China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
BIM – the current state of play
Published in Ray Crotty, The Impact of Building Information Modelling, 2013
Early in their use of BIM, Ryder found that the actual modelling tool was only part of the solution – BIM is actually a whole approach to the technical aspects of managing and developing the design of a building. As noted above, the firm has long experience of working with others on its projects, so skills in basic CAD data exchange are well developed. To a great extent, these are the same as the skills required for BIM, so only limited adaptation is required in the creation and management of the data exchange files. However, to obtain best advantage from BIM interoperability requires a more structured approach, in the sense that the firms need to coordinate their information interchange plans from the outset. Ryder do this through the use of a BIM execution plan for each project. This is developed collaboratively with the other designers and documents the responsibilities, technologies, naming and file format standards to be used. The execution plan must obviously be agreed at the very beginning of the project.
Data Transfer in CAD/CAM Systems
Published in Awais Ahmad Khan, Emad Abouel Nasr, Abdulrahman Al-Ahmari, Syed Hammad Mian, Integrated Process & Fixture Planning, 2018
Awais Ahmad Khan, Emad Abouel Nasr, Abdulrahman Al-Ahmari, Syed Hammad Mian
The primary requirement for data exchange standards arose from computer-aided design (CAD) users, particularly in the aerospace and automotive industries [1]. The aerospace and automobile companies were among the first users of CAD systems. Several of these users also developed their own CAD systems, based on their needs. As a result, the need to exchange data between different systems has become the topic of intense research. There are two important reasons for CAD data exchange. First, there is the need for integration between different CAD systems to transfer data within the organization. The second reason is the implementation and application of concurrent engineering within the company or between companies.
Data transfer analysis of the homogeneous rough surface of a solid model into a CAE system with varying file data formats
Published in Cogent Engineering, 2022
K. Kartini, G.A. Sipayung, R. Ismail, J. Jamari, A.P. Bayuseno
The first option for CAD data exchange relates to the direct model translation, for which the data file stored in a product database can translate directly in one step from any CAD system format to others. Typically, a neutral database may translate data directly and its structure must be universal, generated by the least prerequisite designations of varying modeling data, and be the impartial format of supplier software (Xu, 2009). In this case, using options such as File Open and File Save As can read and/or write other CAD systems such as SolidWorks, PTC Creo, Siemens NX, and CATIA (Chang, 2014). However, this choice is often restricted because most CAD formats are privately owned by suppliers. Accordingly, these direct translators may have unidirectional, partially functional, and un-standardized CAD formats (Choi et al., 2002; Kim et al., 2019)
Revisiting the design intent concept in the context of mechanical CAD education
Published in Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 2018
Jeffrey Otey, Pedro Company, Manuel Contero, Jorge D. Camba
Further research points toward CAD data exchange standards in order to facilitate design intent transfer. However, the main issue related to this approach is that the more widely used neutral formats such as IGES or application protocols 203 and 214 of ISO 10303 (STEP) do not support the transfer of sketch constraints or modeling operations (features) and their relationships, as recognized by Pratt et al. [59]. In addition, design intent information is lost during file transfer between systems because STEP does not allow representation of it [59]. This situation has started to change since the 2014 publication of the first edition of Application Protocol 242 (AP242), “Managed model based 3D engineering.” Valid implementations of this protocol are beginning to appear, which are expected to alter the situation drastically. This new application protocol supports all the elements mentioned previously, however, there is no current commercial CAD application that supports the units of functionality related to parametric history-based feature-based modeling. According to Chang, a plan for incorporating design intent, features, and profiles with corresponding constraints and dimensions is highly beneficial, especially for new CAD users [16]. Pressure from end-users and industry should finally force CAD developers to implement the whole AP242 capabilities fully.