor.

The software is now AWS HPC [Amazon Web services high performance computing] Competency certified. More details at blogs.sw.siemens.com/simcenter/simcenter-star-ccm-2021-1/

- - -

Vectorworks releases service pack 3 of its eponymous software with direct connections to Solibri and Twinmotion, and improved IFC exports. The 30-day free trial of Vectorworks Designer is downloadable from vectorworks.net/trial/form (after registration).

- - -

nPower Software ships Power Surfacing (sub-d organic modeling) and Power Surfacing RE (reverse engineering) v6 for Solidworks with power shell and power thicken, multi-directional mirroring, new quad wrap that automatically fills most holes, updated shrink wrap that checks for self-intersections, and new mesh smoothing that applies to the whole model. More info at npowersoftware.com/pressreleases/pressreleasePowerSurfacing60.html

- - -

Here are posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Letters to the Editor

Re: Q&A With the Inventor of Catia

I read with great interest your Catia article and took special notice of your picture of Mr. Dassault working on a Catia workstation.

As a long retired drafter who morphed from hand drafting to CADD, I remember learning CADD on an IBM Fastdraft system in 1984. It looked much the same as shown in this picture. It had two 19" black-and-white monitors and you drew using a light pen. The CPU unit was the size of a refrigerator and only had 11MB of memory. I saved my work to 11" floppy disks and plotted to an IBM pen plotter.

Cost of this two-monitor system was $125,000. It did include a service contract. Might the Catia system be the same system marketed by IBM as Fastdraft?
- Bob Melusky

The editor replies: I think it is a different system. IBM sold quite a few different CAD programs over the decades. For instance, I have a copy of IBM CAD/3X V3R2 ($99 back then in 1993), which was a 2D CAD program for DOS and OS/2 derived from IBM’s Altium CAD/PCB design group. (It’s interesting to see IBM targeting AutoCAD 12 users.)

From the official IBM history site, I read that in 1982 IBM introduced “the 6361 Fastdraft System, a low-cost drafting system using a light pen and a CRT screen.” I think that it looked similar to Catia because CAD systems used similar hardware in those days.

It was great to read your remembrances!

 

Re: CAD for Chrome OS is Possible in 2021

FWIW. Onshape, on Chromebook, a big reason Onshape recently surpassed +1M users in education. Onshape on Chromebook is excellent.
- Joe Dunne, PTC

The editor replies: Onshape is CAD that runs in browsers, as do many other CAD programs, such as AutoCAD Web and ARES Kudo, whereas I am advocating for native apps designed for tablets that run with no Web connection on Chromebooks through Android, like Krita for paint programs.

 

Notable Quotable

“We are looking for like-minded people to join our diversity committee.”
- Management Speak (@managerspeak on Twitter)

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

 

*4738

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A | | Comments (0)

Monday, March 15, 2021

Q&A With the Inventor of Catia, part i

Issue #1,087  |  The Business of CAD  |  15 March 2021

 

For the upcoming 40th anniversary of Dassault Systèmes, we offer this interview with Francis Bernard, co-founder of the company. He was interviewed by David Levin, co-founder of LEDAS Group, which develops software for CAD vendors.

Mr Bernard was born in French Indochina (now Vietnam) where his father was a mining engineer. His family returned to France around the time he turned 12. Here is the rest of his story.

- - -

David Levin: What influenced your interest in aerospace engineering?

Francis Bernard: I was fascinated by airplanes. When I was 12-17 years old, I spent most of my free time constructing aircraft models, including one with a radio transmitter that I developed by myself with tube amps, because there were no transistors yet, and then flew them in a park in nearby Paris.

As a young student, I worked very hard to enter Supaero, the top aerospace engineering university in France. At Supaero I had the opportunity to fly as a pilot in private airplanes. And I discovered one of the first computers of this time, the CAB 500, which was as big as a wardrobe but a lot less powerful than pocket calculators that you today buy for $10 in a supermarket.

 

Levin: Was joining Dassault Aviation accidental?

Bernard: Joining Dassault Aviation was not accidental. Dassault Aviation was very prestigious because of its Mirage fighter jets at the time of the Cold War. The technology there was quite sophisticated and the salary quite attractive.

Cutaway view of a Mirage fighter jet from conceptbunny.com

I had already a pre-employment contract with Dassault Aviation while I was still a student at Supaero, receiving a monthly fee for several years (including during my military service) before joining Dassault Aviation. So I had a legal commitment to join!

 

Levin: At first glance, your initial specialization in theoretical aerodynamics appears very different from professional software development. How did it happen that you became so quickly involved in a domain that seems new, given your background?

Bernard: When I began with Dassault Aviation in 1967, there were no computers anywhere. It was still the time of paper, pencils, and typewriters. The two first computers, the IBM 1800, were installed by coincidence the same time that I arrived.

We began developing mathematical algorithms to calculate aerodynamic flows along wings and fuselages. We learned how to convert our mathematical language into programming language to deliver air pressure values on aircraft geometry.

Of course, the first fundamental problem was to create the mathematics, then to create a software/data representation of the airplane’s shape, because it was used as input to the aerodynamics computations. Like most engineers in the world at this time (end of the 1960s), we had to learn to experiment with software development on these very early computers.

 

Levin: There is a serious difference between computational software modules that were the predecessors to Catia, and Catia on the other hand as a universal CAD engine. Does this mean that you had to design a new architecture for CAD?

Bernard: In the beginning, at the end of the 1960s and into the early 1970s, the only way to communicate with a computer -- to create and manipulate data -- was to write software in an alphanumeric language that we entered on punch cards. So, we invented a specific language to create and to store the shape of the airplane in the memory of the computer: wings were ruled surfaces between profiles defined by fifth-degree curves, and fuselages were conics evolving along fifth-degree curves.

We also invented a specific alphanumeric language to exploit the shapes: input for computation of aerodynamics, sections of planes, and cutting-tool motions for numerical-control machines.

Then in the early 1970s we had the first black and white graphics terminals (first the IBM 2250, then the IBM 3250 terminal) together with a new generation of much more powerful computers (the IBM/360, then the IBM/370 mainframe). It opened up the opportunity to convert our alphanumeric language (on decks of punched cards) into a much simpler-to-use language on interactive graphic terminals.

IBM System/360 mainframe computer came in several models, from small to huge

In 1977, I decided, with the support of my management, that it was time to rewrite all our software to handle the conversion. As with the first generation on punched cards, we did all the software development ourselves, of course taking benefit of our experience with the mathematical definitions of the shapes and converting the alphanumeric language into an interactive graphical interface.

At this time (end of 1970s) there were five developers on my team.

 

Levin: What is common and what is different between the development of an airplane and a CAD system?

Bernard: What is in-common: we learned from the airplane engineers all about the shapes and optimization of the shapes of airplanes. And how to manufacture these shapes.

What is different: airplane engineers develop an airplane according to specific requests (performance, capacity, range, and so on) but we develop software as a tool to help them develop more competitive airplanes at lower prices.

 

Levin: Aside from Dassault Aviation and Boeing, what was the most significant usage of Catia in terms of new experiences for your team?

Bernard: My first customers, even a few months before the creation of Dassault Systemes in 1981, were Mercedes, BMW, and Honda -- I mean the engineering divisions of these automotive companies. I developed group meetings that involved the three of them, despite them being competitors in the market. I explained and demonstrated Catia to them, and they explained to me the automotive specifics of shape design (body engineering) as well as manufacturing.

As a result, they accepted the offer to evaluate Catia on their sites. My team worked with them to understand and to satisfy their requirements for Catia.

In summary, I implemented as successful a relationship with them as I had with aircraft designers to expand Catia to support the needs of the automotive industry. Similar processes were implemented during the 1980s and 1990s with the industries we support: shipbuilding, equipment, consumer goods, and so on.

This is really a profile of a software developer: create an innovation of value to the customer, by mixing an understanding of each industry segment process with new IT technology.

Catia in 1987

Levin: Catia is 40 years old and it the oldest CAD software still on the market, and yet it still takes the leadership position. How many more years will it live on?

Bernard: I don’t know, but let me remind you of the history of design:

1.  Sketches from antiquity to 19th century (5,000 years): pen and paper, written by individuals for their own purpose; for example, the sketches by Leonardo da Vinci.

2.  Drawings from the 19th to the 20th century (150 years): pen and paper, with the standardization of drawing representations acting like a language for large teams to be able to cooperate; this was the design/manufacturing platform for the Industrial Revolution.

3.  2D CAD from 1970 to 1990 (20 years): computer graphics terminals that optimized the performance of 2D drawings; this was the Cadam positioning.

4.  3D from 1970 to 1980 (10 years): computers with alphanumeric languages on punched cards; this allowed the first exact 3D definition on computers.

5.  3D CAD from 1980 to … (?? years): computer graphics terminals that optimize the performance of 3D design; this is the Catia positioning.

6.  Next Step: probably the automatic generation and exploitation of 3D shapes based on artificial intelligence, with full optimization through integration of simulation and interaction with any type of constraints.

