THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR AEROSPACE … · THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR...

REPORT TITLE

THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE

FOR AEROSPACE SUPPLIERS

THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR AEROSPACE SUPPLIERS

Developing and delivering products as a smaller aerospace supplier is no easy task today. Contractors are passing more system-level work, and increasing complexity, down the supply chain. Fewer contracts mean more companies are chasing less work. Nimble startups compete with established, entrenched players. Regulations and compliance processes are multiplying fast. None of these issues is new. They have been disruptive for years. However, their complexity is growing at an accelerating rate.

In response, suppliers are acting. Many efforts are converging on a super-initiative: Digital Transformation. This effort spans many other initiatives called by many names. Yet, they have two commonalities: the definition and management of a holistic, digital definition of the product and the execution and automation of digital processes.

This report compares development processes run with traditional approaches with those converted by a Digital Transformation initiative. It includes the following sections.

Driver of Strategic Change offers an overview of trends driving aerospace suppliers to modernize their development processes with Digital Transformation initiatives.

Costing, Pricing, and Quoting contrasts traditional and progressive approaches to executing this long-standing internal process.

This report is a comprehensive

digitalization guide for product development by

aerospace suppliers. Each section compares traditional approaches

to progressive ones for a specific phase in product

development.

EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW


Concept Design and System Architecture looks at the earliest stages of development, analyzing traditional and progressive approaches.

Detailed Design, Verification, and Validation details how Digital Transformation efforts can upgrade design procedures and processes.

Manufacturing Planning and Preparation focuses on the use of engineering documentation to develop new deliverables for the production process.

Summary and Recommendations recounts the major takeaways from this report and supplies recommendations for organizations moving forward with a Digital Transformation initiative.

Many issues make it more difficult for smaller aerospace suppliers to succeed today. Digital Transformation initiatives offer a path to counter those issues.

REPORT TITLE

EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW ........................................................................................... 2

DRIVER OF STRATEGIC CHANGE ......................................................................... 5

LESS FUNDING, MORE COMPETITION .......................................................................................... 5

INCREASED COMPLEXITY .................................................................................................................... 7

MORE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ............................................................................................... 8

COSTING, PRICING, AND QUOTING ................................................................. 10

IMPROVEMENT OPPORTUNITY ..................................................................................................... 10

ESTABLISHED APPROACH ................................................................................................................. 11

NOVEL APPROACH ................................................................................................................................ 12

CONCEPT DESIGN AND SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE ....................................... 14



NOVEL APPROACH ................................................................................................................................ 16

DETAILED DESIGN AND VERIFICATION & VALIDATION ............................ 18



NOVEL APPROACH ................................................................................................................................ 20

MANUFACTURING PLANNING AND PREPARATION .................................... 23



NOVEL APPROACH ................................................................................................................................ 25

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................... 26

SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................. 26

RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 27

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT TITLE

Aerospace and Defense supply chain companies face unprecedented challenges today from a variety of sources. Many companies have not updated their business model or their go-to market strategy in a generation, despite multiple disruptive waves. Technical innovation, disruptions in aerospace supply chain management, increasing product and manufacturing complexity, and increases in regulatory oversight all require fresh responses. For several reasons, staying with the status quo is not the path forward today. Demand for more affordable products drives large companies to shift more responsibility for innovation to smaller members of the supply chain.

LESS FUNDING, MORE COMPETITION

Funding for aerospace projects is in decline which means primary contractors have fewer and smaller programs to award. To win business, contractors often must bid aggressively and commit to overly optimistic schedules or uncertain program requirements. This kind of manic urgency rolls down the supply chain, multiplying the uncertainty and likelihood of error. Overspending and late delivery charges undercut profitability; regulatory oversight brings projects to a halt. The cyclic nature of aerospace spending adds an extra layer of unpredictability. More Tier 2 & 3 companies chasing fewer projects means there are fewer winners and more losers.

This section describes the three trends driving aerospace suppliers to

pursue improvements to their product

development processes.

