MovingFrom 2D to

3D CAD

The productivityand business

advantages

The primary challenges of manufacturing companiesare to design better products, in shorter timeframes, at lower cost. The value that manufacturersoffer their customers is continually threatened bycompetitors who are racing to deliver higher-qualityproducts with more features at lower prices. In aneffort to better respond to market pressures,manufacturers are realigning their computer-aideddesign technology to better achieve their businessobjectives. Currently the most remarkable trend inthis realignment is the move from 2D CAD designtechniques to design processes that take advantageof 3D solid modeling.

Why this strong move from 2D to3D design? This paper examinesthe limitations of 2D designprocesses and outlines theengineering productivity andbusiness advantages of productdevelopment using 3D solidmodeling technologies.

Introduction

Two-dimensional engineeringdrawings have been a staple ofthe design process since the lateeighteenth century, when theprinciples of orthographicprojection and descriptivegeometry were first developed and applied toengineering problems. During the period ofexplosive industrial growth in the late nineteenthand early twentieth centuries, drawing standardswere developed that established engineeringdrawings as critical business documents formanufacturing companies.

As we enter the twenty-first century, 2D drawingsstill play an important role in engineering practice,and in many cases serve as the definitive designdocumentation that guides manufacture,fabrication, and assembly of products. The ability to

use and interpret 2D engineering drawings remainsan essential element of the professional literacy ofthe engineer.

Over the past three decades, computer-aided design(CAD) technology virtually eliminated traditionalmanual drafting tools and has helped manufacturersrealize manifold increases in productivity forcreating engineering drawings. With lower costs anduniversal accessibility to computer-aided tools, mostall manufacturing firms have some type of CADsystems installed – a 1998 survey conducted byMechanical Engineering magazine indicates that96% of mechanical engineering professionals

currently use a CAD system.

Despite the advent of affordableand easy-to-use 3D solid modelingtechnology, a majority ofmanufacturing firms still basetheir design processes on 2D CADtechniques and drawing data. A1998 survey by Computer AidedEngineering magazine revealedthat more than 60 percent of CADengineering work is done in 2D.But engineering andmanufacturing businesses seekingorder-of-magnitude reductions intheir design cycles are quicklyturning to 3D CAD tools – thesame survey indicates that

manufacturers' CAD purchase intentionsoverwhelmingly favor 3D CAD over 2D CAD, byalmost a three-to-one margin.

Similarly, a 1999 study of CAD/CAM practices by theDataquest industry research firm

1indicates that

more than half of surveyed companies still use 2Dtechniques as the main design method, though 75%responded that 3D would be the main designtechnique in two years.

1Dataquest, End-User Analysis: Mechanical

CAD/CAM/CAE From the User Viewpoint, 1999

Moving from 2D to 3D CADThe productivity and business advantages

A 1999 study of CAD/CAMpractices by the Dataquest

industry research firmindicates that more than halfof surveyed companies still

use 2D techniques as themain design method, though

75% responded that 3Dwould be the main design

technique in two years.

2

The limitations of 2D design

If most manufacturing companies are moving to 3Ddesign techniques, why are so many still using 2D formainstream product development? In the Dataqueststudy, the top reason for remaining with 2D CAD issimply that 2D CAD is adequate to meet thecompany's design needs, according to more than athird of the respondents.

While most companies are comfortable with time-honored and production-proven 2D designmethodologies, product development processes thatrely on 2D CAD as the primary design tool havecritical limitations that unnecessarily extend designcycle time, compromise product quality, and increaseengineering and manufacturing costs. Theselimitations can be attributed to the nature of 2Ddesign data and 2D CAD tools.

