cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted

PMI Roundtable Summary 2015 PLM Connection Americas User Conference

Community Manager Community Manager
Community Manager

Product Manufacturing Information PMI in NX.jpgAs attendees of the PMI Round Table during the 2015 PLM Connection, you requested a dedicated space for ongoing conversations about PMI and MBD to supplement that annual meeting. 

 

To get things started, here is a summary of what was discussed during the 2015 roundtable.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The NX PMI toolbar seems to lack functions, such as arc length.

The NX PMI toolbar contains many of the same functions as the Drafting toolbar. We’re trying to close that gap between Drafting and PMI. However, all of the items mentioned in the international standard of PMI are included in NX.

 

There are issues with the PMI region with Teamcenter.
We’re working to integrate our platforms with PMI.

 

When it comes to PMI in models and drawings, the commands within the models are not intuitive. It takes too long to get the job done.
We recommend only putting dimensions in the models.

 

PMI in models and drawings and commands within the models are not intuitive.  I ended up going away from PMI, because it took too long to get the job done.
We’re taking a limited dimension approach in which we only put dimensions in the models. Everything else can be accessed from the model.

 

With regard to inputted PMI, how do you manage change? (Ex: Removing or adding a feature)
We’re introducing new functions to deal with change, originally found in drafting. These allow you to compare the two models to see any changes.

 

What about tabular notes in PMI?
There is a small project planned to start in 11 that will most likely carry on into 12.

 

Are you reducing or eliminating the mechanical drafting use in an organization by implementing PMI?
We’re pulling modeling and design engineers into the PMI groups, so the designers have more manufacturing knowledge. Across industries, the knowledge of the designers is increasing to get closer to the standard engineers. Ex: Modeling is done by the engineering group. That gets turned to the drafting group to add PMI and add to the drawing. The engineers didn’t want to touch PMI. It doesn’t reduce the overall effort; it just moves it to another area. Savings come from reduced dimensioning. You can get the same data from a drawing and a model.

 

Do you have to define tech authority and build authority? Build model and a drawing (tech authority), don’t have to include how you fabricated it (build authority), do you have to separate it?
Ideally, you want to include both the tech authority and build authority. It depends on the company, the end product, and how to manufacture it.

 

How can you have a PMI specific “sig”?
You need a Siemens representative and an end user leader.

 

When you have a drawing and a model, which one is the master?
The master should be the model because a drawing is a product of a master.

 

As it stands now, if we want to use faces, we need thousands of curves in the file to create PMI. We need a face-based solution without the need of the thousands of curves.
Try not to violate the standards, but we agree that we want to move to face-based. NX 11 will take a drawing and make it PMI. Put a “V” in PMI for verification.

 

Will PMI be available with JT for iPads?
We will have to follow up on this.

 

Explain the need for a 2D drawing rather than using a 3D model.
It is easier to send a PDF rather than train them to use JT.

 

The problem with 2D drawings is 2D interpretation. PMI associates everything.
If you’re following the standards, be cautious about PMI and what you put in documentation. Ex: Directed dimension is not the documentation that NX is following.

 

Are you paying attention to the Mill 31000 standard?
We are aware, and we’re working on it.

 

Can you pull from WAVE link to PMI?
PMI does support WAVE associativity from source to target. There is only so much you can do at one time with new versions of NX. We’re working on it.

 

Any applications for assemblies or installations?
Shop employees love PMI for exploded views, but not the lines showing. One company uses assembly from PMI. A different company uses assembly PMI from JT to the shop floor.

 

There are differences between how you design the model versus how it is manufactured, so it shows when converting it to PMI.
Assembly PMI is not supported in 4GD.

 

Can you add PMI to a reference set? When you include something other than geometry.
We still need to follow up on this.

 

Is there any way to open the same PMI in a different location, but so it opens with their own customer defaults?
We will have to follow up on this.  

 

Highlighted

PMI Roundtable Summary 2015 PLM Connection Americas User Conference

Community Manager Community Manager
Community Manager

Product Manufacturing Information PMI in NX.jpgAs attendees of the PMI Round Table during the 2015 PLM Connection, you requested a dedicated space for ongoing conversations about PMI and MBD to supplement that annual meeting. 

 

To get things started, here is a summary of what was discussed during the 2015 roundtable.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The NX PMI toolbar seems to lack functions, such as arc length.

The NX PMI toolbar contains many of the same functions as the Drafting toolbar. We’re trying to close that gap between Drafting and PMI. However, all of the items mentioned in the international standard of PMI are included in NX.

 

There are issues with the PMI region with Teamcenter.
We’re working to integrate our platforms with PMI.

 

When it comes to PMI in models and drawings, the commands within the models are not intuitive. It takes too long to get the job done.
We recommend only putting dimensions in the models.

 

PMI in models and drawings and commands within the models are not intuitive.  I ended up going away from PMI, because it took too long to get the job done.
We’re taking a limited dimension approach in which we only put dimensions in the models. Everything else can be accessed from the model.

 

With regard to inputted PMI, how do you manage change? (Ex: Removing or adding a feature)
We’re introducing new functions to deal with change, originally found in drafting. These allow you to compare the two models to see any changes.

 

What about tabular notes in PMI?
There is a small project planned to start in 11 that will most likely carry on into 12.

 

Are you reducing or eliminating the mechanical drafting use in an organization by implementing PMI?
We’re pulling modeling and design engineers into the PMI groups, so the designers have more manufacturing knowledge. Across industries, the knowledge of the designers is increasing to get closer to the standard engineers. Ex: Modeling is done by the engineering group. That gets turned to the drafting group to add PMI and add to the drawing. The engineers didn’t want to touch PMI. It doesn’t reduce the overall effort; it just moves it to another area. Savings come from reduced dimensioning. You can get the same data from a drawing and a model.

 

Do you have to define tech authority and build authority? Build model and a drawing (tech authority), don’t have to include how you fabricated it (build authority), do you have to separate it?
Ideally, you want to include both the tech authority and build authority. It depends on the company, the end product, and how to manufacture it.

 

How can you have a PMI specific “sig”?
You need a Siemens representative and an end user leader.

 

When you have a drawing and a model, which one is the master?
The master should be the model because a drawing is a product of a master.

 

As it stands now, if we want to use faces, we need thousands of curves in the file to create PMI. We need a face-based solution without the need of the thousands of curves.
Try not to violate the standards, but we agree that we want to move to face-based. NX 11 will take a drawing and make it PMI. Put a “V” in PMI for verification.

 

Will PMI be available with JT for iPads?
We will have to follow up on this.

 

Explain the need for a 2D drawing rather than using a 3D model.
It is easier to send a PDF rather than train them to use JT.

 

The problem with 2D drawings is 2D interpretation. PMI associates everything.
If you’re following the standards, be cautious about PMI and what you put in documentation. Ex: Directed dimension is not the documentation that NX is following.

 

Are you paying attention to the Mill 31000 standard?
We are aware, and we’re working on it.

 

Can you pull from WAVE link to PMI?
PMI does support WAVE associativity from source to target. There is only so much you can do at one time with new versions of NX. We’re working on it.

 

Any applications for assemblies or installations?
Shop employees love PMI for exploded views, but not the lines showing. One company uses assembly from PMI. A different company uses assembly PMI from JT to the shop floor.

 

There are differences between how you design the model versus how it is manufactured, so it shows when converting it to PMI.
Assembly PMI is not supported in 4GD.

 

Can you add PMI to a reference set? When you include something other than geometry.
We still need to follow up on this.

 

Is there any way to open the same PMI in a different location, but so it opens with their own customer defaults?
We will have to follow up on this.