skill and knowledge matrix and evaluation tool for cad- users at

Skill and knowledge matrix and evaluation tool for CAD-users at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB Undergraduate thesis in mechanical engineering 15 hp Maria Åberg January 2010

A

Thesis: Skill and knowledge matrix and evaluation tool for CAD-user profiles at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB

Issued by Product Document no

Anna Sundberg General TD2010-0016 Department Area Project

Technical Support a) General B0077 Research/högskola Approved by Date Page

Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 1 (20)

© Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB

This document is our property and shall not without our permission be altered, copied, used for manufacturing or communicated to other person or company.

ABSTRACT This is a 15 hp thesis in mechanical engineering performed at the CAD* support department at Rocktec division within Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB, Örebro, during the fall of 2009. The staff at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB uses a variety of CAD systems for designing electric, hydraulic and pneumatic systems as well as for mechanical design. This thesis will be limited to the two main sys-tems, “Pro/Engineer” for 3D CAD, and “AutoCAD” for 2D CAD. The primary objective is to map and document different user profiles in the CAD systems, and to create a matrix stating the need for skills and knowledge of functionality and work methods for each profile. Also, a tool that evaluates the actual knowledge and skills of the users compared to their user profile will be created, to see what the actual need for training is. The tool can also be used to verify the knowledge and skills of external consults before hiring their services. During the fall of 2009 interviews with relevant staff at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB was performed and the notes from those interviews were used to create a skill and knowledge matrix for CAD-user profiles. The matrix was revised continuously in consultation with the interviewees. And evaluation tool to test the knowledge and skills needed for basic 3D design in “Pro/Engineer” was created and tested, first on students at Örebro University, then on CAD users at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB. The matrix is to be a live document primarily used by CAD support in cooperation with the manag-ers of the departments to keep an overview of the need for competence at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB. This should make it easier to coordinate training and prepare for future needs. The Evaluation tool is, for now, only to be used by CAD support to test external consultants before hiring, or for the individual user that wishes to do a check of their skills for themselves. In the future both the matrix and the evaluation tool can be incorporated in Atlas Copcos compe-tence program “kompetensportalen”. The matrix can be used to keep track of the different compe-tences needed in CAD for the individual employee, but also for the managers to get an overview of the entire group. This will make it easier to perform CAD competence gap analysis and to coordi-nate training. “Kompetensportalen” is not yet up and running completely, therefore I will not give any specific suggestions to how the matrix and the evaluations tool should be incorporated. Maria Åberg January 2010 Örebro Supervisor: Sören Hilmerby Examiner: Johan Kjellander Key words: CAD, user profile, competence, matrix, evaluation tool * CAD= Computer Aided Design





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 2 (20)



Sammanfattning Detta 15 hp examensarbete i maskinteknik har utförts på CAD* supportavdelningen på Rocktec divisionen inom Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB, Örebro, under höstterminen 2009. Personalen på At-las Copco Rock Drills AB använder sig av flera olika CAD system för konstruktion av elektriska, hydrauliska och pneumatiska system så väl som mekanisk konstruktion. Denna uppsats begränsar sig till de två största systemen, ”Pro/Engineer” för 3D CAD, och ”AutoCAD” för 2D CAD. Det främsta målet är att kartlägga och ta fram användarprofiler i CAD systemen, och att skapa en matris med nödvändiga kunskaper om arbetsmetoder och färdigheter i funktionaliteter för varje profil. Ett verktyg för att utvärdera användarnas kunskaper och färdigheter ska skapas, för att kunna se vad de egentliga behoven av utbildning är. Verktyget kan även användas för att bekräfta kunskaper och färdigheter hos externa konsulter innan de anlitas. Under hösten 2009 genomfördes ett antal intervjuer med relevant personal på Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB, och noteringarna från dessa möten blev grunden till användarprofilmatrisen. Matrisen uppdaterades kontinuerligt i samarbete med den intervjuade personalen. Ett utvärderingsverktyg för att testa de kunskaper och färdigheter som behövs för grundläggande 3D design i ”Pro/Engineer” skapades och testades, först på studenter på Örebro Universitet, sedan på CAD-användare på Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB. Matrisen kommer att vara ett levande dokument, som i första hand används av CAD support i sam-arbete med gruppcheferna på de olika avdelningarna för att få en överblick över kompetensbehovet. Detta gör det lättare att samordna utbildningar och förbereda för kommande behov. Utvärderingsverktyget kommer för tillfället endast att användas av CAD support för att testa externa konsulter, eller för den enskilde användaren som vill kontrollera sina färdigheter för egen del. I framtiden kan både matrisen och verktyget införlivas i Atlas Copcos kompetensprogram, ”kompe-tensportalen”. Matrisen kan användas för att kontrollera de olika kompetenser som behövs i CAD för den individuella användaren, men även för gruppchefen för att få en överblick över hela grup-pens samlade kompetenser och behov. Det kommer att underlätta vid gap analyser i CAD och att samordna utbildningar. ”Kompetensportalen” fungerar ännu inte fullt ut och därför kommer jag inte att ge något specifikt förslag på hur matrisen och verktyget ska införlivas där. Maria Åberg Januari 2010 Örebro Handledare: Sören Hilmerby Examinator: Johan Kjellander Nyckelord: CAD, användarprofil, kompetens, matris, utvärderingsverktyg * CAD= Computer Aided Design= Datorstödd design





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 3 (20)



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I want to thank Anna Sundberg, manager of the CAD support department, Rocktec, and my supervi-sor at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB, for giving me support and guidance all the while trusting me to do this thesis my own way. I am also grateful to all the people at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB that participated in the interviews and the test of the evaluation tool. Thank You for sharing Your valuable time with me. Also, I would like to thank Sören Hilmerby, lecturer in mechanical engineering, my supervisor at Örebro University, for guidance and support, not only with this thesis. Last, but not least, I want to thank my partner, Magnus Hidström, for doing everything in his power to ensure that I have had the time I have needed to complete this thesis; and my mother, Kerstin Hull, for babysitting every Tuesday night to give me extra time to work. Thanks to Anna Sundberg, Sören Hilmerby, Magnus Hidström and Kerstin Hull I have been able to complete my education only one semester later than planned, despite having a child during the last semester. This is something I am proud of, but could never have accomplished without Your help. Thank You. Maria Åberg Örebro January 2010





