01

1010! tOlt

oioioi teioioii

010101 10101001101010 10V

101010010101010101W010"'

11010101010101010101010

10101 10101010 I01&IV1

010101010101 01M001 10101

' 101011010'0'

110101010- MIO1O1OIOIO10

110101010' 10101 10101010

'din 11010101010101 IO1010

I0101IOIO101010

M010101010101

J1010

0101

IOI0I 101

,C-|010IOIOIOIO!OIC"C

(( 'yHflOIOIlCICOtO'OlOl

: If'":'01010 IOI010IOI0110

«i: ril01010101|11010!0!0' 0!

•' 'CiV 'JW'OIOH 101010100! ic

'/'. "II 1010101 1010101

^.«noioioionotoioioioio

/ 0101 KI0101011010101

^loiwwioiouui

1

\L »ij

r

1

" 1010.

10110101,

(01 10100-0

101010101011,

1011O10101OIO1

101010011110)

101010101 11

10110101101» 'm:

ijjw low

i*l!)'j;«i

IS'WT'

.VVf : ' 'A

ION!

CASE STUDY

fßim Parts Catalog for Industry Shipyards

Distribution Statement A.

Approved for public release;

distribution is i
This case describes how four industry shipyards

and the Navy collaborated to develop a Common

Parts Catalog (CPC)—a tool that uses catalog

management techniques to promote parts

standardization and management through data

sharing—to dramatically reduce inventory,

design, engineering, and life-cycle costs across

the U.S. marine industry. *^^
DEFENSE STANDARDIZATION PROGRAM CASE STUDY

Common Parts Catalog for Industry Shipyards

BACKGROUND

Tin* CPC is a powerful tool for enabling standardization in shipbuilding. It builds upon a legacy of

successful standardization in ship and submarine

construction. The opportunity for standardizing and

streamlining parts management was clearly demonstrated by the results of part standardization and

reuse in surface ships and submarines. A success

story for submarines was documented in an earlier

I >SP case study, Tfw Virginia Class Submarine

Program, available on the DSP website (http://

www.dsp.dla.mil).That case study illustrates the

power ofstandardization and the millions of dollars

that can be saved through focused and disciplined

standardization.The accomplishments documented

m The Virginia Class Submarine Program case study

provided a solid foundation and a framework for

the creation of a CPC for industry shipyards.

The CPC also has roots in an earlier achievement

of significance, the hull mechanical and electrical

equipment (HM&E) standardization program. The

HM&E program's success is documented in another 1 )SP case study and is also available on the DSP

website. In the 1980s, the Navy began examining

the proliferation of HM&E equipment. That effort

dramatically reduced the unnecessary introduction

of new HM&E equipment in the fleet. The

HM&E standardization effort developed a new tool

for standardizing equipment, the HM&E Equipment Data Research System (HEDRS), a collection

of databases and analytical programs. With HEDRS,

the planning, design, engineering, operations, maintenance, and logistics communities could research

equipment and greatly improve standardization

across the fleet. In many ways, the HM&E program

pilot tested the way for greater standardization at

shipyards.

The Navy also achieved outstanding standardization results through disciplined standardization pro-
grams on the submarine classes constructed after the

Seawolf class was discontinued due to cost overruns.

In Seawolf, part proliferation was a significant problem, and many duplicate part numbers were created

by the multiple shipyards. The Virginia class cost

less in part due to deliberate standardization and by

using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components, especially for computers and data networks.

The Virginia class employed a formalized part

standardization program at the start of the detail

design phase to prevent the part proliferation experienced in the earlier class. The standardization

efforts dramatically reduced the numbers of parts

required and achieved significant cost avoidance.

The program established an empowered Part Standardization Board, used formal standardization criteria, and created a database architecture that

promoted parts discipline and standard part reuse

within the design development process. These outcomes clearly demonstrated the value of parts standardization across shipyards' design, construction,

and maintenance activities.

In 2003, the National Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP) sponsored a project to standardize

and classify the methods of catalog construction and

administration, with the goals of reducing the number of unique parts and eliminating the needless

replication of part data. The project, a collaboration

among four first-tier commercial naval shipyards,

developed a CPC database, with standards and procedures for consolidating shipyard part data in a single shared resource. The CPC enables better

utilization of resources, streamlines the process of

cataloging parts and material, and facilitates direct

interaction among the shipyards' catalog systems.

