Product Lifecycle Exhaust

April 25, 2013

Do you think Big Data and noSQL are the last and coolest trend in data world? No way. Software architects and geeks are sleepless to find new and unknown trends and opportunities. Last week I attended COFES 2013 in sunny Arizona. The following buzzword caught my attention during one of the presentations. Here is a new buzzword – Data Exchaust.

I tried to find a better definition of what this term means. There is no consolidate view about that. The I found the best explanation about what is Data Exhaust on IT Law Wiki. Navigate your browser here. It provides four different definitions. The following one resonated the most with my way to think about data exhaust:

The "aggregation of [consumer] data through the digitization of processes and activities" in the commercial sector which generates metadata supporting corporate profit generation.

Here is a picture I captured during COFES 2013 presentation. It shows the idea of data exposed out as a result of mobile device usage.

Data exhaust is tightly connected to some notions of big data. Another interesting article I captured was a publication from O’Reily Strata website. Navigate to the following link to read the article – Tertiary data: Big data’s hidden layer. The article is worth reading. We are producing lots of data these days and this data can be very valuable. Unfortunately, we are far behind in our ability to capture the data we are producing and getting a value of this. Here is an interesting passage:

Back in the days of floppy disks, the lines of ownership were pretty clear. If you had the disk, the data was yours. If someone else had it, it was theirs. Things these days are much blurrier. That tertiary data — data that’s generated about us but not by us — doesn’t just build up on your mobile devices of course. Other people are building datasets about our patterns of movement, buying decisions, credit worthiness and other things. The ability to compile these sorts of datasets left the realm of major governments with the invention of the computer. We’re all aware of this, and there’s even a provocative buzzword to describe it: data exhaust. It’s the data we leave behind us, rather than carry with us.

I captured the following picture from the same article. It shows a visualization of iPhone location tracker.

Data exhaust conversation made me think about Product Lifecycle Exhaust. In everything PLM does today, we are very focused on how we create data during the engineering and manufacturing stage. PLM products provide little to none attention to the information products produce during their lifecycle. The situation is better for long lifecycle articles like airplane and nuclear submarines. But this is where PLM attention to lifecycle information ends.

What is my conclusion? Cost and quality are two top priorities of every manufacturers. In my view, data exhaust can be an interesting source of information about how to improve quality and reduce cost. We can learn about usage experience of our products, we can discover what features are not used by customers and we can learn how to optimize products in order to serve our customers in a better way. Just my thoughts. Do you see it the same way? Speak up. I want to know your opinion. If it resonates, come with examples, please.

Best, Oleg


PLM and Product Data Insight

February 8, 2013

Data is a trending topic these days. Big Data is even fascinating. It made me think about the meaning of power. In the past, oil was a meaning for power. These days it applies to data. Social data, corporate data, any data. To have the ability to dig into the data, discover facts, relationships and make decisions spins minds of companies, technologists and investors. All I mentioned above applies to manufacturing companies and the data that these companies holds on their servers, data centers and desktop computers.

I’ve been reading WIRED article Data-Visualization Firm’s New Software Autonomously Finds Abstract Connections. I wonder… is it a data analysis revolution or another "fancy graphic" of big data? Aysdi – the company behind the article and video is promising you to discover the data and connections you don’t know. Here is a brief description of what system is doing, including some tech ideas

Their new product is called the Iris Insight Discovery platform. It’s a type of machine learning that uses hundreds of algorithms and topological data analysis to mine huge datasets before presenting the results in a visually accessible way. Using algebraic topology, the system automatically hunts down data points close in nature and maps these out to reveal a network of patterns for a researcher to decipher — any closely related nodes of information will be connected and clustered together, like how a social network arranges its data according to relationship connections.

If you don’t have time to read the article, watch the video below. It will give you the idea of what is that about.

It is interesting that Aysdi is coming with some background of manufacturing from DARPA. For the moment, system provide some result in medicine. I wonder if data in manufacturing companies containing product, supply chain and many other aspects can be targeted using this tech.

What is my conclusion? Manufacturing companies are under stress about making an improvement in their decision management process. Decisions are complicated and can be driven by many factors. Product data insight. It can be interesting way to learn what impact product cost, supply chain, manufacturing processes and many other things. It might sounds like a magic. However, many of today’s technologies could potentially considered as a magic 10 years ago. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


Will PLM follow a custom hardware path?

