Why is it PDMS instead of PDS?
Thread Content
In my opinion, PDMS is primarily a software used in the design of power plants, while for the design of chemical plants, PDS is definitely the best choice. Its proportion in all 3D chemical plant designs is estimated to be between 70% and 75%
For software applications, rather than looking at past usage rates, it’s better to consider the overall performance. After all, PDS has been in use for quite some time, and a substantial amount of experience has been accumulated. I’ve dealt with both PDS and PDMS to some extent, and in my opinion PDMS is relatively more user-friendly. Every time PDS is used, the regional settings need to be adjusted, which is troublesome ； There are so many commands; it’s overwhelming ； The space is divided into 4 sections, and I feel that a 19\" monitor isn’t enough either ； When it comes to extracting single wires and producing composite materials, PDMS is not inferior to PDS. In PDS, working with reference models and extracting individual lines also requires considerable effort ； Gently drag PDMS, and for a single line, just click one command. Of course, PDMS also has its shortcomings; for example, it’s a bit tricky to locate the BOP. But I believe that if you have used both software, you’ll prefer having multiple m’s. This post was last edited by bht11 on 2008-4-30 11:02]
I feel that LZ doesn’t understand PDMS at all; once you really learn about PDMS, you’ll naturally understand why so many people prefer to use it over PDS.
In the petrochemical sector, PDS is still more commonly used.
Comparison content: PDS vs PDMS data structures: File/database; 3D database models. Open structure: Fixed database; user-defined. Backward compatibility: Partial; full. Database portability: No; Yes. Access control: Single user; Multiple users. Application environment: System-oriented; engineering-based. Data hierarchy: Only non-graphical data can be stored; Both types are supported. 3D entity interactive rendering display: Not possible; Possible. GUI definition: Difficult; Easy. Command input: Complex command format; Simple and easy to learn. Vocabulary: Partial; Full. User-defined data: Unlimited; Possible. Device macro instruction library: None; Available. Number of user-defined parts: Limited; Unlimited. Interactive rendering design: Not possible; Possible. Layering: 256 layers; 32,767 layers. Identifiers: Restricted; Unrestricted. Automatic scale markers: No; Yes
However, nowadays most chemical engineering design projects use PDS, while the application of PDMS is less widespread……
PDMS is generally used in power plant design
I still prefer PDMS; it seems to have very powerful functions
Is it childcare? From what I know, everyone is using PDS
Our company uses both, but PDMS is easier to use than PDS
It probably depends on which software the company uses, as well as which one one is more familiar with. The more you use a particular software, the more convenient and straightforward it will seem, haha