we save lives! · pdms manual entry of ebom in ematrix (from tc cad bom) by pdms •legacy systems,...
Post on 20-Mar-2020
13 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
AGENDA2
Key S
afe
ty S
yst
em
s
Overv
iew
Key Safety Systems Overview
Where Were We – The Past & Challenges
Why Aras for KSS – The Value Proposition
Where Are We Now – The Present & Efficiencies
Where Are We Headed – The Future Vision
Adopting Aras - Lessons Learnt / Summary
Key Safety Systems (KSS) Overview
Global automotive
Tier 1 Supplier
manufacturing
active and passive
safety systems
- Passive Safety:- Inflators
- Seat Belts
- Air Bags
- Steering Wheels
- …
- Active Safety- Collision
Prevention
- Lane Departure
Warning
- …
KSS Global Presence4
Continent Country Location Type
Asia China Huzhou Plant
Asia China Shanghai RHQ & Tech. Center
Asia India Gurgaon RHQ
Asia Japan Yokohama RHQ
Asia South Korea Seongnam Manufacturing
Asia Thailand Bangplee Manufacturing
Europe France Paris RHQ
Europe Germany Raunheim RHQ & Tech. Center
Europe Italy Colleferro Plant & Tech. Center
Europe Italy Orbassano RHQ
Europe Italy Tregnago Plant
Europe Romania Arad Plant & Tech. Center
Europe Romania Brad Plant
Europe Macedonia Kicevo Plant
Europe UK Carlisle Plant
North America Mexico Juarez Plant
North America Mexico Valle Hermosa Plant
North America USA Brownsville, TX Plant
North America USA Greenville Plant
North America USA Knoxville, TN Plant
North America USA Lakeland, FL Plant & Tech. Center
North America USA Sterling Heights, MI WHQ & Tech. Center
BMW Fiat Hyundai SGM Suzuki Diamler GM VW
Chrysler Ford Isuzu SGMW Toyota PSA SVW Hino
Jaguar Ferrari …
Customers
KSS Engineering & PLM Overview5
Global Design, Engineering & Release Organization Overview
6 Technical Centers distributed across NA, EU and Asia
Global programs require collaboration, data share, and Follow-the-sun Design support
Meet customer (OEM) demands
Increasing product complexity (Mechanical, Electrical, Electronics and Controls Software)
Increasing demand for localizations to win regional business
Multiple CAD systems (NX, CATIA)
Meet internal requirements
TeamCenter standardized for Product Data Mgmt (PDM)
NX and Catia V5 standardized for Product design CAD
AutoCAD standardized for manufacturing, facilities, other
Active Safety is “New Product Introduction”
Innovation focused
Passive Safety is “Sustain & Grow Existing Product Portfolio”
Operational Excellence, Standardization, Reuse focused
AGENDA6
Where
Were
We?
The P
ast
& C
hallenges
Key Safety Systems Overview
Where Were We – The Past & Challenges
Why Aras for KSS – The Value Proposition
Where Are We Now – The Present & Efficiencies
Where Are We Headed – The Future Vision
Adopting Aras - Lessons Learnt / Summary
Where were we? 2012 Perspective7
Teamcenter Global PDM
N.A. Vaults
(CAD / JT / Other
Replication
(EU, Asia)
Multiple, Regional,
Legacy ERPs
eMatrix NA
eMatrix EU
NA PDM Admin EU PDM Admin Asia PDM Admin
Manual entry
of EBoM into
multiple ERP
systems by
PDMs
Manual entry
of EBOM in
eMatrix (from
TC CAD BOM)
by PDMs
• Legacy systems, unsupported – HIGH BUSINESS CONTINUITY RISK
• TeamCenter limited to designers. ENGINEERS MAINTAINING BOMS IN EXCEL!
• eMatrix not integrated with TC or ERP systems. EBOM creation was manual – MAJOR DATA INTEGRITY ISSUES!
• Multiple ERPs, regional, manual processes for PDM – PLM – ERP information exchange. HIGH ERROR POTENTIAL!
• Enterprise collaboration non-existent. Manual and sequential processes. Manufacturing SURPRISED BY BOM CHANGES
• Quality, PMO / PM, Capacity Planning, Cost Estimating, … - Manual / Excel based:
• NO REAL TIME VISIBILLITY FOR DECISION MAKING
• Technical, Architectural & Process challenges limit ability to support strategic business vision
• “3D BASED RELEASE, GLOBAL DESIGN & ENGR.