October 10, 2012

I want to talk about hardware today. You probably surprised, but I hope not so much. During the last 10-15 years, the majority of works PDM/PLM systems were doing were focused on the commodity low end x-86 servers. There is nothing wrong with that. Nevertheless, I can see some new trends coming in this space. It comes with web development, large data scale, mobile, data analytic and more. I can clearly see two patterns in how vendors are using hardware. One of them is an attempt to build proprietary data centers from commodity level servers (eg. Google, etc.). Another one is to focus on how to delivery solutions bundled with specific highly profiled hardware platforms (IBM Pure Data, Oracle Exadata, Cisco, etc.). Data centers are an ideal place for such type of boxes.

I’ve been reading GigaOM article earlier today – Does Big Data really need custom hardware? The article itself is not about PLM. At the same time, it made me think about some examples author is using. Think about large computational tasks related to designing, rendering, simulation, data analyses or just check-out for a very sizeable assembly for a configured order. All these use cases requires data on scale. To get this information you need to have a very efficient data backend with a significant ability to scale in different dimensions. Here is an interesting passage from the article:

Where the generic server market has been commodified with low-end x86 servers companies like Teradata and EMC are doing their best to hold onto their hardware margins with specially designed systems. And it looks like IBM and Cisco have decided this is an opportunity not to be missed, and are taking it further. Cisco has released a unified computing system specifically designed to run SAP’s HANA database. Oracle is also heading down this path.

The question author is asking is actually a good one. Do we need high-scale performance data boxes or we can leave with the data centers built on top of commodity hardware? Here is another quote:

Instead of these two boxes representing a new hardware for big data these really represent that capitulation by the major hardware vendors to a services model. Technically these boxes may have different chips when compared with commodity servers, but what these guys are actually selling is the plug and play aspect. Sure a customer can buy cheaper boxes and download a Hadoop or other open source software (or pay a licensing fee and have someone like Cloudera manage it for them) but they want something that works with little or no effort.

So, what happens with CAD/PDM/PLM vendors? The expectations of companies are moving beyond simple engineering document management, checkin/checkout process, towards data analytics, social software and more heavy data oriented tasks. I can hear voices of "big data" discussions. However, there are not much clarity in these discussions yet. Vendors are going to re-think many data-driven paradigms. What path vendors will follow? Some vendors will follow cloud data centers and commodity hardware. Another group (eg. SAP HANA) is planning to develop proprietary server boxes.

What is my conclusion? The awareness about data driven backend systems is growing in manufacturing and other enterprise companies. In my opinion, PLM vendors are not there yet. To deliver scalable, performance oriented back-end is nontrivial task and this task can allow PLM software to scale. Cloud PLM opens new untapped classes of applications that we have never seen before. What path PLM vendors will take? Will PLM follow some of the paths alongside custom hardware, continue to use standard hardware and database software or move to open source to develop separate bundles – time will show? What is your opinion?

Best, Oleg


Cloud PLM and Data Liberation

September 24, 2012

The issues of data, data lock-in, interoperability usually drives lots of debates and discussions. Started early from support and conversions of CAD data formats, interoperability continued to be complicated topic for PDM and PLM systems. Companies are still investing lots of money and effort in converting and translation of data. Introduction of SaaS and cloud platforms injected new waves of discussions – what happens with our data on the cloud. What if cloud software vendors lock my data, and I will not be able to get it out? What if a cloud vendor goes out of business, and data disappears. These are all very important questions.

To look for answers I suggest to go and learn from companies that were pioneering cloud applications. Google is certainly one of them. Are you familiar with data liberation front? You probably should. Especially, if you are thinking about cloud and cloud PLM. Navigate your browser to this link to learn more. According to Wikipedia:

Google’s Data Liberation Front is an engineering team at Google whose "goal is to make it easier for users to move their data in and out of Google products."[1] The team, which consults with other engineering teams within Google on how to "liberate" Google products, currently supports 27 products.[2] The purpose of the Data Liberation Front is to ensure that data can be migrated from Google once an individual or company stops using their services.[3]

The key product in Google’s data liberation is Google Takeout, which helps you to escape from any Google apps and take your data out. Google Takeout products available for variety of Google Apps – Docs, Google Profile, Picasa and others.

