mbd interoperability challenges and solutions - elysium

BOEING is a trademark of Boeing Management Company Copyright © 2012 Boeing. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2012 Northrop Grumman Corporation. All rights reserved. GPDIS_2012.ppt | 1

MBD Interoperability Challenges and Solutions

Doug Cheney Tony Provencal

Global Product Data Interoperability Summit | 2012



MBD Interoperability Challenges and Solutions

The adoption of Model Based Definition (MBD) practices promises savings due to the elimination (or significant reduction) of CAD drawings. New MBD compliant models can be easily created and shared using today's CAD and PLM software, but what about all of the existing legacy drawing based data? Is MBD data reliable when reused downstream? As companies develop strategies to implement MBD, questions about interoperability play a central role in planning.

• How is the drawing checking function replaced? • What about all of the legacy 2D CAD drawings? • Without drawings to red line, how will engineering changes be documented? • Are lightweight visualization models (JT, 3D PDF etc...) complete and correct? • Are direct translations to other CAD formats successful? • Can we rely on neutral standards for translation? • What are the risks when switching CAD versions? CAD platforms? • How are archiving strategies (LOTAR) impacted? This session will highlight how migration, translation, and validation technologies are being deployed by leading aerospace companies to address these challenges and ensure successful MBD implementations. It will also include updates on recent standardization initiatives within the US Department of Defense and the International Standards Organization.




Introductions

• ITI TranscenData • Private company headquartered in Cincinnati since 1983 • Development offices in the United States, England,

Israel and India • Engineering software and services

– PLM system migration solutions – CAD interoperability solutions

Doug Cheney • Engineering education

(Caltech and BYU) • CAD validation specialist

• Algorithms • International

standards • Process improvement

consulting

Tony Provencal • Engineering education

(Notre Dame) • CAD translation specialist

• Feature based translation

• Multi-CAD administration




MBE

3D CAD Model &

PMI

3D Lightweight Model plus 3D PMI, e.g.

JT

2D Paper Drawing

3D Lightweight Geometry, e.g. JT, 3D

PDF

DMU

3D CAD Model

The Digital Product Model Evolution

2D CAD

2D Electronic Drawing

2D Paper Drawing 2D Paper Drawing 2D Paper

Drawing

3D CAD

3D CAD Model

2D Electronic Drawing


Drawing

1970 1980 1990 2010 2000

2D Drawing


Drawing

1781




Technical

• Incomplete CAx system functionality

• Limited Interoperability

• Lagging standards and regulations

• Digital data variation

Barriers to a Model-Based Enterprise (MBE)

Non-Technical

• Limited capital expense budgets

• Legacy product reuse rather than new product design

• Process Re-definition

• Human resistance to change




Generating MBD Models from 2D Drawings

Use Case

A CAD plug-in which identifies 2D PMI information in an associative drawing, and automatically creates the equivalent 3D PMI information in the solid model.

Input Single Part and Associated Drawing

Output Single Part w/ 3D PMI

Output Details

• Drawing Views converted to 3D Named Model Views

• Datums, Dimensions, Notes, & Feature Control Frames

• Drawing Frames • Semantic and Non-Semantic

DrawToPMI

6 Confidential




NIST MBE PMI Validation and Conformance Testing

Develop • test case definitions • test case models • software algorithms

…for the purpose of testing CAD system conformance testing of ASME standards for PMI.




NIST MBE PMI Project Participants

Government Sponsor • National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) • http://www.nist.gov/el/msid/infotest/simca_mbe.cfm Contractors • Advanced Dimensional Management (test cases) • RECON Services (test models) • ITI TranscenData (validation) Vendor Partners • Dassault Systemes, Siemens PLM and PTC Collaboration Partners • PDES/ProSTEP CAx Implementors Forum • ProSTEP JT Implementors Forum • 3D PDF Consortium Technical Committee

8 NIST MBE PMI Validation Project Update

http://www.nist.gov/el/msid/infotest/simca_mbe.cfm




NIST MBE PMI Project Task Summary

• Test Case Definition • Create representative set of GD&T constructs

– ASME Y14.5M-1994, Y14.6-2001 and Y14.41-2003 • Native Model Creation and Verification

• Model each test case in each native CAD system – CATIA V5 R21, NX 8, Creo Parametric 1 and SolidWorks 2012

• Compare native test models to each other – Ensure semantic equivalence – calibrate validation process – Assess level of PMI semantic definition

• Derivative Model Creation and Validation • Export each test model to neutral formats

– STEP AP203E2 or AP242, JT 9.5 Rev D and 3D PDF PRC • Compare each derivative model to its native model

– Assess level of PMI semantic translation • Document methodology and high-level testing results