Our PLM Roadmap
• New capabilities
• Lower impact or higher effort implementations
• Efficiency improvements
• Standard reporting
• Automatic metric updates
• Software Control
• MRO, Plant Simulations
• Equip. Standardization
• Financial
• LIMS
• Prototype Builds
• ERP
• Project & Portfolio Mgmt
• Req’ts Mgmt / Issues Management
• Costing
• Standard line designs
• Work Instructions
• MBOM
• SharePoint Integration?
• Supplier RFQ Mgmt
• Supplier Launch Tracker
• Data Migration / Customer RFQ Mgmt
• Document Control / Workflow Mgmt / Change Requests / Release Mgmt
• Data/IP Security
• TeamCenter PDM – UG & Catia Data Mgmt
• Eng BOM Mgmt – Pilot Running
• Visualization
Foundation was kicked
off in 2011 and
successfully completed
in 2013 with
TeamCenter UA PLM
Change Management – 2013
Approx. $2M capital expense +
$0.25M operational expense +
Complete reliance on Siemens PLM
Services for implementation support
NOT SUSTAINABLE
FOR KSS!
Potential Added CapEx / OpEx for
subsequent phases
Potential Added CapEx / OpEx for
subsequent phases
Potential Added CapEx / OpEx for
subsequent phases
Potential Added CapEx / OpEx for
subsequent phases
Potential Added CapEx / OpEx for
subsequent phases
Potential incremental capital /
operational expenses for
subsequent phases with limited
internal operational control on
implementation
Challenges with our PLM Platform in 2012
AGENDA10
Why A
ras
for
KSS
The V
alu
e P
ropo
sition
Key Safety Systems Overview
Where Were We – The Past & Challenges
Why Aras for KSS – The Value Proposition
Where Are We Now – The Present & Efficiencies
Where Are We Headed – The Future Vision
Adopting Aras - Lessons Learnt / Summary
Why Aras? – 2013 Assessment
TeamCenter:
• Too expensive, cost prohibitive & complex for KSS enterprise use:
• Product Management, Quality, Operations, Sourcing, Procurement
• Suppliers, Manufacturing, Outside Design & Engineering
• Executives lack Visibility
• KSS processes constantly evolve.
• TeamCenter is restrictive in process modeling capabilities
• Maintaining, customizing and integrating is time consuming and costly
• Incremental Cost:
• Minimum $1M in License Fees, $200K in Maintenance License Fees,
Implementation cost - TBD
ARAS:
• Software is “Open Source”
• We focus our $$$ to develop targeted solutions using ARAS Business Process
Modeling / Service Architecture Framework
• Configure vs. customize; Microsoft .NET standards
• Basic & Premier Subscriptions available for advanced functionality
• 100K - 250K/annum – scales up to 1000+ users
Why Aras? – 2013 Assessment
TeamCenter:
• Too expensive, cost prohibitive & complex for KSS enterprise use:
• Product Management, Quality, Operations, Sourcing, Procurement
• Suppliers, Manufacturing, Outside Design & Engineering
• Executives lack Visibility
• KSS processes constantly evolve.
• TeamCenter is restrictive in process modeling capabilities
• Maintaining, customizing and integrating is time consuming and costly
• Incremental Cost:
• Minimum $1M in License Fees, $200K in Maintenance License Fees,
Implementation cost - TBD
ARAS:
• Software is “Open Source” & Free!
• We focus our $$$ to develop targeted solutions using ARAS Business Process
Modeling / Service Architecture Framework
• Configure vs. customize; Microsoft .NET standards
• Basic & Premier Subscriptions available for advanced functionality
• 100K - 250K/annum – scales up to 1000+ users
Above all, ARAS is simple and intuitive enough for the business to be
empowered and take operational control of the deployment without heavy
reliance on IT as long as there is structured change management and release
governance.
For a company like KSS, where CHANGE is a constant, this was very liberating!
AGENDA16
Where
Are
We N
ow
Th
e P
rese
nt &
Eff
icie
nci
es
Key Safety Systems Overview
Where Were We – The Past & Challenges
Why Aras for KSS – The Value Proposition
Where Are We Now – The Present & Efficiencies
Where Are We Headed – The Future Vision
Adopting Aras - Lessons Learnt / Summary
Before We Had Aras……17
14+ Year Old, Out of Maintenance, eMatrix PLM
Linear, First In - First Out Process.
