PDM -- The good, the bad and the weird

[zwei]

Recently saw a few posts on using SWx with Teamcenter, and this actually make me wonder what PDM other is using with their CAD software(s) as well as their experience with them.

• What PDM and CAD software(s) do you use?
• What is good about your PDM?
• What is bad about your PDM?
• What is the weird stuff about your PDM?

[mgibeault]

We currently use SolidWorks with no PDM after trying to implement 3DEXPERIENCE for a year.

[XHawkeye]

ACAD\Solidworks\Creo 2 and DDM.

It's used for revision control, ECN signoff (have a couple workflows based on product group) and file access (QC & purchasing) but it's not used for BOMs or any other ERP stuff. I'm just a user, no admin, they've been using it 6+ years.

Good: Cheaper version of PDM Pro. Support is responsive, it is based in the UK so it may take a day to get a reply if the issue late in the day.

Bad: Integration with SW is clucky. (Don't know about Creo) Can't search for a file in DDM and then right-click open the file in SW. Have to use Search and Open in the DDM toolbar to open a file. With ACAD the right-click open, from DDM, works.

Weird: Creo and SW can't have the same file name but SW and Creo can have the same file name as an ACAD file. Since Creo files came first the suffix '_SW' is added as needed. Have lots of configurations, (configuration name = P/N) and are saved to DDM. The base file can't have the same name as a configuration so the base file uses -000 and configurations are -001/-00X

[zwei]

We currently use SolidWorks with no PDM after trying to implement 3DEXPERIENCE for a year.

Now i am even more curious... what make you try to implement 3DExperience in the first place?

[mgibeault]

Now i am even more curious... what make you try to implement 3DExperience in the first place?

Ah ah! Good question and my answer is pretty dumb: we needed PDM to improve our processes and minimize errors. I think there's a consensus on the benefits of such things. SolidWorks has two products; PDM Pro and 3DX. PDM Pro seemed to be nearing end-of-life (the product presentation PDF dated back to 2019) and we're looking for something that will be used for at least 20 years.
The two local VARs were saying 3DX was the way to go and the demos were convincing...
@TooTallToby did a few fun presentations for us where everything went smoothly.

[jcapriotti]

Ah ah! Good question and my answer is pretty dumb: we needed PDM to improve our processes and minimize errors. I think there's a consensus on the benefits of such things. SolidWorks has two products; PDM Pro and 3DX. PDM Pro seemed to be nearing end-of-life (the product presentation PDF dated back to 2019) and we're looking for something that will be used for at least 20 years.
The two local VARs were saying 3DX was the way to go and the demos were convincing...
@TooTallToby did a few fun presentations for us where everything went smoothly.

Can't see PDM going away too soon and it still gets some new functionality each release, although not enough IMO. They also added the "Manage" product a few years which adds some PLM functionality, but it essentially doubles the cost of a PDM license. Compared to what we pay for Windchill, still far less $$$.

There isn't an easy upgrade path from PDM to 3dx so I'm thinking PDM has at least 10 years left.

[bnemec]

ok. So my experience with SW PDM Pro has been very rocky. Going from network shares to a PDM and changing CAD Systems just for the sake of gaining PDM/Vaulting capability. But all that aside, if I could look at SW PDM Pro from a vanilla stand point I would highly recommend it. It does a lot of things well, it's reasonably cost and there are a lot of users so community support is good. In our case is was not worth switching CAD systems for, but we needed about 95% of our SE files in SW to function in SW, so it's really not a fair comparison considering only one of our users had real work experience outside Solid Edge.

My favorite part of PDM Pro is also my biggest pain point. Versions. Version history and the inherent vaulting that goes with it has been invaluable. I think the users that are causing 80% of the problems in Vault were causing 80% of the problems in CAD files stored on network shares but it was completely untraceable. Now, the actions are all stored in history and that data is invaluable to me as a CAD Admin in figuring out WTF is going on... SNAFU is normal but too vague. PDM history helps me categorize the various SNAFUs into bins and report to management and adjust processes and training accordingly. Before PDM doing those things was like flying VFR in IMC.

If you're already use SW then PDM is a no brainer IMO. Changing CAD systems to get a PDM, that depends on a lot of other things.

My $0.02 .

[mgibeault]

Did you end up continuing to use 3DEXPERIENCE? Just curious because it seems like a lot of companies tried 3DX, but it was too cumbersome or too confusing, (and in some cases too unreliable) - and the company decided it wasn't really a good fit. Wanted to ask if your team felt the same way.