Each step demonstrates a significant innovation in design, but does not eliminate the previous steps. Sketches, for instance, are still in use.

It is extremely difficult to predict the future in technology. Who in 1990 knew about the Internet and smartphones? Nobody!

 

Levin: Catia was a revolution in the CAD industry by being the first 3D design system. Do you see the potential for any technology to transform engineering industry as much in the twenty-first century?

Bernard: See my answer above.

 

Levin: If you could go back to the 1980s, is there anything you would like to change in Catia to make even more successful today?

Bernard: I believe that we did our best in the 1980s, according to the technology of the time. We had graphic terminals in color (the IBM 5080) only in 1985, PCs powerful enough only in 1995, and now the cloud. These developments significantly impacted Catia by opening new opportunities to develop new applications.

 

Levin: What was the key to the success of Catia: excellent product management? Brilliant software developers and mathematicians? Sales people from IBM?

Bernard: All three must be taken together. Only one or two would have been insufficient.

For instance, Cadam had brilliant software developers and sales people from IBM, but poor product management, so they missed 3D.

[Catia is short for “Computer-Aided Three-dimensional Interactive Application” while Cadam is short for “Computer-Augmented Drafting And Manufacturing.”]

[Independently-developed] ComputerVision had brilliant software developers but poor product management. By developing their own hardware, they missed the standardization of hardware, and had no sales force as strong as the one from IBM.

[Independently-developed] Matra Datavision lacked a sales force as strong as IBM’s.

They all disappeared after being acquired by other companies.

 

Levin: There is a well-known picture of a Catia demonstration being given to Marcel Dassault. Was this episode important to further business development? Please share the impressions you had from this demonstration.

Francis Bernard and Dominique Calmels introduce Marcel Dassault to Catia

Bernard: This episode was important and at this time probably key to our future.

Marcel Dassault was the extremely respected founder of Dassault Aviation, and the inventor of the new generation of fighters, the Mirage -- quite an important achievement during the Cold War.

At this time, Dassault Aviation was trying to extend its business to commercial airplanes with the Mercure, and so compete with the emerging Airbus conglomerate. He was an engineer, even more than a businessman, therefore he asked for a demonstration of Catia, because he was told that it was such an innovation that it would replace the drawing board for the design of airplanes. This really was his intent during the demonstration: “Show me how you design a fuselage!” Then, as illustrated in the picture, “Let me do it myself!”

In summary, Marcel Dassault wanted to be convinced that Catia was a tool to design and build Dassault’s airplanes in the future. He was 90 years old, and therefore probably not interested in Catia as a new business.

 

Levin: How did you come to the decision to market Catia externally? Was there by this time a lot of CAD use at Dassault Aviation?

Bernard: At this time, in 1980, CAD use at Dassault Aviation was quite high, even at such an early period. More than a hundred 2D Cadam systems had been installed since 1975, and a few Catia systems were installed for the 3D external shape definitions of the airplanes.

An interface between Cadam and Catia had been developed to transfer, for instance, 2D sections from Catia to Cadam as input for the design of wing ribs by Cadam. But it was already obvious that the use of Catia would be extended and so progressively replace Cadam within a few years. This was due to the development of 2D functions in Catia, and the installation of more powerful computers/PCs to extend 3D to mechanical parts design, based on innovative 3D processes being implemented in the Dassault Aviation design office.

The decision to market Catia was due to several reasons. Firstly, the French government was interested in helping Dassault Aviation make such decision. Secondly, Lougheed was interested in a partnership to integrate Catia and Cadam. Thirdly, IBM was a candidate to sell Catia, in addition to Cadam. It took a few months in early 1981 to make the decision on the third option.

And who could believe that when we created Dassault Systemes in 1981 with my team of 20 people, that 40 years later Dassault Systemes would be much bigger (20,000 employees) than Dassault Aviation?

Next week: Part ii

[This article first appeared in isicad, and is reprinted with permission. The interview has been shortened from its initial form.]

 

And in Other News

vdR Group and Sinequa integrated Sinequa’s Intelligent Search platform with vdR Group’s CADnection for search-based applications. data is extracted, enhanced, and then passed to the Sinequa Intelligent Search Platform. Sinequa lets engineers and managers to access content regardless of format all in one place. Visual representations of CAD models are produced for 2D and 3D viewing. sinequa.com

- - -

From CADLine we hear they are hosting an online expo focusing on ARCHLine with 15 presentations and ten languages during 24-26 March. More info here, in case you want to take part: archlinexp.com/events

- - -

3D Systems ceo Jeffery Graves made this comment during its Q4 2020 earnings call: “3D Systems technology provides over half a million production parts every day, 365 days a year, which is more than the rest of the industry combined.” You can read more at Deelip Menezes blog deelip.com/3d-printing-half-a-million-parts-a-day

- - -

I was saddened to learn of the death of Bruce Lowell Jenkins Jr, who passed away in December 2020 at age 61. He was a genuinely nice guy, who took an interest in other people. Another editor said of him, “He was an interesting character and always deeply thoughtful. Very sharp mind.”

- - -

Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Spin Doctor of the Moment

“It was written by a working human being, who made a mistake. It was deleted.”
- World Economic Forum (@wef on Twitter)

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine:

  • Design Master Software (small company donation): “Your newsletter has always been the best source of industry news over the last 20 years.”

To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

*4734

 

Posted at 07:00 AM in Guest Editorials, Interviews, Q&A | | Comments (0)

Monday, March 08, 2021

CAD Trends as Real Changes -- or Marketing Hype

Issue #1,086  |  The Business of CAD  |  8 March 2021

 

Recorded by Ralph Grabowski

CIMdata held an online seminar to talk about CAD trends in 2021. At least, that's what I signed up for. The subtitle has been "Real Change or Marketing Hype?"

By the day the seminar began, however, the title had changed to “A Totally Subjective View of CAD Technology Trends.” That was okay, because we still got to hear Ken Versprille’s opinions on CAD trends, and whether they really are trends in CAD.

Understanding CAD trends is important today, because they will affect most CAD systems into the future.

- - -

Ken Versprille distinguishes between trends in CAD by asking, “Is it a CAD trend, or a software trend in general?” To be a legitimate trend, it should last more than a year, and it should change the internals of CAD, such as its file format or technology, or how the operator interacts with the software.

A search of the Internet showed Mr Versprille a half-dozen topics considered by other commentators to be CAD trends as shown in the figure below. The white box lists the trends that he discussed in the seminar.

CAD trends of the current time

Generative Design

A maybe-trend. On the one hand, it is not a trend because it simply automates the loop of how CAD has always operated: design -> analyze -> design -> analyze. On the other hand, it is a trend, because of the way it allows mesh and solid geometry to work together, which is a CAD trend being worked on by Spatial in ACIS and Siemens in ParaSolids.

CAD on the Cloud

No, not a trend: it is more of a software trend than a CAD-specific one.

SaaS

No. Software as a service is just like desktop CAD but with subscription fees; it is a software trend.

MobileCAD

No, for the same reason as SaaS: it is a software trend.

IoT

No. Internet of things is more of a PLM [product lifecycle management] trend than a CAD trend, but this may change in the future if IoT were to be integrated into CAD.

Model-based Definition

Yes: while MBD can be seen as simply applying GT&D [geometric tolerance and dimensioning] to 3D models (so as to annotate 3D models instead of 2D drawings), it does change how designers interact with CAD models, and it causes the internal CAD data structures to change.

AI/Machine Learning

Yes. Artificial intelligence is logic added to CAD, such as improved feature recognition, prediction of next steps, and predictive selection.

Integrated Development Platform

No, because it is a PLM trend. There is no change in the way CAD works when part of an IDP system. See figure below.

Elements of an integrated development platform

Visualization, VR, AR

Maybe. There was a massive focus on the three ever since covid began. They do change the way the operator interacts with CAD software, but they do not change the way CAD itself operates.

Functional Geometry

Yes, because it creates model geometry from equations and logic.

Q&A

Q: I don’t think we should lump mobileCAD with cloudCAD, because mobileCAD works offline.

Ken Versprille: To me, mobile and cloud CAD are technologies which are the same at their foundation, whether on desktop, cloud, or mobile. It is a technology-shift, not a CAD-shift.

 

Q: Is cloudCAD scalable?

Versprille: Definitely, although it may become cost-prohibitive, such as paying for going from ten CPUs to 20,000 CPUs.

 

Ralph Grabowski: CloudCAD is more difficult to implement than other kinds of software.

Versprille: I don’t think so, although CAD has some unique challenges that are different from regular software. Programmers of regular cloud software would have problems switching to programming cloudCAD, but programmers steeped in CAD would not. They have to pay attention to multi-threading and so on.

 

Q: SaaS for CAD is probably early days, with limited numbers of users.

Versprille: Autodesk and PTC are leaders in it, and actually are doing very well with SaaS. You can blame Microsoft for it!

 

Q: Does the definition of generative design include convergent modeling?

Versprille: Yes. I see a lot of possibilities for convergent modeling [where the software arrives at a design solution thru iterations], more so than for generative design [which optimizes a design for maximum strength and minimum material].

