The PDM Blackhole and coming storm
September 21st, 2009
What’s going on? For many companies, it seems like there is a blackhole at the center of the 3D CAD universe. That blackhole is data management, often referred to by the letters “PDM”. PDM is product data management, which is an application
that stores, tracks, and controls product definition data sets, often in the form of a vault which organizes CAD files and their relationships. In the past, many attempts to fill that PDM Blackhole have been half-hearted, half-supported, and even half-baked.
A decade ago within the SolidWorks realm, there were such players as Agileworks (aka Activault) and PDMWorks (aka SolidWorks Workgroup PDM). The news about Activault? There’s some activity, but I fear it is too little, too late. It’s not dead, but it sure looks like it is still on life support. The news about PDMWorks? Rumor has it that its plug will be pulled, and sooner than many might expect (or want). From what I’ve seen in recent “education” activities hosted by SolidWorks Corp, they are already writing it off. Their VARs have taken the hint, and are rapidly trying to get people on Enterprise PDM.
It would seem that SolidWorks Corp is hoping that no one notices when PDMWorks will no longer be supported. So, the big news with SolidWorks in the PDM field is Enterprise PDM! They are pushing it as though it is the only game in town. There are problems with this forced perception.
Out of the box, Enterprise PDM does not talk to any PLM’s. Take a guess as to who are developing methods to get Enterprise PDM talking to PLMs? Well, again, rumor has it that SolidWorks Corp is working on this. However, they may be a bit behind the curve. There are others who are already putting packages together to fill this gap, and these will likely be to market before SolidWorks Corp brings anything forward. But that’s not the biggest news, er.. I mean rumors.
Oracle is taking PDM very seriously these days. The new Agile PLM 9.3 has a familiar module called Agile Engineering Collaboration, and according to some sources, it actual works now. This means that Agile customers who use SolidWorks and other 3D CAD applications (and there are a lot) can now store files in a fully functional vault that is directly linked with their PLM (namely, Agile PLM). Why would any Agile customer need Enterprise PDM if Agile Engineering Collaboration works even halfway as promised? This might also be asked in regard’s to SAP’s PDM offering to its customers.
More bad news..er..again, I mean rumors for Enterprise PDM. It isn’t supported by SolidWorks Corp’s parent company at all. Dassault Systemes has its own PDM and PLM applications. Some have noticed that they seem to be actively standardizing their PDM applications to one core program. With the continued integration of SolidWorks Corp with Dassault Systemes, and the continued effort by Dassault Systemes to standardize their PDM offerings, what does the future look like for Enterprise PDM?
My fear, given the rumors (and not any actual confirmed facts), is that Enterprise PDM may end up being treated the same way as PDMWorks. Customers that faithfully “upgraded” to Enterprise PDM may find themselves having to “upgrade” yet again within relatively short time to Dassault Systemes’s preferred PDM package. If this scenario were to happen, that would require customers to undergo a mind-numbing number of upgrade cycles that can potentially put the user at risk of not only loosing valuable data in each vault transfer, but also valuable time being spent to support all these vault redoes. And if Dassault Systemes’s solution is sold as yet another “upgrade” (as opposed to being included with the subscription service), the customer has the potential to lose a lot of money too.
Granted, Agile is not cheap…not by any stretch of the imagination. However, if they are going to play ball, I’m sure price structure will come in-line to better compete. Also, they are going forward with one solution. The stability offered by this option may be worth a small premium.
And what else? These aren’t the only games in town. Any one who’s looked under the PDM/PLM heading in the SolidWorks Gold Partners listing knows that there is something going on in the industry. A storm of competition seems to be forming at this very moment. There are other major players that have yet to scratch the surface in the U.S., but they are coming, and with a vengeance.
Given this all this potential (good and bad), how will the customer fair as they navigate into this PDM Storm? To some, it might seem wise to wait on any major PDM purchases or implementations for about 12 to 18 months (if one can wait that long), just to see how things develop. Others might suggest diving in right now to commit to the SolidWorks offerings. Will SolidWorks Corp provide a viable PDM roadmap of solutions for its customer base, and does that include Enterprise PDM for a long time to come? Will they be able to effectively compete? How committed is Dassault Systemes to SolidWorks’ customers and the solutions presented by SoildWorks Corp? Or, should SolidWorks customers seek PDM solutions offered directly by Dassault Systemes? These are just some of the questions that need to be addressed very soon.