Changes Made without Full Impact Analysis
Manufacturing and Purchasing Not Involved Until Late in Launch Cycle
4hrs of Engineering Overhead per Change
Costing Performed Off-Line
Teamcenter CAD Data Management – No Integration
High Levels of Bureaucracy
Project Charter18
Replace eMatrix with a Modern PLM
Engineering Change
Supplier Change Requests (SREA)
Deviations
Document Management
Integrate With Future Systems
Globally Accessible, Single Database
Minimal User Footprint
What We Wanted19
Flexible but Disciplined Enterprise Change Process
Reduced Change Bureaucracy, Enhance Accountability
Full Impact Analysis
Early Extended Team Involvement
Maintain Teamcenter as Global CAD Manager
Best in Class
Too Risky to Change
Integrate with Aras
What We Decided20
Derivative of CMII
Maintained Basic CMII Structure
Removed CMII Bureaucracy
Renamed PR to DR
Issues and potential changes
identified. Approval to investigate.
DRChange
investigation & approval
ECRCreate &
release the change
ECN
New Change Process Benefits21
Forces Execute as Planned Methodology
Captures All Effects of Changes
Earlier Manufacturing and Purchasing Involvement
Costing Captured in Process Flow
Auto-Routing via Project Teams
More Flexible Process Flow
Mix and Match Changes
Revise Order
Release to Multiple Release Levels on One Change
Teamcenter Integration22
POC Showed Strong Integration was Feasible
Developed
Complete BOM Integration
Functional Usage Showed Light Integration More
Desirable.
New Part Numbers Create TC Objects (2D & 3D)
CAD Pushes Links (2D & 3D) and Drawings Back to Aras
Change Management Specification23
Spent Too Little Time on Spec
Minimal Internal Aras Knowledge
Poor Specs Created an Iterative Approach To Development
Scope Change Happened Daily
Desired Method To Ensure Complete Changes
Thought We Could “Repurpose” 9.3 Express ECO Impact
Matrix
9.3 OOTB Impact Matrix Allowed for Incomplete Changes
Impact Matrix24
“Repurposed” from Aras 9.3 Express ECO
Significantly Enhanced Rolls all Changes to All Affected Top Level Assemblies. Prevents
Incomplete Changes.
Reconfigured to Show KSS Specific Information
Reconfigured Data Display. Full BOM View.
Cannot Remove Non-Required Information
Powerful. Captures Everything. Core Of Change Process.
Created Method to Combine Multiple ECRs to One ECN
Every Change Caused Problems With Base Code. Source of Significant Project Delay
Other Processes26
Modified Existing DCO Process
Created New SREA and Deviation Workflows
Created Design Work Order (DWO) For CAD Work
Stand Alone
Attached To An ECR (Manually Generated)
Attached To An ECN (Auto Generated)
Data Migration27
Target: 100% Availability of Old Data
>500,000 Objects Moved
All Relationships MaintainedE-Matrix Oracle Database
Tables:
• 191 Tables
• 36.7 million rows
• 1.87 GB of metadata
(1917.83 MB)
Migrated Data
• 150,000 Document Numbers with
Multiple Revisions.
• 108,000 Part Numbers with Multiple
Revisions.
• 52,000 Engineering Changes VAULT
E-Matrix Vault Size = ~550GB
~300GB in Raunheim
~250GB in Sterling Heights
Data Migration28
Created and Debugged Scripts for Migration
Scripts Iterated to Validate Data
<0.2% Data Failure Rate
Launch Plan29
User PC Configuration
PC Configuration Required
No Central Means to Push Out .Net Settings
Created Per-Site Push Methods
Training
Train, Train, then Train Some More. Expect a World Tour
Develop Local Experts (Hard)
After Launch, More Training
Created Custom Help File
Launch Plan30
Big Bang vs. Staggered?
Large Amounts of Reuse Across Product Lines
Pilot Projects Showed Difficulty of Incremental Approach
Chose Big Bang
T- 6 WeeksWeekly
Communications Begin
T – 7 DayseMatrix Change
Cutoff
T – 3 DayseMatrix
Shutdown (6pm EST). Abandon
Running Changes
Final Data Migration
Aras Global Launch, 8am China Time
Launch31
Data Migration Available 1 Week Before Planned
Launch Date
Impact Matrix on Complex Assy’s Took too long to
Load
Launch33
Countdown to Launch Started at T-minus 6 Weeks
Weekly Email to World
Users Notified of Launch Plans
Training On-Going
Transition
10 Nov: eMatrix Change Cut-Off
14 Nov: eMatrix Shutdown. ~110 Changes Abandoned.
16 Nov: Final Migration Completed
17 Nov: Aras Global Launch
Launch34
Quiet ≠ All is Well
2-3 Weeks for Issues to Arise
IT Issues with Aras 9.3 (IE 11, Access 97)
Training and System Understanding
Failure to Account for Effects of Cancelling Changes
Migrated In-Change Parts without Associated Change Objects
Created Errors in Release States
Still Being Cleaned Up
Users Find Creative Ways to Break Things
Steady State Usage35
User Overhead Greatly Reduced.
