Simulation technology – or rather database, integration, visualisation and web technologies coupled with simulation software for manufacturing engineering – is quietly revolutionising production development. It’s happening particularly in the automotive and aerospace sectors, but as understanding of the power of these systems to save both time and cost through accelerated and right-first-time collaborative working (both for new projects and continuous improvement), it will surely spread.
Why should we be interested? Because we’re talking big improvements – and costs and learning curves that aren’t that steep. The two leaders in this field are independent Tecnomatix (which has growing links with EDS) and Delmia, owned by Dassault Systemes, and part of the Dassault/IBM alliance. Delmia quotes of the order of £20,000 for a system and says that Daimler Chrysler, for example, is achieving savings around the 5% mark on manpower through line balancing alone resulting from its use. And with joined up and real-time information across engineering and manufacturing, there’s a lot more.
“Most companies are still in the Stone Age when it comes to manufacturing production systems,” says Stéphane Declée, vice president R&D at Dassault. “There’s a major bottleneck on cycle time and cost reduction: [manufacturing engineers] don’t have the technology to help them design production systems, for example, as part of new product development.” Factory simulation is part of what we need, but it’s also tools for designing and optimising the production processes, all the operations, the resources, the line balancing, the materials replenishment and impact analysis for change management – in parallel with engineering, purchasing and the rest.
Hitherto, at best the big boys have, for example, integrated 2D factory planning with digital mock-ups as bespoke systems. But CAD remains engineering’s territory, and MRP manufacturing’s. As a result, visibility across BoMs (bills of materials), parts lists and engineering change management, never mind suppliers and so on, is problematic. Few would argue with systems able to handle all of this, as well as logistics planning (with large volumes of data to transfer), keeping departments, suppliers and third parties up to date, and managing robot and machine programming, sequencing and operator support.
Happening right now
“Manufacturers need these systems, and they need them to be highly integrated with their CAD and ERP systems to be efficient,” says Albert Ifrah, senior vice president Europe at Tecnomatix. Both he and Declée describe what for many will seem the holy grail for production analysts. And it sounds far fetched: the scope is enormous, likewise the complexity, to say nothing of the hurdles of existing cultures and legacy systems. After all, we’re managing all this somehow right now – even if with ‘Stone Age’ tools.
But it’s neither fanciful nor beyond reach. So called manufacturing process management (MPM) systems – aimed at sorting out the ‘how to’ manufacture between the ‘what to build’ of CAD/CAM and PLM (product lifecycle management) and the ‘where/when’, crudely, of ERP systems – are here. They’re essentially what used to be termed ‘digital factory’ software, a superset of CAPE (computer aided process engineering).
Today, they provide a collaborative environment for everything from early production line planning, to optimisation and operator assistance, as well as powering 3D engineering and operations design, project management and documentation. They also include business logic, workflow and the all-important integration into both CAD/PLM and ERP on the manufacturing business side.
For many of us, this will be our next step: with ‘vertical’ ERP integration into manufacturing done, and similar but separate integration happening on the engineering side, the next step will be what Declée terms “horizontal optimisation”. Indeed, MPM applications are likely to be among our most valuable investments, alongside PLM, particularly for larger manufacturers involved with complex engineering and change.
It is compelling. As Steve Nevey, CAE manager at Jaguar Racing, says: “For us, CAD geometry should never be locked into the CAD system and only visible to the guys who use Unigraphics or Catia or whatever; it’s got to be available through viewers to everybody further down stream.” Exactly. But Nigel Prue, UK managing director of Delmia, observes: “One of the key issues today is that manufacturing engineers don’t have access to that data or the engineering BoM. They can’t go and look at what the CAD designer’s got.”
With MPM systems, they get precisely that: access to the BoM and to the 3D data “in an environment they are familiar with, and which enables them to do their job.” They get product geometry and structure from engineering. They can associate processes, use gant charts and move things around graphically on-screen until they’re optimised. They can associate products with processes and resources – virtual robots, machines, tools, people, whatever – visualising the manufacturing processes as they go.
Not only is it all virtual and instant; it’s also detailed and accurate, founded on real data. Says Prue: “They can re-use the data that design has provided; if there’s some mechanism, some assembly sequences, they’re also re-usable; they have change control. They can see what the designers change [and] re configure the engineering BoM to the manufacturing BoM. And they keep the links, so if a new BoM comes in, what they export into the ERP system is the manufacturing BoM with the quantities, where they’re going on the line and so on.”
And that means, for example, that procurement gets access to the information it needs for long lead time components fast. In a sense, it’s the old message of PLM – profiting from putting engineering information at the heart of the business, rather than treating it as an add-on. The benefits come not only from starting manufacturing production process planning much earlier in design, development and change cycles, but through improving engineering productivity, ramping up speed and quality and reducing rejects, rework and scrap.
Says Ifrah: “When you get the manufacturing engineer and the designer talking the same language, and they have access to the same geometry, the same structure, you can make immense savings.” Users can take more advantage of best practices in engineering and manufacturing. They can find the best way to build an assembly, using simulation and planning, and then re-use that everywhere. The list goes on.
Automotive, aerospace...
This is well underway in the automotive sector. Big users include GM, Daimler Chrysler, PSA Peugeot Citroen, Ford, BMW, Land Rover, Jaguar, Volvo, Audi, VW, Renault, Hyundai, Mazda and Suzuki. There’s also a large number of Tier One automotive suppliers: names like Visteon, TMS Produktionssysteme, Marxer Anlagen and in the UK TWR, the latter using Tecnomatix’s MPM for simulation in body in white (BIW) and final assembly, as well as running its specialist projects for vehicles like the Volvo C70 convertible and cabriolet. And there are smaller but high profile names like Bentley, which intends to use the software in final assembly factory simulation as it moves from craft operations making 1,500 cars per year to modern production lines and machines producing 9,000 units.
And in aerospace, the British Aerospace and ERP software firm IFS joint venture is harnessing the software for logistics and quality simulation, while long term user Airbus is now planning final assembly for the A380 in Toulouse on it. Other sizeable users include Pratt & Whitney and Boeing. And heavy and more general engineering are starting to shape up, with Caterpillar, Groupe Schneider and Atco now users, while in telecoms and CPG (consumer packaged goods) Nokia and Bosch respectively are Delmia users.
What will hold the rest of us back will be, as much as anything, business culture. Remember how long it took PLM to gain any kind of acceptance – and the hugely long term pioneering work done particularly again in the aerospace sector. As Declée says: “Remember, organisations all have different leaderships on the engineering, manufacturing and business sides – so it will mean new ways of doing business as well.”
Perhaps the real value will come when these innovative software developers turn their attention to the wider market. And that’s only likely to happen when the existing markets are more saturated.
|