ILE Structural Model Import Requirements - Latest in ... · Web viewThis section provides a mapping of sample structural design data to the SCIM and identifies gaps. A detailed mapping

ILE Project Phase 1 Final Report

National Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP)Integrated Logistics Environment (ILE)

Structural Model Final Dataset ResultsFor Subtask 1.2 (Sharing Structural Design Data with

Manufacturing Systems across Shipyards)and

Analysis of SCIM Piping and Structural Models vs. Data Needed for VIRGINIA Migration

For Subtask 1.1 (Migrating VIRGINIA Class IPDE Data)

Document Tracking Number NSRP-ILE-1.2-003

Revision Number 1.0

Revision Date 28 June 2011

Prepared by Michael Olson, Northrop Grumman Technical ServicesDavid Pierce, Northrop Grumman Technical ServicesPete Lazo, Product Data Services CorporationDr. Burton Gischner,

Electric Boat Corporation

Document Number: NSRP-ILE-1.2-003 Rev: 1.0Document Title: ILE Project Phase 1 Final Report

Revision Log

Rev Date Reason for Change Page(s)

1.0 Draft 17 June 2011 Initial Draft for ILE Team Meeting in

Washington, DC All

1.0 28 June 2011 Final updates for delivery

i


Table of Contents1.0 Business Context.................................................................................................1

1.1 Objectives........................................................................................................................1

1.2 Background.....................................................................................................................1

1.3 Scope..............................................................................................................................1

1.4 Assumptions....................................................................................................................4

2.0 Gap Analysis Approach.......................................................................................52.1 Data.................................................................................................................................5

2.2 Analysis Approach..........................................................................................................5

3.0 Gap Analysis Results...........................................................................................73.1 ISPE Common Data Mapping to SCIM...........................................................................7

3.2 Mapping to SCIM..........................................................................................................31

3.3 SCIM Structural Model Gap Summary..........................................................................31

4.0 Gap Resolution...................................................................................................395.0 Final Structural Model Dataset..........................................................................486.0 Issues and Recommendations..........................................................................49

6.1 Open Issues..................................................................................................................49

6.2 Recommendations........................................................................................................49

7.0 Reference Documents........................................................................................518.0 Terminology........................................................................................................52

8.1 Acronyms......................................................................................................................52

9.0 Analysis of Piping and Structural Models vs. Data Needed for VIRGINIA Migration.......................................................................................................................54

9.1 Information Models for SCIM vs. Information Models Used for VIRGINIA Migration....55

9.2 Extraction of PLMXML and Development of Mediator..................................................75

ii


Table of FiguresFigure 1-1 - Shipbuilding Product Models.....................................................................................3

Figure 9-1 - Subtypes of Items for Ship Structures.....................................................................68

Figure 9-2 - Original Plan for SCIM Validation............................................................................76

Figure 9-3 - Alternate Plan Adopted for SCIM Validation............................................................77

Table of TablesTable 1: ISPE Build Tree Entity Mapping to SCIM.......................................................................8

Table 2: ISPE Component Entity Mapping to SCIM...................................................................11

Table 3: ISPE Part Entity Mapping to SCIM...............................................................................15

Table 4: ISPE Common Attribute Mapping to SCIM...................................................................17

Table 5: AP 218 SCIM Structural Model Gap Summary............................................................32

Table 6: AP 218 SCIM Structural Model Gap Resolutions.........................................................40

iii


1.0 Business Context

1.1 ObjectivesThe objective of this document is to describe and provide recommended solutions to the gaps identified between the ship structural design information required by shipyard manufacturing systems and the Ship Common Information Model (SCIM) Structural Design chapter. The structural model import requirements are described in Reference [1] and the structural model gaps are described in Reference [2]. This document also describes open issues and recommendations for further SCIM development. The SCIM Structural Design chapter defines the Navy shipbuilding-specific structural design data requirements derived from the STEP AP 218 standard (Reference [3]).

1.2 BackgroundOver the past several years the National Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP) Integrated Shipbuilding Environment (ISE) project has been developing and prototyping tools to enable interoperability among shipyard and Navy systems. Recently, a specification for the next generation Navy shipbuilding Integrated Product Data Environment (IPDE) system was written as part of the Navy Product Data Initiative (NPDI) project. Included in the IPDE specification is the Ship Common Information Model (SCIM), an information model derived from the STEP Shipbuilding Application Protocols, which defines the minimum set of entities, attributes, and relationships required to support Navy shipbuilding data exchange requirements.

1.3 ScopePhase 1 of the Integrated Logistics Environment (ILE) project applied the tools, methods, and information models developed by the ISE team and the NPDI SCIM project to two current shipbuilding requirements: VIRGINIA Class IPDE data migration (subtask 1.1) and the sharing of structural design information with manufacturing systems across shipyards (subtask 1.2). Phase 2 of the ILE project will complete the remaining chapters of the SCIM document, as well as update existing chapters to incorporate lessons learned during the validation efforts undertaken in phase 1.

Subtask 1.2 of ILE Phase 1 focused on the requirements for sharing structural design information with manufacturing systems across shipyards. The scenario of efficiently exchanging ship product data from design to manufacturing, whether it is within the same shipyard or between two shipyards, has repeated itself time and again in recent years. Historically, the shipyards have not had a viable method for importing structural design data from one shipyard into the manufacturing system of another shipyard. In addition, there are currently very few, if any, systems in place to translate design data to the manufacturing systems of other yards.

Subtask 1.2 addressed the exchange of structural design data from the prime designer to a manufacturing yard, either within the same shipyard or in a second shipyard, and analyzed whether the SCIM provides a sufficient data model to facilitate this exchange. The approach for this task was to define the data model for the exchange of structural design data with manufacturing using existing programs as examples, compare the data model to the SCIM data model, identify gaps in the SCIM data model, and make recommendations for improving the SCIM. These tasks were documented in three deliverables:

1


• Structural Model Import Requirements Report• SCIM Gap Analysis Report• Final Dataset Results Report

This document is the third and final deliverable for ILE Phase 1. The specific scope of this document is to provide suggested solutions to the SCIM gaps identified in the SCIM Gap Analysis Report, as well as identify any open issues and recommendations for further SCIM development in ILE Phase 2.

The structural design data required by manufacturing was identified using the work of the NSRP Integrated Steel Processing Environment (ISPE) project and example data for the CVN 21 and DDG 1000 programs. These requirements are documented in the first deliverable for the project, Structural Model Import Requirements (Reference [1]).

The gaps identified between the structural design data requirements and the SCIM are documented in the second deliverable for the project, Structural Model Gap Analysis (Reference [2]).

Figure 1-1 depicts a notional set of product models in the center, their general content on the left, and the functions which produce or consume the data in the various product models on the right. The focus of this task was on the exchange of the Design Product Model with manufacturing in order to perform the production planning function and develop the 3D Manufacturing Product Model (indicated by the yellow box). This information was compared to the SCIM Structural Design chapter to validate the SCIM content for meeting the design to manufacturing data exchange requirements.

2


Figure 1-1 - Shipbuilding Product Models

3

Scantling Design

3D Detailed Design

3D Manufacturing

2D Neutral Piece Parts

2D Shipyard Piece Parts

Detailed Design

Product Models Functions

Production Planning

Piece PartDevelopment

Manufacturing Definition

Nesting

NC

Drawings &Reports

• Moulded Forms & Lines• Preliminary scantlings• Structural systems• Unit Breakdown

• Structural Part Definition• Structural Part Relationships• Seams• Features

• Assembly breakdown• Assembly order• Welds• Bevels • Bending lines

• Flat pattern parts• Marking Lines

• Shipyard specific parts• Added material• Marking lines, Labeling• Tabs• Manufacturing Aids


1.4 AssumptionsThe following assumptions are made regarding the scope of this effort:

• The Shipyard Common Process Model developed previously for the NSRP Integrated Steel Processing Environment (ISPE) project is still an accurate high level depiction of the shipyard design and manufacturing processes

• While internal processes and systems may be different within different shipyards, a similar set of design data is required to perform the manufacturing functions

• This effort was focused on common 3D Detailed Design Product Model and 3D Manufacturing Product Model, not specific data required to feed shipyard-specific manufacturing tools

4


2.0 Gap Analysis Approach

This section describes the approach for performing the gap analysis between the structural model exchange requirements, identified in the Structural Model Import Requirements Report, and the SCIM Structural Design chapter. The detailed results of the gap analysis are described in Section 3.0.

2.1 DataThree primary sets of data were used to perform the analysis. The first set of data was from the NSRP Integrated Steel Processing Environment (ISPE) project. The ISPE project documented a set of common processes and data for the development and exchange of structural design and manufacturing information across several shipyards including NGSB-GC (Avondale and Ingalls), NGSB-NN, and General Dynamics Electric Boat. This information is documented in the ISPE Shipyard Requirements Final Report (Reference [4]).

The second set of data was from the DDG 1000 program, specifically the design data being transferred from Catia V5 to Teamcenter Enterprise and the data planned for transfer from Teamcenter Enterprise to Teamcenter Manufacturing to support the Manufacturing Planning process.

The third set of data was from the CVN 21 program. This data included the product model data for Design, Manufacturing, and Planning as well as sample entities and attributes from the Catia V4 design tool.

This data is described in the first project deliverable, Structural Model Import Requirements (Reference [1]).

2.2 Analysis ApproachThe overall approach to the SCIM gap analysis was to understand the current content of the SCIM AP 218 chapter, analyze and organize the data obtained for DDG 1000 and CVN 21 to facilitate an orderly comparison with the SCIM, and then perform mappings between the project data and the SCIM data to identify any gaps in the SCIM data.

An initial analysis was performed to obtain an understanding of the derivation of the SCIM AP 218 data entities and attributes relative to the AP 218 Application Reference Model (ARM) and several context schemas developed on the ISE-4 project for structural features, lofting, and manufacturing. This analysis highlighted entities not included in the SCIM AP 218 chapter and reasons for their exclusion. It also provided a baseline understanding of the SCIM AP 218 data from which further analysis and mapping could be performed.

The structural design data obtained from the DDG 1000 and CVN 21 projects were analyzed to understand the information and organize it in a way that would facilitate comparison with the SCIM data. An initial attempt to organize the data according to the ISPE common data organization revealed that this approach would not facilitate direct comparison to the SCIM. Because of this, a decision was made to organize the data according to the main structural entities defined in the SCIM: structural systems/assemblies, plates, and profiles. Once the data was organized in this manner, a mapping was performed between the project data and the SCIM.

5


An analysis was also performed on the ISPE common data requirements to understand this information and assess its applicability to the current SCIM validation effort. It was determined that the common processes and data described in the ISPE final report were still representative of the shipyard processes and data requirements, making this another good source of information for comparison to the SCIM. The common entities and attributes identified in the ISPE project were mapped to the SCIM to identify potential gaps in the SCIM data.

6


3.0 Gap Analysis Results

3.1 ISPE Common Data Mapping to SCIMThe ISPE project defined a set of common data requirements including the following information:

Entity Categories

Attribute Categories

Attribute Names

Entity Relationship Diagram

This section provides a mapping of ISPE common data requirements to the SCIM and identifies gaps. Table 1 provides a mapping of ISPE Build Tree entities to the SCIM. Table 2 provides a mapping of ISPE Component entities to the SCIM. Table 3 provides a mapping of ISPE Part entities to the SCIM. Table 4 provides a mapping of ISPE Common Attributes to the SCIM. For each of these tables an attempt was made to map the ISPE entities/attributes to SCIM entities/attributes. “No mapping” was used to indicate that an appropriate mapping to the SCIM does not exist at this time, and that updates to the SCIM may be required to resolve the issue. A final disposition for each “No mapping” will be included in the next deliverable (SCIM Dataset Results Report).

7


Table 1: ISPE Build Tree Entity Mapping to SCIM1

Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping Comment

Ship Hull Molded Lines define the geometry of a hull as a surface without thickness. Typically, the inside surface of flush shell plating is on the molded line, as is the underside of deck plating.

npd:Physical_assemblynpd:Physical_occurrenceAP218 assembly

There needs to be a npd:physical_occurrence for each npd:design_occurrence as the ship moves from design to manufacturing. They are linked via association: npd:Design_occurrence_physical_occurrence.