 

Q: IoT and AM have been trending on CAD for some time.

Versprille: I have not seen IoT on CAD.

Every example of additive manufacturing (AM) is coming out of generative design, which creates designs that cannot be made by subtractive manufacturing. This is why generative design is popular again after having been invented 30 years ago.

 

Grabowski: Functional geometry has been around a long time, such as with Grasshopper.

Versprille: That is something outside of CAD, just as there is a lot of math software that can be used with CAD.

 

Q: How is functional geometry different from knowledge templates?

Versprille: It comes down to ease of use. Vendors who had it ten years ago never saw a big up-take in knowledge applications. What is new is the way it is being implemented [by firms like Siemens and Dassault], in being able to program it by putting together logic blocks, without having to know how to program.

 

Q: What do you think about integrating simulation with CAD?

Versprille: I think it is great! Simulation should drive CAD modeling, not the other way around. It was not possible in the past, but now it is starting to happen.

 

Q: Is PLM dead? Will CAD survive?

Versprille: I don’t know that PLM is dead, but CAD will survive. I learned 2D drafting and it will survive for another couple of centuries!

 

Q: Will we continue with a hybrid system of desktop and cloudCAD?

Versprille: We will, for quite a while. With the pandemic, cloudCAD has come into play due to working from home. People get around it by creating private clouds, but we have to solve the security problem.

 

Q: Is shape-search a CAD trend?

Versprille: No.I think it is a CAD application. It is an add-on to CAD, and does not change CAD per se. (I define CAD as authoring 3D models.)

 

Q: What about integrating PLM with CAD on the cloud?

Versprille: What about it? PLM is on the cloud, and it is integrated with CAD.

 

Q: Any trends specific to ECAD?

Versprille: No really, but I am not an expert in ECAD [electrical design CAD].

 

Q: Why do companies pay for [externally-developed] CAD? Do you see any other business models out there?

Versprille: Not right now, other than SaaS, such as some airlines no longer buying jet engines but paying for their use.

It is very difficult for a company to develop its own CAD system [so as to not pay for CAD]. We see spin-offs concentrating on one area, like shoe design and clothes design -- they are trying to narrow the demands that are pulling them in different directions. It can be difficult to find programmers who know how to write a certain kind of CAD function, and then they might not be able to sell enough to pay for the effort.

 

Q: What is the distinguishing factor for CAD systems that follow trends?

Versprille: They all follow trends, so the factor is in how they implement them. All CAD systems have a common base; it is the unique differences that make a CAD product stand out. There are different types of customers -- large, small -- to whom CAD vendors cater to, for either better or worse.

 

Q: Is there something that you see as a future CAD trend?

Versprille: We are constantly looking out there for something that is coming. Things are swirling around with the cloud and other things, but nothing is jumping out at me that is revolutionary. We’ll keep looking for it.

- - -

The slide deck (PDF) of this talk is available from cimdata.com/images/Webinars/CIMdata_Webinar_CAD_Trends_2021.pdf

The seminar can be replayed from register.gotowebinar.com/recording/2252568784946569743 (registration required).

www.cimdata.com

- - -

Ken Versprille is with CIMdata, was formerly with ComputerVision, and was the first to publish a description of NURBS — the non-uniform rational b-spline used by most CAD systems today.

 

== 3D Conversion of Ultra-Massive 3D Models
via DWF-3D & Okino’s PolyTrans|CAD ==

One of the most refined aspects of Okino’s PolyTrans|CAD software is in transforming ultra-massive MCAD models of oil and gas rigs, LNG processing plants, 3D factories, and other unwieldy datasets into Cinema-4D, 3ds Max, Maya, and Unity (among others).

What often takes days using blindly incorrect methods takes minutes or an hour with Okino’s well-defined optimization and compression methods using its DWF-3D conversion system.

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].

www.okino.com

 

And in Other News

The Maxon division of Nemetschek Group acquires forger 3D sculpting app, which runs only Apple’s portable devices. “We look forward to exploring what more it can bring to our users,” the company said. forger.app/features/

- - -

Design Master Software celebrates its 20th anniversary this month. The firm, launched by three brothers, focuses on electrical and HVAC design add-ons for Revit. During the 2010s, the firm ran an annual survey of users that found MEP use in Revit did not increase during the decade, confounding experts. designmaster.biz/blog/2021/03/design-master-software-celebrates-20-years/

- - -

Enscape 3.0 from Enscape renders CAD models in real-time. New functions include access to commands in full-screen mode, timeline view for the video editor, more accurate mirror materials, and better support for Vectorworks and other CAD programs.

The 14-day demo version can be downloaded from enscape3d.com/latest-version (after registration). By subscription only; free for students.

- - -

Here are some posts that appeared on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Letters to the Editor

You might want to fix ‘upFront.eZine Archvies’ on your Web site.
            - Dik Coates

The editor replies: Thank you for catching that. It should read ‘Anchovies’.

 

Re: Autodesk Wants to Kill the File

Take a look at the isicad.ru cover for February; it corresponds to your article about Autodesk killing files.

The cover’s Russian title translates something like “Files -- Into the Furnace!”
- David Levin, isicad

- - -

You have gotten loads of emails regarding Autodesk’s desire to “kill the file.” Astonishingly, almost all of them completely miss the point. My thoughts on Autodesk’s wish to kill off discrete files: GOOD, and it’s about freakin’ time!

What they are envisioning is a standard client-server solution, which is nothing new; it’s just driven by Forge, which kinda is. But the concept is tried and true: the database backend feeds the light and heavy apps to the client end.

Anyone who has used Outlook fed from an Exchange Server stuck in the IT closet is intimately familiar with the concept, even if they don’t know it. I would hope Autodesk is moving to something similar.

However, instead of making it completely cloud-based, it does need a purely locally-hosted option, or one where data can be freely segregated and assigned to the combination of cloud and local servers. Revizto follows this model pretty well.

Cloud-only solutions will kill the initiative for organizations who cannot use cloud-based solutions (for whatever reason) or who simply opt not to do so. As we have recently witnessed with Parler, it can be a losing proposition having your entire company’s livelihood dependent on the pleasure of Amazon, Microsoft, or whoever is hosting it.

Contrary to popular belief, there are folks who want and/or need to truly own their own data, and not be beholden to a dopey Internet connection to keep their business alive. They understand that hosting the heavy data usage requirements associated with AEC and other design markets on the cloud is like sucking the ocean through a straw.

Ask any cryptocurrency miner: building out a decent localized data center to process and host server data is relatively cheap and has been done well for a long time now. There are plenty of specialized server tools which can really accelerate data-crunching roles. Just like the Bitcoin guys, one can easily envision BIM-centric ASICs [application specific integrated circuits] built by Intel, nVidia, AMD, and so on.

The benefits of getting rid of files are many, but one that never gets talked about is simple data assurance. Solutions like Microsoft Exchange are transactional in nature. As you make changes at the client end, those transactions are recorded, registered, and threaded at the server to be merged into the central database as load allows.

Databases are constantly fed, maintained, and cleaned by the server. If a server or client crashes, the database transaction logs are simply played back to make the database whole again. Apply this concept to any Autodesk solution: you don’t have to save “files,” because the changes are always being recorded and committed. You never have to worry about having an app crash and losing potentially hours of work. This, after all, is Autodesk, so app crashes will still happen, they will just be a lot more benign.

But more importantly, client apps are decoupled from the data itself, so innovative apps on any platform can present data in various ways and provide specialized clarity. Or course, the data can always be exported to old-skool files for those still living in the 18th century.

To everyone who says, “Even though Autodesk isn’t using files, they’re still using files!” it’s time to grow up. Of course, as with email, you still have files that are created, consumed, and leveraged by the database. The difference is that you don’t have to worry about where they physically are, or whether IT has installed the correct client software (and version!) to interact with them, permissions, corruption, etc. They simply live within the database and are fed to the client(s) as required.

The nice thing is that multiple people can now interact with these beloved “files” at the same time, thus improving collaboration. They are stored only once, instead of having disparate copies strewn about the Wild West that is the dozens of workstation silos that stretch across your organization. Which do not get backed up.
            - Matt Stachoni

 

Re: What BricsCAD Offers MCAD Users

You state that a user needs a BricsCAD Pro version first and only then they can buy a BIM or a Mechanical “module.” This is incorrect. BricsCAD Mechanical can be bought stand-alone. In fact the verticals BIM and Mechanical can be bought as stand alone, see bricsys.com/en-intl/store/bricscad.

Only Communicator requires a BricsCAD license as this is an add-on.
            -Sander Scheiris, global marketing director
            Bricsys

 

Re: Why Apple is taking on Facebook

I have always disliked Apple with its exclusive environment and very pricey products, but when it came to migrate from my Blackberry Z10 (which is still working as a second phone line!) I chose Apple over Android simply because of Apple’s commitment to privacy and vetted apps vs. Google’s data-sucking industrial soul.
            - Dairobi Paul (via WorldCAD Access)

 

Spin Doctor of the Moment

“Together, we expect these actions will help us to optimize the business by reducing the number of unprofitable customers.”
- Enrique Lores, ceo, HP

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine:

  • R&B (Models) Ltd., Israel: “Thanks for the weekly updates.”

