ProcurementVerified Real deployment at a named or precisely described company, with a measured result from a primary source.

Find existing parts before designing or buying a new one (AI shape search)

Added 2026-10-07 · Last updated 2026-10-14

Role

Engineering · Typical users: design engineer, equipment engineer, purchasing / master-data owner

The problem

Engineers lose time searching supplier catalogues and the company's own ERP and PDM for a part that fits, and when they cannot find it they design a new one, even if an identical part already exists under another name at another site. At Wanzl (shopping carts), finding a component and its CAD data often took more than two hours and sometimes ended with the part being modelled by hand. At Starlinger (machines for woven plastic sacks, 550 employees), parts were searched by text only in the ERP and PDM.

Step by step

1. Measure the baseline: how long a typical part search takes, and how many new part numbers are created each month.
2. Connect the search tool to your PDM/PLM CAD library and the ERP part master, so results show part number, cost, stock, supplier and preferred status.
3. Load or link the supplier catalogues you buy from most (bearings, fasteners, pneumatics, linear motion) so standard parts can be dropped in as 3D models.
4. Label preferred parts, so engineers see first the parts purchasing wants reused.
5. Make 'search before you create' a rule: a new part number needs a quick geometric and attribute search first, recorded in the request.
6. For each candidate, check the datasheet: dimensions, tolerances, material, load or rating, standards, and lifecycle status (not obsolete).
7. Send near-duplicates found across sites to master-data cleanup (see the spare-parts cases) rather than merging them on the spot.
8. After 3–6 months, compare search time, new part numbers created and the share of catalogue parts versus custom designs.

Tools

• CADENAS PARTsolutions (GEOsearch geometric similarity search, 3D supplier catalogues): used at Starlinger and Wanzl
• Physna geometric AI: used at the anonymous global manufacturer
• Other tools to evaluate: CADSEEK, the geometric search in your PDM/PLM (e.g. SOLIDWORKS PDM, Siemens Teamcenter, PTC Windchill), 3Dfindit, Octopart for electronic components
• A general LLM to turn a requirement into search terms and a datasheet checklist (it does not know your library or live catalogues)

As reported by the source; most figures are vendor or self-reported and not independently verified.

Practitioner anecdote (not verified)

One practitioner on Reddit (r/manufacturing) reported saving about 8 minutes per part search by asking an LLM for candidate parts, and more than 100 hours in total at his firm. Self-reported, not verified.

Human review: cautions

• Same shape does not mean same part: material, heat treatment, tolerance, coating and supplier certification can differ. An engineer confirms fit, form and function.
• A general chatbot cannot see your library or live catalogues and will invent part numbers; use it to frame the search, then verify every number on the manufacturer's site.
• Check the datasheet revision and lifecycle status before designing a part in.
• Starlinger's euro figure is calculated from minutes saved times an hourly rate, not measured cost savings.

You are a design engineer's assistant. I need a [component type, e.g. linear bearing] with these requirements: [dimensions, load, speed, environment, standards, budget per unit].

1. Turn the requirements into a search spec: the attributes to filter on in our PDM/ERP and in supplier catalogues, and the key words and standard designations (e.g. ISO/DIN numbers) to search with.
2. From this list of candidates I found [paste part numbers and datasheet extracts], compare each against the requirements in a table: requirement, datasheet value, pass/fail/unknown, and the page of the datasheet it came from.
3. List what I must confirm before selecting (tolerances, material, rating, lifecycle status, lead time).
Do not propose part numbers from memory; only work with the candidates and datasheets I paste. Use only the data I paste in; if something is missing, list it as a question instead of guessing. Do not send, order, post or change anything in any system: produce drafts for my review and approval.

Related cases

• Clean up duplicate and incomplete spare-parts records in the material master

Sources

• https://partsolutions.com/starlinger-co-employ-partsolutions-standard-parts-management-system-to-streamline-design/
• https://www.cadenas.de/files/cadenas/Downloads/PDF/Referenzen/EN/PARTsolutions_Wanzl_Success_Story_EN.pdf
• https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/physical-ai/how-physna-and-aws-use-geometric-intelligence-to-bridge-engineering-design-and-procurement/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/manufacturing/comments/1n8kror/how_ai_is_helping_in_manufacturing_projects/