Inability to easily assess fit and toleranceproblems in 2D

Design engineering for the typical product beginswith a layout concept that describes the overallproduct component and subassembly interfaces andworking envelopes. Captured in a 2D drawing, thislayout is of limited value in solving problems in theearly stages of design, when it is easiest and leastexpensive. While a 2D layout drawing may be

somewhat useful in determining general componentand subsystem arrangement, it is woefullyinadequate in helping engineers visualize the 3D fit,interface, and function of assembly components. Theinadequacy of 2D in solving assembly problems isespecially acute in assemblies with many movingparts, where reliance solely on 2D design captureintroduces a multitude of design errors.

2D design complicates the checkingprocess

Because of the limitations of 2D drawings inassessing assembly fit and tolerance stack ups, mostassembly designs that are developed with 2D designtools require a lengthy, laborious, and error-pronedrawing checking process. Drawing checkers oftenmust spend days checking fit and tolerancedimensions between part drawings to assureassembly quality, even on assemblies with only a fewparts. The checking process is compounded whendrawings are produced by different drafters usingdifferent datums and dimensioning parameters. Red-lined drawings go back to designer or drafter forcorrections and then back to checker for final checkand approval, which may extend the design cyclesignificantly, especially for complex assemblies withhundreds or thousands of parts.

2D design demands physical prototyping

Because 2D drawings do not fully capture andcommunicate details of actual three-dimensionalassemblies, 2D design forces development teams torely on physical assembly prototypes to reveal fitand interference problems. With 2D designtechniques, much of the assembly engineering isactually accomplished by building up and tearingdown a physical model – the only way to spot mostinterference and clearance problems. This relianceon a physical model adds significantly to the productdevelopment cycle. Not only are there lead times foreach component prototype, but also the assemblymock-up and problem solving times, along with thedesign changes, rework, and re-engineering that areinevitable with this approach.

3

Inefficient drawing creation with 2D CADsystems

Within the typical 2D design process, both part andassembly design data is formally captured in 2Dengineering drawings. The designer or draftsmancreates and details a variety of 2D views of eachpart, working with CAD commands that control thelines, arcs, circles, dimensions and other primitives ofthe 2D system. Such primitives are clumsy in thatthey require the design professional to think andexecute the design in terms of low-level drawingelements rather than in design engineering terms.For example, a countersunk hole must be mentallyand operationally translated to its equivalent circles,lines and arcs to be rendered in different views inthe 2D CAD system.

In addition, 2D CAD systems arenotoriously inefficient at creatingisometric views and explodedassembly views, where the actualdimensions of the parts do notmatch the dimensions of theelements in the planarrepresentation because of theperspective of the viewing angle.The difficulty and time involved increating isometric views with 2DCAD has forced many companiesto forego isometric view creation,even though these views may bevery valuable in visualizing,understanding, or identifyingdesigns. The same problem is inherent with otherdrawing views like detail views and section views,where the designer or draftsman must spendsignificant time determining the details and scales ofthe views, then create the individual graphicelements that comprise each view. The element-by-element and view-by-view drawing creation processcan add significant time and costs to the design ofintricate parts or complex assemblies.

Tedium of 2D design changes

Because every design typically requires more thanone 2D orthogonal view, and often a variety ofauxiliary views like detail or section views, a singlepart may require the designer to re-create design

details a number of times in a 2D CAD system. Thisrepetition of design data for each view is not onlyredundant; it also becomes extremely inefficientwhen changes are made to a design. Each designmodification must be implemented in all affecteddrawing views, a process that is tedious,cumbersome, and time-consuming. Designers mustreview all affected 2D CAD files and inspect everydrawing view and detail, then edit each affectedview individually.

Many "new" products are actually derivatives ofexisting designs that copy most of the existingdetails but involve some modifications. As withroutine design changes, creating derivative productsor product families from 2D design data involves

going from view to view to viewto make revisions that match thenew product modifications.

Inability to use 2D designdata directly in downstreamprocesses

Two-dimensional design data is ofvery limited value in a host ofcorollary engineering andmanufacturing processes.Whether the design requires onlythe simplest calculation of massproperties or full-blown motion orstress analysis, it is difficult orimpossible to analyze a 2D designwithout re-creating design data in

three dimensions. In addition, production cycles formost products include processes that require 3Ddesign data, such as tooling creation and numericalcontrol programming. While engineering drawingsof a design may form the basis for all downstreamprocesses, the turnaround times for analysis andmanufacturing are inevitably extended wheneverdesign data must be re-created in three dimensions.

