See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265590897

iDMU as the Collaborative Engineering engine: Research experiences in

Airbus

Conference Paper · June 2014

DOI: 10.1109/ICE.2014.6871594

CITATIONS READS

7 527

6 authors, including:

Fernando Mas Manuel Oliva

Comlux America LLC Airbus
57 PUBLICATIONS 382 CITATIONS 18 PUBLICATIONS 127 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

José Ríos Alex Gomez

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
81 PUBLICATIONS 914 CITATIONS 14 PUBLICATIONS 115 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Accelerating the adoption of Industry of the Future (IoF) supporting technologies by Spanish Universities. View project

ARIADNE Project: Value chain: From IDMU to Lean documentation for assembly View project

All content following this page was uploaded by José Ríos on 17 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 iDMU as the Collaborative Engineering engine
Research experiences in Airbus
Fernando Mas, José Luis Menéndez, Manuel Oliva
PLM Process & Tool Solutions Department
Airbus Defence & Space
Sevilla, Spain
fernando.mas@airbus.com
Abstract—Collaborative Engineering aims to integrate both
functional and industrial design. This goal requires integrating
the design processes, the design teams and using a single common
software platform to hold all the stakeholders contributions.
As a result of a virtual manufacturing project for the A400M
Final Assembly Line (FAL), Airbus Military coined the concept
of the industrial Digital Mock Up (iDMU) as the necessary
unique platform to deploy Concurrent Engineering. Along 2013
Airbus Military has developed another research project, named
CALIPSOneo, to implement an iDMU for the industrialization of
the A320neo fan cowls.
The implementation confirmed that the iDMU concept is
feasible as the basis common platform for the development of an
aerostructure.
The experience and knowledge, derived from working in the
implemented iDMU, allow concluding that the iDMU can be the
engine empowering the Collaborative Engineering paradigm and
additionally, it can be extended to comprise the entire product
lifecycle.
Keywords—Collaborative Engineering, iDMU, PLM, Virtual
Engineering, Process Simulation
I. INTRODUCTION
Since 1999, starting with the A340 program, Airbus has
applied Concurrent Engineering practices to several aircraft
design programs: C295, A380, A400M, and A350 [1-4].
In the last ten years, virtual manufacturing techniques are
used for the industrialization of aircraft assembly lines, and
also as an enabler of the Concurrent Engineering endeavor. The
product Digital Mock-Up (DMU) is considered as a strategic
element supporting the implementation of Concurrent
Engineering practices, “DMU as master” approach (Fig.1) [5].
In this period, the model of Concurrent Engineering has also
evolved at the same pace as the information technology and
PLM tools to become the currently called Collaborative
Engineering [6]. The Collaborative Engineering approach
integrates sociological and technological aspects, aiming to
achieving that a set of engineers actively and rationally
participate in a consensual joint decision making process,
supported by a computer based collaborative environment [6].
Within Airbus, the greater obstacle for this evolution is that
the development of the aircraft is carried out by separated
978-1-4799-4735-5/14/$31.00 © 2014IEEE.
José Ríos, Alejandro Gómez, Víctor Olmos
Mechanical Engineering and Manufacturing Department
Polytechnic University of Madrid
Madrid, Spain
jose.rios@upm.es
processes. Where functional design, industrial design, design of
services and related processes are supported in separated
engineering systems: PDM, Virtual Manufacturing tools, Jigs
& Tools (J&T) design and different authoring systems for
shopfloor instructions and services documentation [3-4].
Consequently, to progress in the implementation of the
Collaborative Engineering, it is necessary to increase the
degree of integration of the processes involving functional,
industrial and services design. This should allow getting the
maximum possible feedback among them, to obtain an optimal
design of the aircraft not only in the functional aspect, but also
in the industrialization and service ones. Additionally, this
requires that all the processes of the aircraft development are
carried out by a common team and under a common software
platform shared by all the stakeholders.
This conclusion of the need for a common collaborative
platform is confirmed by the PLM community. PLM experts
and users share a common understanding on the necessity of
solutions that facilitate easy, ubiquitous and fast sharing of