DRIVER OF STRATEGIC CHANGE


Figure 1: Funding in the aerospace industry triggers a series of complications for suppliers

When companies resort to superhuman effort as an innovation strategy, they are prone to overspending, errors in design, excessive scrap in manufacturing, and running afoul of regulations. The industry has adapted by moving toward fewer custom (bespoke) products or services and more tailored production designed to take advantage of interchangeable parts or assemblies. Such a strategy makes sense for the OEM, but for supply chain vendors it makes winning new business like aiming at moving targets.

The democratization of many aerospace technologies only compounds the competitive threat. New businesses are entering the market, unhindered by outdated business practices and workflows. These upstarts of aerospace don’t have to retrain employees, justify the value of 3D printing, or update their software. An aerospace startup has a business model in tune with digital transformation.

The reduction in aerospace and defense

spending triggered a series of circumstances

that results in more development

constraints. That is the first factor driving

aerospace suppliers to seek new efficiencies in

development.


INCREASED COMPLEXITY

In years past, the contracts awarded to Tier 2 and Tier 3 suppliers were almost exclusively for parts. Today OEMs are outsourcing complex critical systems — the kind once kept in-house — to prime and Tier 1 contractors. The complexity rolls down to the Tier 2 & 3 suppliers. These contracts demand a broader range of engineering skills and supporting technology. Thus, a small manufacturer who has only delivered discrete parts in the past may be ill-equipped to deliver assemblies.

Figure 2: More systems outsourcing increases development complexity for suppliers

Historically, aerospace companies are mature; change has been gradual and evolutionary. But the rapid pace of change in technology challenges the industry’s status quo. New technologies including single source of data, integrated design/build processes, electronic simulation, computerized manufacturing planning, and the move

The outsourcing of more complex systems to

aerospace suppliers is an opportunity. However, it

brings more product complexity and development

complications with it. This is the second factor driving suppliers to seek

new efficiencies in product development.


toward design for manufacturing all bring new levels of complexity as well as new possibilities for increased business.

Aerospace complexity is not limited to processes and technologies; the very substance of the product has changed. New material technologies—including aluminum alloys, fiber-metal laminates, and various composites—require new methods of design and manufacture. Integrating these new materials with the technology required to use them is a time-consuming, workflow-challenging process.

Figure 3: Rising regulations around the world increases compliance complexity for suppliers

MORE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE

Aerospace suppliers operate in an age of ever-increasing regulatory oversight. From labor issues to material toxicity, every conceivable aspect of product design, manufacturing, and delivery is subject to government regulations. In this era of global commerce,

Product and process regulations that vary around the globe is

making product development more

complex for aerospace suppliers. This is the

third factor driving them to seek efficiencies in product development.


manufacturers must follow more than one set of rules. Today’s aerospace manufacturers, from OEM to Tier 3, must design and build parts, assemblies, and systems that comply with all regulations. They must also carefully document their compliance. Regulatory audits have become widely feared in the industry.

Failing a regulatory audit means the company is forced to change work practices and pays enforcement penalties. Bigger companies have specialists for this side of the business; smaller companies face the greatest risk. Either they can’t afford employees who only manage regulatory compliance, or they have simply never seen fit to add such a role.

Regulatory compliance issues often force a company to revise best practices. In companies of all sizes, best practices are often primarily tacit knowledge, passed down like family secrets. The challenge today is to design digital workflows to codify these best practices and make them an inherent part of the organization’s processes.

The issues of funding, competition, complexity, and compliance aren’t going away. The future belongs to aerospace companies of every size who make thoughtful, digital transformation an imperative. The following sections examine opportunities to meet these challenges with improvements in the creation, dissemination, and use of design documentation deliverables.


Costing, Pricing, and Quoting (CPQ processes) are critical to the success of any aerospace supplier. Get too aggressive with a proposal, and the company is saddled with a project with no chance of profitability. Get too conservative and the company falls out of the running quickly. Aerospace suppliers must balance the need for accuracy with speed. Winning new business starts with improving how business comes in the door.

