I haven't used iMan (Teamcenter Engineering), but we have several divisions that have it in a global environment.
Other systems that can be a PDM to UG are Matrix One and PTC Windchill/PDMLink. Pro/Intralink cannot do UG data because of the conflict with .prt file extensions. The problem with third party PDM's is that you hve to wait for them to get their code working with the latest version of the UG code before you can upgrade. Of course, even with Pro/E, we have to wait for Pro/I to upgrade to Wildfire!
Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand
I have experience with iMAN, we run this across a Global Network but not all iMAN Databases are linked due to export controls on some of our sensitive data... goes with the territory...
within our own site the software is managing all Unigraphics generated data, both Design and Manufacturing programs, we also manage an extensive WORD dataset for processes, assembly and test, specification and quality documentation.
In-house generated software code then provides the configuration controls necessary to publish this data to the coporate Intranet site for MASS data viewing, using helper plugins to view the Models (VRML) and Drawings (HPGL) and for the WORD releases (PDF).
All works well when you have well trained users. some get careless with data entries which can sometimes be difficult to correct.
Do not underestimate the resource needed to implement PDM software from any supplier, which you won't I know, but as important consider the ongoing maintenance aspects associated with keeping the Database in good shape, working and planning the upgrades, sorting the daily issues.
There are many other apsects of iMAN we do not currently use (Workflow) but for us we have it plugged in and it works well, if not without some faults.
chip in if you wish to ask for any particular experiences, this stuff works most of the time and having data under control is a pre-requisite.
Gary
CAx Manager / Lead Design Engineer
Moog Controls
Good comments on iMAN. We have just implemented iMAN (TcEng) at our company, and we are currently trying to set up the organization of data. One area where we are stuck is the revision of drawings.
Bascially, we have it set up this way. We have a 3D part in a dataset. All of our drawings for that part are in separate manifestations, under the same dataset as the 3D part. Whenever we change the overall geometry, we go to the next revision of the dataset, and copy all the drawings to the next revision as well, and then update them. Our question is then, what happens when we revise JUST the drawing (i.e. add some dimensions or a note)?
Do we go to a completely new revision of the entire dataset, including all unchaged drawings, just because we added a dimension to a drawing? Seems like a lot of computer space wasted just for the addition of a missing dimension on one part.
Could you explain how you (or your company) sets up drawings and revisions of drawings and datasets?
configuration Control is a very particular subject which offers little room for flexibility. In our industry (yours and mine) we pay particular attention to Revision status and issue control of Drawings and documentation as a whole.
Within our use of iMAN no matter how small a change to a drawing the whole ITEM REVISION and all its DATASETS gets bumped a revision.
our release system that 'publishes' drawings and models to our corporate intranet site LOCKS down a revision in iMAN when a revision is released. Any user who wishes to change anything on the Drawing (specification - dataset) is forced to raise it an issue, no matter how small the change.
so basically the 3D Model and Drawing are ALWAYS the same revision in iMAN
we do use manifestations for our machine tool programming data (done straight off the UG Master also) but that topic would only serve to cloud this discussion on Models and Drawings.
hope this helps ............
Gary
CAx Manager / Lead Design Engineer
Moog Controls
I have used iMAN with UG version 15 when I was at Aeronautical Research and Developement centre, HAL Bangalore.
There we used to use iMan extensively for work flow, creating revisions of the data,etc. As Mr.gary has asked that maintaining revisions is a problem, its true. But I have heard from our UG admin people that when the control is with in the organisation one can change the permissions of a released file just to do a small change which you are mentioning..as it won't effect the down stream operations, But only iMAN administrator has this permissions.
So kindly chk. with some admin persons or TCS and you will get the solution. B'coz rightnow I am not in touch with iMAN.
Thanks for your comments. If I understand you right, whenever you modify a drawing, even if it is just to add a single dimension, you create a new revision?
How do you create your drawings? Do you create them in the master (3D) part file, or do you create a specification?
We have an 'internal' procedure to handle this. Internal meaning the CAD department, the update does not get published to other departments.
If the part/drawing is released at 'A', we do a save-as to 'A.01' and make non-drawing changes, like properties or reference sets. We have an internal check procedure to make sure the drawing did not get screwed up, and we release it in iMAN. The sytem works, and the latest always gets loaded. When an acutal drawing revision comes along, we take it to rev 'B'.
A comment on PDM software in general (for whatever it's worth):
As with any system or software that offers the beat-all, end-all solution to all your discipline problems, the complexity often precludes any easy way to implement it into an established culture (and what other kind of culture would you implement it?). I saw first-hand a failed attempt to implement a PDM system into a parametric modeling design environment (in my case, ProductCenter with SolidWorks). I could have easily retired on the wasted money.
The software does not fix discipline problems. It automates discipline that is already in place. It will automate your discipline problems and will be much more efficient in creating a mess.
The PDM software companies are fond of telling their customers that the software will do whatever they want. The truth is, the software writers had their own ideas about what data management discipline meant and didn't put too much effort in making the software flexible. If you make an effort to learn and adopt their paradigm, the software will work better for you. You will definitely find less "bugs". It's like pulling teeth to get that information out of the sales reps, though.
you have it, whenever we make any smaller than small change to the drawing, or the Model (NB: it drives our 2D specification dimensioning, and CAM) we bump it a revision.
we create our 2D drawings as separate 'SPECIFICATION' files and link back to the Master Model. we use reference sets to mask the data arriving in the drawing.
best regards........Gary
CAx Manager/Lead Design Engineer
