Of course it is clear a BOM has components. But what is maybe not so clear is the fact that a BOM also reveals relationships between team members or that a BOM organizes what needs to get done. For example if your team is developing a new washing machine shouldn’t the BOM be able to tell you all the people involved with say the motor? Of course it should, or at least if it could it certainly would be useful, don’t you think? Instead of trying to figure out who to copy on an email wouldn’t if be useful to send an email to the motor and everyone involved would get it?
At a basic level a BOM is simple as it is nothing more than a collection of components organized in some way that makes sense to the team. But what else is there in a BOM? And in many cases doesn’t a parts list work just as well? If you look at something as simple as the washing machine motor you find there are many things that need to be represented. The quantity of motors in the washing machine, the vendor for the motor, all the files that represent the motor (a budget file, a performance calculation file and the CAD model) and the status.
Forgetting about release and staying focused only on the design phase, what things can the team expect/need to have in a BOM? And what about BOM management? At this point in the development cycle the BOM is managed in Excel and therefore the only controls that are in place are more social or collaborative than rigid check-in/check-out.
If a BOM is a convenient method for organizing the team and delivering information to people then how should it be managed during design? What should be in the BOM? Who should control the BOM?
Chris,
I think, BOM is a very misleading term in the modern manufacturing organization. You can talk to two engineers, and they will give me three different definitions of Bill of Materials.
Many people use BOM as any structured representaiton. What you mentione about “people connection” is an interesting one.
I figured it out in my post – How we can socialize Bill of Material? http://plmtwine.com/2009/05/06/how-we-can-socialize-plm-bill-of-materials/
Another short post about the same topic is “Social Bill of Material Dream” http://plmtwine.com/2009/02/03/the-social-bill-of-material-tools-dream/?
With regards to your questions-
1. BOM as a convenient way to organize information – in my view most is organized as structures: projects, assemblies, hierarchy of components, etc. Do you want to call all BOM? Bill of Design, Bill of Process, Bill of Materials… You can try, but this is all about semantics
2. What should be in the BOM? If you use BOM as a universal semantic, you can do it. Multiple PDM/PLM systems did it in the past. It called “structure browser” or “tree”. If you will browse through old presentations of PDM/PLM tools, you’ll find it there.
3. Who can control it? It depends what information you put inside- projects, design, components, manufacturing parts, supply…
Best, Oleg
With regards to your questions-1. BOM as a convenient way to organize information – in my view most is organized as structures: projects, assemblies, hierarchy of components, etc. Do you want to call all BOM? Bill of Design, Bill of Process, Bill of Materials… You can try, but this is all about semantics 2. What should be in the BOM? If you use BOM as a universal semantic, you can do it. Multiple PDM/PLM systems did it in the past. It called “structure browser” or “tree”. If you will browse through old presentations of PDM/PLM tools, you’ll find it there.3. Who can control it? It depends what information you put inside- projects, design, components, manufacturing parts, supply…
+1