To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, go to www.paypal.com and then use 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.

*4758

 

 

 

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A | | Comments (0)

Monday, February 08, 2021

The Meaning of 'M' in MBx

Issue #1082  |  The Business of CAD | 8 February 2021

 

 

I listened in as John MacKrell, chairman of CIMdata PLM, talked about the ‘M’ in MBx, short for model-based anything. Here are the notes I took, and so of necessity they are a paraphrase of what Mr MacKrell said. To listen to the complete seminar, go to attendee.gotowebinar.com/recording/5581930675472864258 (requires registration).

- - -

As products become more complex, MCAD becomes a smaller part of the design process. In today’s automobiles, more is done electrically than mechanically: actions like adjusting the heating system and changing gears are all embodied by software. By changing the software, we change the characteristics of the car.

MBx is short for “model-based anything.” Model-based initiatives must cover form, fit, and function. Form is not just the shape of the product, but also how things operate together, such as the control system of the product.

Many people believe that a “model” has to be a 3D model. It doesn’t. It can be a software model, a financial model, an optical model, a heat transfer model, traffic flow model, and so on. The figure below shows how various kinds of models can be used together.

The various kinds of software models for design projects

Some or all of these are needed for complex models, such as manufacturing models, which answer the question, “How am I going to build this?”

Treating ‘M’ as a 3D CAD model limits the value of model-based strategies, because design occurs relatively late in the development cycle. See pink area in the figure below. You are creating a product that may or may not work. Modifying the CAD model may mean going as far back as changing things like system requirements.

The “V” model of product development

From CAx to MBx

Mr MacKrell says that 3D CAD cannot completely do the following functions:

  • Cannot define fit, form, and function completely

  • Cannot define the complete design of the product

And so he advocates the use of MBx through a PLM system, and not just the model from 3D CAD. He suggests five versions of MBx:

  1. Model-based definition - using 3D models to define components and assemblies.

  2. Model-based design – using mathematics to design complex controls, signal processing, and communications.

  3. Model-based engineering – integrating models to create an authoritative definition for all disciplines.

  4. Model based enterprise – applying engineering, manufacturing, and aftermarket services by reusing product data, instead of recreating models and drawings.

  5. Model-based systems engineering – using modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis, verification, and validation, from concept to end-of-life.

Thinking of M as just the 3D CAD model artificially limits the value of MBxs; expanding the definition can increase the value of a model-based strategy. For example, in vehicle design, the traffic flow model is not part of the 3D model, but the 3D model (of a car) needs the traffic flow model.


Lo-Fi For Hi-Fi

Even 2D hand-drawn paper drawings are a form of model; we just called them “drawings” or “designs.” These kinds of low-fidelity models are needed as surrogates for higher-level models, with each level of fidelity being used at the appropriate time by the appropriate groups. [Fidelity is known as “level of detail” in BIM.]

The low-fi drawing at left in the figure below shows the load, radius, torque, and other parameters of two gears. This is better than taking two high-fidelity gears out of an online catalog (shown on the right) and then doing the analysis on them. A digital thread connects the lo- and hi-fi models, so that as one changes the other changes, too.

Example of a low- and high fidelity models of gears


You cannot model the entire product at high fidelity. You make decisions on partial models and lower-fidelity models, such as when asking how many people fit inside an aircraft cabin or where to locate the center of gravity of ships. Each level of fidelity builds on previous levels throughout development and with its validation:

  • Low fidelity models allow exploration.

  • Higher levels are used for details and refinement, such as generative design, but at a much higher cost. Hi-fi does have the benefit of fewer errors in the final design.


The Complete Model

Product models need to be connected to business models that determine the need to comply with regulations, profit goals, and so on. The V-style model does not handle the physical side of the product, so Mr MacKrell says we need to shift from the V to the diamond.

In the figure below, we see a complete diamond model as defined by Boeing. (We can argue if Boeing is doing things correctly or not.) The two areas highlighted in light blue show the two software models that need to be built.

Complete design-to-physical model, as defined by Boeing


The digital twin mimics the operation of the product, and even looks ahead of the physical product in its operation; the digital thread communicates between the sections.

cimdata.com

 

PROJECT NEWPLEX v2.0

Newplex 2.0 is the advanced SHX font designed for technical documents.

  • Compatible with all DWG-Based CAD software that support Unicode SHX fonts

  • Advanced character forms for readability and clarity

  • Designed for drafting

  • Extensive international character set

  • Includes the most requested technical characters

For more info or to purchase, visit www.tcfonts.com

 

And in Other News

Nemetschek Group is so excited about its 2020 financial results that it's announcing them nearly two months early. In short, revenues were up 7% to €597 million, about US$720 million. More details to come March 23.

- - -

PTC reported Q1 revenues of $429 million, up an even 20% from a year earlier, which excludes the revenue contribution from Arena PLM, whose acquisition closed too late to include in the Q1 numbers.

- - -

I had interviewed ceo Paul Powers about his algorithm-based 3D-model search firm Physna (combination of physics and DNA) last year in issue #1075, and now the firm has landed $20 million in funding, adding the to the $9 million it began with.

- - -

Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Letters to the Editor

Re: Worst hardware design ever

Great article. It took me into a journey to the past. I remember pretty well those pen plotters, the time they took to print, and how they loved to crash (pen or paper) just close to the end and forcing us to repeat the whole process.

Until the moment that the powerful HP designjet 650C (if not mistaken) appeared, nothing more was the same.
            - Ricardo Cruz (via WorldCAD Access)

The editor replies: Pen plotters were slow (20-30 minutes for a typical D-size plot), but their’s was the technology with the best price-performance of the times (1980s). Electrostatic plotters were faster and more reliable, but horrifically expensive.

- - -

Memories of getting my AutoCAD hatch spacing vs pen thickness wrong (usually a factor of ten!) and coming to pick up my plot half an hour later only to find a soggy mess of a series of holes through the paper.
             - Ian McGregor (via WorldCAD Access)

 

Re: LiDAR Scanning

I read with great interest in your newsletter that you think the LiDAR [Light Detection And Ranging] camera is going away in future Apple phones. Do you have more color on this?
            - Tom Greaves

The editor corrects himself: I may have read a badly-sourced rumour, which may well have no substantiation. I was unable to find the source. I’ve updated the archive of upFront.eZine to reflect this.

- - -

A friend was asking me about LiDAR technology to scan and create 3D CAD models. I told him there are many high-cost technologies out there for scanning, but I haven't been following the newest developments in some of the low-cost LIDAR chips being added to phones and other handheld devices. Do you know of any sources my friend can research in this regard?

Thanks and keep up the great work.
            - Todd Majeski

The editor replies: As it just so happens, I just received this press release from SketchFab last week talking about the subject, which should make a jumping off point for your friend:

“The LiDAR feature of the iPhone 12 Pro and iPad Pro (2020) is powering a new wave of mobile 3D scanning apps that are simple and quick to use. Scanning apps SiteScape and EveryPoint have just been updated with direct upload to Sketchfab. These apps join several others, like Polycam and Scandy, in making it easy for you to share your 3D snapshots with the world.”

See the list at sketchfab.com/blogs/community/3d-scanning-with-the-iphone-12-pro-lidar/

 

Re: Graebert Executive Interview

Reading your current edition, having the top people on the line is quite an event. Do you have a hint how they are making out business-wise during the extended pandemic? Or is their business by its nature geared for the long-term, as this is not a retail business?
            - Name withheld by request

The editor replies: CAD software always does well. It sells well during good times, and it sells well during bad times. I have never seen a recession in the 35 years I’ve worked in this business.

 

Re: How to Make Eudora 7 Work with Gmail Servers

Could you run Eudora [email software from 2006] in a virtual machine? For example, a computer is running Windows 10 64-bit, while Eudora is running in a 32-bit Windows 7 VM? Also, it might be worth trying a Windows 10 32-bit VM, especially an older vintage machine, as 32-bit Windows 10 seems to have better compatibility than 64-bit.

We have a machine we just made, special order, that has to run Windows 10 32-bit 1909 -- not the current 20H2 -- because it uses 20-year old hardware and software designs that don't work with 64 bits, and won't work with the latest 32-bit Windows 10.

On the other hand, I have to give Microsoft some credit: can you run 20-year old binary (not source) software on the latest Mac or Linux versions?
            - TonyT (via WorldCAD Access)

 

Notable Quotable

“We were spared [by the pandemic of] the spectacle of Davos Man (and Woman) jetting into the Swiss ski resort in private planes to flaunt not just their outsized carbon footprints and matching unnumbered Swiss bank accounts but their presumed moral superiority as they lecture the rest of us about how our selfish budget holidays and daily car commutes are destroying the planet.”
     - The Spectator Australia

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

*7477

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A | | Comments (0)

Monday, February 01, 2021

Graebert Executive Interview

Issue #1,081  |  The Business of CAD | 1 February 2021

 

interview by Ralph Grabowski

 

ARES Commander began as a replacement to AutoCAD, and then found its greatest impact as OEM software (licensed and branded by other firms) by firms such as Dassault Systemes (“DraftSight”) and Corel Software (“CorelCAD”). Graebert GmbH found further success in selling into verticals, such as facilities mapping and kitchen design.

