Issue # 1,077 | Merry Christmas! | 7 December 2020
Phoenix Integration hosted a seminar on digital threads with Ralf Hartmann (Airbus Defence and Space), David Long (Vitech Corporation), Douglas Orellana (ManTech), Bob Sherman (Procter and Gamble) and Philomena Zimmerman (United States Department of Defense).
- - -
Q: What does the term 'digital thread' mean?
A: Digital thread assumes a full digital representation of models and data for a set of activities. Then, it describes the interconnection of a set of multiple tasks in a sequence, which might go to the full lifecycle support -- from early needs analysis to operations.
A key characteristic factor of a digital thread is data continuity and traceability. In my opinion, a digital thread supports a particular domain, such as mechanical or electrical. For me, in a project, there is a multitude of digital threads travelling through this lifecycle.
A concept totally linked with the digital thread is the digital twin. The digital twin is the full representation of the system at each point in time all along the lifecycle. The development of the digital twin is driven over time by the many digital threads.
A: I have a few key differences. For me, the digital thread is that unbroken thread of traceability, reaching as far back as you can, going all the way through to operations and upgrades. In that area, I agree with the previous speaker: it is the data backbone through life.
Here is where I differ: the digital thread is across levels, through life, across disciplines. It is the singular thread that unifies the program through life [of the product.]
As the previous speaker said, it must be the live backbone of engineering. It's not that archival snapshot after the fact. It is the basis on which we think, we reason, we analyze, we engineer.
A: The cross-functional part is the powerful part, bridging the disciplines. It is largely human-driven today, but in the future it is not hard to image an increasing amount of discovering and leveraging digital threads being executed by computers. We should take care to think that way so that we don't limit it [use of digital threads].
A: This is the easiest hard question I've ever had! The important thing is the currency of the data, that it processes data as it is currently known about the system. That brings the question of, How do we keep thousands of engineers twiddling with the data? [The data] has to be current.
Regarding what two other speakers said, regarding singular versus multiple pulls, the analogy I've heard is that it is the difference between a thread in a tapestry, and the tapestry itself. Lord help us, maybe we need to introduce another term, like a digital tapestry.
We have found that it does not need to be complete to be an executable thread. We as engineers have to learn to deal with — maybe not with imperfection — but with incompleteness. Rather than saying the design is incomplete, saying it is a digital thread of the complete design as we know it today.
Q: What has changed in the last five to ten years to bring digital threads to the foreground?
A: There was a technological evolution in that time. In the past, we had a fantasy about what we wanted to do, but the hardware and software were limited. Today it is the other way around: we have more hardware and software capabilities than we are able to manage.
In recent years, we gained things like semantic data models, like data analytics. These make sense with digital twins and digital threads. Also recent is the maturing of systems engineering as key to interdisciplinary integration as a key enabler.
A: There is also change on the demand side, what we think the Art of the Possible is today, as opposed to five or ten years ago.
Everyone talks about system complexity, cycle time, about time to market. There is an external forcing function that is driving us out of the status quo, to leverage technology in a different way, if we want to stay relevant as an organization.
A: Standards that weren't there ten years ago are demanding the digital thread get up and running.
A: Model-based system engineering is pivotal, because it allows the abstraction to allow us to be cross-discipline. Ten years ago, if we thought of digital threads, we'd just be creating links between dissimilar things that are stored in CAD systems. That is what PLM has done today, virtual descriptions of physical things. It allows us to be agile and open, and not be under one supplier's roof.
A: I want to pull on the tread that was started on systems engineering. We can now separate the tools from the application, the tools in a specific area. We no longer think of mechanical engineering as engineering tools for things that work mechanically. [Systems engineering now] allows us to use the tools across disciplines. Without the push or pull of systems engineering, I don't think we would have got to where we are now.
Q: What is your most successful digital thread implementation?
A: It is in the area of multi-disciplinary design.
A: We don't see a lot of [completed] implementations, but it has a lot of success in on-going projects, of which I cannot pick one, because that would not be fair. I think more of how can we improve things across disciplines: what additional thing, data could I have connected to the digital thread?
A: We find it is much easier to teach systems engineering to subject-matter experts than the other way around.
A: We are looking at the virtualization of C5 systems, which has been looked at as a digital twin.
A: I can't name a favorite, because that would be naming a favorite. I see pockets of excellence; project success occurs when it is aligned with corporate direction.
We see many firms are doing the same thing as competitors. Often people don't talk about it, because they don't want competitors to learn how they do it. So, there is a lot of repetitive effort going on. Let's not treat it as "my secret sauce."
Q: What do you see as the reward?
A: There used to be an emotional debate over "Is it systems engineering, or engineering of systems?" 'Systems engineering' is its own silo; model-based systems engineering done incorrectly creates this new island of data that only serves the need of the system engineer.
