Upgrading SolidWorks

Ok, so its that time of year again, where my fingers are crossed and my sphincter is taught, otherwise know as SolidWorks (SW) upgrade time! For those that might not be "in the know" SW is the software program that I use for all my "real job" mechanical design work. It is also a stressful time as sometimes the process doesn't go as smoothly as one would hope. I've taken all the precautions that I could, such as uninstalling the older version first, cleaning out the old registry files, and sprinkling chicken blood all over my cubicle and computer. Luckily I don't work around any vegans.

30-minutes into the process and I am at 18% completion for installing the new version, SW 2011, SP4! The funny thing about upgrading on this particular date is that the beta version of SW 2012 was just released today. That's pretty confident of SW Corporation to do. Why you ask? Its because everyone knows that the world will end in 2012, or more specifically, there will be a major change in the world on or after December 21st, 2012. I'm not a betting man, but my vote goes towards the start of the Zombie Apocalypse on the 22nd.

WaG! 2

Well, will you look at that? It's already time for another WaG! (What a Gem!) installment. I'll keep this vague and generic, and again place it in the context of the food industry. Suppose your chef is looking through the fridge and he sees a container full of Morel mushrooms, and then proclaims "I'm going to make a new entree using these Morels and add it to the menu!" Some would think that would be a good idea. Some would argue that it would be a good idea to make it a special for the day (to use up that extra stock), but not adding it permanently to the menu.

I would be one to argue against adding it to the daily menu. The problem with creating new products (new entree) with the sole purpose of consuming excess inventory (the Morels) is two fold. 1) You are only concerned about using the inventory, and are not giving any thought to continued sources of supply or quality specifications. 2) If you build and sell something, a customer is going to want more of them sooner or later, see Point 1. Let's suppose our chef creates an entree based off a similar entree, and only replaces Truffles with the Morels. The taste is different, and customers like it a lot. Suppose the inventory of the Morels lasts the chef several days, enough for buzz of the new entree to spread far and wide. The chef is now happy that the Morels are out of the fridge and he has more room for other ingredients, and is unaware of the popularity of his new entree.

The following week, huge parties (new customers) make reservations with the hopes of trying the new entree they have heard so much about. The orders begin to make their way into the kitchen, and now the chef is screwed because he no longer has the Morels on hand. He could try to substitute Truffles, but the customers might not like that. He could jump on the phone and call someone to get more Morels in the kitchen, but he'd only put himself in a bigger bind because he has no idea of the quality that will be delivered, or how soon they could arrive.

What a Gem!

I'm starting a new blog feature called What a Gem! What a Gem! (WaG! ?) will document all the great quotes and quips I hear throughout the day. These may be by people I work with or people that I hear out on the town. I'm sure if you keep your ears open, you'll hear a few gems of your own. So here's the first one:

I was speaking with a manufacturing engineer about a purchased part that needs to be reworked to add holes, he said, "I don't think it needs a new part number. It's not like we're going to buy it under one number then rework and stock as another. We know what we have."

The WaG! aspect of this conversation is, Yes, one should purchase something under one part number, then stock it as a new number if it is reworked and stocked. Suppose you buy a zucchini, and the whole zucchini has a part number of ZCH0123, then you slice it and put it in a container. Now if you need some zucchini and ask someone to get it, they'll grab that container of the sliced zucchini, and you might get lucky in that you wanted the sliced version, but it was only luck.

Now let's expand on this analogy. Suppose you have sliced and diced zucchini in the fridge, in addition to the whole zucchini. Now you ask for "some zucchini" and get the wrong ingredients that you needed. You correct and indicate that you need the diced zucchini. Your assistant has to open all the containers to find the right one. If the whole zucchini was ZCH0123, the sliced ones were stored as ZCH0124, and the diced were ZCH0125, you wouldn't have any troubles getting exactly what you need.

What is this "Design Intent" I keep hearing about?

