ISO 10303 STEP MEETING MINUTES

Myrtle Beach, SC 2002/02

ISO TC 184/SC 4/WG 3/T 23 (SHIP TEAM)

Co-Chairpersons

Ship and Ship Related APs

Ship ATSs

Related Standards Liaison

Attendees

Name

• Briggs, Ted

• Bush, Andy

• Downie, Blair

• Fry, Tony

• Gischner, Burt

• Grau, Matthias

• Haenisch, Jochen

• Han, Soonhung

• Inouye, Takashi

• Jenssen, Peik

• Kakuno, Hiroyuki

• Kendall, John

• Kim, Yong-Dae

• Lazo, Pete

• Lee, Jong-Kap

• Mays, James

• Radack, Gerry

• Shulga, Nikolay

• Turner, Tim

• Ujigawa, Koichi

• Wood, Ron

Monday 

After the general plenary session the T 23 meeting started.

 Jim Mays opened the T 23 meeting.  Annex C contains the opening plenary report submitted to WG 3 for T 23.  John Kendall attended the WG 3 plenary for T 23.  

The agenda (Annex B) was reviewed and adjusted to align with availability of attendees.

AP, ATS, Project Reports

NIDDESC projects on Harvest and ESTEP were reported by Burt Gischner and Ron Wood.  AP 216 advanced comments indicate about 40 comments but only one of a technical error type.  AP 218 should be ready about March to go to WG 3 Convenor.  AP 215 should be ready in March also to go to WG 3 Convenor.  Pete Lazo is working on Appendix D.

Tony Fry discussed the change in focus and name for EMSA.  The new name is the Marine e-business Standards Association (EMSA) is looking more to business processes and XML.  EMSA is starting some new efforts, WunderMar and Trills, that will be presented at the Stockholm meeting.

Ted Briggs discussed ISE demonstration use of XML.  Several approaches are being used.  XML OSEB and SOAP (AIM tags) and XML EDO (ARM tags) are being developed and an XLST translator is being developed to go from OSEB to EDO.  See Annex E.

Tim Turner AP ARM/AIM translator.  Tim discussed approach and issues as part of MoD effort.

John Kendall reported on the WG3 Plenary.  Express schema repository will be set up at STEP Tools, including old versions that may have been implemented against.  This is a service and not the official repository, that is the ISO documentation.  Both long and short forms are needed. AP 234 needs to be worked to keep mandatory retirement from taking place.

Test cases and documentation formats were discussed for AP 216, 218, 227 and 215.  Ted Briggs started the test case discussion.  The availability of test cases is important to get us from the balloting of the APs to real commercial products.  The Torpedo Weapons Retriever was presented as a test ship.  Ted started with a review of the 5 AP 216 test cases developed for ESTEP.   The emerging format is: 

1. Description
2. Purpose
3. Exchange content
4. Conformance class
5. Test data diagram
6. Components
7. ARM application objects

Yong-Dae Kim and Ted Briggs will share test case and ATS 318 information to try and come up with a test case document for AP 218.  We may decide to cancel ATS 318 if the combined document meets T 23 and SC 4 requirements.  Jerry Radack started the discussion on AP 227.  He did a walk through of the NSRP 0424 Version 3.1 Users Guide.  Ted Briggs did walk through of the ESTEP AP 227 test case document.

Tuesday

AP226 Oslo workshop report (Haenisch) was given. Meeting was held in Oslo.  EMSA was invited but it ended up being a Norwegian meeting.  Shiopyard groups are consolidating and are needed in sharing component information for the usual reasons.

AP216 Advance resolution review

Blair Downie provided advanced comments.  See Appendix G.

Some of the AP216 Issues from Sener and ESTEP.

1.  external_identification_items should be a cardinality of one.

2. need rule on all external_items and external_rels to make GUID values match on the applied_identification_item from the dummy product_def and the applied external_identification_assignment

3. Keep Person, organization, and person_and_organization in document references.

4.  id_assignment rules: Rules need to check for ‘version_id’ or ‘globally unambiguous identifier’ in role.

5.  Rule 5.2.4.54 needs to be one prop_def and prop_def_rep (Move WR1 text up to rule definition.

6. Add Group.name roles as parameters for item_structure attributes so can tell what ARM role is for each group.  Use ARM attribute names. Add to Group and Link_to_group templates.

T 23 Plan

The T 23 Plan was discussed and there are various options for what the team can pursue after the ship structural envelope APs are approved.  It was assumed we would not disband T 23 and would continue development of AP 226 and 234. 

Spokesmen for STEP development and implementation voiced where their organization's principle interest lies for future effort.  

