Unleash Story
On Demand
Before You ReQuote It: Finding the Part You Already Have
For manufacturing engineers, estimators, and sourcing teams who keep re-quoting parts they already have. Jacob Elkin of CADDi and Nicholaus McKenna of TRUMPF explain why past parts are hard to find, show how similarity search in the CADDi AI Data Platform surfaces them, and share how design reuse cuts cost, tooling changeovers, and inventory.
On-Demand Webinar: Before You ReQuote It, Finding the Part You Already Have
Every new part number carries cost long after release, from design and sourcing to tooling, inventory, and aftermarket support. Yet when an RFQ arrives, engineers and estimators often can't find the similar part they already designed, quoted, or tooled, so the work starts from scratch. In this SME Media webinar sponsored by CADDi, Jacob Elkin, Director of Solutions at CADDi, explains why past parts are so hard to find and demonstrates how similarity search in the CADDi AI Data Platform surfaces them.
Nicholaus McKenna, Smart Factory Project Manager at TRUMPF, then joins for a fireside chat on how design reuse shows up on the shop floor, from automation to part consolidation.
You'll Learn:
- Where design reuse fits at each stage, from RFQ and design start through sourcing, tooling, and part release, and what one avoidable part number can cost over its lifetime
- Why parts get indexed by customer name, part number, and folder instead of geometry, material, and features, and how similarity search closes that gap
- How design reuse and modularity make parts easier to automate, cut tooling changeovers, and simplify purchasing and inventory
Key takeaways
- Design reuse questions come up at five points between an RFQ and part release. Jacob Elkin walks through six steps, from the RFQ arriving to the part being released. At five of them, someone asks a reuse question. Estimating asks whether the part has been quoted before. Design start asks whether a template already exists. Sourcing asks whether something similar is already being bought. Tooling asks whether a fixture, jig, or tool already exists. Part release asks how the data and inventory will be managed over the product's life. Every unanswered question adds cost.
- Parts are hard to find because of "a mismatch of the index, not of effort." Drawings and CAD are usually filed by customer name, part number, date, project folder, and document type. Estimators, engineers, and buyers need to search by what the part physically is: geometry, size, material, thickness, finish, tolerances, process, and who set the original cost and how. In a live poll during the session, the most common way engineers found past parts was asking the senior engineer who remembers.
- One avoidable part number can cost tens of thousands of dollars over its life. In Jacob's illustrative example, a cast part bought at about $65, at about 25,000 units a year, over a life of about 23 years, carried about $35,000 in lifetime cost. That covers design, sourcing, tooling, and part release. Across a portfolio with 150 to 250 avoidable parts, the cost reaches the millions. Reusing an existing tool for a similar part cut piece price by about 6% in the example. Jacob called that conservative, citing typical benchmarks of 10% to 25%.
- Similarity search follows four steps: ingest, extract, index, and rank. The CADDi AI Data Platform ingests 2D drawings, 3D CAD, and converted spreadsheets. It extracts attributes with an AI model CADDi developed when it was a parts manufacturer. It then indexes each part by geometry, part subcategory, and material preform, and ranks parts in order of similarity. Engineers still decide whether a match can be reused. A part may be the same geometry with a different hole pattern, a different revision, the same part made for a different customer, or the same part quoted differently.
- On the shop floor, design reuse makes automation possible. Nicholaus McKenna of TRUMPF explains that suction cup and magnet automation has fixed profiles, so scattered hole patterns and complex louvers can force gripper changeovers. Standardizing part profiles avoids that. Consolidating from 10 bolt sizes to two simplifies design, purchasing, and factory inventory. In one redesign, a bracket made from four laser cut and welded pieces became a single laser cut part with six bends, removing about four process steps.