Extended engineering analysis turnaroundtimes

The 2D-based design process typically usesengineering rules of thumb that can get designersthrough many problems, but fall short when hardanalysis of possible failure modes is needed. Using

Product developmentprocesses that rely on 2D

CAD as the primarydesign tool have critical

limitations thatunnecessarily extend

design cycle time,compromise productquality, and increase

engineering andmanufacturing costs.

4

practices based on experience and trial and error,most designers using 2D skip detailed analysis infavor of overdesign. But true design analysis andoptimization require sophisticated motion, force,and stress analysis with computer-aided engineering(CAE) tools, which cannot directly use 2D drawingdata. Whether companies use CAE analysis in-houseor outsource their analysis services, the turnaround isextended by the amount of time it takes to re-createdesign data in 3D.

Protracted manufacturing cycles

Product development based on 2D CAD must allowadditional time for manufacturing, fabrication, andassembly because of the incomplete communicationthat 2D drawings afford these downstreamprocesses. Whether the product and its componentsrequire simple jigs and fixtures or specialized toolinglike plastic injection molds, production engineersand toolmakers need additional time to interpretand understand drawings, and also must allow moretime for corrections due to missed dimensions oromitted details.

For numerical control machining, only the simplestmachined or fabricated parts can be efficientlyprogrammed from 2D design data. Full surfacegeometry is a minimal requirement for virtually allcomponents produced by 3- to 5-axis machining.With only 2D drawing geometry as input, thenumerical control programming function is delayeduntil the 3D geometry can be created.

Manufacturers using 2D design techniques cannotreadily take advantage of rapid prototypingtechnologies (such as stereolithography or lasersintering) to trim prototype lead times. Thesetechnologies require 3D solid geometry as input,which must be created from 2D data before partscan be produced in the rapid prototyping machinery.This additional step adds time and expense to theprocess and counters the quick turnaroundadvantages of the rapid prototyping technologies.

Rework for publications and documentation

Two-dimensional engineering drawings may formthe basis for some graphics in technical publicationsand documentation, and may occasionally be used

directly for those purposes. However, in most casesassembly and installation instructions requirecustomized isometric and exploded views. Thesedesign graphics are usually created, with significantdifficulty, either with the 2D CAD system or with atechnical illustration package. Service manuals,marketing documents and product packagingtypically cannot directly use 2D graphics fromengineering drawings, so the production of productdeliverables may be extended for companies using2D CAD.

Summary: Crawl to market with 2D CAD

While engineering drawings have proven successfulin building products for centuries, manufacturingcompanies who base their product developmentprocesses solely on 2D design techniques arecrawling to market. Two-dimensional engineeringdrawings will remain an important form of designdocumentation for the foreseeable future, but 2Ddesign techniques are inherently more cumbersomeand less productive than commonly availablealternatives. New, more productive 3D technologieshave superseded the inefficiencies of the 2D-baseddesign process, and are establishing new standardsfor shorter design cycle times, improved productquality, and lower costs.

Removing the barriers to 3D design

As noted above, the most frequently cited reasonfor not using 3D design techniques – that 2D isadequate – may be a dangerous pretext for manufacturing companies. Indeed, the other mainreasons cited for not using 3D – that 3D systems aredifficult to learn and use, that 3D systems are tooexpensive, and that 3D design is not compatiblewith current design work – are likewise hollowexcuses in light of the current 3D design tools andtechniques that have gained mainstream acceptance.

Unigraphics Solutions' Solid Edge is leading the newbreed of 3D solid modeling tools that are bringinggreater productivity to former 2D CAD designers andto companies using 2D-based design processes. SolidEdge was developed specifically to address theinherent inefficiencies of 2D design and to remove

5

all the traditional barriers to the adoption of 3Dsolid modeling.

