Short answer: It can be, but test each concern explicitly instead of trusting a slide. For MST: protected files move only after access is agreed, through a cloud account or a private deployment. The output is a native, editable SOLIDWORKS assembly built from your own released parts. The default integration reads PDM without overwriting released masters, and review and release stay with your engineers.
The three concerns, in the order people raise them
1. Where do our drawings and models go?
2. Will we get something we can actually edit, or a dead shape?
3. Will it break our PDM states, review and change control?
Below is how a design team should test each one, and what MST states about its own workflow: P&ID gas-line diagram + approved PDM parts + equipment rules -> native, editable SOLIDWORKS assembly, starting with semiconductor gas equipment.
Concern 1: Data security
Nothing moves before the data path is agreed
Your gas-line diagrams and part models often contain your customers' process information, so they carry obligations as well as IP. The right first conversation is non-confidential: the equipment family and the repetitive task. MST asks teams to start that way and to arrange a private channel before sharing company drawings or models.
Choose the deployment model on purpose
MST offers two options ([Deployment](https://mst-us.ai/deployment/)):
- Cloud: MST opens an account for your team, and the model-library import and equipment workflow are agreed for the deployment.
- Private: MST implements the solution in an agreed private environment under an enterprise license plus implementation, with terms and deliverables defined in a proposal.
Which one fits depends on your customer contracts and IT policy. Settle it before choosing a pilot job, because it may limit which jobs you are allowed to use.
Share the minimum
Send only the approved subset the job needs, not the vault. MST describes either a configured customer-side adapter or an approved, fixed export of required files and metadata, with permissions, retention and release authority agreed before access. A fixed export is easy to audit, since you know exactly what left. An adapter avoids repeated exports but needs its own security review.
Free tools
On the free [Drawing to BOM](https://mst-us.ai/drawing-to-bom-guide/) page, MST says your original file and the recognized result are stored privately by MST, and you can delete the server files from the tool. MST states on the tool page that uploaded files are not used for model training. Apply your own policy anyway. A sample drawing or a sanitized sheet is a sensible first upload.
Questions to put to any vendor
| Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Where are files processed and stored? | Contracts and export rules |
| Who can access them, and is that logged? | Audit |
| How long are they kept, and how are they deleted? | Retention obligations |
| Can it run in our environment? | Customer-confidential jobs |
| Are our files used for training? | IP leakage |
| What happens at the end of the engagement? | Exit plan |
Concern 2: Is the model editable?
Native versus neutral
Many AI-to-CAD outputs are meshes or neutral solids. They look right but have no feature tree, mates or part identity, so the first engineering change means rebuilding. MST's mechanical assembly AI saves a native .SLDASM built from your native parts ([SolidWorks Execution](https://mst-us.ai/solidworks-execution/)). Engineers can open it, move components, edit mates and add or replace parts as usual.
What to test in the pilot
Don't accept "editable" as a word on a page. Make these changes on the generated assembly:
- Replace a regulator with another released model and watch how the mates respond.
- Move a component along the stick and rebuild.
- Suppress a stick, or switch configurations if your conventions use them.
- Check the assembly into PDM and open it on another workstation.
- Generate a drawing and a BOM from it.
If those behave like they would on an engineer-built assembly, the model is editable in the sense that matters.
Traceable to your parts
Because components are released models from your vault, each one keeps its part number and revision. [Q29](https://mst-us.ai/questions/reuse-pdm-approved-parts-in-generated-assemblies/) explains why that matters for purchasing and change control.
Checked before you open it
MST reopens the saved assembly and reads back components, transforms, mates, rebuild state, routes and traceability. It is evidence you can check, and it doesn't stand in for your review.
The drawing-to-model module
MST's separate module turns 2D drawings into 3D models, with source views shown beside the result. Confirm during scoping that its output suits your CAD environment.
Concern 3: Workflow fit
PDM states and masters
The default integration reads approved models and creates a separate project assembly. It doesn't silently overwrite released masters, and any write-back or lifecycle change needs a separately approved workflow. In practice, the generated assembly enters your vault the way new work does, at your initial state, and moves through review and release by your normal transitions.
Review and authority
The generated assembly is a proposal. MST doesn't claim autonomous production release, and engineers keep approval authority. Keep your review checklist and add a line asking whether the read-back's unresolved items were closed.
Downstream steps
Drawings, BOM export, ECOs and manufacturing handover work as they do for any native assembly. Running the generated BOM against the expected one through the free BOM Compare tool is a quick sanity check.
Known boundaries
MST starts with semiconductor gas equipment. Each PDM vendor, schema and vault policy needs its own integration review, and a new equipment class needs its own rules and validation. Write these boundaries into the pilot plan so nobody expects universal coverage.
Scenario: the IT review meeting
An engineering manager brings the proposal to IT and security. Their questions: which files leave the building, where they are kept, who sees them, and whether customer-confidential jobs can be used. The team picks a fixed export of a small approved subset for a non-confidential job, under the cloud option, and records private deployment as the route for customer-restricted work later. The CAD administrator adds a test: the generated assembly is checked into a sandbox vault and run through the normal state transitions before anything touches production. The design lead adds the editability tests listed above to the acceptance criteria. Every concern now has a specific test with an owner.
Checklist
| Concern | Confirm |
|---|---|
| Data path | Cloud or private, agreed before files move |
| Data scope | Approved subset only, with retention agreed |
| Output | Native .SLDASM from your parts |
| Editability | Replace, move, suppress, check in, draw |
| PDM safety | No silent overwrite, normal state transitions |
| Authority | Engineers review and release |
| Boundaries | Equipment class and PDM integration reviewed |
If those answers cover your concerns and your team designs semiconductor gas equipment in SOLIDWORKS, [contact MST](https://mst-us.ai/contact/) and bring your IT contact.
FAQ
Must our vault go to a cloud?
No. Private deployment is an option, and in either case only the agreed subset is shared.
Will there be real mates?
It is native SOLIDWORKS, and mates are among the facts read back for review.
Can we keep editing?
Yes, as with any native assembly.
Will it change released parts?
Not by default.
Every PDM?
No. Each environment needs an integration review.