The project brief, although the shortest of phases of the design process is the one which will set the tone for the rest of the project. A client should give the designers clear instructions as to the purpose of the idea, parts that should be included in the assembly and any particular aims that they have. This feedback often comes from the end users who can give a variety of views and opinions all of which are likely to be valid and need to be considered throughout the design process. The brief also includes key details which are essential to make the product work efficiently.

For example, Checkpoint.S™ a facial recognition camera that we designed recently for Omniperception, required the housing of a high voltage Xenon flash unit which flashed hundreds of times while in use, therefore the unit needed to dissipate the heat very quickly. This has a major influence on the potential manufacturing processes and materials used and therefore the final form. Without knowledge of this crucial requirement, other materials might have been initially considered and, if this hadn’t been stated from the start, additional costs may have been incurred due to changes to the brief.

A good brief involves outlining:

• what the product will do and how it will do it

• any specific technology to be incorporated

• knowledge of any other products or components with which the new product must be compatible

• any official standards to which the product must comply

• end user requirements

• the unique selling points of the product

Like lego our process is based on standard blocks that combine to create a process that is unique for every client

When we’re approached by a company with an innovative idea or product proposal each product is assessed individually to consider the unique elements of a proposal and deliver a route to manufacture that is tailored to each clients needs and considerate of their experience and skill. We deliver this tailored solution based on a proven generic process, which is similar for all products regardless of  size or complexity but adjusted to each specific client and product.

Ideally the client will have an existing route to market, a potential customer base and a budget within which to work. Our perfect client is one that collaborates with our designers and contributes to the project but this doesn’t suit everyone and it isn’t essential.

Following the exchange of a non-disclosure agreement, the design team will then be able to follow these five phases of the design development process.

1. Briefing

2. Ideas generation

3. Concept development

4. Working models and prototyping

5. Accumulation of manufacturing data

In most instances, the full design development process breaks down into five principal categories or phases. By breaking the process down both the client and the consultancy commissioned to undertake the work have a clear and concise aim at the end of each stage and both parties can decide and agree how to proceed to the next stage.

We find that some clients have undertaken some phases of the product development process already and perhaps wish us to quote for prototyping or to produce CAD data or technical drawings. This isn’t always as clear cut as it might seem. Turning a 3D model into a product that is ready for large-scale manufacturing can take time and a good understanding of the production processes is required. This is one of the main reasons why design companies are commissioned to undertake the work. Working with potential manufacturers, a design consultancy will (or should) optimise the cost of production tools and design the product so that the parts are also as cost-effective as possible without compromising the form or function.

Research into the intended market place is vital. How big is it? Is it local or international? How many competitor products are there? What is the unique selling point going to be of the new product? What is the target market share for the product and therefore how many units could be sold per month/year? Most importantly, when predicting these figures be realistic!

An important assessment to make is will the results be worth the time, resources, and effort involved? It is likely that costs will not be recovered immediately; however, there must be confidence that the product will be worthwhile, useful and an improvement in the long term.

In order to ensure the product features are as applicable to the consumers as possible it is useful to carry out customer interviews and observations. What are their goals? For each task, how do they go about it? What is the product of their work? What do they feel could be improved upon and done better?

To download our FREE tips booklet click here

Delivering product design funding for technology-inspired innovation

The Technology Strategy Board has launched its latest round of funding.  They are investing up to £2m in feasiblity studies to stimulate innovation across core technology areas and to help ensure that small and micro businesses in the UK are well equiped to respond to society’s current and future challenges.

Projects in the fields of: Advanced materials, nanoscale technologies, biosciences, electronics, photonics, electrical systems, and information and communications technology are being sought.

Funding is exclusively available to small and micro companies working either singly or in collaboration with one partner.  projects can last up to four months and are eligible for grants of up to £25,000.  Total project costs must not exceed £33,000.

Call us for a free consultation – The closing date for applications is April 11th 2012.  ACT NOW!

Nottinghamshire-based heating engineer Adrian Morley set out to find a solution to this problem. The answer needed to be a simple device that could be attached to new boilers and retrofitted to existing installations to solve this costly problem.

In this case Adrian had a clear concept in mind and a presentation to sell the idea. Canard Design used this as our starting point to design a unit that met our clients need and budget. We were able to turn the project from an initial idea to a production item in less than a year including support for marketing and project management.

Our first step was to evaluate the existing design and decide what should change, what could change, and what was fixed. We decided that a more pragmatic design solution was required to meet our clients need within their tight budget: A standard float switch was fitted inside a conventional vessel and simple electronics were removed to a secondary container.

The next task was to re-design the internal components to minimise risk of failure and keep tooling cost as low as possible without affecting the performance of the Boiler Condensate Guard.

