Jeff Erno (@ernoj) header
Jeff Erno (@ernoj) profile picture

PLM Expert & Technical Fellow | 30+ years helping engineers stop wasting time on data management | Husband/Father/Athlete

Upstate South Carolina
Joined January 2009
Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)Photo by Jeff Erno (@ernoj)
É a primeira vez que eu vejo uma música eletrônica analógica
1,067
11,794
1,834
78,633
4,117,489
EBOM and MBOM? Most shops have one enterprise mashup. The factory's structure got pushed onto engineering years ago. It's been that way so long people just call it "the EBOM."
1
1
1
165
What the mashup costs you: ➡️ Engineering doing manufacturing's job too ➡️ One change, fixed in every plant's copy ➡️ Factory improvements wait on engineering ➡️ A second plant means restructuring it all again
1
4
The fix isn't picking a winner. Keep an engineering structure that holds intent. Derive the build structure from it. I've heard this called arrangements, level 5s, installations, model list items. What do you call it?
3
Every engineer knows the rework loop. You design it. You release it. Then someone downstream finds out it can't be built the way you designed it.
1
17
Then it checked the real process, saw the tooling couldn't reach one joint, and moved that fastener before anything was released. It caught a collision that normally bites two steps downstream.
1
3
This came up on the "Designing With Intelligence" panel at Ai4. If your designs keep colliding with reality after release, let's talk. youtu.be/OyCaNu3I034?t=2317
16
The BOM said eight fasteners. It can't say where they go.
1
17
So it stays invisible until the floor, where one person finds a wrench that won't fit. Make the 3D the authoritative truth and the problem shows up on a screen, weeks early, while the fix is cheap.
1
2
If your source of truth is a BOM and a stack of drawings, what are you shipping that no one can see until it's built?
2
We train engineers for years. We hand them the best CAD and simulation tools on the market. Then we bury a quarter of their week in non-engineering work. Not because they're slow. Because of how we make them manage data.
1
19
CoLab's research puts it at 23% of engineering time lost to non-value-added work. More than a day a week, every week. That's not a discipline problem. It's an architecture problem.
1
2
I've watched teams claw back most of that day by killing the clone-and-own habit alone. Same team, more engineering, not more hours. Let engineers engineer. How much of your team's week disappears into non-engineering work?
By the time you're in detailed design, most of the performance is already baked in. The big levers moved during the system phase. After that, changes get smaller, harder, and more expensive.
1
1
40
That early work is too important to keep stranded in tools nobody can maintain or connect to anything else. The behavior it captures should feed the rest of the lifecycle, not die in a folder.
1
3
System-level modeling isn't new. Doing it on something modern and connected is. Where does your early performance work live today, and what happens to it after the decision is made?
2