No, as of today we don't have any working 3DX license.
After a year;
-I was the only user familiar enough to do some work in 3DX
-Users that are in CAD only a few hours a week forget about all video training after a week
-3DX training is mostly videos, not much reference material
-We created our own very simple reference material but as the platform changes a lot it was in constant re-write. Updating screen captures is time consuming.
-We encountered a lot of bugs and inconsistencies. How the configurations are handled, sheet metal, mirrored parts. Lost so much time there.
-Every action is a chore. Only one way to accomplish something; find the document you want to work with (it's difficult to select more than one at once), remember what is the app you need to perform the action, find a way to bring this app to open the document. The Bookmark Editor now has a toolbar that has almost all the tools conveniently shown, but you have to do a lot of housekeeping to have a workable Bookmark Editor.
-Having dozens of apps doing a couple of things is frustrating on many levels
-The number of options in the "Collaborative Spaces Configuration Center" is mind-boggling. No good descriptions and poor documentation of these settings, I spent hours with Dassault support trying a thing and another.
-It's slow in general

[krisreddy]

Most one-size-fits-all PDM systems are an overkill for many companies.

We are a small company (8-10 engineers) designing/developing simple to medium complexity products (imagine a lawn mower as the most complex product we make). We use SolidWorks as the main design tool, but have a couple of legacy products too.

We do not have a PDM/PLM system - we find almost all the products out there way too rigid to use, and too expensive to implement and manage. The overhead they impose on our workflows are very high. So we manage all our product releases using network storage and folders.

Recently we felt that a good design change cycle management tool would help us better understand the evolution of the design. Such a system must be on the web/cloud so all internal engineers and the external suppliers can freely participate in the change cycle process. We want to continue to manage the product release process we currently have.

Can anyone share ideas on this?

[zwei]

Most one-size-fits-all PDM systems are an overkill for many companies.

We are a small company (8-10 engineers) designing/developing simple to medium complexity products (imagine a lawn mower as the most complex product we make). We use SolidWorks as the main design tool, but have a couple of legacy products too.

We do not have a PDM/PLM system - we find almost all the products out there way too rigid to use, and too expensive to implement and manage. The overhead they impose on our workflows are very high. So we manage all our product releases using network storage and folders.

Recently we felt that a good design change cycle management tool would help us better understand the evolution of the design. Such a system must be on the web/cloud so all internal engineers and the external suppliers can freely participate in the change cycle process. We want to continue to manage the product release process we currently have.

Can anyone share ideas on this?

GrabCAD workbench used to be a good option... but Stratasys killed it recently.

Maybe try looking at OpenBOM or Bild?
I have never user either of them so i cannot vouch for it, but i heard some good feedback.

https://www.openbom.com/

https://www.getbild.com/

[krisreddy]

OpenBOM and Bild are still PDM systems, except on the cloud.

If I am looking for the traditional PDM/PLM paradigm for data management (which I already have said is an overkill for us), these cloud-based systems are less attractive than on-premise implementations. With the latter, atleast there is a better chance of a tight integration between CAD and PDM/PLM, which some companies may need based on their product complexity.

As a company, we gain little from simply storing releases in PDM. Due to the nature of CAD data (unlike software code), it is not easy to do a simple 'compare' to figure out changes and why. Such visual compare tools (in CAD but not so much in PDM) show 'what' changed. But users still have no way to know "why" the changes were made, either in CAD or in PDM. The 'why' and 'what' is the really the ECOs/ECNs for the part. The traditional PDM/PLM paradigm offer little to help automate that.

[Adrian_V21]

What PDM and CAD software(s) do you use?
SolidWorks with PDM Pro
What is good about your PDM?
Highly Customizable (Workflows, Rev Schemes)
What is bad about your PDM?
Old Technology (Overhead), SolidWorks does not know of the existence of PDM so references are not robust
What is the weird stuff about your PDM?
It does not have a future, no roadmap

What PDM and CAD software(s) do you use?
Onshape
What is good about your PDM?
Integrated, No broken references, inmutable and infinite history
What is bad about your PDM?
Limited customization, can get cluttered (for Release Management tracking)
What is the weird stuff about your PDM?
Really focused in "Startup" needs, still needs improvements for more "Controlled" environments

[Brian-M]

@krisreddy
"a good design change cycle management tool would help us better understand the evolution of the design."
Not sure I understand the request and what you have now, but I'll take a stab at it. I agree that an EC should have the What and Why of a change.

Sounds like you probably have an EC process now, but it's not in the cloud?
There are a lot of ways to approach that.
* One that's relatively easy to implement: https://www.jetbrains.com/youtrack/ cheap, customizable, can be set up to track ECR and ECO, attach files, and more.

"Due to the nature of CAD data (unlike software code), it is not easy to do a simple 'compare' to figure out changes and why. Such visual compare tools (in CAD but not so much in PDM) show 'what' changed. But users still have no way to know "why" the changes were made, either in CAD or in PDM. The 'why' and 'what' is the really the ECOs/ECNs for the part. The traditional PDM/PLM paradigm offer little to help automate that."

Some of that seems to be exactly what some PDM and PLM tools brag about.
For knowing how the BOM changed over time, that's either quite manual, or a more complex tool that integrates with CAD. That is something that many PDM or PLM platforms can do. Some of the PLM systems don't manage CAD files (they don't include PDM so might meet your requirement). And most MRP, ERP, or MES platforms can track BOM changes.
The 'Why' generally needs to be tracked with text that someone types somewhere, no?