The NSRP is a cost-sharing, collaborative, shipbuilding technology research consortium of 12

shipyards, the Navy, and the U.S. Coast Guard,

whose aim is to reduce the cost ofship acquisition

and repair. The consortium focuses on common

cost drivers and inherently multiyard, multiprogram

problems. The NSRP framework efficiently coordinates collaborative research and development

among all segments of the ship construction and

repair enterprise to reduce the cost and time

required for Navy and commercial ship construction, conversion, and repair. Nearly 150 entities

from 34 states have collaborated on NSRP-funded

activities.

PROBLEM

A common problem in industry, including the

shipbuilding industry, has been the lack ofstandardization in parts catalogs. The industry lacked a

standardized method for representing and communicating information about product characteristics

without ambiguity or redundancy. This resulted in

large, nonstandard catalog systems that made it difficult to search for and reuse parts. Over time,

when existing parts could not be easily located,

duplicate parts were created, perpetuating and exacerbating the cataloging problems. The Seawolfpart

proliferation scenario proved that many duplicate

part numbers are created (as many as 10) during a

new class design when part standards and criteria

are not established, monitored, and enforced.
Shipyards employed outdated control systems for

tracking and monitoring parts within shipyard cataloging systems. Legacy parts catalogs used outdated

customized, rather than COTS, software; had inadequate user interfaces; provided poor support for

queries and analyses; were unsuitable for integration

with computer-aided design (CAD), product data

management, planning, and procurement systems;

and had inadequate linkage to specifications and

other technical and contractual documentation.

Other issues with the legacy parts catalogs included

their inability to support Integrated Product Data

Environment (IFDE) initiatives or part equivalency

between shipyards and their minimal ability to support part searches, standardize data, or share or

transmit part data for reuse by shipyards, customers,

or entities in the supply chain.

Shipyards experienced part proliferation, difficulty

in finding appropriate substitute parts, barriers to

teaming and collaboration, too many suppliers and

small order quantities, excess inventory in storage

and handling, and invisible surplus material. The

impact was compounded at the industry level, limiting collaboration, workload sharing, and surge

capability. Shipyards had no standard ways to communicate about parts procurement, use, and inventories. Vendors had no standardized format for

delivering part functionality information to shipyards, so similar components were often described
in several different ways. The results were long

acquisition lead-times and design rework. In short,

the shipyards' legacy parts catalogs had limited or

inadequate capability to support marked improvements in these areas and was the primary reason to

develop a CPC.

APPROACH

With funding from NSRP, the CPC project teamed

Electric Boat in Connecticut, Bath Iron Works in

Maine, Ingalls Shipyard in Mississippi, and Avondale

Shipyard in Louisiana. (Electric Boat and Bath Iron

Works are part of General Dynamics Marine Systems Group, and Ingalls and Avondale were part of

Northrop Grumman Ship Systems.) Three support

contractor organizations were also involved: i2

Technologies (a provider ofsupply chain solutions

subsequendy acquired by JDA Software Group),

Computer Sciences Corporation, and Ingalls IT.

Together, the seven entiries developed the collaborative CPC database system. They adopted industry

best practices and innovations in parts management

to advance parts commonality, equivalency, standardization, and data configuration management.

Key Teams

Three key teams were formed:

CPC project (earn. The team consisted offive to

eight full-time individuals—managers, material

engineers, and catalog personnel with experience in project management, cataloging, and

software engineerings—from each participating

shipyard. This group had overall responsibility

for designing and implementing the CPC. The

resulting CPC is a state-of-the-art relational

database populated with detailed part-related

data. The team created a structured data model

architecture, data models, a data dictionary, and

detailed procedures for adding and maintaining

data in the CPC.

Central Configuration Control Group (CCCG).

The CCCG consisted of one or more representatives from each participating shipyard. This

group functioned as a single authority to ensure

consistent, continuing, and structured communication among the shipyards regarding catalog

data, data models, and operating systems. The

participating shipyards developed agreements

defining the objectives, project management, and

bylaws for the CCCG and identified the

processes required to develop, format, issue, and

revise data to ensure and maintain data integrity.

