Since this group is for all of us to learn more about PMI and share experiences, as well as learn how other people are using PMI and MBD in their organizations, I thought it would be good to get a baseline of where everyone is at on this topic.
I outlined some questions I thought would be good to know about those of you who participate in this group. If you have some time and would like to introduce yourself, please feel free to respond. The questions I chose help us to understand where each of you stands with PMI / MBD and gives a good indication of how we can best help you. These also should facilitate some good conversations between your fellow group members.
What industry do you work in?
What version of NX are you currently using?
Are you currently using PMI in production?
If yes, how long have you using PMI and how is it being used within your organization?
If you’re not using PMI today can you please share the reasons why?
Do you plan to use PMI in the future?
These questions are just suggestions to get you started. You don’t have to answer all of them if you don’t like, and if there is any information you would like to include other than what I outlined here, you are more than welcome.
I look forward to seeing more posts as this group continues to grow and evolve!
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software, Inc.
My name is Loren Brandenburg and I work in Aerospace manufacturing in CT.
We are currently using NX9 (going to 10 shortly) and are using PMI to be apart of the whole Model Based Enterprise thang.... we are currently just testing it out but plan on using it in every group from estimating, engineering, programing and inspection. Currently we are testing NX CMM and I'm amazed by the automation that PMI gives us.... Its like the future finially has arrived!
Hello to Everyone!
My name is Piotr Szymanczyk, and I work in Aerospace manufacturing in Connecticut. We are using NX9 for CAD and CAM. We have only tried to use PMI, but currently not using it on a large scale. However, in the past, we met PMI embedded in MBD "CATIA" models.
In a fast paced manufacturing environment, it's sometimes hard to convince everybody to try or learn something new. I am really passionate about MBD and PMI in the modern industrial world. These tools are the links that connect the product circle, beginning from a design concept, through planning and process development, then through manufacturing and a product inspection. I am glad to hear that some companies are making progress in implementing those valuable options of NX software.
My name is Hannu Kiiskinen and I am working in Konecranes. Konecranes is one leading companies in lifting businesses and typically these kind of forum counted as machineru insdustry.
We are currently using NX8.5 and TC9.1. Testing of NX10 should get started rather soon now. There are lot of discussion about PMI and MBD in our company. Engineering is looking it as new possibility when some of other departments thinks it to be threat. In engineering they would like to stop creating drawings and using PMI instead. In purchase process this is taken as challenge as they feel we need drawing as attachment of agreement what we buy from the subcontracting manufacturing. One person has now started his thesis work to evaluate what use of PMI in engineering means pratically and how we could tackle those question with other departments. If any of you are, who are already using PMI more, can share the ideas how you have been tackling the resistance of using PMI instead of drawing, please share.
Br, Hannu Kiiskinen
IT Product Manager, Design tools
My name is Preben Reventlow and i work with Alfa Laval in Denmark.
We work in the food machinery industry.
We are currently using SolidWorks but are moving to Siemens NX 8.5 within the next couple of months.
We use MBD on all our models currently, and shall continue working the same way with NX.
I have been investigating PMI and see some issues in comparison with SW, but we'll find a solution.
When we start using PMI we will be the first in our organization.
I'm pretty much amazed about how little information I have been able to find about PMI, so I'm quite curious about how much it's actually used!
Right now I'm transforming our Design Manual from SW to NX and generally finding a Best Practice for our 3D Models.
We're using Teamcenter 9.1, pretty much OTB, but with some workflows.
I am Rusty Michael and I work in the Automotive Industry. We are currently on NX9.0.3 and planning on migrating to NX10.0.3
EO1Q 2016. We are not currently using PMI in production but have a team put together that has tested PMI and are proceeding with a two phase approach. Phase 1 will be implementing PMI in our databases based on ASME Y14.5-2009 and ASME Y14.41-2012 but we will continue to finish making a drawing in NX Drafting application (inheriting what is put in via PMI) allowing us to introduce the MBD into all other business units and to our vendors. It also allows us the time to properly vet the 3D PDF vendors. We are currently using SAP/ECTR for our PDM system and phase 2 of our project will require many changes to our release process for 3D PDFs.
