Engineering Change Management System
Lincoln Foodservice Products
Final Project Report
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Course
MSE 7000 Advanced Topics in Engineering Management
By
Duane Lee Yoder
At
Indiana Institute of Technology
Fort Wayne, Indiana
October 12, 2006
Approved:
Technical Advisor: _____________________________ _________
Faculty Name
Date
Dean: ________________________________________ _________
Professor Dave Aschliman
Date
1
Abstract
Lincoln Foodservice Products manufacturers equipment for the commercial foodservice
industry. Their products are in various stages of their product life cycle. The Engineering
Department is located in the same building as the manufacturing. It would seem logical that
communication between departments for product changes would be relatively straightforward.
However, the process of changing products from development through implementation lacks
structure and discipline to be an effective change management system. There are many out of
the box solutions, which give a basic framework but lack the process requirements needed for the
specific organizational structures.
There are two options being considered. Lincoln is implementing the Parametric
Technology Corporation (PTC) PDMlink data management system, which includes a change
management component. They are also implementing a new ERP system from QAD, MFG/Pro,
which has a change management module, Product Change Control (PCC). The project is to
evaluate the alternative solutions, develop the customization workflow, prototype the solution,
test the solution and prepare the implementation plan.
Introduction
Lincoln Foodservice Products for many years had one electronic database for the “as
built BOM”. Engineering drawings were paper format and the BOM on the paper was the “as
designed BOM”. Engineering change implementations often lagged because the disposition of
the change was to “Use Up Stock”. If there was a large inventory, changes could take 6 months
to a year to be seen in the electronic “as built BOM”.
The first CAD system introduced electronic files for the ease of repetitive designs and
faster changes. The change management system was still a paper format and the distribution of
2
paper drawings. The printed electronic file was the controlled document not the electronic file.
Each file was independent and was not associated with others to electronically maintain a BOM.
The database management was a security vault with backup for catastrophic risk management.
Lincoln’s CAD software was a Computervision product called Medusa. PTC purchased
Computervision and worked to transition it’s customers to ProEngineer. Lincoln made the
transition to ProEngineer to design new products. They also purchased Intralink to manage the
drawings and utilize the state-of-the-art database manager for the “as designed BOM”.
An electronic tracking system for Engineering Change Request (ECR) and Engineering
Change Notice (ECN) was developed in-house using a database within the Lotus Notes software
package. It provides the ECR and ECN communication, routing and logging of activities
throughout the company.
A robust engineering change management system is critical during the life of a product.
Design changes can be initiated as a result of manufacturing improvements, quality
improvements, cost improvements, warranty, customer requirements, supply chain issues,
regulatory changes and marketing enhancements to name a few.
The typical engineered product’s life cycle consists of four stages: design, prototype,
production, and obsolete. During the work-in-process phase of the design and prototype stages
changes are relatively informal. However during the production stage a formal process to
control the design changes is critical. Each design change starts with an initiating action or
problem report. The report is evaluated by a change administrator the scope and merit of the
issue before becoming a formal request. Problem reports relating to the same product can be
combined into a single engineering change request. Several change requests can also be
combined into a single change order. PDMLink refers to an engineering change order (ECO)
3
and Mfg/Pro calls the same processes a product change order (PCO). The change order is
prepared and evaluated for its completeness by a manager. The workflow of a change order
should represent only the roles that are required to process the implementation of the change. In
a closed loop system a final audit needs to be conducted documenting the accuracy of the
implementation.
To make each change order follow the same workflow process is not Lean. Only the
steps that add value should be in the workflow. The review and approval process must touch
only the functions that have input. Certain changes to a product do not merit a full and formal
review. A minor change to a hole position or bend-line correction which does not impact form
or function should be processed with the least amount of effort in the system. For this a Fast
Track workflow is required
Literature Review
The engineering change process is not new to the manufacturing industry. In the
industries where change management is critical the process is very well defined. The automotive
industry, aerospace and defense industries have stringent requirements for engineering change
management. Peter Pikosz and Johan Malmqvist conducted a study entitled “A Comparative
Study of Engineering Change Management in Three Swedish Engineering Companies.” In the
case studies they reviewed Volvo Car Corporation, Celcius Tech Electronics a supplier to the
defense industry and FFV Aerotech a supplier of test equipment for the military. Their
conclusion was that company specific factors impacted the Engineering Change process. There
was not one solution that fit the requirements in each company.