1. EMSA stated and interest in machinery systems and AP translator certification.
2. Warship Support Agency in MoD is AP 232, AP 233 and through life support PLCS.
3. NAVSEA is interested in implementing all existing APs and working with emerging APs to influence them to address ship issues and needs.
4. JMSA is interested in implementation of the existing ship APs.
5. NGSS is interested in manufacturing, implementation of existing APs, engineering APs,  and influencing emerging APs for ship industry interoperability.
6. GD is interested in manufacturing, implementation of existing APs, and engineering analysis APs.
7. Korea STEP Center is interested in implementation of the existing ship APs.
8. Korean Navy is in AP 232, AP 233 and through life support PLCS.
9. Intergraph is interested in implementation (integration, interfaces, data sharing).
10. GL is interested in mechanical products, PDM and implementation (usage guides/implementers agreements).
11. DNV is interested in machinery systems (AP 226, 15926) and PLCS.
12. STEP Tools Inc is interested in interoperability testing of the ship APs.
13. CTC in interested supply chain management, libraries of standard parts .

We considered options for developing a consensus and team effort for future planning. The priorities that were developed by T 23 are listed in Annex H  (not in priority order).

Jim Mays will develop a priority list of the possible T 23 efforts and ask the T 23 email list for input.  Tony Fry will create a white paper on the benefits of the proposed T 23 efforts.

AP 226

Gerry Radack provided a walk through of AP 226.  

Major Issues ?

• Need to add RDL referencing (flexible library definition/content, quicker updates)

• Normative vs informative dictionaries - Need to precisely define when a library conforms to the normative library – need ability to add attributes as become defined

• Need to classify machinery via  functional breakdown

• Need to add machinery to systems

• Need to add connectivity model to support system componnents

• Need to locate machinery relative to physical breakdown (deck, frame, offset, compartment)

• Need to add external reference to 227, 218, 212

• Must support external reference for AP 215 product structure by space

• Units are not consistent with SCM usage

• Equipment footprint, bolt hole location / orientation

• Need to harmonize product_anomoly with PLCS

• Hull applicability

  Minor Technical ?

• Clause 3 – probably needs cleanup, may have redundant definitions

• UoF - not harmonized with SCM

• Nuclear should not be out of scope

• Conformance classes – need to examine structure

• GUID – remove company name, local name

• AP 226 is based on PLIB Part 24 – implicit modeling, PLIB has added  Part 25 – explicit modeling is now supported (modeling - what instances belong to class, must be same for one library)

• Set value attributes – now supported by PLIB Part 25

• Product_composition – should use item_structure

• Approval event – enum slightly different than SCM

• Ship dictionary not consistent w general_characteristics definition

• Properties are not segregated by life cycle stage (Zabi – intended to create property groups, but deferred)

• Properties should be listed alphabetically

• Need to include UoF in Annex G captions

• Need to ensure occurrence attributes and catalog attributes are seperated

• Stir-up pump –recrocapting, not rotating, but subtype of rotating_pumps – mixing function and movement (should be orthoganol)

• Change pump to rotary pump, add recropcrating_pump, add stir-up, bicycle pump – check AP 221 classification

• Add diagrams to Annex L

• Multiple failures – need additional attributes for time, originating person, etc.

• Use standard terminology for failure –  MTTF

• Add MTTF to dictionary

• Need to be able to add occurrences to systems  (product_composition??)

• Product_composition – AIM is consistent with item+item_structure, ARM is not consistent with SCM

• Figure K.5 – should reference Part 24?

• Figure K..5 – add libraries

• Clarify mapping from library space to design space

• Put nuclear in of scope.  With PLIB vendors can supply attributes of their systems critical to meeting user's nuclear requirements. 

• Consider upgrading from PLIB Part 24 (implicit properties) to 25 (explicit properties) in library_references BB. 

1. How can RDL be referenced for parts libraries.  Should it be a separate conformance class?
2. Include vessel functional reference. The mechanical function is based on requirements.  DNV is working on a model.
3. Stability is also an issue for equipment location and weight.
4. .

Hiroyuki Kakuno presented JMSA issues against AP 226. AP 226 was compared with ZHWeb Standard Data Items.

Uwe Langbecker from GL discussed WIPS and AP 226.

Wednesday

T 23 members attended liaison meetings all day.

Thursday

Liaison Reports

Data Retention - Burt Gischner reported that  PDES Inc is starting an aerospace project.  Automotive was going to Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) to propose an effort.  They encouraged the ship attendees to undertake a similar pilot effort to identify problems and benefits.

Implemeters Forum - Ted Briggs reported on his presentation.  Unfortunately it was sparsely attended for the ESTEP presentation.  ESTEP Implementers Forum presentation is Annex O.  The follow on efforts presented a test case for PDM schema.  Blair Downie presented shape representation problems in AP 203.  For example they send a design, manufacturing, and inspection representation.  Tony Fry reported on STEP NC implementations.  There were about 4 presentations.  There is concern about losing the feature information in 224.  SC1 and SC4 met in liaison to improve coordination and cooperation.  Existing systems needs to work for a long time to come to address legacy hardware.  SC 4 will control new AP 2xx on "process planning".  Plates and structural steel are process planning areas where T 23 participants should take the lead.  It must also address manual tools (grinding, etc), not just "NC" processes.  MoD (Tony Fry) may be able to provide assistance to through LSC (Alan Crawford) to help MoD manufacturing (Margaret Crawford).