product, processes and resources information across the entire
product lifecycle and among all the actors involved [7-10].
The development of solutions, to facilitate the
implementation of both the concurrent engineering and the
collaborative engineering in the aerospace sector, was the
objective of some projects since the end of the 1990’s decade.
Two of the most relevant ones are the European projects
ENHANCE [11] and VIVACE [12].
The ENHANCE project, focused on the Concurrent
Engineering approach, started in 1999, comprised up to forty
nine partners, including first level suppliers, and its aim was to
enhance the business processes, information management,
information technology infrastructure, working methods and
the integration of the supply chain [11].
The VIVACE (Value Improvement through a Virtual
Aeronautical Collaborative Enterprise) project started in 2004.
It used as input the results derived from the ENHANCE project
but pursuing a Collaborative Engineering approach [12].
VIVACE was focused on the aircraft development cycle and
the propulsion system. It aimed developing the tools needed to
create a collaborative environment to facilitate the knowledge
engineering, the objective oriented design, the information
management and the extended enterprise integration [12].
 The mentioned projects are characterized by being focused
on the aircraft functional design engineering, leaving the
industrialization design engineering out of their main scope.
The main European aerospace companies participated in such
projects, and to some extend it helped them to implement the
concept of ‘DMU as master’ [1].
In this context, Airbus has not limited itself to be an end
user of Virtual Manufacturing and PLM tools, but it has
worked to build and spread a body of knowledge and
methodology related to such techniques [1-5, 13-16].
Fig. 1. Concurrent versus Collaborative approaches: “DMU as master”
versus “iDMU for all”
Unlike the mentioned projects that left the industrialization
design in a secondary place, but with a smaller scale of action,
the A320 CALIPSOneo project was launched by Airbus to
promote the Collaborative Engineering by implementing the
industrial Digital Mock-up (iDMU) as a way to help in making
the functional and the industrial designs evolving jointly and
collaboratively.
The iDMU concept is the approach defined by Airbus to
facilitate the integration of the processes of the aircraft
development on a common platform throughout all their
service life. An iDMU gathers all the product, processes and
resources information, both geometrical and technological; to
model a virtual assembly line. An iDMU provides a single
environment, in which the assembly line industrial design is
defined and validated [3]. Once the industrial design is
completely verified and confirmed as free of errors, the result is
an iDMU that contains all the necessary information for the
automatic generation of the shopfloor documentation needed to
execute the manufacturing processes [16]. As a step forward in
the approach based on the “iDMU for all” (Fig. 1), the design
of services could also be defined and validated in the same way
as the industrial design, and after it, all the services
documentation could be authored. This objective of
incorporating product information that goes beyond the
Beginning of Life phase, to include activities and services
occurring in the Middle of Life and in the End of Life phases is
still a research topic being address by the PLM community
[17]. Fig. 1 illustrates the Concurrent versus the Collaborative
approaches (“DMU as master” versus “iDMU for all”).
In the following sections, it is explained the process
followed by Airbus to implement a virtual manufacturing
framework to execute a pilot implementation of the iDMU of a
medium size aerostructure. The identified main barriers, the
solutions adopted and the knowledge acquired out of this
endeavor are also presented.
II. COLLABORATIVE ENGINEERING EXPERIENCES
Collaborative Engineering (CE) is a socio-technical process
promoting that all the design teams work towards a common
goal [6]. In Airbus, this requires that all the teams engage in a
process of interchanging their different perspectives regarding
the aircraft design. Along such process those different
perspectives evolves until a common understanding about the
aircraft design is reached [2].
To pursue that, the concept of CE in Airbus aims
integrating the teams and the processes of functional and
industrial design to produce a common unique deliverable, the
industrial Digital Mock Up (iDMU) [3]. Figure 2 depicts an
example of a 3D representation of an aircraft FAL iDMU,
showing the product and the resources.
