Data translation from I-Deas 11 to Catia V5

[prolynx]

We are in the process of implementing Catia V5 and we will need to migrate "some amount" of data from I-Deas to Catia.

I'd like to hear if anyone here has done similar things or if any usefull advise (like difference between buying a software and doing it internally, or just buying the service from outside)...

TIA

 

[RCDLtd]

For 3D data I've found STEP to be as good as any other, and it's likely that you already have licenses within you current software packages.

Translations are not always perfect though, but then, when are they ever? There are some settings within both the Catia and I-DEAS STEP translators that may help improve translations, but there are no hard and fast rules.

I also have access to a Cat V4 <--> I-DEAS direct translator. So if I have problems with STEP I'll try:
V5<-->V4<-->I-DEAS, but generally this route is not as robust as STEP.

This is also a service I sell (or the company I work for does) so if you get stuck....

If you also need 2D data translated then I've found DXF to be the best, but expect to rework the drawings in the receving system to correct items that have "fallen off" - expecially GD&T and weld symbols etc.

 

[solid7]

If you've got both Catia and I-DEAS, you may want to just look into buying the MultiCAx plugin, and use it until the maintenance expires. At least, ask your reseller for a trial of the product, to see if it fits your needs.

Here are the details:

http://www.3ds.com/index.php?id=10&type=222&3dsplm[product]=144&cHash=89b618f202&filename=doc

Or here, if the page comes up blank:

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:04oNP7sRLY8J:

http://www.3ds.com/index.php?id=10&...+translator+multicax&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

On another note, I know that UG has a great translator for writing out V4 .model files. One of the best that I've seen from a competitor product, in fact. Since they are both owned by UGS, you might also ask if there is a plugin or translator available for I-DEAS to Catia. (They claim to have a Catia plugin on their site, but I can't find any specifics - it would most certainly be V4) Probably, that would be the better option, because I-DEAS seems to be pickier about writing files out than most packages. (in my experience, anyway) Again, if something is available, ask for a test drive.

One word of caution - data translation of I-DEAS files can be tricky - a real bear, in fact. Having both systems in-house is to your advantage - but if you decide to hire out to a company for data conversion/migration, make sure that they: A)have a seat of both programs, (not a 3rd party translation setup) B)Open each file individually, and not batch translate blindly, C) Verify the integrity of the translation, D) give you a guarantee on their work. (not a "one touch" price)

Good luck, and hope that helps.

---
CAD design engineering services - Catia V4, Catia V5, and CAD Translation. Catia V5 resources - CATBlog.

 

[RCDLtd]

I can understand people thinking I-DEAS translations are tricky, but good results are obtainable. And out of I-DEAS into Catia shouldn't be a problem at all.

The I-DEAS <--> Catia V4 "Plugin" offered by UGS is an Elysium product and is on a par with other Direct Translators available, such as the Theorem Solutions Product. I think Theorem now have an I-DEAS <--> Catia V5 product, but the costs of these types of products are prohibitive, and I haven't had a chance to trial it.

The cautionary note from solid7 is a good point, nearly all translations require some level of manual rework and you need to understand if the manual rework is included in the price. I would tend to run a few trial pieces first to gauge the quality of translated data and judge if it is acceptable for the job you want it for. If you can get away with batch translated data then the costs will be far lower.

 

[solid7]

I can understand people thinking I-DEAS translations are tricky, but good results are obtainable. And out of I-DEAS into Catia shouldn't be a problem at all.

No doubt that good results ARE attainable - but they are not always attained. 2 systems constantly give me grief - I-DEAS and Pro/E. Pro/E because the quality of data is always bad, (not really sure why) and I-DEAS, because it appears to be rather quirky. (although it looks like an incredible CAD system)

but the costs of these types of products are prohibitive

That's a relative comparison. Migrating a complete set of engineering data may very well justify the cost. On the contrary, hiring translation services is generally the losing end when it comes to data migration on a mass scale.

The Catia plugin for I-DEAS to V5 is $4500, plus 12% annual. That's pretty cheap compared to hiring out, if you've got a bunch of models to move. I would guess that the UGS offering runs in similar price range, so as not to price themselves out of competition.

If you can get away with batch translated data then the costs will be far lower.

I certainly respect your point - but in my experience, I-DEAS is not a system that I would take a blind stab at, when it comes to translating data. If you could get a firm to run a small batch of files first, that's one thing. People are always trying to scam a translation company into doing a "sample", so it may be best just to pick 10 or 20 of your most complex parts, and pay for the batch. If you get good results on the critical stuff, full speed ahead with everything else.

---
CAD design engineering services - Catia V4, Catia V5, and CAD Translation. Catia V5 resources - CATBlog.

 

[RCDLtd]

At first sight, $4,500 appears very cheap. Certainly when compared to the +$20,000 Elysium and Theorem Direct translators.