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 4 (20)



Table of Contents

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. 1

SAMMANFATTNING ............................................................................................... 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ 4

TABLE OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ 5

ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................... 5

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 6

1.2 Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 6

1.3 Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 7

1.4 Delimitations .................................................................................................................... 7

2 WORK METHOD .................................................................................................. 8

2.1 User Profile Matrix ........................................................................................................... 8

2.2 Evaluation tool ................................................................................................................ 12

2.3 Recommended training ................................................................................................... 13

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ............................................................................. 14

3.1 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 14

3.2 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Further comments and suggestions ................................................................................. 18

4 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 19

5 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 20

Appendix A – Proposed matrix ............................................................................................ 20 Appendix B – Module description........................................................................................ 20 Appendix C – Evaluation tool, test 1 .................................................................................... 20 Appendix D – Evaluation tool, test 2 .................................................................................. 20 Appendix E – Evaluation tool, finished test ......................................................................... 20





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 5 (20)



Table of figures

Figure 1: Matrix example .................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 2: Module specification example ........................................................................................... 11 Figure 3: Profile example .................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 4: Module Pro/E Basic ........................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5: Profile ................................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 6: Profile with modules .......................................................................................................... 15 Figure 7: Full description .................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 8: Example matrix for the manager of the department ........................................................... 17

Abbreviations

RDE: Atlas Copco Rock Dills AB CMT: Construction and Mining Technique SDE: Surface Drilling Equipment URE: Underground Rock Excavation TME: Tunnelling and Mining Equipment LHD: Loading, Hauling and Dumping RBM: Raiseboring R&D Research and Development D&D Design and Development TME, R&D Riggs Face Drilling and Production Drilling, Bolting TME, R&D Components Group Components, Drilling CAD: Computer Aided Design Pro/E: PTC 3D cad program Pro/Engineer Wildfire 4 AutoCAD: Autodesk 2D cad program 2010 Gap analysis The identification of the difference between the desired and current state.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 6 (20)



1 Introduction

1.1 Background

Atlas Copco Rock Dills AB (RDE) in Örebro is divided in three divisions; Rocktec (RTE), Surface Drilling Equipment (SDE) and Underground Rock Excavation (URE). The three divisions are part of the Construction and Mining Technique (CMT) business area within the Atlas Copco Group. The Rocktec division develops and manufactures rock drills, components and automation systems exclusively for the URE and SDE divisions. At its modern laboratory and research centre in Örebro, Sweden, services are provided to all divisions within the Construction and Mining Technique busi-ness area. Surface Drilling Equipment develops, manufactures, and markets worldwide rock drilling equip-ment for various applications in civil engineering, quarries and open pit mines. Underground Rock Excavation develops, manufactures and markets worldwide a wide range of tun-nelling and mining equipment for various underground applications. RDE uses a variety of CAD systems for designing electric, hydraulic and pneumatic systems as well as for mechanical design. RTE has a CAD support department that work solely with everything concerning CAD for all three divisions and sites in Örebro. They are responsible for creating and maintaining the installations and configurations of the systems, development of best practices and work methods as well as providing user support and internal training. The two main CAD systems are Pro/Engineer (Pro/E), for 3D design, and AutoCAD, for 2D design and schematics. The systems are used for a wide variety of purposes, and the user knowledge and skills varies.

1.2 Purpose

The purpose of this thesis is to map and document different user profiles in the CAD systems, and to create a matrix stating the need for skills and knowledge of functionality and work methods for each profile. A tool that evaluates the actual knowledge and skills of the users compared to their user profile will be created, to see what the actual need for training is. The tool can also be used to verify the knowl-edge and skills of external consults before hiring their services. Depending on the time left, the thesis will also include information about recommended training for each profile, and weather the training needs to be specific for RDE, or can be purchased from exter-nal suppliers.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 7 (20)



1.3 Objectives

The objectives for this thesis are: To create a matrix stating the need for functionality skills and method knowledge for each user pro-file. To develop a tool that evaluates what the actual need for training for each user is. To perform an evaluation test on a limited group of users.

1.4 Delimitations

The thesis will only include users at Atlas Copco RDE in Örebro. Only the two main CAD systems, Pro/E and AutoCAD, will be analysed in this project. The evaluation tool will be developed primarily for one profile using Pro/E. The number of users testing the evaluation tool will be limited depending on the time left when the project reaches that point. The depth of documentation of the training recommendations will be determined depending on time left after the matrix is completed.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 8 (20)



2 Work method

This thesis is made at the department for CAD support at Rocktec. It will investigate the skills and knowledge needed by different users of AutoCAD and Pro/E and from that information create user profiles. A matrix where the skills and knowledge needed for each profile will be created, to get an overview of the needs for skills and knowledge and use of CAD programs at RDE. Also, a test of one of the profiles will be created, as a tool to verify that the users have the necessary skills and knowledge to perform their jobs as stated by their profile.

2.1 User Profile Matrix

In the fall of 2009, interviews with the following were performed: URE R&D TME: Fredrik Lundberg, Group Leader Group Components Face Drilling Magnus Berggren, Group Manager Face Drilling Anders Olson, Group Manager Production Drilling, Bolting R&D RBM Stefan Dahlberg, Manager Raiseboring R&D LHD: Joakim Lundgren, Group Manager Electric/System engineering Jonas Henrysson, Group Manager Hydraulics/Drivetrain Mikael Petersson, Group Manager Mine Truck Andreas Nordh, Super User Pro/Engineer Robert Johnson, Super User 2D schematics Technical Documentation: Christer Hermansson, Manager SDE R&D: Patrik Kenger, Group Manager Mechanics Jimmy Holler, Group Manager Rig Systems Technical Documentation: Tommy Larsson, Group Leader RTE R&D Rock Drills & Innovation: Lars Persson, Manager R&D Rock Drills: Ulf Nilsson, Super User Pro/E R&D Innovation:





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 9 (20)



Alex Liebert, Group Manager Industrial Design R&D Automation: Jan Knutsson, Group Manager Hardware Development

The interviewees were selected by Anna Sundberg, manager of the CAD support department. The main issues discussed were the following:

- What different “types” of engineers do You have at Your department, e.g. mechanical, hy-draulics etc.? This to try to establish different user profiles.

