BMW to bring its engineering systems to the 3DExperience.
Product lifecycle management (PLM) is a cross-functional operational framework to drive innovation. However, discussions about it are often reduced to IT systems and technical architectures. In reality, PLM relates to an ecosystem of solutions, processes, standards, governance, analytics and ways of working related to managing product complexity. Product data management (PDM), on the other hand, focuses on CAD and CAE data management.
For example, BMW’s diverse PDM and PLM landscape includes a combination of proprietary and commercial solutions, such as:
- PRISMA (PRoduct data Information SysteM with Archive), a PDM system for geometry and functional dimensioning.
- SAP’s iPPE (integrated Product and Process Engineering) for master data, manufacturing BOM management and similar.
- Dassault Systèmes’ Enovia VPM for assembly modelling and Catia integration.
- Siemens Teamcenter for Digital Mock-Up (DMU) and Tecnomatix for manufacturing process planning and simulation.
- PTC’s Windchill for engineering BOM configuration with ThingWorx for data integration.
As recently announced, BMW and Dassault Systèmes are partnering to bring BMW’s future platform to the 3DExperience. The question is, how much transformation will be required for BMW to introduce this platform to its existing ecosystem? Will 3DExperience be introduced to replace legacy Enovia VPM as the new PDM for Catia interoperability? Or will BMW aim higher to move from multiple legacy PDM and PLM platforms to the full 3DExperience?
Either way, there is much to learn. So, this article discusses the challenges of re-platforming including data migration, vendor relationships, politics, multi-CAD and multi-PLM ecosystems.
Leveraging an effective engineering platform
The purpose of an engineering platform is to manage product development-related data, documents and processes throughout the product lifecycle. It facilitates collaboration, version control, change management and workflow automation across cross-functional teams and departments. Innovation-driven development is multi-disciplinary: from mechanical and electrical CAD integration to bills of materials (BOM), requirements, quality and compliance, release and change processes, supply chain collaboration, procurement, intellectual property and other deliverables.
Engineering platforms provide core design and validation capabilities, including:
- Historical content traceability, with version control, predecessor/successor relationships and more.
- Consistent and timely interoperability with large design and engineering data sets.
- Integrated workflows to enable concurrent engineering and other traceable means of data exchange.
- Common environments for enterprise-wise collaboration and decision-making — beyond the design office and engineering teams.
- Product development analytics to optimize reuse and carry-over.
- Requirement traceability across product components, semi-finished goods and suppliers.
- Virtual simulation and physical testing results and issue traceability.
- Quality, compliance, costing and requirement traceability, across multi-party deliverables.
To this point, BMW and Dassault Systèmes’ release on re-platforming said, the goal is to develop BMW Group’s future engineering platform with the 3DExperience as its core collaboration platform: “17,000 users will be working globally on a virtual twin of a vehicle that can be configured for the variants of each model with consistent data in real time.”
Addressing multi-CAD and multi-PLM challenges
Managing multiple CAD solutions within the same environment can pose significant challenges due to interoperability issues, data translation complexities and version control discrepancies. CAD tools are intricately integrated with their respective PDM systems, making it difficult to seamlessly exchange data between different platforms. This leads to concerns regarding data integrity, collaboration efficiency and increased risk of errors in collaborative design environments.
Moreover, supporting diverse CAD platforms requires additional resources for training, skillset diversification and integration with PLM systems, leading to higher overhead costs and potential vendor lock-in. Organizations must carefully weigh the benefits of a multi-CAD environment against the complexities and risks associated with managing diverse CAD ecosystems to ensure effective design collaboration and data management across the product lifecycle.
Furthermore, multi-PDM and PLM system bring different sets of challenges across data, process, user, system. and solution provider perspectives. Examples include how to:
- Manage master data and build data threads across systems.
- Reduce capability duplication and overlaps.
- Migrate data from one system to another when upgrading or simplifying components of the estate.
- Manage user skills when operating across multiple platforms, including ongoing alignment to internal capability maturity development.