NIST 3D MBE PMI Validation Data Process Flow

50 Test

Cases

50 CATIA V5 Models

50 Creo

Models

50 NX

Models

Verification Validation

50 SolidWorks

Models

200 STEP

Models

200 JT

Models

200 3D PDF Models

CAx (STEP) Implementor

Forum

JT Implementor

Forum

3D PDF Implementor

Forum

Implementor Forum = Vendor partnership to resolve implementation issues




NIST 3D MBE PMI Validation Test Case Example

Creo Model

NX Model CATIA Model

Test Case




NIST MBE PMI Semantic Verification and Validation Criteria

• Product Geometry • Annotation Entity • Associated Geometry • Annotation Geometry • Annotation Text • Annotation Type • Associated Annotations • Annotation Parameters • Saved Views • Saved View Annotations • Saved View Geometry


Non-Semantic Characteristics (NOT verified and validated) Annotation Label Annotation Location Annotation Orientation Font Font Size Text Spacing Leader Line Routing Arrowhead Style




NIST MBE PMI Project Schedule (milestone dates)


CATIA, NX and Creo • 08/12: Test case definition • 08/12: Test model creation • 09/12: Test model verification • 11/12: Expert review • 12/12: Test model refinement • 02/13: Neutral file exports • 03/13: Neutral file validation

• 09/13: Final Report

SolidWorks • 08/12: Test case definition

• 03/13: Test model creation • 04/13: Test model verification • 04/13: Expert review • 05/13: Test model refinement • 06/13: Neutral file exports • 08/13: Neutral file validation • 09/13: Final Report




Lagging Standards and Regulations – Not for long!

• International Data Modeling Standards • ISO 10303-242 STEP AP242 = AP203 x AP214 • ISO 14306 JT • ISO 14739-1 PDF with PRC

• FAA Aircraft Type Certification • MBD approved for Gulfstream G650 and Boeing 787 • Other aircraft programs pending

• Department of Defense Regulations • MIL-STD-31000 Revision A • Technical Data Package (TDP)

can be 3D with PMI




Technical

• Incomplete CAx system functionality

• Limited Interoperability

• Lagging standards and regulations

• Digital data variation

Barriers to a Model-Based Enterprise (MBE)

Non-Technical

• Limited capital expense budgets

• Legacy product reuse rather than new product design

• Process Re-definition

• Human resistance to change




Types of Digital Data Variation

1. Master Design Interpretation • Confusing structure • Inconsistent data • Unrealistic features

2. Data Translation/Migration

CAD A to CAD B or CAD A Rev 1 to Rev 2 • Data loss • Degradation • Unacceptable change

3. Engineering Revision

• Unintentional change • Undocumented change

Can it be manufactured? Is it equivalent? Is it correct and clear?




Master Design Interpretation Divergence

• Unrealistic (ambiguous) features in models must be interpreted by downstream users

• Different interpretations can affect part quality

Design Model

Prototyping Model

Analysis Model

Rework

Rework

Manufacturing Model




Master Design Interpretation Divergence Example

• Simulation approved the design • Manufacturing produced initial parts from native model • All parts failed during final testing • Caused last-minute schedule delay and retooling

Test Part

Fatigue Failure




Testing failure (missing material)

Manufactured Part

Master Design Interpretation Divergence Example

Unrealistic feature (zero thickness)

Native Design Model




Master Design Geometry Defect Examples

Blocked Hole Crack

Void Thin

Volume




Master Design PMI Defect Examples




Geometry Translation Variation Example

• Parametric feature definition preserved, with different geometric result

• Fillet converted into a round which extends along top of flange

Translated Model Legacy Model




PMI Remastering Variation Example

• Different graphical presentation (expected, acceptable) • Lost datum feature symbol • Tolerance value change

Remastered Model Legacy Model




Geometry Migration Variation Example

The highlighted geometry was added when all features were updated in the new version of the CAD system.

Updated Model Current Model




PMI Migration Variation Example

Dimension display values changed when model were updated in the new version of the CAD system

Updated Model Current Model




Unintentional Revision Change Example

• Pocket depth on back side increased • Hole break-out introduced • Missed by drawing checker reviewing as-is drawing

redline

To-Be Model As-Is Model




Intentional Revision Change Documentation

• Side-by-side 3D PDF with synchronized graphics • Each geometric and PMI change highlighted separately




Changing Landscape of Design Variation

2D DRAWING-Based

Enterprise

3D MODEL-Based

Enterprise Simple

(2D geom, text, notes) Complexity Complex (3D geom, relationships, pmi)

Visual Checking Software Sufficient Time Process Shortened/Automated

Human Interpretation Machine Graphic Translation LOD Graphic/Geometric/Semantic

Data Re-created Downstream Use Associative Links

Controlled with

Flexibility

Uncontrolled yet

Highly-Constrained




Managing Variation in a Model-Based Enterprise

1. Automated design checking and expert review before release • Consistent and stable structure • Complete content • Realistic features

2. Automated translation validation before delivery • No data loss or degradation • Only negligible changes

3. Automated ECO validation before release • No unintentional changes • Clearly document intentional changes

Early warning systems

with Issue resolution

processes



Questions and

Discussion

mbd interoperability challenges and solutions - elysium

Documents