Skip to content

Failure Ledger

Status: Customer-evidence container Validation status: Initial customer-described themes captured; no artifact-seen or pilot-confirmed entries yet

This page is the core learning asset for the pivot. A real entry here is worth more than ten polished scenarios.

The ledger records release failures where an artifact was wrong, incomplete, ambiguous, or missing engineering intent. Each entry should explain what happened, why the normal process missed it, who suffered, what it cost, and what RapidDraft could have shown before release.

Failure Classes

Class Meaning Example Product implication
Consistency two fields disagree drawing Rev C, BOM Rev B MVP-ready wedge
Completeness required field or file missing ERP material group blank, missing STEP MVP-ready wedge
Standards customer, product-family, or industry rule not satisfied required coating note missing for part class needs customer rules
Intent artifact lacks something required by function bearing seat has no fit callout judgment layer, high trust bar
Historical past lesson not reused same supplier failure as 2019 repeats judgment memory
Process ownership or approval unclear supplier package sent before quality approval workflow/accountability, maybe not a check

If most stories are consistency and completeness, the wedge may be enough but the moat is thin. If painful stories are intent or historical, the judgment layer has a stronger case.

Customer-Described Discovery Entries

These entries come from July 2026 calls and should guide demo selection. They are stronger than AI-generated bait scenarios, but they are not yet artifact-seen or pilot-confirmed.

Several entries now have account-specific workflow breakdowns: Volocopter, Bauer Kompressoren, Theegarten, Avilus, Rohde & Schwarz, and Deutsche Aircraft.

ID Evidence status Source Failure class Pain Product implication Next proof
RR-CUST-001 customer-described Volocopter / Vinicius standards / completeness NX drawing setup varies by engineer across layers, dimensions, reference sets, and validation targets drawing setup standards checker one concrete NX standard matrix, validator output, and failing drawing
RR-CUST-002 customer-described Volocopter / Vinicius + Aaron historical / search-reuse engineers cannot search by actual geometry/dimensions across PLM/ERP geometry and dimension search over CAD/PLM/ERP one bolt/screw search example with expected hits and known false positives
RR-CUST-003 customer-described Rohde & Schwarz / Robin standards / intent functional reviews miss requirements and guideline compliance requirements-driven review one material/area/environment requirement and artifact
RR-CUST-004 customer-described Bauer Kompressoren / Wolf Goetze historical / intent senior engineers map unstructured custom requests to prior designs from memory engineering search, design reuse, decision memory one anonymized request, one expected prior design, and one near miss
RR-CUST-005 customer-described Deutsche Aircraft / Evgeny completeness / process CATIA/3DEXPERIENCE drawings loop through manual completeness checks before SAP release drawing completeness and release-cycle reduction one checklist, one drawing package, and one SAP/BOM metadata export
RR-CUST-006 customer-described Ulrich standards / intent DFM checks must reflect actual machine park and quantity machine-aware DFM and quantity-dependent costing one machine constraint and one quantity-sensitive rule
RR-CUST-007 customer-reacted Dennis Schmitz standards / intent review should account for material density, AM orientation, CO2 footprint, process, rendering, and drawing-analysis errors material/process-aware review one part with material/route/scrap calculation
RR-CUST-008 customer-mentioned, needs confirmation Theegarten/Marcel signal, Bauer fit completeness / standards ERP/CAD metadata and engineering master-data fields are likely manually maintained Engineering Master Data Assistant new-part creation walkthrough: fields, systems, time, owner
RR-CUST-009 customer-described Avilus / Franz signal standards / completeness drawings should match company standard; notes mention missing dimensions, missing surfaces, missing material, bend parameters, Teamcenter drawing standards and completeness checker one drawing standard, one sheet-metal drawing, and one Teamcenter package/export
RR-CUST-010 customer-described Deutsche Aircraft / Jose V. C. consistency / historical / process correct CAE load report was lost, analysis used wrong loads, and the correct report was found later stress input readiness and load provenance one sanitized load report, one analysis input table, and one expected correct source

Ledger Template

Use this format for every real discovery story:

Field Description
Failure ID RR-YYYY-NNN
Source interview, artifact, pilot, internal hypothesis
Evidence status unvalidated, customer-described, artifact-seen, pilot-confirmed
Industry e.g. packaging machinery
Product family e.g. wrapping module
Release event e.g. supplier RFQ package
Persona affected e.g. manufacturing engineering lead
Artifact drawing, BOM, CAD, PDM metadata, ERP template, PPAP binder
What was wrong exact defect
Why normal process missed it process or technical gap
Who found it downstream role
When found supplier RFQ, manufacturing, inspection, field, audit
Cost or delay quantified if possible
What RapidDraft could show issue card and evidence
Required data exact files and fields
Detection method rule, extraction, RAG, geometry, customer rule, human review
False-positive risk low, medium, high
Product implication check, workflow, rule-learning, not productizable

Seed Hypothesis Entry

This entry is not customer-confirmed. It is included only as a template example.

Field Value
Failure ID RR-HYP-001
Source AI-generated packaging machinery scenario
Evidence status unvalidated
Industry packaging machinery
Release event Konstruktionsfreigabe to Einkauf and Fertigung
Artifact shaft drawing
What was wrong 35 mm bearing seat has no fit/tolerance callout
Why a consistency checker missed it title block, BOM revision, material, and part number all agree
How a senior engineer recognizes it shaft function and mating bearing imply a controlled fit
Downstream consequence ambiguous machining target, scrap, assembly delay
Required data drawing geometry, feature classification, mating context, customer rule or past example
Detection method not generic MVP; possible with customer-provided rules/examples
False-positive risk high
Product implication judgment layer, not first demo opener

Seed Commodity Checks

These are candidate wedge checks, not customer-validated pain.

ID Check Failure class Required input Feasibility
RR-CONS-001 Drawing revision matches BOM revision consistency title block + BOM revision column high
RR-CONS-002 Drawing part number matches BOM part number consistency title block + BOM row high
RR-COMP-007 All BOM children have part numbers completeness BOM high
RR-COMP-008 All make parts have released drawings completeness BOM + file inventory high/medium
RR-COMP-011 ERP item group populated for every new part completeness ERP item template/export high
RR-PKG-015 Supplier package includes PDF, STEP, BOM, and process notes completeness package inventory high
RR-CONS-010 STEP file revision matches released drawing revision consistency STEP filename/metadata + drawing revision medium
RR-CONS-003 Drawing material callout matches BOM material field consistency note extraction + BOM material medium

Intake Rule

Do not add polished invented scenarios as ledger entries. Add real failure stories, customer corrections, or pilot findings. If the entry is hypothetical, label it as hypothetical and keep it out of validation counts.

Open Questions

  • Which failure class appears most often in real conversations?
  • Which failure class creates the clearest budget owner?
  • Which real failure can be converted into the first one-check demo?

Sources