In 2019, the company announced its plan to move into the adjacent-BIM market. With the limitations of Revit well known, Graebert saw the opportunity to provide ARES with Revit/IFC viewing, data extraction, and linked drawing generation.

Following last December’s announcement of the upcoming ARES Commander 2022, I interviewed CEO Wilfried Graebert, CTO Robert Graebert, and marketing director Cedric Desbordes.

- - -

Ralph Grabowski: In 2019, you came out with a BIM roadmap for your ARES Commander CAD software. How closely are you following it?

CTO Robert Graebert: We set out a set of goals that year. We wanted to be able to bring BIM models inside our CAD program, be able to extract data from them to give you access to it, and then create drawings.

We couldn’t deliver all of that last year, because there was so much foundational stuff that we ended up doing. We are now filling in those [missing] things. What we are delivering this year is not the end of the picture, but an important milestone.

Marketing Director Cedric Desbordes: Last year, there already was the idea of extracting drawings. What we are showing this year is automating drawings -- the idea of automating [the production of] more and more drawings.

R Graebert: When we talk to users, a lot of them are frustrated with the drawing creation process in some [CAD] tools that are popular today. They are frustrated with the disconnect to the original BIM model. When you look at, for example, how you are supposed to collaborate between Revit and AutoCAD, it’s extremely broken.

We want to make that better, especially when you change the [BIM] model after you create the drawings. Every architect I talk to is frustrated with having to redo that work. Doing it twice kills them because of the time. They get paid for it, and they’ll do it; it’s just that it’s not creative, it’s not interesting work; it’s just dumb-work.

That is our first driver. And based on that, we say, “What more can we automate?” You would just do the one plan, and then we would help you create the other plans.

So there is a whole roadmap of capabilities we can still work on.

 

Grabowski: I am not familiar with CADian, the Korean distributor you landed as a customer. Am I correct that they are the largest CAD dealer in Korea?

Desbordes: Cadian has been very successful at establishing Korean brands, as Korean people are very proud of national brands.

Cadian was very successful over the last few decades, but more and more it was feeling the need for more than a general CAD package. Also, it faced increased pressure from Chinese [software] products in terms of performance.

It intends to continue with the IntelliCAD brand, but sees that the switch to ARES is necessary now. It felt it needed what we are doing with mobile and cloud. Korea is very strongly developing the Internet and is known for having the fastest Internet in the world. They are also very strong in mobile. It is a sweet spot for us.

The Korean market is booming for CAD alternatives. Cadian shared figures from 2019 that showed that something in the range of 60% of users were considering switching from AutoCAD in the next one or two years.

Wilfried Grabert: We have a similar history. Cadian started [like Graebert GmbH] very early as an AutoCAD distributor, and tried their luck after with an AutoCAD alternative. So we will have a good relationship moving forward.

 

Grabowski: In creating their OEM version, did Cadian rename ARES, and did they change more than just the language?

Desbordes: Actually, it is interesting that they want to use the brand ‘ARES’. So they are distributing ARES.

R Graebert: We are seeing this more and more. Five years ago, every OEM wanted their own brand [on the software]. We are getting more and more people who are okay with the ARES brand, they prefer to be associated with ARES. We don’t say it has to be ARES, but if brands want to do this, it definitely doesn’t hurt us.

 

Grabowski: It helps them, because otherwise they are just selling a new brand name that nobody knows.

W Graebert: The latest big one was the IIA, the Indian Institute of Architects. They insisted on their own name, it had to be an Indian product.

Desbordes: It is not exactly what we would call an OEM version. As a professional organization, the IIA has little expertise or willingness to enter the business of software distribution or development. Graebert India licenses the brand “IIACAD” from the IIA, and IIACAD is sold by Graebert India to the [20,000] IIA members, under specific terms negotiated by the IIA.

 

Grabowski: Did they make changes to the software?

Desbordes: Technically speaking, the product is ARES Commander desktop version for Windows and Mac, with the mobile and cloud versions sold as add-ons, if the members want that.

R Graebert: I think we saw it somewhat in the Revit letter that was posted last summer-- I think there are industry associations who kind of see their role now in advocacy around software vendors.

We are pretty happy that the IIA came to us, as I think it is an industry model. Why not do something for your members, use your collaborative buying power to work with a vendor like us to have a standardized [contract] term? There are specific terms that make sense for the IIA; for example, if an IIA member retires, he can pass the license on to his direct descendent.

Desbordes: There was a strong frustration by Indian architects of the behavior of Autodesk. You see this through the declarations by architects in other places in the world, even in Brazil. There seems to be a serious movement from architects and, I would presume, from other professional organizations.

R Graebert: You would think the market is saturated, but we are still finding new customers. When times are bad, the first thing a government will do is invest in infrastructure, or they will do an R&D [research and development] spend [that requires software purchases]. And so CAD benefits in a boom and in a bust.

There still is a question what happens this year, if 30 or 40 percent of architects lose their jobs.

 

Grabowski: You would say you are strong in Korea, India, Japan; where else?

R Graebert: In the last 12 months we really built out our team for the German-speaking market. It always takes two to three years to really get to the big accounts, but we are quite happy with the results we are already seeing. It is our home market, and we need to have a presence here.

Desbordes: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong have also always been very strong for us.

W Graebert: And we have a growing number of OEMs [who resell ARES software under their own brand names], who are acting worldwide. This is still the majority of our revenue.

Desbordes: We see quite a shift in new users coming to us. They are interested in solutions that involve cloud and mobile. For instance, through Onshape [which embeds Graebert's Kudo cloud-based DWG editor], they see that ARES is a good fit. We see quite a number of Bricsys resellers coming to us, recently.

W Graebert: What Cedric said about Bricsys resellers: They show up, we don’t look for them. They are showing up, I think, because Bricsys is changing its business model, and it looks like some resellers are not happy with that strategy.

 

Grabowski: It is always uncertain what the future holds with a new owner.

Desbordes: They are selling more and more direct to large customers. They say to old resellers, “You’ve been developing a market for 20 years, and now we will sell direct to them.”

R Graebert: Which, as we know, is never the favorite tactic for a reseller. If we were to be realistic, today our major sales are still through OEMs and our subsidiaries.

 

Grabowski: Do you want to talk about how well your Mac and Linux sales are doing?

R Graebert: It is hard for us to tell, because we don’t sell individually [by operating system] -- we don’t sell an individual Mac or Linux seat. [A single license works for all three operating systems.] We have partners, like Corel, who sell on the Mac app store, but we don’t sell on Apple’s app store at this point.

We saw good usage after some CAD vendors dropped Linux support last year. Mac is pretty steady for us.

Desbordes: Adding BIM functions to the Mac version makes sense, because there are quite a number in the architectural field who use Macs. One thing people like about ARES is that they can mix and match, so we have users that might have Mac and Windows computers, and our license allows you to use whichever platform you want.

R Graebert: I just got the M1-powered MacBook, and ARES ran on it flawlessly. For us, to build our software for ARM [CPUs] is trivial, because we already have that for the mobile versions [which run on ARM CPUs], so there is no downside to us doing it.

I asked our programmers to look into switching all of our cloud apps to run on ARM servers, because they are typically 20-30% cheaper. If the savings is big enough, then we might as well rebuild them.

 

Grabowski: Do you mean running ARM servers for Kudo and the cloud functions in ARES?

R Graebert: Kudo has multiple services running to make it work: we have services to make thumbnails, data management, load balancing--. We would look at whether an ARM configuration is more economical. We are just taking a look right now.

Everything talks through REST [representational state transfer] APIs, and so it is really easy for us to replace one piece with another; we don't have those hard binary dependencies any more.

www.graebert.com

[Disclaimer: I write tutorial books about ARES and related software for Graebert.]

 

And in Other News

LEDAS reports that software development on behalf of customers in additive manufacturing and CAM, and digital medicine made up 60% of their 2020 revenues. The highest growth in 2020 came from the geometric engines it develops for CAD, up 45%. ledas.com/news/871-3d-web-additive-manufacturing-kernels-and-solvers-raised-ledas-earnings-in-2020/

- - -

The 2021x release of CATIA from Dassault Systemes adds the Multidiscipline Automated Drafter, for interactive drafting and batched rule-based automatic generation of drawings specific to marine & offshore, energy & materials, and construction industries.

The campaign image for Catia 2021x

In generative design, the new Catia offers Generative Functional Tolerancing that automates accurate geometric tolerancing schema. The  new Flow Driven Generative Designer allows non-fluid analysis specialists [always a scary thought] to generate optimal duct shapes based on functional specifications. The new Lattice Designer does both conceptual and detailed designs of complex lattice structures.

