Industrial designer says brand loyalty tied to self-esteem

By Geoff Hedges | Published: September 2, 2011 

Industrial designer, Lance Hussey, says that consumers turn into brand evangelists when a product makes them feel good–not just about the product, but about themselves. 

“The moment of truth is really after the purchase, when they bring home the product to loved ones and they get a response like ‘that was a great purchase!’” Hussey said those affirming moments enhance self-esteem and in turn create brand loyalty.

Industrial designers can and should take steps to promote that kind of response with their work, he said. At RKS, for example, designers have adopted a process that integrates research and business strategy into its industrial design.

“The key is really understanding the people and what’s important to them, understanding the brands in the target space, and mapping a particular aesthetic approach back to any product we create.”

If that sounds daunting, the company has written a book on its process, Predictable Magic by RKS CEO Deepa Prahalad.

Besides a string of successful clients, RKS’ process has also earned awards from IDEA, Good Design, Spark! and many others.

During the webinar, Hussey reviewed RKS-designed products, including the popular Zyliss salad spinner, audio devices from JBL and Alpine, and an innovative tattoo machine from Neuma.
While many companies use RKS to fully design their products, some, like LG, reach out to RKS just for research and ideas that it then develops in house.

In later articles, we’ll talk about how Hussey says Creo’s direct modeling approach fits into the RKS process. Until then, why not explore RKS’s award-winning product designs.

The Tools Used in Conceptual Design

By barb schmitz | Published: September 1, 2011 

 

When designers are provided with the right tools during the conceptual design stage of new product development, they are empowered to think broadly about a problem; visualize, explore, probe, and fully evaluate many ideas quickly; and ultimately, generate several concept designs that will lead to a better product.

These tools should be intuitive and capable of quickly creating realistic models that can be shared and evaluated by others on the design team. These tools must also be flexible, so designs—still fluid and changeable—can be iterated on and recreated quickly based on design input.

Often as a result of this laundry list of requirements—which are quite different from those of an engineer’s CAD software used for more detailed engineering design—manufacturers end up using myriad of concept design tools from multiple vendors that offer little integration with downstream applications.  As a result, these concepts models must often be recreated in engineers’ CAD program, often losing design intent in the process.

Use of Multiple Tools Multiplies Downstream Issues

In a recent study entitled, Trends in Concept Design, conducted by PTC, the majority of participants (51%) said that they capture design concepts and ideas electronically in the form of 3D data. So what software tools are being used during this exploratory phase of design? The lion’s share of participants in the PTC survey (61%) responded that they use 3D CAD modeling and surfacing tools to quickly create a multitude of potential product designs. Based on the survey results, manufacturers use many different tools during this phase of development.

The use of multiple tools from multiple vendors often complicates the process of concept design and creates problems downstream when concept models move to detailed design.  According to the PTC survey, participants who reported that they used tools from multiple software vendors during the concept phase of new product development were three to seven times more likely to have to recreate data due to incompatibility.

According to the survey respondents, companies using design tools from two vendors were three times more likely to have to recreate data later in the design cycle, compared to those using tools from a single vendor. Those using tools from five different vendors were seven times more likely to have to recreate data, than those buying tools from just one vendor.

One way to avoid these issues is to choose a suite of design tools that is capable of handling all phases of design from concept to detailed design through manufacturing. These tools offer bi-directional interoperability, reducing the risk of miscommunication and eliminating the need for engineers to reinterpret or re-create designers’ conceptual models, safeguarding design intent and facilitating the re-use of design data so mechanical engineers are not starting from scratch once concept models are approved.

Standardizing on one suite of design tools can facilitate brainstorming, manage the exploration of ideas, and aid in the development of product concepts within a single environment. By integrating all these efforts into the same software platform, product concept data is managed in a single, cross-disciplinary data repository, which enables team members to access the information in a timely, secure manner. In addition, customers—through the use of intuitive modeling tools—can collaborate and provide feedback to ensure that concepts will ultimately meet their requirements.

