Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1406534
16 SMT007 MAGAZINE I SEPTEMBER 2021 example, in the Aegis Digital Manufactur- ing Engineering tools, we import a wide vari- ety of differing BOM formats. We understand these formats perfectly. e problem is more how and to what extent the data has been pop- ulated. Different solutions will decide to popu- late different things based on the different pro- cesses that they go through as part of their de- sign-through-manufacturing operation. Here is where "best practices" are very important to follow. My recommendation is to look at the IPC- 2581 standard, to understand how it works, then look at the solutions that support it throughout the flow and understand what they really pro- vide. en, in that flow, establish your own de- sign-through-manufacturing best practice. Happy Holden: Looking at the BOM, I real- ize that it's essentially the singular focus of the EMS provider because they are all about the component. ey must buy and stock the com- ponent. ey only worry about the component footprint for solderability on the board. en they test the component. But on the BOM is the printed circuit board, and when you go to a fab- ricator, they don't care anything about the com- ponent. e world of fabrication is all about the schematic and what it represents, but the world of assembly is all about the component and what it represents. en it all comes togeth- er with the board designer who doesn't neces- sarily know a lot about assembly or fabrication, but nonetheless is trying to create the product. We're talking about three very complicated, different worlds. You need these digital twins or these data standards to have the discipline to collect everything together. We don't real- ize how complex that communication path is, which is maybe why we keep coming back to a standard. ere needs to be some way to sim- plify all this complexity. Ford: Exactly. e use of standards in which data formats and language are specifically de- fined creates the opportunity for interopera- bility across different solutions. But does the designer know how the inter- dependencies are connected across these op- erations? No. e digital twin must ultimate- ly combine the manufacturing information for fabrication, together with assembly, togeth- er with the design intent, and use those three sources of information together. e nice thing about the digital realm is that you do it once, and it is automated. With people, every- body has a different perspective and it's very difficult to build up a consistent knowledge base. Where these things are done in the digi- tal world, we have a chance for rules and a ba- sic understanding of how these things work to- gether. But it does require cooperation, which starts with interoperability. I should add here that security of design in- formation is also of key importance. It is good practice to restrict information to third par- ties to be on a "need to know" basis, and for it to be deleted aer use. It is very dangerous to expose all the design and manufacturing in- formation together. To this end, the data shar- ing should be managed and secured, such that only key information needed by each party is selected from the holistic digital twin and used as required. e secure transmission of IPC- 2581 data, as well as the appropriate selection of data is a key area of enablement being devel- oped currently. My recommendation is to look at the IPC-2581 standard, to understand how it works, then look at the solutions that support it throughout the flow and understand what they really provide.