E
xpensive, highly technical metrology equipment, which is used worldwide to measure critical parts in aerospace, automotive, nuclear, and communications industries (to name a few), has increased productivity and quality of virtually every product manufactured today. There’s an accompanying assumption that users of portable dimensional metrology equipment are highly trained in the field of dimensional metrology. To validate this assumption, I developed a survey using Surveymonkey.com and distributed the link though my network of metrology professionals. I also asked those individuals to pass the survey on to their constituents.
ADVERTISEMENT |
Definitions
|
This article examines the results of that survey, exploring how users of portable dimensional metrology equipment receive training, what training methods they prefer, and what percentage of users are trained by metrology professionals. It also examines the use and quality of training and reference materials provided to metrology equipment users.
During the last 30 years, the manufacturing world has changed dramatically. We have moved from designs drawn by draftsmen and verified by tradesmen using single dimension measurement equipment to computer-aided design (CAD) and dimensional metrologists. The implementation of CAD has led to improvements in engineering, which in turn have brought about improvements in fabrication, inspection, and analysis of key features and components of products.
The development of portable dimensional metrology equipment and software has taken coordinate measurement from environmentally controlled facilities, where parts had to be delivered to the coordinate measurement machine (CMM), to today’s technologically advanced machines that can be taken to the part, and where precise and accurate measurements can easily be obtained.
Changes in engineering, design, manufacturing, and inspection have created new requirements for those individuals responsible for collecting and analyzing measurement data. Single-dimension measurements required a great deal of mathematics to be performed by someone highly skilled in that field, as well as in operating the measurement equipment itself. Too often the assumption about portable dimensional metrology equipment and software is that “anyone can use it.” Although this perception contains some truth, an investment in an operator’s education must be considered as well. In today’s world of advanced engineering and design, senior management and quality managers should realize that metrologists must be able to perform sophisticated measurements and analyses to fully use the equipment and software in which the company has invested. Now that CAD-based software is used in conjunction with most measurement equipment, a dimensional metrologist must be savvy not only in operating the measurement equipment but also in manipulating a CAD model. These skills, combined with the ability to visualize 3-D, read blueprints, and understand geometric dimensioning and tolerancing (GD&T)—not to mention a solid background in statistics, trigonometry, and geometry—are also an essential part of being a successful dimensional metrologist.
Currently, many companies that use portable dimensional metrology equipment have developed internal training programs to meet their measurement requirements. Typically, operators are trained only to meet these specific requirements. They may have learned what to do through on-the-job training (OJT), or simply from other individuals who had previously been trained (cascade training). This type of training can result in a steeper learning curve or in critical errors due to the incorrect application of measurement equipment or analysis data. Generally, OJT and cascade training are diluted because the person providing the training can only disseminate information that he has retained from his own training. With each iteration of this type of training, more information is lost; this can result in reduced productivity and costly manufacturing errors.
Hardware manufacturers and software developers in the portable dimensional metrology industry often promote “ease of use” as an attribute of their product. This statement causes confusion when trying to promote and sell training, which is often viewed as expensive and time-consuming. Training’s return on investment must be emphasized during these discussions because operating skill is critical to the success of all parties involved—the customer, the operator, and the manufacturer/developer.
Certainly, we would not provide a Ferrari to a 13-year-old who has no driving experience and expect that she will experience no problems when she gets behind the wheel. However, putting an inexperienced operator behind a piece of metrology equipment with the same value as a Ferrari and expecting him to operate it successfully is not unusual.
Dimensional metrology applications
Dimensional metrology is used in the fabrication stages of many industries to control tooling, robotics, and assembly of critical components. Real-time feedback using sophisticated metrology software is an obvious advantage of the technology. The typical method is to use a CAD model of the tool or component and measure directly to the engineering design while the tool or component is being built.
Dimensional metrology is also used in the inspection process to verify that a part or structure meets the engineering design. Usually this is done after assembly has been completed. Often, the inspection process involves collecting a cloud of points and using software to accurately analyze the point deviations from the engineering model.
Both these methodologies require unique tools, skills, and an in-depth understanding of the equipment being used.
Who responded to the survey?
The survey was presented in sections covering background information, general training information, training experience (i.e., receipt of training), training materials, questions for training professionals, and questions for training service providers. This survey addressed training only as it pertained to the portable dimensional metrology and precision measurement industries.The survey was launched in February 2009 via a mass e-mailing to my personal metrology professional network. Postings on Linkedin Group pages and the web site Measurementconsultant.com also promoted the “Survey for Training in the Portable Metrology Industry.”
The following results and assumptions are based on the responses received for the key questions of the survey.
The first section, “Survey for Training in the Portable Metrology Industry,” included the following question:
Assumption: The majority of respondents were individuals operating metrology equipment in shops and factories that use dimensional metrology. These are the employees most affected by how training is implemented.
Other questions in this section included:
What type of company do you currently work for?
Nearly half (47%) worked in the commercial manufacturing sector, typically aircraft, automotive, shipbuilding, and other manufacturing.