- What does an engineer at Your department do in CAD today? This to determine the skills and knowledge needed.

- What would they need to be able to do to streamline the concept to product process? This to investigate present needs not quite met and/or future needs.

The notes from the interviews were used to create a user profile matrix. In the matrix the columns are the user profiles and the rows are modules that contain specified skills and knowledge. The module specifications can be found in appendix B.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 10 (20)



Figure 1: Matrix example How to read the matrix: MUST: The modules marked with red are imperative; every engineer with this profile must possess these skills and/or knowledge to be able to do their jobs. NEED: The modules marked with yellow are necessary within the group, i.e. some, but not all, en-gineers in the group must master the skills and knowledge in that module. Alternatively, all the en-gineers in the group must have a general understanding of the module. NICE: The modules marked with green are things that would facilitate the work process in that de-partment, but are not in use today. They grey modules are modules that are needed but does not yet exist. The question marks are to indicate that the need for that module is not quite clear. Since the matrix is to be a live document, this will be corrected continuously.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 11 (20)



Figure 2: Module specification example The matrix was sent to all the participants for revision, and after considering their feedback and dis-cussing with Anna Sundberg, manager of the CAD support department, a new, revised matrix “pro-posed matrix”, appendix A, was created. This matrix is to be read the same way as the “current ma-trix”. The new column, “Profile Add on”, was added to make it easier to see the needs for an engi-neer that has extra responsibility in addition to the basic profile. This matrix is a mix of the skills and knowledge used today, and the skills and knowledge needed according to CAD support and the interviewees.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 12 (20)



Also, an attempt to create more comprehensive profiles was made, without success. They were all variations of this: Example: URE cabin designer

Figure 3: Profile example The main profile is ”mechanical”, containing all the modules under the respective headline. There are three sub profiles “construction”, “cabin” and “AutoCAD” containing the modules under the respective name. The reason this idea was discarded was because most engineers, CAD support excluded, will be none the wiser looking at the main profile with sub profiles, but are going to want to see all the modules to get a grasp of the requirements for their particular profile. So this way of organising the modules will only lead to an extra step with no actual benefits.

2.2 Evaluation tool

Once the matrix was created and the modules were specified, an evaluation tool was developed. Because the matrix is arranged the way it is, I decided in consultation with Anna Sundberg, that the evaluation should be of a specific module, instead of a profile. We chose the module “Pro/E Basic” (Figure 4), since my own skills and knowledge of Pro/E is limited, and because it is one of the most frequent modules, covering most profiles.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 13 (20)



Figure 4: Module Pro/E Basic As a base for the tool I used the educational material that RDE employees get when they complete an external five day course in basic design in Pro/E WF4 ¹. From that I tried to include tests of all the parts of the educational material. I constructed a rudimentary test, appendix C, which included most of the parts of the educational material. On the 18th of December 2009 students at Örebro University that had completed the uni-versity course “solid modelling” recently, were invited to take the test. Only two students did. Even so, it became apparent that the test was too complicated and took to long to complete. I altered the test in such a manner that everything was prepared, so that the user only has to do specific tasks, and clarified the instructions to the tool. The revised tool is found in appendix D. A test of that tool, this time on RDE employees, was performed on the 14th of January 2010. There were seven subjects, all with different experience of using Pro/E. The more experienced users com-pleted the test in about an hour, the others in about two hours. After completing the test the subjects were asked their opinion of the test and any suggestions of improvements they might have. From those comments, the following changes were made: - Further clarifications in the instructions. - A built in fault in one of the tasks, so that the user must exit from resolve mode, was added. - A task where the user has to deal with layers was added. - Some of the questions were altered to concern parent/child relationship rather than blend tool. - The name of an unfortunately named part was changed. This resulted in the finished test, appendix E.

2.3 Recommended training

Due to limited time I decided, in consultation with Anna Sundberg, that I should not look into the recommended training in favour of developing, testing and tweaking the evaluation tool.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 14 (20)



3 Results and Discussions

3.1 Discussion

So, what do we do with the matrix and the evaluation tool? The matrix is to be a live document primarily used by CAD support in cooperation with the manag-ers of the departments to keep an overview of the need for competence at RDE. This should make it easier to coordinate training and prepare for future needs. The Evaluation tool is, for now, only to be used by CAD support to test external consultants before hiring, or for the individual user that wishes to do a check of their skills for themselves. In the future however, “kompetensportalen” is a near perfect solution for use of both the matrix and the evaluation tool. A meeting was held with Magnus Johansson, Competence Development and Employer Branding, to explore the possibilities. “Kompetensportalen” (=the competence portal) is a competence tool for the Atlas Copco employ-ees. In “kompetensportalen” the employees register their CVs and all their completed trainings, courses and other activities. They can find and sign up for various internal and external training and courses and it is used to book and record appraisals. In the future it is also going to be used as a tool to perform competence gap analysis. “Kompetensportalen” is not yet up and running completely, so therefore I cannot give an exact proposition of how the matrix and the evaluation tool can be used. So, respectfully disregarding any limitations, this is how I would like for it to work:





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 15 (20)



For the employee: In their personal space they can see their user profile, possible “add on”s and possible extra modules they have confirmed knowledge of (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Profile If they click on the user profile they can see all the modules included in their profile, with some kind of indication to weather they have confirmed knowledge/skills of that module or not (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Profile with modules





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 16 (20)



If they click on the module they get the full description of the module and a link to do an evaluation test of that module, alternatively the date they passed the evaluation test (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Full description Also, there is a link to the relevant training and/or existing work methods for the module. If they click on the link to the evaluation test, they get instructions on how to perform the test, and on com-pletion a notice will be sent to CAD support.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 17 (20)



For the manager of the department: In their space they can see an overview of their staffs’ profiles (Figure 8). They can also see how many modules are verified. With this information it is easy to perform a CAD competence gap analysis for the entire department. Just like for the employee clicking on a module will display a description of the module as well as links to training and work methods.

