Parasolid takes over Detroit

I am no expert of the CAD scene in Motor City, and so a reader (wishing to remain anon.) explains that parts suppliers might actually be happy with the fiat from Fiat mandating Chrysler switch from Dassault's Catia to Siemens' NX:

I'm not sure how much of a pushback there will be, if any, from the suppliers. GM and Ford use UG [NX] already; no Catia at Chrysler means the suppliers have one less system to deal with -- and a very expensive system, too.

What this means: Detroit is all Parasolid-based now. Inventor is probably safe, but I won't bet much on other ACIS-based systems.

MotoCity going mono-culture could eliminate the need for third-parties that write translators.
 
[As for the Fiat 500, here's my opinion: its styling is too ugly to succeed in North America.]

Comments

[Marc G]

Inventor has nothing to do in there. Autodesk has one product near the auto industry; Alias.

[RobiNZ]

Ugly? Most think it's too "cute"

Besides, ugly cars sell well in America. Look at what Detroit mostly made...

[Bill]

Ford currently uses CatiaV5 in addition to Teamcenter and Ideas (NX).
So suppliers will not be dumping Catia anytime soon let alone Catia is used by Toyota, Daimler, VW, Honda, and others

[Allan]

FYI Ford mandate JT as their interchange format

[Allan]

...and another thing (most see) the 500 is a work of art based on the old (1957-1975) model but designed/developed/manufactured with modern engineering technologies and specs. My wife also thinks it's great and indeed Fiat must be doing something right...see stats vs. last year in Europe on http://tinyurl.com/32ho6m6

[Bob]

As a former product development exec at a major Tier 1 supplier I can tell you that quite the opposite is true. Suppliers have standardized on a single system CATIA V5 and even do GM work in CATIA when possible. I have already heard complaints from every supplier I talk to about having to purchase new software for no good reason. Chrysler is going to pay thru the nose for this change.

[Anon]

>Ford mandate JT as their interchange format

Data exchange success rate is defined by how you convert geometry. JT geometry definitions follow Parasolid, so for all practical purposes JT *is* Parasolid.

Bob:
>Suppliers have standardized on a single system CATIA V5

That is interesting. Is it true for Chrysler suppliers, or GM and Ford suppliers as well?

What is actually used at Ford for CAD, CATIA or NX/Unigraphics?

[Stan]

Original CATIA decision for vehicle engineering in 2000. In 2006 - "Ford Designates CATIA V5 as Global Design and Engineering Standard for All New Vehicle Development; Reinforces Commitment to IBM and Dassault Systemes' PLM Solutions for New Product Development," which added powertrain, replacing I-deas.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Ford+Designates+CATIA+V5+as+Global+Design+and+Engineering+Standard...-a0148688290