In a presentation to the aerospace and defense industry on configuration management and
engineering change management, Donald N Frank addressed company structures and multiple
4
locations of data management. Engineering and manufacturing are in a constant struggle over
the bill of material (BOM) as to which has the correct one. Design Engineering maintains the
“as designed BOM” where as Manufacturing maintains the “as planned BOM” or “as built
BOM”. When an engineering change is processed the effectivity and timing of the change may
not be realized across the multiple BOMs. Mfg/Pro refers to the BOMs as Product Structures.
The Product Structure history and changes are maintained within the database according to the
effectivity dates of the implementation of the changes at any given time.
CAD and ERP software providers such as Unigraphics (UG), Parametric Technologies
Corporation (PTC), SAP, Telelogic, TDCI, Altera Corporation and Microsoft provide
engineering change management solutions. The installation guides and white papers that are
published give the companies an opportunity to look at their internal processes and customize the
software to meet their specific environment. Clearly the CAD providers cater to the engineers
where the ERP providers make solutions suitable for the business operations.
The current focus of each of these companies is to develop ways to track and monitor a
product’s lifecycle. They offer communication and workflow models to streamline the process.
The software tools create dashboards, reports, charts and graphs to assist the management in
keeping product changes in focus and timely.
Many engineering companies have transitioned from a paper based drawing format to
electronic CAD systems. The technology for the change process has also made the transition
from paper to electronic. Routing a paper form for signatures transitioned to emailing files and
electronically distributing the documentation with electronic signatures.
5
Methodology
An in-depth study of the development and user guides for both systems identifies the
strengths and weaknesses of each system. The user guide becomes a framework of how the user
will interface with the system. The developers guide gives an understanding of the
customization that is possible.
PDMLink provides several workflow templates for the ECO process. A problem report,
Engineeirng Change Request and Engineering Change Notice link the engineering files which
are affected. The engineers can access the change process through their CAD sessions upon
notification of the change and be linked directly to the part file to minimize the time required to
search for the documentation.
MFG/Pro PCC provides the Manufacturing and Operations with the functionality on the
business side to address the workflow, costs and effectivity dates for the implementation and
materials planning. The engineers would initiate the change electronically in text format but
would have no linkage to the electronic “as designed BOM”.
The preferred solution is to operate with one database for the entire company. However,
this solution is not possible in the current environment. The best alternative is to maximize the
benefit of both systems for their individual strengths.
Presently there is no direct interface of the two databases to eliminate human intervention
to transfer the data. The best alternative is to extract data from PDMLink in a file structure to be
imported into the Mfg/Pro PCC module. With minimal effort a production planner can
incorporate and implement the change into the Mfg/Pro ERP system. A PDMLink programmer
will be required to write the required code to construct the file structure and output the data.
6
Since the current CAD Administrator is also a PDMLink programmer this task can be performed
in-house.
The workflow for PDMLink is illustrated in the following chart.
Change Administrator I
Problem Reports
Analyze
Problem
reports
Create ECR
Analyze
ECR
Full Track
Fast Trak
PDMLink
Stored CAD
Data
Change
Review Board
Create ECN
Mfg/Pro
Stored Data
Create ECN
Change Administrator II
Incorporate
Implement
ECN
Review
Imp
Plan
Released
Import
Data in
PCC
Change Imp Board
Prepare
Data
Extraction
ECN
Audit
Implement
Changes
Change Administrator II
7
The cost and equipment for this project are not a matter of consideration since both are
modules contained within the purchased systems. Consultation costs to implement either system
are also part of the total package implementation. The timeline for the project implementation is
illustrated below. The implementation path exceeds the allocation of time for completion of this
project.
Application
The ECO system in PDMLink is roles based. By naming individuals according to their
role in the Value Stream the ECO process workflow is consistent for each product. The Change
Administrators are manager roles that are capable of making decisions regarding the ECO path
and analysis of the change impact. The Change Review Board and the Change Implementation
8
Board are cross-functional teams that are responsible for the business decision for the change.
These boards meet either face-to-face or virtual and respond accordingly to the ECO impact to
their respective disciplines.
Since all notification of the system is email based and the application is web-based
participants outside of the company can be included. Major customers of Lincoln have requested
notification of any changes that are being considered or made to the products that they have
specified. This system will restrict access by the customer to only the data that is relevant to the
products they purchase.
Results
The decision to utilize both PCC and PDMLink as a solution was not considered at the
beginning of the project. It was believed that either one or the other would be the solution. In
reality neither system alone would meet the expectations since there are two separate databases
involved. The resulting solution is a workflow with the minimal effort for the user to process the
ECO in each database.
