The failure of Ariane 5’s maiden flight stemmed from an inertial reference system designed for Ariane 4, which was inadequate for its faster velocity. This incident highlights the dangers of assuming prior success in similar systems without reassessing their applicability to new contexts. Verification methods must include clear scope definitions to prevent such oversights.
Thomas Jefferson observed two key demonstrations of interchangeability: Honoré Blanc’s honest display in 1785, where random parts fit perfectly, and Eli Whitney’s staged 1801 demonstration, which misled observers and led to delays. The outcomes reflect the importance of who selects components during tests, emphasizing the need for impartiality in acceptance evaluations.
On August 30, 1785, Thomas Jefferson observed a demonstration by Honore Blanc, showing the interchangeability of musket lock parts. This highlighted the importance of validation over mere declarations. The article discusses modern challenges in proving interchangeability, emphasizing a structured process to ensure claims are supported by evidence and not just assumptions.
The article highlights the issue of parts with duplicate numbers obscuring interchangeable parts. It emphasizes the hidden costs of managing duplicates, which can lead to inefficiencies and lost savings. By implementing better identification schemes, organizations can reclaim the value of interchangeable items, potentially saving millions annually. Understanding and managing these duplicates is essential for operational efficiency.
Starting February 18, 2027, EU regulations will require traceability for every EV battery through the Digital Product Passport, mandating records of production details. Effective configuration management is essential for compliance to avoid false declarations. Organizations must treat this regulation as a critical data discipline rather than merely a sustainability exercise.
This article, part of the How Do YOU CM2? blog series in collaboration with IpX, emphasizes that true configuration management (CM) maturity transcends documentation. It requires standardized processes that are adaptable, measurable, and actively improved. Organizations must apply CM consistently across all lifecycle phases and maintain traceability to ensure effective performance.
In the 53rd edition of the Future of CM Newsletter, I continue my collaboration with IpX – Institute for Process Excellence in our “How Do You CM2?” series.
This time, an article dear to my heart: the integration between CAD models and Parts. What do you think is the right strategy?
This article emphasizes that parts do not have revisions; rather, datasets do. It discusses the confusion and inefficiency created by treating part revisions as part of the part number. Shifting focus to dataset revisions enhances clarity, reduces errors, and streamlines processes within organizations, driving down costs and improving quality in product development.
There is no such thing as precise bill of materials, they do not exist! So there I said it… Well this does require a little bit of explanation and nuance. In one of my previous articles I wrote about Parts don’t have Revisions, where I explained the different data models in PLM, ERP and CM2. Here is a quick refresher of the different setups (for more details check the article): All above models… Read More »Precise Bill of Materials Don’t Exist
Next to this newsletter I have been posting a new series of posts on my blog mdux.net and LinkedIn. The Configuration Management is… series posts are not intended to limit the scope of Configuration Management, but to create awareness of the breadth of CM. Each of these elements is part of good Configuration Management Practice.
