Talk:CATIA

Untitled

How do You pronounce it?

It's "CAT-E-AH". Someone who knows how to use those funky pronunciation symbols can add that to the main article. StuRat 14:51, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I (and everyone else I've heard) pronounces it kah-TEE-uh

The name is French, and is pronounced as kah tee ah. David.Monniaux 06:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

updating

this article needs updating, v6 is out now... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.200.238 (talk) 06:00, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

jargon

Damn! Did the author try to cram in as much TLAs as possible or what? Circeus 16:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Platform

Supported platforms??

Already listed under "Supported Operating Systems & Platforms". - EndingPop (talk) 15:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Didn't CATIA support IRIX at some point? Was it not up to V5? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.2.136 (talk) 12:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

irix was dropped v5r16 I think. IRIX workstations are no more sold anyway --Dwarfpower (talk) 13:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

PLM?

Catia all by itself is not a PLM software. For that you have software like VPM, SmarTeam, Delmia, etc. These type of programs are used to manage the files created by a software like Catia or SolidWorks. PLM is about managing the data of a project. Catia doesn't do that. I suggest removing the reference to PLM for the sake of this article. 65.220.113.252 19:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree by itself Catia is not PLM but PLM is not just managing data (PDM) it is all aspects of the product development lifecycle, which includes creating geometry to describe the shape of products. CAD is one of many software tools in the field of PLM. An earlier version did put it differently Freeformer 21:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Version 5, R16 and R17 installers (And probably earlier) will install Enovia if you have the proper product license. Enovia is a database based management system for storing Catia models, Drawings, and Catalog sets. The various extended workbenches in Catia, such as Knowledgeware Advisor and Knowledgeware Expert are geared almost exclusively toward continued product lifecycle operations; such as parameterization of features for dynamic reconformation of models, global standards checking against rulebases, and inclusion of specification documents. Additionally, Catia has a Catalog editor, for the creation of collaborative part-and or-feature development and is geared toward multi-department collaboration, making it a vital component to PLM operations. Catalogs are used in everything from product creation, to testing, to the various machining and fabrication workbenches. PLM is a very centralized theme in V5, and can be seen literally EVERYWHERE if you take the time to look.68.102.128.172 09:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

DMD Branefold DMD Etherflow ~~4space — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.177.65.149 (talk) 05:13, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Sources for Notable Industries using CATIA

On "Notable Industries using CATIA" I added two references for Frank Gehry. This section now has enough references to take down the notice... Agree? Keecheril 17:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Price?

How much does this software cost? --24.249.108.133 (talk) 17:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

About 700 euros, if you buy it from a greek mathematician-turned-hacker-turned-spy. See story:

http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSL2568324820080125 http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/5486068.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.210.162 (talk) 13:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

A lot. It can vary quite a bit though, based on what country you are in, who you buy it from, how many seats you buy, and which modules you want. I once found a website with prices listed for each module, but it has long since been taken down. Jf00830 (talk) 22:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Without even a range for pricing I would argue that this page does not belong in Wikipedia. It's like not listing the time for world record for the 100m sprint, just saying, yes a fast time for it does exist. Without a price it just isn't comparable with any other software. Hullo exclamation mark (talk) 22:27, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

A Boeing seat licence figure of $20k is given in: http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/70795/792861154.pdf?sequence=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.100.133 (talk) 00:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

airbus demises

I removed the reference to CATIA beeing the cause of A380. A380 is not a CATIA V5 based project, it is a project based on tools used prior to the cATIA V5 migration, as stated by Theorem in this paper: [1]. CADALYST article used as reference to support the claims is self described as beeing based on blogs and PTC claims targetting Dassault Systemes, its competitor on the EADS market. --Dwarfpower (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Airbus A380 delays

• Airbus_A380#Production_and_delivery_delays
• Airbus#Development_of_the_A380

Both implicate the CATIA v4-v5 incompatibility in production delays of the A380. 67.117.130.143 (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

File Extensions

For people looking for CATIA files the releveant extension(s) are .stp, .sat (I think) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.189.7.40 (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

The standard in CATIA V5 is .CAT* as in .CATPart .CATDrawing .CATProduct .CATAnalysis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.83.199.22 (talk) 23:15, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

