Engineering for a much better future

Smaller companies that decide to embrace advanced integrated CAD and full PLM (product lifecycle management) software tools and concepts can now expect to achieve much the same considerable improvements in efficiency and cost savings as far bigger enterprises, and at reasonable cost. But they should be prepared for the possibility of significant pain in getting there. That seems to be the consensus verdict from among those on the trail. Not atypical is the experience of the Hiroshima, Japan-based Kobelco Construction Machinery company, which employs 633 people and makes hydraulic excavators. Speaking at last month's European Catia Forum in Paris, Kobelco's Tetsukaro Yanaka said that adopting Catia V5 3D CAD and SmarTeam PLM had decreased design changes required at prototype stage, and that the company was going to extend its 3D design process to the shopfloor, sales and service and alliance companies. However, reaching its present position had been "a tough road". One of the firm's goals, for example, had been to produce full digital mockups to avoid clash problems caused by rotating the upper part of an excavator relative to the lower part, taking into account a raised bulldozer blade. He said that even trying to call up a full upper assembly using Catia files took two to four hours – upon which SmartTeam became unstable. Beautiful curves That problem was eventually solved by using cut down CGR files, and it has now apparently been fully resolved by Dassault Systemes developing a module called DMU (digital mock up) Optimiser 2, which, in its words, "creates alternate representations of products and assemblies for size reduction or geometry creation better adapted to specific contexts." Kobelco had designed in 2D using Cadam, and bought its first two seats of Catia V4 in 1993 to ease the task of designing more modern 3D curved parts, such as those for its cabins. Despite the initial problems with V5, Yanaka now enthuses about how the software helps in the design of difficult parts such as curved counterweights that have to fit round various other parts and still have their centres of gravity intact. He also says the software helped with the design of common hose assemblies and cable harnesses for different models, while also solving maintenance problems, such as enabling spanner use in restricted places, and filter removal without dismantling other parts. His company has clearly already come to depend heavily on its new software: "Having three designers working in the same assembly cannot [happen] without SmartTeam control… There is a huge possibility that our engineering quality is enhanced." Meanwhile in the UK, Neil Patterson, engineering manager for the body systems group at Woking-based McLaren Cars, says the company went through a relatively painless process when replacing drawings boards with his Catia V5 system, thanks in large part to a high degree of support from IBM. McLaren is responsible for the design and low volume build of the Mercedes Benz SLR McLaren which costs £300,000, has a top speed of 208 mph and launches itself from 0 to 60mph in just 3.8 seconds. As well as using Catia VPM for design data management, McLaren has Maxim ERP, which drives the BoMs (bills of materials) and controls configurations. IBM developed a live link between VPM and Maxim, which makes drawings available across the business – especially useful for the purchasing department. The link also allows configured BoMs to be replicated in the VPM environment in real time. For McLaren, introducing Catia took a week of basic training, followed by a week back in the office, a second week of training on digital mock-ups and generating shapes, another week back in the office and a third week on advanced surfacing. IBM also supplied laminated quick reference guides plus two months of on-site support, and Patterson says that whole package assisted with its "rapid culture change". He said the transition was assisted by early basic training of key users that in turn became product champions. IBM trainers who took time to understand the McLaren process provided consistent help, he says and, "we now have a fully integrated engineering manufacturing environment with 55 users." Longer term, the company intends to expand its PLM side by moving from VPM to Dassault's Enovia system, and to embrace 'on-the-move engineering' on laptops for those that need to travel – simultaneously changing from Sun Unix workstations to Windows systems. On the subject specifically of PLM, Ed Miller, president of PLM system analyst Cimdata, says one of the key issues is simply: "Most CEOs don't understand what PLM is." Much the same view was expressed at a round table organised by PLM software vendor Agile Software for users, analysts and the computer media. Delegates there noted that even among experts, there is little agreement as to what it actually is or should be. And PLM's identity crisis is not helped by the fact that more than 100 software companies now use 'PLM' in their marketing information, some of which offer what we would consider full PLM, and others of which certainly do not. Roger Tempest, who runs an independent PLM interest group, believes "you don't have to define PLM in order to do it," and suggests that its prime virtue is in its ability to manage complexity, which he defines by example as designing the Large Hadron Collider at CERN by some of his members. Manage complexity On a slightly different note, however, one of the complex data problems facing just about everybody is the growing movement to make manufacturers responsible for what happens to their products at the end of their lifecycle. Agile's increasingly accepted concept of PLM is that it should be capable of covering every aspect of a product's life, from concept to disposal – and the crucial element is the product record. Mark Goldby is finance director of SMS Electronics, which populates PCBs for customers, and is an enthusiastic Agile customer. "We don't know where we'd be without it," he says. He accepts the requirements of the European WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) and recycling directives, but remarks: "Our customers still have to grasp the nettle of tracking products right through to disposal." That may yet crystallise more demand for PLM systems. CIMdata's Miller notes that "disposal and recycling are being pushed on us whether we like it or not." He also predicts that companies will soon no longer purchase solutions with the acronyms CAD, PLM, CRM (customer relationship management), SCM (supply chain management) and ERP, but will want just two: PLM and ERM (enterprise resource management) to cover all tasks, the pair having absorbed all engineering, manufacturing and business management. As to who to buy CAD/PLM solutions from, Ove Palmberg of Electrolux Home Products Europe, which comprises a host of SMEs, revealed that his company initially evaluated Catia V5, SolidWorks and Pro/Engineer for enterprise-wide roll-out, and concluded that all would do the job. We understand that its choice of Catia came largely down to the fact that the company already had a lot of Catia V4, and an upgrade was the most logical path. Interestingly, Palmberg attributes problems on some of its sites to: "Lateness in migration plans, interference with project work, limited support from local IT departments, bad performances from migration project teams and local management, and data that does not convert." Food for thought there, and note the lack of criticism of the software. Also, despite all that, he says payback was "less than one year." Meanwhile, data that does not convert is being sent to India to be reprocessed: more food for thought. Palmberg also says that he is evaluating the relative merits of SmarTeam and Enovia for PLM – but has already decided on SmarTeam. "Enovia is not quite ready for us yet. A lot of our sites are small and they mainly need something to keep track of their Catia models. SmarTeam is fine for that." The response from one Enovia enthusiast, who wanted to remain nameless, amounted to SmarTeam being sufficient for those with simple tasks who don't want to put in too much effort. Suffice to say that getting good, objective information on what's best where is not easy, and you're going to have to do (or pay for) some evaluation. The final word goes to Jan Ruzicka, engineering director of Skoda Energo in the Czech Republic, which makes steam turbines. He makes no mention of any problems in his implementation of Catia V5, Ansys FEM (finite element method), Fluent CFD (computational fluid dynamics), PDM (product data management), PLM and virtually every other software tool that one could think of. After spending around one million euros, he reckons he has a payback on cost grounds alone of 2.64 years due to a 30% increase in productivity, shortened product delivery times and improved product quality and employee skill and knowledge.