Please be advised that a New Work Item Proposal has been loaded to the BSI Standards Development Portal for comment. We hope this will assist in increasing awareness of the Standards Development Portfolio.
Any comments received will be submitted to AMT/4 – Industrial data and manufacturing interfaces, for consideration when deciding the UK response to ISO.
Proposal: ISO/PWI 3151-2 – Visualization elements of PLM-MES interface – Part 2 – 3D error feedback in the plant industry. Please visit http://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/9022-06822
Comment period end date: 29/03/2022
Scope of the proposed deliverable.
This part of the standard specifies a data model of visualization elements for 3D data exchange for error information feedback between Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) and Manufacturing Execution System (MES or MOM: Manufacturing Operations Management) in the plant industry.
The following are within the scope of this standard.
a) Data model of visualization elements for the plant industry with complex and long-lifespan products.
b) Defining the properties of the data model for the visualization elements of the PLM-MES interface.
c) Relationship with the information model of visualization elements as defined in ISO 10303-239 Product Lifecycle Support
d) Relationship with the information model of the visualization element as defined in IEC 62264 Enterprise Control System Integration
The following are out of the scope of this standard.
a) Information model of visualization elements for the industry of products with simple and shortlifespan products.
b) The definition of the method of the data model representing the visualization elements of the PLMMES interface.
c) Overall coverage of the PLM-MES interface. A larger outline is covered in ISO TR 3151-1.
Figure 1 (attachment) shows the current interface among PLM, ERP, MES systems which is optimized for the mass production context. Because ERP does not handle 3D engineering information such as CAD models, sometimes there is a separate direct link between PLM and MES. As the production system is well tuned for the mass production system through a series of test productions the direct link does not exist for many cases.
Figure 1 As-Is Configuration of PLM-MES Data Exchange (Please see the separate attachment for the figure)
Because the commercial markets have more than enough suppliers, customers have more power than suppliers. That unbalanced force promotes ‘mass customization’ to satisfy customers and arrives at the concept of ‘personalized production’. The problem of personalized production is that cost and time can increase as similar to the old-fashioned custom-tailor cloths. The new technologies should help to provide the personalized product with the price level of mass production.
Another problem is the maturity level of design. In the case of mass production context, the maturity level of design is high because any small design error creates a big problem at the automated production line. Through a series of test production cycle the design maturity level goes higher. This is possible because the design cost is relatively small compared to the production volume and costs. When it comes to the personalized production, the maturity level of design cannot be high so that during the production cycle the design can be modified to heal the error found late. The plant industry including shipbuilding and construction is born to be a personalized type. Because every product has its own design, there is pressure to design the product fast so that the production cycle begins even though the design is not yet finished. In addition to the short time allowed for design, the design cost does not afford many cycles of iteration because each product should be designed individually.
In this kind of situation where the design and production are overlapping (This concept is already popular in concurrent engineering), the two departments of design and manufacturing should collaborate well and exchange more information. 3D information should be shared between two departments because both design and manufacturing work in 3D world. Figure 2 (attachment) shows the proposed configuration among three systems where there is a direct link between PLM and MES to support the personalized production context. Because two systems are developed without any mutual consideration, there are mismatches of terminology and concept. There is a need for standardized interface definition and implementation of the interface.
Figure 2 To-Be Configuration of PLM-MES Data Exchange (Please see the separate attachment for the figure)
Based on an analysis of related PLM standards and MES standards, the visualization elements of PLM-MES interface defines an information model of PLM-MES interfaces which can be used to map and to visualize corresponding entities with the same meaning.
Figure 3 Process of PLM-MES Data Exchange (Please see the separate attachment for the figure)
Figure 3 shows the use case of data exchange between PLM of a design department and MES of a production department. The use case is collected from a shipbuilding company of Korea. The numbered stages in Figure 3 are explained below.
(1) The design department handovers information such as 3D configuration data, drawings, process information to the production department using PLM and the production department produce products using MES.
(2) The production department feedbacks information (design errors, process changes, facility changes, or malfunctions of facilities) which are generated during the production planning to the design department through PLM.
(3) The design department updates the design data and delivers again the updated information to the production department. There can be a separate and small purchase request to ERP and to the procurement department.
(4) Field generated information such as temperature, RPM, pressure, deformation which show the status of the steady operation of production facilities can be feedback to the design department.
The states-of-the-arts technology in a world class shipyard shows that the 3D shape model from the design department is usually delivered to the production department using a digital model which is a simplified mesh model of the original CAD model. The PDA (personal digital assistant, also known as a handheld PC) is used to visualize the 3D model. The delivery channel of 3D product model is separate from the traditional PLM ~ ERP ~ MES sequential interface as shown in Figure 1.
The problem is when something is wrong with the production which is not controllable inside the production department and needs input from the design department. The current channel of communication is to print out the 3D model from PDA and to highlight the problem area. It is sent to the design department with messages via email or voice communication together with the scanned image of the hardcopy with hand markings. There is a need for a reliable digital channel of 3D feedback information. Where both PLM and MES share and modify the same 3D model of the project. The focus of this specification is on the stage (2) and stage (3) of Figure 3 and visualization of the related data models. The same concept can be expanded to include the whole aspects of the project and the whole scope of MES and PLM.
This standard part specifies information models of visualization elements for exchanging data between PLM (Product Lifecycle Management) and MES (Manufacturing Execution System or MOM – Manufacturing Operations Management). The focus is given to the use cases of shipbuilding industry because the industry is typical in terms of ‘personalized production’ from the beginning of the industry and characteristics of the industry are similar to those of the construction industry or plant industry. The interface can be expanded to accommodate requirements of other industry domains as the industry 4.0 or the personalized production is getting established.
If you have any comment or need more information, please contact Sami Ortiz at [email protected]