Doug Halliday at Adobe PLM

Hi there,

I just received some news I thought I would pass along.  (The marketing guys promised to buy me dinner for this.)  It is news that could be important to you if you are using or considering adoption of the PDF format for leveraging CAD data across your operations and repourposing it in technical docs and so forth.  Adobe is announcing an update that you may want to check out...  details are spelled out below. 

The Acrobat 3D version 8 update is schedule to go live on Feb 21 at 9am PST.   Here are the details:

A free CAD translator update for Acrobat 3D Version 8 is available for download for registered or trial users of Acrobat 3D Version 8.

This update provides support for more recent versions of CAD file formats, allowing users to more easily and effectively convert 3D designs from major CAD applications to PDF documents.

For more information, including a list of supported formats, please go to: http://www.adobe.com/go/a3d_update . This URL will link to the support when we go live. It’s not working yet.

The free download includes translator updates for the following CAD file formats:

CAD Format	Supported Versions
Autodesk Inventor	Up to 2008
I-deas	Up to 13
JT	Up to 8.2
NX (Unigraphics)	Up to NX5
OneSpace Designer	Up to 2007
SolidWorks	Up to 2008

Posted by Doug Halliday at 09:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

2D to 3D… What is the trend?

 

Okay, what’s the trend?  According to almost every account or study I read, use of 3D CAD data is growing.   To some that means that everyone is (or will be) moving to 3D.  I don’t believe that at all, but I think 3D data should become the standard for key workflows.   I think that the reasons it has not are a combination of business and technical limitations that are being overcome.

Use of 3D data is growing.  Cambashi recently reported 13% 2007 growth in sales of engineering software world-wide (with the Asia Pacific region leading the way, which I think is very important to note).  While slower growth rates are expected through 2010, there is clearly something going on here.   You can assume that 3D data use/applications are growing proportionately, at least.  They are probably faster, because there are indeed many mid-size and smaller companies that have resisted, but are being driven to 3D by the large OEMs they sell to.   Then there are 3D Model Based Engineering/Design initiatives intended to take whole industries in that direction.

 

How fast is 3D usage growing?  The rates vary, depending upon whom you want to believe.  I’m not going to try to give a precise answer.  I’m not going to look at this question from the perspective of someone who has worked to develop PLM systems (broadly defined to include CAD, CAM, PDM, etc.), deploy them.  I am going to look at this from the perspective of what will benefit the enterprise mostly outside of today’s PLM focus.

 

I am going to ask you to look at this problem by starting with the end in mind.  We will then look at the product lifecycle in reverse, trying to identify where 3D data makes sense, and perhaps where it doesn’t.

 

So let’s get to it… click below to read on.

Let’s quickly look at the question in reverse

So what is the goal of a discrete manufacturing enterprise?  You Eli Goldratt fans are saying “to make money”.  Okay, so let’s not go that far to the end state, but let’s consider what is necessary to deliver a product say to a retail outlet.  For the sake of making this more concrete, let say a car dealership.  You are, of course going to need the product and a way to order and deliver it.  You will need marketing collateral – probably both print and web-based.  You will need service instructions for the shop (and inmost industries for the field).  There are also aftermarket needs, but let’s leave those out for the sake of brevity. 

Now, of course, if we step back a bit, there had to be a production manufacturing facility up and running near flawlessly to deliver the product.  Not only did the production tooling need to be right, but inspection and monitoring systems needed to be in place to ensure everything is right quality-wise.  Parts and systems had to be scheduled and delivered to meet today’s demands fro one-part flow and JIT delivery.

So where would 3D data make a real difference, and where would it be just nice to have or even irrelevant?   What were the process steps and systems that were essential to getting to this point to get everything up and running?   Which of those are just fine 2D oriented processes, which are best using 3D data and which could be either?  Go to 3D if the benefit outweighs the cost, but for goodness sake, don’t go to 3D just because you can or want to.  

