My experience of plastic models was that it was great for the non technical
people who couldnt read drawings to understand what they were getting for their
money. It was totally useless for construction except for heavy lift planning.
The operators loved it for training as they didnt have to get wet walking the
plant. They could also whinge about access and lift facilities in the cosy
offices next to management.
We use 3D models and walk throughs now for client presentation, training and design. Its an improvement on the model particularly when the process designers change the design at the last minute or the stress engineer wants to add some flexibility to a line.
The main point is you have to be geared up to do 3D modelling from the outset. The infrastructure has to be in place with necessary hardware and trained operators to use it. The commitment from upper management to the cost of going the whole way is absolutely essential. Too often its treated as a side show where an enthusiastic CAD operator plays around with some software and does some interesting stuff.
In Australia we have developed submarine and frigate projects using 3D modelling. Now CH2MHill are doing the Changi project in Singapore consisting of sewage pump stations, treatment plants and reuse water facilities using a 3D model as the basic design document. The job is huge, replacing a number of existing substantial facilities.
"Paul Bowers" <pbowers@pipingdesign.com> on 31/07/2001 10:19:53 AM
Please respond to <a href="/group/PipingDesign/post?postID=TF6jiL40LlTvqYmnTvD9fkV3mTAWsA3cQIViBTSYeT8REfGWPFOlrtcWp6NBEGCPpGV1myXDB0_iIOpWY_xqFq3d">PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com</a>
To: <PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com> cc:
Subject: Re: [PipingDesign] Re: Plant Model
That is fairly old technology, though, I remember reading about it 5-6 years ago, the original idea was to use it for small mechanical parts. At that time, model size was limited to the chamber volume and it laid down progressive layers of "plastic ink" (I suppose similar to the elevation lines one sees on a topographical map) . Maybe it has developed since then and soon they will have a refinery-sized chamber.
All kidding aside, plastic models were great in the sense that they provided a 3D view of the intended facility, not hard-to-decipher plans and elevations for the client to review.
As I've mentioned before, I fear that the CAD revolution's legacy will be a bunch of fast-fingered, CAD-compatible operators who know little or nothing about the hundreds of years of knowledge that have been built up.
It's getting late, and many of the old farts have retired in frustration. I think it is time that the budget-creators build in extra allowance for the old crew to come in and offer their experience. Bring back the checker and have him/her validate early designs. Make 3D CAD piping software intuitive to learn so that a certificate in "piping technology" easily can transform itself into a competent "piping designer" certificate without having to have an additional degree in computer science. Take the "which button should I push now" impediment out of the equation.
(Here I go again) In the old days, you weren't asked which pencil you used, all that counted was your experience and competence. The fragmentation of different software solutions is winnowing the available people that can do the job. Piping design is already complicated enough without making it more difficult than it should be.
Paul
> There is also a guy in Alaska who has a "printer" that can
generate a plastic model from a 3D computer model.
>
> Peter Quinn
> Rebis Industrial Workgroup Software
> (925)933-2525x242
>
>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Bowers
>
> There are now "3D monitors" that don't require wearing those
silly
> glasses. I could find the link if anyone's interested.
>
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <hirap_napinoy@yahoo.com>
>
> > before edms and pds, plastic model are good (not great) visual
> aide -
> > but they do not come cheap. but now my preference is for a 3d
> > microstation model that you can walk through. Better still if
> the
> > model is updated during construction using a stereo
> photogrammetry
> > technique. Helps a lot in resolving conflict or rerouting and
> having
> > as-built at the same time that are scalable. I can remember
some
> > instances where you dont even have to go to the field to
resolve
> a
> > clash between a piping and a heater super structure - group of
> > engineers just did a walk through using the monitor.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Lose 20 lbs by September 24th!
[IMAGE]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Received on Mon Jul 30 21:03:00 2001
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 04 2008 - 11:40:14 EST