IMPROVEMENT OPPORTUNITY

There are two goals in applying transformation to the fundamental activities of CPQ:

• Develop proposals quickly — Velocity is theconstant companion of innovation. Aerospacecompanies need to develop proposals quickly, if forno other reason than for the sake of appearances.All too often, the first responder wins the bid.

• Develop proposals accurately — Winning the bid isonly the beginning. If the data used to create thebid is faulty, it causes the entire project to skewtoward the loss column. The earlier the mistake orerror in judgment occurs, the greater the chance ofa winning bid becoming an unprofitable mess.

Sales and engineering staff undertake a variety of activities to achieve these goals, including:

• Use of manual, configure-to-order (CTO), orengineer-to-order (ETO) approaches to assess thecosts involved with the manufacture of

COSTING, PRICING, AND QUOTING

This section focuses on the impact of

digitalization on the process to cost, price, and quote jobs. Overly aggressive companies

win bids by overpromising, setting

product development up for failure. Conservative

companies lose bids because their prices are

too high. Accurately modeling costs is crucial

to success.


deliverables. This entails the development of designs, in manual or automated fashions.

• Analyzing manufacturing process to establish operational costs. This can involve mocking up specific operations in production.

• Assess and understand the implications of all customer requirements and regulatory compliance and the supplier’s delivery of the items.

• Gaining insight into product performance as a validation step, either through digital or physical means.

Figure 4: Suppliers face competing goals while improving CPQ processes

ESTABLISHED APPROACH

Traditional processes and methods for design, engineering, and manufacturing workflows were at one time state of the art — or at least state of the budget. Data handoff was manual and by-request, based on an individual’s data management practices instead of open access digital collaboration. Such methods generally mean engineers spend a significant portion of their time seeking information, time poorly spent.

The established approach is heavy on the use of spreadsheets and documents to track requirements, material costs, sources, and operational costs. This personal or workgroup approach to manufacturing data

The traditional approach to CPQ is reliant on

documents and spreadsheets. This

exposes the process to the risk of human error,

costing inaccuracies, and more. This results in

over constrained product development

projects.


also relies heavily on personal experience to assess implications in areas including customs requirements and regulatory compliance. Such methods are complicated to track, share, and maintain. Some quick work in CAD, detached from the primary design, may arise late in the development cycle, adding another level of complication.

These methods risk uncoordinated changes in spreadsheets and documents, shattering any pretense of a single source of truth. There is potential for human error in estimating and assessing costs when based on personal experience. A new supplier, a new material option, and discontinued products are only three of a myriad of potential issues. Such reliance on personal experience is a risk if a key employee leaves the company. It all adds up to multiple opportunities for errors in costing. If the data is faulty, such projects have no chance to be profitable.

NOVEL APPROACH

Digital Transformation brings a whole new level of quality and assurance to every step of CPQ processes. The focus shifts from working harder to working smarter. Such efforts become the launching pad for products that are created in a networked, connected fashion. Using digital models and related data is always accessible to every team member and every member of the value chain. When an event occurs, everyone can see it and work on it immediately, as appropriate. Several specific tactics become possible in the Digital Transformation of CPQ processes, including:

• Allocation: Proposal requirements can be managed using allocations to specific aspects of a design solution.

• Simulations: Quick templated simulations can be used to verify mechanical and electrical design performance.

• Mockup: Because all the data is available, it becomes an easy process to use either 2D or 3D

The novel approach to CPQ relies on integrated

systems spanning design, simulation,

mockup, collaboration, and costing. The

employment of a single, digital definition of the

product eliminates many errors and risks

associated with the established approach.


to mockup a design solution for any given proposal.

• Sharing: A digital platform makes sharing design solutions with customers and supply chain partners fast and easy, and prevents breaking the single source of truth.

