Piping modeling without SW routing (looking for ideas)

[mp3-250]

We tried SW routing for our pipings in the past but:

1. a premium license is needed and our licensing costs with Pro+PDM+simulation are already too much for what we get in return, let alone all the unsolved bugs we face every day.

2. we do not support configurations inside part files anymore as it led to many problems with ERP, PDM etc, and our catalog parts should be redesigned for use inside routing with control points etc

3. looking at the comments from its user base, piping routing is almost not supported anymore (while electrical wiring is more active) and it seemed far from being a usable package without having to heavily put your hands under the hood, almost no bug fixes in recent releases.

4. It creates too many sub assemblies and it require an additional layer of specific administration and training to use it.


As an alternative we are looking for a compromise to design piping routes and stick with simple modelling practices and make our PDM happy too.

I did some 2D P&ID in the past, but at a high level and with plastic fittings for chemicals, while in my current company we are handling mainly metallic fittings and pipes.
Basically we have different departments that need different kind or a mix of the following kind of routes:

A. BENT PIPES:
we use a NC bending machine so we need to export 3D files and a part lists.

I made a macro for this dept. handling the NC machine that allow them to model their route in a simple way.
They make a routing assy, insert the mechanical 3D data of machinery as lightweight envelope and they design multiple routes as separate 3D SKETCHES with straight lines, then they select a pipe size (and material) from the macro and pick one line in the routing sketch: the macro copy all the connected sketch lines into a new part, apply the correct bend radius and sweep the appropriate diameter. If the sketch is over 4m we have a sensor that triggers a warning so the engineer is advised to split the route in smaller chunks.

Once the routing assy is complete they can export an excel BOM with all the main pipes data (material, diameter, bend radius, total length, bend/straight flag, over 4m flag) in one click from both SW and PDM, and in the end they convert the files with a PDM task fine tuned for our NC bender.

PROS
It is already working for a department that uses mainly bent pipes since last year and they are happy with that.

drawing 3d sketches is quite easy and we discovered that we could "autoroute" along x,y,z using the exploded view sketch lines that comes with the standard license.

CONS
routes are almost A to B with little "in the middle" valves, regulators etc.
if a route is split you need to account for the fitting/valve/etc length that split the route and draw it as a construction line inside the routing 3D sketch.


B. THREADED PIPES:
We do not have a solution yet.
The current (bad) practice is that every designer just come up with its own way to mess with pipes. No 3D sketches for routes and every component is mated in a sequential way: every time you have to modify a piping route everything is going to explode in your face.
They insert the standard fittings, and catalog parts from our PDM vault and mate them all together.

The problem implementing a 3d sketch mentality is that you want to control the pipe length and the sketch is drawn from fitting center to fitting center instead, leading to a not round pipe length all the time. or you need to use manual calculation which is annoying.

C. WELDED PIPES: custom/standard straight pipes with bushing, nipples, flanges welded.

Again we do not have a solution yet.
Same as B. no route sketch, but every custom component is designed as stand alone part (with design library components like flanges, barrels, nipples) or a welded assembly, then assembled into the machinery assy without rules.

we are looking for the simplest approach allowing to better control the route, standardized approach and speed up the modelling and drawing phase. I think that three kind of approaches depending on the route type could be acceptable as well. at least some degree of control is better than no control at all.

[TTevolve]

I have been using an assembly with a weldment (Using a 3D sketch) for the piping and adding flanges / fittings. It makes it easier to adjust the lengths and the weldment table gives you the pipe lengths. We don't do a lot of piping, mainly use it to make railings, so I didn't have to make to many templates.

[mp3-250]

I have been using an assembly with a weldment (Using a 3D sketch) for the piping and adding flanges / fittings. It makes it easier to adjust the lengths and the weldment table gives you the pipe lengths. We don't do a lot of piping, mainly use it to make railings, so I didn't have to make to many templates.

Thank you for commenting.
I think it is a nice idea and I was pondering to use a part file with weldments for that kind of piping scenario too.
The problem is that my engineering dept will assign a drw No (and we need a separate file) for each piece of piping that require welding.

[retonny77]

I think simplifying your approach with 3D sketches for threaded pipes is a smart move. It could really help avoid the chaos. And using weldments for welded pipes sounds like a solid plan too.