The npd:Physical_assembly is linked to the npd:Physical_occurrence by the associations: - npd:Physical_assembly_child - npd:Physical_assembly_parent

Module A Module or a Superlift is a section of a ship consisting of several units. Module size is subject to each shipyards capacity and processes. For example, the LHD 5 ship produced at Ingalls consisted of 5 Modules.



The npd:Physical_assembly is linked to the npd:Physical_occurrence by the associations: - npd:Physical_assembly_child - npd:Physical_assembly_parent

1 Recommend handling build trees in AP218 SCIM by adding AP218 entity assembly as a sub-type of npd:Physical_occurrence.

8



Unit A Unit is the last assembly level before the Module. Units are typically the basis for planning, reporting, and scheduling.



The npd:Physical_assembly is linked to the npd:Physical_occurence by the associations: - npd:Physical_assembly_child - npd:Physical_assembly_parent

Build Tree Level 1

Build Tree Level 1 is comprised of Build Tree Level 2 plus additional parts




Build Tree Level 2

Build Tree Level 2 is comprised of the next lower Build Tree Level plus additional parts




9



Build Tree Level X

Build Tree Level X is the lowest level construction assembly




10


Table 2: ISPE Component Entity Mapping to SCIM

Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping CommentFrame Planes Frame Planes are reference lines

which can be stiffened with plates or profiles.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="frame"

Deck A Deck is a continuous horizontal strength member inside a ship hull that supports equipment and personnel.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="deck"

also"strength_deck""accomodation_deck""main_deck""weather_deck""navigation_deck""platform_deck""deck_in_superstructure"

Platform/Flat A Platform/Flat is a horizontal, non-strength, non-continuous surface inside a ship’s hull.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="platform_deck"

"flat" NOT IN THE SCIM. Recommend "user_defined" for "flat".

Girder A Girder has the following definitions: 1. A continuous member running fore-and-aft under a deck to support the deck and deck beams. 2. The vertical fore-and-aft plate members on the ship's bottom (shell and tanktop only).

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="girder"

also"longitudinal_girder"

11


Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping CommentBulkhead Bulkhead is a term applied to

the vertical partition walls which subdivide the interior of a ship into compartments. Various types of bulkheads (transverse, longitudinal, forepeak, watertight, wire-mesh, pilaster, etc.) are distinguished by their location, use, material type, or fabrication method.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="bulkhead"

Floor A Floor is a vertical transverse plate immediately above the bottom shell plating, often located at every frame, extending from bilge to bilge above the shell plating to tank top only.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="floor"

Sponsons Extensions of the ship's hull to accommodate the flight deck, weapons system, refueling platforms, etc…

No Mapping Recommend adding “sponsons” to npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function.

Transverse Bent

Transverse structural arches that support the Flight Deck.

No Mapping Recommend adding “transverse_bent” to npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function.

Web Frame A Web Frame is a built up frame to provide extra strength, usually consisting of a web plate which is flanged, or otherwise stiffened, on its edge. Web frames are typically spaced several frames apart, with smaller regular frames in between.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="web_frame"

also"vertical_web_frame""transverse_web_frame"

12


Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping CommentInnerbottom / Double Bottom / Bilge

The area of the ship between the tank top and shell, includes all structural members in between (i.e. floors, longitudinals, etc…)

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="inner_bottom"npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="double_bottom"npd:Structural_part_functional_definition.The_function="bilge_plate"npd:Plate_functional_definition.The_function="bilge_plate"

also"bottom"

Stringer Bar Angle connecting the deck plate to the shell plate.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="stringer"

Deck Beam An athwartship horizontal structural member, usually a rolled shape, supporting a deck or a flat.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="deck_beam"npd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function="deck_beam"

Profile Extruded run of standard structural material used to strengthen or otherwise support plated structures. They are made from stock profile material (T's, angles, bulbs, etc.) and are often described in terms of their Web and Flange components. Profiles are also used in foundation design to support machinery or equipment.

npd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function= [appropriate enumeration value of <xs:simpleType name="Structural_part_functionality">]

i.e.:"bracket""stiffener""longitudinal_stiffener""transversal_stiffener""carling""beam""deck_beam""pillar""hold_pillar""user_defined"

13


Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping CommentCommodity Components

Standard components such as brackets and collars.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="bracket"npd:Structural_part_functional_definition.The_function="bracket"npd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function="bracket"

"collar" NOT IN THE SCIM; recommend adding to npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function,npd:Structural_part_functional_definition.The_functionnpd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function

Recommend adding other commodity components when identified.

Breast Hook A Breast Hook is a triangular plate bracket joining port and starboard side stringers at the stem.

No Mapping Recommend adding “breast_hook” to npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function.

Stanchion A Stanchion is a vertical column supporting decks, flats, girders, etc.

No Mapping Recommend adding “stanchion” to npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function.

Foundation A Foundation is a structural support for boilers, engines, gears, machinery, etc.

npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function="engine_foundation"

Other foundation types NOT IN SCIM; recommend adding "foundation" to npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_function.

14


Table 3: ISPE Part Entity Mapping to SCIM

Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping CommentPlate Part A Plate Part is the lowest level

assembly structural component which has manufacturing data, and can be cut from flat plate. This does not include "hardware" (i.e. washers) or hardware-like accessories.

npd:Plate_functional_definition.The_function="standard_plate"simpletype: Structural_part_functionality:

"standard_plate""doubling_plate""shedding_plate""clip""watertight_clip""lug""bracket""face_plate""carling""flange""web""frame""bilge_plate""user_defined"

Shell Plate Shell Plates form the outer side and bottom skin of the hull.

No Mapping NOT IN THE SCIM; recommend adding the following enumeration to SCIM and AP218:

simpleType name="Structural_part_functionality"npd:Plate_functional_definition.The_function="shell_plate"

Note: simpletype Structural_system_functionality has the complementary enumeration values:

"outer_shell""inner_shell""double_shell"

15


Entity Business Description AP218 SCIM Mapping CommentProfile Part A Profile Part is the lowest level

assembly structural component which has manufacturing data, and can be cut from profile stock such as I-beams or flat bar.

npd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function="standard_plate"simpletype: Structural_part_functionality:

"stiffener""longitudinal_stiffener""transversal_stiffener""beam""deck_beam""pillar""hold_pillar""user_defined"

16


Table 4: ISPE Common Attribute Mapping to SCIM

Entity Category

Attribute Category Common Attribute Name AP218 SCIM Mapping Comment

Build Tree Physical Description

Footprint Assembly_manufacturing_position.assembly_footprint Mass Assembly_manufacturing_definition.mass Center of Gravity Assembly_manufacturing_definition.centre_of_gravity Manufacturing Orientation Assembly_manufacturing_position.orientation

Configuration Management

Identifier npd:Physical_occurrence.Id Version npd:Physical_occurrence.Version Hull Applicability npd:Ship.Hull_number

npd:Hull_applicability.Start_hullnpd:Hull_applicability.End_hull

Need to revisit Hull Applicability vs Ship in PDM chapter. Reference Piping 227 recommended changes.

Include npd:Physical_occurrence in this review.

Associations:npd:Ship_physical_occurrence

Does Ship need association to npd:Hull_applicability?

Scheduling Start Production Date Estimate No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

End Production Date Estimate No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

Start Production Date Actual No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

End Production Date Actual Assembly_manufacturing_definition.production_dateStatus No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need status?

Routing Next Production Stage No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need next production stage?

Current Production Stage Assembly_manufacturing_definition.assembly_stage

17


Entity Category


General Fabrication/Manufacturing Methods

Assembly_manufacturing_definition.assembly_method

Drawing No Assembly_manufacturing_definition.assembly_drawingDesign Component

Description Component_Type npd:Structural_system_functional_definition.The_functionnpd:Panel_system_functional_definition.The_functionnpd:Plate_strake_functional_definition.The_function

npd:Structural_part_functional_definition.The_functionnpd:Plate_functional_definition.The_functionnpd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function

Mass Mass is handled in parts in SCIM. See Part-plate and Part-profile below.

Center of Gravity Center of Gravity is handled in parts in SCIM. See Part-plate and Part-profile below.

Manufacturing Orientation Manufacturing Orientation is handled in build tree in SCIM. See Build Tree/Physical Description/Manufacturing Orientation above.

Material_Type Material_Type is handled in parts in SCIM. See Part-plate and Part-profile below (Material_code).

Thickness_Throw npd:Panel_system_design_definition.Material_offsetGeometric_Origin No Mapping Derivable from the geometry. Not

stored in the SCIM.Max_Length_neat No Mapping Derivable from the geometry. Not

stored in the SCIM.Min_Length_neat No Mapping Derivable from the geometry. Not

stored in the SCIM.Load_bearing-strength_requirements

No Mapping

Material characteristics (type) No Mapping Need to add to AP218 SCIM material entity. No such attribute now.Type is at part level.

18


Entity Category


Material characteristics (thickness)

npd:Panel_system_design_definition.Thickness

Material characteristics (grade) No Mapping Need to add to AP218 SCIM material entity. No such attribute now.Grade is at part level.

Attached/adjacent structural entities

Attached: npd:Structural_system_relationshipAdjacent: npd:Structural_system_adjacency_relationship

- Relative thickness No Mapping- Joining requirements No Mapping- Relative material types No Mapping- Structural entity types No Mapping- Orientation No MappingLocation and orientation within the ship

No Mapping Derivable from the geometry. Not stored in the SCIM.

Process requirements such as shaping

No Mapping

Assembly sequence See build tree, assemblies Build tree identifies the parts in the assembly but not the sequence.

Routing (shop assignments) No MappingConfiguration Management

Identifier npd:Design_occurrence.IdVersion npd:Design_occurrence.Version

19


Entity Category


Hull Applicability npd:Ship.Hull_numbernpd:Hull_applicability.Start_hullnpd:Hull_applicability.End_hull





Manufacturable Component

Design Attributes

*All the attributes of a Design Component plus the following

See Above

Yard and Shop Specific Mfg. Attributes

Added_material npd:Structural_added_material_feature_design_definition.Added_material_length

Applied to Part-plate and Part-profile only.

Removed_material No Mapping Chamfers npd:Corner_cutout_design_definition "A Corner_cutout_design_definition

may specify the design_definition for either a Corner_cutout (see4.2.42) or an Edge_feature (see 4.2.73). Material is removed along the direction of the Z-axis. If theZ-axis is oriented along the part edge, the Corner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Edge_feature(see 4.3.26 for the application assertion). If the Z-axis is oriented perpendicular to the part edge, theCorner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Corner_cutout (see 4.3.25 for the applicationassertion)".

20


Entity Category


Welding_access_and_clearance_features

No Mapping

Ships_reference_lines_for_erection

AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_layout_marksAP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_layout_marks

Need to add AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition to SCIM.

NOTE: review ISE 4, ISPE Final Report, table 7 to determine if marking lines and labels require more detailed definition in SCIM.

Long_Point_or_Short_Point_geometry

No Mapping

Beveling npd:Corner_cutout_design_definition "A Corner_cutout_design_definition may specify the design_definition for either a Corner_cutout (see4.2.42) or an Edge_feature (see 4.2.73). Material is removed along the direction of the Z-axis. If theZ-axis is oriented along the part edge, the Corner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Edge_feature(see 4.3.26 for the application assertion). If the Z-axis is oriented perpendicular to the part edge, theCorner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Corner_cutout (see 4.3.25 for the applicationassertion)".

Surface_Clearance No Mapping Part-plate Description Part_Type npd:Structural_part_functional_definition.The_function

npd:Plate_functional_definition.The_function

Units npd:Definition.local_units (association) Do we have capability to use global units in SCIM for all parts?

21


Entity Category


Material_code No Mapping Need to add AP 218 entity, homogeneous_ship_material_property

Review homogeneous_ship_material_property.material_reference andhomogeneous_ship_material_property.description for applicability to the SCIM. Consider changing "description" to "Material_code".

Plate_thickness npd:Plate_design_definition.Thickness Min-max_extent No Mapping Area No Mapping Center_Of_Gravity No Mapping Replace

npd:Plate_design_definition.Mass with new property: npd:Plate_design_definition.weight_and_centre_of_gravity.

Need to add AP218 entity, weight_and_centre_of_gravity to SCIM.

Center_Of_Gravity is assigned to weight_and_centre_of_gravity.centre_of_gravity.

22


Entity Category


Weight npd:Plate_design_definition.Mass Replace npd:Plate_design_definition.Mass with new property: npd:Plate_design_definition.weight_and_centre_of_gravity.


