COFES
The Congress on the Future of Engineering Software Register | Login
COFES 2009
April 16-19, 2009
Scottsdale, Arizona
The Scottsdale Plaza Resort
 Search
discussion topics
Location: BlogsDavid Prawel    
Posted by: David Prawel 2/8/2007

Thanks for comments so far. I think a good way to reach some convergence without pushing us down any particular path is to take a top down look at what areas we're looking at. I won't try to suggest I could even think of them all, let alone list them. But if we bubble it up to the top, I think it's all about enabling innovation, reducing time to market, and increasing quality and productivity. A key enabler of all these is effective communication - people working together smoothly and efficiently.  To this end, 3D is an extremely valuable aid, but not for everyone, nor every application.

 

And people can't communicate/collaborate if they can't share information. This involves topics like interoperability and deployment of 3D, light-weight vs. CAD file formats, standards, etc.

 

So, given this proposed breakdown, I think there are two general categories of topics I propose we could zero in on: 3D Deployment/Ubiquity and Interoperability

 

Some questions that could be considered in either or both:

Who needs 3D and who doesn't? Why?

What are issues/barriers to using 3D - socio problems, political problems, technology problems? User interface limitations, training/experience issues?

How can one determine if their company is ready to use it?

Challenge of trading off features vs. ease of use - how products approach modeling, e.g. Industrial design vs. prismatic shapes, creative, conceptual vs. production (know what you're going to do and model it)

How much does a lack of relevant content affect 3D ubiquity?

How can we deal with business and process issues of deploying 3D, e.g. the value of 3D vs. the cost of getting into it?

 

There was some discussion last year about splitting AEC and MCAD in this discussion. Let's hear opinions on this. Are benefits of 3D the same for AEC as for MCAD? An arguement for separating might be that 

different factors affect 3D uptake in these industries differently. An arguement for keeping them together might be the value of cross-pollination, interchange of ideas between the two industries. It seems as though AEC is becoming more and more manufacturing in many ways.

 

How important is standardization? Does a company need a management "mandate" of a standard? Does this work? Why/why not?

 

What about standards - are they succeeding/adding value or not? Why? Where are they helping most? are there new developments that will make a big impact? Can we do something to accelerate the development and adoption of industry-driven standards or is it fait accompli that they will move more slowly than user requirements?

What trends, activities, technologies hold promise in addressing the problems caused by poor data interoperablity? How (will?) SOA affect interoperability? How about the open source movement?

Permalink |  Trackback

Comments (1)   Add Comment
Re: discussion topics    By John Callen on 2/28/2007
Wow, David! lots of good thoughts going on here, but it sure would be nice if this were broken appart into logical threads that could be pursued individually. Maybe I'll do that in my formal response to your posting.


Your name:
Title:
Comment:
Add Comment   Cancel 
COFES Blog Search
Copyright 2008 by Cyon Research Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy
Site Credits