Sipbuilder Moving to 3D [Archive]

stephen gibson

05-01-2007, 08:03 AM

Thanks for the reply,

shipconstructor looks expensive for larger vessels and doesnt appear to do fitout such as cabinets etc. Ideally we would like to use just 1 software to do everything but cant find it... we are planning to do all of the structure with a ship specific software, that will give us our cutting lists, flat patterns etc, then import it into a 3d modeller to do everything else.

Crag Cay

05-01-2007, 08:36 AM

I think any solid modeller that will allow collaborative effort in projects as complex as your vessels, is going to be expensive in purchase, training and on going maintenance.

I work at the design end of the construction process with MaxSurf, but have noticed the increased use of Dassault products to compliment both Ship Constructor when working with metal boats and also as a stand alone with composite construction where its reliable component definition guarantees reliable interior and systems planning.

Andrew Mason

05-01-2007, 10:17 AM

Stephen

if you're building any kind of metal boat ShipConstructor is all you should require. ShipConstructor is both modular and scalable, it has modules for structure, piping, HVAC as well as outfitting. Each module has price levels based on the number of parts that can be used; you can start out with a low-cost module, and as your needs increase you can pay more and increase the number of parts the module can handle.

ShipConstructor works within AutoCAD and pieces of equipment such as cabinets (or engines, pumps, winches, anchors etc.) can be created with standard AutoCAD tools, so there should be no need for further solid modelling tools.

Hope this helps

lazeyjack

05-01-2007, 03:48 PM

Raggi_Thor

05-01-2007, 06:20 PM

ShipConstructor is very efficient if you know some AutoCAD.
While many other solid modellers can do much of the same, they don't come with suggested setup or work flow or methodology.

stephen gibson

05-02-2007, 03:34 AM

Im from an Inventor background and have done a few boats with this software. I have also done a lot of 3d AutoCAD on mega yachts but did not find it that easy, (back in 2001, the top of the range machines struggled with the size of models, this may be better now)

compared to inventor, (or other mid range 3d package) ship constructor and autocad look cumbersome, both in the modelling and navigating your way round the model.

we have ruled out high end packages such as Cadds5 and Catia because of the cost, and speaking to others, training and useability.

Ideally i would like to do just the hull and shell expansion with a ship package and everything else with Inventor, but its hard to convince others that this is the way to go...

Crag Cay

05-02-2007, 04:11 AM

Speak to Andrew Mason (details above), as his program 'Workshop' might fit into the set up you suggest.

stephen gibson

05-02-2007, 04:42 AM

i lived in fremantle for a bit, working for Austal ships. Ive been trying to catch my old boss to quiz him, but by the time I get to work in the UK hes on his way home in Oz. Ill try to get an email off to Mr Mason,

thanks

Raggi_Thor

05-02-2007, 04:58 AM

Stephen, you don't need the part numbering and the database that come wth ShipConstructor?
I have sold Alibre+Rhino to some builders of smaller boats, 30 feet fishing boats.

Arvy

05-02-2007, 05:37 AM

What about MasterSHIP, it does all construction, fairing, piping, HVAC, Electrical, numerical cutting code generation all from within AutoCad in a single package. It is holland based with support centers around the world.

Take a look at www.mastership.nl

Grtz,
Arvy

Andrew Mason

05-03-2007, 08:02 AM

Stephen

To give you a bit of background regarding ShipConstructor, using the software is totally different to using native AutoCAD 3D, so don't judge Shipconstructor based on your previous experience.

Although programs such as Solidworks, CATIA and Inventor are seductive, the reality is that they don't have the specialist tools and shipbuilding oriented workflow that you require. If you were to use one of these programs you would find that you took significantly longer to create production output and using ShipConstructor.

Regarding Workshop, there is little or no overlap between Workshop and Shipconstructor. Workshop does preliminary structural design, allowing you to rapidly produce the major structural elements for a vessel in a parametric manner. Shipconstructor does detailed structural design and production output, so the two products are complementary rather than competitors.

Raggi_Thor

05-03-2007, 08:21 AM

I strongly agree with Andrew Mason above.
I like Inventor and worked with it for five years, after 10 years of AutoCAD and Mechanical Desktop.
What you need is automation!
Mid range (and low cost :-) solid modelers may look great for simple tasks, but you will have to work out your own methodology, and they are often hard to automate.

stephen gibson

05-03-2007, 10:20 AM

I hear what you guys are saying but im not sure i want to go back to the crappy graphics and poor performance.