Dictionary Workshop - ECADDS, Rosetta Net and ECCMA provide definitions of terms.  Uwe Langbecker reported that guidelines have been developed and recommendations by a non profit group.  The discussion was divided into five topics.  Members get to respond on the domains that dictionary of codes fit in.  30k of definitions available.  It is free to members who can distribute freely.  See www.eccma.org for information.  Another Chinese group has identified over 400 dictionaries for mechanical parts.  They have identified some categories that match ship needs.  There is no one simple solution for all needs.

Intelligent Schematics - Jim Mays reported AP 221 NWI is restarting for schematics and uses AIC 504 and 505 which will be wrapped and voted as modules.  It also builds on the RDL and the PDM schema.  It is addressing AP 212, 210, and 227.  AP 227 is adding schematic capability into Plant Spatial Configuration.  Intelligent schematics is a PWI planning to use modular technology to develop a new modules for schematics.   Ron Wood put up definition and functional requirements of intelligent schematics.  The document he referenced is in Annex M.  He commented that intelligent schematics is a work in progress and they are still looking for leaders and editors to take over the module development.  We finished by  discussing voting on the AP 221 NWI.  T 23 participants need a schematic capability.  T 23 decided to vote yes on the AP 221 NWI with the requirement that it remove references to AP 210, 212, and 227 and clarifies that AP 221 will build on 15926 RDL and PDM Schema.   

AP 227 CD Review

AP 227 ballots comments was next on the agenda and a logical follow on to the schematics discussion.  Burt Gischner identified conformance classes, Edition 2 additions, work shop attendees, over 150 comments.  Five key categories of comments were identified and are in Appendix L.  The planned schedule is ambitious.  It is largely dependent on input from others to meet the schedule.

AP 234 Review

Jochen Haenisch conducted a walkthrough of AP 234 and discussed activities (Marvin, Electronic Port Clearance, Nauticus, Mindnet, Intelligent Portable Pilot Assistance, NIas, Environmental reporting), business cases (requisitions, operational monitoring, emergency response, ship-port communication) and reports (operation, safety records) and scope (survey data for classification society, harmonization with IEC 1162-4, events and activities,  and relationship between operations and previous life cycle information).  

T 23 agreed the title still describes AP even with new scope.

AP 236 Review

Roberto Goncalves briefed the team on AP 236 integration of AP 214 (properties), 225 (space), and PLIB part 20 (expression).

SCM Building Blocks

Pete Lazo briefed the status of the Building Blocks.  The BB exploder was turned off while the DIS documentation was prepared for 216, 218, and 215.  Anyone doing work requiring the BBs should get the updated models.

WG 3 Plenary Summary

HTML publishing guidelines are going out in a month but will be enforced immediately.

Resolutions were reviewed.

Plenary will be at same times as usual in Stockholm.

Long range data retention was discussed as an open technical forum topic but less than half the WG 3 plenary attendees indicated interest so WG 3 will not propose it.

T 23 Closing

WG 3 T 23 Closing Plenary Report is Annex N.

Updated action items are in Annex P.

Updated T 23 Schedule is Annex Q.

Generated T 23 agenda for Stockholm Sweden in Annex R.

T 23 Adjourned

March 1 at 11:30 am the T 23 meeting at Myrtle Beach closed.

LIST OF ANNEXES

Contact T 23 Chairpersons for copies of annexes.

Annex A - Acronyms

Annex B – Myrtle Beach Agenda

t23-annex-b-agenda.html

Annex C - Opening Plenary Report

t23-annex-c-my-plenary.ppt

Annex D - AP 215 Status

t23-annex-d-ap215_status.ppt

Annex E - ISE XML

t23-annex-e-my-ise2xml.ppt

Annex F - ESTEP Status

t23-annex-f-my-estep.ppt

Annex G - AP 216 DIS Advanced Comments

t23-annex-g-my-ap216-comments-estep.doc

Annex H - T 23 Priorities

t23-annex-h-my-t23priorities.doc

Annex I - DNV AP 226 Comments

t23-annex-i-my-dnv-AP226-comments.doc

Annex J - JMSA AP 226 Comments

t23-annex-j-my-jmsa-ap226-comments.ppt

Annex K - GL AP 226 comments

t23-annex-k-my-ap226-lessons-wips.ppt

Annex L - AP 227 CD Ballot Summary

t23-annex-l-my-ap227-summary.ppt

Annex M - Draft PWI for Intelligent Schematics

t23-annex-m-my-PWI_Intelligent Schematics_02_02_22.doc

Annex N - Closing Plenary

t23-annex-n-my-plenary-close.ppt

Annex O - Ship Building Implementors Forum

t23-annex-o-my-Shipbuilding Imp Forum.zip

Annex P - Action Items

t23-annex-p-my-actn-2002-02.doc

Annex Q - T 23 Schedule Update

t23-annex-q-my-schd-2002-03.doc

Annex R - T 23 Stockholm Sweden Agenda

t23-annex-r-my-stockholm-agenda.htm