With such aim, an enabler, as it is widely acknowledge in
literature [6-10], the intensive use of PLM tools is promoted.
Especially Virtual Manufacturing is the key element to
guarantee an aircraft functional and industrial design free of
errors. At the end of the design process, the iDMU contains all
the information regarding both functional and industrial design:
3D geometry and technological information. This way, the
iDMU is the unique source of information for the later
activities in the aircraft lifecycle, the “iDMU for all” concept
[3]. In particular, the documentation for shopfloor can be
obtained by exploiting the iDMU by means of virtual and
augmented reality solutions [16].
Evolve the working methods from a concurrent approach to
a collaborative one requires a progressive and permanent
process, lead by the organization, supported by the personnel
and facilitated by the technology. It is a challenging process,
along which the A400M Final Assembly Line (FAL) project
and the A320 CALIPSOneo project are, so far, the cornerstone
of it. Next, both actions are briefly explained, pointing out the
main contributions that helped to implement the CE concept.
A. The A400M FAL Project: the antecedent
In 2003 Airbus began the detailed industrial design of the
A400M Final Assembly Line (FAL). It posed a difficult
challenge, because the A400M military transport entailed some
final assembly requirements very different from the ones
demanded to the previous military transport. It was a larger and
much more complex aircraft than any previous one. The
monthly rate of three aircrafts was twice the previous ones. The
concept of modular final assembly was also different from the
previous concepts. To meet this challenge, Airbus considered
that Virtual Manufacturing was one of the main solutions for
designing the A400M FAL.
With that idea, Airbus launched a project to implement
Virtual Manufacturing for the A400M FAL [3]. The two main
aims of the project were to cope with the complexity of the
industrial design of the FAL, and to leverage the concurrence
with the functional design of the aircraft.
 A platform based on Dassault Systemes PLM tools was
implemented. This platform included CATIA V5 for the
aircraft design and the Jigs &Tools (J&T) design, DELMIA V5
for executing Virtual Manufacturing simulations and a
customized DELMIA V5 Manufacturing Hub to manage the
process structure including all the metadata of each process and
the processes’ precedence. The Airbus times system was
implemented and a utility to optimize the sequences of the
processes of each station was developed. Such development
takes as input the information of times and precedences
recorded in the process structure. In addition the DELMIA V5
finite events simulator QUEST was used to optimize the flow
of the assembly line.
Fig. 2. Example of an aircraft FAL iDMU
New collaborative working procedures were defined to
carry out the new process. A multidisciplinary team, composed
of industrialization engineers and PLM tools experts, was
assembled. Working procedures were defined to steer and
assist the collaboration. Considering the professional profile of
the personnel, the workload was distributed and specific
training was provided. For instance, industrialization engineers,
focused on the industrial design tasks, were trained to
comprehend the way PLM tools could help in the
industrialization design process. And PLM experts, with
specific training in the virtual manufacturing tools, were
responsible for creating the DMU and the simulations
requested by the industrialization engineers.
The project provided a technological leap that can be
resumed in the following points:
• The assembly processes were studied and defined in
specific digital mockups of product and J&T. The more
critical processes were validated by means of assembly
and ergonomics simulations using DELMIA V5.
• Expensive J&T physical mockups were substituted for
digital ones. The J&T were designed in context in
specifics digital mockups of product for each resource
with CATIA V5.
• The definition of the process structure, including all the
metadata and precedences, was implemented in a single
repository. The assembly sequences of each assembly
station of the FAL were analyzed and optimized.
• The assembly line flow was simulated for different
configurations, identifying the optimal solution for the
ram-up and several production rates.
• A Virtual Manufacturing environment was deployed,
including hardware and software platform, a virtual
reality room and a group of PLM tools experts.
• The Virtual Manufacturing culture was introduced in
the community of industrialization engineers.
• The concurrence with the aircraft functional design was
