Process drawing software SMART PID and AUTO CAD

SMART PID will replace AUTO CAD; AUTO CAD is merely a platform for drawing, while SMART PID is a professional tool. Once you start using SMART PID, you won’t use CAD anymore. Which design firm is that? They must be very wealthy

Have you used it upstairs? I’ve used it, and to be honest, it’s not useful at all, nor is it convenient; it wastes a lot of time. It is said that a pipeline index table can be generated automatically, but you have to enter the information into the computer one by one, and errors often occur; as a result, the table produced is in a messy state, requiring you to spend a lot of time correcting it. Not to mention that various problems often arise during the drawing process, requiring constant rework; more importantly, it’s not possible to copy and paste freely like in CAD. In a word, it’s not as good as the advertisement claims!

I’m on the 3rd floor; I don’t know which design institute you belong to. Just like 3D piping software such as PDS and PDMS, advanced tools are useful, but not always applicable in every situation. Saying such things only shows that your level of application is too shallow. You say it’s not effective and a waste of time; perhaps that’s because your projects are relatively small, and you didn’t use this software in the initial stages, instead drawing by following the drawings from AutoCad. Not every project is suitable for this software. You don’t yet have a clear understanding of chemical process design. This software is only time-saving for projects of a certain scale. If you input a large amount of information into the model at the initial stage, you will save time later on. You say, “The table generated in this way is still messy; it requires a lot of time on your part to make corrections.” ”It’s because you didn’t do planning in the early stage and there were no regulations for this project. You say, “Not to mention the various problems that often arise during the drawing process, the constant need to redo work, and more importantly, the inability to copy and paste freely like in CAD.” ”You don’t understand that what makes this software better than AutoCas is its database; you shouldn’t use copy and paste, but rather the assembly function. :handshake :handshake :handshake

I’m a beginner; it’s obvious that the person above is very skilled.

Is our project small? Is a project worth several billion considered small? I’d say I’m far more proficient in using it than you are. The copying method you mentioned is known to those who use it, but you don’t realize that it is precisely this copying method that causes conflicts between the visual representations and the data in the database, leading to errors. It’s said that this method can be integrated with PDS, thereby reducing the workload for downstream specialists who handle data import into PDS; unfortunately, this feature is not yet fully developed. As for the pipeline index table, the guy upstairs said it’s because you didn’t carry out planning in the early stages and because of the project’s specifications. You still don’t understand what the actual problems are. When creating a pipeline index table, if a pipeline contains control valve assemblies or elbows, those elements do not cause the pipeline to be listed as separate items; only changes in material grade do so. However, in SMART, when there are control valve assemblies, there are usually elbows before and after the control valves, which means that such a pipeline is divided into three separate pipelines. In that case, you need to combine these items into one entry in the generated index. Just such long main pipelines result in as many as a dozen of them in the generated index table. Another issue is related to the transmission of temperature-related properties during drawing; if you disconnect the connections, the properties will not be transmitted for sections of the same pipeline that are separated by fittings. If the connections remain intact, even if it’s not the same pipeline, the insulation properties will be automatically transmitted as long as they are connected together. There are many other minor issues with the details, but I won’t mention them. In short, everything you say is based on the assumption that everything is in order; from this perspective, this software does have its unique strengths and many advantages. However, doing anything isn’t just a matter of theory – achieving perfection isn’t as easy as you say; there’s still a long way to go! Furthermore, the fact that you can’t spot any problems only shows that you have limited experience with it; it’s only when you use it little that you fail to notice any issues, and thus you remain at the theoretical level, merely talking big. So, I suggest that guy use it more often; once he uses it frequently and gets familiar with it, he will be able to spot the problems. This post was last edited by maggie1978 on 2008-4-8 09:21]

I think SmartPID is still more useful; its functions are more powerful than those of AutoCAD. The main difference is that Smartpid is an object-oriented program, while Autocad is merely a drawing tool. The factory equipment and pipeline numbers generated by Smrtpid can be unique without repetition. For a large operating factory, Smartpid’s functionality as a database is far superior to that of CAD. At present, Smartpid is not yet connected to the ports of Intools, and the interfaces with the 3D models of pipelines are not fully developed. However, the software keeps being upgraded step by step; once it can connect to Intools for instruments as well as the pipeline model interfaces, it will make coordination between different technical fields much easier.

The discussions were wonderful; I hope we can all learn from each other and exchange ideas. We newcomers can also gain some knowledge from this; let’s not compete fiercely. Thank you

If anyone has information related to SMART PID, feel free to share it as well

If anyone has information related to SMART PID, they can share it; our institute also wants to adopt it. I’ll be responsible for drafting the relevant regulations, and it seems like the workload for the process engineering team will double or triple – it’s frustrating. In our design institute, process engineering is already considered second-rate!

I haven’t used this software; those who have experience can share their insights.