Ease of learning, ease of use for 3D solidmodeling

With its initial launch in 1996, Solid Edge introducedrevolutionary innovations in interface design anduser operation that changed forever the ease-of-useparadigm for 3D design. Every subsequent release ofthe software has included significant enhancementsaimed at making 3D solid modeling easier to learnand more efficient in the design process.Independent studies of software usability haveconfirmed that Solid Edge is indeed the most user-friendly and productive solid modeling design toolavailable.

Low entry cost for 3D design

In addition, Solid Edge was developed from theground up as a Windows-based application that runson inexpensive Intel processor-based workstations,so thatmanufacturingcompanies neednot makestaggeringinvestments togain access to 3Ddesign capabilities.In a recent studyof the cost of CADby the TechniComindustry researchfirm, Solid Edgeranked lowest in five-year cost of ownership inmultiple-seat configurations of the many 3D systemsincluded in the evaluation.

2

Compatibility with 2D design

Solid Edge also challenges the objection that 3Ddesign is not compatible with current design work –it includes built-in tools that address the needs ofdesign professionals currently using 2D CAD. SolidEdge can read and write files in all the popular 2DCAD formats, and can even employ existing 2D CADdata directly in the solid modeling process. Thesoftware includes demonstrations, tutorials, andhelp aimed at easing the transition to 3D for 2D

users, and provides a complete 2D drafting system socompanies can use familiar, comfortable 2D designtechniques while migrating to 3D-based designprocesses. With Solid Edge, companies don't have tothrow away their legacy data or their existingprocesses and start from scratch – they can insteadgrow and evolve their current design practices tomeet the needs of the future.

Thousands of companies have already recognizedthat with Solid Edge, there are no more excuses fornot adopting 3D solid modeling design techniques.Companies who have made the transition from 2Dto 3D are realizing significant time-to-market andproductivity benefits of 3D CAD. Many of theirexperiences are related in the review of 3D CADbenefits that follows.

The benefits of 3D CAD

Three-dimensional solid modeling is no Holy Grailfor manufacturers – rather, it is a mature technology

that has practicalbenefits invirtually all phasesof the productdevelopmentprocess. Productdefinitionscaptured in 3Dsolid geometryprovide superiorcommunication ofdesign intent, not

only among the members of aproduct design team, but also throughout theengineering and manufacturing organization, thelarger enterprise, and the supply chain.

Faster design capture with solid modeling

Parametric, feature-based solid modeling with SolidEdge is a very intuitive method of design capture

2TechniCom, Inc., An Analysis of Pricing and Offering

Conditions of Principal Participants in theMechanical CAD/CAM Industry, 8th Edition,published September 1999.

©TechniCom Pricing Study 1999. Prices include software only and maintenance costs.

6

which uses terms, concepts, and commands that areinherently more familiar to design professionalsthan the placement commands for drawingprimitives in the typical 2D CAD system. With ease-of-use innovations like STREAM technology, whichuses inference logic to optimize CAD efficiency byimproving the speed and effectiveness of userinteractions, Solid Edge enables designers,engineers, and drafters to be comfortable andproductive with powerful solid modeling designtools that are easy to master and control. The resultis faster design capture – in complete, precise 3Dsolid models – than design capture in 2D drawinggeometry.

Case study. "Working in 2D requires the operatorto follow a laborious process of placing andtrimming a series of elements until the desired netshape is produced," says Howell N. Cornell, directorof engineering/research at TRACO, a leadingmanufacturer of commercial and residentialreplacement windows. "This is often very time-consuming, especially if revisions are necessary later,which is often the case in the design developmentenvironment." As an example, Cornell cites a simpleextrusion that required 25 commands and 45 picksto create with AutoCAD. Dimensioning it required10 commands and 20 picks, for a total of more than100 operations.