improved. The industrial design of the assembly line
was carried out in parallel with the aircraft functional
design, both designs maturing at the same time. Thus,
an early detection of problems of the aircraft functional
design and the J&T design was possible when the
correction of these problems still has little economical
impact, avoiding its later correction by expensive
procedures of design modifications.
• The Virtual Manufacturing environment was used to
review the assembly processes with the shopfloor
supervisors and to provide virtual training to workers.
Notwithstanding the previous advances, the
accomplishment of the project and its later deployment,
logically, did not solve the flaws of the concurrent engineering
model. The processes of functional design and industrial design
stayed separated and carried out by teams having different
abilities and perspectives and often having opposed objectives.
This issue fits within the interactive and separate decision style
type described by S.C-Y. Lu et al. [6].
Another flaw of the concurrent model is the ‘product
digital mockup (DMU) as master’ approach. Created in the
process of functional design, using PLM tools, the product
DMU is the source of all the product information for the rest of
activities of the aircraft service life [5]. But the relevance of the
product DMU decreases along the product lifecycle. For the
industrialization tasks, the closer they are to the physical
production of the product, the less they use the product DMU
and the more they are based on paper. This could be a
consequence of the lesser degree of attention that
industrialization design received in the past within the
concurrent and collaborative research initiatives.
After the project deployment, the functional design and the
industrial design had still separated environments, but the
industrial design process made use of PLM tools. The Virtual
Manufacturing, the management of the process structure and
the analysis of the assembly line flow were done in a not fully
integrated environment. Virtual Manufacturing was made case
by case. Each assembly process was studied and simulated
separately, being necessary to build the DMU of the specific
context of product and J&T for each process. The influence of
the industrial design in the functional design consisted of
feeding back information of manufacturing for the detection
and early correction of problems.
Despite the improvement reached with the implementation
of the Virtual Manufacturing practices in the A400M FAL
project, it was necessary to continue advancing in the reduction
of the still existing separation between the processes and
environments of functional and industrialization designs. That
is, to evolve from the concurrent (“DMU as master”) to the
collaborative (“iDMU for all”) paradigm.
As part of the implementation of the collaborative policy,
Airbus undertook the A320 CALIPSOneo project.
B. The A320 CALIPSOneo project: the last experience
This project is a joined effort involving Engineering
Companies, IT companies, PLM Vendors and Research
Centers and Universities [4].
The project has comprised a real implementation of an
iDMU for the industrialization of the A320neo Fan Cowl, a
mid size aerostructure. It has encompassed the industrialization
design by means of the Product, Process and Resources (PPR)
context, including assembly work instructions and their
deployment using augmented reality techniques. From the
industrialization design perspective, it comprised a wider scope
than projects dealing with 3D assembly simulation reported in
the literature [18].
Fig. 3. Example of an iDMU in the DPM environment
Fig. 4. Example of an iDMU in the DPE environment
The iDMU implementation was made in CATIA/DELMIA
V5. The iDMU was built by customizing the DELMIA V5
Manufacturing Hub [4]. The customized environment
comprised the PPR context, which was accessible by means of
two user interfaces. A 3D geometrical interface: Digital
Process for Manufacturing (DPM) and a database interface:
DELMIA Process Engineer (DPE). Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show an
example of both environments respectively.
In terms of scope, this iDMU implementation was focused
on the industrial design of the Fan Cowl, while the functional
design was managed by means of the existing PDM platform.
In order to maintain in the PPR context the product structure,
an ad-hoc application was developed that periodically updates
all the modifications released by functional design.
The Resources structure was populated directly in the PPR
context. Each resource comprises its 3D design and metadata.
The Process structure was also populated directly in the