Another interesting example. Navigate to the following article – You Might Be Able To Download All Your Tweets By End Of The Year. In my view, this is another example of data liberation. Here is the passage:

Users might able to download all of their past tweets by the end of the year, according to reports from those attending Twitter CEO Dick Costolo’s talk at the Online News Association conference. In response to Emily Bell, Director of Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia’s Journalism School, Costolo said he would like to see the feature “Before the end of the year,” given their engineers’ capacity. In other words, being able to download your tweets is now a priority. Update: Twitter has confirmed to TechCrunch’s report of Costolo’s talk.

What is my conclusion? Do you have your data in Google account? I’m sure, you do. Did you try to backup and/or escape from your Google cloud? Honestly, I checked how I can do it. But I never wanted. Data is accessible and stored conveniently. In my view, data liberation is a good example of how cloud software vendors need to provide for their customers the way to escape from cloud services. I believe cloud providers will open a way in liberating data by making it accessing in many easy ways. Combined with the ability to escape from these platforms, it will provide a new paradigm of openness in the industry. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


What is the right data model for PLM?

August 17, 2012

I think the agreement about importance of the data model among all implementers of PDM / PLM is almost absolute. Data drives everything PDM / PLM system is doing. Therefore, to define the data model is the first step in many implementations. It sounds as something simple. However, there is implied complexity. In most cases, you will be limited by the data model capabilities of PLM system you have. This is a time, I want to take you back in history.

Spreadsheet Data Model

Historically, it became the most commonly used data model. And the reason is not only because Excel is available to everybody. In my view, it happened also, because tables (aka spreadsheets) is a simple way to think about your data. You can think about table of drawings, parts, ECOs. Since almost everything in engineering starts from Bill of Material, to think about BOM table is also very simple. The key reason why in many cases spreadsheet model became so wide-accepted are simplicity and absolute flexibility. Engineers love flexibility, and this data model became widely popular.

Relational Data Model

This data model was developed by Edgar Codd back more than 50 years ago. Database software runs on top of this model, and we got what known today as RDBMS. Until second half of the last decade, it was the solution all PDM /PLM developers were relying. First PDM systems were developed based on RDBMS. However, they had low flexibility. Because of rigorous rules of this model, making changes was considered as not a simple task. One of the innovations of late 1990s was to develop a flexible data model as an abstraction on top of RDBS. Almost all PDM/PLM systems in production today are using object abstractions developed on top of the relational data model.

The challenges of Spreadsheets and Relational Databases

Despite these technologies are proven and used by many mainstream applications, it is far from perfection. One of the product development demands is flexibility. Spreadsheet model can deliver that, but gets very costly within the time. Relational data model can combine flexibility and support manageability of data. However, it becomes to make a change in these models is costly. Identification, openness and expandability is problematic in relational data models opposite to some other web-based solutions.

Future data models – NoSQL, RDF, etc.

Thinking about what comes in the future, I want to spell to buzzwords – NoSQL and Semantic Web. I can see a growing amount of solutions trying to adopt a variety of new data platforms. NoSQL comes to the place as an alternative solution to Relational Database. If this is a first time you’re hearing this buzzword, navigate to the following Wikipedia link. NoSQL is not all the same. It combined the whole group of solutions such a key-value stores, object databases, graph databases, triple store. Semantic web is collaborative movement led by W3C. The collection of Semantic Web technologies (RDF, OWL, SKOS, SPARQL, etc.) provides an environment where application can query that data, draw inferences using vocabularies, etc. Part of these standards something called Linked Data – a collection of data set in open formats (RDF) that shared on the web.

What is my conclusion? Many of the technologies used by PLM companies these days are outdated and came from the past 20-25 years. There is nothing wrong in these technologies. They are proven and successfully used for many applications. However, in order to achieve the next level of efficiency and embrace future of PLM, new horizons need to be explored. Data flexibility, openness and interoperability – these elements are absolutely important in the future of PLM. Options to use future data models coming from past 10 years of web experience need to be explored. Important. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net


PLM, Semantics Technology and Data Federation

June 8, 2012

I’m in a deep technological mood these days. As you probably noticed, I’m attending Semantic Technology & Business conferencein beautiful, but cold San Francisco. SemTech 2012 covers an interesting technological space that covers a variety of topics related to data, data management, big data, semantics, linked data and semantic web. So, the environment of the conference and some presentations made me think about some modern trends in data management related to data federation. It probably goes a bit beyond the technological level of this blog, but I found it interesting and insightful.