Figure 8: Example matrix for the manager of the department For CAD support: The CAD support department will have control of the original matrix, continuously updating it in consultation with the managers of the departments concerned. They also have a matrix similar to Figure 8, but showing the status of all the engineers at all the departments. Here they can easily see and evaluate the need for training. They will also manage the evaluation tools and verifications here.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 18 (20)



3.2 Conclusion

To begin with the matrix will be used by CAD support to keep an overview of the need for CAD competence at Atlas Copco RDE. The matrix is to be a live document that will help CAD support to coordinate training and prepare for future needs. The evaluation tool can be used to test external consultants and for self testing for those engineers that wish to confirm their knowledge of and skills in Pro/E. In the future I sincerely hope that the matrix and the evaluation tool can be incorporated in “Kompe-tensportalen” in a similar fashion to my suggestion. Although I realise that it will be a time consum-ing project, I also hope that evaluation tools for all the modules will be created. This to maximise the use of the matrix in “Kompetensportalen”.

3.3 Further comments and suggestions

During almost all the interviews the interviewees expressed the need for a more homogenous way to work in 3D CAD. Today the different departments and even individual engineers have different work routines. This leads to problems, both with stability in models and assemblies as well as with the handling of models the engineer is not familiar with, costing RDE many man-hours. The inter-viewees asked for more work methods and/or best practices regarding almost every aspect of 3D modelling. There are already some work methods issued by CAD support, but they are not always imple-mented. I have a strong feeling that there are quite a few man-hours every week lost due to this problem. I believe that RDE could save a considerable amount of time and money by investigating this further. I think that this is a good subject to investigate in a thesis, preferably a 30 hp thesis in mechanical engineering or quality.





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 19 (20)



4 References

1. Smith, Steven G. (2008). Pro/ENGINEER WILDFIRE 4.0, BASIC DESIGN, CADquest Incoorporated, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA (ISBN 1-930933-65-7)





Anna Sundberg 2010-01-22 20 (20)



5 Appendices

Appendix A – Proposed matrix

Appendix B – Module description

Appendix C – Evaluation tool, test 1

Appendix D – Evaluation tool, test 2

Appendix E – Evaluation tool, finished test

Skill and Knowledge Matrix, revisedMustNeedNiceA Profile Executive

A:B

Su

bp

rofi

le

SD

E, D

&D

RT

E, R

&D

Ro

ckd

rills

TM

E, R

&D

C

om

po

nen

ts

SD

E, D

&D

LH

D, R

&D

RB

M, R

&D

TM

E, R

&D

Rig

gs

SD

E, D

&D

LH

D, R

&D

RB

M R

&D

TM

E, R

&D

Rig

gs

A:B

:C

Sub

prof

ile

Bas

ic

Cab

in

Driv

e T

rain

Con

sulta

nt

Bas

ic

Bas

ic

Adm

in

Cab

in

Bas

ic

Pro

Hyd

raul

ics

Hyd

raul

ics

Hyd

raul

ics

Bas

ic

inte

rmie

diat

e

Adv

ance

d

SD

E

UR

E

Aut

oCA

D

pro/

E

AutoCAD AutoCAD BasicAutoCAD AC SpecificAutoCAD ElectricalAutoCAD MechanicalAutoCAD view/exportAutoCAD Executive viewer

Pro/E Pro/E Basic ?Pro/E AC Specific ?Pro/E Large Assembly ? ? ?Skeletons user ? ? ?Skeletons creatorPro/E Mechanism UserPro/E Mechanism CreatorPro/E MechanicaPro/E Piping and Cabling ? ?Pro/E Sheetmetal ?Pro/E ISDX/SurfacePro/E ARX renderingPro/E Manekin ?Pro/E TAX Tolerance AnalysiseDrawing ?importing modelsexport to ANSYSPro/E view/exportPro/E Executive viewer

Common AC SpecificsCAD overview for executives

Other Rhino ISOdrawIllustrated

Technical Documentatio

RT

E, I

D

RT

E, A

uto

mat

ion

Profile Add on

Pac

k an

d S

tow

Industrial DesignMechanical Electrical Systems

LH

D, R

&D

RB

M, R

&D

TM

E, R

&D

Rig

gs

AutoCAD Basic AutoCAD AC Specific AutoCAD Electrical AutoCAD Mechanical AutoCAD View/exportSkills in AutoCAD Work methods Skills in AutoCAD

ElectricalSkills in AutoCAD Mechanical

To use AutoCAD 2D. Knowledge of work methods used at AC concerning AutoCAD use and the drawing archive.

How to use specific functions and different component libraries i AutoCAD Electrical to create electrical, hydraulic and pneumatic schematics.

How to use specific functions and component library i AutoCAD Mechanical to create 2D drawings.

To view drawings in autoCAD and to export them to Illustrator.

AutoCAD Executive viewer

Basic knowledge and skills on how to view and check drawings in AutoCAD.

Pro/E Basic Pro/E AC Specific Pro/E Large Assembly Skeletons User Skeletons Creator Basic modelingBasic AssemblyDrawings

IntralinkWork methods

ShrinkwrapWork methodMerge

To use an exisiting skeleton To create and manage skeletons

To create solid models and assemblies, to create drawings and to use Pro/E together with Intralink.

Knowledge of workmethods used at AC concerning Pro/E use, Intralink and the drawing archive.

Knowledge to create and handle large assemblies (lots of models or complicated models) in an efficient way.

To use an exisiting skeleton in an assembly to change modules. To create references to an exisiting skeleton when adding modules to an assembly as specified by AC workmethods for Skeletons.

To create and manage skeletons used in large assemblies. Also AC specific work methods for creating skeletons.

Mechanism User Mechanism Creator Pro/E Mechanica Pro/E Piping and Cabling Pro/E Sheetmetal

To create simple assemblies with Mechanism and use assemblies created with Mechanism to check movements and create snapshots of diffrent positions for drawings.

To create complex assemblies with Mechanism, apply forces and servo motors and create and run analysis.

To perform basic stress analysis basedon thermal, static andsimpler dynamic loads.

To create cable and hose routings in assemblies for spacial claims using AC specific work methods to ensure stable models.

To create models that are manufactured by bending or molding and to create flat spreads that suppliers can us as reference for manufacturing.