PTC and QAD do not currently have a combined solution for transferal of data. PTC has
solutions that directly interface with other ERP systems such as SAP. There was discussion
earlier with PTC regarding an enterprise interface that was possible in the future but not
available at the present time. It would certainly be a consideration in the future to implement this
module when it becomes available and would eliminate the manual step to import data to
Mfg/Pro.
Conclusions and Recommendations
This project was to develop an ECO process for Lincoln Foodservice Products that would
meet the current needs for a flexible yet robust system. The ECO process must meet the needs of
9
the Value Streams that manage the different product lines. It is required to be closed-loop to
assure compliance with ISO9001 requirements for a change management system. All of these
conditions are met with the proposed system.
The implementation of the new system and the measurement of its effectiveness needs to
be assessed after cut-over. The ECO does not only impact an engineering document change but
also the Finance, Production, Planning, Purchasing, Sales and Service Departments. The
lifecycle of an ECO must be short in order to be responsive to customer and regulatory agency
requirements. The integration of the ECO process with the PDM software provides the solution
that maximizes the effectiveness and minimizes the effort. Any improvements that will reduce
the time of deployment and implementation will benefit the effectiveness of this Engineering
Change Management process.
10
References
“Collaboratively Implementing Product Lifecycle Engineering Changes Using the Microsoft
Office System”. Microsoft. 18 September 2006.
<http://www8.sap.com/businessmaps/D0A45D785990457D990738D4CC4FD4C6.htm>.
“Configuration Management in Aerospace and Defense”. Donald N. Frank, 2003. 4 October
2006. <http://www.johnstark.com/CM.ppt>.
“Connecting PLM to ERP and other Enterprise Systems with Windchill ESI”.2004. PTC. 3
October 2006. <http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/30442/en/30442en_file1.pdf>.
Crow, Kenneth. “Product Data Management Implementation”. DRM Associates. 17 September
2006. <http://www.npd-solutions.com/pdmimpl.html>.
--- “Configuration Management and Engineering Change Control”. 2002. DRM Associates. 17
September 2006 <http://www.npd-solutions.com/configmgt.html>.
--- “Product Data Management/ Product Information Management”. 2002. DRM Associates. 17
September 2006. <http://www.npd-solutions.com/pdm.html>.
“Engineering Change Management”. Microsoft Dynamics GP. 2005. Microsoft Corporation. 16
September 2006. <http://download.microsoft.com/download/a/2/a/a2a1cde9-c4c4-426ea406-f18086a3d22b/GP_MfgEngChngMgmt.pdf>.
“Engineering Change Management”.SAP. 4 October 2006.
<http://www8.sap.com/businessmaps/D0A45D785990457D990738D4CC4FD4C6.htm>.
“Engineering Change Management”. Quartus II Handbook Volume 1: Design & Synthesis, ver
6.0, May 2006. Altera Corporation. 17 September 2006.
<http://www.altera.com/literature/hb/qts/qts_qii51005.pdf>.
11
“Guidelines for Evaluating an Enterprise Change and Configuration Management System”. Ver
1.4. 2006. Telelogic. 6 October 2006. <http://www.tdci.com/macpac/MACPAC_XE/pcm_desc.htm>.
MFG/PRO eB2 User Guide – Master Data. QAD. 2005
Pikosz, Peter, and Johan Malmqvist. A Comparative Study of Engineering Change Management
in Three Swedish Engineering Companies. Machine and Vehicle Design Chalmers
University of Technology. Götenborg, Sweden. 1997.
<http://www.johnstark.com/ec008.pdf>.
“Product Change Manager (PCM)”. TDCI. 4 October 2006.
<http://www.tdci.com/macpac/MAC-PAC_XE/pcm_desc.htm>.
“Radically Accelerating Change Management”. 2004. PTC. 4 October 2006.
<http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/30438/en/30438en_file1.pdf>.
“The Proven Path to Delivering an Improved Change Management Process”. Change
Management Deployment. 2004. PTC. 5 October 2006.
<http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/30442/en/30442en_file1.pdf>.
“Understanding the CMII Change Process”. PTC. 24 September 2006.
<http://www.ptc.com/community/windchill/8/tutorials/codebase/wt/helpfiles/help_en/tutorial
s/pdm/R7PDMChProc/index.htm>.
Windchill Business Administrators Guide. Windchill 8.0. 2006. PTC.
Windchill PDMLink Users Guide. Windchill 8.0. 2006. PTC.
12