I have done a lot of skeletal modelling with inventor and feel that the workflows i create will be better than the existing ones in shipconstructor, (taylored directly to our needs rather than a half hearted attempt to please everyone). except for the shell expansion, i think that i could do almost everything better and more efficiently.

at the end of the day, shipconstructor is just autocad programmed to do additional tasks. if the base program was better, (a real 3d modeller) then im sure there would be no contest.

sorry if this sound brash, but i have to go to a meeting tomorrow and justify reasons im including and discounting software, (with objections im sure from other members of the company).

i am thankful and appretiate everyones help

Andrew Mason

05-03-2007, 11:41 AM

suggest you have a look at this list (http://www.shipconstructor.com/documents/userlist/06-09_User_List.pdf), particularly the Australian users, and ask yourself what these companies know that you don't.

There is plenty of information at http://www.shipconstructor.com/productsandsolutions/main.html, particularly in the downloads section, suggest you have a good look, you may find that your preconceptions are preventing you from seeing the best solution.

Raggi_Thor

05-03-2007, 07:48 PM

I am not a great fan of AutoCAD or Autodesk, but AutoCAD has improved in this area lately, acad 2007 and 2008.
When you buy Inventor you also get AutoCAD :-)
So, go for Inventor and try out ShipConstructor...

acearch72

05-03-2007, 10:27 PM

Seems to me that you have your mind made up so why ask for others opinions? What these guys have said about Ship Constructor is right on. There are certainly 'sexier' programs out there, but none more effective for designing a boat. I have been through the Tribon, Foran, CADDS 5, Nupas full evaluations and settled on Ship Constructor, because at the end of the day it is how much work is produced not how flashy it looks on the screen. Also, the training curve for new SC users is almost nothing compared to the 'high end' programs because any Autocad user is automatically familar with the basis of the system. And Autocad users are easier to find, and cheaper to hire, than the more 'sexy' high end system drivers.

So my advice is if you want a 'sexy' looking product that you can facinate your secetary with as to how smart you are, then go for the high end stuff. But if you want to impress your boss with how much productive work you are producing, then you should go with ship constructor.

My $.02 on the subject.

Raggi_Thor

05-04-2007, 03:51 AM

Right!
I think Inventor (and probably others of the kind) demand a lot of clicking and navigation in dialogs even for the simplest task, wading through parts planes and sketches before you can do the thing you need to do. SC and acad is much more direct, much faster, and you maintain a useful database with all parts in the boat. How you are going to make that database in Inventor, I don't know. I could program a solution for you in VBA, that will cost the same as three licenses of CS :-)

stephen gibson

05-04-2007, 04:42 AM

Andrew, the amount of companies using software is a good indication of the quality of the software but not conclusive. how many companies use windows OS? most including mine, does that mean it is the best? doubtful.

acearch72, my mind is not made up, i have strong ideas in which direction i would like to go but am trying to learn from others experience. having a "flashy" screen is not the issue, being able to navigate around you model and look at the part you are interested in quickly does not seem that easy with shipconstructor. also, once you are used to good graphics its awful returning to crap, imagine having to go from a 21" LCD screen back to a 15" CRT.

Raggi, Inventor is faster than autocad, both 2d and 3d, is more customizable to remove repetative tasks. you could program, (with no need for programming language) inventor to build a whole boat from an exel spreadsheet. as for the database, vault comes free with inventor which also acts as a drawing tracking database. if you wanted to get really clever and link other departments such as purchasing and marketing, productstream would be your choice.

at the moment, shipconstructor shipcam is looking good for the hull which is about as far as ive got. I understand that there have been massive changes in the programming architecture for 2008 release, due autumn. also migrating projects between releases seems to be a problem, we were told that anything we did on 2005, they would have to look at to see if it was POSSIBLE to migrate to 2006... this is rather worrying

thanks again for taking the time to reply to my post

Raggi_Thor

05-04-2007, 04:53 AM

Stephen, it's an interesting discussion :-)
Inventor is not usefull for hull design, because you have little control over curvature and not an easy listing of hydrostatics and hull parameters.
So I suppose you get the hull from somewhere else, so it's not parametric.

I haven't used Inevntor or SC for the while, just tested Inventor 11 and found that I could do the trial excercise faster in Alibre :-)

With database I mean automatic numbering of parts for example, and automatic output of shop drawings and semiautomatic nesting. In small projects I have found that I nest better myself than nesting programs that costs 10.000USD.