Pro/E ISDX/Surfaces Pro/E ARX rendering Pro/E Manekin Pro/E TAX eDrawingsAdvanced Rendering Ergonomic analysis Tolerance Analysis Plug-in to view Pro/E models

outside of Pro/E environment.To create advanced surfaces. To create rendered

pictures of Pro/E models.

To create and perform ergonomic analysis of e.g. cabins.

To perform one dimensional tolerance analysis.

To create and use eDrawings.

importing files export to ANSYS Pro/E View/export Pro/E Executive ViewerWork method Work MethodTo import files in other formats to Pro/E accordning to AC work methods, and how to heal them if necessary.

To use the right export settings when exporting to FEA analysis.

To view models and assemblies in Pro/E and to export them to ISOdraw.

Basic knowledge and skills on how to view and check models and drawings in Pro/E.

Common OtherAC Specifics CAD overview for

executivesRhino ISOdraw Illustrator

Knowledge of the drawing standards used at Atlas Copco and the Atlas Copco specific work methods connected to them. Also knowledge on how CAD is related to other engineering systems, e.g to handle drawing revision in regards to article revisions et.c.

Overview of possibilities in CAD systems.

A 3D modeling program that can create and handle more complex surfaces than Pro/E ISDX.

A program for creating technical illustrations, where it is possible to use pro/E 3D models as a starting point.

A program for creating technical illustrations.

Evaluation tool for Pro/E Basic For consultants

WHAT This is an evaluation tool created for employees using Pro/Engineer at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB. It is primarily for those who have completed XDIN’s course in basic design in Pro/Engineer WF4. This tool was created as part of an undergraduate thesis by a Mechanical Engineer student at Örebro University.

HOW To perform the evaluation test, check out the folder “PRO_E_BASIC” from CAD support in IntraLink and set as Your working directory. Then follow the instructions. Save your files so that they can be reviewed by CAD-support. Note that this is not a test that evaluates Your ingenuity as an engineer, but a test to see how familiar You are with Pro/E tools. Therefore it is not important if minor things do not look like the original, try not to get stuck with details. The test consists of three parts; basic modelling, basic assembly and detailing. Some parts You will create from scratch, and some are prepared for You to finish. Therefore it is very important that You follow the instructions, otherwise unnecessary problems will arise. Note that the drawings used are not detailed according to standard, but only to serve as support for completing the test. The test should take one to two hours to complete, depending on Your experience. If You get completely stuck, skip that task and move on to the next. You may not use the help function in Pro/E.

TEST OBJECTIVE Complete the watch by altering and completing existing parts, create missing parts and assemble them. Create a detailed drawing of a specific part and an assembly drawing to show the completed watch. Good luck! Maria Åberg Örebro University December 2009

TASK 1 Complete the watch housing and the bottom plate 1:1 Open the part EVAL_WATCH_HOUSING.prt. Complete the housing so that it matches the drawing “watch_housing.pdf”. NOTE: The housing’s basic shape is symmetric both right/left and up/down. Use that symmetry! Use the mirror tool to create the other flange. Also create a relation so that the shallow shape around the right button hole changes with the size of the hole with a ratio of 20% (i.e the shape should always be 20% larger than the hole). Set the parameters according to “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save. 1:2 Open the part W_BOTTOM_PLATE_EVAL.prt. Complete the plate according to the drawing “bottom_plate.pdf” with the parameters as in “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save.

TASK 2 Complete the straps and create the screw. 2:1 Open “EVAL_STRAP_1.prt”. Use the pre-existing sketch to create the strap according to the drawing “strap_1.pdf”. Use the pattern tool to create the holes. Set the parameters according to “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save. 2:2 Open “EVAL_STRAP_2.prt” and complete it according to the drawings “strap_2_A.pdf” and “strap_2_B.pdf”. Use the datum plane “START” as Your starting point to create the attachment. Start with the widest section. When creating the holes, it doesn’t matter how deep the ø2 cut is, as long as the head of the screw will not show over the edge and it looks similar to the original, approximately 3mm deep. Set the parameters according to “wrist_watch.pdf”: Save. HINT: Having problems setting the right dimensions for the cut for the flange? Check out how the flange is created in “EVAL_WATCH_HOUSING.prt” and use the same method for the cut. Also, be careful in witch order You create the features. If it is hard to see how the strap should look, use the XXXXX.exe file to look at the model in 3D. 2:3 Create a part EVAL_SCREW_YOURNAME.prt. Create the screw according to the drawing “screw_.pdf” by using the revolve tool, disregard the threads. Set the parameters according to “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save.

TASK 3 Complete the assembly to look like the original drawing “wrist_watch.pdf”.

Open the assembly WATCH.asm. Place the remaining parts EVAL_STRAP_2 WATCH_PIN WATCH_SLIDER (use the axes “SLIDER_AXIS” and “SLIDER_REF” for easier assembly.) BUTTON_LEFT W_SCREW_EVAL_YOURNAME x4 according to the drawing. NOTE: When creating the assembly You may notice that strap_2 do not fit the housing perfectly. This is easily corrected, but if You are pressed for time, leave it. It is not important for the evaluation.

TASK 4 Create detailed drawings. They do not have to match the original exactly, do not get stuck with details. NOTE: The drawings are not detailed according to standard, only to serve as support for completing this test. 4.1 Create a drawing WATCH_HOUSING.drw. Choose XXXX template . Complete the drawing to look like the original drawing “watch housing”. Create and save a slanted view to be used as 3D view in the right corner (does not have to look like the original). 4.2 Create an exploded assembly drawing with BOM-list. Use the XXXX template.

Evaluation tool for Pro/E Basic For consultants

WHAT This is an evaluation tool created for employees using Pro/Engineer at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB. It is primarily for those who have completed a five day introduction course in basic design in Pro/Engineer WF4. This tool was created as part of an undergraduate thesis by a Mechanical Engineer student at Örebro University.