Here’s my assessment of what systems and processes need to be/should be 3D:

2D and 3D Workflows – Many do not require 3D

Representative Manufacturing Workflows
Workflow	Key Activities	2D	3D	Mix
Product Planning	Scope (New-C/O content) Features Financial Targets	X X X		X
Concept Development	Product and Market Requirements Design Concept Product Concept (trade-offs)	X   X		X
Sourcing	Technical Packages/Requirements RFQ Source Selection & Engagement	X		X   X
Design	Product Design Inc. Mock-Up System Design Component Design		X X X
Test and Analysis	Prototype Build Prototype Test FEM/FEA		X	X X
Manufacturing Engineering	Process Planning Process Design (Line/Station/Operation) Tool and Die Design	X	X   X
Release	CAD Data Model Revision Production Approval		X	X
Purchasing/ Sourcing	RFx Process System and Component Sourcing Co-design Design Integration	X	X X	X
Change Management	Issue Management Engineering Change Request/Notification Manufacturing Change Request/Notification	X	X	X
Pilot Production/Launch	Quality Glide Path/Acceleration Issue Management	X X
Production	Procurement/Broadcast/Scheduling Plant operations	X X
Sales and Marketing	Sales Brochures Advertising/Promotions			X X
Customer Service	Service Manuals User Manuals	X		X

 

Note, I have highlighted cells where which I believe represent the sweetspot...  the place top performers will end up.  So what’s the point?  Well the point is that while I fully support the notion of CAD everywhere, as a friend of mine at one of the largest automotive companies likes to say, don’t assume that everything needs to transition to 3D.    The best in class competitors seem to be headed toward intelligently blending 3D data into traditionally 2D workflows.  Notice how many of these are a mix or 2D and 3D. 

Many manufacturing workflows are, and likely always will be 2D.  Companies who do the best job of meeting business requirements such as quality, time to market and cost, simply do a better job of using 3D data where it makes sense.  Many strictly 2D processes can be enhanced with 3D data.  In general, 3D communicates better.   The issue for manufacturing companies is extending workflows and making them easy to engage with.  That is why growth in the use of 3D data has been slower than many have predicted.   The CAD everywhere idea is spot on, but it hasn’t been easy historically to extend 3D beyond engineering to effectively blend 2D and 3D.  That is changing.   I think that is the place we’re going to see tremendous growth in coming years.

What should you do?

Find out how to extend both your 2D and 3D workflows as necessary, to the entire enterprise and outside to suppliers and JVs.  That is where the battle will be won or lost.  Then adopt technology that will allow you to both mix 2D and 3D technology and even more importantly, share it securely.

Your Opinion? 

So, while I admit my table above is not exhaustive, I would like to find out what your experience has been.  Think about whether you have done the things you need to do to extend your workflows smartly across and beyond you enterprise.  Analyze where 3D would improve what you are doing, and then ensure your engineering/manufacturing tools support that need. 

I would like to see some comments on this.  What would be required in your company to improve workflows, regards less of whether they are 2D, 3D or a combination (which is really the holly grail for many firms). 

Posted by Doug Halliday at 07:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Is Adobe a PLM company?  Product Lifecycle Management or PLM is an area I have been around for the majority of my career.  I decided to name this blog “Doug at Adobe PLM”, but I must say I have been asked several times about changing the name. 

Let’s start with a definition of PLM.  Dr Michael Grieves in his book Product Lifecycle Management defines PLM this way:

“Product Lifecycle management (PLM) is an integrated, information-driven approach comprised of people, processes/practices, and technology to all aspects of a product’s life, from its design through manufacture, deployment and maintenance – culminating in the product’s removal from service and final disposal.  By trading product information for wasted time, energy, and material across the entire organization and into the supply chain, PLM drives the next generation of lean thinking.”

Well, by that definition, Adobe is certainly not a PLM company.  So why would someone like me, at Adobe blog about PLM?  To understand, please read on.