PPR context. It comprises the FAL, station, assembly operation
and task levels, each one with his corresponding metadata. In
each level, each process includes the network of precedences
between its children. As a consequence, the process structure is
a collection of nested precedences networks. Each process also
has assigned all the products that have to be assembled and all
the resources that have to be used. Once the PPR context is
structured in this way, the Manufacturing Hub is able to
calculate the configuration of the digital mockup of product
and resources that corresponds to each process, taking into
account all the products assembled in the preceding processes,
the resources used in the process and the resources that remain
in use from previous processes. This capability of the
Manufacturing Hub provides automatically for each process, in
the 3D interface, the specific product and resources context, in
which it can be analyzed, defined and validated by means of
simulations (Fig. 5). Therefore, there is no more need to build,
manually and case by case, the digital mockup of product and
resources for defining each process and validating it by means
of simulations.
This capability also makes possible to review, step by step,
the execution of assembly processes, to select any process node
as the initial process and to control the lower lever of the
process structure to be executed.
Fig. 5. Static view of an iDMU assembly process context for simulation
Another capability provided by the Manufacturing Hub is
the control of the assignations of product and resources to the
processes. Colored flags in the 3D interface show if an element
of product or resource is assigned to a process or not. This way,
the assignations can be controlled and elements pending of
assignment can be detected.
Another capability of the Manufacturing Hub is to manage
effectiveness, not only for product, but also for processes and
resources. Thus the three processes, product and resources
structures are configured ones.
The Manufacturing Hub is implemented on an Oracle
database. Therefore, it can be customized by developing
specific user utilities. The main developed utilities were the
following:
• Airbus times system including the application of the
training curve.
• Verification of the coherency of process, product and
resources lifecycles based on sequence constraints
between the maturities states of each element lifecycle.
At any level and for each process, the Manufacturing Hub
makes possible to include assembly annotations and views to
illustrate the shopfloor documentation. These views can
include the assembly annotations and the design annotations
included in the product elements. As a consequence, all the
necessary information to create the shopfloor documentation is
included in the PPR context. A sub-project of CALIPSOneo
was dedicated to analyze the diversity of information that must
be shown in the shopfloor documentation and the methodology
necessary to include such information in the PPR context, as
well as to make the developments needed for an automatic
generation of the shopfloor documentation. A third sub-project
developed the applications needed to deploy the shopfloor
documentation by means of augmented reality in a tablet-PC.
As a result, the project CALIPSOneo has implemented one
real iDMU comprising the complete process, product and
resources structures of the A320neo Fan Cowl. In this iDMU
was possible to deploy the complete cycle of definition and
validation of several selected processes, and to obtain
afterwards the corresponding shopfloor documentation. The
achieved results confirm that the iDMU provides a common
platform to carry out all the industrial design tasks and to
record all its related information for the A320neo Fan Cowl.
III. THE A320 CALIPSONEO PROJECT RESULTS.
The main result of the project was the creation of an iDMU
of a real aerostructure. Such result proves that the iDMU
concept is viable and it can be implemented with current PLM
tools.
The PPR context of the commercial software provides a
generic data structure that has to be adapted for the processes
and resources of each particular implementation. In this case, a
specific data structure was defined to support the Airbus
industrial design process, the process structure nodes, the
resources structure nodes and their associated technological
information, 3D geometry and metadata.
The Process structure comprised four levels represented by
four concepts: assembly line, station, assembly operation and
task; each concept has its corresponding constraints
(precedence, hierarchy), its attributes and its allocation of
products to be assembled and resources to be used. Once the