Digital Transformation of CPQ processes establish a greater level of trust in data throughout the department or organization at a critical time in the project. Material and operational costs are accurate because they always come from the data’s origin point. Trusting these costs allows for a tighter band of quoting for a proposal. Customers gain confidence that your company has developed a feasible design solution at reasonable cost.


Innovation starts with freedom to explore at the conceptual stage. Developing shape and function collaboratively sets engineering teams up with a sound basis for Detailed Designs or dooms them with design ideas that were never feasible and over constrained. This process leaves much room for improvement.


The principles of Concept Design remain the same whether an engineer uses a drafting table, a desktop computer, or a networked engineering platform. The goal is to explore and develop concepts and architectures for products, setting the design solution direction for the rest of product development.

Concept designers and engineers undertake a variety of activities to achieve this objective, including:

• Develop logical and physical ideas and concepts for both mechanical and electrical systems. This spans architectures, geometries, and functions.

• Validate that the concepts functionally perform as expected.

• Verify that these concepts do, in fact, satisfy customer, functional, safety, regulatory and other requirements.

• Ensure that design costs, material, operational requirements, and otherwise, fall within the expected bands set during CPQ processes.

CONCEPT DESIGN AND SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE

This section delves into the effect of

digitalization on the development of concept

designs and product architectures. Due

diligence during this phase is key. Overly

restrictive requirements or infeasible designs set the rest of development

up for failure.


Figure 5: Activities in Concept Design set projects up for success or failure


For years Concept Design teams have been using general-purpose software products like diagramming tools, spreadsheets, and word processing to capture and develop logical, functional, and physical architectures. Spreadsheets have also been the primary tool for calculations, and to track regulatory requirements. Mockups have been created using traditional parametric feature-based modeling tools. Legacy software does little to help companies reduce the number of iterations in the design-to-manufacture process.

These general-purpose software tools are an improvement over paper and pencil, but they no longer represent the apex of technology. Design representations and product requirements are disconnected from one another, which means the context for requirements validation is not saved as part of either data set. Using these general tools also often means there is low fidelity in design definition and validation, which introduces the

The established approach to developing

concept designs and product architectures

relies heavily on copying and pasting designs,

documents, and spreadsheets. Human error and inefficiency

are the main detriments to these approaches.


risk of inaccurate validation in downstream processes. All these issues can lead to errors in compliance with the subsequent risk of penalties and cost overruns.

NOVEL APPROACH

The advantage of Digital Transformation in Concept Design is the ability to capture every concept and every architecture of the potential solution in a shared environment. That way, data can be shared directly with engineering to develop the Detailed Designs required for manufacturing. A collaborative approach to mechanical and system design improves design concepts and ideas from day one. Key decisions occur during Concept Design, and they can be captured immediately. The time savings from a shared collaborative environment can be significant, impacting the entire product development process.

In Digital Transformation of Concept Design, formal tracking of requirement begins immediately and continues through to product development and manufacturing in an unbroken thread. Requirements can be allocated to logical, functional, and physical architectures as needed. They can be formally tracked from the earliest stages and associated with specific design aspects, providing the right context for assessment of compliance or customer satisfaction.

Both 2D and 3D mechanical design tools can prove out concepts; direct modeling/sketching (as contrasted with parametric modeling) is valuable at this stage. Simple design of wiring schematics and harnesses can be started and integrated into the 3D mechanical design as concepts are established. Consider the use of generative design tools to assist in designing mechanical components. It suggests concepts and designs that would not have otherwise been considered, and these iterations can occur more quickly than is humanly possible.

Upfront analysis tools allow concepts to be tested very early, saving time later when decisions about design will

A host of digital methods all pointing

back to a single, holistic definition of the product are the key enablers to the novel approach for

developing concept designs and system architectures. These

tools, many the same as those used in the CPQ process, are a natural

extension into this process.


impact the engineering process. Such simulations lead to more informed initial designs, as well as provide an early proof-of-concept for design performance. Technical design issues can be discovered and resolved at the earliest stages, when design is flexible. Finding problems early prevents costly late-stage design issues, thus protecting profitability.