When conceptual design tools and MCAD tools have interoperability with each other, the fruits of designers’ labor—sketches, drawings, and 3D concept models—can be seamlessly brought into engineers’ CAD software where they can get to work further refining the model into a true 3D digital model or virtual prototype that can be ultimately designed, tested, and built.

What is concept design? A product development perspective

By Geoff Hedges | Published: August 26, 2011

 

It’s hard to get a straight answer when you Google, what is concept design? Search results come from architects, graphic artists, decorators, web masters, and every other creative type on the internet. That’s why I want to take a few paragraphs to talk about what we mean when we talk about concept design in product development. In 2007, the Danish agency FORA said there is “no collective perception” of concept design. So FORA took on the job of defining the phrase in its 221 page publication (pdf) Concept Design–How to Solve the Complex Challenges of Our Time.  I’ll save you about 220 of those pages: “Concept design is the solution to a problem that has not yet been solved or which so far has been solved unsatisfactorily.”

It’s a thoughtful explanation, but it’s also broad. In fact, you could argue there’s little difference between the expression “concept design” and simply “design.” We take a narrower view. When we talk about concept design, we refer to a phase of the design process, within the product development process.  Recognizing that phases overlap, we specifically mean that after you’ve determined product requirements, but before you start detailed design, you’re in the thick of concept design. Here’s a quick visual:

IDEA–>REQUIREMENTS–>DESIGN concept–>DESIGN detailed–>PROTOTYPE–>MANUFACTURING

Concept design for industrial equipment

Concept design is the initial big picture or macro design. It shows us what problems the product will solve, how it will solve them, and what it will feel like as it is solving them. Arguably the most creative stage of product development, concept design is stickies slapped on whiteboards, ink and wash, napkins and crayons even. It calls on us to consider sweeping ideas and all the various possibilities. The more the better. In concept design lies the very soul of innovation.

Detailed design, for many product developers, signals the introduction of CAD tools. It’s the cold hard truth phase where we build mathematically correct virtual models. In detailed design, we worry about manufacturability, clearances, and how long you can use the product before it starts a fire. One more thing: Notice I didn’t say concept design is limited to sports cars and shiny laptops.  Potato harvesters, water treatment devices, industrial packaging lines, hospital equipment–any product worth developing–goes through some form of concept design. Or should.

Concept design for an electric vehicle

In all of our articles about Creo and concept design, we’re arguing a role exists for CAD before detailed design–in concept design.  Furthermore, we’re working to show it can enhance concept design. But that’s for a future post. [Ed - Like the concept designs we've included in this post? For even more inspiration, browse the PlanetPTC Community for even more designs from our user community]

Safeguarding Design Concepts and IP

By barb schmitz | Published: August 25, 2011

 

Intellectual property is the most important asset of a manufacturer and, if leaked to a competitor, can lead to lost market exclusivity and competitive advantage. Today, IP contained in product concept designs is increasingly at risk, along with the revenue and corporate know-how it represents. The threat to product IP has increased as a result of globally distributed design teams that design products collaboratively, and ironically, by the approaches required to enable truly distributed design and manufacturing networks.

 

A lack of processes and procedures in place to protect IP and safeguard design concepts during development, can lead to lost IP, which in turn results in lost sales, product commoditization, and lower profit margins. Manufacturers must implement organizational structures, business processes, and technologies that support “IP friendly” collaboration, document IP and enable legal protection, and safeguard product data, including enhancing IT security and digital rights management.

Protecting Product Concepts

Concept designs are captured and managed differently at organizations. In a recent study entitled, Trends in Concept Design, conducted by PTC, only 37% of the participants responded that their company utilized some type of centralized management system to capture and manage design concepts. Another 34% indicated that their companies “strictly manage all concept designs, including revisions, in a centralized process.” Another 22% of respondents said that each person on the development team stores concept designs on his or her own computers, indicating that no centralized management system was in place.