For more on the new release, check out this PDF: extend.inescrm.com/maxdownload/download.dll/V2021.1-EN.doc

- - -

The LiDAR [Light Detection And Ranging ] camera on iPhone 12 Pro and iPad Pro (2020) is finding use as mobile 3D scanners, although my understanding is that it will be removed by Apple in future phones. [Update: this prediction was based on a badly-sourced claim.] In the meantime, SiteScape and EveryPoint are iOS scanning apps updated to do direct uploads to Sketchfab.

Street art scanned by an iPhone

To celebrate, Sketchfab is holding a street art LiDAR scanning challenge: blog.sketchfab.com/blogs/community/sketchfab-lidar-scanning-challenge-street-art/

- - -

Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

 

Letters to the Editor

I thought you’d want to know that I just found out that Dave Weisberg passed away last month. He was 83. Don’t know if you know him, but Jack Ring also passed away in April.
            - Name withheld by request

The editor replies: Mr Weisberg was a pioneer of the CAD industry, and his obituary is at legacy.com/obituaries/denverpost/obituary.aspx?pid=197263219.

His history on the early years of CAD, "The Engineering Design Revolution: The People, Companies and Computer Systems That Changed Forever the Practice of Engineering," can be read free at cadhistory.net.

 

Re: Varjo's Third-Gen VR/AR Goggles

Every time I tried to play a video game or use VR [virtual reality], I got such a headache that I can't do it. What's up with that, do you think?
            - Chris Cadman

The editor replies: It’s due to all of the issues I listed at the start of the article. Movement involving the eyes is a tricky problem to solve, and game-based VR just isn't up to snuff. Neither were early ones, like the first Oculus. I don't know if high-end VR goggles are any better, as I have not had the opportunity to try a set.

Mr Cadman responds: Interesting! So basically, these VR hackers are screwing up everybody’s brains.

- - -

Do you use VR headsets  just for evaluating products or also for your entertainment?  I picked through your article, but it's beyond me. Good to see you slugging away. Never give up.
            - Name withheld by request

The editor replies: No, I do not use them, as there is no reason to. When I tried VR headsets at trade shows, I found them irritating.

 

Re: Dynamic Blocks

You may want to tell Jack Foster to have a look at the great Lee Mac’s dynamic block property functions here: lee-mac.com/dynamicblockfunctions.html, such as get/set dynamic block property values, toggle flip states, and get/set dynamic block visibility states.

If Jack needs some example code, I can send him a block and a program to help him get his feet wet. My code is nowhere as polished as Lee’s is but it is much easier to follow.
            - Ron Powell

The editor replies: I’ve forwarded your email to Mr Foster. Thank you for the lead!

 

Notable Quotable

“Apparently, market manipulation is only legal when rich people do it.”
     - Robert Reich

 

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

 

*4748

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A, Software | | Comments (0)

Monday, January 11, 2021

Two CAD Guys Talk About MCAD

Issue #1,078  |  Happy New Year! | January 11, 2021

 

From the Editor

This week marks the 30th anniversary of me leaving my post as senior editor at CADalyst magazine (the very first publication for CAD users) to strike out in 1991 on my own as a freelance technical writer.

It seems to have worked out. Thank you to all who over the years supported and encouraged me!

…were they asking him to sacrifice his culture, his unique Canadian identity, for mere financial rewards in the glittering towers of a foreign publishing company? …’I could live with that,’ thought Ralph! (cartoon credit: Dennis Pritchard)

We start of the new year with two CAD guys talking about which kinds of 3D design software lets us get 2D plans from 3D models. Paul Cotton is a software engineer from England who sometimes wishes he were a CAD draughtsman: “I like computational geometry and secretly wish all CAD was still done through coding.”

Ralph Grabowski is a ex-civil engineer from Canada who sometimes wishes he still were a manual drafter: “But I like writing better.”

- - -

Paul Cotton: I've seen your YouTube videos on nanoCAD and managed to track you down.

Does nanoCAD wrap much of the C3D toolkit? I come from a Rhino background and I wanted to use it to replace AutoCAD completely, because my workflow starts in 3D with Rhino anyway. However, I don't think Rhino has a very good underlying 3D engine, because I want to take cross-sections of the 3D geometry to produce 2D elevations and cross-sections accurate enough for engineers to fabricate the metal substructure required for forms.

I researched further, found the C3D toolkit, and thought it would easily be powerful enough to import the geometry from Rhino so that I then could set to work on a detailed model. Of course it's very low level, but I'm a software engineer so I'm used to C++, but even so, that's not gonna be a quick job.

Anyway, up pops nanoCAD! I saw video where the Russian head developer said they swapped out the kernel for C3D and so everything looks very exciting indeed! Please enlighten me further.

Ralph Grabowski: The issue at play is that there are two types of 3D modeling, surface and solid.

Rhino is a surface modeler, making it suitable for fast, conceptual modeling in 3D. With it, you concentrate on how things look. So, it cannot do sections, because there is no "inside" to surface models.

3D surface model by Seyi in Rhino V6

 

(Within surface modeling, there are two approaches: the older one based on polyfaces, and a newer one based on meshes.)

nanoCAD is a solid modeler, which is why it can cut sections, handle constraints, determine physical properties, generate 2D drawings from 3D models, and so on. With solids, you concentrate on how things work, how they will be built, and so on.

(Within solid modeling, there also are two approaches: older history-based modeling, and a newer direct modeling.)

Typically, architects do their conceptual design in Rhino, then move the model to a solid modeler to do the detailed design, analyze the building structurally, and generate 2D plans.

Some CAD programs, like AutoCAD, handle both types of surface modeling and both kinds of solid  modeling.

You are right: NanoSoft switched its solid modeling kernel and constraint system to the one from C3D Labs. So in nanoCAD Pro V20 you get:

  • The older polyface surface modeling, but not modern mesh (surface) modeling

  • History-based solid modeling

  • A start to direct modeling (not yet fully developed)

Whether nanoCAD does more kinds of 3D modeling depends on (i) the functions C3D Labs adds, and (ii) the functions Nanosoft chooses to expose. This is the same for any 3D CAD program, no matter which kernel it uses.

Solid 3D model in nanoCAD Pro 20

 

nanoCAD uses DWG as its file format, so it can read drawings and models from other DWG editors like AutoCAD, but things are a bit different when it comes to 3D models.

It might or might not read 3D models from other DWG systems, depending on which kernel they employ. In some cases, you might get only a "proxy," a visual representation of of the 3D model. (This can be the same for any DWG editor importing a 3D DWG file from another system.)

Best thing is to download the 30-day demo of nanoCAD Pro 20 to see if it does what you need. Now, it is a bit peculiar, in that it is very powerful in some areas that other CAD programs don't handle, and lacking in others. It depends on your needs; see if it is suitable for you. Certainly, the price is attractive.

Paul Cotton: I knew of the distinction between surface and solid modeling, hence I wanted to get geometries out of Rhino and into a solid modeler ASAP.

When it comes to history vs. direct I am far less clued-up. When you say history, I am guessing you mean parametric like Solidworks and I love that sort of thing. But direct is alien to me.

I downloaded nanoCAD but it doesn't seem to work. I raised a ticket with support and they responded, so I sent a screenshot. Heard nothing since. Will have to wait and see. It looks a bit 2D-centric for my tastes, even the 3D version, but again, I will have to see.

I like modeling in code. I hope direct modeling doesn't take that away altogether.

I wish someone would get a good BIM [building information modeling] alternative to Revit. I detest it, and Autodesk. But that's another story.

Ralph Grabowski: Direct editing is what it means: you directly interact with the 3D model. For instance, draw a circle on the face of a cube, pull the circle out to make a cylinder, or push it in to make a hole.

No one is going to make a replacement for Revit, such as the 30+ replacements that exist for AutoCAD; it’s just too complex. But there are BIM alternatives to Revit from Vectorworks, Bricsys, Graphisoft, and so on.

Paul Cotton: Oh I see, direct editing is push-pull and direct placement. I think the thing I'm interested in is called “geometric dimensioning and tolerances”.

I still don't entirely understand how a 3D surface modeled geometry gets to 2D engineering drawings without a solid modeler. I guess this is covered in the world of CAM [computer-aided modeling] instead of CAD.

Well maybe it isn't CAM, because that's more about machining, but either way, the leap from Rhino to a set of accurate 2D engineering drawings is still fuzzy. At least it is for the facade industry where I work and I know for a fact nothing like Solidworks is used there.

Ralph Grabowski: Tolerancing is available in 2D drawings as GD&T, although in my time as an engineer I never used it. In 3D, there also is PMI (product manufacturing information).

I think what you want is parametric modeling: here you use formulas to determine the size and positions of objects in drawings through 2D dimensional and geometric constraints. Some CAD programs, like nanoCAD Pro, even do 3D geometric constraints, although these tend to be used mainly for positioning parts to make assemblies.

This tutorial on making 2D drawings from Rhino seems useful: studiorola.com/tutorials/2d-illustration/tutorial-making-2d-technical-drawing-using-rhino-3d-part-1/. SketchUp has an add-on LayOut module for generating 2D drawings from its 3D surfaces.