When projects hit this stage of development, far more detailed, digitally tangible work starts. Today, Detailed Design and Verification & Validation (V&V) are becoming more complicated, thanks to the increased integration of electronics, electrical systems, and embedded systems. With this rise in complexity, this process has become increasingly error-prone and time consuming.


The opportunity to improve product development at the Detailed Design and V&V stages is of great value. Overall, engineering aims to achieve two goals during this time.

• Develop designs that satisfy requirements, comply with regulations, meet cost constraints, and can be manufactured and delivered on time.

• Produce design documentation that downstream functional departments use in the development process.

To achieve these goals, mechanical and electrical engineers carry out a range of activities.

• Develop mechanical designs and documentation.

• Verify that the functional performance of the mechanical design satisfies requirements.

• Develop designs and documentation for electrical systems (harnesses)

• Verify that the functional performance of the electrical system satisfies requirements.

DETAILED DESIGN AND VERIFICATION &

VALIDATION

This section focuses on the effect of

digitalization on detailed design and verification and validation. The key

in this phase is to efficiently develop designs, document

them, and verify they comply with allocated

requirements. Failure to do that results in

disruptive change orders and many rounds of

prototypes.


Figure 6: Activities in Detailed Designs fulfill core, fundamental needs in development


In established work environments, the process of Detailed Design and V&V is one of limited communication outside one’s own workgroup, with many spreadsheets, Computer Aided Design (CAD) applications and simulation tools in use. Spreadsheets and documents track and manage requirements. Mechanical designs are created using parametric feature-based modeling, in isolation from other tasks and data sources. Mechanical design data is exchanged with supply chain partners and customers using file-based import/export of 3D models. Legacy designs are often reused in parametric CAD, even if it means considerable rework. Spreadsheets and hand calculations are often the tools of simulation.

When changes are required, data is exported as separate files, demolishing the idea of a single source of truth. Electrical system diagrams must be converted to the right format and inserted into the existing mechanical CAD model. Changes to board systems layout are also exported from one CAD system only to be imported into another to check for form and fit.

The established approach relies on many

manual methods, including requirements

tracking in spreadsheets, limited modeling

methods, and other basic digital tools.


Such methods are an unending source of tactical setbacks. When requirements are managed in separate documents, it undermines the availability of a single source of truth. This disconnection of requirements from designs makes it easier to miss changes that invalidate a requirement or violate a regulation — an expensive misstep.

Parametric modeling is a powerful tool for embedding engineering intent into the design and for reacting to changes. But it cannot quickly explore design modifications that might step beyond initial intent, thus restricting the freedom to investigate alternatives. At the same time, importing and modifying imported designs in the parametric CAD environment is time-intensive, resulting in missed deadlines and late products.

The low level of interoperability at work in such CAD-and-document environments is laborious. There is little time to exchange WIP changes until late in the design cycle. These last-minute changes are constrained to the minimum. Significant modifications are highly constrained if addressed at all.

Hand and spreadsheet calculations lack the fidelity required to accurately predict product performance. It is a point-by-point evaluation, not a systems analysis. Design flaws can remain hidden until physical prototyping and testing, which results in multiple expensive rounds that eat into budgets, schedules, and profits.

NOVEL APPROACH

In the Digital Transformation of Detailed Design and V&V, requirements are managed as an enterprise function directly connected to design, not by employee or workgroup. Mechanical designs come together using a mix of parametric feature-based modeling, direct modeling, facet modeling, surfacing, and subdivision modeling as required for the task.

As Detailed Design continues, parametric optimization and/or generative design technology can be used to fine-


tune the sizing of detailed designs, which in turn helps validate material cost savings. Legacy designs can be incorporated, using direct modeling and direct sketching as required. Once complete, mechanical designs can be natively opened by customers and suppliers using the same platform, enabling associativity with changes from the original CAD.

