UNIT 5
Digital trend and Industry 4.0 movement is bringing a huge opportunity
for PLM software vendors. A huge focus is given to PLM in the last 5
years in manufacturing organizations to implement modules in Design,
configuration, change, manufacturing, service, and supply chain
departments. Though there is a huge opportunity lies ahead, there are
major roadblocks to implement the solutions in all industries. We will be
discussing the obstacles and some of the solutions to overcome them in
this article.
Below are a few of the top hurdles industries are facing for
implementation,
1. Integration
2. New data models
3. Foundation data
4. Process mapping
5. OOTB vs Customization
I N T E G R AT I O N W I T H E N T E R P R I S E S Y S T E M S
PLM owns the entire product, process data, and demands transferring to
other enterprise systems. Generally, BoM’s, process plans, work
instructions, and CAD are transferred to other systems viz. (ERP, MES,
BIM, CMS, QMS, CAD, CAE, CAM, IoT, AR, Mock-up, etc.). Interfaces are
bridged by third-party applications such as (ESI/ERP connectors, TIBCO
connectors, etc.). This is a complex process, and all industries face major
problems whilst transferring data. Siemens enabled Closed-loop
manufacturing (CLM) and closed-loop Quality (CLQ) by providing out of
the box integration features within their PLM, MES, and QMS systems. In
recent days, these interface issues are being addressed by partnering
PLM vendors and ERP, MES vendors. A partnership between SAP &
Siemens PLM, PTC & Rockwell is the best example.
N E W D ATA M O D E L S
CAD is the foundation of the majority of the PLM systems. Traditionally
PLM started as a CAD data & engineering bill of material management
tool. The need for utilizing the CAD by downstream departments is
growing and it is enabled by lightweight CAD Models. All the major PLM
vendors have their own lightweight CAD system (PTC-Creo View,
Siemens-JT, Dassault-eDrawing). Lightweight CAD models are used for
visualization, Illustrations, documentation, and manufacturing
simulations, and these activities are performed outside of a native CAD
system. As an example, every OEM should create an illustrated parts
catalog (IPC) for their product as part of entry into service requirements.
Illustrations are performed by external software (Creo Illustrate, Rapid
Author, etc.), and connecting with native CAD is a challenging activity. In
the above picture, we can see Native CAD is transformed into 4 different
file types to reach its final format. This is applicable to most of the
downstream consumption processes. Due to this, the changing data
model content becomes unstable and change management also
becomes unstable. All the PLM vendors are working to resolve these
issues and we can see further improvements in the coming years.
F O U N D AT I O N D ATA
Successful implementation of any tool depends upon the availability and
quality of foundation data. As PLM started as a CAD Data management
tool, the focus was given to CAD more than any other processes. Finding
a source for any object is difficult and still lies within the human mind.
Mapping all the knowledge regarding product, process and performance
is still in the early stages and takes a few more years to mature. Due to
the unorganized data structure, implementing downstream applications
are difficult and a huge amount of time needs to spend to clean up the
data. This is one of the major challenges for successful PLM
implementation.
P R O C E SS M A P P I N G
PLM applications traverse through multiple departments and processes.
Successful implementation depends on efficient process mapping and
stakeholder identification. One of the successful ways to implement is,
running the proof of concept and pilot phase. After completing the pilot
phase, we should be able to define the process 98%, so that there will be
minimum hurdles in the full-scale implementation. Define a structured
approach by having a project manager, functional consultant, and
solution architect, and end-users. This will make sure that all the
stakeholders are aligned, and maximum business value is earned.
O O T B V S C U S T O M I Z AT I O N
OOTB vs customization is a longstanding discussion taking place for most
of the PLM implementation projects. Both approaches have their own
pros and cons. Every company operates differently and it’s not always
possible to map the processes with OOTB configurations. When
processes deviate from the available configurations, we may have to
think about customization. The major challenge we face with
customization is, when the software upgrade happens, always there will
be issues with the customization. We can solve this issue in two ways,
one is accepting the OOTB configuration and manage the deviation
process outside of the system. If the business process is critical and
error-prone, customization is essential. While making customization, it’s
always advisable to consider future upgrades and possible future
enhancements.