Weight is assigned to weight_and_centre_of_gravity.weight.

Length_and_width No Mapping Geometry 2D: plate_manufacturing_definition properties

3D: plate_manufacturing_definition.representations

Quantity Required quantity No Mapping Can be derived from product model instances.

Nested quantity No Mapping Nesting N/AConfiguration Management

Identifier npd:Plate_design_definition.Id Version npd:Plate_design_definition.Version

23


Entity Category


Hull Applicability npd:Ship.Hull_numbernpd:Hull_applicability.Start_hullnpd:Hull_applicability.End_hull





Scheduling Estimated Start No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

Actual_Start No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

Status No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

Mfg. and Design Associations

Weld npd:Weldnpd:Weld_design_definitionnpd:Welded_jointnpd:Welded_joint_design_definitionAP 218 weld_manufacturing_definition

Need to add AP 218 weld_manufacturing_definition to SCIM.

24


Entity Category


Edge Prep npd:Corner_cutout_design_definition "A Corner_cutout_design_definition may specify the design_definition for either a Corner_cutout (see4.2.42) or an Edge_feature (see 4.2.73). Material is removed along the direction of the Z-axis. If theZ-axis is oriented along the part edge, the Corner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Edge_feature(see 4.3.26 for the application assertion). If the Z-axis is oriented perpendicular to the part edge, theCorner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Corner_cutout (see 4.3.25 for the applicationassertion)".

Penetrations npd:Feature_design_definition (3D)AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.inner_contours (2D)AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_punch_point (2D/3D)AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_punch_point (2D/3D)


Marking Line AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_layout_marksAP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_layout_marks


NOTE: review ISE 4, ISPE Final Report, table 7 to determine if marking lines and labels require more detailed definition.

25


Entity Category


Label AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_annotationAP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_annotation



Nest tape No Mapping Process & route No Mapping Manufacturing aid No Mapping

General Programmer No Mapping Job_number No Mapping Job_name No Mapping Drawing_number npd:Document_metadata engineering_remarks No Mapping

Part-profile Description Part_Type npd:Structural_part_functional_definition.The_functionnpd:Profile_functional_definition.The_function

Units npd:Definition.local_units (association) Do we have capability to use global units in SCIM for all parts?

Material_code No Mapping Need to add AP 218 entity, homogeneous_ship_material_property

Review homogeneous_ship_material_property.material_reference andhomogeneous_ship_material_property.description for applicability to the SCIM. Consider changing "description" to "Material_code".

26


Entity Category


Plate_thickness npd:Profile_cross_section.Designation npd:Profile_cross_section.Designation is the profile equivalent to a plate thickness. The Designation provides the name of the profile cross section from which pertinent profile information can be derived.

Min-max_extent No Mapping Area No Mapping Center_Of_Gravity No Mapping Replace

npd:Profile_design_definition.Mass with new property: npd:Profile_design_definition.weight_and_centre_of_gravity.


Center_Of_Gravity is assigned to weight_and_centre_of_gravity.centre_of_gravity.

Weight npd:Profile_design_definition.Mass Replace npd:Profile_design_definition.Mass with new property: npd:Profile_design_definition.weight_and_centre_of_gravity.


Weight is assigned to weight_and_centre_of_gravity.weight.

27


Entity Category


Length_and_width No Mapping Geometry 2D: plate_manufacturing_definition properties

3D: plate_manufacturing_definition.representations

Quantity Required quantity No Mapping Can be derived from product model instances.

Nested quantity No Mapping Nesting N/AConfiguration Management

Identifier npd:Plate_design_definition.Id Version npd:Plate_design_definition.Version Hull Applicability npd:Ship.Hull_number

npd:Hull_applicability.Start_hullnpd:Hull_applicability.End_hull





Scheduling Estimated Start No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

Actual_Start No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need additional dates?

Status No Mapping Does AP 218 SCIM need status?Mfg. and Design Associations

Weld npd:Weldnpd:Weld_design_definitionnpd:Welded_jointnpd:Welded_joint_design_definitionAP 218 weld_manufacturing_definition

Need to add AP 218 weld_manufacturing_definition to SCIM.

28


Entity Category


Edge Prep npd:Corner_cutout_design_definition "A Corner_cutout_design_definition may specify the design_definition for either a Corner_cutout (see4.2.42) or an Edge_feature (see 4.2.73). Material is removed along the direction of the Z-axis. If theZ-axis is oriented along the part edge, the Corner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Edge_feature (see 4.3.26 for the application assertion). If the Z-axis is oriented perpendicular to the part edge, theCorner_cutout_design_definition specifies an Corner_cutout (see 4.3.25 for the applicationassertion)."

Penetrations npd:Feature_design_definition (3D)AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.inner_contours (2D)AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_punch_point (2D/3D)AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_punch_point (2D/3D)


Marking Line AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_layout_marksAP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_layout_marks



29


Entity Category


Label AP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.top_annotationAP 218 structural_part_manufacturing_definition.bottom_annotation



Nest tape No Mapping Process & route No Mapping Manufacturing aid No Mapping

General Programmer No Mapping Job_number No Mapping Job_name No Mapping Drawing_number npd:Document_metadata engineering_remarks No Mapping

30


3.2 Mapping to SCIMThis section provides a mapping of sample structural design data to the SCIM and identifies gaps. A detailed mapping of NGSB-NN Catia data to SCIM is provided in the following Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet also includes a mapping of ISPE Common Data to SCIM as well as a summary of the gaps and discussions and recommendations from the 11 January 2011 ILE team meeting in Norfolk, VA. A detailed README tab is also included which describes the contents of the spreadsheet.

3.3 SCIM Structural Model Gap SummaryTable 5 provides a summary of the SCIM Structural Model Gaps identified in this analysis, along with recommended changes to the SCIM Structural Design chapter. A final disposition of the gaps is included in Table 6.

31


Table 5: AP 218 SCIM Structural Model Gap Summary

Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationSCIM Structural manufacturing chapter entity candidates

The following AP 218 entities are not included in SCIM:

assemblyassembly_bounding_boxassembly_relationshiphomogeneous_ship_material_propertyship_material_propertystructural_added_material_boundary_relationshipweld_filler_materialannotationplate_manufacturing_definitionprofile_manufacturing_definitionstructural_part_manufacturing_definitionweld_manufacturing_definitionelectrode_chemical_compositionstructural_cutout_manufacturing_relationshipweld_testing;assembly_manufacturing_definitionassembly_manufacturing_positioncentre_location

Candidates for SCIM Structural manufacturing chapter based on analysis of AP 218 SCIM entity mapping to ISE 4 manufacturing entities.

Since there are so few entities to add, recommend augmenting the existing AP218 SCIM design chapter with these entities.

There will be one context schema but SCIM AP 218 chapter will identify/list what entities/associations are used in a given exchange (design, planning, or manufacturing).

32


Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationMissing AP218 SCIM material attributes

The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

MaterialDensityQualityMATERIAL_DESCRIPTIONMATERIAL_REVISION_LEVELTREATMENT SPECMATERIAL_CONTROL_LEVEL

The following ISPE attributes map to AP218 material entities:

Design Component/Description/Material characteristics (type)Design Component/Description/Material characteristics (grade)

Add the following AP218 material entities to SCIM:

ship_material_propertyhomogeneous_ship_material_property

Ensure piping (AP 227) has a corresponding material model.

33


Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationAssembly concept missing The following NN Catia assembly Attributes do not map to SCIM:

PARENTPLN1PLN2P02_BASE_LVL NAMEP03_PLANNING LVL 3 ITM #P03_PLANNING LVL 3 NAMEP04_PLANNING LVL 4 ITM #P04_PLANNING LVL 4 NAMEP05_PLANNING LVL 5 ITM #P05_PLANNING LVL 5 NAMEP06_PLANNING LVL 6 ITM #P06_PLANNING LVL 6 NAMEP07_PLANNING LVL 7 ITM #P07_PLANNING LVL 7 NAMEP08_PLANNING LVL 8 ITM #P08_PLANNING LVL 8 NAMEP09_PLANNING LVL 9 ITM #P09_PLANNING LVL 9 NAMEP10_PLANNING LVL 10 ITM #P10_PLANNING LVL 10 NAMEP11_PLANNING LVL 11 ITM #P11_PLANNING LVL 11 NAMEP12_PLANNING LVL 12 ITM #P12_PLANNING LVL 12 NAME

Need to address concept of assemblies (design, planning, and manufacturing) in PDM/AP218 SCIM.

Address assembly in PDM chapter, i.e., solve in PDM. Specialize in other chapters (e.g., structures) if needed.


The npd:Physical_assembly is linked to the npd:Physical_occurrence by the associations: npd:Physical_assembly_childnpd:Physical_assembly_parent

Discuss how to represent build trees.

Recommend adding AP218 entity assembly to AP218 SCIM. Subtype AP218 entity assembly from npd:Physical_occurrence.

SCIM AP215/ AP218 Arrangements The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

COMPARTMENT_NOZONELEVEL

Consider adding a lightweight arrangements concept in PDM or even move AP215 to PDM. The goal is to avoid a separate AP215 export.

34


Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationMissing AP218 & SCIM planning/manufacturing entities


CONSTRUC_AREA_LVLTEMP_STR_CUT_TO_SUITTEMP_STR_REQD_LIFT_TYPE

Need to add to AP218/SCIM planning/manufacturing entities.

Issue: no mapping to SCIM, no AP 218 entity available to add to SCIM.

Review for new SCIM chapter based on ISE 4 steel processing recommendations, especially for Catia attributes:

OP CODESECONDARY OP1SECONDARY OP2SECONDARY OP3SECONDARY OP4

Enhance npd:Design_occurrence The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

ESWBSCOST_CLASSMATERIAL_COST_CLASS

Need to add attributes to PDM/SCIM npd:Design_occurrence.

Electric Boat concurs: add to PDM, npd:Design_occurrence

This is also needed by planning.

35


Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationPDM change model improvement The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

HOLD-UP_01HOLD-UP_02HOLD-UP_03HOLD-UP_04HOLD-UP_05HOLD-UP_06HOLD-UP_07HOLD-UP_08HOLD-UP_09HOLD-UP_10CONST DWG REMARKS 1CONST DWG REMARKS 2REMARKS

Candidates for improvements to PDM change model. May need associations to show parts that hold up other parts.

Consider portions of NIDDESC CM model incorporated into PDM.

Be sure AP239 does not cover this.

SCIM Analysis chapter The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

Y Axis Shear AreaZ Axis Shear AreaAngle of Main Axis of Inertia

Candidates for AP209 (analysis) chapter.

The CAD system may compute this data. If so it can be derived from SCIM data. However, if this is human defined (e.g., section properties), consider exchanging this in libraries, especially catalog parts.

Manufacturing Macro Names The following NN Catia end cut related Attributes do not map to SCIM:

EndCut 1 Design Macro NameEndCut 2 Design Macro NameENDCUT 1 MFG MACRO NAMEENDCUT 2 MFG MACRO NAME

Recommend adding npd:Feature_design_definition.Name property for this. "Name" currently does not exist.

Robotic macro names are yard specific, therefore may not be needed for data exchange. Review endcuts on next row.

36


Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationEndcut definition The following NN Catia manufacturing related Attributes do not map to

SCIM: ENDCUT 1 MFG P00 ENDCUT 2 MFG P00 ENDCUT 1 MFG P01 ENDCUT 2 MFG P01ENDCUT 1 MFG P02 ENDCUT 2 MFG P02 ENDCUT 1 MFG P03 ENDCUT 2 MFG P03ENDCUT 1 MFG P04 ENDCUT 2 MFG P04ENDCUT 1 MFG P05 ENDCUT 2 MFG P05ENDCUT 1 MFG P06 ENDCUT 2 MFG P06ENDCUT 1 MFG P07 ENDCUT 2 MFG P07ENDCUT 1 MFG P08 ENDCUT 2 MFG P08ENDCUT 1 MFG P09 ENDCUT 2 MFG P09ENDCUT 1 MFG P10 ENDCUT 2 MFG P10ENDCUT 1 MFG P11 ENDCUT 2 MFG P11ENDCUT 1 MFG P12 ENDCUT 2 MFG P12ENDCUT 1 MFG P13 ENDCUT 2 MFG P13ENDCUT 1 MFG P14 ENDCUT 2 MFG P14ENDCUT 1 MFG P15 ENDCUT 2 MFG P15ENDCUT 1 MFG P16 ENDCUT 2 MFG P16ENDCUT 1 MFG P17 ENDCUT 2 MFG P17ENDCUT 1 MFG P18 ENDCUT 2 MFG P18ENDCUT 1 MFG P19 ENDCUT 2 MFG P19ENDCUT 1 MFG P20 ENDCUT 2 MFG P20ENDCUT 1 MFG P21 ENDCUT 2 MFG P21ENDCUT 1 MFG P22 ENDCUT 2 MFG P22ENDCUT 1 MFG P23 ENDCUT 2 MFG P23ENDCUT 1 MFG P24 ENDCUT 2 MFG P24

Recommend adding to appropriate npd:Feature_design_definition or subclass. TBD manufacturing operation needs to be added to AP218 SCIM, which may be part of structural manufacturing SCIM chapter.