The same model becomes the basis for mechanical analysis. Doing the simulation within the design environment provides more information for engineers, who can adjust the work accordingly. Using analysis directly during verification and validation ensures designs are ready for prototyping and testing. The design environment is also where electrical systems can be developed directly, enabling associativity during the back-and-forth between logic diagrams and 3D mechanical assemblies.

There are additional advantages to the Digital Transformation of Detailed Design and V&V. Configuration management takes place in a central location, and the model continues to be the single source of truth for the entire engineering organization. This centralization of data reduces error by eliminating sharing, converting, and modifying various disconnected files.

It is easier to see, report, and fix errors in such a central environment. It is also possible to explore more design options and use more modeling approaches. This opens the opportunity for more innovation, further reduction of costs, and schedule compression if necessary.

Specifying modern complex materials is easier when there is a central approach to design and testing. Running simulation, parametric optimization, and generative design specifically to push the limits on these new materials becomes easier.

Digital Transformation allows companies to accelerate the design cycle by reusing and modifying legacy mechanical designs with less CAD-based friction.

The progressive approach relies on a

comprehensive digital definition of the design, including requirements, simulations, and more. This definition removes

ambiguity, instilling more confidence in validation.


Changes from customers and suppliers are more easily accepted, and companies engage in more frequent collaboration, especially between electrical and mechanical engineers.

Finally, earlier simulation leads to better decisions, which makes one more positive impact on product cost. Analysis during V&V ensures the design will pass prototyping the first time.


In this last step before full-scale production, companies fully invest in preparing to make products. This includes designing tooling like jigs, fixtures, and molds. It involves developing numerically controlled (NC) programs that will drive programmable equipment. Collectively, these digital assets are then used to start making physical things.


The objective during this stage of development is clear and simple: Use design documentation to create the deliverables necessary to manufacture parts, assemblies, and systems for delivery to customer.

Achieving that goal involves a range of activities for NC programmers, manufacturing planners, quality inspectors and other stakeholders, including:

• Assess designs for manufacturability to reduce production cost and complexity.

• Prepare for manufacturing includes modifications to design.

• Design all tooling required in the manufacturing process.

• Produce machining toolpaths needed to drive NC equipment.

• Generate inspection toolpaths to drive Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) equipment.

MANUFACTURING PLANNING AND PREPARATION

This section explains how digitalization

improves the manufacturing planning and preparation phase of development. The digital deliverables created during this

phase directly affect the efficiency of

manufacturing production.


Figure 7: Activities in Manufacturing Planning and Preparation set limits on production efficiency


In the established approach, mechanical designs are often prepared for manufacturing using the same parametric feature-based CAD solution designers use. Working with complex models lead to feature failures that are time-consuming to resolve. Foreign models are just as difficult to modify as they lack features to change. Instead, NC programmers are forced to remove or add geometry in workarounds. Tool design and machining prep usually have their own software products, allowing limited interoperability with design and subsequently isolating departments and workgroups.

NC programmers use manual, tedious methods to develop NC programs by manipulating speeds, feeds, and tool selection. Quality planners experience the same as they develop programs for CMM equipment. In some cases, they must painstakingly modify moves as text. Doing so leads to difficulty visualizing equipment operation, introducing the risk of missing an error. In turn, that leads to broken tools, scrapped material, and in the worst case, damaged equipment.

The established approach relies on combinations of

automated and manual approaches. NC

toolpaths are created in an automated fashion only to be manually

edited as g-code. Such inefficiencies, and

potential for human error, directly affect scrap and rework.


NOVEL APPROACH

Applying direct modeling technology — instead of using parametric feature modeling — makes it easier to design and modify tooling and factory equipment. It also makes it easier to modify designs when required for manufacturability. In practice, direct modeling is faster and easier to use, reducing the time required to prepare designs for manufacturing.