PPR structures were defined, the system calculated the product
digital mock-up and the resources digital mock-up that relate to
each process node. As a result, in the 3D context (DPM), the
3D context specific to each process node was shown to the
designer. Then the designer created simulations to analyze and
validate the defined manufacturing solution. This validation of
the process, product and resource design, by means of Virtual
Manufacturing utilities in a common context, is a key feature in
the Collaborative Engineering deployment.
Once the process was validated, work instructions were
created as part of the iDMU. Such instructions were used to
create the shopfloor documentation. Ad hoc proofs of concept
developments were created to generate shopfloor
documentation with a basic level of automation and deployed
by means of augmented reality.
Although in this case, it was not implemented, since it
required an additional development to migrate the current PDM
solution used by the company. The iDMU provides a suitable
environment to carry out the Functional Design process. This
option would allow a better collaboration with the functional
design.
During the execution of the project, the reutilization
capabilities of the iDMU were also tested. The information
generated by the design activities, both 3D geometry and
metadata, were available for task downstream in the lifecycle.
Hence, it can be stated that the iDMU provides all the
necessary functionalities and features to be the unique
deliverable defining the functional and industrial design of an
aerostructure completely.
The software environment used to create the iDMU,
Dassault Systèmes V5 (DS V5) commercial applications
together with the ad-hoc developments, allowed eliminating the
separation between different platforms for process, product and
resources design. All the design activities could be done in a
single environment, helping to eliminate the separation
between design processes. All the design activities could be
carried out in parallel but in a coordinated way, sharing all the
information generated between them.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The implementation of the Collaborative Engineering
concept requires a progressive approach, where the
organization, the people and the technological resources
involved in the different processes evolve from the concurrent
practices and state to the collaborative ones. In that sense, the
execution of the A400M FAL project was a first step that
created the basis for the later success of the A320
CALIPSOneo project.
Out of the implementation of the A320neo Fan Cowl
iDMU and the knowledge derived from working in it, a main
conclusion can be drawn: the iDMU is suitable as the single
platform were the Collaborative Engineering socio-technical
process can by carried out.
In the iDMU the perspectives of functional, J&T and
industrialization design teams can be shared, challenged and
validated, evolving until a common understanding is reached.
 From the results, it can be concluded that the iDMU offers
features and capabilities to leverage the Collaborative
Engineering socio-technical process. The main ones are:
• The gathering of the process, product and resources
designs in a PPR context, is a big enabler to share the
diverse design perspectives, to discover errors hidden in
each design, to show up the divergences between them
and to facilitate the interchange between teams.
• The iDMU capabilities of information reutilization help
to test and validate a greater number of solutions, thus
improving the harmonization and optimization of the
process, product and resources designs.
• The iDMU as a single environment for the aerostructure
design facilitates that both the functional and the
industrial design mature at the same pace greatly
influencing each other.
The mentioned features support the iDMU as the engine
empowering the Collaborative Engineering paradigm. But
Collaborative Engineering deals not only with integrating
processes and platforms. It aims also integrating the functional
and design teams in a single team doing all the design
activities. This has a large set of implications, not only
technical, but mainly functional, which were not addressed in
the conducted projects.
V. NEXT WORK
As stated above, the A320 CALIPSOneo project focused
mainly in the implementation of an iDMU for the industrial
design process. But the Airbus vision is that the iDMU must be
the unique platform for all the activities along the aircraft
lifecycle. To achieve that, more developments are needed in
the following areas:
• The migration of current PDM functionalities into the
iDMU, so the functional design could be carried out