HOW To perform the evaluation test, copy the folder “XXXXXX” to a suitable location and set as Your working directory. Then follow the instructions. Save your files so that they can be reviewed by CAD-support. Note that this is not a test that evaluates Your ingenuity as an engineer, but a test to see how familiar You are with Pro/E tools. Therefore it is not important if minor things do not look like the original, try not to get stuck with details. The test consists of three parts, basic modelling, basic assembly and detailing. Some parts You will create from scratch, and some are prepared for You to finish. Therefore it is very important that You follow the instructions, otherwise unnecessary problems will arise. Note that the drawings used are not detailed according to standard, but only to serve as support for completing the test. The test should take about an hour to complete, depending on Your experience. If You get completely stuck, skip that task and move on to the next. You may not use the help function in Pro/E.

TEST OBJECTIVE Complete the watch by altering and completing existing parts, create missing parts and assemble them. Create a detailed drawing of a specific part and an assembly drawing to show the completed watch. Good luck! Maria Åberg Örebro University December 2009

TASK 1 Complete the watch housing and the bottom plate 1:1 Open the part EVAL_WATCH_HOUSING.prt. Complete the housing so that it matches the drawing “watch_housing.pdf”. The M1 holes are symmetrically placed, use mirror tool to place them. The depth of the holes is not important, set it reasonably. Set the left button hole diameter to 3.5 mm. Also create a relation so that the shallow shape around the left button hole changes with the size of the hole iwth a ration of 20% (i.e. the shape should always be 20% larger that the hole). Set the parameters according to “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save. 1:2 Open the part W_BOTTOM_PLATE_EVAL.prt. Complete the plate according to the drawing “bottom_plate.pdf” with the parameters as in “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save.

TASK 2 Complete the straps and create the screw. 2:1 Open “EVAL_STRAP_1.prt”. Use the pre-existing sketch to create the strap according to the drawing “strap_1.pdf”. The pre-existing trajectory should be placed in the centre of hte section. Use the pattern tool to create the holes. Save. 2:2 Create a part EVAL_SCREW_YOURNAME.prt. Create the screw according to the drawing “screw_.pdf” by using the revolve tool, disregard the threads. Create the chamfer using the chamfer tool, not in sketcher. Set the parameters according to “wrist_watch.pdf”. Save.

TASK 3 Complete the assembly to look like the original drawing “wrist_watch.pdf”. Open the assembly WATCH.asm. Place the remaining parts WATCH_GLASS.prt BUTTON_LEFT.prt W_SCREW_EVAL_YOURNAME.prt; place one screw only, that will suffice according to the drawing. Save

TASK 4 Create detailed drawings. They do not have to match the original exactly; do not get stuck with details. NOTE: The drawings are not detailed according to standard, only to serve as support for completing this test. 4.1 Open EVAL_WATCH_HOUSING.prt and WATCH_HOUSING_DRAWING.drw. Complete the drawing to look like the original drawing “watch_housing_drw.pdf”. Create and save a slanted view named SLANT_3D to be used as 3D view in the right corner (does not have to look like the original). The 3D view should show tangent edges. Save. 4.2 Open WRIST_WATCH_ASSEMBLY.asm. Create an exploded assembly drawing with BOM-list. Use the pre-selected template drawing and then go to File � Page Setup � Format � Browse, select “wf_a3_asm”. Use the default exploded state; there is no need to adjust it, even if it rarely looks good. Create BOM-balloons. Save.

TASK 5 Do the knowledge check test.

Knowledge check test 1. Match the tool to the description.

a) Parallel Blend b) Sweep c) Variable Section Sweep

A) One section that is extended along one trajectory. B) One section and two or more trajectories that controls the path and the shape and size

of the section. C) Two or more sections merged with a user defined distance, no trajectory.

2. BLEND TOOL 2:1 What effect does unequal number of vertices in the different sections have on a parallel blend feature?

a) None b) You cannot create a blend with unequal number of vertices. c) You can only create surfaces, not solid protrusions.

2:2 How can You solve the problem of unequal number of vertices in the sections?

a) I don’t have to, Pro/E automatically creates additional vertices. b) By adding a blend vertex from the sketch � feature tools menu. c) By adding vertices using the sketcher tool “divide”. d) Both b and c.

2:3 How does the Start Point and Direction Arrow effect the shape of the blend?

a) The start point decides which vertex is first, the Direction Arrow in which direction the following sections will be numbered, in each section. Vertex 1 in all the sections will be connected to each other, same with vertex 2 and so on.

b) The Start Point decides which section is first, the Direction Arrow in which direction the blend will be created. The section with the Start Point will be the first and dominant section, the other sections following in the direction of the Direction Arrow.

3. RELATIONS When You regenerate a part with relations, in which order are the relations executed?

a) From the top of the relations window to the bottom. b) Form the bottom of the relations window to the top. c) That depends on how You write the code. d) All commands are executed simultaneously.

Evaluation tool for Pro/E Basic

WHAT This is an evaluation tool created for employees using Pro/Engineer at Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB. It is primarily for those who have completed a five day introduction course in basic design in Pro/Engineer WF4. This tool was created as part of an undergraduate thesis by a Mechanical Engineer student at Örebro University.

HOW To perform the evaluation test, check out the folder “PRO_E_BASIC” from CAD support in IntraLink and set as Your working directory. Then follow the instructions. Save your files so that they can be reviewed by CAD-support. Note that this is not a test that evaluates Your ingenuity as an engineer, but a test to see how familiar You are with Pro/E tools. Therefore it is not important if minor things do not look like the original, try not to get stuck with details. The test consists of three parts; basic modelling, basic assembly and detailing. Some parts You will create from scratch, and some are prepared for You to finish. Therefore it is very important that You follow the instructions, otherwise unnecessary problems will arise. Note that the drawings used are not detailed according to standard, but only to serve as support for completing the test. The test should take one to two hours to complete, depending on Your experience. If You get completely stuck, skip that task and move on to the next. You may use the help function in Pro/E, if You wish.

TEST OBJECTIVE Complete the watch by altering and completing existing parts, create missing parts and assemble them. Create a detailed drawing of a specific part and an assembly drawing to show the completed watch. Good luck! Maria Åberg Örebro University January 2010

IMPORTANT: The tasks are not interdependent. Therefore, if You get stuck, leave the task and return to it later, if You have the time. Appearance is not important, so just do the bare minimum. Otherwise this test will take unnecessary long time.

