On an ECAD vendor’s web site recently I read a statement: library flaws leading to design issues are “notorious.” The concept of notoriety isn’t usually associated with electrical platform wiring systems designs. I think the use was more marketing license rather than poetic license.
Outrageous oatmeal cookies and notorious library problems
Language is elastic, metaphors stretch only so far. I think “frequent” is sufficient rather than “notorious” to describe the bad effects of having an inaccurate or incomplete library of component definitions and symbols. There is no doubt Mentor Graphics Integrated Electrical Systems Division’s customers take on an important responsibility to keep up a store of data about electrical interconnect componentry. Customers embrace making that data accurate and complete and Mentor, as partner helps them succeed. The goal of building a library is to make data which has practicality and is relevant as underpinning for efficiencies & process automation. Capital and VeSys have algorithms which choose terminals, seals plugs and additional connector system parts suited to the wires terminated therein. Using these features yields a considerable benefit in saved engineering time performing the selections, and validating the results.
Getting the library right is important. It is also paramount, key, strategic, significant and highly significant. Hopefully I made that clear enough. It is tempting to believe you have the quality you want, buying in a data set or using an outside service.
In- or outsource or shake-it-all-about-source.
Somebody, somewhere, somehow needs to do some work. In any return for investment an investment must be made. So with library, do you decide to buy it as a service, or do you invest by building it for yourself?
Outsourcing creating the library definitions for an initial build may initially seem as straightforward as purchasing some data from an independent vendor. Or better yet – getting it for free.
Ok. Let’s start with a brief analysis of what that data may consist of. A part, let’s consider a connector, may have a part number. Correct. Well, actually sometimes more than one part number – a reference for internal use, then perhaps two internal part numbers referring to the same item. And then customer part references for the same thing – if you are a systems supplier to an OEM, or for the OEM just a 1:1 relationship between your part number and maybe another class of reference, the supplier part number, or part numbers sometimes – because there are different vendors for the same item – or the manufacturer declared different part numbers for different variations of the orderable item.
Have I confused you? Sorry. The point is that electrical components are deceptively simple. And we will not touch at all in the following about whether any symbols are the right scale, appearance, have an insertion point where you like it to be, and hold the right properties for your drawing(s) standard(s). Perhaps another time I will describe the many variations in design and manufacturing drawing symbologies.
Next comes a couple of graphics to give a high level view of information which may be modeled for a connector system. The first graphic shows the basic pattern of library facts which is included in a design and manufacturing analysis – e.g. a BOM report.
Typical information held for electrical connection systems.
The second diagram – a taller one – is a drill-down into the facts in detail and expresses somewhat more explicitly the interrelationships. It is a representation made to explain generally. There could be still more boxes tacked on if I were to expose the entire Capital Library data model.
Underlying facts and interrelationship for connectors partly visualized
An innocent bystanders’ point of view is that a library for Capital or VeSys is just some connector housings and wires. Once you are responsible for delivering 100% quality for a few thousand assembled harness parts or more such naivety is a distant memory. Where library responsibility has been outsourced to a service, a bureau for data entry or trusted in part to a software vendor’s “off-the-shelf” store of symbols and definitions you want to do this with confidence.
Octet for outsourced control of component library.
If you see a library of components with the purchase of a new software module you may wish it is production ready. This wish will be unlikely to be wholly true.
Test before you trust by answering the following 8 questions:
When you answer these – just summarize quickly one, two or three stars depending on whether you have a good, better or best appreciation of how you have mitigated the risk. No stars means you know you are in trouble on an item – 3 stars means it is comfortably under control.
- Metrics: Can you acceptably track or report on or quantify the items being delivered and services? Are the measurements straightforward, relevant to you?
- Flexibility: Do you have a way of correcting or re-working data – is there flexibility in the service so that you can redirect attention and resources when the project is already underway?
- Validity: Do you have a way of knowing or testing the quality of what is transferred or delivered to you by the outsourcer? How is the provider accountable for poor quality?
- Fitness for purpose: Can you with certainty know you have understood and verified how the library data will be integrated successfully at every step of your design workflow?
- Reputation and experience: Is the data or service already proved to be useful in similar working environments by comparable organizations. Have you seen references or success stories? Do your partners know the difference between a device and a connector, a terminal seal and a connector seal (have domain knowledge).
- Coverage: Is the data offered a superset of what you need, and you must live with ignore/purge/pare down or mask off the extra and are you okay with that?
- Follow-up: Is the data offered or being constructed for you a sub-set of what you need and do you understand what you must do to supplement those definitions to attain a production-ready state?
- Commercial sensitivity and privacy: Where your data is authored and augmented outside of your company to your needs, is that data private to your use only? Can it be distributed by the people to whom you will outsource the component relationships and attributes management work? What prevents that information getting to competitors and do you care if it does?
Insights from these answers convert to manageable otherwise uncontrollable problems. If you can’t get 15 stars of reassurance out of answering these questions, you definitely should add more effort to eliminate future risks. Whatever you are paying for your library building services – less than 20 stars out of 24 means you may be wasting time and resource.
Quartet for quality of in-house librarian activity.
If you manage your parts library in-house, then give honest answers to only the questions above numbers 1-4 . You will have a good idea of your efficiency and the business risk your design teams are getting into. The latter four questions are taken care of by having responsible employees under your corporate structure.
Oh – I nearly forgot – the “outrageous” oatmeal raisin cookie is sold at one of the USA’s more ubiquitous coffee retailing giants. As one buys a coffee to the invitation “would you like anything else with that?” one replies: “was considering your oatmeal raisin cookie, however having endured notoriety because of ECAD library issues, I simply cannot countenance outrage.”
Does Mentor Graphics provide an ECAD data set with Capital and VeSys?
Here’s the current best thinking. Mentor provides a starter data set, suitable for evaluation and training purposes.
There is a tremendous variation in Mentor’s substantial customer base in requirements for symbols, attributes, properties at different stages of design through to manufacturing. Part numbering protocols for components can proliferate too. Moreover there is often a need to transfer inward some legacy data sets mapping them to the newer, better model. You may be obliged also to adjust the definitions to accommodate OEM, customer, region, departments and enterprise information interchange along the way. And most organizations through approval/release controls seek to preserve the fidelity of the electrical component definitions.
In lots of circumstances it is simply impractical to think of an “off-the-shelf” data set slotting immediately in to production use.
Automotive assembly line workers 100 years ago did not care so much about electrical interconnect components
If you are working for an OEM, a set released in Capital’s format from your customer is the best start. Or, as a vendor sending to your OEM an upload from Capital of your library as you want it to impact their design work is also an good thing to do to start harmoniously. Mentor Graphics provides consulting, support and training which will get you on your way at all speed. Take full advantage of that offer of experience, because the benefits of conscientiously making a reputable library accrue over many years to come.
The goat has no opinion on the matter. However I think because Capital Library is so important you should retain responsibility for it in-house; except in specific projects you can package for tightly managed outsourcing.
Outsourced services for your library is something which should be carefully scrutinized before you make the leap into actually doing it. There are some good partners out there for you. Mentor Graphics’ Consulting Division and re-sellers organizations affiliated to Mentor offer professional services help with library projects.