Author Topic: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...  (Read 10908 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MP

  • Seagull
  • Posts: 17750
  • Have thousands of dwgs to process? Contact me.
Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« on: January 20, 2006, 10:40:51 AM »
Couple random questions off the top of my head ...

1. What does your company use?

2. Does it scale well (works equally well on small plants as well as mega projects)? e.g. COADE (CADWorx) does not scale well to large projects because it is model based rather than database based.

3. Does it adapt to your work flows or does it force a work flow scheme on you that is unweildy?

4. Can notifications be suspended? i.e. early developmental ("what if we try this, that ...") work work well with P&ID software that sends out a notification every time you change something because said work is so dynamic. If notifications can't be suspended it can be maddening.

5. Are the modules well integrated and "cross module aware" or does it strike you as a bunch of work by different software vendors duct taped together and sold under the umbrella of the Plant softwar evendor?

6. Is model versioning supported, i.e. Staging: Issued for Design, Issued for Construction ... as well as State: "As-Designed" versus "As-Built" etc.

7. Robust and mature translation / Migration tools? i.e. Can fully import / export plant models (and associated databases) from other vendors or previous versions of ther own software?

8. Does it support SAP integration?

9. Experienced user pools one can draw work force and experience from?

10. How much administrative support is required? Just a few or is it prohibitive unless you have a minimum of x number of CAD operators / designers?

11. Is there a documented programmer's API c/w programmer's reference and tutorial?

12. Has vendor's tech support been responsive in a timely and helpful manner?

13. After having used the software and had time to reflect it's effectiveness for your company and projects are you content with the decision to use said software?

14. Do you feel it is good value for the money?

Etc. etc. etc.

One of the companies I'm contracting with are in the process of choosing a new plant software system. I'm sitting thru the sales pitches of the noted vendors but value the opinions of front liners actually using these tools is more valuable to me.

Any feedback small, novelesque, good, bad is invited.

Thank you for your time and effort, I hope I can reciprocate in some way down the road.

- Michael.
Engineering Technologist • CAD Automation Practitioner
Automation ▸ Design ▸ Drafting ▸ Document Control ▸ Client
cadanalyst@gmail.comhttp://cadanalyst.slack.comhttp://linkedin.com/in/cadanalyst

M-dub

  • Guest
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2006, 10:57:50 AM »
Sorry, but I don't have much to add (as usual) but all I can tell you is that one of our clients used AutoPlant years ago when they were adding a new unit and it worked well for them, but they haven't used it since.  I haven't seen it in use since I've been working there, which is now about 8 or 9 years.  I've heard it was very good for them at the time.

I know that's not much help, but I thought I'd tell you all I knew...Didn't take long, eh?!  ;)  :oops:

MP

  • Seagull
  • Posts: 17750
  • Have thousands of dwgs to process? Contact me.
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #2 on: January 20, 2006, 05:12:01 PM »
Thanks Mike, short and sweet, but still appreciated.

:)
Engineering Technologist • CAD Automation Practitioner
Automation ▸ Design ▸ Drafting ▸ Document Control ▸ Client
cadanalyst@gmail.comhttp://cadanalyst.slack.comhttp://linkedin.com/in/cadanalyst

MickD

  • King Gator
  • Posts: 3619
  • (x-in)->[process]->(y-out) ... simples!
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2006, 08:44:24 PM »
Couple random questions off the top of my head ...

1. What does your company use?

I run my own Co. and have tried a couple, the ones I stuck with the most were TSD200 and Prosteel and I'm still currently using Prosteel (which is also Rebis AutoPlant) although I'm working on some tools to go back to vanilla acad 3d solids and editing.
Prosteel is what I will discuss here.

Quote
2. Does it scale well (works equally well on small plants as well as mega projects)? e.g. COADE (CADWorx) does not scale well to large projects because it is model based rather than database based.

Yes, it's not too bad if you have a reasonable pc setup for CADD work. If the models get too large you can also use xreffing or break the job up into workable sizes. If I do this, I will bring in any interfacing objects from the first model into the new model for reference. At the time of checking I'll bring all models into one and 'bolt' them together just to make sure it all works but I will not do any db work with it as it can get slow with some operations.

Quote
3. Does it adapt to your work flows or does it force a work flow scheme on you that is unwieldy?

It does force a certain workflow on you that's not entirely different to how you would work anyway. I've personally found this to be ok when working on an entire project myself but when working with more than 1 person on a project it can make it more difficult to check the output without a really strict work practices that more often than not can't be adhered to due to time constraints on a project.
This is the main reason I'll be switching back to vanilla - and also the cost for more seats - current cost in Australia is ~10kAU with 1 years support (~1500/year).

Quote
4. Can notifications be suspended? i.e. early developmental ("what if we try this, that ...") work work well with P&ID software that sends out a notification every time you change something because said work is so dynamic. If notifications can't be suspended it can be maddening.
It doesn't send out notifications as such but does notify you of changes that have happened to detailed documents that require updating. This idea is good but not always as reliable as you would like.

Quote
5. Are the modules well integrated and "cross module aware" or does it strike you as a bunch of work by different software vendors duct taped together and sold under the umbrella of the Plant softwar vendor?

Pretty well integrated. It does have a lot of features that I don't and wouldn't use making it a bit bulky. I guess this is a result of trying to target many disciplines and work methods of different countries etc.

Quote
6. Is model versioning supported, i.e. Staging: Issued for Design, Issued for Construction ... as well as State: "As-Designed" versus "As-Built" etc.

You could accomplish this by 'saving as' but no, not that I know of.

Quote
7. Robust and mature translation / Migration tools? i.e. Can fully import / export plant models (and associated databases) from other vendors or previous versions of ther own software?