Making 2D plans from 3D Rhino models

But solids are preferred, as intelligent cross-sections can be generated in 2D from 3D solids, complete with hatching, interior details, and associativity — make a change to the 3D model, and the 2D plans update automatically.

Paul Cotton: In the end, nanoCAD didn't work on my PC, because I had the QT libraries installed. I contacted support and they were keen to help, but couldn't get their heads round the fact that it's OK for me to have QT on my PC if I want to.

And in Other News

Wikifactory is working with $4.5 million in funding to offer an online MCAD collaboration site that handles assemblies, real-time exploded views, and commenting. After opening in beta last year, the site hosts three thousand projects with 70 thousand members.

The "Wiki" half of the name means that you can invite people to help you work on designs, although it appears that at this point you can only view and comment on designs, not edit them. The "factory" half involves manufacturing the designs, although it is not clear to me whether that function is up and running yet. wikifactory.com

- - -

In a first, Graphisoft releases a mid-release update to ArchiCAD 24 to add to its new emphasis on integrated design. With parent Nemetschek Group hosting so much disparate technology, the pieces are starting to be put together without the need for IFC translation; instead, data flows directly with other programs like Solibri issue tracking and MEP modeler.

Also in this release is new support for Revit 2021 and an improved IFC importer/exporter. The model compare function handles structural analysis, modified openings, and custom-defined tags. graphisoft.com/downloads/archicad/updates/archicad-24-update

- - -

PTC paid a remarkable 14.3x multiple for Arena and its cloud-based PLM [project lifecycle management] software: $715 million for a company that made $50 million last year. (A normal multiple is 3x.) The overpriced acquisition came as the result of an optimistic survey indicating that PTC customers have “a 25% increase in readiness for SaaS PLM since the pandemic started.” schnitgercorp.com/2020/12/14/super-quick-ptc-to-acquire-arena-for-saas-plm/

- - -

Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

Letters to the Editor

In upFront.eZine #1,076 you wrote, "I had found my number somewhere on the Internet." Hello, Ralph! News flash! Just because someone finds something on the Internet doesn't automatically mean that it’s true or accurate! <g> Be careful, stay healthy...

            - Bill Fane

- - -

Re: Now is the time to cancel MailChimp

Duff Kurkand wrote in the Release 12 AutoCAD Customization Manual, "Don't overuse icons attempting to encode abstract concepts into cryptic symbols. It doesn't work; ask any archaeologist" (page 98).

When I met Duff (a founder of Autodesk, for those who don't know), he told me he had pretty much single-handedly written all the AutoCAD manuals through at least Release 10. Unlike Bill Fane, I like icons -- well, some of them -- especially when I create them myself so I know what they mean. But, I have found Mail Chimp to be a cryptic experience at best during the many times I've had to use it.

            - Steve Wells

The editor replies: Mr Kurkand set the standard for technical publications, and I appreciate him for that. Disappointing, then, that Autodesk subsequently forced only icons on the status bar.

Notable Quotable

“Status is irrelevant. It’s the freedom to make the thing that matters.”

- Jen Gerson

 

*4758

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A | | Comments (0)

Monday, December 07, 2020

Understanding the Digital Thread

Issue # 1,077 | Merry Christmas! | 7 December 2020

 

 

Phoenix Integration hosted a seminar on digital threads with Ralf Hartmann (Airbus Defence and Space), David Long (Vitech Corporation), Douglas Orellana (ManTech), Bob Sherman (Procter and Gamble) and Philomena Zimmerman (United States Department of Defense).

Participants in the digital thread seminar

- - -

Q: What does the term 'digital thread' mean?

A: Digital thread assumes a full digital representation of models and data for a set of activities. Then, it describes the interconnection of a set of multiple tasks in a sequence, which might go to the full lifecycle support -- from early needs analysis to operations.

A key characteristic factor of a digital thread is data continuity and traceability. In my opinion, a digital thread supports a particular domain, such as mechanical or electrical. For me, in a project, there is a multitude of digital threads travelling through this lifecycle.

A concept totally linked with the digital thread is the digital twin. The digital twin is the full representation of the system at each point in time all along the lifecycle. The development of the digital twin is driven over time by the many digital threads.

A: I have a few key differences. For me, the digital thread is that unbroken thread of traceability, reaching as far back as you can, going all the way through to operations and upgrades. In that area, I agree with the previous speaker: it is the data backbone through life.

Here is where I differ: the digital thread is across levels, through life, across disciplines. It is the singular thread that unifies the program through life [of the product.]

As the previous speaker said, it must be the live backbone of engineering. It's not that archival snapshot after the fact. It is the basis on which we think, we reason, we analyze, we engineer.

A: The cross-functional part is the powerful part, bridging the disciplines. It is largely human-driven today, but in the future it is not hard to image an increasing amount of discovering and leveraging digital threads being executed by computers. We should take care to think that way so that we don't limit it [use of digital threads].

A: This is the easiest hard question I've ever had! The important thing is the currency of the data, that it processes data as it is currently known about the system. That brings the question of, How do we keep thousands of engineers twiddling with the data? [The data] has to be current.

Regarding what two other speakers said, regarding singular versus multiple pulls, the analogy I've heard is that it is the difference between a thread in a tapestry, and the tapestry itself. Lord help us, maybe we need to introduce another term, like a digital tapestry.

We have found that it does not need to be complete to be an executable thread. We as engineers have to learn to deal with — maybe not with imperfection — but with incompleteness. Rather than saying the design is incomplete, saying it is a digital thread of the complete design as we know it today.

 

Q: What has changed in the last five to ten years to bring digital threads to the foreground?

A: There was a technological evolution in that time. In the past, we had a fantasy about what we wanted to do, but the hardware and software were limited. Today it is the other way around: we have more hardware and software capabilities than we are able to manage.

In recent years, we gained things like semantic data models, like data analytics. These make sense with digital twins and digital threads. Also recent is the maturing of systems engineering as key to interdisciplinary integration as a key enabler.

A: There is also change on the demand side, what we think the Art of the Possible is today, as opposed to five or ten years ago.

Everyone talks about system complexity, cycle time, about time to market. There is an external forcing function that is driving us out of the status quo, to leverage technology in a different way, if we want to stay relevant as an organization.

A: Standards that weren't there ten years ago are demanding the digital thread get up and running.

A: Model-based system engineering is pivotal, because it allows the abstraction to allow us to be cross-discipline. Ten years ago, if we thought of digital threads, we'd just be creating links between dissimilar things that are stored in CAD systems. That is what PLM has done today, virtual descriptions of physical things. It allows us to be agile and open, and not be under one supplier's roof.

A: I want to pull on the tread that was started on systems engineering. We can now separate the tools from the application, the tools in a specific area. We no longer think of mechanical engineering as engineering tools for things that work mechanically. [Systems engineering now] allows us to use the tools across disciplines. Without the push or pull of systems engineering, I don't think we would have got to where we are now.

 

Q: What is your most successful digital thread implementation?

A: It is in the area of multi-disciplinary design.

A: We don't see a lot of [completed] implementations, but it has a lot of success in on-going projects, of which I cannot pick one, because that would not be fair. I think more of how can we improve things across disciplines: what additional thing, data could I have connected to the digital thread?

A: We find it is much easier to teach systems engineering to subject-matter experts than the other way around.

A: We are looking at the virtualization of C5 systems, which has been looked at as a digital twin.

A: I can't name a favorite, because that would be naming a favorite. I see pockets of excellence; project success occurs when it is aligned with corporate direction.

We see many firms are doing the same thing as competitors. Often people don't talk about it, because they don't want competitors to learn how they do it. So, there is a lot of repetitive effort going on. Let's not treat it as "my secret sauce."

 

Q: What do you see as the reward?

A: There used to be an emotional debate over "Is it systems engineering, or engineering of systems?" 'Systems engineering' is its own silo; model-based systems engineering done incorrectly creates this new island of data that only serves the need of the system engineer.

‘Engineering of systems’ is what customers need. It is done with digital engineering, it’s a digital thread, and it’s gotta be connected.

A: The problem with 'digital engineering' is that the emphasis is on the digital part and all the value it brings, but success comes when everyone engineers. There is a way to break down the problem and then recompose the solution.

I didn’t embrace it because I thought it was brilliant; I embraced it because I was told what it was going to be called. We had some pretty big failures where we didn't draw connections between the big pieces. There was a buzz about 'model-based' and we connected that technique to the engineering system we had.

We embraced it, because were tired of losing the traceability, tired of not having the rigor. Digital doesn't solve problems; digital just shows you faster that you are failing.

A: The motivation was (1) the pull from the market and (2) the need to reduce time-to-market. There was no alternative if we wanted to meet the market's need.

A: It is really hard to do iterative and concurrent development. We are trying to do concurrent iterative development.

A: I saw it as great knowledge management.

 

Q:  How do you motivate people to get onboard?