File conversion fidelity

User Special:Contributions/75.119.250.1 has quite rightly requested a reference for the claim that conversion from V4 to V5 can result in data loss of up to 90%. I haven't been able to find anything supporting those numbers, but lots of general articles about the fact that file conversion between V4 / V5 and now V6 is a problem with CATIA. I've written to transcendata.com who are one of the companies working with managing this transition. Hopefully I'll hear from them. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I would like to throw out a few bits of info from times that I was involved in the history of CATIA and CAD software in general. I was heavily involved (I spent a great deal of time, travel and interviews; after our company blowing over a million dollars on a white-elephant CAD system) in our evaluation of CAD-CAM systems, particularly CATIA v4 and SolidWorks mid 1990s. The field was narrowed to these two after also evaluating Pro Engineer, Unigraphics (sp) and others around the time these CAD-CAM programs were being re-written/ported to run MS Windows based PCs; replacing the very-expensive operating systems that what would later become legacy Un*x (UNIX, AIX, etc.) platforms. The company I was working for did a lot of sub-contract work for Boeing in the Pacific Northwest; due to the location of our facility many ex-Boeing engineering personnel also worked with us as contractors.

At that time, CATIA was very expensive compared to the growing mainstream CAD market, especially in 2D software, Autodesks AutoCad being a shining example. A relatively new up-start company, SolidWorks, had begun selling a MS Windows-based software product that was based on the Parasolid 3d modeling kernel (owned by UGS? at the time). Unigraphics-like and similar to the popular Pro-Engineer (also having been ported to Windows 95 and NT); at a cost that was (very-approximately) around 10% the cost of CATIA and the other high-end CAD systems, and would run on PCs instead of expensive proprietary Un*x hardware - AND was very nearly comparable in every way to what was at-the-time considered superior software (that's imho; anyone hear about how Microsoft, uh, Bill Gates,...uh and Jobs,...f--- never mind).

In the early 90's we had some mfg engineering/tooling using CATIA v4 but only being of very limited use in Design engineering due to costs. The company purchased more seats of SolidWorks over the next decades - not only because the cost and ease-of-use, but it had earlier been revealed to us that around 1997 the owners of CATIA, Dassault Systemes, would spend a lot of money to acquire SolidWorks to help build their next major release, CATIA V5, to run on Windows based platforms. As I had been around in the early times of SolidWorks, it was fascinating but not really that remarkable to see early versions of CATIA V5 that carried exact copies of SolidWorks features (the "Hole Wizard" was an exact copy). Most of these features had been converted to something a little less recognizable but if you had learned to use SolidWorks or other Parasolid based programs at that time, CATIA v5 was pretty easy to pick up. During all of this, translating CATIA v3 and v4 to any other CAD-CAM system continued to be a nightmare. The algorithms for geometry definition were so foreign to modern-day 3d CAD systems that errors were rampant(Boolean subtractions vs. feature additions). Unless it was a square block with a couple of simple holes, it was a very laborious effort to translate the files. It was very common to simply(?) re-build the model from engineering drawings rather than continue to waste time attempting a useful translation. Work-around efforts over time slowly helped, but until the transition from AIX to Windows could be considered complete, it was a slow and expensive process (and still is? I hope not!).

If anyone is interested in this subject I will check back; I do have material proof for most of what I have stated here. I will not immediately add anything, but feedback is welcome before I embarrass myself.

It was fun to be part of 3d modelling history. I began my career in the early 70's with pen and ink on the drawing board, helped with a slide-rule and trig tables. Hand-held calculators were prohibitively expensive. At over $800 (my Boeing Supervisor bought one new HP calculator for our group of about 20). Marchant number-crunchers could sometimes be found, but nowhere as quiet as my trusty slide-rule. When I retired (around 2005), 3d models were the future and is our next big thing- along with 3d printers we will continue to rule. Thanks for allowing my considerable indulgence.

70.58.84.245 (talk) 07:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CATIA. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051201074232/http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/aec/select/103103_day_gehry.htm to http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/aec/select/103103_day_gehry.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:46, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Release History

In August 2020 a contributor deleted much of this CATIA article, including the "Release history" chart. They cited their reason for the major edit was "Rewrote some and removed most to get rid of the feeling of an overlong adverisement" In the past, I have returned to this article many times just to review the "Release history" chart, and am sorry it is gone. It was helpful for both the "Version History Value" and the "Release Date" columns. Here is a link to the CATIA page before the "Release History" chart was removed: I have never considered the history of an application an advertisement. Convince me it is. Jeffsmith99 (talk) 12:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

References

Jeffsmith99, I've gone ahead and reinserted this table into the article. Seems like a well-intentioned clean-up effort gone a little too far. AngryHarpy‍^talk 06:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)