completely on the iDMU.
• To build in the iDMU the As Built product structure.
This requires interfacing the iDMU with the ERP and
MES systems to feedback into the iDMU the deviations
of the manufacturing of the aircraft.
• To extend the iDMU scope to the Services function.
Services engineers are also stakeholders of the product
development and should be able to exploit the iDMU to
design services and create service documentation.
• To extend the iDMU scope also to the external
enterprise engineering providers. The supply chain is
increasingly participating in the product development
and also should be able to work collaboratively.
• The Manufacturing Hub is a DS V5 tool. It is worth to
test how the iDMU could be implemented in a V6
platform and identify the gains that could be achieved.
View publication stats
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to colleagues
from Airbus Military, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid,
Universidad de Sevilla and partners of CALIPSOneo project
for their collaboration and contribution to the project.
REFERENCES
[1] T. Pardessus, "Concurrent engineering development and practices for
aircraft design at Airbus," in Proceedings of the 24th ICAS meeting,
Yokohama, 2004.
[2] R. Haas and M. Sinha, "Concurrent engineering at Airbus - a case
study," International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and
Management, vol. 6, no. 3/4, 2004.
[3] J.L. Menendez, F. Mas Morate, J. Servan, J. Rios. “Virtual verification
of an aircraft Final Assembly Line industrialization: an industrial case”,.
Key Engineering Materials. Material Science and Engineering. vol. 502,
2012, pp. 139-144.
[4] F. Mas, J. L. Menéndez, M. Oliva and J. Ríos. “Collaborative
Engineering: an Airbus case study”, Procedia Engineering, vol. 63,
2013, pp. 336-345.
[5] R. Garbade, W.R. Dolezal. “DMU at Airbus – Evolution of the Digital
Mock-up (DMU) at Airbus to the Centre of Aircraft Development”. In:
The Future of Product Development. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP
Design Conference, 3–12, Springer, 2007.
[6] S.C-Y. Lu, W. Elmaraghy, G. Schuh, R. Wilhelm. “A scientific
foundation of collaborative engineering”, CIRP Annals - Manufacturing
Technology, Volume 56, Issue 2, 2007, pp. 605-634.
[7] M. Cantamessa, F. Montagna and P. Neirotti, “An empirical analysis of
the PLM implementation effects in the aerospace industry”, Computers
in Industry, vol. 63, no. 3, 2012, pp. 243-251.
[8] D. Chen, T. Kjellberg, A. Von Euler, “Software Tools for the Digital
Factory – An evaluation and Discussion”, Proc. of the 6th CIRP
Sponsored Intl. Conf. on Digital Enterprise Technology, Advances in
Intelligent and Soft Computing, vol. 66, 2010, pp. 803-812.
[9] Van Wijk D, et al. “Integrated Design and PLM Applications in
Aeronautics Product Development”. In: Proc. of the 19th CIRP Design
Conf. Competitive Design, 2009, Cranfield University.
[10] C. Rouchon. “V6 deployment in new business Jet. Top 5 PLM
breakthroughs”. Proceedings of the 3D EXPERIENCE FORUM Europe
2012. Brussels. 2012.
[11] H. Braudel, M. Nicot, J.-C. Dunyach. Overall Presentation of the
ENHANCE Project. Air & Space Europe, vol 3, no. 3-4, 2001, pp.49-52.
[12] T. Nguyen Van, F. Féru, et al. Engineering Data Management for
extended enterprise - Context of the European VIVACE Project. Intl.
Conf. on Product Lifecycle Management, 2006, Bangalore, India.
[13] F. Mas, J. Ríos, J.L. Menéndez, A. Gómez. “A process-oriented
approach to modeling the conceptual design of aircraft assembly lines”.
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2012 vol.
67, no. 1-4, 2013, pp. 771-784.
[14] F. Mas, J. Ríos, J.L. Menendez. “Conceptual Design of an Aircraft Final
Assembly Line: a case study”. Key Engineering Materials. Material
Science and Engineering. vol. 502, 2012, pp. 49-54.
[15] F. Mas, J. Ríos, J. L. Menendez, J. C. Hernandez, A. Vizan. “Concurrent
Conceptual Design of Aerostructure Assembly Lines”. Proceedings of
14th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising. 2008, ISBN:
978-0-85358-244-1, pp 783-790.
[16] F. Mas, J.L. Menéndez, J. Serván, A. Gómez, J. Ríos. “Aerospace
Industrial Digital Mock-Up exploitation to generate assembly shop floor
documentation”. Proceedings of 29 International Manufacturing
Congress. Belfast. 2012.
[17] H-B. Jun, D. Kiritsis, P. Xirouchakis, Research issues on closed-loop
PLM, Computers in Industry, vol. 58, 2007, pp. 855-868.
[18] J. Butterfield, D. McAleenan, C. Gibson, S. Crosby, R. Curran, M. Price,
S. Raghunathan. Optimization of aircraft fuselage assembly process
using digital manufacturing. Journal of Computing and Information
Science in Engineering, vol. 7, no. 3, 2007, pp. 269-275.