Catari 将 PON CAD 与 BricsCAD 集成，实现高效脚手架设计
技术
- 平台即服务 (PaaS) - 应用开发平台
适用功能
- 产品研发
用例
- 虚拟原型与产品测试
关于客户
Catari Indústria SA 是一家总部位于葡萄牙的公司，40 多年来一直致力于设计和制造金属脚手架解决方案。该公司在其设计部门使用 BricsCAD Pro 以及 PON CAD（一种 BricsCAD BRX 应用程序）。项目工程师 Marcelo Magalhães 在位于 Vale de Cambra 的总部负责脚手架项目的设计、分析和成本估算。该公司以其简化设计流程的能力而自豪，从读取客户提供的文件到开发 3D 模型，再到为脚手架项目创建成本估算。
挑战
Catari Indústria SA 是一家总部位于葡萄牙的公司，在设计和制造金属脚手架解决方案方面拥有 40 多年的经验，该公司正在寻求简化其设计流程。该公司在其设计部门使用了大约 15 个席位的 BricsCAD Pro，以及 PON CAD（由意大利乌迪内的 MEC CAD 构建的 BricsCAD BRX 应用程序）。然而，该公司正在寻找增强其工作流程的方法，从读取客户提供的文件到开发 3D 模型以及为脚手架项目创建成本估算。我们面临的挑战是找到一种能够与现有系统无缝集成、提供 3D 建模功能并支持 DWG 文件转换和导出以进行结构分析计算的解决方案。
解决方案
该解决方案采用将 PON CAD 与 BricsCAD Pro 集成的形式。此次集成为 BricsCAD Pro 添加了 3D 脚手架设计工作流程，使 Catari 能够简化其设计流程。该公司现在可以使用BricsCAD的所有3D建模功能，这对他们的工作有很大帮助。在 BricsCAD 上运行的 PON CAD 成为该公司的必备工具。定价和许可类型也是 Catari 的重要因素。在测试试用版后，该公司发现 BricsCAD 具有与其他 CAD 软件相同的潜力，但成本更低。这种集成使 Catari 能够拥有自己的产品，并在项目上节省大量时间和金钱。
运营影响
数量效益
Case Study missing?
Start adding your own!
Register with your work email and create a new case study profile for your business.
相关案例.
Case Study
Intralox Using Demo3D Case Study
Intralox strives to create significant economic value for our customers by optimizing their conveyance systems. Intralox wants to emulate real-world production environments for end users and OEMs working in multiple industries, including packaging, warehousing, parcel, beverage, brewery, food, tire, and consumer goods. They frequently had to perform physical tests to demonstrate to customers how ARB equipment would handle their products.
Case Study
General Dynamics Uses Wind River Simics to Meet NASA Challenge
In designing and building Fermi, the General Dynamics C4 Systems business unit was faced with a challenge: it needed to provide an environment that could support rigorous testing by multiple Fermi subsystem groups before the spacecraft hardware was available.
Case Study
Issue and Defect Resolution
One of the world's largest complex hardware manufacturers' business units, responsible for the post-product validation process, was looking to speed up its time to market and the time it took to identify and resolve process issues. Duplicate debugging hardware and software issues was eating up 70% of production time, slowing down time to market and costing money.