Assumption: A great many portable dimensional metrology systems are used by the manufacturing sector. This is the largest single group affected by the training process.
How long have you been involved in the precision measurement/metrology industry?
Responses varied from zero months to 32 years, with the vast majority of respondents (68%) having more than 10 years of experience.
Assumption: The majority of people involved in portable dimensional metrology have a wealth of experience to draw from when performing their jobs. However, these people will be the first to leave the industry via retirement. To recruit new and younger workers to expand the industry, we must encourage portable dimensional metrology education in our educational institutions.
Which of the following best describes what you currently do?
Often a person’s job description doesn’t match what she actually does. This question was used to determine how respondents viewed their current positions as they pertain to metrology.
The largest number of respondents (28%) view themselves as “measurement experts,” defined as “I am called on to answer metrology questions and give input on hardware and/or software as well as run the equipment, take measurements, and analyze data.”
Another 22 percent consider themselves “jacks of all metrology,” i.e., “I am asked to do anything/everything to do with metrology for my company.”
A total of 15 percent referred to their positions as “measurement specialists,” meaning, “I run the equipment, take the measurements, and analyze the data.”
Assumption: Eleven possible categories were available for this question. A total of 50 percent of respondents viewed themselves and their metrology positions as critically contributing to their companies; another 15 percent considered themselves specialists. Thus, this is the group that requires and benefits the most from training programs.
What is the importance of training?
The survey’s next section was used to determine the importance placed on training at the companies where respondents are currently employed.
When new hardware or software is available at your company, what type of training is typically provided?
Results showed that 55 percent of the available training is self training or cascade training. Meanwhile, 18 percent of respondents were trained by a developer of the hardware or software. Only 27 percent received training by a subject-matter expert.
Assumption: With 30 percent of respondents training themselves, the industry must stress the importance of the skills required to perform this type of work efficiently. The costs to companies in manufacturing and quality due to incorrect metrology application are seen in increased scrap and loss of man hours. When these types of problems occur, it is often viewed as measurement equipment failure or a software problem rather than an application problem, especially in small companies that are inexperienced with metrology. Dimensional metrology’s value must be promoted through education; this can be done by ensuring that all users of portable dimensional metrology are properly trained.
When implementing new hardware/software at your current company, what priority is made for training?
This question was asked to determine how respondents view the decision-making process by their employers for purchases. Results show that 53 percent believe their companies decide what hardware or software they will buy before they consider what type of training will be required for the new product. Only 22 percent responded that their employers consider training prior to making a purchasing decision, and 25 percent begin to consider training only after the product has been delivered.
Assumption: The value of training to the success of implementing new hardware or software is not considered a critical part of the decision-making process.
Given the cost of new hardware and software, organizations could increase return on investment with better planning; this would positively affect all parties involved. Improved planning improves the organizations’ quality and efficiency; therefore, the new product could be viewed as the “best purchase we ever made.” This is good for the product’s manufacturer/developer because it encourages return business from the satisfied customer. Ultimately, the portable dimensional metrology industry itself is then viewed as a more valuable commodity.
Preferred types of training
The next series of questions addressed the respondent’s preferences on training.
When being trained on new hardware/software, what would you describe as your best training process?
Seven options were provided for the respondents:
1. Read a training manual and use tutorials
2. Use tutorials
3. Training by a subject-matter expert
4. Training on specific application by a subject-matter expert
5. Training by a subject-matter expert and then using hardware/software immediately on a job
6. All of the above plus easy-to-follow guidelines and information to help me do my job after the training is over
7. All of the above plus practice, practice, practice
Of these choices, option number seven was chosen 51 percent of the time.
Assumption: To feel prepared to succeed, users of portable dimensional metrology equipment prefer to have subject-matter experts provide the information to them, have adequate materials provided to which they can refer, and be allocated enough time to practice their new skills, not only in a classroom setting but also on the job.
The next question concerned users’ preferences about training:
Assumption: A near unanimous 98 percent of respondents prefer training that includes hands-on application of hardware/software during the training process, while only 2 percent chose tutorials. There were no responses for classroom or computer-based training, indicating that to offer a successful training class, some hands-on work must be included.
Are training opportunities available?
The next series of questions were provided to gather information about the training classes respondents had been given the opportunity to attend. Just 6 percent of respondents had never attended a formal training class and did not complete this portion of the survey.
The first question in this group asked users to rate the training they received.
Assumption: Training in the dimensional metrology industry is effective and considered an asset to users given the opportunity to attend formal training classes.
When you have received formal training in the past, what one thing do you remember about the trainer and the training presentation?
This question sought to determine the one quality that stood out with regard to the trainer/training. Five categories were provided, with results as follows:
1. Trainers knowledge of the use of the product in the real world: 50 percent
2. Trainers knowledge of the product: 30 percent
3. Trainers presentation: 9 percent
4. Training materials provided: 6 percent
5. Content of training class: 5 percent
Respondents were also given an opportunity to write their own comments. These were generally directed at trainers’ lack of experience and knowledge of the subject matter.
