Mission Ready PLM

BAE Systems Sweden
ARAS - Mission ready PLM
Kalle Hagström
Head of Information Systems, Platforms & Services Sweden
1

BAE Systems Sweden
Part of a Leading Global Defence Company
2
© BAE Systems 2016 Uncontrolled/Open
Air
Land
Naval
Support
solutions
Cyber

Our global operations
3
BAE Systems
Key markets
Australia
circa 4,100 employees
Oman
circa 25 employees
Saudi Arabia
United Kingdom
United States
Other
Global Business
Development Offices
* Employee figures correct as of 31 December 2014, and include share in joint venture companies.

BAE Systems Sweden: Locations
4
Karlskoga (Weapons)
Stockholm (Office)
Linköping (Office)
Örnsköldsvik (Vehicles)

BAE Systems Sweden: Our Main Products
5
All Terrain Vehicles Combat Vehicles
Howitzers Naval Gun Systems Ammunition

Business Characteristics
6

Complex Products
7
Mechatronic
Offset
Custom
Made
Support
Solutions
Software
design
Many
subsystems
Simulations
Complex
interfaces
Support
Solutions
Mechanical
design
Systems
Engineering
Electrical
Design

Product (long) LIFECYCLE Management
8
Disposal
Fielding In-service
Manufacturing
Design
Concept
…through system life cycle
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
50
Year

Complex Programmes
9
Security and
Export
Control
Offset
Customization
Short Series
and lead
times
Support
Contracts
Many
Suppliers
Information
Management
deliverables
Change
Management

PLM Selection Process
10

Our PLM Maturity
11
Unstructured
•No processes defined
•Manual work
•Document oriented
•No central repository
Repeatable
•Basic processes
•Basic central file
storage
•Document Oriented
Defined
•Process are
described and
followed
• Different
information systems
per domain
Managed
•Change management
process implemented
•Data stored centrally
Optimized
•Closed loop change
management
processes
•Applications are
integrated
•Central repository for
all information
domains
BusinessValue
Maturity
Our PLM
maturity
Our PDM
maturity

Background
12
• Two outdated PLM systems, one per site
• One bespoke PDM implementation (PDA) which has been implemented from 1989
and onwards.
• One PDM implementation based on Teamcenter Enterprise 2005.
• Risk and constraints with current solutions
• The PLM IT-environment as such is outdated and unstable.
• All additional functionality has to be funded
• Current process coverage is only core PDM
• Dependent of local support
• Configuration and Change Management is inefficient
• BoM management is time consuming for TeamCenter
• Tight CAD integration is missing for TeamCenter
• Current solution is out of vendor support
• Dependencies on external key resources

Challenge
13
Dear Management Committee, we propose to assess SystemX and
SystemY!
Manufacturing: ”Why not use
our ERP system instead?”
Wider BAE: ”Why not just
share or copy another
existing enterprise PLM
system?”
Finance: ”Why not recode
our bespoke system to
modern technology?”
”Hey, you IT guys and you
Engineering folks.
Your wet dream is to
implement a expensive high
end PLM system, go out and
find something else!”
Why not
consolidate PLM
systems in Sweden?

Vendor Positioning*
14
Large
Enterprise
Small
Enterprise
NewProduct
Development
BackOffice
Capability SAP
OracleIFS
ARAS
Autodesk
PDA
Size reflects PLM capability
Dassault
Siemens
PTC
*based on slide from Marc Halpern, Gartner

High Level Plan
15
PLM assessment
2014 Q1-Q3
• Gap analysis
previous studies
• Assess
suppliers/systems
• Down select of
suppliers/system
• Define
implementation
plan and RoM
costing
• Presentation to
engineering
management and
MC
• PLM Core team
PLM Scoping
2015 Q1
• Define AS-IS view
of process, toolset,
information models
and interfaces to
other systems
• Detailed
implementation
plan
• Total cost for
implementation
phase
• Schedule with
activities and
dependencies
• PLM Core
team+workshop
s with SME:s
PLM
Implementation
2015-2016
• Scope: Replace
existing PDA/TC
functionality
• Implement best
practise PLM
processes
• Reimplement
Interfaces to
existing systems
• Migrate appropiate
PDA/TC data
• Develop and
conduct training
• Full blown
implementation
project
PLM Phase II
2017->
• Implement
further
capabilities like:
LSAR, MRO,
Systems
Engineering…
• Extended
enterprise PLM
• Wider CM
• Separate impl.
Projects RoI