It does have some import/export capabilities but I haven't used them. The models we would receive from an engineer would need very thorough checking and would more than likely need many changes as they're 'knocked up' for design mainly. We would call these details 'Noddy' drawings/models as they are not very accurate.

Quote
8. Does it support SAP integration?

Not sure.

Quote
9. Experienced user pools one can draw work force and experience from?

Yes, there are at least 2 discussion boards that I know of with many experienced users. And there's also support.

Quote
10. How much administrative support is required? Just a few or is it prohibitive unless you have a minimum of x number of CAD operators / designers?

Once you had a good system in place and your users were properly trained it would be pretty low maintenance regardless of cad user numbers.

Quote
11. Is there a documented programmer's API c/w programmer's reference and tutorial?

Yes, there is a vba reference that's pretty comprehensive and has many examples. The main use would be to design custom connections, to get the most out of this feature you really need a good knowledge of 3d geometry concepts and calculations. A good knowledge of OOP and how Prosteel works is also necessary.

Quote
12. Has vendor's tech support been responsive in a timely and helpful manner?

Yes.

Quote
13. After having used the software and had time to reflect it's effectiveness for your company and projects are you content with the decision to use said software?

This is purely personal and I don't mean to pick out Prosteel in particular,  I've found after using and testing quite a few different app's over the years that they all steer you to their way of doing things because that's the way their software works. This makes sense and has many benefits if your users are properly trained and experienced. They also have many downfalls, to achieve these capabilities some use custom objects and then you have to deal with proxy objects or conversions, enablers etc - a right pain when distributing files to other people.
The output is not as flexible as most would like either in anything but the most simple details. I've actually gone back to manually adding dimensions to the output rather than cleaning up what's dished out to a presentable detail. Again this is purely personal and some people find the output quite acceptable.

Quote
14. Do you feel it is good value for the money?

Again, only my opinion as I have a small office -  not really. If I was working by myself again I'd probably still use it though but it's just too hard in a small office to train, oversee and check all that's being produced without a good drafting and checking system. PS doesn't provide this (easily) and can make my job harder than needed.
While it has many good features, if you don't do things 'just' the right way you can spend a lot of time just getting things to work that should be a simple task. A lot of this has to do with training and experience and once you 'master' it you will have little problems and be very productive.
The only problem with this scenario is staffing - you either hire a Prosteel 'operator' or you hire perfectly good drafters that could take many months to train to master the product and may eventually leave anyway. This is also what I'm trying to avoid in my office by using as many standard acad commands and features as possible and a workable system that can change and grow as my company does.






"Short cuts make long delays,' argued Pippin.”
J.R.R. Tolkien

MP

  • Seagull
  • Posts: 17750
  • Have thousands of dwgs to process? Contact me.
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2006, 02:43:47 PM »
Whoa! Thanks a million Mick! I'm printing this off right now and will come back tonight to discuss your opinions / experiences, but for now you have my sincere gratitude for taking the time to share your thoughts on this topic. Abundant apologies, but must dine and dash.
Engineering Technologist • CAD Automation Practitioner
Automation ▸ Design ▸ Drafting ▸ Document Control ▸ Client
cadanalyst@gmail.comhttp://cadanalyst.slack.comhttp://linkedin.com/in/cadanalyst

MickD

  • King Gator
  • Posts: 3619
  • (x-in)->[process]->(y-out) ... simples!
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2006, 03:55:41 PM »
No prob's, it is hard to give a fair and honest review in a single post but really, you need more like 3 months and at least some introductory training to see if the product will work well for your company before you purchase 'any' of these specialised app's. This could take quite a while!
Cheers,
Mick.
"Short cuts make long delays,' argued Pippin.”
J.R.R. Tolkien

Draftek

  • Guest
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2006, 05:50:01 PM »
I've used a few and will post something tomorrow. Gotta go play racquetball now...

Draftek

  • Guest
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2006, 08:07:36 AM »
I have some experience with the old pro-pipe & adev (now rebis), cadworx and a few others I can't remember. I've had to work with some drawing produced by consultants for Plant4D is about the only exposure I've had.

Now, I definitely have some bias because I have done some contract/trade-out programming/spec work for the two programs I choose to use.

I loved pro-pipe and produced some quality designs with it. loved the batch ISO program. I worked directly with the company on tech issues and wound up writing some specs and beta testing apps for them. Hated when rebis took over and combined adev and pro-pipe. They lost touch with the customers while doubling the cost.

I then migrated to Cadworx. Didn't care for the lack of batching iso's but loved the 3d iso produced. cool idea. Wound up with about the same deal with them and communicated with the developer on issues. We're still friends who email each other occasionally. I've done contract training for each of the programs and could get a good cad user up to speed in about 3/4 days of working on a sample project.

My bias comes from being the primary 3d designer at each company / plant I worked for. I like the light / easy to learn packages that do not use custom objects and that I can customize for my own use. The bigger more expensive (do all) apps are good if you can afford them and the functionally matches everything you want to do. otherwise your just stuck..

I'd suggest getting the demo's going thru the tutorials and buying the one that drives the best for you.

MickD

  • King Gator
  • Posts: 3619
  • (x-in)->[process]->(y-out) ... simples!
Re: Plant Software (AutoPlant, SmartPlant, Plant 4D) ...
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2006, 05:06:07 PM »
Another point to remember too, while everything is working fine with these app's, all's ok. If you do start to have trouble - and you will, even Autodesk verticals are causing grief as posted in other threads - you need a good back up plan to get your job finished without resorting to reinstallation of software and OS. You'll find at that very moment how much you rely on the software to do your job and can really find yourself stranded.
That may also be a good test to see if the software is suitable for your office?
"Short cuts make long delays,' argued Pippin.”
J.R.R. Tolkien