Scope

This study focused on the Return on Investment of Model-Based Definition initiatives. Specifically, this includes:

• Any time savings involved with the transition to Model-Based Definitions in the engineering organization.
• Any realization of benefits in organizations downstream from engineering, including reduced ECOs, lowered scrap rates and more.
• An update on the adoption, application and value of MCAD applications for creating engineering documentation as well as Model Based Definition (MBD) and Model Based Enterprise (MBE) initiatives based on the research initially conducted as part of The Model Based Enterprise Study.

Study Lifecycle

In August and September 2016, Lifecycle Insights surveyed 463 respondents to understand their practices and adoption of technology with respect to engineering documentation. Survey respondents originated from five research partners, including Lifecycle Insights, Desktop Engineering, ENGINEERING.com, Action Engineering, and Techsoft3D. Survey respondents were compensated for their time with a complimentary copy of The Modern Engineer’s Toolset, an eBook published by Lifecycle Insights in January 2016.

Study Demographics

The number of respondents to the survey totaled 463. The findings of this report, however, are based on a subset of these respondents, totaling 355, who directly participate in the product development supply chain. Responses from engineering service providers, software providers, service providers, and system integrators were excluded.

Respondents to the study’s survey serve a wide variety of industries. The industries served at the highest rates by the survey respondents include:

• 32% Aerospace and Defense
• 24% Automotive
• 22% High Tech and Electronics
• 20% Medical Devices
• 20% Heavy Machinery and Industrial Equipment
• 19% Consumer Products

Survey responses for this study were gathered from fifty-one different countries. The contribution by geographic area is as follows:

• 85% from North America
• 6% Europe
• 5% Asia
• The remaining 4% split between Australia and New Zealand, South America, Africa and the Middle East

Defining Cohorts for the Study

This research report grouped respondents into cohorts based on their answers in the survey. The following cohorts were used in the findings of this report.

Defining Cohorts based on Engineering Deliverables

The organizations of the respondents were categorized into cohorts based on their answers to questions on the types of deliverables released as engineering documentation for component designs. The multi-select options, which means respondents were allowed to select more than one answer, included Drawings, 3D Models and 3D Models with PMI.

Respondents were categorized into cohorts based on the following rules:

• Those that selected Drawings only were categorized as Drawing-Reliant.
• Those that selected 3D Models were categorized as Model-Reliant, even if they had selected Drawings as an option as well.
• Those that selected 3D Models with PMI were categorized as Model-Based, even if they had selected Drawings and / or 3D Models as an option as well.

This cohort categorization was used to compare and contrast the relative advantages for engineering organizations and the company as a whole across a variety of measures.

Defining Cohorts based on Including 3D Models in Manufacturing Instructions

The organizations of the respondents were also categorized into cohorts based on their answers to questions on whether or not 3D models were embedded in their manufacturing instructions. The option to designate whether their organization employs this practice was part of a larger bank of questions.

This cohort categorization was used to compare and contrast the relative advantages for the company across a variety of measures.

Measuring Performance

A primary objective of this research study has been to verify whether or not MBD initiatives provide measureable value. The following questions, compared and contrasted against cohorts, provided the means by which that theory was tested.

Estimating the Creation of Dataset Deliverables

As the complexity of engineering documentation varies greatly depending on a company’s product, industry, and role in the supply chain, a means of baselining estimates of developing MBD deliverables was required. Four datasets, created by Action Engineering and detailed in Appendix D, were developed for their specific use in this survey. Respondents were asked to provide their estimate for each dataset. The assumptions associated with each dataset is detailed in Appendix D.

These estimates were then averaged for all respondents or within a specific cohort, as needed, to calculate averages that could be compared. The following values were calculated:

• Estimations from all respondents, not a single cohort, were used to calculate the average amount of time it would take to create the Fully Annotated Drawing.
• Estimations from Model-Reliant cohorts were used to calculate the average amount of time it would take to create the Minimally Annotated Drawing because this more closely matches their current operating state today where many are releasing a model and a drawing, meaning their estimations are likely the most accurate.
• Estimations from Model-Based cohorts were used to calculate the average amount of time it would take to create a Fully Annotated Model and Minimally Annotated Model because this more closely matches their current operating state today where many are releasing MBD deliverables, meaning their estimations are likely the most accurate. Estimations for the Fully Annotated Model dataset were also calculated for Model-Reliant and Drawing-Based cohorts for comparison.