Design Intent is not a buzz phrase like "ideation funnel" or "value streaming." It is a real term, with a real purpose. Ok, so those other buzz phrases are real too, but I'm just not talking about them at the moment.

Design intent could be better understood simply by reversing the order of the words. Does "intended design" make any more sense to you? Design intent comes into play when using parametric solid modeling programs, such as SolidWorks, ProENGINEER or Catia. As a refresher, "parametric" refers to a model that has features with a meaningful relationship to other model features or data. It is these meaningful relationships in the CAD world, these parametric relations, that make 3D modeling so powerful to us in the engineering realm.

Back in the days of 2D CAD (way back to the early 1990s), programs could not incorporate design intent into a model. It could display geometry of a design, but the model itself did not contain any information beyond the start and end points of a line, or the diameter of a circle to construct the model. In the mid and late 1990s 3D CAD powered onto the scene, allowing the model to become a virtual representation of a design. Associated data became contained within the confines of the model file, not simply the geometry required to construct the model. These other data covered information such as density, material, and the locations and sizes of features. This data could then be retrieved and modified at any time. When these modifications were changed, due to parametric relationships, the entire model would update itself. Of course as some of us have discovered, the extent and scope of these "automatically updating" features were highly dependent on design intent.

To build a robust parametric model (that is also easily editable), some design intent in the form of forethought on how the model is to be constructed must be given. After all, designs are conceived to fulfill a purpose. Take for example a strip of metal requiring a hole in the center of its width, much like a lawnmower blade. The design mandates a hole to be drilled in the center of the part's width and length. If you model the design by dimensioning a hole half the width from the edge, it is indeed "in the middle" of metal strip, but you have ignored the design intent of the hole. If the width changes in the future your hole would still be a half the original width away from the edge, and no longer in the middle of the part. Had you placed your hole in the mid-plane of the metal strip, no matter how the width changed the hole would remain in the middle of the strip. The design intent of the hole was maintained, and all it took was a little forethought during the modeling process.

This forethought does not stop at the part level however, as parametric relations are not confined internally to part models alone. Parametric relations can span between several models, along with their associated drawings, or be driven by the top level assembly itself. For this reason, design intent is very important and should be considered early on in the design phase of every project.

For All Our Technology...

It seems that for all of our techonology we are becoming less able to do things on our own. I'm talking the most basic of things as related to the typical office environment. For example, what is happening right now in my office. We have two rather expensive color copiers. These scan, fax, print, make capuchino, etc. I am witness to the downfall of man as I type this.

Person A (Bob) is talking with Person B (Stan). Stan really likes the information Bob has on a particular brochure and wants a copy. Bob agrees its good for Stan to have, so both walk over to the copier. Hm, copier seems to be on the fritz, they make their way to the other copier. It seems to be misbehaving this morning as well. The duo walk back to the first copier (closet to me). They try it again, I suppose in the hopes that the Copier Fairy had magically fixed the machine while they were on the other side of the room. Unfortunately, they forgot to leave the brochure under their collective pillows, for the machine is still not working.

Not to be done in by a simple copier though, Stan and Bob begin to troubleshoot the infernal machine. They proceed to fill ALL the paper trays. I suppose as an offering to the Copier Fairy. This doesn't seem to work, perhaps they should have offered a bloody chicken foot. A quick check of the internals of the machine doesn't seem to be helping either. They discuss the ill behaving copier at length, then make their way to the second copier. They must have had an epiphany or something, perhaps the Copier Fairy favors this second machine over the first? No. The second copier is just as out of commission as the first.

This wonderful floor show has been going on for a good 15 minutes now, with no sign of slowing down. I wonder how long it would have taken Stan to manually copy the critical information from Bob's brochure? Probably less time. Assuming this duo makes $90k a year, they wasted $21.64. That's lunch for 3 days! No worries though, I took considerably less time to write this.

