My company is currently trying to link Autocad P&ID with the Plant 3D. Not validate but have them linked so all the information stored in the P&ID such as tank capacity, tag, voltage, etc. is passed onto the Plant 3D model. We are also trying have these properties imported from Vault.
Clash detection is a vital part of 3D design. In the Plant systems elements are typically displayed with representative objects only. This can lead to errors when performing clash detection and ultimately expensive field reworking.
What I think should be added to Plant 3D is the ability to add shapes to all components at the catalogue level to provide administrator level control of default clearances. For example valve maintenance and actuator operating clearances, exchanger coil removal clearances, service access to equipment, clearance objects for space around ladders and platforms to confirm operator access. If added to a catalogue these could be dynamic, taking the diameter of a hand wheel for example and adding hand clearance, so if the wheel diameter is changed the clearance adjusts to suit, or similar clearance features for swing type valve actuators (lever).
In addition to the administration level control it would be great to be able to manually add basic shapes to the model and then be able to “convert to a clearance object”. This would allow designers to factor in any space need to be kept clear easily and would lessen the need for high volumes of administrator added spaces. For example pedestrian clearances in pipe racks or even spaces reserved for future expansion.
These elements should be very simple transparent shapes that should be able to be toggled on and off (similar to the insulation).
I have attached a basic model to demonstrate some options as an example. There are also two PDF’s with details to make viewing easier. Please not the model has been exported to AutoCAD so there are no proxy objects. Clearance objects are all on a single layer.
We do we not have Endline instruments. The big advantage would be that the instruments like pressure measurement could be there. (They sit typical
at the end of a line). The general instrument symbols can not be mapped to 3D.
I can have default values there and I can use the acquisition methode for general instrument symbols to transport information to these symbols too.
Today both instrument and signal have to be drawn with "general Symbols" and the acquisition is not possible.
There is a difference between an physical instrument and a signal bubble. So it would be a big help if this would be possible to differ in Autodesk
P&ID too. From the graphical side yes the symbols are maybe the same. But the information engineers need are completely different. Reporting is
There are two way's which are possible for me to make life easier:
1. The best would be an own Endline instrument class. (no rotation of bubble like in general instruments).
2. remove the rotation of the bubbles inside the inline instrument class. Then I could place all my instruments in this class as use
the acquisition method to transport information from the instrument to the signal bubble. Mapping would we possible for 3D.
When creating orthographic views positioned in an isometric view perspective (current view option) the placed dimensions are incorrect. The workaround is similar to isometric drawings where the dimension text override must be used to manually key in the actual dimension from the model.
I would like to have consistent dimensions on all drawings including across continuation drawings.
When a valve or a fitting is on the same Isometric it is dimensioned to the IP point and connecting lines are dimensioned to the centerline of the connecting pipeline, but when there is a continuation drawing the dimensions finish at the end of a pipe or fitting, as a rule you do not terminate a dimension at a welded or screwed joint.
The attached image explains this better
Project may has many files. And when user validate project, program scans all these files. But in some cases user needs to compare just one 3D model and just one P&ID drawing, and he is not interested in other files, but program takes a lot time for checking all project's Models and P&IDs.
So it would be useful if user could select 3D Models and P&IDs to compare them.
When creating grating, the Hatch Scale no longer works. You set it to 64" and when the grating is created it is at a 5" scale and you have to fix it in the Properties palette. This use to work correctly but has not in 2016 or 2017 including 2017.1
Also, even though others have put this in the past it still has not been added, We need the ability to add a hole to grating and plate. You can do this in AutoCAD Architecture and AutoCAD MEP but not in Plant.
If a valve is set in the P&ID with a flanged end connection, then when inserting the valve from a P&ID Line List it should place a Flanged Valve. If the end connection on the P&ID list is set to butt weld then the P&ID Line List should place a butt weld valve.
Currently it defaults to a butt weld valve no matter what when using an out of the box spec like CS300 or CS150.
Changing line numbers in the P&ID even after using the P&ID line list to draw from does not effect the 3D model. The lines must be manually changed. The ability to push that data from the P&ID to the Plant 3D database would save time and remove some chance for error.
The insertion routines should recognize specs made from the custom parts spec or the placeholder spec and allow components placed from those specs to adopt the spec of the line they are on.
Right now, if the spec is not named custom parts or placeholder, the program will try to find connecting components like flanges in the current spec and not the spec of the line the item is being placed on. For example, I created an instruments spec to hold control valves, but when a valve is placed, flanges are not found in the instrument spec.
The ContentType property from the Repository Desriptor field can be used to see whether to allow adopting the spec when placed or not.
I would like to see the ability to have an instrumentation class in the spec editor. Currently there are ways to do it, but they are convoluted and a very manual process. I think there is enough demand to add it as a category so it is there by default. The blocks exist for instrumentation, why not have a category for it.
This is the way currently:
It is a common request from my students and client. Can we do pipe analysis within Plant 3D.
We need Autodesk to provide analytic tool within Plant 3D for pressure, stress, loads (supports) and particle projections.
The ability to analyse the different valve position, pump status scenarios, etc.
Live updates, changes made in the analysis tool reflected back in the model.
Reporting available in dashboard and graphic formats.
Can have Autodesk add to Plant 3D a tool or method to add Jacketed Piping Systems.
Sometimes when laying out drawings it becomes necessary to move an already created view to another sheet. If you have already spent time creating the view and "cleaning it up" you lose that time investment. I would like to see a tool that allows the user to easily move or copy already created views between drawings.
You are able to xref Navisworks underlays into a Plant model but they won't be shown in the ortho views. It will be great if this will be changed.
It should be possible to establish a direct link between:
A Dimension of a parametric part-definition (for example “L” on the left side or “G2” on the right side) and
A property (class definition) that can be used by the report-creator resp. the data-manager.
If the dimension of the parametric part (that is already part of the piping) is modified the property of the part should also update.
This would be very useful for generating additional information for the manufacturer. For example it would be possible to generate automatically additional texts on the isometric drawings with the gap of a guide-support or the length of a pipe-hanger.
This link should also be possible for parts that are created by a custom python-script (as shown on the right side of the picture).
The "Length" property does not populate for Pipe supports. It should be replicating the dimension "L".
See attached image showing missing field data.
Note: this field does populate for structural members.
Please review our Idea guidelines and best practices before posting a new idea, or voting on an existing one!