People are familiar with 2D drawings and use them as a means of defining a finished product. 2D drawings contain standard symbology that is universally understood and interpreted. However, in some cases, the existence of multiple, redundant data required to define a manufactured part can lead to deviations in the final 3D form. Interpretation errors, duplication errors or revision inconsistencies can contribute to costly mistakes that quickly translate into lower quality and productivity.

The use of 2D drawings for the purpose of communicating downstream production requirements adds an unnecessary burden to the product development cycle. A simple change in the product definition not only requires updated 3D digital data, but also necessitates numerous engineering changes to all 2D documentation associated with the product. Since it takes time to maintain this documentation, the lifecycle for implementing a product change grows with the extent of its associated 2D data.

Product teams can capture and share engineering requirements within the 3D model, thereby permitting full utilization of the design intent, eliminating the need for 2D drawings and ensuring that the final product complies with its engineering specifications.