With Solid Edge,creating newdesigns has becomemuch simpler. Thesame extrusion thattook more than 100operations inAutoCAD is createdwith threecommands and 32picks in Solid Edge.It is dimensionedwith two commands

and 12 picks, for a total reduction in operations of51 percent.

Faster drafting with solid modeling

3D solid modeling can eliminate the need to createdrawings view by view from low-level 2D drawingelements. With a solid modeling system, companies

can make drawings by simply defining views of thesolid model – the graphics of the planar drawingviews are created automatically based on the 3Dpart and assembly geometry.

Automated view layout greatly simplifies the processof creating orthographic views, auxiliary and detailviews, and isometric views. Because the drawings areactually references to a master solid model, there isno need to revise drawings on a view-by-view basiswhen the design is modified – the views updateautomatically when changes are made to thegeometry of the solid model.

Case study. Efficiencies provided by solid modeling,such as the speed of generating drawings, havereduced Kaiser Optical Systems' development cycleby 20 to 30 percentcompared to theprevious 2D CADprocess. Thecompany'sexperience with thesoftware so farindicates a 20 to 30percent reduction inthe time needed tocreate a model andproduce drawingscompared to usingAutoCAD orCADKEY. "Drafting productivity has improvedsignificantly," says Joe Slater, manager of newproduct development. "Once the model is made, thedrawings come out at least twice as fast." Also,when changes to a design are needed, they nowrequire about two-thirds the time they didpreviously due to the ease of modifying a Solid Edgemodel.

Better visualization with 3D solids

Companies are moving away from sharing designinformation using 2D paper drawings. With 3D solidmodels of parts and assemblies, the design team anddownstream users of the design information nowsee exactly what it is and how it fits in the assemblystructure before anything is actually built, ensuringthat the product is manufacturable the first time.The superior visualization provided by solid assemblymodels also allows engineers to visually evaluate fits,

7

interferences, and working envelopes, quickly andwith great accuracy.

Case study. W. F. Mickey Body Company, Inc. didn'tswitch to solid modeling lightly. Officials of thecompany, which manufactures aluminum truckbodies and trailers, would consider a move to solidsonly if it was both cost-effective and significantlysuperior to the 2D design approach. One of the firstbenefits of solid modeling that designers noticedwas the ability to evaluate assembly integrity. Thevarious parts of truck bodies are all eventually

joined duringassembly. But untilthe move to solidmodeling, designershad to work withmultiple 2D viewswithout the abilityto see how all thepieces fit together.With an assemblyimage on the screen,fit problems aredetected beforethey reach

production assembly. Designers are also finding waysto improve products that were not evident before."Being able to see all of the parts instead ofmultiple 2D snapshots enables us to see possiblemodifications to one part of assembly that mighttotally eliminate the need for another," says JohnHargett, manager of research and design. "Thesethings weren't nearly as obvious when we workedwith 2D drawings."

3D modeling reduces design errors

With the more complete visualization and geometricdefinition that 3D solid modeling affords, companiescan significantly reduce the number of design errors,as compared with 2D design techniques. This errorreduction eliminates the time and expense ofrework, re-engineering, engineering change orders,and iterative cycles for analysis, prototyping, tooling,manufacturing engineering, and other relatedproduct development activities.

Case study. Dayton Systems Group Inc., a Dayton,Ohio-based machinery supplier to the can industry,designed a new machine in half the time it would

have taken using 2DCAD. The ability todigitally assemblethe machine, whichautomatically bagscan lids and placesthem on a pallet,ensured that all4,000 componentsinteracted perfectlywhen the firstprototype was built."We might havedesigned this machine in the same amount of timewith 2D CAD, but because of all the moving partsthere would have been many errors," says vicepresident Steve Cook. "Fixing those errors wouldhave taken us at least another year. By building themachine digitally using the software's assemblymodeling capability, we knew everything would fit.That was much more efficient than tearing apart aprototype to make it work."