Need library of endcut definitions taking CPC into account.

Desire is to handle this in a generic way as parametric manufacturing features. Consider including secondary operations in a similar manner.

37


Gap Category Issue Comments/RecommendationHangers The following NN Catia hanger related Attributes do not map to SCIM:

HANGER_IDHANGER_PART_IDDWG_NO_OR_SPECASSEMBLYSYSTEM_DESIGNATORDWG NO. OR SPEC DOCHANGER ASSY NO

Ensure SCIM can handle hangers:

Verify AP227 (piping, electrical, and HVAC) can handle hangers.

Ensure AP218 can handle hangers within its scope (manufactured hangers).

Need to review catalog hangers vice piece built hangers.

Different yards address hangers differently. Some are more catalog centric. NGSB-GC and NN may handle hangers as CAD reservations in some cases, but actually create the hangers in the field.

NGSB-GC has Standard Procedure (SP) books from which the field decides how to implement a given hanger. The SP book may give several options for a given situation. This may be a “don't care” in a Design to Design exchange, but may be important in a Design to Manufacturing exchange.

Further research required. Need to handle hangers by discipline. Consider a separate chapter on Outfitting and Furnishings.

Shipyard/ISPE attributes do not map to SCIM

Numerous Catia Attributes and ISPE attributes do not map to SCIM. Review each occurrence in the raw data, reevaluate, and disposition.

38


4.0 Gap Resolution

This section provides a summary of the gap resolutions based on the gap summary described in Table 5.

39


Table 6: AP 218 SCIM Structural Model Gap Resolutions

Gap Category Issue ResolutionSCIM Structural manufacturing chapter entity candidates

The following AP 218 entities are not included in SCIM:

assemblyassembly_bounding_boxassembly_relationshiphomogeneous_ship_material_propertyship_material_propertystructural_added_material_boundary_relationshipweld_filler_materialannotationplate_manufacturing_definitionprofile_manufacturing_definitionstructural_part_manufacturing_definitionweld_manufacturing_definitionelectrode_chemical_compositionstructural_cutout_manufacturing_relationshipweld_testing;assembly_manufacturing_definitionassembly_manufacturing_positioncentre_location

Added AP218 manufacturing entities to SCIM AP218 Chapter:

npd:Structural_added_material_boundary_relationship npd:Structural_cutout_manufacturing_relationship npd:Ship_material_property npd:Homogeneous_ship_material_property npd:Weld_filler_material npd:Structural_Material_quality_requirements npd:Centre_location npd:Assembly_bounding_box npd:Layout_label npd:Layout_mark npd:Manufacturing_definitionnpd:Assembly_manufacturing_definition npd:Structural_part_manufacturing_definition npd:Plate_manufacturing_definition npd:Profile_manufacturing_definition npd:Weld_manufacturing_definition npd:Assembly npd:Assembly_manufacturing_position npd:Weld_testing npd:Electrode_chemical_composition

Identified entities as design or manufacturing

Did not add planning/manufacturing entities for assembly order, scheduling, routing, shop floor assignments, etc.

40


Gap Category Issue ResolutionMissing AP218 SCIM material attributes


MaterialDensityQualityMATERIAL_DESCRIPTIONMATERIAL_REVISION_LEVELTREATMENT SPECMATERIAL_CONTROL_LEVEL

The following ISPE attributes map to AP218 material entities:

Design Component/Description/Material characteristics (type)Design Component/Description/Material characteristics (grade)

Added AP218 material entities and augmented with additional attributes:

npd:Ship_material_property npd:Homogeneous_ship_material_property npd:Weld_filler_material

41


Gap Category Issue ResolutionAssembly concept missing The following NN Catia assembly Attributes do not map to

SCIM:

PARENTPLN1PLN2P02_BASE_LVL NAMEP03_PLANNING LVL 3 ITM #P03_PLANNING LVL 3 NAMEP04_PLANNING LVL 4 ITM #P04_PLANNING LVL 4 NAMEP05_PLANNING LVL 5 ITM #P05_PLANNING LVL 5 NAMEP06_PLANNING LVL 6 ITM #P06_PLANNING LVL 6 NAMEP07_PLANNING LVL 7 ITM #P07_PLANNING LVL 7 NAMEP08_PLANNING LVL 8 ITM #P08_PLANNING LVL 8 NAMEP09_PLANNING LVL 9 ITM #P09_PLANNING LVL 9 NAMEP10_PLANNING LVL 10 ITM #P10_PLANNING LVL 10 NAMEP11_PLANNING LVL 11 ITM #P11_PLANNING LVL 11 NAMEP12_PLANNING LVL 12 ITM #P12_PLANNING LVL 12 NAME

Added the following entities, which coordinate with Physical_assembly:

npd:Assembly(subtyped from npd:Physical_occurrence)

npd:Assembly_bounding_box npd:Assembly_manufacturing_definition npd:Assembly_manufacturing_position

SCIM AP215/ AP218 Arrangements The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

COMPARTMENT_NOZONELEVEL

Subtype appropriate AP215 entities from PDM entities, such as npd:Design_Occurrence_Assembly, to link arrangement information to PDM structures

Use externals references to other SCIM AP exchange files to identify piping, HVAC, structures, etc. associated with the compartment, zone, etc.

42


Gap Category Issue ResolutionMissing AP218 & SCIM planning/manufacturing entities


CONSTRUC_AREA_LVLTEMP_STR_CUT_TO_SUITTEMP_STR_REQD_LIFT_TYPE

Planning/manufacturing entities for assembly order, scheduling, routing, shop floor assignments, machine op codes, etc.

These are not addressed in AP218

43


Gap Category Issue ResolutionEnhance npd:Design_occurrence The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

ESWBSCOST_CLASSMATERIAL_COST_CLASS

Entity npd:Pdm_design_definition changed to npd:Design_occurrence_definition and attributes added:OwnerIdVersionDesign_ownerCreatorPart_supplierDesign_supplierCreate_dateMake_or_buyGovernment_furnishedRevision_blockESWBSLabor_cost_classMaterial_cost_class Find_status

Added new PDM associations to Design_occurrence_definition for entities:npd:Certificationnpd:Contractnpd:Security_classificationnpd:Change_request (new)npd:Material_quality_requirements (new)npd:Design_occurrencenpd:Shape_representationnpd:External_geometric_modelnpd:Safety_requirements (new)npd:Weight (new)

AP 218 Parts subtyped from npd:Design_occurrence:npd:Structural_part (direct subtype)npd:Platenpd:Profilenpd:Built_profilenpd:Structural_system (direct subtype)npd:Panel_system npd:Plate_strake

44


Gap Category Issue ResolutionPDM change model improvement The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

HOLD-UP_01HOLD-UP_02HOLD-UP_03HOLD-UP_04HOLD-UP_05HOLD-UP_06HOLD-UP_07HOLD-UP_08HOLD-UP_09HOLD-UP_10CONST DWG REMARKS 1CONST DWG REMARKS 2REMARKS

Added Change_request

SCIM Analysis chapter The following NN Catia Attributes do not map to SCIM:

Y Axis Shear AreaZ Axis Shear AreaAngle of Main Axis of Inertia

Defer analysis entities to SCIM AP209 Chapter in Phase 2

Manufacturing Macro Names The following NN Catia end cut related Attributes do not map to SCIM:

EndCut 1 Design Macro NameEndCut 2 Design Macro NameENDCUT 1 MFG MACRO NAMEENDCUT 2 MFG MACRO NAME

Composite_features are included in AP218 Chapter for combining individual features like snipes, copes, and bevels into a single referenceable feature. The specifications for the stiffener and plate cutting macros that have been programmed into each Yard’s cutting machines should be compared to these features defined in AP218 to identify any missing cutting features that should be added to AP218.

45


Gap Category Issue ResolutionEndcut definition The following NN Catia manufacturing related Attributes do not

map to SCIM: ENDCUT 1 MFG P00 ENDCUT 2 MFG P00 ENDCUT 1 MFG P01 ENDCUT 2 MFG P01ENDCUT 1 MFG P02 ENDCUT 2 MFG P02 ENDCUT 1 MFG P03 ENDCUT 2 MFG P03ENDCUT 1 MFG P04 ENDCUT 2 MFG P04ENDCUT 1 MFG P05 ENDCUT 2 MFG P05ENDCUT 1 MFG P06 ENDCUT 2 MFG P06ENDCUT 1 MFG P07 ENDCUT 2 MFG P07ENDCUT 1 MFG P08 ENDCUT 2 MFG P08ENDCUT 1 MFG P09 ENDCUT 2 MFG P09ENDCUT 1 MFG P10 ENDCUT 2 MFG P10ENDCUT 1 MFG P11 ENDCUT 2 MFG P11ENDCUT 1 MFG P12 ENDCUT 2 MFG P12ENDCUT 1 MFG P13 ENDCUT 2 MFG P13ENDCUT 1 MFG P14 ENDCUT 2 MFG P14ENDCUT 1 MFG P15 ENDCUT 2 MFG P15ENDCUT 1 MFG P16 ENDCUT 2 MFG P16ENDCUT 1 MFG P17 ENDCUT 2 MFG P17ENDCUT 1 MFG P18 ENDCUT 2 MFG P18ENDCUT 1 MFG P19 ENDCUT 2 MFG P19ENDCUT 1 MFG P20 ENDCUT 2 MFG P20ENDCUT 1 MFG P21 ENDCUT 2 MFG P21ENDCUT 1 MFG P22 ENDCUT 2 MFG P22ENDCUT 1 MFG P23 ENDCUT 2 MFG P23ENDCUT 1 MFG P24 ENDCUT 2 MFG P24

Composite_features are included in AP218 Chapter for combining individual features like snipes, copes, and bevels into a single referenceable feature. Endcuts may be a composite of pre-defined AP218 features. Each Yard’s standard endcuts should be examined to make sure that they are covered by the AP218 composite_feature definition.

46


Gap Category Issue ResolutionHangers The following NN Catia hanger related Attributes do not map to

SCIM:

HANGER_IDHANGER_PART_IDDWG_NO_OR_SPECASSEMBLYSYSTEM_DESIGNATORDWG NO. OR SPEC DOCHANGER ASSY NO

A cross-reference may be needed between Piping and HVAC hangers and the structure to which they are mounted in AP218. This cross-reference between chapters of the SCIM will be added if needed when the Piping and HVAC chapters are worked in Phase 2.

Shipyard/ISPE attributes do not map to SCIM

Numerous Catia Attributes and ISPE attributes do not map to SCIM.

Included additional attributes where appropriate

47


5.0 Final Structural Model Dataset

The final structural model dataset defined for the SCIM AP218 Chapter is represented in the context schema. See Reference [6] for the ILE Phase 1 context schema. This context schema will be updated when the SCIM AP218 chapter is completed in Phase 2 of the ILE project.

48


6.0 Issues and Recommendations

This section describes the open issues and recommendations resulting from the ILE Phase 2, Subtask 1.2 gap analysis.

6.1 Open Issues6.1.1 Change ManagementChange Management was discussed as an area of potential enhancement to the SCIM chapters. AP218 contains entities related to changes, revisions, and versioning that were not included in the SCIM AP218 chapter (or SCIM PDM chapter). As part of the ILE Phase 1 analysis the Change_request entity was added to the SCIM PDM chapter, but further discussion is required to determine the need for additional change management entities in SCIM.

6.1.2 Additional Manufacturing InformationSome manufacturing information was identified in the analyzed data related to manufacturing shop floor processes, planning, scheduling, and routing. This type of information is not included in AP218, but some or all of this data may be included in other STEP APs such as AP238 (Computer Numeric Control) and/or AP240 (Process Plans for Machined Products). An analysis would have to be performed to determine whether this type of data is included in these two APs and whether it makes sense to include this information in the SCIM.

