Dimensional Management and Drafting

For years now, the term “innovation” continues to be in many corporate objectives, goals, visions, and mission statements, whatever the difference is among the four. Well, to be innovative, doesn’t that some how imply that one should “get out of the box”; get off the beaten path; perhaps not use the “de-facto standard”? In my mind, yes!

On the other hand, consistency breeds success. Initiatives like “Process Excellence, “Design Excellence”, and similar Six Sigma programs are designed to achieve process excellence through consistency. There are some well documented benefits of consistent process. For example, the benefit of “capturing the voice of the customer” (VOC) assures validation that the product is what the customer wants. To make the point, there is no point in delivering a great snow ski to a customer who wants a great water ski. Process consistency leads to repeatedly doing things right, and repeatedly doing things wrong. The repeatedly wrong part provides improved capability to study root cause and ultimately “improve” process, design, and product. After all, isn’t that part of a process excellence program known as DMAI2C (Define, Measure, Analyze, Innovate / Improve, and Control)?

So here is the catch. There is nothing about “consistency” that says we have to consistently do everything the way we have been doing it for years. If we did, we would not have CAD systems and, a slew of other design and engineering software applications that has lead to the plethora of data that ultimately lead to PDM, PKM, and PLM; call it whatever you want. The bottom line is that new technology helps to achieve innovative processes and as the SIG leader of the Dimensional Management and Drafting SIG, it is and has always been my objective to demonstrate new ideas in communicating design requirements. Improved communication of design requirements leads to reduced development costs, production costs, and ultimately improves design to be more robust at a better price, much to the delight of the customer.

Where am I going with this? Those who know me already know. And for those who don’t, I am going after 3D annotation. I have for ten years now; demonstrating my patience in society. LOL And I intend to continue to convince anyone and everyone who either has to create a drawing or in one form or another read a drawing to take advantage of the now ten year old technology of 3D annotation that we have come to know as 3D PMI; Thank-you I-DEAS. I want to be clear too that I am ok (for a little while longer anyway) with the continued use of 2D drawings for present state process flows. But, being stuck in the 2D drawing world doesn’t mean the 3D PMI technology is of no value.

Everyone wants to stream line the drafting. Using the 3D PMI in NX, I-DEAS, and Solid Edge can do that. In fact, a huge part of the development of 3D PMI is to do exactly that; reduce the drafting time. The bottom line is that using 3D PMI does not mean the company or industry in general must eliminate the 2D drawing to realize any value. The technology provides the ability to eliminate a step in the present process flow, but if the step must remain for a little while, why not use the process innovation included in the 3D PMI capability for the purpose of leaning the 2D drafting stage of design while achieving greater accuracy all at the same time?

With all that said, the Dimensional Management and Drafting SIG at PLM World really has a huge potential for impacting the process of product definition and it will take a larger group of people working together to develop new and innovative “de-facto” standards. It will take a group to demonstrate the “yes we can” leadership and to help culture change. The undertaking is no different from the days when the drafting board users told CAD users that CAD would never make it and that the manual drafting table will always be the master. There was a transition. In the beginning CAD, although fully capable of eliminating the drafting table right from the beginning, was simply used by the innovative few to enhance and help the drafting table. In time the culture realized; “So why are we doing things twice; Right?” The drafting table was doing design and CAD was doing the drafting because CAD drawings were “cleaner and easier to read” and ultimately, due to electronic data storage, now known as product data management (PDM), eliminated micro-filming. Oh, by the way, before eliminating micro-filming CAD “improved” the quality of micro-filming because of the more clear and concise line and lettering quality.

My message is this. 3D PMI (GD&T, Notes, and any other annotation) on the solid model is a technology to be embraced and used to some advantage. Struggling to maintain the same old way of doing things is a loosing battle. History has clearly demonstrated that. So, I hope to help develop a group of people who want to get on the “process improvement program” of using 3D PMI in whatever your process is or may become in the future. 2D drawings can be faster and more accurate with improved linkage to the 3D CAD model that we all know ultimately gets placed on the face of the drawing as “the master” by way of some general note. With that, there is a growing challenge for the drafting users to provide voice of the customer to the software developers to further enhance the affective use of 3D PMI to produce the 2D drawing.

For those who don’t know me and wondering who this quack might be, here is, in part, what I bring to the table for the Dimensional Management and Drafting SIG. I have applied 3D PMI to solid models for over ten years now. I know 3D PMI. I have demonstrated the visualization of 3D PMI in the JT format for over ten years. I have done drawings from lead on paper to many a CAD system. I know drafting. Innovation of the drafting process is nothing new. I have fought the cultural battles before and have won. I know GD&T, the very foundation of design definition, and I know the ASME Y14.41-2003 standard for “Digital Product Definition Data Practices”. But there is more for the Dimensional Management & Drafting group to consider.

Dimensional Management is a lifecycle in itself. There are opportunities for input and learning with regard to tolerance analysis (VisVSA, TSV, Valysis), inspection (CMM programming & reporting), Point cloud & SPC data, and more. Oh by the way, I know VisVSA.

Last but certainly not least is involving Solid Edge users. Historically, the Drafting & PMI SIG has always involved I-DEAS and NX users, but now we can add the strength of Solid Edge users as well. Solid Edge users can add significant value, because it is very common for a major part of the infrastructure to be the smaller but extremely important supplier and design groups using so called mid-range systems. We want these users in our group. I myself am jumping into Solid Edge 3D PMI to see how it compares to the NX and I-DEAS systems with regard to user interface and overall functionality throughout the dimensional management lifecycle. I will have significant focus on how the Solid Edge PMI stacks up to the Y14.5 & Y14.41 standards and downstream visualization capability. From there, I hope to continue to provide Siemens/UGS enhancement requests with help from the opinions and practical experience of the Dimensional Management and Drafting group.

Regards to all & Happy Holidays,

Norman Crawford
Dimensional Management & Drafting SIG Lead
GDTP S-0386
Norm.Crawford@GDandT.com