Assumption: Attendees of formal training classes value trainers’ backgrounds in using the product and applying their knowledge to do a specific metrology task.
The next question was as follows:
Assumption: Due to the difference in each individual’s learning process, these results would be considered nearly perfect from an instructor’s viewpoint. To attempt to have 100 percent of the respondents agree that there was sufficient time for training would mean that a high percentage also found there was some wasted time because they would likely not be fully challenged throughout the entire training process.
Are training materials useful?
The next series of questions were used to determine how trainees viewed the materials being provided, and if they are useful to the learning process.
Do you find training materials such as manuals and handouts helpful?
Three options were provided:
1. Always: 50 percent
2. Sometimes: 49 percent
3. Never: 1 percent
Assumption: Given that individual preferences to training materials vary widely, this type of split would be as good as could be expected.
What do you like in a training manual?
The following four options were offered in this question:
1. I like a training manual to be easy to understand and to be useable as a reference manual for years to come after the training: 43 percent
2. I like the training manual to provide the most common operations in easy-to-understand terms with pictures and text so that I can get familiar with the product fast, then grow my knowledge with hands-on use: 33 percent
3. I like the training manual to show and describe all of the functionality of the hardware/software: 20 percent
4. I am surprised when I get a training manual: 4 percent
Assumption: Training manuals that offer the subject matter in an easy-to-understand manner but contain all the necessary information that will be required by the operator are preferred. Training manuals that attempt to incorporate all the information about the product are favored by a smaller majority.
How would you prefer to receive training manuals?
Given five options (PDF, web site, paper/digital, paper only, and paper-compact size), the overwhelming choice was to receive paper and digital copies.
Assumption: Trainees would prefer to receive their manuals in a paper copy for the training class, but retain a digital copy for easy storage and reference. In general, training manuals from hardware/software developers have been extremely large and difficult to store after the training is complete; therefore, the digital copy for archiving purposes would be the choice. Providing a manual to be used during the training class and then returned would be a consideration in our “green world.”
Analysis of data collected from trainers
This portion of the survey addressed respondents who instructed a training session at some point during the previous six months. These questions were used to gather information on how the trainer views the training class process, how the company views the training, and its opinion of the instructor’s skills.
During the collection of responses, 34 percent answered that they have provided a training class in the previous six months; however, only 4 percent of respondents selected “trainer” as their position in their companies.
Of the individuals who provided training classes, 58 percent indicated that when they receive training on new hardware or software, the training is either self training or training by someone who was previously trained—not a formal training class.
These facts indicate that individuals providing training in the dimensional metrology industry do so as a secondary or tertiary function of their regular jobs, and time is not allocated for their skill development. This in itself raises concern about the priority given to education in the dimensional metrology industry.
Following are highlights from the trainers’ portion of the survey:
What type of training have you provided?
A total of 83 percent of trainers provided training on both hardware/software, 13 percent provided software only, and 4 percent provided application-specific training classes.
Assumption: The majority of training classes are provided for hardware and its interface to specific software applications. This requires trainers to be savvy about both metrology hardware and software.
Which of these do you feel is your strongest attribute when providing a training session?
Six options were provided; 69 percent selected “My experience in the real world using the product.”
Assumption: Trainers are experienced in using the hardware and software to perform measurement tasks. These people would be considered ideal candidates when training individuals to perform measurement tasks in a manufacturing environment.
Does your company sell training as a service?
This question was asked to determine how many respondents were performing training “in house” and how many for various companies and applications. A total of 72 percent of trainers responded that their companies were selling training as a service.
In marketing, is enough emphasis put on the value of training as key to the success in using the product?
This question was asked to help determine how manufacturers and developers view training within the context of the success of their product for their customers.
A total of 60 percent of respondents said there is not enough emphasis put on training when their companies market their new products.
Assumption: The value of training on portable dimensional metrology equipment is not a top priority when new products are brought to market.
Conclusion
The portable dimensional metrology industry has grown fast during the last 30 years due to advances in technology; however, the quantity and quality of training available to users has not kept pace.
With changes in types of hardware and software technologies, it is challenging for any individual to maintain a level of expertise without dedicating a portion of time to continuing education in the field. The time required for this continuing education in most cases is not being recognized by employers or hardware manufacturers and software developers. Eventually, the industry may reach a plateau due to the limitations of end-users; however, as with any industry when this happens, a few companies will survive. The majority may reach a point where they will have to stop and focus on retraining before they can continue growing, whereas continuous education leads to steady growth in knowledge without a plateau effect.
As an industry we must recognize the requirement for educational development and growth. Recently the Coordinate Metrology Society (CMS) identified the need for some type of certification for metrology professionals. This is the first step in recognizing the skills required to work in this specialized industry. A certification process will put a higher demand on the industry’s education system and will require individuals involved to meet some form of standard. This step can only be viewed as a positive one in the continual development and growth of the dimensional metrology industry. The industry must take these steps to be acknowledged as an authority; with this recognition will come more responsibility and opportunities for growth.
Add new comment