6.1.3 External ReferencesAP218 has a mechanism for referencing entities within another data exchange file using the External_instance_reference and Global_id entities. These are not currently included in SCIM AP218. Further discussion on whether to include these entities in SCIM AP218 is required.

6.1.4 Compartment and Zone InformationCompartment and Zone information was identified in the analyzed data, but is not included in AP218 or the SCIM AP218 chapter. AP215, Arrangements, contains information on compartments and zones; therefore, this issue should be addressed in the SCIM AP215 chapter to ensure the AP215 entities properly utilize the PDM entities/relationships to tie in compartment and zone information.

6.2 RecommendationsThe following recommendations are being made for ILE Phase 2:

Consider expanding the change management structure in PDM as described in section 6.1.1.

Review AP238 and AP240 (along with recommendations from NSRP ISPE and NSRP STEP NC projects) to determine need for this type of information in SCIM. At the ILE Phase 1 final meeting it was determined that we do not have the time nor resources to include these additional tasks and these chapters were not included in the original scope of the ILE project. In addition, there were questions about the need to exchange this type of data among shipyards.

49


Ensure gaps identified for resolution in other APs (e.g. AP209 and AP215) are included in Phase 2 SCIM updates.

Address lower priority gaps identified but deferred (e.g. manufacturing macro names, endcut definitions, hangers).

50


7.0 Reference Documents

NumberDocument Number / Revision Document Title

[1] NSRP-ILE-1.2-001, V1.4, 5 November 2010

Structural Model Import Requirements

[2] NSRP-ILE-1.2-002, V1.0, 21 January 2011

Structural Model Gap Analysis

[3] ISO 10303-218:2004(E): 2004-11-15

STEP AP 218

ISO 10303-218

Industrial automation systems and integration - Product data representation and exchange -

Part 218: Application protocol: Ship structures

[4] 27 January 2003 Integrated Steel Processing Environment (ISPE) Shipyard Requirements Final Report

[5] N/A SCIM Chapter 4: Structural (AP 218)

Structural_001.zip: AP218_Structural.pdf (text)

AP218 diagrams.doc (context diagrams)at URL:

http://www.isetools.org/eb-cgi-bin/yabb2_ISE/YaBB.pl?num=1222711663

expanded_context_schema_pdm_218_merged_009.xmlat URL:


[6] N/A SCIM AP218 Context Schema expanded_context_schema_pdm_218_merged_ILE_Phase_1_final.xml

at URL:

http://www.isetools.org/eb-cgi-bin/yabb2_ISE/YaBB.pl?num=1308796191/0

51








8.0 Terminology

8.1 AcronymsThe following is a list of all acronyms used in this document:

Acronym Definition

2D two dimensional

3D three dimensional

AP Application Protocol

CAD Computer-Aided Design

CATIA Computer Aided Three-Dimensional Application

CVN21 CVN21 is the project name used by the U.S. Navy, its contractors, and Congress to denote the development of the next design in supercarriers. CVN 21 is a reference to the next class fixed wing nuclear carrier (CVN) for the 21st Century.

DDG 1000 USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) is the lead ship of the Zumwalt class of guided missile destroyers.

DWG Drawing

ILE Integrated Logistics Environment

ILS Integrated Logistics Support

IPDE Integrated Product Data Environment

ISE Integrated Shipbuilding Environment

ISE-4 Fourth ISE project addressing four areas: Electrical, Engineering Analysis, Ship Arrangement, and Steel Processing (CAD to CAM)

ISO International Organization for Standardization

ISPE Integrated Steel Processing Environment

Mfg manufacturing

N/A Not applicable

NGSB Northrop Grumman ShipBuilding

NGSB-GC Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding – Gulf Coast

As of 3/31/2011 NGSB-GC became Ingalls Shipbuilding, a Division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.

52


Acronym Definition

NGSB-NN Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding – Newport News

As of 3/31/2011 NGSB-NN became Newport News Shipbuilding, a Division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.

NGTS Northrop Grumman Technical Services

NPDI Navy Product Data Initiative

NSRP National Shipbuilding Research Program

PDM Product Data Management

PREP preparation

SCIM Ship Common Information Model

STEP Standard for the Exchange of Product Model Data, is a comprehensive ISO standard (ISO 10303) that describes how to represent and exchange digital product information.

URL Uniform Resource Locator

53


9.0 Analysis of Piping and Structural Models vs. Data Needed for VIRGINIA Migration

The VIRGINIA Class submarine is in the midst of its production cycle with several more hulls pending. The current VIRGINIA Class IPDE platform is approaching its end of life and Electric Boat (EB) is in the process of implementing a new next generation IPDE. A major effort is currently underway to migrate most if not all the VIRGINIA design data from the current system to the next generation IPDE.

The VIRGINIA Class IPDE, owing to limitations in the COTS CAD/PDM tools, is a highly customized solution. Moreover, the VIRGINIA Class IPDE is a system that evolved and grew as the VIRGINIA Class design progressed and as new requirements and issues revealed themselves. As a result, the VIRGINIA product model does not possess the degree of data model integrity that is expected in a new system. Thus, the exact entities, attributes, properties, and relationships that must be migrated to the new IPDE are not obvious. Recent experience in extracting information from the system to support new manufacturing processes has revealed a number of technical questions that must be solved before a data migration can be successfully completed. Major decisions in this effort revolve around which pieces of the product model must be migrated, and how to maintain their relationships in the new system.

The SCIM is intended to provide the information requirements to guide the extraction and collection of product data and specifies the entities, attributes, and properties required for exchange in each discipline.

Unfortunately, the SCIM was not available in time to support the early efforts of VIRGINIA data migration. If the SCIM had been issued and validated before the VIRGINIA Class data migration began, the information models specified in the SCIM could have been used to help implement the change of VIRGINIA Class IPDE platforms. However, since the VIRGINIA data migration is already underway, and the SCIM has not yet been completed, this task is serving as a means of validating several chapters of the SCIM (in particular, those dealing with piping and structural models) by evaluating how the information models specified in the SCIM support the VIRGINIA data migration effort. The task is validating the thoroughness and correctness of the SCIM information requirements in these disciplines.

The task focused on the extraction of structural and piping models because these represent a major portion of the VIRGINIA product model, and because those chapters of the SCIM have already been completed. Specifically, as data was pulled from the VIRGINIA Class IPDE, it was externalized in a straightforward XML mapping. This externalization was then transformed to the default SCIM representation. At this point it was possible to analyze the contents of the VIRGINIA Class IPDE extraction and the SCIM model. Any discrepancies or mismatches that were found have been resolved, and the open source SCIM model will be updated, if appropriate. It should be noted that much of this work done so far has been largely manual, consisting of a side by side comparison – since robust schema validation tools for the SCIM do not yet exist. Currently, an XML Mediator is under development (as described below) which will provide an automated tool to translate PLMXML files from the NX/TeamCenter environment into SCIM formatted information models.

54


Potentially, this task has already benefitted the VIRGINIA Class data migration efforts by revealing properties or attributes of the product model that are required to be moved to the new IPDE. However, it is anticipated that the primary benefits of the task will be in using VIRGINIA data for the validation of the information models in the SCIM. It is thus using VIRGINIA as a means for verifying the ability of the SCIM to support interoperability of the next generation IPDE.

Any deficiencies that have been discovered in the SCIM, or difficulties in using the SCIM-specified format, will be addressed during Task 2 for Completion of the Ship Common Information Model. Thus, the results of Subtask 1.1 will lead directly to enhancements of the SCIM as it is completed in Task 2.

9.1 Information Models for SCIM vs. Information Models Used for VIRGINIA Migration9.1.1 SCIM Piping Information ModelPiping systems are used to convey and process fluids or gases within a variety of engineering products. Generally, a piping system comprises a network of pipes and piping components (fittings and valves), and is attached to processing equipment such as pressure vessels and pumps. Large piping systems are generally attached to some supporting structure through the use of pipe supports and hangers.

Four major application areas corresponding to major stages of piping product life cycle are:

contract/functional design;

detail design;

production engineering;

support engineering.

Users/developers of piping product information in these stages of product life cycle have different information requirements and views of the product. Users in the contract design stage design view a piping system principally as a functional network of equipment.

Functional design stage designers see piping in much the same way but develop and use much more detailed information concerning operating states of a system, and the characteristics of sub-networks of piping within an overall system (pipelines) in terms of material specifications and flow characteristics. They also, for some systems, develop and use data concerning the loading on, and fixity of, portions of the system in order to evaluate stress levels. The functional view is typically used to identify a preliminary purchasing bill of material in which purchase specification and long lead-time equipment and components are identified. The functional design stage view is also the one which, along with contract specifications, is used in formulating and performing systems testing following installation. Because of the commonality of views in the contract and functional design stages, they can be combined into a single application area. Detail design users have a three-dimensional arrangements view of piping. They are concerned with the arrangement in 3-D space of piping components meeting the applicable system specification and with ensuring that the arranged components are free from

55


interference with the surrounding environment. This view of the data is also the view that typically supports the final purchasing bills of material.

Production engineering stage users are concerned with defining piping assemblies and the information needed to fabricate the pieces of these assemblies. This information can consist of bending instructions, joining instructions/specifications, and coating instructions. They also specify the installation processes to be used to install such assemblies in the final product and the post-installation tasks to be carried out. The production engineering function creates and makes use of the production bill of material view.

The piping product view taken by users in the support engineering stage is mainly that of the functional design, but from the standpoint of defining the support requirements of the product. Such requirements include spare parts complements, maintenance procedures and related documentation, and operational specifications and documentation.

9.1.1.1 Piping Physical ChapterThe Piping Physical Chapter of the SCIM focuses on the second and third of the application areas above – detail design and production engineering. It specifies the product model information needed to capture the design and facilitate the manufacturing of the piping system. Information concerning items such as operating states, material specifications, and flow characteristics will be captured in the Piping Functional Chapter of the SCIM.

9.1.1.1.1 Piping Specific GeometryPipes are not represented using the various solid geometric entities that are permitted for components (e.g. Constructive Solid Geometry, Boundary Representation, or Wireframe). Instead, a pipe is described by a Curve representing its Centerline. The radius and wall thickness of the pipe will be provided as attributes of the pipe entity, rather than as properties of the geometric representation. This representation applies to Straight Pipes, as well as Bent Pipes, both of which have their geometry specified by the shape and parameters of their centerlines. Pipes (and other Design_occurrences) can be placed in the ship using traditional ship reference points via the Location_in_ship application object. The Ship_item_location and Relative_item_location entities are used to position a Pipe or other Design_occurrence based on the translation and rotation of a point and set of axes, or based upon the relative position of this Design_occurrence with respect to another Design_occurrence.

A Piping_size_description is used to explain or summarize the physical size of a piping connector or a piping system component, based on a set of dimensional characteristics, and an optional dimensional standard. Each Piping_size_description is an Inside_and_thickness, an Outside_and_thickness, a Pressure_class, or a Schedule.

Piping components (as opposed to Pipe) are located within the ship by a combination of the Standard_point, Global_axis_placement, Location_in_ship, and Local_co_ordinate_system entities. The Standard_point specifies an x, y, z coordinate position on the generic part defined for the component that will position the instance of the component in the ship.

A Global_axis_placement defines a fixed system of right handed orthogonal axes to which geometric data are referred. A Global_axis_placement shall have a positive Z-axis in an upwards direction starting from the base of the ship and a positive X-axis running along the ship

56


on the intersection of the centerline with the base. In one case it is directed from the after part of the ship to the forward part of the ship and in the other it is directed from the forward part of the ship to the after part of the ship. The origin of the Global_axis_placement can be any point on the X-axis. The distance of the after perpendicular from the origin and the orientation of the X-axis shall be specified. If any other system of axes is used, local or global, then the transformation relations between it and the Global_axis_placement shall be specified

A Local_co_ordinate_system is used to locate an object in space. A Local_co_ordinate_system is always defined with respect to another coordinate system. This might be a Global_axis_placement or another Local_co_ordinate_system that is a member in the same hierarchy.

The location_and_orientation specifies the relative position and orientation of the Design_occurrence within the Ship.