This blog entry provides a PDM definition where PDM define, and PDM defined.
Categories: CAD Mngmt, News, PDM, PLM | Tags: Agile, Agile EC, data management, DBWorks, Enterprise PDM, keytech PLM, PDM Blackhole, PDM defined, PDM definition, PDM Storm
Matthew I had a few process/usage questions for you. When in the development process do you think the average user starts checking stuff in? Our data says this is about 90%, meaning they check-in at the very end. I know this is not the proposed approach but this is what we are finding in practice… what have you found? Also do you think the ERP system is a ok/fine/exceptable place to check this stuff into or should it be in a seperate application? Also do you think the ERP system really needs to CAD data or is it perfectly ok to have just a visual there? Vuuch has proposed there is a new market that we are calling people centric PLM!
Chris, my opinions about your questions:
1. In my experience, PDM works best when stages of designs are checked as completed. I think waiting to the very end of a whole design isn’t a good use of the application, and could actually waste time, as well as not being very collabrative.
2. ERP are usually not able to hold 3D CAD data intelligently enough to make it useful as a collabrative tool. Also, since most ERP’s store files flatly (no links maintained between files), they may actually destroy product definition created from the external links within 3D CAD files.
3. PDF files are the industry standard, and now that 3D PDF format is becoming more common, reference to the 3D CAD source files once a design is released is less necessary. This improves audits as there are no reason for an auditor to dive into the PDM vault because all the information they want to see is in the PLM/ERP. Besides that, the last thing anyone needs an auditor asking is “What is a broken external link?”
Chris,
Your question touches upon what I feel is the real distinction between PDM/TDM and PLM. PDM/TDM is a tool for collaboration amongst engineers. As such, it should capture changes made to your product during the design phase. As soon as your design needs to be looked at by another engineer, you should check it in to PDM. PLM on the other hand is for collaboration amongst various roles within the enterprise (e.g. engineering, production, quality, purchasing, etc…). Likewise, your design should be checked in to PLM as soon as another group outside of engineering needs to take action on your design. Do you need to have physical prototypes ordered for your design as part of the vetting process? If so, that should likely be a step in your product approval workflow in PLM.
Interesting Blog; First I can say Workgroup is not going away but it is no secret the bulk of effort is going into Enterprise PDM. It makes sense for the VARs to focus on this as they continue to serve their installed base. This is the SolidWorks of PDM for a majority of the SolidWorks base. I say majority because some have found reasons to look at other offerings (PLM for example).
To suggest that Enterprise PDM is a temp solution and DS will come in with an Enovia offering is quite a statement. You may want to bring this question with you to Anaheim however over 1,500 companies to date have signed up for this technology.
Rest assured, working with ERP solutions is alive & well with EPDM enabling that ever present question of “Can it talk to my ERP system?”
Yes, a very interesting blog indeed.
For years there has been a gap in communication between PDM and PLM (ERP/MRP) systems that has only been addressed by fully encompassed solutions or by custom programming conduits. Most PLM level systems are not releasing new technology at the same rate as the PDM/CAD tools in the market so integrating these technology can lead to some issues when it comes to updates and new technologies.
When solutions are all encompassing, the typically are less integrated in the CAD tool and the custom conduits, although usually custom tailored to address the specific system are not resilient to updates or changes.
Going the route that SolidWorks EPDM is currently going, I believe, is the best long term route since they export and import an open standard (XML). This allows each system to bring in this data any way and parse it to keep both systems up to date, eliminating the data entry and duplicate efforts many of us in Engineering have faced. Having import and export rules that can do “folder monitoring” can allow PDM and PLM to standalone and be maintained separately without effecting integration. EPDM could enhance this by allowing other formats like CSV and a way to massage the items in the XML further to make the “talking” process easier but overall I think it is the best direction as the industry marches forward.
[...] a recent article, I expressed concerns about the current state of PDM, especially for SolidWorks. There were [...]