Embedding Fundamental 3D Transformation into Corporate Strategies / Dialogue with Michael Ernst (Part 3)
Conclusion of the Michael Ernst Report
ME: When it comes to physical material parameters, the belief is still rampant that systems must be able to simulate an infinite variety of materials in truly different ways. Considering all the simulation parameters, such as grid size (mesh), friction, distance to an avatar, collision management, realism of virtual "manufacturing" - plus inlay materials, ribbons, etc. there are still numerous adjusting screws and yet the material parameters are permanently checked in a time-consuming manner.
However, all systems can only simulate a limited number of physical and material parameters in a diversified and perceptible way. You just have to accept that. And even the waterfall shirt may not immediately show the same position on the first fall in 3D as on the bust with attached linen. How is it supposed to know how to fall in 3D now? If there are already numerous variations in reality. On top of that, it needs the ability to "read and interpret" a 3D simulation correctly. Nevertheless, there are serious differences between the systems. If I simulate really "messed up" cuts in 3D, which could never be sewn together in real life, and the result still looks great, then I have to ask myself what the 3D simulation is really telling me? Then we are just as far along as in the current image sender process. Now, perfect-looking 3D simulations are generated. But the appropriate cuts, those are to make then again someone else. With this approach, 3D is nothing more than a better 2D drawing tool - with more game options. I hope this will not catch on. YH-F: At the Mönchengladbach premises of The Niederrhein University of Applied Sciences (HSN), where you teach and conduct extensive application-related research, enjoy a top reputation beyond the borders of Europe with its textile/clothing department. To what extent do you personally consider the possibilities and thus also the curricula for the complex and widely ramified segment of textiles and clothing at HSN to already meet the requirements of the industry? What is missing so that teaching in these times of extreme and also rapid change produces the qualified young people that the digitally networked industry needs?
When listening to statements like "now, where processes are getting all-digital, there is no more need for real samples, to teach manufacturing and classic cut design." I only can reply that there still stands a real product at the end. Managing apparel processes purely virtually therefore cannot be an option. The real problem, however, is that "from the outside" this is always suggested, and thus the implementation of the product with sewing, ironing, or even gluing and welding, etc. no longer sounds quite so "sexy" compared to the work in front of the screen. This is a worrying development that harms the transformation process.
I don't accept the argument that "others will do it anyway." I always ask our industry partners who the others are supposed to be and why it is assumed that these unknown third parties can then perfectly implement everything that is part of the production process. Therefore we are constantly working on the university to stop - to prevent - the progressive loss of know-how.
There is no need to mention dependences, especially in these times, when the limits of globalization are brought home to us all.
ME: Most important remains the close connection with the clothing companies. Students write that cooperation with companies is appreciated since they are the employers. After all, our primary goal is not to train scientific personnel for jobs in the university sector - but still for the industry.
This connection is synergetic and leads to pure win-win constellations. It would be useful if CAD providers also saw it this way. Unfortunately, one must state that some, after they have also gained a foothold in the market, tighten the set screws and then demand ever more expensive license fees. Some decision-makers seem to forget that today’s students will be tomorrow's customers. And perhaps also a bit about why they were able to establish themselves in the first place. Fortunately, as a university, we are free to choose our systems and, with our number of graduates, we are multiple mouthpieces directly to industry.