9.1.1.2 Piping Functional ChapterThe Piping Functional Chapter of the SCIM is designed to capture the connectivity and logical structure of a 2D representation of a piping system. It focuses on the first and fourth of the application areas above – contract/functional design and support engineering. It specifies information concerning items such as operating states, material specifications, and flow characteristics.

The piping functional configuration entails connectivity, sequencing, component size, and schedule, and may include other information, such as equipment tag numbers and requirements to perform consistency checks between the functional and physical representations of the design. This data will include:

basic engineering data as needed for spatial layout and configuration of systems

references to functional requirements of piping systems, such as stream data and operational characteristics

references to or designation of functional characteristics of components and connected equipment as required for system design

The SCIM Chapter on Piping Functional describes the functional connectivity of a piping system and the functional connectivity among objects in that system. It provides the information that describes the functional links and properties of a flow stream in a piping system. It includes information about the segments in the line and the specifications for these segments, such as design criteria, service conditions, and line identifier.

9.1.1.2.1 Functional InstancesSeveral entities in this chapter of the SCIM have the suffix “functional” attached. In those cases, the entity represents an instance of this item in a 2D representation, rather than the detailed 3D description provided in the design occurrence. For example, as quoted in the SCIM XML: “The Piping_system_component-functional represents an instance of the Piping_system_component in a 2D model.”

In general, “functional” is a descriptive adjective that, when applied to an item, refers to the actions, activities, or capabilities, that the item provides or may provide to fulfill a purpose.

57


The functional configuration entails connectivity, sequencing, component size, and schedule, and may include other information, such as equipment tag numbers and requirements to perform consistency checks between the functional and physical representations of the design.

One should note that a functional connection can exist between two items without a physical joining of the items.

9.1.1.3 PDM ChapterThe purpose, the only purpose, of the shipbuilding Independent Product Data Environment (IPDE) is to create and manage a digital ship product model. The ship product model is broader than some may expect, encompassing not just the ship design but also the catalogs of parts that support the design, the planning, manufacturing and testing information to realize the design, the engineering models to analyze the design, and the logistics models to support and maintain the ship itself. The ship product model is not a single monolith. It spans the aforementioned life cycle stages and resides in a number of different (though interconnected) systems, applications, and data repositories. These various systems, while managing distinct aspects of the product, depend upon information in other portions of the IPDE, and the product model itself must behave as if it is managed on one logical repository. This is necessary so that the items of the product model are available for re-use, for sharing, for collaboration, and for internal consistency. Across the life cycle stages, the representations of many items evolve, and the IPDE must be able to maintain the proper associations not just between the progress stages of each item, but also between items and the data objects that define their properties, and between items and the other items they depend upon.

Many of the properties and associations captured in particular application systems are unique to a single application domain; however, as a result of the need for integration within the model, there are some elements of the product model that are common and generic. The PDM Chapter of the SCIM defines those common elements. Technically, many of the entities defined in this section are the abstract supertypes of the items that are more specifically defined in each application domain.

The PDM Chapter (also known as the PLM Core) entities are abstract in that they appear in the ship product model only as instances of the more specialized application specific types. The purpose of an abstract supertype is to collect data that is common to all its more specific subtypes. In the case of the PLM Core that data is concerned primarily with configuration management, a requirement that befalls all the items in the ship product model - irrespective of life cycle stage or application domain. Configuration management is comprised of a number of facets: one is the ability to create and manage versions of items within the ship product model. This capability applies across the entire product model. A second fact relates to the effectivity of items, which in the shipbuilding world is treated as hull applicability. The PLM Core defines the entities by which each item in the ship product model is applicable to certain hulls or a certain class of hulls. This capability preponderates in the design stage, but it appears in other stages as well.

Finally, there has traditionally been a practice of associating certain metadata with items in the ship product model. In the early PDM systems, this metadata consisted of properties, such as author, creation date, etc., which were tied to the models or files managed by the PDM system. In today's PLM approach, this metadata is tied to particular items within the product model. The PLM Core metadata properties include approval data, the association of documents to items in

58


the product model, certification, and contract references. The PLM Core also describes how product model items are to be linked to various geometric representations of shape. Finally, the PLM Core defines the high level means to define collections or aggregations of items. These aggregations may be hierarchical (as for a product structure or indented bill of material), or they may be unordered (as a for a model's worth of items).

9.1.2 Piping Information Model Developed for VIRGINIA Migration 9.1.2.1 Submarine Data Migration Task at Electric BoatAt Electric Boat, the Submarine Data Migration Task exists because EB’s CATIA-based Integrated Product Development Environment (IPDE) will become unsupported and must be retired in the 2013 timeframe, and submarine product model data managed in that system will need to be migrated to the new IPDE system before that time. Prior to that, this task will determine the best balance between automated and manual techniques to ensure a cost-effective and reliable migration. This task will also make decisions regarding the out-sourcing or in-sourcing of various tools to be used in the effort.

Submarine product model data consists of geometric data and attribute data. By and large, the geometric data is processed by a CAD system and the attribute data with a database management system (although there are exceptions to this parceling). The VIRGINIA Class IPDE uses the CATIA Data Manager (CDM) to manage its attribute data and CATIA V4 to process its geometric data. The next-generation IPDE uses Siemens’ TeamCenter (TC) to manage its attribute data and NX to process its geometric data.

The VIRGINIA Class IPDE is the source of data for and/or integrates with a number of other systems, including parts management (CPC), scheduling (Artemis), manufacturing resource planning (MACPAC), and various manufacturing execution systems. Data migration from the VIRGINIA Class IPDE to the new IPDE must be timed so that downstream and integrated applications will be ready by 2013 to receive data from the new IPDE.

EB’s CATIA-based Integrated Product Development Environment (IPDE) is the vehicle for the creation and management of a digital product model of the VIRGINIA Class submarine. The digital product model is an artifact that consists solely of data; the Submarine Data Migration project will extract, transform and load that product model data into the next-generation IPDE system so that the functionality of the new IPDE can be used to process VIRGINIA Class design data after the current IPDE is retired. The VIRGINIA Class product model is comprised of two distinct categories of data: the geometric (or CAD) data and the attribute (or tabular) data. The task will migrate both categories of VIRGINIA Class piping product data.

9.1.2.2 Structure of the VIRGINIA Piping Migration ModelThe VIRGINIA piping migration model was designed to capture the information needed for the data migration from the CATIA/CDM system to NX/TeamCenter. It was not based on general industry or surface ship requirements, and therefore was not intended to be as complete as the SCIM piping model. The attributes associated with any entity tended to be those stored in the CATIA Data Manager (CDM) database as it is used at Electric Boat, rather than being based on abstract properties of a theoretical piping CAD system.

59


9.1.2.3 Significant Differences from the SCIM ModelThe VIRGINIA migration model is not broken down by Piping Physical, Piping Functional, and PDM. Instead, it consists of one model incorporating the essential features of all theses chapters that were deemed needed for VIRGINIA migration efforts.

Attributes were placed in the SCIM generally because that information was required in order to model the piping system. On the other hand, as stated above, attributes were added to the VIRGINIA piping migration model when that data was loaded into the CATIA/CDM system. Thus, a given attribute which might be required (and therefore included in the SCIM), but could be derived or deduced from other data in CDM, would thus not be included in the VIRGINIA piping migration model.

All aspects of the migration have not yet been addressed, so the VIRGINIA migration model is not complete. In particular, Piping Supports have not yet been modeled, even though they are addressed in the Piping Chapters of the SCIM.

In support of and as part of the requirements definition for the Submarine Data Migration Task, a set of assumptions has been established. The purpose of the assumptions is to present an accurate level of expectations and, in particular, to note technical and/or procedural constraints that may curtail some expectations. A deliverable of the project will be the documentation of the strategic assumptions. In general, these assumptions do not apply to the SCIM piping information model, since the SCIM is designed to provide a mechanism for transfer of all the product data including GD&T, to handle hull-specific as-designed product data, and to permit two way transfers. Thus, the unique requirements for the VIRGINIA migration piping model have caused some distinct differences between that and the SCIM model.

9.1.3 Comparison of Information Models 9.1.3.1 Enhancements Needed to VIRGINIA Piping Migration ModelAs was discussed above in Section 9.1.2, the VIRGINIA piping migration model was established with a very different set of goals than the SCIM, which inevitably caused differences in the structure of the two models. However, in the course of performing Subtask 1.1 for Migrating VIRGINIA Class IPDE Data, comparison with the SCIM revealed some deficiencies in the VIRGINIA piping migration model.

Thus, although the primary goal of this task was to evaluate and improve the SCIM, an ancillary benefit is enhancements determined for the VIRGINIA piping migration model. Since the Submarine Data Migration Task and the ILE Project will both be active for several years, it is anticipated that further enhancements will continue to be identified for both the VIRGINIA piping migration model and the SCIM.

The following modifications have been made to the VIRGINIA piping migration model as a result of the analysis conducted during the ILE Project:

The structure and association of parts has been adjusted in both the SCIM and the VIRGINIA piping migration model to better reflect the relationships between parts in a catalog versus particular instances of parts in a design. An entity to describe parts that was called Cpc_design_part has been replaced by a structure of entities called Catalog_part, Design_part, Generic_part, and Master_part_definition with both Design_part and Catalog_part being subtypes of Generic_part, and Design_part having

60


an association with Catalog_part and Master_part_definition. All properties and entities required for the part were assigned to the appropriate entity based on whether they applied to the catalog representation of the part, or were properties of a particular instance of that part.

Along with this new part structure, the association between Design_occurrence and Design_part was replaced by an association between Design_occurrence and Generic_part.

Several attributes referring to class, version, or owner_id for a part were removed from the VIRGINIA piping migration model as this migration is designed to transfer only the latest model, and not track a historical record of previous revisions or applicablilites.

Several “make from” relationships extracted from the CDM database, which were tied to the Design_occurrence entity, have been moved to Design_part as they are properties of the part and not the particular instance.

An attribute was added to the entity for Design_occurrence_definition to permit a pointer to related documents. This capability was available in the SCIM under the entity for Pdm_design_definition, but was not provided in the VIRGINIA piping migration model.

An attribute to capture the Paint Schedule for a part was also added to the Piping_design_occurrence_definition. This requirement from the data migration effort was previously missing from both the SCIM and the VIRGINIA piping migration models.

9.1.3.2 Modifications Needed in SCIMThe information model in the SCIM to represent piping systems involves entities, attributes, and properties from three different chapters within the SCIM:

Product Data Management (PDM)

Piping Physical

Piping Functional

The ILE Subtask for Migrating VIRGINIA Class IPDE Data is analyzing all of the piping data that needs to be migrated, no matter which of the SCIM Chapters is required to represent it. Examination began with the representation in the SCIM PDM Chapter and then proceeded to review the modeling in the Piping Physical Chapter. Only minimal attention is being paid to the Piping Functional Chapter, as the piping migration is focusing on the 3D product model, rather than the 2D representation of the piping system. The VIRGINIA Piping Migration and its comparison to the SCIM will be an ongoing effort throughout the course of the ILE Project, and all proposed revisions to the SCIM will be recorded during this project, and then delivered with the revised SCIM documents at the end of the two year ILE effort.

9.1.3.2.1 Product Data Management Chapter (PDM)The most significant change to the structure and association of parts in the PDM Chapter is similar to the one described above for the VIRGINIA piping migration model. In order to better reflect the relationships between parts in a catalog versus particular instances of parts in a design, an entity to describe parts that was called Cpc_design_part has been replaced the entities called Catalog_part and Design_part which are both subtypes of Generic_part, and

61


Design_part having an association with Catalog_part and also to Design_part_definition. All properties and entities required for the part were assigned to the appropriate entity based on whether they applied to the catalog representation of the part, or were properties of a particular instance of that part.

Other changes reflected an improved method for the SCIM to capture change and revision information as well as an expansion of the attributes attached to a given part to better reflect all of the properties that were required for the VIRGINIA piping migration.

The SCIM entities in the PDM Chapter which have been modified are listed below along with a description of the actions taken to modify those entities.

SCIM Entity Action TakenCatalog_part Along with Design_part replaces Cpc_design_part

Attributes: OwnerIdVersionDescriptionPart_numberCommercial_and_government

Definition: A type of part in a shipyard catalog which is used in design. The part is referenced by the CAGE of the shipyard in the Common Parts Catalog (CPC). Typically, a Catalog_part embodies a specific form, fit, and function (FFF) which may be satisfied by many OEM Parts.