Digital Transformation opens new opportunities to automate the creation of NC and CMM programs. Tolerance-Based Machining or Feature-Based Machining are approaches where Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) software reads and interprets tolerances and other information on a 3D model before applying a set of machining toolpaths based on standards and best practices. These capabilities work well with Model-Based Enterprise efforts where Product and Manufacturing Information (PMI) are embedded in 3D models. Adding this information provides an unambiguous definition for CAM software. This approach offers a chance to accelerate the process while maintaining quality.

Bringing digital transformation to manufacturing planning opens the door to digitally automated traceability, both forward and backward in the product development and manufacturing cycle. It is easier to edit mockups, and to see the implications of change on regulatory compliance. It is also possible to link operational requirements to specific physical items and to the original CAD model.

The progressive approach relies on the continued use of the single, holistic, digital

definition of the product to create manufacturing

deliverables in an automated fashion.


There’s no doubt about it: aerospace suppliers face many disruptive factors today. That likely isn’t going to change in the future. Digital Transformation initiatives delivery benefits throughout the product development process. This effort spans many other initiatives called by many names. Yet, they have two commonalities: the definition and management of a holistic, digital definition of the product and the execution and automation of digital processes.

SUMMARY

• Funding for aerospace projects is in decline, which means primary contractors have fewer and smaller programs to award. To win business, contractors must bid aggressively and commit to overly optimistic schedules or uncertain program requirements.

• In years past, the contracts awarded to Tier 2 and Tier 3 suppliers were almost exclusively for parts. Today OEMs are outsourcing complex critical systems — the kind once kept in-house — to prime and Tier 1 contractors. The complexity rolls down to the Tier 2 & 3 suppliers.

• Today’s aerospace manufacturers, from OEM to Tier 3, must design and build parts, assemblies, and systems that comply with all regulations that vary around the world. They must also carefully document their compliance.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Digitalization represents an impactful improvement

opportunity for aerospace suppliers. It applies throughout the development process, from beginning to end.


RECOMMENDATIONS

• Balance the need for accurate CPQ processes with speed so they can capture programs at profitable prices. There is a strong need to improve costing accuracy while still delivering proposals quickly.

• Manage requirements with allocations in CAD solutions in CPQ activities, Concept Design, Detailed Design, and all the way through to manufacturing preparation. This ties specific features to specific aspects of a design. Requirements traceability from beginning to end delivers valuable insight.

• Use direct modeling to supplement parametric, feature-based modeling. Employing a full range of modeling capabilities accelerates many tasks in the CPQ, Concept Design, and manufacturing preparation processes.

• Explore the application of generative design in Concept Design. It produces innovative new concepts that might not have ever been considered by human minds but that are imminently applicable.

• Run quick templated simulations and upfront analyses as part of the CPQ and Concept Design, and Detailed Design processes to check feasibility, verify performance, and requirements satisfaction. This work allows engineers to identify and solve issues earlier in development with fewer cost implications and design constraints.

• Develop quick, easy design mockups with 2D and 3D capabilities in CAD applications early in development. This exercise allows engineers to check concepts and ideas more thoroughly.

• Investigate the applicability of Tolerance-Based or Feature-based machining in conjunction with Model-Based Enterprise efforts. It offers a means to accelerate and standardize machining practices.


Chad Jackson is the chief analyst and researcher at Lifecycle Insights, providing insights on a range of technology-led initiatives across mechanical, electrical, embedded software, system, and IoT engineering.

Lifecycle Insights is a research and advisory publishing firm. Our mission is to empower executive’s ability to reap more value from technology-led engineering initiatives in less time, with more surety, and less disruption.

The entire contents of this publication are copyrighted by Lifecycle Insights and may not be distributed, reproduced, archived, or transmitted in any way, shape or form without prior written consent by Lifecycle Insights.

Chad Jackson is the chief analyst and researcher at Lifecycle Insights, providing CONTACT | EMAIL [email protected] | SITE www.lifecycleinsights.com

THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR AEROSPACE … · THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR...

Documents

Transcript of THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR AEROSPACE … · THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION GUIDE FOR...