The group ensured that the shipyards acted as

one while not adversely affecting day-to-day

business activities at each shipyard. The group

also ensured that data integrity was maintained

by enforcing procedures to maintain part and

system configuration across the shipyards. In

addition, it audited the participating shipyards to

ensure compliance with standardized processes.

Executive Steering Committee (ESC). The ESC,

like the CCCG, consisted of one or more management representatives from each participating

shipyard.The ESC served as the project sponsor,
providing guidance, support, and resources as

required.

Project Management

After receiving the NSRP contract in 2003, the

CPC project team held kickoff meetings at each

shipyard to ensure project management synergy.

The team developed shared objectives and a

detailed integrated project plan. Software was

selected and successfully installed at four shipyards.

The CPC exists in two identical and connected

environments, one in Mississippi, supporting Huntington Ing.ills Industries—Ingalls Shipbuilding and

Avondale, and the other in Connecticut, supporting Bath IronWorks and Electric Boat.This

enables multicorporate part standardization and data

sharing. The two environments are maintained to

ensure compatibility and are linked in real time by

a dedicated line to ensure synchronization and continuous data flow, as well as to provide full redundancy and backup capability.

The CPC interfaces with the shipyards' individual

legacy catalog systems while ensuring that the functionality of those systems was not affected. The

team reviewed business processes at all participating

shipyards and identified best practices in the areas of

part commonality or equivalency, part standardization, and part data configuration management. The

team used catalog management techniques from all

participating shipyards to provide standardized catalog data to engineering, design, manufacturing, and

procurement systems.
The project used milestones within a comprehensive schedule to ensure project objectives and goals

were met. The project managers held weekly teleconferences to coordinate activities, identify issues,

and track progress on specific schedule-sensitive

activities. The project team developed scenarios

(use cases) for sharing and for representing parts and

associated document information. The scenarios

included not only the sharing of part data among

internal shipyard applications but also across organizations for collaborative purposes.

The project was implemented in four phases.

Requirements and standards definition occurred in

phases 1 and 2. Application development and standard data loading occurred in phase 3. Production

turnover, part sharing, and equivalency functions

took place in phase 4.

Data Model Architecture

The CPC is a single electronic repository for all

technical, quality, and document data associated

with unique catalog number designations. The

CPC contains all technical data attributes required

to purchase or manufacture material on the basis of

part definition. Configuration management provides the foundation for a part equivalency program. The CPC links catalog part numbers that are

technically and contractually interchangeable, and it

provides a vehicle for intershipyard part collaboration. The participating shipyard that creates the part

is responsible for conformance to the CPC standards relating to interchangeability analysis, as well

as for configuration management of the part during

its lifetime.

The CPC structures and organizes previously

unstructured information for material management

and parts definition within a meaningful and systematic taxonomic structure. The data model is a

representation of classes of data needed by the

companies, valid properties associated with each

class of data, and relationships between the classes

of data.

Shipyard catalogs intersect in the CPC data model. The architecture supports each shipyards business needs and supports intrashipyard practices such

as part sharing, equivalency, and data standardization. The data model identifies part and document

classes and shows their associations with each other.

It contains a compilation of the shipyards' procedures, work methods, policies, and contractual

requirements.

The data model provides a road map to identify

standard parts and document data relationships

using part object class and document class attributes. Each participating shipyard adds its own part

data following standard procedures and performs

research to link part data across the enterprise. The

model has 38 different classes of data. Each class

contains all relevant attributes plus necessary crossUnking. Several classes describe primary objects,

such as a part object, document, national stock

number (NSN), environmental legislation, Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS), Allowance Parts List

(APL), procurement history, product structure, or
M

shipyard-specific capabilities. Three of the most

important data classes are as follows:

Part object. A part object is specific to a catalog

number.The part object class has 100+ attributes, some of which apply to all parts (catalog

number, name) and others that are specific to

mechanical parts (diameter, thickness) or to

electrical devices (ohms, volts).The part object

contains the primary description of the part

number.