My name is Ed Williamsen and I work in the Aerospace Engineering industry in MD. I can’t begin to tell you how great it feels to see so much interest in PMI. I feel like I have been exploring this all alone.
My company is currently using NX8.5 with Teamcenter Unified 10. Plans are under way to upgrade to NX10 by end of year (which is fast approaching).
I have been following the progress of the NX PMI application since 2008. We have introduced the use of PMI in a test program in 2010 with limited success. The NX PMI application worked well from the engineering data perspective but our MFG and downstream processes were still 2D drawing dependent. We do manufacture from the 3d model but the drawing is still used.
This year, with the release of MIL-STD-31000A in 2013, we have seen customer data delivery requirements making reference to 31000. We used this "opportunity' to try PMI again. The customer still required the delivery of 2D drawings.
Our application of PMI for this need was basically reproducing dimensions, notes and contractual data in the 3D model and inheriting PMI into the drawing views. There was no work completed in drafting beyond adding MBD model views. This approach meet our customer needs but does not seem to support feature based manufacturing as we always entered PMI in the end product model (detailed assembly).
The current functionality of the NX PMI application worked with small compromises here and there. We are continuing with the effort of achieving full 3D MBD (no drawings) but we need many changes to our current digital thread of data.
Hope to see everyone in Florida 2016!
My name is Mark, and I work in the aerospace industry. The company I work for is currently running NX8.0 with TC8.3. We have been using PMI in production since NX6, about 2010. We've been doing MBD since 2001. (Prior to NX6, we found creative ways to employ NX Drafting annotations.)
My company deals primarily with procured machined and composite parts. From the beginning of our journey, we recognized the CAD model as the arbiter and specification of all dimensions. The CAD model is used to create NC paths for parts, or the tools used to make parts. Therefore, the sole purpose of the PMI is to define tolerance that departs from otherwise stated standard tolerances. As such, the volume of PMI annotations applied is greatly reduced. The reduction of PMI annotations eliminates any need for multiple Model Views. In general, all PMI is presented in a single Model View. (We find it easier to create the PMI as Model Dependent, visible in all views.) Additional Model Views are discouraged, but permitted, when necessary. The replacement of Drawing Border, Drawing Views, and Full Dimensioning, with an equal number of Model Views, and Full Dimensioning, eliminates only the Drawing Border, an insufficient benefit to attract attention.
Several challenges have been overcome along the way. Some downstream consumers, like CAE, have become more CAD capable, to interrogate models for dimensional information. Many other downstream processes are driven with Siemens Vis Products. With the advent of CMM and on-machine probing, the definition of Quality Assurance plans has transitioned to a supplier activity, with customer oversight and approval. Suppliers must meet criteria and demonstrate certain capabilities to be certified MBD capable.
Still, there are more challenges before us. CMM tools, capable of directly leveraging PMI, demand the translation of semantic PMI through neutral formats, STEP or JT. This development may drive my company away from "otherwise stated standard tolerances", to application of standard tolerances to every model. I don't know what that means yet, but it will be interesting to solve.
Do you mean me specifically, or are you referring to someone else in the group? I am happy to speak with you or have the PMI Product Manager @D_Wingrave contact you! We can most certainly arrange a call. That invitation applies to anyone in this group as well. If anyone wants to speak with me offline, I am always open to doing so.
Please be aware, it is against the community rules to post your contact information though. I realize this is a closed group, so it is not as public as the rest of the community, however we do still have to follow the rules. It is ultimately to protect your privacy, as anyone who sees your post may share your information beyond your control. Direct messaging is the best way to share that kind of info and arrange to connect offline