‘Engineering of systems’ is what customers need. It is done with digital engineering, it’s a digital thread, and it’s gotta be connected.
A: The problem with 'digital engineering' is that the emphasis is on the digital part and all the value it brings, but success comes when everyone engineers. There is a way to break down the problem and then recompose the solution.
I didn’t embrace it because I thought it was brilliant; I embraced it because I was told what it was going to be called. We had some pretty big failures where we didn't draw connections between the big pieces. There was a buzz about 'model-based' and we connected that technique to the engineering system we had.
We embraced it, because were tired of losing the traceability, tired of not having the rigor. Digital doesn't solve problems; digital just shows you faster that you are failing.
A: The motivation was (1) the pull from the market and (2) the need to reduce time-to-market. There was no alternative if we wanted to meet the market's need.
A: It is really hard to do iterative and concurrent development. We are trying to do concurrent iterative development.
A: I saw it as great knowledge management.
Q: How do you motivate people to get onboard?
A: For me it is very simple: Point out to the non-believer that they are already doing it, just that it might look different to them. If you have ever built an Excel spreadsheet, congratulations! You are a digital engineer -- you are placing information in an orderly manner where you can find it.
A: Lower the barrier-to-entry by framing things as 'evolutionary'. We as engineers like complexity, but that creates fear in people. Play to the benefits that they can see. We don't like other people's change, because it is our pain at their gain. It is making it personal, to shortening that step.
A: I ask, "What is the greatest pain point?" Fix that small problem to show the benefits.
A: We go for the toughest problem. We also go to standards: open standards mean users don't lose expertise in their vertical domain.
A: A chain is as strong as the weakest link, and we don't want to be that weakest link.
A: When you start to capture knowledge from an expert in a model, you can share the knowledge across the enterprise. Many people don't want to learn how to model; they are comfortable with other ways of doing things. So pair them with someone who does know how to model.
A: When people hear about digital threads, they get into the frame of silo-busting. I emphasize that silo-busting is a very dangerous thing in organizations, because it becomes a threat. It threatens peoples' roles, peoples' contributions, peoples' influence.
The critical piece of organizational change is instead to expose knowledge and make connections, instead of busting silos.
A: If done improperly, engineering change can still build silos. There is no knowledge sharing going on beyond that.
- - -
There was much more discussed, so to view the archived seminar, register at phoenix-int.com/expert-panel-the-digital-thread-phoenix-integration/
And in Other News
Open Design Alliance is the first to release CAD-related software running on Apple’s new ARM-based CPU. All SDKs and APIs are M1-compatible. It says that “ODA has a significant user base on Mac, particularly in the area of architectural design.” opendesign.com/blog/2020/december/oda-releases-apple-silicon-support
- - -
The MacOS and Linux versions of Grabert GmbH’s ARES Commander 2022 will have feature-parity with the Windows version, including all of the new BIM-realted functions. See figure below. As well, a universal build of ARES for MacOS will run on both Intel- and ARM-based computers. The 62-page What’s New document is here: graebert.com/whatsnew (PDF).
Two public beta versions of ARES Commander 2022 are available now; the software is due to ship before April.
-
Windows 64bits: www.graebert.com/getares2022PRforwin64
-
MacOS X and MacOS 11 (Big Sur): www.graebert.com/getares2022PRformac
- - -
IronCAD LLC releases IronCAD 2021 with new options for bulk view creation, direct feedback on face/edge lengths and areas, and automatic bend alignments on angled sheet metal stock. Plus this cool feature: right-drag IntelliShape handles to resize objects symmetrically. See figure below.
Get the details on all the rest of what’s new, along with mini video tutorials at www.ironcad.com/blog/whats-new-in-2021/. Download your free trial version from ironcad.com/free-online-trial/ after registration. IronCAD celebrates its 20th anniversary in March.
- - -
Here are some of the posts that appeared recently on my WorldCAD Access blog:
You can subscribe to the WorldCAD Access blog’s RSS feed through Feed Burner at feeds.feedburner.com/WorldcadAccess.
Letters to the Editor
It looks like one of those things you guys always warned about is happening. Lots of Autodesk users can’t get license authorization this morning due to a problem with AW [Amazon Web Services, which hosts many cloud vendors]. I’m still able to work, but I suspect that after a reboot I might not be so fortunate. Happy Thanksgiving!
- Ron Powell
The editor replies: As far as I know, the license check takes place once every 30 days, so you might be good. But yah, relying on the Internet is not the approach to take. I recommend viewing Internet access as an adjacent service for businesses, and not one on which to rely. Have contingency plans in place for when the Internet fails, as well as when your office systems fail.
