Atmosphere of Trust, Geneva PLM Conference Update, PLM: Virtual Technology
2PLM NewsletterJohn Stark Associates May 23, 2011 - Vol14 #4 |
|
Welcome to the 2PLM e-zine This issue includes :
|
 |
| An Atmosphere of Trust by Roger Tempest |
|
| On June 07-08, companies from around Europe have the chance to meet in Munich and agree how to formalise the PLM best practices that have been developed over the past 10 years. This sounds like a straightforward case of constructive group working, but as one user put it: "We need an atmosphere of trust".
Vendors embody their industry experience in their product offerings and refer to them as "best practice", but commercial pressures mitigate against placing any of these in an open, generic space. We need a new, neutral structure of PLM standards to which vendors can contribute, so that the core principles can be followed through the whole industry. Most user organisations want a clearer PLM landscape, and a framework that they know will lead to effective implementation. They have had to invent their "best practices" in isolation, with no standard well of experience to draw from. Many have been very successful, but the results are still bespoke and there is no practical way of pooling the best ideas. Recent conference presentations by Unilever, Philips and General Dynamics have all included elements that match parts of the new PLM standards. This illustrates the situation very well. |
At present, if you are in the audience, you have to take notes and try to identify which parts of the presentation are relevant for you. With standardisation, we can formalise these best practices into tools that everyone can use.
The product structure rules illustrated by Unilever, and the PDM definition expressed by General Dynamics, are simple and straightforward. They don't replace the more complex proprietary methodologies, but if we could all follow them, then implementing the more complex areas would become much simpler. The Munich Workshop will build on the results from Sweden, and provides a constructive, open platform for this kind of collaboration. Vendors are already participating at the Gothenburg launch, so the industry cooperation is starting to happen. The standards framework is still at its formative stage, so it is a chance for you to put your views into the mix and to take back with you some PLM best practices as they currently stand. More information and registration details are available via standardisation@plmig.com.
Roger Tempest is co-founder of the PLMIG. Membership of the PLMIG is available via membership@plmig.com. |
 |
| Geneva PLM Conference Update by John Stark |
|
| The PLM Conference and Exhibition to be held at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland on September 6-7, 2011, has four tracks. There are three Presentation Tracks and a Workshop Track.
The Conference and Exhibition will address PLM across the product lifecycle: innovation; development; manufacturing; use/support; retirement/disposal. With about half of the speakers for the Presentation Tracks now known, the provisional Agenda includes speakers from organisations such as Bobst, Bombardier Transportation, CERN, EADS, European Commission, Givaudan, Merck Serono, Mettler Toledo, Salomon, SR Technics, Synthes and Varian Medical Systems. In the Workshop Track, each Workshop will be led by a moderator, and limited to a maximum of 20 participants. |
Selection of Workshop topics will be based on the preferences of Conference attendees. Current suggestions for Workshop subjects include: Organisational Change accompanying PLM; Addressing Legacy Applications, Processes and Data; PLM and ERP; PLM in Middle-of-Life and End-of-Life; PLM Vision.
Concerning the Exhibition, discussions have now started with potential exhibitors and sponsors. If you're interested in participating in this PLM Event on September 6-7, 2011 - whether as a speaker, an exhibitor, a sponsor, or an attendee - please contact John Stark. A copy of the latest version of the Conference Brochure and Agenda can be requested here. |
|
|
| PLM: Virtual Technology by Henk Jan Pels |
|
| Technology is the art of forming Matter, according to an idea, in order to make it work for Man. Engineering can be seen as the skill of transforming an idea into form and function. In my previous column, I argued that a PLM system is, essentially, a large blackboard, on which all designers are drawing, in parallel, on their piece of the design. And, by stepping back a little, they can see what all their colleagues are creating. An important difference, however, is that a blackboard is 2-dimensional, while the PLM system, together with 3D CAD and simulation software, can show a 4-dimensional view of the product: spatial and dynamic. Compared to that, an ERP system is a 2D blackboard, only showing static tables.
Shaping a development process around a virtual product has big advantages. First of all, Matter suffers from inertia, so that making and testing prototypes, per definition, takes time. A virtual product has no mass and no inertia. There is no physical limit to development speed, only a psychic limit in the minds of the engineers. Using virtual products, new technology can be brought to the market faster, cheaper and better. It's not only the product that can be created and tested virtually. Digital Manufacturing offers software that, starting from the virtual product, can create a virtual manufacturing system to test and optimise the manufacturing process. Expensive pre-production runs and ramp-up periods are no longer required. The learning curve can be completed in the virtual factory. The first real product can be produced at maximum efficiency. The product is earlier on the market. And the production line pays back sooner. The next step is the virtual product lifecycle. The product can be used, maintained, refurbished and dismantled in cyberspace, meaning that a lot can be learned and improved without waiting until the 30-year product lifecycle has run its 30 calendar years. Why do PLM vendors believe that their customers will benefit so much from their virtual product lifecycle? Especially as many engineers are still sceptical even about the benefits of 3D CAD. The belief of the PLM community is based on the positive relationship between communication, coordination and performance. Modern industry is a set of complex systems. Achieving performance with a complex system requires strong coordination between the activities of subsystems. Therefore the control system needs real-time detailed information about the present and planned state of these subsystems. Likewise, political power depends far more on good information than on good weapons. |
For a system to be able to function, each subsystem must have a level of freedom, or slack, with respect to its neighbouring subsystems. When a system has better knowledge about its subsystems' individual states, it can react faster and needs less slack. Think of cars driving in the fog. The thicker the fog, the less information the drivers get about the positions of other cars, the more distance they need to be safe. In the same way, without radar, a modern airport couldn't handle one tenth of the traffic, because much more time would be needed between landings. As another example, a factory needs stock when delivery times of materials aren't known. When communication with suppliers is improved, and they can supply directly to the line, stock is no longer needed.
The product development process is still soaked in slack. Every engineer is more than 100% loaded, but looking at each individual piece of product knowledge, the ratio between processing time and waiting time is less then 1%. Designers are working for years on a new product before the customer gets to see it. Software engineers are programming for months, without any contact with the mechanical engineers who design the device to be controlled by the software. Sequential engineering is a way to prevent design accidents by creating large distances between information packages. It's also the most effective way to make the design process slow and inflexible. A design process can be imagined as a swarm of starlings, gathering for the yearly trip southwards. It's fascinating to look at their elegant but uncoordinated dance, but as an industrial engineer you wonder why they don't just start moving south. Now suppose each starling is an engineer with the task to position itself relative to the other starlings, such that a spatial pattern, conforming to previously-specified requirements, results. How much easier it would be when a virtual model could be projected in the air, showing the conflicts with the requirements and allowing each starling to depict its position and that of its neighbours. One can imagine that the virtual model would evolve in a smooth flow to the intended result, and that the physical starlings would immediately take their place in the structure and just take off .... To be continued.
Dr.ir. Henk Jan Pels is Associate Professor, Industrial Engineering & Innovation Sciences, Information Systems, at the Technical University of Eindhoven, The Netherlands. He can be contacted here. |
|
|
| Small Ad Section | |
|
|
 |
|
|
Top
To unsubscribe, please visit My account, - Newsletters- "manage my subscription" and untick the appropriate box.
Subscription is free to registered users. Register now
Post to Twitter