The Maths
16
1 – Shall requirements fulfilled
2 – Cost 50%
3 – Requirements 50%
Vendor
Checksum 100 100
W1 W2 W3
Pos. Requirements 50
1 Vendor, commercials, licenses... 5 100
1.1 Company specific/culture 50
1.2 Commercial agreement, license model 50
2 Non functional requirements 10 100
2.1 Security 35
2.2 Integration and Technology 30
2.3 Searching and reporting 25
2.4 Printing 10
3 Functional requirements 40 100
3.1 General functional Demands 2
3.2 BOM & Configuration Management 18
3.3 Content and document Management 5
3.4 Compliance 3
3.5 Maintenance Repair Ovehaul 2
3.6 Manufacturing Process Managment 5
3.7 Part classification 8
3.8 Project and portfolio Management 5
3.9 Simulation Management 2
3.10 Visualization 8
3.11 Workflow Management 4
3.12 xCAD 16
3.13 Change management 10
3.14 External/Internal collaboration 5
3.15 Mechatronics process management 2
3.16 Requirements management 5
4 Proposed infrastructure, Technical solution 10 100
4.1 Central infra(server, DB mm) 15
4.2 Technical solutions (instances, segregation etc) 70
4.3 Client HW 15
5 Service, maintenance and support 12
5 Service, maintenance and support 100
6 Training 1
6 Training 100
7 Documentation 2
7 Documentation 100
8 Project 20
8.1 Implementation Model and Process 90
8.2 Scoping phase 0 10
Total cost 50
Total cost 100
Total sum 100

The Result
17
TCO SystemX SystemY ARAS
Impl time More Less Equal
Internal time Equal Equal Equal
Licence cost 1-off More More None
Scoping cost More More Less
Impl cost More Equal Equal
Annual renewal cost Equal More Equal
Upgrade More More None
Ext impl cost BAE More More Less
Total 1-off More More Less
5 year ext cost More More Less

ARAS SWOT
18
Strength
• License Management
• Upgrades
• Technology
• Configurable
• Openess
• Architecture for CAD
Weakness
• Overall OOTB capabilities
• Manufacturing Process Planning
• Local support
• xCAD-integration
• Unclear RFP response
• 3D-support in PDM
Opportunity
• Possibility to consolidate systems
• More capabilites to use for ”free”
• Reports
Threat
• Too much configaration
• No CatiaV6 integration
• Third parties used for CAD
integration
• Risk for M&A:s
• Need more internal resources

Why Aras?
19
• No upfront investment
• Lower Total Cost of Ownership
• ”Good enough” and broad capabilities to support our business
• Strong on configuration management and change management
• Good culture fit
• Open and resilient solution
Differentiator
Support our
complex
business
Support our
long life
cycles

Lessons learned…so far
21
Partners
System
Migration
Business
Change
Deployments
Project plan

Strategic Way Forward
22

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019ConceptDesignCollaboration
Change Management Manufacture Support
Obsolescence
Proposals?
Replace
ReqMgnt?
New Supplier
Portal?
External
change
management?
Process
planning
MBOM?
Replace
CM Portal
Replace
PDA/TC
Replace
TechPubs?
Project/Portfolio
Management?
Replace
LSA tools?
Compliance
IT Cost
Reduction
Business
Optimisation
Revenue
Growth
Replace IPC:s?
Replace
DMS:s?
23

Thank You!
26

Mission Ready PLM

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Mission Ready PLM

More from Aras

Recently uploaded

Mission Ready PLM