Examples of ECRs Executed in < 1 hr.
Overall Change Time Reduced 28% and getting better
Manufacturing and Purchasing Involved In All Changes
Cost Process Visible and Trackable
TC Integration Working Well
Users Say Aras Is A Significant Improvement
Nobody Wants to Go Back To eMatrix
Continuous Improvement37
>150 Continuous Improvement Actions Identified
Initial Prioritization Complete – Funding Established
Embrace User Change Requests. Do them Quickly
Lessons Learned38
Create a Good (Not Perfect) Spec Before Starting Embrace Changes Before and After Launch
Bad Spec = Scope Creep and Delay
Do Data Migration Early Test with Real Data
Train, Train, Train Local Experts
Expect Problems Can’t Test For Every Scenario
Users Will Always Find A New Way To Break It. Be Ready To Fix It.
Not Everyone Is An IT Wizard
AGENDA39
Where
Are
We N
ow
Th
e P
rese
nt &
Eff
icie
nci
es
Key Safety Systems Overview
Where Were We – The Past & Challenges
Why Aras for KSS – The Value Proposition
Where Are We Now – The Present & Efficiencies
Where Are We Headed – The Future Vision
Adopting Aras - Lessons Learnt / Summary
Enabling the Connected Enterprise – Realizing Our PLM Vision with Aras
Deploy ARAS PLM /
BPM 100% Web-Application
Web-Services
Open Source PLM solution
Subscription model for advanced capabilities
Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)
ARAS IS:
Multi-CAD
TC for CAD Data Management
(TC for Product Data Mgmt (PDM) only – NOT
PLM!)
Engineering (Change)
Process (EBoM)
Aras-TC Integration
2013/14
Scope
2014/15
Scope
Cost Estimation
(Price Information
Forecast) Customer & Prog. Mgmt
(Concept To
Manufacturing Product
Lifecycle)
Marketing &
Sales (Volume,
Price, Region)
Capacity Planning
(Plant Product
Data Sheet)
Quality (PPAP,
FMEA, APQP)Purchasing
(Supplier Launch Ttracker
Early Supplier Involvement)
Financial
(Annaul Ops. Planning,
Capital Appropriation
Request)
JV Partner
Collaboration
Other Business
Process Automation
EE Automotive Edition
ERP / MRP
Aras-ERP
Integration
Production Plant
Asset Mgmt
Manufacturing Process Planning
(MBoM / BoP)
Global Supplier Mgmt
& Collaboration
Product Portfolio
Mgmt.
2015/16
Scope
AGENDA41
Where
Are
We N
ow
Th
e P
rese
nt &
Eff
icie
nci
es
Key Safety Systems Overview
Where Were We – The Past & Challenges
Why Aras for KSS – The Value Proposition
Where Are We Now – The Present & Efficiencies
Where Are We Headed – The Future Vision
Adopting Aras - Lessons Learnt / Summary
What Did We Learn? What are the Critical Success Factors?43
Drive the program TOP – DOWN:
It may start with Engineering, but it will spread to other process areas quickly
Get your Executives proactively updated and excited about what Aras can truly do for your enterprise
You will need their cross functional support as you traverse this journey
Traditional SDLC based development process does not work with Aras. Be more AGILE:
Meet, talk, mockup, review, revise, develop, Meet, ….
Keep reviews frequent – at least once per week and engage the business SMEs actively and often
Aras facilitates rapid mockups – Leverage it!
Have a blend of in-house dedicated team and implementation partner(s) with strong process expertise
It’s not just technology expertise
Partners must understand business processes so they can guide you through the configuration of Aras
When you go OFFSHORE for development:
Expect to lose efficiency, especially if you don’t have good internal AGILE processes
Do not underestimate:
Data migration, deployment & training challenges
Effective planning for ongoing maintenance, support, continuous improvement & release management
Subscription:
If you start with Open Source, make sure you understand pricing options for “Subscription” upfront
You will MOVE to a PAID SUBSCRIBER, Its not a “IF” but “WHEN”
Plan ahead and set expectations appropriately
top related