You mention one big problem with all AutoCAD add ons, they can't keep track with all the new versions from Autodesk...

stephen gibson

05-04-2007, 08:37 AM

yes, Autodesk release too many versions too quickly. they are trying to push everyone onto subscription and to justify this they release a new version of software every year. this is a major PITA for 3rd party developers and most users alike. autocad is not too bad because you can backward save but there is no such function in inventor, (or most other 3d modellers)

with inventor we tended to upgrade every 2 years and just leave the middle version sitting on the shelf. we would usually wait for at least service pack 1, a few months after the initial release.

it would be nice if one of these ship type software developers bought the kernal licence and developed there own software instead of riding on the back of software they have no control over. rhino started of like this and is one of the reasons they are able to be so cheap. when i was at uni rhino educational was free, i dont know nowdays

Raggi_Thor

05-04-2007, 08:49 AM

295 USD/Euro for Rhino EDU now, I think.
It's abit too much, I think.

davidjgray

05-21-2008, 12:01 PM

Hi Chaps

I am at the point of committing to a 3D system to take my Maxsurf models from surfaces, to being able to fully fit out the structure and interior in 3D. I am happy to keep Workshop doing the plate expansions.

Now I have looked at Shipconstructor and never really took to it. I was quite hopeful that CATIA's new venture into the yacht 3D software would be good, but when I eventually managed to get a try at it, found it very non-intuitive - so struggled to achieve anything useful. I am useing AutoCAD Inventor 2008 just now on a 30day trial and achieving some good results for a very square dredger design we are working on. I get some simple stress analysis tools, and find it very easy to use. However, I have no idea how to, for example, import an iges hull, set up a standard frame, and make multiple copies of that frame that adjust themselves to the shape of the hull as they are copied forward. I can see that trying to make up the internal structure of even a simple hull in Inventor could become very laborious. If anyone has some suggestions, then I would like to hear from them.

David Gray, Ace Marine Ltd, Limekilns, Fife, Scotland

Ed Glowacki

05-28-2008, 10:19 AM

David,

I have had Inventor for years with the intention of unleashing its power into the marine design field. Up to this point I have used the reasoning (excuse) that I am too busy keeping up with ongoing business to stop and retool our design process to involve Inventor.

Our current process typically begins with MultiSurf for design and weight control, followed by AutoCAD for detailed design. Throw in some GHS for stability analysis, Algor for FEA as required and NavCad for performance prediction and that's what our process has looked like for some time.

Although Inventor is (figuratively speaking) gathering dust while we keep turning over projects, I still maintain my desire to one-day shift hull structure and outfitting over to it. There was a time in the late eighties when our first version of AutoCAD was sitting around, waiting to be fully utilized while we still were doing drawings by hand on the boards. Just as AutoCAD grew to become invaluable over time, I expect solid modeling to take over in our office. I just need to apply some discipline to make it happen sooner rather than later.

As you seem to be on a similar road regarding Inventor, I would appreciate any anecdotal experiences you may have to share in the future, even to the extent of scrapping the effort, if it came to that. Please keep in touch.

Regards,
Ed

Edmund Glowacki, P.E.
Naval Architect

GLOWACKI ENGINEERING
1835 East West Parkway, Suite 10
Orange Park, Florida 32003 USA

(904) 278-8870 ph
(904) 278-8826 fx
ed@glowackiengineering.com

alidesigner

06-15-2008, 02:23 AM

I use Maxsurf for lines creation and then take the hull shape to Solidworks for everything else, except hull plate development which I do in Workshop.

Solidworks is not much more expensive than Autocad and it comes with a product called dwg editor which is almost identical to Autocad (same commands, look etc) so you get 2 for 1. It also comes with Cosmos FEA and a basic CFD modeller.

Many will say that these mid range cad packades are no good for boats. That's just not true. Have a look at this you tube video by Westport. They use Solidworks for Motor Yachts and are happy to promote it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9c5QHGuNu0

I find that my rework has reduced dramatically as drawings are linked to model changes and I can even change hull shapes with minimal rework by simply rolling the model back and replacing the imported surface.

You have the option to use parametics if you want or you can turn it off if you dont which gives a smaller file size. You can create an assembley structure that mirrors your build sequence and it can be altered and re-ordered at any time.

Another great feature is that changes can be undone at any time, even days later, by just editing the feature tree, unlike Autocad where the undo command is restricted to the one session.

And of course it's well suited to mechanical items such as shafts, couplings, rudders etc. It's easy to learn. I did one 4 hour training session, did the tutorials that come with it and that's about it. There's also plenty of books on Amazon on how to use it.

Good luck with your evaluation.