20 prototypes made to test the principle and performance of the units fitted

The first 20 units used a wiring loom, and no PCB – but after cost-down evaluation it was determined that a PCB would be marginally cheaper AND provide savings in assembly

A membrane was introduced to the moulding to explain the function and operation of the CondensAlert BCG

Using the prototype parts we employed an external test house to evaluate the proposal and advise on CE marking and conformity to relevant standards. For the most part the test house report was positive but highlighted some areas Canard could improve upon before the CondensAlert went into production. As a part of the test procedure the test house provided a template which we used to produce a technical file – which they then evaluated. Our experience is that this technical file is extremely useful, especially when other tests, trials or assessments need to be carried out.

Canard Design worked with tool makers to improve the design for manufacture and assembly and continued to be involved throughout production. For us it is critical to stay involved. Initially we provided a purchasing document which contained information about components, sources, order number and costs – however as we neared production some suppliers could not deliver on time or required design changes to successfully deliver their components. Thanks to our close involvement we were often able to identify and solve potential setbacks in less than 24 hours resulting in timely and cost-effective delivery to our client.

If you would like to see more on The CondensAlert project please see the links below:

Testimonials

Portfolio

Buy one

Before designing or redesigning a product goals must be set. The SMART method is a recognised way of setting goals; this means the goals should be Specific, Measureable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-framed. Accurate goals help to ascertain a realistic time plan to work to. The better it is understood how the goals will look, sound, and feel, the more likely it is that the result will be exactly as anticipated.

To be specific and measurable the goals should detail specific figures or standards to meet, to enable the end solution to be tested or measured against the original requirements.

The goal should be significant but achievable, given a reasonable timescale and have a realistic budget. If your initial goal is found to be too expensive, too time consuming or resources are not available, this goal should be refined and adjusted until it is appropriate and satisfies the needs of all stakeholders involved. Product design goals need to be aligned with business goals to ensure everyone involved, whether they are investors, employees or the design team, are comfortable with and back the plans, this should ensure full cooperation from all parties.

Once goals have been set and finalised, share them! All members of the team must know what the aims and objectives are from the very beginning of the project. Make sure the design team also has full knowledge of these aims from the start and keep them notified of any changes as the project progresses.

Brave New World,  a channel 4 program looking at exciting new technologies, claimed that 3D printing will change the way we view design and purchase products; Could this happen? And if so how far away from a Star Trek replicator are we? What does it actually mean for the average business or person?

3D printing has become a catch all term that describes a variety of additive manufacturing services and materials traditionally referred to as selective laser sintering (SLS) Steriolithographic artefact (SLA) and other variations of these technologies. All these processes produce parts by fusing material together in a series of extremely thin layers (as thin as 0.05mm). The technology isn’t new, metal SLS has its roots in a German patent filed in 1971 and first became commercially available in 1992 [http://bit.ly/uiKL6K]. The production of polymer parts using SterioLithography has been commercially available since 1986.

The advantages are that anyone with a 3D CAD program can send a file of virtually any shape that could not be manufactured any other way for the part to be made exactly as modelled on the cad software. In the last 25 years 3D printing has become common as part of the design process to test the fit, function, and appearance of designs before commissioning expensive tooling. Recently Airbus have decided to use an SLM (selective laser melting – similar to SLS, but using higher energy to fully melt the powdered material) to create a series of parts for their flagship A380.

Image shows difference between a traditional part and one that is 3D printed

This is a landmark moment in the history of manufacture – As far as we’re aware it is the first time a 3D printed part has been used on a commercial product. The weight reduction due to the otherwise impossible to produce shapes shown in the component is worth the additional cost of manufacture in the low volumes that Airbus require.

Although the powders and resins are regularly improving they are still some way off the performance of their traditional counterparts: Self lubricating parts and soft parts are still impossible, only small parts can be made, the material used is often inferior to high grade alternatives used in traditional manufacturing methods and the powder used, machines needed, and energy required all contribute to make it an expensive process. Parts in some applications will require post machining, for example facing, reaming, drilling and tapping, the additional costs and time of which may negate the benefits of the additive manufacturing process.

There are some low-cost 3D printers that could be purchased by most small businesses or keen amateurs but the end product is dependent on so much more than the ability to produce parts, in the same way that most of us could buy tools and materials to make our own furniture we choose not too because we can buy higher quality items in less time, often at a lower price than the cost of the materials alone. For this reason 3D printing is likely to remain a predominantly industry only tool.

One exciting development could be that as fuel prices increase companies might choose to send data to service engineers, garages  or factories rather than parts – although consumers wouldn’t notice a difference it would revolutionise the supply structure, and potentially mean that parts would never be discontinued.

Whatever happens will inevitably make the current technology more affordable. At present the technology is worth investigating as one route to manufacture for some applications but often an alternative should be considered even if it takes some creativity and lateral thinking to design the alternative. We might never get that Star Trek replicator but the possibility of combining complex hose assemblies into a single block, building intricate pathways into a part (possibly to cool parts like cylinder heads or complex mould tools) or creating lightweight lattice structures in a single part is still enough for anyone designing or manufacturing products to get excited about.