TASK 1 Complete the watch housing and the bottom plate 1:1 Open the part BASIC_HOUSING.prt. Complete the housing so that it matches the drawing “basic_housing.pdf”. Place the M1 holes symmetrically, use mirror tool to place them. The depth of the holes is not important, set it reasonably. Create a relation so that the shallow shape around the left button hole changes with the size of the hole with a ratio of 20% (i.e. the shape should always be 20% larger than the hole). Save. 1:2 Open the part BASIC_BOTTOM_PLATE.prt. Complete the plate according to the drawing “basic_bottom_plate.pdf. Save.

TASK 2 Complete the strap and create the screw. 2:1 Open “BASIC_STRAP_1.prt”. There is a pre-existing sketch for You to use, “TRAJ_A”, but first You have to make it visible to be able to use it. Use the sketch and sweep tool to create the strap according to the drawing “basic _strap_1.pdf”.The pre-existing trajectory should be placed in the centre of the section. Use the pattern tool to create the holes. Save. 2:2 Create a part SCREW.prt. Create the screw according to the drawing “basic_screw.pdf” by using the revolve tool, disregard the threads. Create the chamfer using the chamfer tool, not in sketcher. Set the parameters: Denomination: SCREW Article no: 0000 0000 11 Material: Steel Save.

TASK 3 Complete the assembly to look like the original drawing “basic_watch.pdf”. Open the assembly BASIC_WATCH.asm. You will start in resolve mode. Make it so that You can continue to work with the assembly. Place the remaining parts: BASIC_GLASS.prt BASIC_BUTTON_LEFT.prt SCREW.prt; place one screw only, that will suffice according to the drawing. Save.

TASK 4 Create detailed drawings. They do not have to match the original exactly; do not get stuck with details. NOTE: The drawings are not detailed according to standard, only to serve as support for completing this test. 4.1 Open BASIC_HOUSING.prt and BASIC_HOUSING.drw. Complete the drawing to look like the original drawing “basic_drawing.pdf”. There is no need to be precise with the locations of the dimensions, but the shape of the arrows should be the same. Create and save a slanted view named SLANT_3D to be used as 3D view in the right corner (does not have to look like the original). The 3D view should show tangent edges. Save. 4.2 Open BASIC_WATCH.asm. Create an exploded assembly drawing with BOM-list. Use the pre-selected template drawing and then go to File � Page Setup � Format � Browse, select “wf_a3_asm”. Use the default exploded state; there is no need to adjust it, even if it rarely looks good. Create BOM-ballons. Save.

TASK 5 Do the knowledge check test.

Knowledge check test 1. Match the tool to the description

a) Parallel Blend b) Sweep c) Variable section sweep

A) One section that is extended along one trajectory B) One section and two or more trajectories that controls the path and the shape and size

of the section. C) Two or more sections merged with a user defined distance, no trajectory

2. RELATIONS When You regenerate a part with relations, in witch order are the relations executed?

a) From the top of the relations window to the bottom b) From the bottom of the relations window to the top c) That depends on how You write the code d) All commands are executed simultaneously

3. PARENT – CHILD Briefly explain the parent – child relationship, using the picture as reference:

copyin

g o

f th

is d

ocum

ent or

any p

art

there

of is

pro

hib

ited.

Pro

pert

y o

f A

tlas C

opco R

ock D

rills

AB

. A

ny u

nauth

orized u

se o

r

Rev. Posi-tion

Modified from Intr. DM no.

TMG4

AC-STD 1102 K/

Secrecy class

DateAppd.Prod.chd.Design chd.

SheetDesignationFin.wt.Blk.wt.Std.chd.Transferred from

ReplacesBlankDrawn

Drg.owner.CompareFamScale

Material

NameAC-STD:

Date

Tolerances, if not indicated,

according to

Ver.

B B

2xR0.2

1

M1x.25

3.5

4x°55

4x10

1

5

1.2x

3.5

152.54x0.75

1

- - - 2009-12-03 WATCH_HOUSING- - kg 0.0 kg )1(1

M.A - -

1:1 - -

atlas black Pro/E

alWatch housing -

1350 K - - - - - -

Machined surfaces - - - -

- - - -M

odel

nam

eR

evV

erO

bjW

AT

CH

_HO

US

ING

03+

Design

Pre

limin

ary

P

relim

inary

Onl

y fo

r Atla

s C

opco

Inte

rnal

Use

4 identical M1x.25 holes symmetrically placed

Depth of holes not important

A

5:1A

B-B

C

1:2

3:1C

copyin

g o

f th

is d

ocum

ent or

any p

art

there

of is

pro

hib

ited.

Pro

pert

y o

f A

tlas C

opco R

ock D

rills

AB

. A

ny u

nauth

orized u

se o

r

Rev. Posi-tion


TMG4

AC-STD 1102 K/

Secrecy class



ReplacesBlankDrawn


Material

NameAC-STD:

Date


according to

Ver.

A

A

0.6

3 0.6

- - - 2009-12-03 W_BOTTOM_PLATE- - kg 0.0 kg )1(1

M.A - -

2:1 - -

Atlas Black Pro/E

AlBottom plate -

1350 K - - - - - -


- - - -M

odel

nam

eR

evV

erO

bjB

OT

TO

M_P

LAT

E0

1

Design

Pre

limin

ary

Onl

y fo

r Atla

s C

opco

Inte

rnal

Use

A-A

copyin

g o

f th

is d

ocum

ent or

any p

art

there

of is

pro

hib

ited.

Pro

pert

y o

f A

tlas C

opco R

ock D

rills

AB

. A

ny u

nauth

orized u

se o

r

Rev. Posi-tion


TMG4

AC-STD 1102 K/

Secrecy class



ReplacesBlankDrawn


Material

NameAC-STD:

Date


according to

Ver.

AA

5x

2

2

20

20°

4x

°15

10

- - - 2009-12-07 STRAP_1- - kg 0.0 kg )1(1

- - -

1:1 - -

- Pro/E

Plastic Fantasticstrap_1 -

1350 K - - - - - -


- - - -M

odel

nam

eR

evV

erO

bjW

AT

CH

_ST

RA

P_1

00+

Design

Pre

limin

ary

Onl

y fo

r Atla

s C

opco

Inte

rnal

Use

B

B

1:4

A-A

2x R8

copyin

g o

f th

is d

ocum

ent or

any p

art

there

of is

pro

hib

ited.