Associativity: Physical_partGeneric_partDesign_part

Change_request Entity Added

Attributes: OwnerIdVersionChange_idChange_type

Change_request cont’d. Definition: A Change_request is the modification or requested modification of a Design_occurrence.

Associativity: Pdm_design_definition

62


SCIM Entity Action Taken

Configuration_item_definition Entity Added

Attributes: Create_dateCreate_userResponsibleApproval_statusDiscipline

Associativity: Configuration_item

Design_part Along with Catalog_part replaces Cpc_design_part

Attributes: OwnerIdVersion

Definition: A Design_part is an instantiation of a Catalog_part used in the design. Typically, a Design_part embodies a specific form, fit, and function (FFF) which may be satisfied by many OEM Parts

Associativity: Design_occurrenceLogisitcs_occurrencePart_assemblyDesign_part_definitionGeneric_partCatalog_part

Design_part_definition Entity Added

Attributes: Noun_nameTypeModifierPart_description

Hull_code Entity Added

Attributes: Ship_classHull_codeHull_numHull_positDsaShip_num

Definition: Hull_code is the identification of which particular ship hulls, within a class of ships, to which these information items are applicable.

Associativity: Pdm_design_definition

63



Pdm_design_definition Attributes Added: PaintConstruction_yardDeep_submergenceEstimated_quantityFind_numberFind_statusHull_integrityMaterial_quality_levelNuclearSubsafeServiceShock_gradeSound_dampingMagnetic_particle_testingPenetrant_testingRadiographic_testingQuality_assuranceUltrasonic_testingMaterial_verificationVisual_testingGovernment_furnishedQuantityUnit_of_measureShip_class

9.1.3.2.2 Piping Physical ChapterA significant change was made to the structure of the items in the Piping Physical Chapter. This chapter contained itemized entities for to indicate the possible fitting types, flange types, connector types, etc. Since the permitted types of these entities are already specified in the Common Parts Procurement (CPP) Chapter of the SCIM, it was decided that the Piping Physical Chapter should not repeat these lists, but instead should reference the CPP Chapter for applicable types, and then specify the acceptable attributes for each particular type. Matrices will be inserted in this chapter of the SCIM to indicate the possible attributes of fittings, flanges, etc. and which ones apply to each particular type.

9.1.3.2.2.1 Pipes and Piping PartsThe change described above made to the PDM Chapter and the VIRGINIA piping migration model to replace the Cpc_design_part entity was also implemented in the Piping Physical Chapter of the SCIM. In order to better reflect the relationships between parts in a catalog versus particular instances of parts in a design, the entity to describe parts that was called Cpc_design_part has been replaced by a structure of entities called Catalog_part, Design_part, and Generic_part with both Design_part and Catalog_part being subtypes of Generic_part, and Design_part having an association with Catalog_part and also to Design_part_definition. All properties and entities required for the part were assigned to the appropriate entity based on

64


whether they applied to the catalog representation of the part, or were properties of a particular instance of that part.

In conjunction with the above change, Piping_system_component_part was made a subtype of Design_part, not Generic_part.

To permit the description of distance required on a pipe for Clamping or Fitup, an attribute called Additional_length_code has been added to the Design_occurrence entity.

The attributes for End_to_end_cut_length and End_to_end_cut_length_unit have been moved to the Pipe_part entity rather than the Straight_pipe_entity.

In the entity for Pipe_part, a property was added for Min_allowable_wall and its Unit of measure.

The entities for Schedule, Inside_and_outside_thickness, and Pressure_class will be moved out of the Piping Physical Chapter and placed in the Common Parts Procurement Chapter of the SCIM.

In the entity for Pipe_size_description, the property for Dimensional_standard will also be moved to the Common Parts Procurement Chapter.

An association was added from Pipe_instance to Pipe_instance_centerline.





Design_occurrence Attribute added: Additional_length_code (To describe Clamping or Fitup required)

65


SCIM Entity Action TakenDesign_part Along with Catalog_part replaces Cpc_design_part






Inside_and_outside_thickness Entity removed and placed in CPP Chapter

Pipe_part Attributes added: End_to_end_cut_lengthEnd_to_end_cut_length_unitMin_allowable_wallMin_allowable_wall_unit_of_measure

Pipe_instance Association added to Pipe_instance_centerline

Pipe_size_description Attribute removed: Dimensional_standard

Piping_system_component_part Made a subtype of Design_part

Pressure_class Entity removed and placed in CPP Chapter

Swept_bend_pipe_part Attribute removed: Wall_thinning_allowanceAttributes added: Min_allowable _wall_bend

Min_allowable_walll_bend_unit_of_measure.

66


9.1.3.2.2.2 Connections and PortsThe philosophy discussed above of referencing the CPP Chapter (rather than including lists for all possible types in the Piping Physical Chapter) will cause significant changes in the handling of connections and ports in the SCIM.

The current SCIM has an entity for Piping_connector with subtypes of the many possible connector types. This will be replaced by an entity called Port_physical with a property called Port_type. The Port_type property will then have an enumerated list of possible values that correspond to the subtypes of connectors. This method of handling connectors was instituted in the Piping Data Migration Project, and is an improvement over the structure in the SCIM.

The entity for Piping_physical_connector will be replaced by an entity for Port_physical_occurrence which will be pointed to by Piping_connection and will in turn point to Port_physical.

In a similar manner, the entity for Connector_definition now has subtypes of the many different types of connectors. These subtypes will be removed and replaced by a property for Connector_definition_type which will contain an enumerated list of the possible connector types.

A matrix will be created and added to the SCIM relating Port_type to Attribute which will indicate which attributes apply to which port types.

SCIM Entity Action TakenConnector_definition Attribute: Connector_definition_type

Port_physical Entity to replace Piping_connector entity.

Attributes: NameOwnerIdVersionPort_type

Port_physical_occurrence Associations: Pointed to by Piping_connectionPoints to Port_physical

9.1.4 SCIM Structural Information ModelThe SCIM provides an information model for the computer-interpretable representation of product information and for the exchange of product data. The objective is to provide a neutral mechanism capable of describing products throughout their life cycle. This mechanism is suitable not only for neutral file exchange, but also as a basis for implementing and sharing product databases, and as a basis for archiving.

9.1.4.1 Structural Detailed Design ChapterThe Structural Detailed Design Chapter of the SCIM specifies an information model and schema for the exchange of product data representing the definition of ship structures and its related data. It defines the context, scope and information requirements for the communication of ship structural data and specifies the integrated resources necessary to satisfy these requirements.

67


These data may need to be exchanged or shared between different organizations. Such organizations include ship owners, ship classification societies, design agencies and fabricators. This chapter of the SCIM has been developed to support the shipbuilding activities and computer applications associated with the pre-design, the main design, the manufacturing, the maintenance (repair), and the inspection and survey during operation life cycle phases for commercial or naval ships.

The Structural Detailed Design Chapter of the SCIM supports the exchange and sharing of ship structures data. It has been developed in conjunction with other chapters so that important shipbuilding concepts are common and interoperable within the SCIM chapters. The ship structures product model provides a set of subtypes of item for describing the ship structures which are listed in Figure 9-1 below. It includes ship, parts as well as their connections, systems, assemblies and hull_cross_sections as they are the essential subtypes employed in this chapter.

Figure 9-2 - Subtypes of Items for Ship StructuresThis chapter of the SCIM is derived from ISO 10303-218: Application Protocol - Ship Structures. In ISO 10303-218, the schema for defining detailed design and manufacturing information is based on the definition and relationship of three main types of entities: items, design definitions, and manufacturing definitions. In the chapter of the SCIM for Structural Detailed Design, the manufacturing definitions are not included; they will be specified in a later chapter of the SCIM. Items represent individual instances of elements within a structural envelope. Types of items in a structural model include structural parts (e.g., plates, profiles, assemblies) and structural features (e.g., weld/fabrication information, internal/edge cutouts). Design definition data captures all the information necessary for the complete definition of the structural components of a ship. In a feature-based design, structural features, such as interior and edge cutouts and

68


preparations, are defined parametrically and associated to their corresponding design items. For example, a center location and radius parametrically define a circular hole, and profile cross-section dimensions parametrically define a stiffener penetration along the plate’s edge. In the case of the design definition, each of these feature’s geometric representation are independently referenceable within the SCIM data. Instances of like features are derived from a common source thus simplifying the geometry model and making it possible to utilize feature libraries, which allow a single geometry representation to be shared across various design elements. Also, defining individual features in a model allows them to be further characterized by their function.

9.1.4.2 PDM ChapterThe Structural Information Model also references the PDM Chapter of the SCIM (as does the Piping Information Model). Background information on the PDM Chapter is provided above in Section 9.1.1.3.

9.1.5 Structural Information Model Developed for VIRGINIA Migration 9.1.5.1 Submarine Data Migration Task at Electric BoatThe data migration task for structures is following the same basic tenets as the Piping Data Migration Task, so the descriptions in Section 9.1.2.1 apply to this application also.

9.1.5.2 Structure of the VIRGINIA Structural Migration ModelThe VIRGINIA structural migration model was designed to capture the information needed for the data migration from the CATIA/CDM system to NX/TeamCenter. It was not based on general industry or surface ship requirements, and therefore was not intended to be as complete as the SCIM structural model. The attributes associated with any entity tended to be those stored in the CATIA Data Manager (CDM) database as it is used at Electric Boat, rather than being based on abstract properties of a theoretical structural CAD system.

9.1.5.3 Significant Differences from the SCIM ModelThe VIRGINIA migration model is not broken down onto Structural Detailed Design, Structural Manufacturing, and PDM, as is the SCIM. Instead, it consists of one model incorporating the essential features of all theses chapters that were deemed needed for VIRGINIA migration efforts.

Attributes were placed in the SCIM generally because that information was required in order to model the structural system. On the other hand, as stated above, attributes were added to the VIRGINIA structural migration model when that data was loaded into the CATIA/CDM system. Thus, a given attribute which might be required (and therefore included in the SCIM), but could be derived or deduced from other data in CDM, would thus not be included in the VIRGINIA structural migration model.

All aspects of the migration have not yet been addressed, so the VIRGINIA migration model is not complete. In particular, all the requirements for areas such as welding or lofting have not yet been modeled. Also, the Structural Manufacturing Chapter of the SCIM has not yet been developed. Therefore, this validation task will focus on the entities, properties, and attributes that are currently in the structural migration model, and are captured in the Structural Detailed Design and PDM Chapters of the SCIM.

69


In support of and as part of the requirements definition for the Submarine Data Migration Task, a set of assumptions has been established. The purpose of the assumptions is to present an accurate level of expectations and, in particular, to note technical and/or procedural constraints that may curtail some expectations. A deliverable of the project will be the documentation of the strategic assumptions. In general, these assumptions do not apply to the SCIM structural information model, since the SCIM is designed to provide a mechanism for transfer of all the product data including GD&T, to handle hull-specific as-designed product data, and to permit two way transfers. Also, the VIRGINIA structural migration model focuses on those parts required for submarines, and does not include many specific types of structural parts that are required only for surface ships which are defined in the SCIM. Thus, the unique requirements for the VIRGINIA structural migration model have caused some distinct differences between that and the SCIM model.

9.1.6 Comparison of Information Models 9.1.6.1 Enhancements Needed to VIRGINIA Structural Migration ModelAs was discussed above in Section 9.1.5, the VIRGINIA structural migration model was established with a very different set of goals than the SCIM, which inevitably caused differences in the content of the two models. However, in the course of performing Subtask 1.1 for Migrating VIRGINIA Class IPDE Data, comparison with the SCIM revealed some deficiencies in the VIRGINIA structural migration model.

Thus, although the primary goal of this task was to evaluate and improve the SCIM, an ancillary benefit is enhancements determined for the VIRGINIA structural migration model. Since the Submarine Data Migration Task and the ILE Project will both be active for several years, it is anticipated that further enhancements will continue to be identified for both the VIRGINIA structural migration model and the SCIM.

The following modifications have been made to the VIRGINIA structural migration model as a result of the analysis conducted during the ILE Project:

The structure and association of parts has been adjusted in both the SCIM and the VIRGINIA structural migration model to better reflect the relationships between parts in a catalog versus particular instances of parts in a design. An entity to describe parts that was called Cpc_design_part has been replaced by a structure of entities called Catalog_part, Design_part, Generic_part, and Master_part_definition with both Design_part and Catalog_part being subtypes of Generic_part, and Design_part having an association with Catalog_part and Master_part_definition. All properties and entities required for the part were assigned to the appropriate entity based on whether they applied to the catalog representation of the part, or were properties of a particular instance of that part.