Measuring Time Spent on Engineering Documentation

Another method of testing the theoretical advantages of MBD initiatives in this research study was to average performance across a bank of productivity metrics and downstream error rates. Specifically, the metric bank of questions in this study’s survey asked for the following:

• The average time an engineer in your company spends on design documentation per week (0-60 hours)?
• The average number of change orders (ECOs) per product end items after first release?
• Average number of Non-Conformances (NCs) resulting in scrap?

These metrics were then averaged for different cohorts for comparison.

Measuring the Rate of Benefits Experienced

Another approach to testing the theoretical advantages of MBD initiatives in this research study was to calculate the percentage of respondents citing a variety of benefits, which included:

• Shrink the amount of time to create and / or review engineering documentation
• Cut the number of clarification requests on engineering documentation
• Lower the number of change orders, revisions and updates generated after first release
• Shorten time to create data packages for Request for Quote (RFQ)
• Reduced scrap generated from poor or manually manipulated manufacturing methods
• Decrease in non-conformances
• Increased first time resolution rates for service calls

The averages of each cohort were compared.

Datasets Used in the Survey

The survey for this research study requested that respondents enter estimates for the amount of time needed to create four different engineering documentation datasets. Each one is detailed as follows.

Fully Annotated Drawing

This dataset represents a drawing that is released without any other deliverables.

The following specifies the information and assumptions given to the respondent for this question.

• The following estimate should be entered by an engineer.
• The drawing contains 6 views of the model. Note that all six views were included in the survey.
• Assume that the 3D model has been completely modeled and can be used to develop the views in the drawing.
• Assume that dimensions used to create model geometry cannot be used in the creation of the drawing.
• Each dimension must be created manually as measurements on the model geometry.
• The drawing is meant to be the released source authority. The 3D model is not released.

Minimally Annotated Drawing

This dataset represents a drawing that is released alongside a 3D model. It represents a drawing that has a minimal or reduced set of annotations.

The following specifies the information and assumptions given to the respondent for this question.

• The drawing contains 5 views of the model. Note that all five views were included in the survey.
• Assume that the 3D model has been completely modeled and can be used to develop the views in the drawing.
• Assume that dimensions used to create model geometry cannot be used in the creation of the drawing.
• Each dimension must be created manually as measurements on the model geometry.
• The drawing and the 3D model are meant to be the released source authority.

Fully Annotated Model

This dataset represents an Annotated 3D Model that is released without any other deliverable. It represents an MBD deliverable where all aspects of a traditional drawing are replicated.

The following specifies the information and assumptions given to the respondent for this question.

• The following estimate should be entered by an engineer.
• Compared to the document shown in the prior question, this document includes more dimensions in the front and right views and contains two additional views. Note that all views were included in the survey.
• The 3D model in this document is interactive, meaning the user can pan, zoom, spin and select different views.
• Assume that the 3D model has been completely modeled and can be used to develop the views in the drawing.
• Assume that dimensions used to create model geometry cannot be used in the creation of the drawing.
• Each dimension must be created manually as measurements on the model geometry.
• The document is meant to be the released source authority.

Minimally Annotated Model

This dataset represents an Annotated 3D Model that is released without any other deliverables. It represents an MBD deliverable that has a minimal or reduced set of annotations.

The following specifies the information and assumptions given to the respondent for this question.

• The 3D model in this document is interactive, meaning the user can pan, zoom, spin and select different views.
• The document contains 7 annotated views of the model. Note that all views were included in the survey.
• Assume that the 3D model has been completely modeled and can be used to develop the views in the drawing.
• Assume that dimensions used to create model geometry cannot be used in the creation of the drawing.
• Each dimension must be created manually as measurements on the model geometry.
• The document is meant to be the released source authority.

Share this post