Document. This class has 20+ attributes, such as

do< ument type, document number, and vendor

part number. A document may be a specification, drawing, sketch, list, standard, pamphlet,

report, technical manual, vendors drawing, or

other information relating to the design, manufacture, material, testing, inspection, or procurement of a catalog number. A document

discloses, at a part level, the physical and functional end-product requirements. The CPC

includes parts-related documents needed to

qualify and describe the parts themselves. Parts

documents may be versioned and amended. The

association of a part document to a part also

designates the ship contract to which a particular version of a part document applies. Specification histories and part audit histories are also

represented to support part configuration management. Finally, parts are associated with various supplemental documents, such as life-cycle

attributes and environmental legislation.

Shipyard-specific capabilities. Shipyard-specific

classes have 90+ attributes that describe unique

business capabilities required for each participating shipyard to perform on their contractual

obligations.

The CPC data model also has mapping classes,

which are specifically designed for linking data

classes. For example, mapping classes link part

objects or documents to related data such as NSN,

document identification, revision, applicability,

equivalency, audits, environmental legislation, CAS,

APL, procurement history, and product structure.

Below are the four most important mapping classes:

Part/document applicability. This class contains

electronic links between catalog numbers and

contractually effective documents, specifications,

and procurement requirements, and it provides

for online, real-time transaction audit trails in

support of contractual requirements.

Part equivalency. This class provides the capability to identify interchangeability links within and

between yard, vendor, and government part

numbers and provides intra- and intershipyard

part equivalency. Part equivalency is the key to

sharing, standardization, and inventory reduction. The project team developed requirements,

processes, and procedures to implement and

maintain part equivalency. It produced instructions for designating catalog part numbers that

are technically and contractually interchangeable, the requirements for maintaining part

equivalency, and the criteria used to audit part

equivalency. Equivalent parts must pass technical and contractual reviews to determine part
equality and interchangeability. Equivalent parts

may be interchanged with no additional

approvals. Personnel involved in the part equivalency review represent parts organizations and

engineering, quality, and design functions. The

focus ofthe equivalency review is on the technical attributes that determine part equality. The

goal is to provide procurement and material

control systems with the ability to use equivalent parts information in their associated business processes.

NSN. This class provides an ability to associate

one or many NSNs to a single catalog number.

Product structure. This class provides a capability

to identify parent-to-child part relationships

within a catalog number.

The CPC data model defines relationships

between parts and the hierarchical relationships of

part category attributes.The project team identified

relationships between parts, as well as the mandatory and preferred part attributes at each level. This

approach provided standard steps so that resulting

replacement data could be easily reused. The data

relationship standards are electronically maintained

in the data model.

Data Element Dictionary

The CPC data element dictionary is an organized

repository ofinformation about data resources; it

contains data element specifications, data file structures, and data file maintenance features. The data

element dictionary is the control document for definition and data structure and provides a single control for standardization of data elements shared electronically between participating shipyards.

Configuration Management

The controlled use of documents and revisions is

an important requirement for CPC configuration

management. Managing the configuration of a document or catalog number is the responsibility of the

shipyard owning the document or part. Only that

shipyard is allowed to update the data. Each shipyard's configuration management procedures must

meet CCCG requirements. A revision to a document or part record must be reviewed for its effect

on part interchangeability. The CCCG audits the

shipyards to ensure conformance to standards.

The system contains processes and procedures for

configuration management within and between the

participating shipyards. It provides a compilation of

the procedures, work methods, and policies that

control configuration management of part document data within and across the shipyards. It identifies application rules for the use of government and

commercial specifications and standards, design

agent and vendor drawings, vendor parts, model

types, procurement notes, and all other documents

required to be associated to a part object. It provides a standard method to maintain part equivalency for the shipyards.

Configuration Management Audits

The CCCG audits the data being entered into the

CPC to assess data integrity for both part and asso-
dated document attributes. The audits were

designed to ensure awareness, among all participating individuals, of functional responsibilities and of

the importance of data integrity in supporting business needs.

Excess/Surplus Material

The ("PC provides visibility to surplus material that

may be available for resale. Indicators of surplus

material are electronically updated in the CPC on a

regular schedule.The schedule ensures accurate

information is available to all participating shipyards.