A: For me it is very simple: Point out to the non-believer that they are already doing it, just that it might look different to them. If you have ever built an Excel spreadsheet, congratulations! You are a digital engineer -- you are placing information in an orderly manner where you can find it.

A: Lower the barrier-to-entry by framing things as 'evolutionary'. We as engineers like complexity, but that creates fear in people. Play to the benefits that they can see. We don't like other people's change, because it is our pain at their gain. It is making it personal, to shortening that step.

A: I ask, "What is the greatest pain point?" Fix that small problem to show the benefits.

A: We go for the toughest problem. We also go to standards: open standards mean users don't lose expertise in their vertical domain.

A: A chain is as strong as the weakest link, and we don't want to be that weakest link.

A: When you start to capture knowledge from an expert in a model, you can share the knowledge across the enterprise. Many people don't want to learn how to model; they are comfortable with other ways of doing things. So pair them with someone who does know how to model.

A: When people hear about digital threads, they get into the frame of silo-busting. I emphasize that silo-busting is a very dangerous thing in organizations, because it becomes a threat. It threatens peoples' roles, peoples' contributions, peoples' influence.

The critical piece of organizational change is instead to expose knowledge and make connections, instead of busting silos.

A: If done improperly, engineering change can still build silos. There is no knowledge sharing going on beyond that.

- - -

There was much more discussed, so to view the archived seminar, register at phoenix-int.com/expert-panel-the-digital-thread-phoenix-integration/

And in Other News

Open Design Alliance is the first to release CAD-related software running on Apple’s new ARM-based CPU. All SDKs and APIs are M1-compatible. It says that “ODA has a significant user base on Mac, particularly in the area of architectural design.”  opendesign.com/blog/2020/december/oda-releases-apple-silicon-support

- - -

The MacOS and Linux versions of Grabert GmbH’s ARES Commander 2022 will have feature-parity with the Windows version, including all of the new BIM-realted functions. See figure below. As well, a universal build of ARES for MacOS will run on both Intel- and ARM-based computers. The 62-page What’s New document is here: graebert.com/whatsnew (PDF).

Two public beta versions of ARES Commander 2022 are available now; the software is due to ship before April.

- - -

IronCAD LLC releases IronCAD 2021 with new options for bulk view creation, direct feedback on face/edge lengths and areas, and automatic bend alignments on angled sheet metal stock. Plus this cool feature: right-drag IntelliShape handles to resize objects symmetrically. See figure below.

Get the details on all the rest of what’s new, along with mini video tutorials at www.ironcad.com/blog/whats-new-in-2021/. Download your free trial version from ironcad.com/free-online-trial/ after registration. IronCAD celebrates its 20th anniversary in March.

- - -

Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

Letters to the Editor

It looks like one of those things you guys always warned about is happening. Lots of Autodesk users can’t get license authorization this morning due to a problem with AW [Amazon Web Services, which hosts many cloud vendors]. I’m still able to work, but I suspect that after a reboot I might not be so fortunate.  Happy Thanksgiving!

            - Ron Powell

The editor replies: As far as I know, the license check takes place once every 30 days, so you might be good. But yah, relying on the Internet is not the approach to take. I recommend viewing Internet access as an adjacent service for businesses, and not one on which to rely. Have contingency plans in place for when the Internet fails, as well as when your office systems fail.

 

Re: Now is the time to cancel MailChimp

Further to your comments about the icons in MailChimp: I agree wholeheartedly!

I HATE ICONS! Especially when they "update" (read "redesign") them with each new release. I find that I spend an inordinate amount of time hovering over each icon in turn, waiting for its tooltip to appear so I can read the word, to see if its the one I want.

Traditional Chinese uses something like 450,000 icons, while the introduction of modern Chinese managed to cut it to about 4,500. Depending on who you ask, AutoCAD uses over 1,300, but European-based languages can say pretty much all you need to say in just 26 basic letters, 10 numbers, and a dozen or so punctuation marks.

            - Bill Fane

 

Re: How to buy a new laptop

One thing in this post [about how to buy a new laptop] struck me. Those that have forever been into CAD/CAM believed that what you called an add-on discrete graphics card is preferred or required. Years ago when we went to integrated graphics we tended to experience lots of problems, horrid video performance, errors, CAD/CAM applications graphically not working, and so on.

I understand the level of user ( light user versus medium user versus power-user) is important. For this discussion lets assume a light to medium user. Has the video development environment in recent CAD/CAM programs or has integrated video improved such that the need to go with an add-on discrete card has changed? We don't much anymore but it used to be all we heard about related to graphics was OpenGL. 

            - Dave Johnson

The editor replies: I have not tested nVidia and AMD boards recently. A number of years ago, I ran extensive benchmarks comparing an nVidia board with the built-in Intel graphics in my desktop computer. The results were shocking: the nVidia board was slower at nearly all CAD visual operations, such as wireframe and rendered display. The only area in which the nVidia was faster than the Intel was in hidden-line removal.

After this, I tried talking to nVidia folks about the results but they weren't particularly interested. But I did notice that their marketing used the catch phrase, "up to x faster."

I think nVidia boards are important for high-demand games and when CAD-linked software makes use of the GPUs on the board, such as for rendering and finite element analysis. But otherwise, it's marketing at work.

- - -

I echo your sentiments that "low-priced ones just aren't worth it." When friends ask me what they should get for a laptop, my answer (though not in the detail you go into) is simply "the most you can afford."

My own experience over the last 20 years has borne that out. I have owned only two laptops in my life. The first was and IBM Thinkpad A21e; that would have been circa 2000 or so, before Lenovo acquired the PC division from IBM or not. That purchase lasted survived some 9 years through Windows 98 and XP, in useful service.

The A21e was replaced in December of 2008 with a Lenovo (yes, made in China, I know) Thinkpad W500. The W500 has served me well. A couple of years ago the discrete video card failed, but the unit continued to served my needs utilizing the integrated Intel graphics. It was only on just this COVID-Spring that the W500 ended its career. Although it had enjoyed an upgrade to Windows 7, it could not handle the leap to Win 10. So, that was 10 years!

I am not as involved in CAD work as I once was. But with this experience I would be reluctant to buy a consumer-grade laptop. I'm not in the market for another 10-year laptop, and still looking.

            - Jim Longley

The editor replies: My dad happily uses an old, used, lease-return HP business-class laptop. I forgot in my article to mention lease-returns: they are cheap and well-built.

My experience with Lenovo was pretty bad. It displayed the Blue Screen of Death frequently, with the error messages pointing to a Windows problem, randomly. It was not until the warranty ended that I found the laptop had a BIOS-based RAM checker that found bad RAM. (The Windows-based RAM checker always told me the RAM was good.) The bad RAM probably explained the randomness of the BSOD messages.

Then came the litany of horror:

  • RAM was soldered in, so I could not replace it

  • Lenovo was not particularly interested in me with and out-of-warranty laptop

  • When I finally located a local authorized repair depot, they quoted the motherboard replacement at  $1,500 (for a $1,300 laptop)

But then things looked up. I found a replacement motherboard on eBay for $300 and replaced it myself, and then a friend bought the Lenovo off me for $300.

I know mine is a rare story and that Lenovos are otherwise well-built. But after five years I still am not fond of seeing the Lenovo name.

Thank You, Readers

Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

Notable Quotable

“There is a longing for unity among all humans, for unity offers the promise of peace. The problem is that we want unity on our terms, and it is our rival programs that tear us apart.”

  • Leslie Newbegin, 1989

*4763

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A, Software | | Comments (0)

Monday, November 23, 2020

Physna & Thangs Do Algorithmic 3D Searches

Issue #1,075: | 23 February 2020

 

by Ralph Grabowski with Paul Powers

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.”

https://physna.com

And in Other News

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.

The library is used by ANSYS, 3D Systems, Mecsoft, and others. Actually, there is much, much more to this release, and you can read all about it at polygonica.com/polygonica-blog/polygonica-30-new-features/.

- - -

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:

You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.

Letters to the Editor

Wow, a new format!

- Stan Przybylinski

The editor replies: Yup! I detail the gruesome changeover process at worldcadaccess.com/blog/2020/10/now-is-the-time-to-cancel-mailchimp.html.

- - -

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.

Airbus -- has a similar approach, but uses different software: airbus.com/content/dam/corporate-topics/publications/suppliers/A220-Suppliers-Quality-Requirements.pdf. Airbus requires that all Catia files submitted be stamped inside the Catia file that Q-Checker has blessed this file; see technia.us/software/q-checker/.

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:

$25 for individuals > paypal.me/upfrontezine/25

$150 for small companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/150

$750 for large companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/750

Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use 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.

Notable Quotable

“Minimum wage is the industry standard, I’m afraid. Now, would you like to be called a Colleague or an Associate?”

-Management Speak (@managerspeak on Twitter)

*4771

Posted at 07:00 AM in Interviews, Q&A, Software | | Comments (0)

« Newer | Older »

Advertisements


Search This Blog


  •  

Recent Comments

Translate

Subscribe to this blog's feed

About

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 12/2003

Thank you for visiting!