Is Adobe a PLM company?  No, of course… never will be. We don’t come close to meeting Dr. Grieves definition of PLM and therefore what a PLM company is.  Is Adobe is a CAD authoring company?  No.  Is Adobe a product data management company? No.  We do not do BOM management.  Do we do engineering change management?  Nope.  ERP?  No.  So if Adobe is not in the PLM business, why did I name my blog “Doug at Adobe PLM”?  Well here is why:

 

Adobe’s mission is to revolutionize the way people engage with ideas and information.  A huge part of what Adobe does is vastly extending the reach of customer processes and systems.  I understand what it is like to have to enable global operations.  To share data with suppliers and JV partners.  Here is a picture I created recently to explain what I mean:

 

Adobe’s mission is to revolutionize the way people engage with ideas and information.  A huge part of what Adobe does is vastly extending the reach of customer processes and systems.  I understand what it is like to have to enable global operations. 

So, despite the fact that Adobe is not a PLM company, what Adobe does absolutely makes PLM solutions more effective.  Almost every entry on this site deals with sharing information and interoperability (almost every data format!) in ways that are difficult and expensive without almost complete ubiquity, and of course, the functionality to make access easy.  My focus at Adobe is manufacturing, and product information is the life blood of the industry. So yes, just like we help extend and solidify such things as legal, HR and purchasing processes, Adobe supports and enhances PLM.  

So the name will remain the same, but there is something I must confess.  The majority of manufacturing business processes are still 2D and many are paper based.  I think I have emphasized 3D data a bit too much, so my next entry will deal with what I see as the current balance of 2D and 3D processes and perhaps and making better use of all product data. 

 

Posted by Doug Halliday at 08:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

The Adobe Manufacturing Team visited Anaheim, CA last week for the Pacific Design and Manufacturing Show where we had the opportunity to speak with several hundred customers.  To all of you who stopped by to see us, Thank You!  This show seems to attract a high percentage of entrepreneurial firms.  Many of the companies we spoke with are already Adobe customers, and wanted to investigate how to better leverage our products in there day-to-day operations. We get lots and lots of questions, and I can’t answer them all here, but I want to discuss the ones that seem to surface over and over again.  These customer needs stood out at this show:

• “I am growing my innovation network globally, and need to reach partners and customers in emerging regions.”
• “I need to share all kinds of data, including 3D CAD, more effectively across the extended organization.”

And this question:

• “How is this different than the visualization technology we already have (or are thinking about acquiring)?”

Read on to find out how we responded.

So, here are the responses to the frequent needs and questions:

Need:  Reach partners and customers globally

I blogged about innovation networks a few months ago.  I won’t repeat the article here, but the key point is “reach”.  The “reach” provided by Adobe’s cross-platform, run-time utilities is the main thing we point to.  In the case of Acrobat and PDF, the ubiquitous Adobe Reader enables many, many capabilities the casual user may not be familiar with.  Forms data collection, ad-hoc review and comment-based collaboration, analysis of 3D data and the ability to combine 2D and 3D documents of virtually any type and open/interact with them in the Reader is the difference.

 

Need:  Sharing 3D Data

In part, I answered this question above.  The ability to embed 3D data from almost any source solves many problems for companies who are trying to get more out of their investments in CAD and PLM.  Acrobat extends access to the data, either as part of other documents such as marketing brochures, field service manuals, manufacturing work instructions, and so forth, or simply as a single PDF.  Additional CAD or PLM seats, with all of their cost and complexity, are not needed.  

 

How is this different from visualization?

Well, there is some overlap with 3D visualization offerings for sure.  PMI and meta data, measurement and sectioning are supported by the free Reader.  Many companies try to monetize these functions and don’t include them in “free” viewers. But, really the key differences are:

1. Acrobat can contain and even export precise, b-rep models in addition to tessellated models.  
2. Acrobat adds numerous security advantages like digital signatures that most CAD and visualization applications cannot match.
3. Acrobat allows combining all sorts of 2D and 3D documents in ways that are not possible otherwise.  

Thanks to all of you who stopped by to see us.  I hope this article helped reinforce the answers we gave you at the show.

Posted by Doug Halliday at 09:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)