Distributed Data Architecture

Our world is getting more and more distributed. The time when you was able to concentrate the data in a single computer and/or databases almost became a history. We are moving towards something bigger that can scale to the level of web. The following two examples show a potential role of semantic technologies in support of federated data environment:

Andrew Sunderland of Spry Inc presented enterprise data management options. Here is the interesting quote explaining his presentation:

Companies are looking for methods to quickly expose data sources for federated data access, while at the same time developing a robust, executable enterprise ontology. Data profiling tools can be leveraged to profile data sources and bootstrap ontologies and mappings. This talk will showcase how Spry is leveraging these tools to quickly expose data sources, while in developing an enterprise ontology

Another example is coming from FluidOpsTransformation of Enterprise Data Islands into Linked and Living Knowledge. Information Workbench environment coming from FluidOps. The discussion focus was on the transformation of enterprise data islands into linked and living knowledge and elaborates on the costs and benefits of managing information in a unified semantic space.

The following picture shows Information Workbench architecture and the role of semantic technologies to achieve the role of data unification.

Data Federation and Asymmetric Computing

I had a chance to attend the presentation of Bryan Thompson of Systap discussing the bigdata® architecture. His presentation was focused on the computing side of distributed data environment and federation. The following slide presents the role of RDF and graph as a unified model for heterogeneous data sources.

How is that related to PLM?

Now, you can ask me- how it is related to PDM and Engineering and Manufacturing world. Here is my take. IT infrastructure of manufacturing companies is extremely complicated these days. It includes existing data management and enterprise systems, content and document management vaults, unmanaged files and other data sources. Nowadays, cloud and web are coming as an additional data places companies target for data. The overall environment is global and distributed. Existing PLM systems are striving towards centralization of data into a singe data. The single database architecture might be not sufficient, cost of data transition might be too high, cloud and globalization is another dimension of complexity. Distributed and federated data management capable to scale to the level of web – logically and physically can be an interesting platform option to discover.

What is my conclusion? The history gave us many examples when large companies missed new technological trends, and it cost them to lose their leadership position. At the same time, we can see how web companies built their infrastructure and disrupted many existing domains. What will be the technological foundation that can support challenges manufacturing and engineering companies are facing today? What will be the role of semantic data technologies in the future of these systems is a right question to ask these days.

Best, Oleg


PLM and Selling Data

February 10, 2012

Manufacturing companies aggregating a lot of data these days. Data is coming from many places. For many years, product development, manufacturing and supply chain was major sources of data in companies. Nowadays, data is coming from outside of a company. Internet, social network and communication created new source of information. The intersection of data from inside of a company and outside data is a very interesting place. I’ve been reading Forester blog – Mo’ data mo’ problems few days ago written by Clarence Villanueva. The publication discusses a potential value of data created during marketing campaigns. Here is a quote:

…a client was looking to have a marketing company take its point-of-sale (POS) data to prepare email campaigns. Upon closer review of the contracts, data ownership was ambiguously defined and nested in three separate areas: the Master Services Agreement (MSA), SOW, and an addendum. When you trace the definition through the various documents, the only thing made clear on data ownership was that the campaigns resulting from the ETL (extract, transform, load) process were owned by the client. What about the POS data that was sent over to the marketing services company?

This example made me think about multiple cases when manufacturing companies as well as outside companies such as suppliers, service providers and many other entities can create an interesting value from the combination of the data owned by them – product information, sales information, contracts, customer data, etc. Imagine PLM software will be able to combine these pieces of data into valuable assets.

