5 Replies Latest reply on Feb 24, 2016 2:36 PM by Casey Gorman

    A possible way of handling MBD opposition

    Casey Gorman

      Below is an email that I sent out that has comments added. It might be an approach to introducing the change to Model Based Definition (MBD) in your company a little at a time.

       

      This is great. Thank you, Casey.

      My thoughts are listed below. Would it be possible to bring this
      discussion to the SW MBD forum?

       

      Due to the opposition to MBD I have here, I have thought
      about taking an approach the walks people into the use of MBD without call it
      MBD. Once these practices are accepted it will just be announcing we are there.
      What do you think? Is this a viable approach?

      [Oboe] Good idea. We are doing MBD not for the sake of terms and
      it’s wise to comfort resistance in any way we can. Do you know why this MBD
      term got oppositions?

       

      1. Approach to Challenges
        1. Buy in

      [Oboe] Management buy-in is always vital. Value analysis would
      be a great support. Two key aspects: presentation and representation.
      Presentation wise, it’s much less ambiguous leading to fewer miscommunications,
      scrap and rework; Representation wise, the digital and intelligent 3D PMI
      drives downstream mfg applications automatically such as CAM and CMM as you saw
      at SOLIDOWRKS World. NC programing time can be cut from hours to minutes. These
      two aspects apply to both internal and external procedures.

      • Hold a general meeting/bitch session, not just
        on MBD but all things documentation (EPDM, templates, part files, etc.); what
        works? What doesn’t?

      [Oboe] I’d love to learn these issues beyond MBD too. 

      • Act upon or answer issues brought up in bitch
        session
      • Hold MBD meetings
        1. Maybe more like training
        2. Present concepts without calling it MBD
          1. Creating STEP files
          2. Providing STEP files with PDFs (2D and 3D)
            (attaching files in Adobe Reader XI)
          3. Validating STEP files against the CAD file
            (model is Master)
          4. Reduce Dimension Drawings/Critical Dimension
            Drawings

      [Oboe] Good point. Drawings are not completely gone at least at
      this stage, but reduced dimension drawings can facilitate transition and shift
      orientation onto 3D further. There was a bad MBD practice of delaying drawing
      creation from engineering to manufacturing. The lesson learned here is not to
      throw models over the wall. Engineering needs to take responsibilities in clear
      and sufficient communication, which shouldn’t change in drawing processes or
      MBD.

      1. Introduce SOLIDWORKS DimXpert

      [Oboe] SW training classes, in-product tutorials, MySW learning
      modules, SW blogs, CSWP-MBD exam are some good resources.

      1. GD&T as part of RDD/CDD

      [Oboe] What is RDD/CDD? Requirement (concept) definition
      document? What does this point mean?

      1. Introduce SOLIDWORKS MBD add-in
        • Capturing 3D views

      [Oboe] Organizing 3D PMI is key. Engineering need to present MBD
      in a presentable, consumable and actionable fashion. Otherwise messy rat nests
      would invite unpleasant and unnecessary resistance.

      • Recapturing Captured views (name change,
        dimension changes, etc.)
      • Publishing to 3D PDF
        • Re: A possible way of handling MBD opposition
          Oboe Wu

          Thanks for starting this conversation, Casey.

          Recently I came across this report on MBE benefit metrics in CAM and CMM.

          http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.GCR.15-1009

          Hope it's helpful.

          -Oboe

          • Re: A possible way of handling MBD opposition
            Tim Benson

            I'm coming a little late to the discussion but it was good to see Casey's list. I can put a check-mark next to each item here at my site. One point listed that should NOT be discounted is the capturing of organized, thoughtfully presented 3D views. Just recently, our Core Research team began using MBD, and one of the first parts completed was not presented very well. The views and dimensions were scattered about, in no logical order, and it just looked bad. So bad, in fact, that the machinist ended up creating his own manual sketch on paper to create something he could work with! Not exactly a ringing endorsement of MBD. Fortunately, I was able to clean up the presentation and show the machinist how the data could/should be presented. He was much happier after that.

             

            It's the little things like this that will set back your implementation. If possible, especially during a pilot, monitor what the users are creating. Head off any problems before they get downstream. Work with the users to document and show 'Best Practice' fundamentals. It will pay off in the long run.

            - Tim

              • Re: A possible way of handling MBD opposition
                Casey Gorman

                Tim,

                So far the only issue we have heard about comes more from within than from our suppliers, but I think our suppliers might have the same comment. It is more about the size of the view we provide them. When we move to SW MBD 2016 and can create multi-page 3D PDF's we will add at least a second page that will be mostly a view port. There will be some other basic information (title, document number, etc.) but that is it.

                 

                If the 3 views acted together... then I might be more inclined to have a sheet set up this way. As of yet though there hasn't been a request. I have a copy of what our 3D PDF template looks like in this thread Custom Templates for SW MBD . The part shown is pretty simple, but others we have in this template are a bit more involved.

              • Re: A possible way of handling MBD opposition
                Casey Gorman

                Well we had our bitch session meeting. It didn't go as hoped, but we did glean a couple of items to follow up on. A couple had to do with training. One on the use of our PLM system and the other on our use of EPDM.

                 

                Some of the other issues we are going to have to work on long term. They have to do with our PLM being controlled by corporate headquarters. To me, I see them as challenges that can be over come based on request and support from the engineering team at this division. This division is the largest of all our divisions and produces the largest income. Hopefully this helps in our favor.

                 

                Has anyone else started their journey?