Enhancements

Since the CPC's implementation, there have been

many lessons learned, along with suggested enhancements and advancements in technology. Currently,

the CPC is providing part definition processes and

disclosure capabilities to the participating shipyards.

The CPC is limited to part attribute and document

tl.it.i; it does not capture, exchange, or link threedimensional (3D) geometry to the part data, a capability desired by both the shipyards and the Navy as

a cost-saving enhancement.The engineering data

sharing and 3D geometry reuse to support arrangements, layout, and visualization were in the original

scope ofthe CPC but were unattainable due to

software and technology limitations.

There are plans to analyze, identify, and map the

implementation of enhancements to the existing

capability in the following areas:

Network, software, and application changes. This

area addresses application upgrades required to

provide capability improvements. Business

processes also need to be updated to account for

new capabilities and facilitate effective data

reuse, and where possible, common tools should

be used to support the common processes.

Model inclusion and exchange. This area

addresses the inclusion or linking of models

with CPC parts to support visualization, spatial

integration, and reuse of full 3D geometry.

Enhancements will include 2D and 3D graphics,

including drag-and-drop into CAD sessions.

Functionality enhancements. Potential functionality enhancements are continually examined.

Some examples are the inclusion of engineering

data. Navy best value data, and catalog numbering systems; development and extension of a

common data element dictionary and set of

enumerated valid values that support the CPC;

review of the system architecture and classification schemes; and development of one set of

procurement notes used by all shipyards.

In addition, an NSRP goal is to broaden participation, implementation, and application of the

CPC across the U.S. shipbuilding enterprise. Plans

include other first-tier shipyards performing an

analysis and business case to determine possible

expansion of the collaboration. Core capabilities of

each participant will be analyzed to determine the

degree of change required to adopt CPC processes

and tools. Reviews will employ a project development plan that supports the participation of CPC

participating shipyards, their information technology

and application providers, and potential new partici-
pants, each developing its requirements by examining the current state and then applying best practices and lessons learned to design its desired future

state. Each potential new participant will use the

data to develop a business case analysis to support

the recommendation on becoming a CPC participating shipyard.

CPC Web Service

A web service can be used to provide on-demand

access to CPC data to external applications. The

data provided by the service consists mainly of vendor or shipyard part data associated with catalog

part entries in the CPC.The web service is

designed to facilitate the exchange of data between

the CPC and external applications that are associated with the most common parts catalog use cases.

The service provides the minimum set of operations that will allow for searching the catalog to

create a list of parts that meet a specific set of

requirements, for locating and downloading the

details of a part entry, and for adding new part

entries into the CPC.

BENEFITS

The improvements made possible by the CPC—

enabling sharing of standardized data across company boundaries, a rare occurrence because companies

often treat part data as proprietary—have resulted in

cost reductions and cost avoidance for the participating shipyards in the areas of part standardization,

part equivalency, part configuration management,

and data sharing.

Project resources included a set ofrequirements

and standards supporting the catalog needs of the

individual shipyards and a software application to

manage and store the standard catalog data. The

shipyards' best practices and business processes were

integrated into the CPC" design. The design is scalable and flexible, allowing for growth of data, users,

and user sites. The design is flexible enough to

enable the CPC to easily interface with other applications such as product data management systems

and suppliers' online catalogs. The design also allows

for the addition of other shipyards' part data.

The CPC has over 2 million catalog numbers

categorized into a standard classification scheme and

7 million configuration-managed document identification numbers linked to the catalog numbers. It
.dl» jisü'sätis«**»'^

has more than I8<>,000 intershipyard part equivalency links and supports hundreds of daily shared

part transactions between shipyards. Audits identify

a 99.9 percent accuracy rate against defined intershipyard standards. A substantial majority of the

procured material for the Navy's surface combatants, submarines, and amphibious ships is now

standardized and configuration managed in the

CPC.

The CPC has enabled faster and more accurate

information retrieval. Users can find parts information quickly and easily. Less time is required to find

parts and to retrieve vendor or government specifications. The CPC has reduced material searches by

an estimated 30 to 50 percent and reduced partrelated design and engineering costs by an estimated

10 to 20 percent.