The Catia "Plugin" however does not appear to be a Direct Translator in respect of I-DEAS. It quotes itself as reading I-DEAS IFF files. I think in this case IFF is meaning Interchange File Format, relating to an UGS IDI format, which although a proprietary UG format, should still be considered a neutral file format. ie. you have to have an I-DEAS license to convert your Native I-DEAS data to an IDI format that would then be translated a second time via the MultiCAx Product.

The caveat I add is that I have no first hand experience of the MultiCAx product.

There are very few translators able to work directly on an I-DEAS ".prt", ".asm" or ".mf1" format without requireing an I-DEAS License.

Personally I'd go with STEP, and see what the results are like.

 

[solid7]

I also have no particular experience with that particular MultiCAx plugin. However, that being said, the translators that you mentioned, being direct translators, are not really the norm for data migration. Being direct or feature based requires the API from both supported systems - hence the increased cost. It's a lot of money for a method that's still hit or miss, no matter what they may tell you. (the models that I have seen are usually a nightmare to deal with - garbage trees)

I'm not sure what prolynx (and/or his organization) intend to do with the data after conversion, but standards based translation - i.e., neutral formats - are genearally fine for maintaining legacy data, and even for use in assembly structures. They're absolutely fine when new parts are being rebuilt off of the old. However, there is a breakover point when manual corrections are required. If you are going to spend months doing manual rebuild of legacy parts, even $25,000 plus the time to convert is probably cheaper than the manhours of 100% manual rebuild.

I would reiterate the previous sentiment - my suggestion would be to pay someone for a small batch of the most complex parts, and see what you get before committing to a full scale effort.

Prolynx - you never really mentioned what type of data migration that you need. Do you have a need to maintain history, or would "dumb" geometry meet your needs? Second question - I know that UGS is working hard to integrate I-DEAS and NX fully. When the next release of UG comes out, I understand that there will be 100% interchangeability between the 2 systems. It may be worth exploring that angle, and looking into a seat of UG, which can then be used to output STEP (for assembly structure) or Catia .model files.

---
CAD design engineering services - Catia V4, Catia V5, and CAD Translation. Catia V5 resources - CATBlog.

 

[prolynx]

Thanks for all the information here.

We have decided that "dumb" solids will be enough, no need for the history tree. If we need modifications, then rework the part, but that's what we decided.
What we are going to migrate is models of snowmobiles, so big assemblies, that includes all kind of parts (few big and complex "plastic/design" part, lots of sheet-metal parts, and a big bunch of everything else). Typical amount of parts inside those assemblies would be between 500 and 2000.

Concerning the NX product, I could already have a seat installed, as UGS promised to I-DEAS customers the "free" migration, but it would require way too much work (database clean-up is one "small" part), knowledge and actually also to pay something (Oracle related cost for the Teamcenter, the data management for NX). Also I've been following the development of the product, and they are still not garantying the full "integration". It seems some data are still not working.

I've contacted Theorem already, and we run some tests, but some parts (typically the "plastic" parts) needed to run with the translator twice, with a special setting applied the 2nd time if I understood correctly. So that was not a "great" solution IMO.
STEP is also an option we consider here, but we might hit some difficult parts that won't export (I have seen few of those already) and then we are in trouble...
I'm now more and more leaning towards buying the service, of course with the "warranty" that the data will work so it would minimize the work we have to do here.

 

[RCDLtd]

solid7, Just to clarify my use of the term "Direct" with regards to translation, I was referring to directly moving Native Cad system 1 data to Native CAD system 2 data in one direct step. Rather than using a Neutral file format such as STEP or IGES in between.

I agree that Feature Based Translation, especially between I-DEAS and Catia, is not a realistic option.

I see no benefit in migrating I-DEAS to NX first, there is already a Catia V4 "Plugin" and STEP translator available within I-DEAS.

For info, the I-DEAS/NX integration is to be achieved by NX binaries including the I-DEAS modelling Kernel, so when NX needs to edit/rebuild an I-DEAS file it will use the I-DEAS commands to do so. UGS do not plan to convert I-DEAS feature based history to NX feature based History.

prolynx, don't be too concerned with the size of your assemblies. I have seen similar data sets translate cleanly and retain their assembly hierachy as well as their naming structure. The limit is likely to be the physical and virtual memory on the machine performing the translation. There is also a chance of a single part within the assembly that the translator cannot handle stopping the whole assembly translating. It may help to break those assemblies down into smaller chunks and rebuild them in the receiveing system.

Unless you have Business reasons not to, it would seem the process your heading towards is about right. The simplest solution for the CAD office is Leave all your Legacy data Mastered in I-DEAS, and just translate Orphan data through to your new system for reference.

If Legacy data needs to be modified in the future, then you have a choice of editing the file in I-DEAS or remodelling it in Catia. A good way of making this decision is whether or not you are replacing or modifying component tooling. If tooling is to be modified then edit in the Legacy system. If tooling is to be replaced then remodel in the new system.

This does require a process for Dual Data management, but with a robust process in place it can work work very well.