What is my conclusion? I think PLM has an opportunity to convert data into valuable assets. I can see more companies adopting PLM these days. Cloud PLM will provide an additional opportunity to connect data coming from multiple sources – supply chain, subcontractors and customers. Sounds like an important topic and cool opportunity. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


PLM, RDBMS and Future Data Management Challenges

January 5, 2012

It is not unusual to hear about problems with PLM systems. It is costly, complicated, hard to implement and non-intuitive. However, I want to raise a voice and speak about data management (yes, data management). Most of PDM/PLM software is running on top of data-management technologies developed and invented 30-40 years ago. The RDBM history is going back to the invention made by Edgar Codd at IBM back in 1970.

I was reading Design News article – Top automotive trends to watch in 2012. Have a read and make your opinion. One of trends was about growing complexity of electrical control units. Here is the quote:

As consumers demand more features and engineers comply, automakers face a dilemma: The number of electronic control units is reaching the point of unmanageability. Vehicles now employ 35 to 80 microcontrollers and 45 to 70 pounds of onboard wiring. And there’s more on the horizon as cameras, vision sensors, radar systems, lanekeeping, and collision avoidance systems creep into the vehicle.

It made me think about potential alternatives. Even if I cannot see any technology these days that can compete on the level of cost, maturity and availability with RDBMS, in my view, now it is a right time to think about future challenges and possible options.

Key-Value Store

These types of stores became popular over the past few years. Navigate to the following article by Read Write Enterprise -Is the Relational Database Doomed? Have a read. The article (even if it a bit dated) provides a good review of key-value stores as a technological alternative to RDBMS. It obviously includes pros and cons. One of the biggest "pro" to use key-value store is scalability. Obvious bad is an absence of a good integrity control.

NoSQL (Graph databases)

Another interesting example of RDBMS alternative is so-called noSQL databases. The definition and classification of noSQL databases is not stable. Before jumping into noSQL bandwagon, analyze the potential impact of immaturity, complexity and absence of standards. However, over the last 1-2 year, I can see a growing interest into this type of technology. Neo4j is a good example you can experiment with in case you are interested.

Semantic Web

Semantic web (or web of data) is not a database technology. Opposite to RDBMS, Key-value stores and graph databases, semantic web is more about how to provide a logical and scalable way to represent data (I wanted to say in "semantic way", but understand the potential of tautology :) ). Semantic web relies on a set of W3C standard and combines set of specification describing ways to represent and model data such as RDF and OWL. You can read more by navigating to the following link.

What is my conclusion? I think, the weak point of existing RDBMS technologies in the context of PLM is a growing complexity of data – both from structural and unstructured aspects. The amount of data will raise lots of questions in front of enterprise IT in manufacturing companies and PLM vendors. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


PLM: Controversy About Process vs. Data Management

November 16, 2011

Process vs. Data. I think, this topic not requires a special introduction. In my view, every PLM implementation is facing this discussion and requires to take a decision about how to proceed. Few conversations with customers during DSCC 2011 last week and some articles I read on the long flight from Boston to Europe during the weekend made me think again about this process vs. data controversy, and I wanted to share my thoughts with you.

I was reading Capgemini blog post Business process management and mastering data in enterprise by Nicholas Kitson. Nicholas is talking about interesting aspects in failure of Business Process Management (BPM) implementations he experienced with customers. In the beginning of the artcicle, Nicholas quoting Gartner analyst Michael Blechar: “A failure to address service-oriented data redesign at the same time as process redesign is a recipe for disaster.”

I found this notion of “recipe for disaster” as something very important. In people’s mind, PLM system was a recipe for disaster. Even today, after the value of PLM was confirmed by many organizations and implementations, lots of people are still questioning about how to approach PLM in a right way. To continue with Capgemini article, I found the following passage very interesting:

While BPM tools have the infrastructure to do hold a data model and integrate to multiple core systems, the process of mastering the data can become complex and, as the program expands across ever more systems, the challenges can become unmanageable. In my view, BPMS solutions with a few exceptions are not the right place to be managing core data[i]. At the enterprise level MDM solutions are for more elegant solutions designed specifically for this purpose.

I found an interesting connection between this statement, and the presentation made by Bell Helicopter during Dassault Customer Conference last week in Las Vegas. Bell Helicopter embarked on the journey to implement Dassault newest V6 platform, and I was impressed by the presentation they made. You can see the following slide introduced one of the biggest problems in Bell’s organization back in 2005 was a significant need to modernize processes in the organization. They found that processes are too fragmented, and 467 legacy systems create a significant data and enterprise complexity.

