CAD has become what today is referred to as a “commodity”. It goes without saying that design engineering relies on authoring systems that enable a realistic model of the product being developed to be created on the screen –or on a powerwall – everybody appreciates that. But the model is not only easier to understand. It also allows digital methods to be used for validation, testing and quality assurance where once physical prototypes were imperative. The benefits reaped have now whet the appetite of completely new departments, which had previously never shown any interest in technical details. While technical drawings could only be read by “insiders”, design engineers, people with specialist know-how and spatial visuali-zation abilities, the 3D model can serve a wide variety of purposes for a wide variety of people.

At the same time, an enormous demand for exploiting this potential has developed. Theoretically – and technically –there is hardly any task that cannot already be completed with the help of a virtual product model. Theoretically, therefore, there is hardly any department in a modern manufacturing enterprise or other enterprise that would not also benefit from access to the 3D models created in the product development department. In practical terms, however, there are still a number of obstacles to be overcome.

If we want to put a name to the main obstacles involved, they are: CAD systems require too much specialist know-how to allow them to be used everywhere – they are simply too expensive for that; in its original format, the volume of data for the precise geometry and product structure is too big and the data is illsuited for a number of tasks; its handling is too complicated and the overhead involved in converting it to the required format is too great. And in addition to the actual geometry, this data also contains know-how that should not be exchanged at all.

On the one hand, these obstacles have meant that many of the benefits offered by CAx technologies have not yet been exploited to an extent that actually makes sense from the point of view of the processes, costs and quality of the work results. That is the negative aspect. On the other hand, they have also resulted in the creation of alternatives that allow industry to avoid these obstacles. That is the positive aspect. One of these alternatives is JT (Jupiter Tessellation). The reason why the VDA Working Committee PLM, together with the ProSTEP iViP Association, is lending its support to the process of standardizing JT on an international level is because this alternative enjoys both great popularity and widespread use within member companies. Leading car manufacturers’ and automotive suppliers’ loud call for standardization is a clear indication of the enormous benefits that key sectors of the industry expect as a result of using JT. If the next stage of virtual product development is to be achieved and physical prototypes are to be rendered even more obsolete, it must be possible to display and use the data generated in the development departments with the required level of quality, regardless of its origin. And with the guarantee that, in this format, the data is based on internationally recognized standards and will therefore remain valid and processable for years to come.

This paper provides information on JT and the path it has take from a proprietary visualization format to an international standard. It illustrates which processes and tasks can derive significant benefits from the format, where the limitations regarding its use lie and what points need to be remembered when using JT.

Another format, which was also created by Siemens PLM Software and provides a mechanism for the lightweight, geometry-less transfer of metadata and structure data, often crops up in connection with JT: PLMXML. This format is, however, not currently slated for standardization and is for the time being merely a product from Siemens PLM Software and as such has not been included in this White Paper. In the near future, the industry will also have to come to an agreement regarding the use of uniform, open standards for the exchange of structure data. Only then can the use of visualization formats like JT lead to the hoped-for success and the promised cost savings actually be achieved.