Re: Now is the time to cancel MailChimp
Further to your comments about the icons in MailChimp: I agree wholeheartedly!
I HATE ICONS! Especially when they "update" (read "redesign") them with each new release. I find that I spend an inordinate amount of time hovering over each icon in turn, waiting for its tooltip to appear so I can read the word, to see if its the one I want.
Traditional Chinese uses something like 450,000 icons, while the introduction of modern Chinese managed to cut it to about 4,500. Depending on who you ask, AutoCAD uses over 1,300, but European-based languages can say pretty much all you need to say in just 26 basic letters, 10 numbers, and a dozen or so punctuation marks.
- Bill Fane
Re: How to buy a new laptop
One thing in this post [about how to buy a new laptop] struck me. Those that have forever been into CAD/CAM believed that what you called an add-on discrete graphics card is preferred or required. Years ago when we went to integrated graphics we tended to experience lots of problems, horrid video performance, errors, CAD/CAM applications graphically not working, and so on.
I understand the level of user ( light user versus medium user versus power-user) is important. For this discussion lets assume a light to medium user. Has the video development environment in recent CAD/CAM programs or has integrated video improved such that the need to go with an add-on discrete card has changed? We don't much anymore but it used to be all we heard about related to graphics was OpenGL.
- Dave Johnson
The editor replies: I have not tested nVidia and AMD boards recently. A number of years ago, I ran extensive benchmarks comparing an nVidia board with the built-in Intel graphics in my desktop computer. The results were shocking: the nVidia board was slower at nearly all CAD visual operations, such as wireframe and rendered display. The only area in which the nVidia was faster than the Intel was in hidden-line removal.
After this, I tried talking to nVidia folks about the results but they weren't particularly interested. But I did notice that their marketing used the catch phrase, "up to x faster."
I think nVidia boards are important for high-demand games and when CAD-linked software makes use of the GPUs on the board, such as for rendering and finite element analysis. But otherwise, it's marketing at work.
- - -
I echo your sentiments that "low-priced ones just aren't worth it." When friends ask me what they should get for a laptop, my answer (though not in the detail you go into) is simply "the most you can afford."
My own experience over the last 20 years has borne that out. I have owned only two laptops in my life. The first was and IBM Thinkpad A21e; that would have been circa 2000 or so, before Lenovo acquired the PC division from IBM or not. That purchase lasted survived some 9 years through Windows 98 and XP, in useful service.
The A21e was replaced in December of 2008 with a Lenovo (yes, made in China, I know) Thinkpad W500. The W500 has served me well. A couple of years ago the discrete video card failed, but the unit continued to served my needs utilizing the integrated Intel graphics. It was only on just this COVID-Spring that the W500 ended its career. Although it had enjoyed an upgrade to Windows 7, it could not handle the leap to Win 10. So, that was 10 years!
I am not as involved in CAD work as I once was. But with this experience I would be reluctant to buy a consumer-grade laptop. I'm not in the market for another 10-year laptop, and still looking.
- Jim Longley
The editor replies: My dad happily uses an old, used, lease-return HP business-class laptop. I forgot in my article to mention lease-returns: they are cheap and well-built.
My experience with Lenovo was pretty bad. It displayed the Blue Screen of Death frequently, with the error messages pointing to a Windows problem, randomly. It was not until the warranty ended that I found the laptop had a BIOS-based RAM checker that found bad RAM. (The Windows-based RAM checker always told me the RAM was good.) The bad RAM probably explained the randomness of the BSOD messages.
Then came the litany of horror:
-
RAM was soldered in, so I could not replace it
-
Lenovo was not particularly interested in me with and out-of-warranty laptop
-
When I finally located a local authorized repair depot, they quoted the motherboard replacement at $1,500 (for a $1,300 laptop)
But then things looked up. I found a replacement motherboard on eBay for $300 and replaced it myself, and then a friend bought the Lenovo off me for $300.
I know mine is a rare story and that Lenovos are otherwise well-built. But after five years I still am not fond of seeing the Lenovo name.
Thank You, Readers
Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. To support upFront.eZine through PayPal.me, then I suggest the following amounts:
-
$25 for individuals > paypal.me/upfrontezine/25
-
$150 for small companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/150
-
$750 for large companies > paypal.me/upfrontezine/750
Should Paypal.me not operate in your country, then please use www.paypal.com and use the account of [email protected].
Or mail a cheque (US$ or CDN$ only, please) to upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd., 34486 Donlyn Avenue, Abbotsford BC, V2S 4W7, Canada.
Notable Quotable
“There is a longing for unity among all humans, for unity offers the promise of peace. The problem is that we want unity on our terms, and it is our rival programs that tear us apart.”
- Leslie Newbegin, 1989
*4763
Recent Comments