Initial Graphics Exchange Specifications

Drawings created with Computer-Aided Design Most companies find it difficult to enforce the use of
(CAD) tools, which were introduced in the 1960s, a common set of CAD/CAM tools within their organiza-
represented tremendous productivity gains over paper tion, much less across (multiple) supply chains and
drawings, such as ease to revise and archive. CAD among joint venture partners. Because of the lack of any
tools also opened new opportunities, such as enabling common set of tools, a common format for neutral file
manufacturing instructions to be derived automatically exchange is needed. Using a neutral standard for
and executed directly from the drawing. Nevertheless, as transferring information across systems drastically
computer design and manufacturing tools proliferated to reduces the requirements for translators. The cost
meet increasingly complex and diverse engineering benefits are suggested by the reduction in necessary
needs, so did the formats that each tool used to capture translators shown in Fig. 1. It illustrates that by using a
and store product data. While paper drawings can be neutral file exchange, the number of translators
marked up by anyone with a pencil, a product model (for N systems) can be reduced from scaling as n (n –1)
that cannot be interpreted by the necessary CAD tool to 2n .
is useless. For organizations to share designs across In 1979, a series of events catalyzed the CAD vendor
various CAD and Computer-Aided Manufacturing and user community to create the first national standard
(CAM) tools, their data files must be formatted in a for CAD data exchange, which is documented in the
manner that the tool can recognize. This requirement has report Initial Graphics Exchange Specification, Version
become increasingly important in an age where large 1.0 [1]. CAD systems were less than ten years old, and
manufacturers often form joint ventures to address a only a handful of products had any significant market
business opportunity, and where partners in a supply penetration. Even at this early stage, users were over-
chain are being called upon to deliver an increasingly whelmed by the inability to share data among these
complex array of services. tools and with their own internally developed databases.

Fig. 1. Illustration of the benefits of using a neutral file exchange.

246
In September 1979, frustration came to a head at the Boeing supplied the structure of its Computer Integrated
two-day Air Force Integrated Computer-Aided Manu- Information Network (CIIN) database. Both GE and
facturing (ICAM) Industry Days meeting [2]. On the Boeing contributed their existing translators. A core
first day, a representative from General Electric team formed, including representatives from NBS
(GE) challenged a panel of CAD vendors, which (Roger Nagel), Boeing (Walt Braithwaite), and GE (Phil
included ComputerVision, Applicon, and Gerber, to Kennicott). Team members had worked closely with
work together to enable an exchange mechanism. While each of the vendors on internal integration projects. This
this need was intuitive from a user’s perspective, prior experience built the expertise and trust needed to
this was a very threatening proposition to the CAD craft a solution in a very short time, and neither vendor
vendors—who feared that sharing the structure of their felt it gave an unfair advantage to the other.
databases publicly would be tantamount to giving away Soon after the ICAM Industry Days, NBS called an
their competitive advantage. It would have been easy to open meeting at the National Academy of Sciences
gloss over the challenge; after all, the major vendors all (October 10, 1979). Around 200 people attended to
had at least token representation on the ANSI (American herald the birth of IGES. There was an atmosphere of
National Standards Institute) committee responsible for extraordinary excitement, although not everyone was
CAD standards. Instead, the ComputerVision represen- readily supportive. In addition, although it was hotly
tative responded with a challenge of his own: if Boeing debated, the name was accepted eventually with the
and General Electric (and perhaps others) would con- minor change from “Interim” to “Initial.”
tribute the CAD translators they had already developed, After two critical reviews, the IGES team released its
the vendors would share their database structures. first draft in 1980, containing geometry, graphical data,
What led to this offer was just the right mix of and annotations. The IGES specification was brought to
business motivation and intrigue. Large Navy contracts the ANSI Y14.26 committee for standardization. The
were looming on the horizon, and no vendor wanted to first version of IGES was adopted as an ANSI standard,
look unresponsive to customer requirements. Y14.26M-1981 [3].
In the evening after the panel, several interested IGES successfully met a critical need. The IGES
parties gathered and asked themselves if a common publication [1] establishes information structures to be
translator was really possible. The room had the right used for the digital representation and communication of
mix of people and ideas at the right time. This included product definition data. The specification is concerned
an Air Force, Navy, and NASA representative, each with the data required to describe and communicate the
willing to fund $25,000 for such an effort. A National essential engineering characteristics of physical objects
Bureau of Standards representative, after a call to his such as manufactured products. Such products are
boss at home for approval, was willing to champion it as described in terms of their physical shape, dimensions,
chair and coordinator. The IGES Organization was and information that further describe or explain the
formed by NBS in the spring of 1980. With the funda- product. The processes that generate or utilize the
mentals to a common translator decided, conversation product definition data typically include design, engi-
turned to a name for this new translation project. A neering analysis, production planning, fabrication,
minimalist approach was suggested: material handling, assembly, inspection, marketing, and
field service. [4]
I – Interim, to suggest that it would not replace
The Initial Graphics Exchange Specification is the
ANSI’s work
U.S. national standard for the exchange of data between
G – Graphics, not geometry, to acknowledge that dissimilar CAD systems. The IGES standard, now in its
academics may come up with superior mathe- sixth revision, has been expanded to include most con-
matical descriptions cepts used in major CAD systems. All major and
E – Exchange, to suggest that it would not dictate how most minor non-PC-based CAD systems support some
vendors must implement their internal databases version of the IGES standard. Some of the over 1000
PC-based CAD systems (including all of the major
S – Specification, not to be as imposing as a standard.
ones) include some IGES support.
The panel reported on the second day, and the wheels This first edition of IGES [1] served as a landmark to
were set in motion to create an “IGES.” Once the panel introduce a change in the way manufacturers thought
admitted that a common translation mechanism was about capturing and sharing their information about
possible, it was impossible to stop the momentum of the product data. As enhancements to the original version
customers’ enthusiasm and expectations. Applicon and continued and IGES became an American National
ComputerVision agreed to open up their internal data- Standard, the IGES Specification was routinely in the
bases, GE offered its internal database structure, and top best sellers from the National Technical Information

247
Service (NTIS). Records show that through 1988 NTIS Memorial Award. The first author, Roger Nagel, was a
sold 2055 copies of IGES 3.0, and through 1991 sold NBS staff member at the time and is now the Harvey
1295 copies of IGES 4.0. This U.S. national standard Wagner Professor of Manufacturing Systems Engineer-
was also renowned internationally; it was adopted ing in the Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
nationally by Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom, Department at Lehigh University. He created Lehigh’s
to name a few. IGES was the precursor and provided the Robotics Research Institute, established and directed the
technical groundwork to the international standardiza- Manufacturing Systems Engineering Program, and
tion effort known as STEP—Standard for the Exchange served as Executive Director of Lehigh’s Iacocca
of Product model data. The national and international Institute for Competitiveness Research. While an
impact on the development and deployment of product employee of NIST, Nagel was a key member of the
data standards in manufacturing has provided economic scientific team developing the Factory Hierarchical
benefits to many implementing companies using Control System in the Robotics Group. This work on
product data standards for exchanging their data. hierarchical control systems, performed with James
Examples of improvement brought about by the use Albus, Tony Barbera, and Gordon Vanderbrug, has been
of IGES include [5]: the basis of hundreds of computer-based control systems
for automation over the last 20 years. Nagel continues to
• Electric Boat Corporation, along with the rest of
serve as a technical advisor and consultant to NIST’s
the SEAWOLF (the US Navy’s newest attack
Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory.
submarine) Team, pioneered the use of IGES to pass
The other two authors were from industry. Walt
construction data in digital format directly from
Braithwaite is currently Corporate Vice President
design to manufacturing.
for Company Offices Administration at the Boeing
• Honeywell Commercial Flight Systems (Minnea- Company. He has held numerous positions within
polis Operations), with its use of IGES, reduced Boeing, including Director of Program Management
engineering change orders from 40-120 (1989) to for the 737 and 757 airplane programs and Chief of
0-3 (1991). Engineering Operations for the 747 and 767 programs.
As the lead engineer responsible for technical direction
• Piccione Machine Tool & Gear made a significant
in developing an information network to integrate
CAD/CAM investment, using IGES for a neutral
computer-aided design and computer-aided manufac-
exchange format. Consequently, the process of
turing, he led development of Boeing’s common data
manipulating their data was reduced from a manual
format and translators, which were used as a basis for
operation of 200 hours to a mostly automatic process
developing the IGES protocol.
which was completed in less than two working days.
Philip Kennicott joined the General Electric Research
• Unique Tool & Gauge Inc.’s CAD/CAM department Laboratory in 1961 where he made contributions in the
has the responsibility of importing customer CAD fields of x-ray crystallography and spark-source mass
files into CAM for manufacturing. Utilizing several spectrography. As a consultant to General Electric’s
software packages, the company found with effec- Computer Aided Design Center, he was instrumental in
tive IGES translation they were able to use their making General Electric the largest user of CAD/CAM
IGES prowess as a competitive advantage offering equipment in the world in the 1970s. This work led to
services above and beyond what they were the concept of a neutral database, the basis for the
previously able to offer. General Electric contribution to IGES. Within the IGES
community, Kennicott served as a leader of many
Today, IGES is still used as a universal tool, providing technical activities, including Editor of the continually
a neutral format for many companies to transfer evolving IGES standard. He also led a technical team to
engineering data between CAD/CAM systems. As of develop the Department of Energy Data Exchange
late 1999, over 25 vendors offered commercial IGES- Format, the first IGES application protocol. He contin-
supporting tools [6]. ued this work at Sandia National Laboratories in 1989
In 1987, the three authors of The Initial Graphics and retired from Sandia in 1997.
Exchange Specification were recognized collectively for
their contributions to the development of IGES Version
1.0 by receiving the AIMTECH Joseph Marie Jacquard Prepared by Sharon J. Kemmerer.

248
Bibliography [3] Sharon J. Kemmerer (ed.), STEP, the Grand Experience, NIST
Special Publication 939, National Institute of Standards and
[1] Roger N. Nagel, Walt W. Braithwaite, and Philip R. Kennicott, Technology, Gaithersburg, MD (1999).
Initial Graphics Exchange Specification IGES, Version 1.0, [4] Initial Graphics Exchange (IGES), (http://www.nist.gov/sc4/
NBSIR 80-1978, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC national/usa/iges/iges.htm), National Institute of Standards and
(1980). Technology. [5]Product Data Exchange Technologies Success
[2] Brad Smith, Roger Nagel, and Joan Wellington, IGES—Initial Story Booklet, 1997 IPO Winter Meeting.
Graphics Exchange Specification, in Autofact III: Conference [6] IGES Workshop/Tools, (http://www.nist.gov/iges/igesTools.html),
Proceedings, November 9-12, 1981, Detroit, Michigan, Society of National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Manufacturing Engineers, Dearborn, MI (1981).

249