I have been using plant 3D for the first time on a
My main point of frustration with the program is t
Considering that program is a piping program I fin
Then there is the situation where you want to join 2 disconnected items; you run the "di" command and everything is in alignment - but when you try connect them you get the error "ports need to adjacent". Then you try selecting one item by the node you wish to connect, then move the item to the port you wish to connect to by selecting the node again. You would think that things would have to be in alignment now and work, but you still get the same error message.... Very frustrating indeed.
Other problems experienced with the program:
Another problem I have is with not being able to p
Then there are valve tags. You can tag a valve, th
Then we have the isometric production. What's the
Then we have the BOM... Can someone advise how the
Then the orthographic production. The program is i
Overall the program is "useable" and I know that s
I have used this program for 8 months now and I share your frustration with many of the listed errors.
In Plant 3D 2012, I also experienced that "force iso into one sheet" was useless and it kept creating about 10-15 different iso drawings from a simple pipeline, literally creating a separate iso for every straight pipe segment, elbow, tee and so on. But in Plant 3D 2013 things are a bit better and I have managed to get isos on one sheet.
im batteling the adjacent port saga at the moment
when you do the di command, make sure your units are maxed out on the decimal places...I usually find that they are ...eg from model
Distance = 0.00002259, Angle in XY Plane = 227.2908, Angle from XY Plane =
Delta X = -0.00000993, Delta Y = -0.00001076, Delta Z = -0.00001721
This usually happens on sloped lines.
A pipeline can be modeled, fully connected and iso'ed.
Then down the track when a change may be needed to a note or some such, then certain parts of the line suddenly become problamatic
I believe it may be a rounding issue, so for pipes that follow the x, y and z directions, its not an issue as autocad isnt doing any calculations to control the endpoints, however when lines are sloped in the vert and skewed in plan, there is some possible rounding going on.
I know in one of the xml's there is a section about node location tolerance but when i tested it in 2011 it didnt actually do anything.
So, I'm going to try to pull out your key questions.
1. Precision - I agree we need a way to tell plant what degree of precision we want for the ports to be adjacent.
2. UCS - in 2013, you can modify the ucs by selecting it and then dragging the axis in the direction/plane you need.
3. Parametrically placed supports - I know in 2013, they modified the support insertion to include more options for dimension input. I don't know if this addresses your problem or not?
4. Losing valve tags - I am not able to duplicate this issue. How many people do you have working on your project?
5. BOM description - You can configure which field is shown in the BOM under your BOM Table settings. The second tab has an option to choose the Long Description Family or the Long Description Size. You can also use a long description style which builds the description from the properties of the component.
6. Isometric orientation - I agree we need a way to specify an elevation offset. I've requested that they also allow us to specify the offsets in the style so that we don't have to do it in the advanced settings.
7. Isometric splitting - We've had a lot of issues with this, I'm not sure that anyone knows what is causing the problem, only that the splitting needs to happen better.
8. Bolts - There has been a post on bolts, but I can't remember where the link is for the white paper on it.
9. Ortho - We have given a lot of feedback on the orthos, I'd like to see what gets missed on your orthos. I haven't had those particular problems myself.
With regard to precision you can change pricision for connection types for both offset amount and angle edit the DefaultConnectorsConfig.xml
Change the red number to suit the pricison you want, you will need to change all the different join types you may want to have different amounts for different types of fixing (welded items may have larger amount of freedom compared to screwed.)
that was what i was talking about in my post
the code is there in the xml, but does it actually do anything ? (back in 2011, it did nothing)
can someone test
i see you changed yours to 2
what does that mean? does that mean that the ports can be 2units (mm or inch??) away from each other and still connect
I cannot see that this issue from last year has been resolved.
I made the recommended changes to the buttweld joint section in the DefaultConnectorConfig.xml. I then spent a lot of time trying to build a piping model with flanges that are skewed with respect to the centerline of the pipe to which they attach. No luck!
Is there anything else I need to do to get Plant 3D to relax the colinearity constraints?
This is a real-life scenario where an existing piping installation is to be modified. A laser-scanned model of the existing installiation provides location, rotation, and tilt of the existing flanges to which new piping is to be connected.
The fabricator delivers complete spools that fit directly into the installation without any site welding.
The project deliverables are piping isometrics for new piping with corresponding annotation and dimensioning for flange tilt and rotations.
Any new information will be greatly appreciated.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register