- Track cross-product integrated change and related pan-enterprise data exchange.
- Balance the need for specialized and generalist platforms.
- Effectively manage technical debt across the system.
- Maintain effective multi-vendor relationships.
- Track multiple vendor product development roadmaps and leverage modern architecture strategies.
In the BMW context, multiple PDM and PLM tools could be consolidated to simplify the landscape for more effective automation, data integration and technologies. Julien Hohenstein, vice president of Processes, Digitalization, Governance Idea to Offer at the BMW Group’s research and development, highlighted that “We will only optimize our engineering process if we think digital, work [connections] rely on an integrated data. For the BMW Group, the 3DEXPERIENCE platform will support this approach and help to reach a higher level of quality in our processes.”
Transitioning to a unified and simplified ecosystem
While multi-CAD environments offer flexibility and choice, they also present significant challenges. These include interoperability, data management, training, vendor lock-in, integration across PDM/PLM systems and more. Organizations must carefully evaluate the trade-offs and complexities associated with managing multiple CAD platforms and implement strategies to mitigate risks and maximize the benefits of a diverse CAD ecosystem.
CAD-PDM interoperability often influences PDM and PLM adoption decisions, especially in traditional engineering environments where legacy data is crucial and there is limited appetite or perceived need for change. Expanding from PDM to full-fledged PLM often faces resistance due to legacy inertia. Transitioning to true PLM implies “taking the plunge” to embrace business transformation and holistically focus on data continuity across the enterprise. Achieving this requires a clear data architecture strategy and process simplification ambitions that are supported by end-to-end workflow automation and a platform integration strategy.
Multi-PDM simplification and PLM consolidation requires:
- Robust change roadmaps, with a business engagement model to drive adoption, education and reskilling.
- Holistic master data management strategies and data architectures.
- Data migration capabilities to transform and combine relevant data sets, including archiving strategies while minimizing customization.
- Data extractors and loaders with relevant open APIs and connectors to build data threads and interfaces.
The notion that working in a harmonized PLM ecosystem necessitates using a single toolset or vendor is often exaggerated. While there are benefits to standardizing on a single PLM solution, such as streamlined integration, simplified support and consistent user experience, the reality is that many organizations operate in heterogeneous environments due to various factors such as legacy systems, acquisitions or specialized needs.
In practice, harmonizing a PLM ecosystem involves integrating diverse tools, platforms and data sources to facilitate seamless collaboration and data exchange across the product lifecycle. This may include interoperability between different CAD systems, integration with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, and connectivity with supplier/customer systems.
Federating the PLM ecosystem by connecting datasets
Furthermore, modern PLM platforms are designed with open architectures and standards-based interfaces, enabling interoperability with third-party applications and systems. This flexibility allows organizations to leverage best-of-breed solutions and technologies while still maintaining a unified view of product data and processes within the wider ecosystem.
Ultimately, harmonizing a PLM ecosystem is not about enforcing uniformity or vendor lock-in but about optimizing collaboration, innovation and efficiency across the organization’s diverse toolset and vendor landscape. It’s about creating an integrated digital environment where data flows seamlessly, processes are standardized and stakeholders can collaborate effectively to drive business outcomes.
In the context of BMW, harmonizing the PLM ecosystem would involve integrating these diverse legacy tools and systems to facilitate seamless collaboration, data exchange and workflow automation across the product lifecycle. This could include interoperability between:
- Different CAD and PDM platforms used by BMW’s design teams.
- Integration with suppliers’ systems for parts procurement.
- Connectivity with manufacturing systems for production planning and execution.
The vision for a more connected PLM ecosystem is clear: to reduce complexity and drive step-change simplification. Or as BMW said in the release, “All BMW Group engineering disciplines will be working on a virtual twin of a vehicle that can be configured for the variants of each model with real-time, integrated data. Teams can reuse components more easily, master the complexity of car variability, and improve the engineering to manufacturing cycle time. In addition, BMW Group can seamlessly migrate data from its existing IT solutions and extend its engineering platform to other disciplines such as modeling and simulation.”