3D design reduces or eliminates physicalprototypes

The 3D part and assembly modeling functions inSolid Edge enable manufacturers to identify andsolve almost all form, fit, and function problemswith virtual assembly models, prior to actuallybuilding prototypes. With 3D solid part models,designers can automatically determine mass andphysical properties of their designs, such as weight,center of gravity, and moments of inertia, withoutmanual calculation. For assembly designs, Solid Edgeenables engineers to design in the context of theassembly, using the geometry of neighboring orinterfacing parts to ensure correct-by-design fit ofassembly components. This "virtual assembly"capability is an accurate and complete geometricrepresentation that provides all the advantages ofthe physical assembly prototype for solving assemblydesign problems. Companies using solid assemblymodeling can dramatically reduce or even eliminatephysical prototypes and their associated costs andlead times. With 3D solids, prototypes function inthe design process more as pilot builds or even asfinished products.

8

Case study. Value Plastics, a Colorado-basedmanufacturer of precision plastic tubingcomponents, was racing to develop a working

prototype of a tubesetting machine fora trade show. Theability to visualizethe machine's 50individualcomponents as solidsenabled engineersto fine-tune theirdesigns as theycreated the CADmodels. Then, as thecomponents wereassembled on

screen, potential interferences and clearanceproblems were spotted and fixed. The result was aprototype that behaved just like a finished product.

"If we had tried to do this with 2D CAD, we eitherwould have missed the deadline, or we would havehad dedicated a lot more man hours in testing andin the tool room," says Bruce Williams, chiefengineer at Value Plastics. "Either way, without solidmodeling, our prototype would not have looked asgood or performed as well as it did. With the bettervisualization that solid modeling provides, we couldsee things about the individual components that wemight not have noticed working in 2D. And puttingcomponents together and seeing how they fit inrelation to each other was a tremendous time saver.Without Solid Edge, we would have needed to do agreat deal of prototype testing. Instead we foundproblems and solved them on-screen, saving us atleast six weeks."

Easy design changes in 3D solids savetime, improve quality

The ability to quickly and easily make designchanges and variations is one of the key advantagesof parametric solid modeling. Because parts andassemblies are defined in Solid Edge inparameterized features and associative relationships,designers can rapidly effect changes. Instead ofcreating new geometry from scratch to capture adesign change, the designer can simply alter adimension value, modify the shape of a definingprofile, or redefine a design relationship to create a

new variation of the design. The solid geometry ofthe part or assembly automatically regenerates in afashion that preserves all captured designintelligence and behaves in a predictable way. Thiscapability not only saves time and expense whenimplementing engineering change orders; it alsohelps designers improve the quality of designs byevaluating more iterations in a given time frame.

Case study. MPB Technologies, Inc., a Canadianhigh technology firm, used Solid Edge's family ofparts capability to quickly generate 60 differentproduct configurations from a single master designof a fiber amplifierproduct. ScottSumner, manager ofnew productdevelopment,created an assemblyof 25 componentslinked to a matrix ofdriving dimensionsstored in MicrosoftExcel. When Sumnerchanged thespreadsheet, SolidEdge automaticallygenerated new models, new 2D drawings, newassembly drawings and new bills of material. In amatter of minutes, Sumner can create a newconfiguration and print a complete catalog of morethan 100 component parts. Sumner recommendsSolid Edge's family-of-parts modelingwholeheartedly. "Anyone trying to design morethan 3 configurations without it is wasting time andmoney."

3D CAD accelerates other developmentprocesses

Because they provide precise and completegeometric descriptions of designs, 3D solid modelsare far superior to 2D drawings for communicatingdesign data to downstream engineering andmanufacturing functions. Solid models contain allthe surface and volumetric information needed toconduct engineering analysis and manufacturingprocesses – there is no need to re-create data totake advantage of advanced CAE analysis,automated NC toolpath generation, or rapidprototyping technologies. Furthermore, solid models

9

provide detailed, unambiguous visualization thathelps eliminate errors to further reduce turnaroundtimes for analysis, tooling, fabrication, production,and assembly.