Chapters
- 00:04 Welcome, speakers, and agenda
- 05:18 The cost of designing a part twice
- 10:19 Where design reuse belongs, from RFQ to part release
- 12:00 What one avoidable part number really costs
- 17:52 Why past parts are so hard to find
- 26:38 Search tools and how similarity search works
- 33:01 Live demo: similarity search in the CADDi AI Data Platform
- 37:20 Where design reuse pays off
- 39:05 Fireside chat with TRUMPF: design reuse on the shop floor
- 49:56 The future of fabricated parts and wrap up
Meet the speakers
Jacob Elkin
Jacob Elkin, Director of Solutions, CADDi (LinkedIn)
Jacob Elkin is Director of Solutions at CADDi. He started his career as a Product Development Engineer and has spent over a decade in manufacturing operations since. He spent nearly six years at McKinsey in product development and procurement, where he ran the Chicago Design Lab and led a team of 10+ engineers and data scientists, then digital manufacturing and strategy roles at Fast Radius, then a 100+ person engineering and operations organization at SyBridge Technologies, which builds injection tooling and additive parts for automotive, industrial, and medical customers. He holds a BS in nuclear engineering from Purdue.
Nicholaus McKenna
Nicholaus McKenna, Smart Factory Project Manager, TRUMPF (LinkedIn)
Nick is a Smart Factory Project Manager at TRUMPF, the world's technological and market leader in machine tools for flexible sheet metal processing and industrial laser technology. In this role, he leads Smart Factory installations from purchase order through site acceptance testing. His role requires a deep understanding of each customer's parts, designs, and production processes, insight he uses to align system configuration and automation technology with how the factory actually operates. Before TRUMPF, he worked as a Design Engineer and Design-to-Value Specialist at McKinsey & Company, where he conducted cost and design analyses on industrial and commercial products to reduce manufacturing cost and increase competitive value, work directly rooted in the principles of design reuse and standardization.
Frequently asked questions
Why is it so hard for engineers to find parts they have already designed?
Jacob Elkin calls it "a mismatch of the index, not of effort." Drawings and CAD are usually filed by customer name, part number, date, and project folder. What estimators, engineers, and buyers need is the physical part: its geometry, size, material, thickness, finish, tolerances, and process. File formats add to the problem. Scanned TIFFs and vendor prints carry no searchable data, so a PLM search or a call to a senior engineer often comes up short.
What does one avoidable part number cost a manufacturer?
Speaking about a moderate complexity assembly costing $50 to $100, Jacob said the lifetime total is often greater than $30,000. In his illustrative example, a cast part bought at about $65, at about 25,000 units a year, over a life of about 23 years, carried about $35,000 in lifetime cost. That covers design, sourcing, tooling, and part release. Across 150 to 250 avoidable parts in a portfolio, the cost reaches the millions.
What counts as a "similar part" in similarity search?
Similarity search in the CADDi AI Data Platform compares parts by geometry, part subcategory, and material preform, and ranks them in order of similarity. Jacob noted that "similar" can mean several things: the same geometry with a different hole pattern, the same part in a different revision, the same part made for a different customer, or the same part quoted differently. The tool doesn't approve reuse. Engineers do.
How does design reuse affect manufacturing automation?
Nicholaus McKenna of TRUMPF explained that sheet metal automation often uses suction cups or magnets with fixed profiles. Very different designs, scattered hole patterns, or complex louvers can stop the automation from picking up parts. Modular designs across a part portfolio save time and tooling, because teams don't have to swap grippers or move from suction cups to magnets.
Is design reuse only worth it for large manufacturers?
No. Nick said smaller job shops generally have little reuse but are great candidates for automation, while larger companies with higher part throughput are generally more ready for it. Either way, reviewing the part portfolio pays off. That can mean combining features like holes, threading, and chamfers, or consolidating fasteners, for example from 10 bolt sizes down to two. Jacob summed up that design reuse and automation are good for every size of company.
Related resources
Recommended for those facing these challenges
Speakers
Other Webinars
View All Webinars
Webinar Registration