Pro

pert

y o

f A

tlas C

opco R

ock D

rills

AB

. A

ny u

nauth

orized u

se o

r

Rev. Posi-tion


TMG4

AC-STD 1102 K/

Secrecy class



ReplacesBlankDrawn


Material

NameAC-STD:

Date


according to

Ver.

A A

Hexagon 0.5

12

8

2

M1 x.25

- - - 2009-12-07 SCREW_- - kg 0.0 kg )1(1

M.A - -

15:1 - -

- Pro/E

steelscrew -

1350 K - - - - - -


- - - -M

odel

nam

eR

evV

erO

bjW

_SC

RE

W_E

VA

L0

1

Design

Pre

limin

ary

Onl

y fo

r Atla

s C

opco

Inte

rnal

Use

A-A

50°x0.1

5:1

copy

ing

of th

is d

ocum

ent o

r any

par

t the

reof

is p

rohi

bite

d.P

rope

rty o

f Atla

s C

opco

Roc

k D

rills

AB

. Any

una

utho

rized

use

or

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Rev. Posi-tion


TMG3

AC-STD 1102 K/

Secrecy class



ReplacesBlankDrawn


Material

NameAC-STD:

Date


Com

pare

with

the

orig

inal

stru

ctur

e in

DE

MO

according to

Ver.

AlBottom plate10000 0000 3571alpin10000 0000 7412alslider10000 0000 9513alWatch housing10000 0000 0034glassglass10000 0000 4565plasticbutton large10000 0000 9636plasticbutton left10000 0000 1237plasticbutton right20000 0000 3218plasticstrap 210000 0000 0029plastic fantasicstrap 110000 0000 00110steelscrew40000 0000 35511

- - - - -

- - - YYYY-MM-DD WRIST_WATCH- - kg 0.0 kg )1(1

- - -

1:1 - -

- Pro/E

--

1350 K - - - - - -


Pos. Designation Number Name Material

Mod

el n

ame

Rev

Ver

Obj

WR

IST

_WA

TC

H_E

VA

L0

0

Design

Pre

limin

ary

Onl

y fo

r Atla

s C

opco

Inte

rnal

Use

4

7

10

9

11

11 5

8

11 8

11

6

1

2

3

copyin

g o

f th

is d

ocum

ent or

any p

art

there

of is

pro

hib

ited.

Pro

pert

y o

f A

tlas C

opco R

ock D

rills

AB

. A

ny u

nauth

orized u

se o

r

Rev. Posi-tion


TMG4

AC-STD 1102 K/

Secrecy class



ReplacesBlankDrawn


Material

NameAC-STD:

Date


according to

Ver.

B B

2xR0.2

3.5

4x°55

4x10

40±0.1530

- - - 2009-12-03 WATCH_HOUSING_TASK4- - kg 0.0 kg )1(1

M.A - -

1:1 - -

atlas black Pro/E

alWatch housing -

1350 K - - - - - -


- - - -M

odel

nam

eR

evV

erO

bjW

AT

CH

_HO

US

ING

03+

Design

Pre

limin

ary

P

relim

inary

Onl

y fo

r Atla

s C

opco

Inte

rnal

Use

MAKE NOTE HERE!

A

5:1A

B-B

1:2

Evaluation tool for Pro/E Basic Key

Name: Date: Checked by:

TASK 1 In this task the following points should have been performed: 1:1 Housing Check OK Extrude or Revolve Cut to create the button hole and the shape on the left

Modeltree

Relations to control the shape of the cut around the button hole on the left

Change the radius on the button hole, then regenerate

Round Tool to create a round on the edges of the left button hole

Modeltree

A new datum plane with the correct angle created to place the hole correctly.

Light datums Analysis

Hole tool to create the hole with correct thread

Edit definition

Mirror tool to place the other three holes Modeltree

1:2 Bottom plate Check OK Shell tool to shape the bottom plate Modeltree Correct setting in shell tool to create different thickness

Analysis /visual inspection

Inserting the shell tool in the model tree to avoid shell in logo

Modeltree

TASK 2 In this task the following points should have been performed: 2:1 Strap Check OK Light up layers Visual inspection Sweep feature to create the strap using existing trajectory

Modeltree/visual inspection

Hole tool/Extrude Cut to create a hole at the centre of the strap (10 mm), 20º from end

Modeltree Analysis

Pattern tool to create the remaining 4 holes with 15º spacing

Modeltree Analysis

Round tool to create the rounded end

Modeltree/Visual inspection

2:2 Screw Check OK Revolve tool to create the screw

Modeltree

Chamfer tool to create the chamfer with 50º and 0.1mm.

Modeltree � Chamfer �Edit definition

TASK 3 In this task the following points should have been performed: 3 Assembly Check OK Resolve mode handled, preferably by altering the missing reference.

Visual inspection/model tree

The three remaining parts assembled according to “wrist_watch.pdf”

Visual inspection

TASK 4 In this task the following points should have been performed: 4:1 Detailed drawing Check OK A projected view on the right Visual inspection All dimensions matching “basic_drawing.pdf”

Visual inspection

A section “B-B” at the top with the section arrows in the general view at the centre

Visual inspection

A detailed view “A” showing the threaded hole in the flange with hidden lines

Visual inspection

Axes showing according to “basic_drawing.pdf”

Visual inspection

The correct tolerance ±0.15 at the 40mm dimension

Visual inspection

A user created 3D view named SLANT_3D showing tangent edges

Visual inspection and Properties � model view

The appearance of the dimension arrows

Visual inspection

The Scale of the different views according to “basic_drawing.pdf”

Visual inspection

A note according to “basic_drawing.pdf.”

Visual inspection

4:2 Assembly drawing Check OK An exploded assembly drawing as stated in the task

Visual inspection

BOM balloons visible Visual inspection/ clean up BOM balloons to ensure the command show BOM has been used.

TASK 5 Key knowledge check test 1. a) C) b) A) c) B) 2. a)

skill and knowledge matrix and evaluation tool for cad- users at

Documents