Case study. Subsea Ventures, a leading provider ofoffshore drilling equipment, moved to solidmodeling with the goal of reducing cycle time, andalso to facilitate the use of structural analysis in thedesign process. When Subsea used 2D CAD, an

outside analystwould work fromdrawings to recreatecomponents in 3Dfor analysis. Solidmodels eliminatethat step byproviding the 3Dgeometry foranalysis models. Tobring analysis in-house, SubseapurchasedCosmos/Edge, a

structural analysis program that operates within theSolid Edge environment. "Reducing cycle time is themain reason we moved from 2D CAD to solidmodeling, says Frank Mooney, senior designer atSubsea Ventures Inc. "But since we found how easyit was to bring analysis into the design process,we've also begun to optimize our products to amuch greater extent."

Case study. CTS, a major supplier of electronic andelectrical components to the automotive industry,

produces manyinjection moldedcomponents.Consequently,creating propermolds is one of themajor challenges inramping upproduction of a newdesign. Designengineer WarrenWilliams says thatsince moving from2D design to Solid

Edge, CTS now sends designs to mold makers innative Parasolid solid geometry format. There is zerodata loss and no need to discuss markings on

drawings. Williams estimates Solid Edge has helpedthem produce molds 50% faster.

3D design data is useful throughout theenterprise

The 3D data generated in solid modeling-basedproduct development can be applied far beyonddesign, engineering and manufacturing to manyother enterprise functions. Unlike 2D drawings, solidmodels can be used intuitively wherever there is aneed to communicate product information. Supportand service organizations can use solid model datato enhance communication with customers. Fieldservice personnel can use solid models to assist introubleshooting and repair. Purchasing can usemodels to ensure clarity of communication andreduce errors in dealing with suppliers. Marketingcan even use solid models in promotional efforts.With a broad spectrum of potential applications, 3Dsolid modeling-based design has much greatercorollary benefit than 2D engineering drawings.

Case study. Med-Eng Systems, the world's leadingdeveloper of personal protection systems for bombdisposal and mine clearance technicians, recentlymoved from 2D AutoCAD to Solid Edge. The moveinto 3D has created excitement throughout thecompany. MarketingCoordinator JohnCarson calls SolidEdge "a very usefulmarketing tool."Colorful 3D modelshelp promoteproducts by visuallycommunicating thehigh-tech nature ofMed-Eng'sinnovative designsto non-technicalcustomers. Carson isalso excited by the upcoming multimedia CD-ROMof Solid Edge models that will allow customers tosee Med-Eng's products from any perspective, animportant selling feature to people whose livesdepend upon 360 degree protection. In the future,the Marketing department plans to use 3D modelson their website so potential customers can suggestimprovements to new designs before they arefinalized and sent to production.

10

Cost justification for moving to3D solid modeling

Even if the benefits of moving from 2D to 3D CADare well documented, most companies require someformal cost-benefit analysis to justify the investmentin 3D design tools. Below are some return-on-investment examples that can help sell the bottom-line advantages of 3D CAD expenditures.

Labor cost reductions: design and draftingproductivity gains

With the streamlined 3D solid modeling techniquesin Solid Edge, manufacturers typically realize a 4 to 1productivity increase in part design and drafting, ascompared to using 2D CAD for the same tasks.Companies can readily calculate annual design anddrafting direct labor savings with the followingformula:

Burdened hourly engineering salary x Number ofhours per year x Percentage of engineer's timeusing CAD systems x Typical 3D cycle time reduction= CAD labor cost savings per year

Example:l 4 people @ $30/hourl 7,680 total man-hours per yearl 85% of time utilized on CAD systeml 4:1 productivity gain = 75% savings

$30 x 7,680 x 85% x 75% = $146,880 direct annuallabor savings

Quality cost reductions: reduced errors

Solid Edge's 3D solid modeling and automatedassociative drafting eliminate the vast majority ofdesign and drafting errors. This directly reduces thenumber of engineering change orders (ECOs)companies must process through the productdevelopment cycle. With correct-by-design virtualmodels of assemblies, designers can eliminate mostassembly fit and interference errors in the earlieststages of the design. In addition, most drawingerrors are eliminated because drawing views actuallyreference the 3D solid model and do not need to bechanged individually when changes are made to thedesign model. Typically, companies can eliminate

90% of the ECOs attributable to design and draftingerrors.

