×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

(OP)
To those of you who have transitioned your production enviornment with NX and the native file system to NX within a PDM/PLM integrated enviornment,  What are some examples of KPIs and metrics that you began tracking to determine the success of your implementation?  

RE: Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

What metrics do you have in place now? What do you expect to take more/less time after PLM?

Put those maetrics into play before the transition so you have a valid comparison both before and after the move to PLM.

RE: Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

In all implementations of a PDM on top of CAD, do NOT expect a reduction in time to justify the expense of the PDM system. It won't happen.
PDM systems provide better access on a wider area to common data within your company, and sometimes outside, if you allow it. They provide better organization and control of files. They provide a workflow for design signoff. They do not increase productivity of your CAD team.
 

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

RE: Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

Having moved from Native to Teamcenter 3 years ago, I can now sum up some figures:

   - tedious work we had to check/map many users fancy native parts number and attributes to comply to the controlled environment and to have consistant and fast search/find results on desciptions

   - today the biggest advantage of Teamcenter is that we do not spend 25% of our time looking for parts into a folderized system anymore - everything is just withing the big container and IMHO this should be considered as an  improvement of our productivity

   - our fear towards using WAVE links because of possible broken ones due to copied/moved parts is slowly fading away and we start to take full advantage of that approach

   - NXOpen application managing parts in all kind of processes now also work much more efficiently because you don't need to specify any paths to data anymore

   - Couple your part creation with the integrated number generator and you'll really free your users' mind from tedious typing actions and give them better ability to fully focus on their design

As always in life, a lot of fear to change in the begining but, afterwards and from the users themselves: don't want to go back native for anything!

I hope this helps.
 

RE: Measuring success going from Native file system to PDM

(OP)
We currently don't measure the time it takes to search for parts across local or network drives, or the time somebody spends creating a model that has already been created by another user because there is no common container.  The CAD data gets zipped up and release under one document record at the end of a project and then revised during later sustaining efforts. That is the only way the 3D source data is "managed" today. The 2D PDF drawings output from NX are the master controlled documents.   So from what you are saying, we should be prepared for:

1) individual users hour by hour productivity = worse, more mouse clicks and strict process to follow.

but anticipate:

2) Reduction in time searching for data,
Elimination of time spent creating a COTS part that has already been created by somebody else, (multiple files for the same fastener)
Elimination of the Risk that downstream functions are using an out of date copy of a model,
etc.
All adding up to offset 1), overall making it = much better.   

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources