“This is an incredibly affordable way of learning the concepts… I got a lot more understanding, I had a little bit of fun with it, and I learned it much faster and much more affordably.”
Ben Kassel, Model-Based Engineering Technical Authority at LMI, shares his experience at a recent virtual MBD Using Modern GD&T course. Watch his interview with Dan Feighery, Action Engineering MBD instructor.
Ready to take the next step on your MBE journey?
Join us for the next MBD Using Modern GD&T course.
“Best GD&T class I’ve taken, the MBD focus makes it more relevant and easier to apply… The class was well done, the content was great, the instructor knew the material very well and was very good at instructing.”
– Zachary Miller, CAD/CAE System Analyst, TE Connectivity
Dan Feighery
Well, Ben, why don’t we start, if you don’t mind, by introducing yourself and what you’re currently doing and your background?
Ben Kassel
I’m Ben Kassel. I’m a mechanical engineer by training. I graduated from the University of Maine with my Bachelors of Science and Mechanical Engineering many decades ago. I began my career as a mechanical design engineer.
From then, I went on to become a computer-aided design person of 3D solid models, and a system manager, and a systems developer. And then from there, I went into research and development in computer-aided design manufacturing systems, primarily for early stage ship design, detailed design, and construction. And of course, I’ve always been involved in my first love, which is the design of mechanical piece parts and manufacturing processes.
And that’s where I got to today. I was a government employee for 37 years, and now I’m a senior consultant at LMI specializing in technical data.
Dan Feighery
So Ben, that leads me to my next question then. Why did you sign up for Action Engineering’s MBD Using Modern GD&T course?
Ben Kassel
Primarily for the GD&T, because I was a little bit rusty. As a mechanical engineer who did the design and communicated the design to the shop, primarily by using dimensions with tolerances, I’m fully bought into the idea of a feature-based design in which I use the relationships between the features, or relationships between the faces of an object, to communicate how I want the piece made with as little ambiguity or confusion as possible.
Dan Feighery
Excellent. So before you took the course, how much did you know about model-based definition and geometric dimensioning & tolerancing?
Ben Kassel
The biggest reason I took this class was more of a refresher. And to see what the Action Engineering perspective was on the relationship of the MBD way of doing things with ASME Y14.5. But primarily it was to get a refresher on GD&T.
Dan Feighery
With that in mind, what would you say surprised you the most after you completed the course?
Ben Kassel
I had a bit of an epiphany. I’m embarrassed to say I probably should have had this years ago, but it was some during some of the discussions we had during breaks and things like that. When I started thinking about the communication of design intent, with ASME Y14.5 approach, you truly can communicate a great portion of what the design intent should be. That’s what I walked away with. That was my number-one light bulb going off in the particular class I took.
Dan Feighery
In addition to that, what were some other valuable insights you had coming out of that class?
Ben Kassel
It was just the ability to be able to take some of the concepts of GD&T and to be able to walk through them in sort of a communal atmosphere with other people and our guide who would show us, “This is what it means, this is what it does.”
Being able to think about the design of mechanical pieces and parts from that perspective was, to me, something I wish I knew when I was actually a real designer. Or maybe not necessarily knew, but was something that I was aware of and consciously thought about. I think that was a big thing too. The GD&T makes you think upfront about how this part is going to be constrained itself – and more importantly, how it can be constrained by other parts of the assembly.
Dan Feighery
So Ben, what’s the first thing that you have done – or you will be doing – to apply your new course knowledge?
Ben Kassel
I’m glad that you asked that. One of the biggest reasons I took this class was I’m in the process of putting together a presentation for our executives about why model-based definition is important. And more importantly, why the semantic definition is so important.
Dan Feighery
Your background is as a mechanical engineer. In addition to design engineers, what sort of roles or functions or job titles do you think would benefit the most from this course?
Ben Kassel
I think it’s anybody who has to either author or consume a technical data package. Even perhaps people in acquisition; they might not have to have a total understanding, but to be able to look at it, and to be able to get an appreciation for what this part is they’re about to put out for purchase, is important. Of course, anybody who’s involved in the design, or the manufacturing – very important, inspection – and even the people that may have to install these particular items in the field should have a good understanding of GD&T.
Dan Feighery
Now that you’ve completed the course, Ben, why do you others should take it? I think that kind of goes hand-in-hand with your answer or discussion on the last topic.
Ben Kassel
This is an incredibly affordable way of learning the concepts. I could pay for this three-day class, I got a lot more understanding, I had a little bit of fun with it, and I learned it much faster and much more affordably.
Dan Feighery
Awesome. Ben, thanks a lot for your time today.
Ben Kassel is a mechanical engineer with decades of experience in the use, design, and implementation of computer-aided design tools, product model technology, and the exchange of digital data to support the manufacture of mechanical piece parts & assemblies, early-stage, detail design, and the construction of ships and ships systems. Connect with Ben via LinkedIn.