Along with this new part structure, the association between Design_occurrence and Design_part was replaced by an association between Design_occurrence and Generic_part.

Several attributes referring to class, version, or owner_id for a part were removed from the VIRGINIA structural migration model as this migration is designed to transfer only the latest model, and not track a historical record of previous revisions or applicablilites.

70


Several “make from” relationships extracted from the CDM database, which were tied to the Design_occurrence entity, have been moved to Design_part as they are properties of the part and not the particular instance.

An attribute was added to the entity for Design_occurrence_definition to permit a pointer to related documents. This capability was available in the SCIM under the entity for Pdm_design_definition, but was not provided in the VIRGINIA structural migration model.

Several attributes were identified that are needed in the SCIM to define items such as Paint Schedule, Cut Lengths for Lofting, etc. When the SCIM chapter for Structural Manufacturing is developed (during Phase 2 of the ILE Project), it will be determined if these attributes should be included in this new chapter or added to the Structural Detailed Design Chapter of the SCIM.

9.1.6.2 Modifications Needed in SCIMThe information model in the SCIM to represent structural systems involves entities, attributes, and properties from three different chapters within the SCIM:

Product Data Management (PDM)

Structural Detailed Design

Structural Manufacturing

The ILE Subtask for Migrating VIRGINIA Class IPDE Data is analyzing all of the structural data that needs to be migrated, no matter which of the SCIM chapters is required to represent it. Examination began with the representation in the SCIM PDM Chapter and then proceeded to review the modeling in the Structural Detailed Design Chapter. The SCIM chapter on Structural Manufacturing will be written during the second phase of the ILE Project, so it clearly cannot be validated during Phase 1. Attributes needed in the VIRGINIA structural migration but not currently included in the SCIM will either be added to the SCIM PDM or Structural Detailed Design Chapters, or included in the yet to be developed Structural Manufacturing Chapter of the SCIM. The VIRGINIA structural migration and its comparison to the SCIM will be an ongoing effort throughout the course of the ILE Project, and all proposed revisions to the SCIM will be recorded during this project, and then delivered with the revised SCIM documents at the end of the two year ILE effort.

9.1.6.2.1 Product Data Management Chapter (PDM)The most significant change to the structure and association of parts in the PDM Chapter is similar to the one described above for the VIRGINIA structural migration model. In order to better reflect the relationships between parts in a catalog versus particular instances of parts in a design, an entity to describe parts that was called Cpc_design_part has been replaced the entities called Catalog_part and Design_part which are both subtypes of Generic_part, and Design_part having an association with Catalog_part and also to Design_part_definition. All properties and entities required for the part were assigned to the appropriate entity based on whether they applied to the catalog representation of the part, or were properties of a particular instance of that part.

71


Other changes reflected an improved method for the SCIM to capture change and revision information as well as an expansion of the attributes attached to a given part to better reflect all of the properties that were required for the VIRGINIA structural migration.

The changes to the SCIM entities in the PDM Chapter were included in those changes listed from the analysis of Piping Data Migration and are detailed in Section 9.1.3.2.1 above.

9.1.6.2.2 Structural Detailed Design ChapterThe change described above made to the PDM Chapter and the VIRGINIA structural migration model to replace the Cpc_design_part entity was also implemented in the Structural Detailed Design Chapter of the SCIM. In order to better reflect the relationships between parts in a catalog versus particular instances of parts in a design, the entity to describe parts that was called Cpc_design_part has been replaced by a structure of entities called Catalog_part, Design_part, and Generic_part with both Design_part and Catalog_part being subtypes of Generic_part, and Design_part having an association with Catalog_part and also to Design_part_definition. All properties and entities required for the part were assigned to the appropriate entity based on whether they applied to the catalog representation of the part, or were properties of a particular instance of that part.





72



Design_part Along with Catalog_part replaces Cpc_design_part






A significant difference in the construction of the VIRGINIA structural migration model vs. the SCIM Structural Detailed Design Chapter results from the fact that the VIRGINIA data migration project focuses on those parts required for submarines, and does not include many specific types of structural parts which are defined in the SCIM but are required only for surface ships. Thus, the unique requirements for the VIRGINIA structural migration model have caused some distinct differences between that and the SCIM model.

In particular, the SCIM model defines an entity called “Feature_design_definition” with subtypes that explicitly cite various types of structural parts and their properties and attributes. Although some of these subtyped parts are used on submarines, their prevalence and variety is much less extensive than those used in the design and construction of surface ships for the U.S. Navy, and, consequently these multiple type of features were not treated as explicit entities in the VIRGINIA structural migration data model. This does not reduce the requirement for these subtypes in the SCIM, but decreases the ability to validate that portion of the SCIM based on the VIRGINIA data migration. Hopefully the subtyping of these features can be validated much more extensively in Subtask 1.2 of the ILE Project which focuses on the exchange of structural models for the manufacture of surface ships.

73


Among these subtypes of the “Feature_design_definition” entity in the SCIM are:

Corner_cutout_design_definition

Round_corner__design_definition

Inward_round_corner_design_definition

Outward_round_corner_design_definition

Bevel_design_definition

Shear_bevel_design_definition

Rectangular_corner_cutback_design_definition

Edge_cutout_design_definition

Drain_hole_cutout_design_definition

Interior_cutout_design_definition

Free_form_interior_cutout_design_definition

Circular_cutout_design_definition

Elliptical_cutout_design_definition

Elongated_oval_cutout_design_definition

Rectangular_cutout_design_definition

Round_corner_rectangular_cutout_design_definition

Round_edge_rectangular_cutout_design_definition

Triangular_cutout_design_definition

Position_feature_design_definition

Seam_design_definition

Structural_added_material_feature_design_definition

9.1.6.2.3 Structural Manufacturing ChapterThe chapter of the SCIM on Structural Detailed Design is derived from ISO 10303-218: Application Protocol - Ship Structures. In ISO 10303-218, the schema for defining detailed design and manufacturing information is based on the definition and relationship of three main types of entities: items, design definitions, and manufacturing definitions. In the chapter of the SCIM for Structural Detailed Design, the manufacturing definitions are not included; they will be specified in a later chapter of the SCIM.

Thus, the plans for the SCIM included developing a separate chapter to define the entities, properties, and attributes needed for an exchange to support Structural Manufacturing. In some of the proposals for the SCIM, this has been identified as the chapter for “Structural CAM”.

In developing the VIRGINIA structural migration model, it was decided not to separate design and manufacturing requirements, and to include entities supporting either activity in one model. Analysis of this model reveals that the number of entities needed just to support manufacturing

74


is not very large, and many of the entities needed to support manufacturing are also required in a detailed design model.

The STEP Application Protocol from which the SCIM is derived (ISO 10303-218: Application Protocol - Ship Structures) also does not separate design and manufacturing requirements into separate documents.

A separate SCIM Structural Manufacturing Chapter would of necessity duplicate many entities from the PDM and Structural Detailed Design Chapters, without developing many new entities.

Therefore, the ILE Project would recommend that the philosophy used for ISO 10303-218 and the VIRGINIA structural migration model be followed in completing the SCIM, and that the SCIM chapter for Structural Detailed Design be expanded to include manufacturing entities, rather than developing a separate SCIM chapter to support manufacturing alone.

In order to guide users of the SCIM in how to accomplish the transfer of structural manufacturing information, a foreword should be written to the SCIM Structural Design Chapter indicating how this portion of the SCIM can be used to support manufacturing.

9.2 Extraction of PLMXML and Development of MediatorSubtask 1.1 of the ILE Project has focused on examining the SCIM as it compared to the VIRGINIA Data Migration Project at Electric Boat.

An extensive comparison was done of the SCIM models for piping, structures, and PDM as 2compared to the information models developed for the VIRGINIA migration efforts. The results of this study are outlined in Section 9.1 above.

The last effort under Subtask 1.1 involves an attempt to automatically get VIRGINIA data into SCIM format as a means of validating the SCIM constructs.

9.2.1 Original PlanThe original thought was that a “Mediator” 1 would be written to take an XML file exported from the CATIA/CDM environment at Electric Boat, and translate it into a SCIM-compliant piping or structural XML file. Another Mediator could then be written to take this SCIM file and translate it into a PLMXML file that could be successfully loaded into the NX/TeamCenter environment. Figure 9-2 below diagrams this approach.

21 Note: For the purpose of all discussions in this chapter, a “Mediator” is defined as an XSL stylesheet that reads a compliant XML file from a “Sending System” and produces an XML file that can be read by the “Receiving System”.

75

Diagram of Original Proposed SCIM

Validation Exercises

Internal Data Schema








- Inte

rface

(AP

I)

Inte

rface

(AP

I)

- Inte

rface

(AP

I)

Inte

rface

(AP

I)

SCIM Compliant FileCATIA/CDM

IPDE Environment NX/TeamCenter

IPDE Environment

Original Plan:Develop Mediator Develop Mediator

Requires Development of Two Mediators Must identify problems in NX/TeamCenter Environment and then

determine if they relate to: NX/TeamCenter orMediator Programs orSCIM


In this way, the SCIM could be used as a means of migrating the data from CATIS/CDM to NX/TeamCenter, and the task would have directly supported the data migration efforts and had the side benefit of helping to validate the SCIM models. This approach involved developing two Mediator programs, and it would especially have made sense if the ILE Project was preceding EB’s data migration efforts.

9.2.2 Alternate ApproachHowever, by the time the ILE Project was funded, Electric Boat was in the midst of its data migration efforts and had already developed in-house techniques for migrating its piping and structural models. Therefore, an alternate approach was developed for validating the SCIM, which involved the development of only one XML Mediator.

VIRGINIA models were moved from the CATIA/CDM Integrated Product Development Environment (IPDE) into NX/TeamCenter as part of the data migration effort, and then those models were extracted from the new IPDE using Siemen’s PLMXML software. A Mediator was then developed to convert the PLMXML files into SCIM-compliant XML. This approach is shown in Figure 9-3 below.

76

Diagram of Alternate Proposal for SCIM

Validation ExercisesAlternate Proposal:


Internal Data SchemaInternal Data Schema


Inte

rface

(AP

I)In

terfa

ce (A

PI)

CATIA/CDM IPDE Environment


Internal Data SchemaInternal Data Schema


Inte

rface

(AP

I)In

terfa

ce (A

PI)

NX/TeamCenterIPDE Environment

--SCIM Compliant File

Develop MediatorTransfer Done as Part ofData Migration Project

Requires Development of only One Mediator Can evaluate if Model is well represented by current SCIM or by

proposed modifications to SCIM Builds upon results of VIRGINIA Data Migration Project


The entities, attributes, and properties in the resulting SCIM model can then be evaluated to reveal any deficiencies in the SCIM, or any problems with the model as it was received in NX/TeamCenter.

In the earlier efforts under Phase 1 of the ILE Project, it wad decided to make significant changes in the Structural Detailed Design Chapter of the SCIM. Among these was the major decision to expand the SCIM model in this chapter to include manufacturing information for the structural parts, rather than writing a separate Structural CAM Chapter.

Also (as revealed in this report), Subtask 1.2 of the ILE Project had devoted much effort to validating the Structural Detailed Design Chapter of the SCIM.

Thus, although both VIRGINIA piping and structural models have been moved to NX/TeamCenter as part of EB’s data migration efforts, it was decided to focus the Mediator development and SCIM validation efforts in this final phase of Subtask 1.1 on the transfer of piping models.

These piping models have been successfully migrated from the CATIA/CDM IPDE into the NX/TeamCenter environment, and the pLMXML files extracted from NX/TeamCenter. The Mediator software to translate the models into SCIM-compliant XML will be completed shortly, and then the SCIM entities, properties, and attributes will be evaluated for completeness and accuracy.

If time and funding under the ILE Project permits, a further effort may be undertaken to transfer these SCIM files into the NX/TeamCenter environment at HII-Newport News. Successful completion of that effort would be a further validation of the usefulness of the SCIM information model as a basis for shipbuilding data exchange. Although this last effort was not specifically

77


included in the ILE Project tasks, it is felt that it would greatly enhance the validation efforts done in Subtask 1.1.

This report will be updated and reissued with the final results of the Subtask 1.1 efforts.

78