I he CPC facilitates the elimination of duplicate

part numbers, eliminates the generation of new part

numbers for components already in the CPC, and,

through the use of a part standardization program,

reduces the total number of parts. Fewer parts in

the government supply system means less paperwork and a reduction in the number of parts that

must be procured, received, handled, inspected,

and warehoused. With fewer parts to manage and

control, inventory costs have been reduced by an

estimated K) to 20 percent.

The CPC facilitates reuse ofstandard part data

across shipyards by providing more visibility and

timely access to the data. It enables better communication regarding part replacement, interchangeability, and applicability. It also enables better communication regarding part data requirements

between design yards and shipbuilders. It supports

realization of unit volume benefits through joint

procurements and reduction of acquisition cost

through common parts and equipment. It facilitates

grouping of requirements, reductions in the number of purchase orders, increased quantity procurements, and leveraging of volume discounts. It

provides an ability to increase material availability

and reduce cost with joint procurements. The CPC

can substantially reduce material cost and the number of unique parts procured through a part standardization program. It supports the use ofstandard

part data across shipyards, suppliers, and customers.

Part data are shared across multiple shipyards, providing standard part data for design, manufacture,

and procurement.

Standardization across the shipyards can improve

operational readiness of the platforms through

greater availability of parts across surface and submarine inventories and reduction in the number of

parts required to support ships.

The CPC facilitates part equivalency programs

and contains procedures to communicate detailed

comparison results to the participating shipyards

regarding commercial replacement specifications

and deleted or nonmaintained military specifications. The system provides a means to communicate, share, and compare analyses of parts or

documents, eliminating the need for individual

shipyards to duplicate reviews and providing cost
savings to the shipyards and the Navy customer. It

provides a method to minimize part duplication and

facilitate part standardization. The CPC supports

shipyard IPDE capabilities and provides an ability to

support present and future IPDE initiatives.

The CPC provides for access to data on critical

attributes (e.g., SUBSAFE); to design data, procurement, and quality characteristics; and to shipyard

part number cross-references to NSNs.The CPC

provides suppliers with electronic exchange of

component development data; standardized descriptive and document data; and electronic links

between catalog numbers and contractually effective

documents, specifications, and procurement requirements. The CPC also provides for online, real-time

transaction audit trails.

LESSONS LEARNED

Important lessons learned during the CPC project

are as follows:

Develop a strong business case that is approved

and championed by the participating organizations' highest management officials. Develop and

document a mutually agreed upon set of

requirements. Set up standards early and implement procedural steps to maintain them.

Create an Executive Steering Committee consisting ofsenior executives from the participating organizations to act as project sponsors.

Meet at least biannually to ensure that all activities are being performed

and that standards and procedures

are up to date and support company and

intercompany objectives.

Employ strong project managers who promote

trust across organizations and develop a team

culture of collaboration and compromise.

Ensure that converted data conform to the

organizations'established standards. Train personnel and repeat training as necessary. Anticipate growth in initial cost and time estimates.

Set up an mtershipyard Central Configuration

Control Group with procedures and data audits.

Ensure the system is maintained after project

completion. Meet at least biannually to ensure all

activities are being performed and standards and

procedures are up to date. Perform audits to ensure data integrity within and across organizations.

The CPC project team made a commitment to

reduce the cost of ships to both government and

commercial customers through the implementation

of a common parts catalog with associated standard

procedures. This required the marine community

to examine process improvements to reduce time

and related costs in all phases of ship design, construction, and life-cycle support. Shipbuilding

enterprise activities can build on the CPC foundation to increase cost savings during design, construction, and life-cycle activities. This project

continues to exceed and expand.
'SS'}

If
x%

t ' < »

DEFENSE STANDARDIZATION PROGRAM OFFICE

8725 John J. Kingman Road, Stop 5100

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6220

(703) 767-6888

dsp.dla.mil

For information about the National Shipbuilding Research Program,

contact Ed Gladue

General Dynamics Electric Boat

75 Eastern Point Road

Groton.CT 06340

(860)433-2568

egladue@gdeb.com