Companies can calculate their annual cost savingsfrom reduced ECOs using the following formula:

Number of ECOs per year attributable to design anddrafting errors x Average hours per ECO x Hourlysalary x Percent reduction in number of ECOs =Annual cost savings from reduced ECOs

Example:l Design error ECOs (25) + Drafting error ECOs (30) l 30 hours per ECO l $30/hour l 90% typical reduction

55 x 30 x 30 x 90% = $44,550 annual savings fromeliminated ECOs

Other quality savings

Many other downstream savings are attributable tothe enhanced quality that 3D design affordsmanufacturers. These can be included in the costjustification where quantifiable, and include:

l Reduced tooling costs due to more accurate and complete information

l Reduced scrapl Reduced inspection manpowerl Reduced development test reruns

Rework & warranty savings: Reduction ofrework, reduced reliance on physicalprototyping

Unigraphics Solutions has found that almost allform, fit and function problems can be foundthrough virtual assembly modeling, prior to actuallybuilding prototypes. The abilty to solve problemsearly in the design cycle using solid modelingtechniques yields direct cost savings, both throughreduced errors and rework and through fewerprototypes.

In calculating the cost savings, most companies canassume that 3D design will yield a 50% reduction inboth rework costs and in costs associated withphysical prototyping.

11

Unigraphics Solutions, Unigraphics, Solid Edge, iMAN, Parasolid and Predictive Engineering are trademarks or registered trademarks of Unigraphics Solutions. Copyright ©2000 Unigraphics Solutions. All rights reserved. All other marks belong to their respectiveholders. The information within is subject to change without notice and does not represent a commitment on the part of Unigraphics Solutions.

Technical publication savings: reduction ofproduction time

Companies that produce technical publications withmany product illustrations like isometric andexploded views can realize significant savings byusing Solid Edge 3D models to automatically createthe graphics. Savings depend on the number of suchpublications, the number of illustrations, and theircurrent creation costs.

Example:l Number of technical publications per year = 20l Average illustration time per publication = 40

hoursl Hourly burdened labor cost = $30l Typical reduction in illustration time = 50%

20 x 40 x $30 x 50% = $12,000 annual savings

Time to market benefits of 3D design

Time to market is critical to the business success ofall manufacturing companies. Market share, salesvolume and revenues are increased because the firstto market with a unique product captures the lion'sshare of sales. While difficult to quantify, it ispossible to attribute some time to market value to3D design technology. Product development time isreduced with faster design and drafting, as well asother downstream benefits such as fewer designerrors and prototypes. The first to market with aunique product can also count larger margins beforecompetitive pressures force downward pricing.

Product innovation benefits

Three-dimensional CAD technology allows designersto produce and evaluate more design iterations,which increases the degree of innovation inproducts. To account for this in 3D CAD justification,companies can estimate the number of newproducts or design projects that can be completedeach year. This can be translated into more productlines introduced and thus will be included in thetime-to-market benefits estimate.

For More Information, CallYour Solid Edge Reseller:

Unigraphics SolutionsInternational Headquarters

Americas13736 Riverport DriveMaryland Heights, MO 63043USA(800) 498-5351

EuropeCentrum House101-103 Fleet RoadGU13 8NZ

UK+31 (0) 79363 5515Asia PacificSuite 1701Cheung Kong Center2 Queen’s Road Central

HONG KONG(852) 2230-3333

Other Areas(256) 705-2600

800-807-2200www.solid-edge.comsolidedge@ugsolutions.com