How accurate Plant 3D Catalog is???

[DJPiper]

Yesterday we have pulled out a bunch of Iso that are ready to be submitted for IFC. The reason, Checker found out that the SPECTACLE  BLINDS ARE THICKER THAN USUAL. So i Investigate and Found out that the catalog has a different dimension compared to ASME B16.48. For the benefit of the doubt because i trust Autodesk, i dig some more reference. From Vendor catalog, The internet and Even CADWorx Catalog and only to find out that Spec Blind in Plant 3D has the wrong thickness dimension (at least on 600Lb, and im still checking the other ratings)

I lost Face on this one. I told out my boss to ditch CADWorx and we go with plant 3D instead.

This my very first real Plant 3D Project and i almost lose my job.

of all those version releases, Improvements and somehow Autodesk forgot to clean their Catalog which is the very heart of their program.

How about clean it up and make your Catalog foolproof first, Instead of making Plant 3D Fancier?

Now I really have a big doubt on how accurate the component dimensions are.

Autodesk can you Please tell me which components i need to look at and change?

And Oh Please dont say everything....

Thanks!

[dgorsman]

Old saying: trust but verify.

Did you include B16.48 sections 4.3.1 and 5.2.2?  The raised face length and tolerances, respectively, can catch people if they aren't looking at those values.

[DJPiper]

Thanks man, Thats explain wheres the extra half inch is coming from. So I go back to my engineer and talk it over. And he said for the correctness of the model the Raised face should not be included for the total length. He explained that there are really no one using it. yes its available but more expensive. plus there are no extra benefit of doing that. i guess that's why some major references does not include the extra RF dimension, like PIPE DATA PRO, and other 3D Software Catalog. Just a precaution for other user, Check if you want to include the face or not.