Engineering notebooks are commonly used to capture proposed designs during the concept phase of development. In the PTC survey, the largest percentage of respondents (66%) said that some team members use engineering notebooks during the concept stage. Who owns the information contained in those notebooks? Over 59% of respondents believed the company owned the notebooks and the information contained within, however, another 41% of respondents either didn’t know who owned the notebooks (22%) or believed that the individual owned the data captured in the notebook (19%).

Despite advancements in and increased deployment of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems and knowledge management systems, many manufacturers still use informal tools and processes, such as engineering notebooks, to communicate and manage key product data, which can inhibit collaboration and elevate IP risk.

Without established procedures in place to safeguard the information contained in these notebooks, when employees leave a company, valuable and proprietary data leaves right along with them. Though 67% of respondents indicated that they didn’t think the notebook would be taken upon an employee’s departure, another 33% either “didn’t know” or thought it would be taken.

So how is this information safeguarded? At many companies, there are no established procedures to protect this valuable corporate product data. In the survey, only 16% of respondents indicated that the data captured in these engineering notebooks is captured electronically in the company’s systems. Nearly 70% of respondents said that there was no such procedure in place to capture this data electronically in corporate systems.

A strong strategic approach to IP and concept design management must span from product conception to market release. Companies must implement a systematic approach to safeguarding emerging design concepts and the potential IP they hold in order to reduce the risk of IP theft or loss. Integrating IP management into R&D through product development seamlessly provides opportunities to improve IP protection that can reduce a manufacturer’s risk and lower costs.

The big grunt

Process types: Design and Manufacture. 27 July 2011

With a bellowing, gravel-spitting fury a rally car immediately sucks in anyone with a hint of petrol in their blood. Stephen Holmes travels to Prodrive’s Oxfordshire facility to see how the MINI has been transformed into the ultimate rallying machine.

Read the full article

MKS Integrity®, a PTC Product, Certified for ISO 26262

NEEDHAM, Mass., July 20, 2011 - PTC (Nasdaq: PMTC), The Product Development Company^®, today announced that MKS Integrity®, a PTC product, is the first software system lifecycle management solution certified to help manufacturers comply with a key automotive industry safety standard governing areas such as steering and braking systems. 

Specifically, TÜV SÜD Automotive, a global leader in technical certification services, has certified Integrity, release 2009 SP6 (9.6) is fit for purpose to develop safety-related systems for use in ISO/DIS 26262 and IEC 61508 compliant development processes. This independent assessment of Integrity^TM change and configuration management capabilities enables automotive engineering organizations developing safety-related embedded systems to qualify the tool chain being used to produce these systems up to ASIL-D or SIL3, the most stringent levels of safety function as defined by the standards. 

"We have seen that Integrity helps automotive development organizations adhere to the requirements and recommendations of the safety standards, resulting in improved reliability, quality and safety," said Andreas Bärwald, Product Line Manager Functional Safety, TÜV SÜD Automotive GmbH. "These product capabilities combined with the reporting functionality can even increase the efficiency of functional safety assessments performed by our organization at vehicle manufacturers and suppliers." 

The use of Integrity as prescribed in the Integrity Safety Manual gives vehicle manufacturers and their suppliers the confidence to know they are in compliance with industry safety standards. Integrity allows companies to improve productivity by automating manual activities through workflow and dynamic reporting. Systemic errors can be reduced through tight integrations between Integrity and engineering authoring tools. In addition, by providing a single source of truth for software-intensive products through an unparalleled single data model that delivers full lifecycle traceability, organizations are able to continue accelerating product innovation in the midst of high rates of change and stringent compliance. 

"This certification will help our automotive customers to cost-effectively comply with functional safety standards such as ISO26262 that ensure safe software system development processes," said Christoph Braeuchle, Global Automotive Product Manager at PTC. "Our ground-breaking work coupled with the certification by TÜV SÜD Automotive gives our customers the confidence they need to reduce the risk of non-compliance and deliver high quality software-intensive products to the market with decreasing cycle times." 

Additional Resources

• MKS Integrity Acquisition Resource Center
• PTC's Automotive Industry Resource Center
• HKMC Selects PTC for Enterprise PLM (Press Release)