The critical strategic decision made by Bell was to make PLM implementation first. Part of this strategy was so-called “get the core [product] data right first”.

PLM – Focus on Process

Since the industry focus move from PDM to PLM over the past 5-10 years, the question about what is the focus of PLM implementation emerged as something important. Until that time, most of the companies understood the value of PDM. Even despite PDM implementation complexity, the value of having the ability to vault CAD data and manage changes was mostly not disputable.

At the same time, I cannot say the same about management of product development processes. Let’s take Item / BOM and Change Management. Many PLM systems were “pushed” to manage BOM and Changes. However, in practice, it creates many problems. Bill of Material data (especially if you think not only about BOM from your CAD drawing) normally spread out multiple systems- PDM/PLM, ERP, Supply Chain Management. ECO is a process which clearly crossing multiple departments and data islands in an organization.

So, PLM system was pushed to be “focusing on processes”, and this push was very problematic. Sales and marketing were focused on promoting of the values of PLM to the companies. In practice, many organizations faced significant level of complexities to have, for example, change management process implementation across the entire organization. Why so?

PLM: How to streamline the data access

In my view, every manufacturing organization experiences a complexity of data. Data is overwhelmed. According to some industry researches, the amount of data volumes in organizations will be growing x44 times for the next 10 years. The question of managing data is long time in the spot of all PLM implementations. Very often, this question presented as “who owns part, BOM, etc.?”. The same question, but asked in a more intelligent way can sound like “who is mastering Part, BOM, etc. information”. The hidden question, I hear is the need to streamline data access related to these processes. This is a vital part of every PLM implementation.

The latest trend in this space is “unification”. PLM vendors are trying to push everybody to so-called “unified PLM platform” that will consolidate all data in a single place. For PLM vendors like Dassault, PTC, Siemens, it was “all except ERP”. For ERP-based PLM providers it gives even stronger voice of why PLM-ERP bundle may have an advantage.

The question, “how to streamline access to data” in the organization before you embark to the journey of process improvements is the key question that needs to be asked by all manufacturing companies. Without that, most of the “process improvements” and implementation will stack forever or will turn to a nightmare.

PLM and the promise of cloud applications

Cloud is hyping these days. It is not unusual to hear that cloud will solve the problem of complexity related to existing software in the enterprise. Here are few examples:

Dassault is talking about their V6 platform as a unique cloud platform (last week Bernard Charles, DS CEO mentioned $2B investment made into re-architecture of Dassault platform).

Another large company in engineering domain – Autodesk is just a week before making a significant announcement (see more details here). I found this quote interesting: Autodesk will forever improve the way you manage your business processes and workflows when we unveil a modern, zero deployment solution that makes collaboration, data, and lifecycle management accessible to anyone, anytime, anywhere.

Another new comer in this market – Kenesto (according to COFES 2012 registration, Mike Payne is CEO of Kenesto) promising to “revolutionize process automation“.

What is my conclusion? I think the failure to design data access in organizations, was a recipe for disaster for many PLM implementations. PLM programs were focused on “how to improve processes” and forgot about how to put a solid data foundation to support cross-departmental process implementations. So, I’d like to put a quote from Bell Helicopter’s presentation during DSCC 2011 as something PLM vendors and customers need to remember – “to get the core data right first”. Just my opinion, of course. YMMV.

Best, Oleg


PLM Migration to… Text?

February 21, 2011

Sometime data management Q&A looks funny. World Online Review published the following solution on the request about how to migrate data into the text. Hit thislink to read a simple instruction:

1. In sql enter the command SQL>spool
Then enter the required select statment.The entire output is
transfered into the speficied file.The file’s default extension
is LST.Then enter SQL>spool off
2.You can also transfer the contents using utl_file utility.

Migration of PDM/PLM environment is a very complicated task. It is not as funny and simple like SQL recommendation. Think about the option to spool data out of PLM system and get it back in another system. Sounds complicated? However, wait a minute and think one more time… Data is in your PDM Oracle database. You just spool data out of your database. Do you think it is wrong? Not as wrong as you are thinking now. Just my thoughts, of course… YMMV.

Best, Oleg


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 115 other followers