Outsourcing

You hear a lot of static about "outsourcing". The first thoughts that comes to your mind are probably shipping a product design to China for manufacturing. While this is usually what happens, it is only one small aspect of outsourcing, and China is not the only place that gets our business. There is plenty of domestic (inter and intra-state) outsourcing going on as well. Toy companies for years have been shipping simple design artwork overseas, and allowing those molders to design the toy for manufacturability while still retaining the look of the original artwork. Of course you have probably noticed that some of these overseas companies are better than others due to the quality you see on our store shelves. As you can see, not only manufacturing but also design has been (and will continue to be) outsourced beyond our national boarders.

I'm not writing to praise or pounce on the virtues of outsourcing, foreign or domestic. I can't claim to know enough about the subject to make my mind up whether is it "good or bad" for America. I would rather discuss the finer details that one needs to be aware of when weighing the decision to outsource, speaking from a mechanical engineering perspective.

Outsourcing makes sense for a lot of companies. It allows a company to tap into specialties that do not reside in-house, or frees important resources for more critical actions. Have you ever hired a designer to make a business logo for you? Ever drove into one of those oil change shacks to get your oil changed? You've just committed "outsourcing" because you didn't have the required skills or didn't want to waste your time doing it yourself. Take this a step further, you are a manufacturer that makes a widget that uses hydraulic cylinders. The design of these cylinders are unique to your business (your IP (intellectual property)), and contrary to popular belief, business is doing great. You have reached capacity with your own manufacturing, and astute research by others in your organization have revealed that outsourcing the manufacturing of these cylinders makes financial sense. Outsourcing, great! Now what?

First you need to fully define your product requirements. I don't mean take a photo and email it, or crate up a cylinder and ship it off, asking your outsourcer to make "this" for you. You will need to quantifiably define the technical standards and performance requirements. Having measurable standards from which to inspect from will reduce the need to hand-hold your supplier in the long run.

Understand that internal personnel need to take on new responsibilities, or you need to hire people with these new skills if you want outsourcing to work. Your existing engineers will become project managers, system integrators, and specification writers. Your contract lawyers will become an important part of The Team. Your CAD jockeys will become the go-to people for file translation and database management. Discuss these changing roles, identify your weaknesses and plan accordingly.

Before your outsourcer gets started, have a Requirements Review meeting (or two or three) so both of you are on the same page and talking the same language about your product and expectations. Just because you specify a red coupe with shiny rims does not mean you will get a Lamborghini. Chances are you will get what was easiest for your outsourcer to deliver, a Kia (or worse yet, a used Yugo).

Hammer out a realistic Project Plan or Schedule. If you are outsourcing from overseas, don't forget to include time for boat transit time, customs, etc. Don't enter "1 day" for your internal inspection, it may take longer. Be sure to include/schedule internal review meetings. The sooner you identify where your supplier is lacking or where cost can be taken out of your product the better. Be sure to include/schedule teleconferences after you receive a deliverable so you can discuss with your supplier what they have done and what you are looking at.

Have a technical design review (preliminary, critical, etc) if your outsourced product warrants it. Double check those tolerance stack-ups, calculations, and margin analyses. Make sure your supplier conducted the proper studies and they are not over confident in their approach. Also, make sure they weren't too conservative, if they were, you just found an area of potential cost savings.

Look at the nuts and bolts, do this as a Product Readiness or Production Plan review. Are the facilities, equipment, material and labor force available to achieve this Plan? Is every adequately trained? In what quantities are you going to receive your product? A palletized gross makes no sense if your company is Lean and working one piece flow correctly. On the other hand it might make sense if your parts are small, and it makes financial sense if it came across the ocean in a shipping container. Then you should be asking who will warehouse this item, you or your supplier?

How do I DO what I do?

I was recently asked, "How do you Do what you do?" Huh? It took a moment for me to grok that question. Was I being asked about my workflow? Was I being asked to train others? Did someone think I was crazy or crazy-like-a-fox? As it turned out, the correct answer was "all of the above." I rambled through some explanation that satisfied my inquisitor, and the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I needed to write something down for my own sake. You get the benefit of reading about here.

