I love this technology!  It lets me dynamically navigate, variationally shape, structurally optimize, generatively machine, and more.  So much, in fact, that we sometimes lose sight of good old "Problem Solving 101".  I promise in the future to delve into some meaty technical issues, but I feel compelled to launch this column on a philosophical mission… are we applying this beloved technology to the right things?

In our quest for continuous process improvement, we start by identifying process bottlenecks. And then (no rocket science here) we decide to either improve the efficiency of the bottleneck task, move the task off the critical path, or better yet eliminate the task altogether. Let’s look at two examples.

One company I recently visited identified that one of their major bottlenecks is the creation of rapid prototypes.  Specifically, their current RPT supplier can only turn around 2-3 parts per week.  So the first question is… "Why do you need rapid prototypes?"  Their answer was "to give our industrial designers, managers, and customers a tactile feel for the product".  Bingo, good answer.  OK, so we can’t eliminate the task nor can we likely remove it from the critical path, so for this case we look at ways to increase the throughput.  Maybe locate more RPT suppliers, even in other areas of the world.  Or consider buying our own machine.  In any event, the challenge here is straightforward… increase the efficiency of the bottleneck task.

Our second case is a bit more interesting.  A large German company is upgrading a few hundred seats of CAD.  Their first pilot project determined that generating drawings from solid models is a bottleneck… the time for hidden line processing, detailing, plotting, and checking the drawing.  So being the reckless cowboy that I am, I posed the question… "Why do you need drawings?"  The chief engineer, rather puzzled, answered, "Because we need drawings."  I asked calmly, "Why?"  He replied, "Because that’s the way we communicate our designs."  "Why?"  "Because we’ve always done it that way."  Oops, wrong answer!

By the way, there are a few acceptable answers to this question about drawings.  Some industries still need drawings to satisfy documentation requirements of regulatory agencies (FDA, FAA, whatever), other industries require fifty year archival of drawings.  To one of these good answers, I would have continued, "But do we need drawings on the critical path?"  If you’re generating a detailed drawing for each iteration of the solid model… don’t.  If you’re generating completely dimensioned drawings to send to your suppliers… don’t.  Most all tooling and parts suppliers today can accept 3D surface data, supplemented by a minimally dimensioned drawing to convey inspection data. Or better yet, encourage the supplier to use 3D CAD and store the inspection data directly on the solid model.  But more on this in a future column.

So ask the tough questions.  Process improvement isn’t an idle pastime.  The success of your company depends on innovative strides that leverage technology, process and people to deliver dramatic business benefits.  Broaden your focus beyond productivity and efficiency improvements.  Move bottlenecks off the critical path.  Eliminate some bottlenecks… "a task not worth doing, certainly is not worth doing well."  Be creative and don’t accept (at least on face value) "because" as an answer.  Be tenacious in asking "Why? Why? Why?!"

A 35-year veteran of the computer-aided design, engineering and product lifecycle marketplace, Wayne McClelland is well-known as an energetic pioneer in the development and implementation of technologies for structural dynamics, finite element analysis, 3D solid modeling, and workgroup data management.  Wayne can be reached at waynemcc@wamware.com or www.wamware.com.