Here's What Our Tools Have Delivered on Real Projects

~15% → under 2%

BoM error rate after CAD-to-SAP integration, AutoCAD Plant 3D environment

See Case Study

10 days → 3-4 days

multi-discipline model review cycle, 8 disciplines including piping

View Case Study

6+ weeks → 1 week

engineering-to-procurement handover on the same plant project

Discover Case Study
icon
icon

Challenges with AVEVA E3D

Manual Pipe Routing & Specification Checks

Spec compliance gets verified at review rather than during modelling, so errors surface after they've already propagated into isometrics and material requisitions.

Diagram Automation Gaps

P&IDs in AVEVA Diagrams and the E3D model drift apart between revisions. Line sizes, instrument tags and equipment references diverge quietly, and the mismatch is found downstream in procurement.

Reporting & Data Export Bottlenecks

Standard E3D reporting produces extracts, not the format your procurement and project controls actually need. The gap gets closed by hand, every revision.

Limited Customisation Capabilities In-House

PML is a specialised skill and most engineering teams don't have a dedicated E3D developer. Work that would take a specialist two weeks stays undone for two years – not because it's hard, but because nobody owns it.

What We Do with AVEVA E3D

From PML automation to enterprise integration, we extend E3D to match how your projects actually run. Unlike firms selling E3D modelling hours, we build tools your team owns and uses independently – the deliverable is reusable software, not drawings.

AVEVA Customisation

PML macros and appware for automated modelling tasks, batch operations, validation sequences, drawing generation and reporting. Catalogue structure modification and spec-driven selection rules aligned to your material codes and procurement standards – so what an engineer picks in E3D matches what procurement needs in the ERP. Custom UI and workflow extensions on top of E3D's standard functionality.

AVEVA Diagrams Automation

Automated consistency checks that compare P&ID definitions against the E3D model continuously – flagging mismatches in line sizes, specs, equipment references, instrument assignments and connection points during design rather than at review. Tag synchronisation and change propagation in both directions, plus equipment specification extraction for downstream engineering.

icon
icon

Case Studies

Real projects and real results

Integration of CAD/BIM with SAP for a Midstream Gas Processing Plant

Engineering worked in Plant 3D while procurement ran on SAP, with no automated connection between them. Every Engineering BoM thousands of line items per package was re-entered by hand at roughly 4 hours and a ~15% error rate. Project managers had no view of material availability during design, and asset handover to operations ran consistently 6+ weeks late.

BoM entry ~4 hours → under 15 minutes per package. Errors ~15% → under 2%. Handover 6+ weeks → 1 week. Asset registration ~10 days → same day. Roughly $120,000 in annual engineering labour savings about 1,200 hours at a $100/hour rate.

More Information About Case
Integration of CAD/BIM with SAP for a Midstream Gas Processing Plant

3D Model Review Tool for Multi-Disciplinary Clash Management on a Gas Processing Facility

Eight engineering disciplines. Hundreds of clashes. All tracked in Excel with no version control. Coordination meetings wasted time arguing about which model was current.

We deployed an automated platform with version control, duplicate filtering, assignment workflows, and live dashboards. The result: coordinators could stop chasing spreadsheets and start solving actual design problems.

The review cycle went from 10 days to 3–4 days. Audit preparation became a report rather than a reconstruction, and coordinators stopped chasing spreadsheets.

View More Details
3D Model Review Tool for Multi-Disciplinary Clash Management on a Gas Processing Facility

Technologies We Work With

Integration & Enterprise

SAP S/4HANA logo SAP S/4HANA
Oracle ERP integration Oracle ERP
React logo React
Microsoft WPF logo WPF

AVEVA-Specific

PML PML
AVEVA E3D and AVEVA Diagrams AVEVA .NET API & Diagrams

Core Stack

Microsoft .NET Framework logo .NET Framework
C# logo C#
Python programming language Python
MySQL database logo SQL

Related Services & Industries

CAD-ERP Integration

Connect your CAD systems (E3D, Plant 3D, AutoCAD, Revit) to enterprise systems (SAP, Oracle, PLM) with automated data synchronisation. Our integration for a midstream gas plant cut BoM errors from 15% to under 2% and saved $120K/year in engineering labour.

CAD-ERP Integration

Clash Detection & Model Review

Automated clash detection and interdisciplinary coordination for large EPC projects. Our 3D Model Review Tool cut clash resolution from 3–5 days to under 1 day on a gas processing facility.

Clash Detection Solutions

Oil & Gas Industry Solutions

Specialized automation for oil & gas engineering – from Plant 3D and AVEVA E3D to SAP integration and piping isometrics.

Oil & Gas Solutions
icon
icon

Frequently Asked Questions

Ask Your Question

Can you customise AVEVA E3D catalogues?

Yes. We modify and extend catalogue structures to match your project specifications, material codes and procurement standards custom components, spec-driven selection rules, and catalogue naming aligned with your ERP material masters. On O&G projects, catalogue alignment is what removes the mismatch between what an engineer selects in the model and what procurement needs in the ERP.

Do you develop PML macros for E3D?

PML development is a core capability. We write macros and appware for automated modelling tasks, batch operations, custom validation sequences, drawing generation and reporting from single-function productivity scripts to full appware modules extending E3D for project-specific workflows.

Can you integrate AVEVA E3D with SAP?

Yes. Our DesignBridge platform supports bi-directional integration between AVEVA E3D and SAP S/4HANA, handling the schema mismatches, project-specific naming conventions, and SAP validation rules that make generic connectors fail. The same architecture we deployed for AutoCAD Plant 3D–SAP integration on a midstream gas processing plant – where it eliminated 15% BoM error rates and saved 1,200+ engineering hours per year – is applicable to E3D environments.

How do you ensure consistency between P&IDs and 3D models?

We build automated consistency checks that compare P&ID definitions in AVEVA Diagrams against the E3D model continuously, flagging mismatches in line sizes, specs, equipment references, instrument assignments and connection points during design rather than at review. Combined with tag synchronisation and change propagation, discrepancies get caught while they’re cheap to fix.

We don’t have an in-house E3D developer. Does that make this harder?

It’s the usual situation and it shapes how we work. We document what we build, hand over source, and run sessions with your team so the tool doesn’t become something only we can touch. If you later want to maintain it internally, that path stays open.

What does a first engagement look like?

A 30-minute technical call on one specific workflow. If it looks viable, a paid Discovery produces the scope, the architecture and a fixed-price estimate before any build commitment.

Bring Us One E3D Workflow That Doesn't Fit

Tell us the thing your team works around – a catalogue rule, a check that keeps landing at review, a report rebuilt by hand every revision. In 30 minutes we'll tell you whether PML solves it, what building it would involve, and where the honest limits of our E3D track record are.

38 Middlehill Road,
Wimborne, BH21 2SE

    What you’ll get

    • Current-state mapping of your E3D-to-ERP workflows
    • Time and cost analysis of manual data handling
    • Integration architecture recommendations
    • ROI projection for automation solutions
    • Implementation roadmap with quick wins
    • Reference cases from similar projects