When I am faced with a design challenge the first thing I try to do is understand what the design scope is. For example, a customer might comment about a panel being flimsy.

1. They could be saying the panel is too flexible and are worried about drum-skinning.
2. They could be saying that it won't hold up in the user environment and want it more robust.
3. They could be saying that it just looks too cheap and are worried about user perceptions.

All three examples are covered by the "flimsy" comment above, and all three require different approaches in the design. Pick the wrong direction to precede and at a minimum you look like someone that doesn't know what they are doing. In the worst case, you or your employer just lost a customer. Design is a very subjective field, and the sooner a designer knows what the customer truly desires, the sooner a designer can create an item that will satisfy that customer. Of course there is a fine line between what the customer wants and what they need, but I'll save that for another topic. Ask questions, and make sure there are no Yes or No answers. Get your customer to paint a full picture for you.

When I am called to discuss a design I sit back, listen, and take notes. Usually there are others in the room that have spent a great deal on time on a project already, let them talk. They know their product or manufacturing capabilities, and combining the two can only yield one design outcome that they can see. These existing personnel are too close to the design, so close in fact they are married to it and can't see where improvements can be made. This is all right in the short term, at least they are showing some compassion for their work. Its hard to come into a situation like this, as I may be unfamiliar with the industry or the unique challenges that are encountered. The best thing to do is listen to all the arguments being presented, draw on my past experiences, and formulate something that tries to address all the issues. I'm there to provide a new perspective on the problem, collectively being known as "thinking outside the box" and "ideation". Sometimes a successful design might require suggesting a manufacturing method that is not common in the customer's industry. Sometimes I have to literally "turn the world on its ear" and suggest a different assembly process that gets the design back to familiar and manageable territory. You can't get faulted for paying attention and listening, just be sure you stay focused on the task and are ready to provide solutions when its your turn to speak up.

When I am developing the design, I am considering the entire system. How will my widget interface with other items? How will manufacturing produce it? How assembly build it? How will end users interact with it? As I develop my models in SolidWorks, I try to envision what the final assembly will look like. This will lead me to where the assembly origin should be, and in turn tells me which components are the critical driving factors for the design. This also gives me further insight into how each part should be modeled, as in when a part should be a revolved feature or multiple extruded bosses. From the base sketch, should I extrude in only one direction in the plane, or should it be a mid-plane extrude. The proper model construction should be intuitive at higher levels of the model. It should make sense that if I want to grow a particular feature that I should only have to select that feature and modify it, not find myself in a cascading chain of changes.

Cans of Corn & Energy

Everyone knows if you drop a can of corn on your bare foot from the kitchen counter, it can hurt. Everyone knows if that same can of corn was dropped off your roof it would hurt more. Drop it from a bridge? Yup, that equals more pain, bare-foot or not. This is a pretty simple example of turning potential energy into kinetic energy.

Everything has potential energy; air, water, cheese, Parcheesi dice. Some folks think of this potential energy as "free energy". Nothing is free, except maybe choking on your tongue while you are sitting on the porcelain throne ... even that situation takes money, so I'll stand by my words- nothing is free. It amazes me that there are people out in cyberland that try to prove to others everyday that some things can be free, such as free energy.

People try to use the concept of utilizing potential energy as a source of free energy. If I walk that can of corn to my roof or the top of a bridge, I had to exert some amount of energy to get there. That spent energy costs something- a hot dog, a slice of Spam, a few Skittles. The higher I try to get that can of corn, the more energy I'll require. The bigger the can of corn, the more potential energy, but again, the more energy I have to exert to get it higher to release that potential energy and turn it into kinetic energy.

potential energy + time = kinetic energy.

In the example above, the component of time takes the form of the can accelerating through the air as it plummets towards your foot. I'm not sure where I am going with all this, just be careful of things that sound too good to be true. If someone is claiming something amazing, you'll hear about on the news.