We transfer is a great way to send files to anyone for free. We email, a lot. We often send attachments in the form of pdfs to our suppliers and clients – but when we come unstuck when sending larger files such as complex e-drawings or solidworks assemblies.

We think Dropbox (http://bit.ly/tu6492)  is great if the other person is happy to sign up, especially if we’re constantly collaborating with them but for one offs with no hassle We transfer.com is great!

visit the site here:

http://bit.ly/rFI48X 

The British economy, as we are reminded on a daily basis, is going through tough times. Interest rates remain low, banks have a reputation for not lending to business and manufacturing industry is on its ‘last legs’.  However, while not having the growth of China or even Germany, the British economy is sustained by its innovation in niche markets. The example of the new Airbus manufacturing plant in Broughton North Wales (www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15298547) and design and engineering facility in Filton near Bristol is testament to British expertise in these and other niche markets.

British design has long been recognised as being at the forefront of innovation and, combined with what remains of British manufacturing, where possible is surely going to play an important part in helping to the country to work its way through, if not out of, the current economic downturn.

In his article ‘Whys doesn’t Britain make things anymore? ‘of 16^th November 2011 Guardian Economics leader writer Aditya Chakrobortty , writes of the Tyneside ship-building  town of Wallsend, ‘You still find industrial estates, of course, and they look the part: overalled men milling about, passing lorries. Only up close does it become clear that there’s not much actual industry going on’.

Many areas certainly have been stripped of their manufacturing base (two thirds in the last twenty years according to Chakrobortty), but take a turn down a local industrial estate and see what ranges of skills are on show. This local area employs engineers to cabinet-makers, rubber moulders to trailer manufacturers. Companies such as these have been the life-blood of the local and British economy for over a hundred years and while times are hard, those that innovate to stay ahead of the game will continue to be successful in Britain and overseas.

To continue this success, maybe British consumers need to take a leaf out of the French and German books and consciously buy more product made in our own country. Chakroborrty points out that ‘The Germans and French have kept their big domestic brand names – the Mercedes and Mieles, the Renaults and Peugeots – and with them their supply chains of smaller suppliers and partners’.

Many of us of a certain generation remember a number of ‘Buy British’ campaigns and John Lewis has recently announced that it will be launching its own range of ‘Made in Britain’ products very soon. Although the BBC article Buy British: Why isn’t there a new campaign? (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-15287225) states that ‘The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills says the UK relies on open markets and a ‘Buy British’ campaign would be counter-productive’. In the article, political pundit Kevin Maguire says it would be a bit like shooting yourself in the foot. “UK companies need to be able to access global markets so restricting access to the UK or the EU market could all too easily encourage retaliation, which would leave everyone worse off.”

But maybe we should keep it regional rather than national. At Canard Design, we prefer to, and thankfully still have the ability to, be able to support local companies whether it is injection moulders with in the East Midlands, casting suppliers in Leicestershire or, more locally still, engineering firms or marketing companies within the Harborough district.

We find keeping these local ‘partnerships’ and networks allow referrals and the potential of work to flow both ways. This is much more likely to happen with companies within the area than if we were to go further afield for our suppliers’ services. This way of doing business not only assists and sustains the local economy but reduces transport costs, environmental impact and is self-perpetuating in that it creates its own a virtuous business circle.

According to the Guardian comment, ‘To me, it still sounds too extreme but I saw their (Wallsend workers) point: the loss of manufacturing means Britain no longer pays its way in the world. Last year, we British bought £97bn more in goods from other countries than we sold to them – the biggest shortfall since 1980’.

So in order to reduce the nation’s largest trade deficit in 30 years, retain (and grow) our (sixth largest in the world) industrial manufacturing base and employment, maybe we should buy more goods from the local community, whether it’s industrial product or vegetables from the local farm shop, it’s effect on the national economy will surely be positive.

We have been named as partners in Omniperceptions collaboration project which has been shortlisted for this prestigious award. The Omniperception team have developed innovative facial recognition software which they needed to house in a casework that not only reflected the value of their brand but allowed for scaleable production quantities. The Omniperception team included Adrian Steel of Steel Badger consulting (http://steelbadger-consulting.com/) who project managed the Checkpoint S allowing us to micro-manage the mechanical design.

Part of the success of the casework was the close collaboration we had with the manufacturers involved based on a long term relationship that allowed us to respond quickly, communicate effectively and have complete confidence in the team we had assembled.  Despite Omniperception being based in Guildford most of the manufacturing was carried out in Leicestershire and the East Midlands area.

The Full shortlist for all catagories can be read below:

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Journals/1/Files/2011/11/1/TE_2011_SHORTLIST.pdf

For more information on the OmniPerception Checkpoint S you may like to visit our related blog posts below:
Case study, Portfolio Images

or visit OmniPerception’s own website by clicking here