Importance of Conceptual Design in New Product Development

Before going deep into NPD, let us revisit the definition of conceptual engineering design. According to Professor Barry O'Sullivan, Head of Department, Computer Science, University College Cork, Ireland, "Engineering Conceptual Design is the phase of the product development process during which the designer takes a specification for a product to be designed and generates many broad solutions or schemes." Concept design is crucial to new product development in a competitive scenario.

NPD and Conceptual Engineering Design

New product development is the order of the day during recessionary times. Manufacturers want to innovate new models to trigger consumer decisions. Take the example of automobile sector. As the market calls for attractive new models faster before the competitor offers similar models, design engineers have to be on their toes to offer the best design in the shortest timespan. This has to be seen in a scenario where design decisions results in more than 75% of ultimate product costs. Customers want quality, manufacturers want to reduce cost, and competitive markets want swift product solutions. Can design engineers involved in conceptual engineering design satisfy all the stakeholders in all parameters?

A design engineer’s job assumes significance at this juncture. His decisions during the conceptual design phase will have its bearing primarily on cost, then comes performance, reliability, safety aspects of the product to avoid product recalls. Now our question is, how to reduce the time to market with a new product meeting all cost, performance, and quality parameters. For that, do we need a new product development process? What plagues the current product development process? If a change is brought in the form of smart design software solution, how the heavy equipment sector will benefit out of it? Let us address these issues.

More Ideas

When it comes to the actual process of working out ideas for new products, it is important that more and more ideas are worked out in the conceptual phrasing stage. The whole process of generating a new product may start with problematizing. The objective of the new product is to be the crux of the problem and all the possible solutions for this problem may be considered as candidate ideas for the new product. It’s vital to consider as many ideas as possible so that the best and most cost effective solution may be chosen based. It calls for tools and software that can clearly evaluate all aspects of the concept.

Iteration vs. Synthesis

In this aspect design synthesis has proved to be a better methodology than the methodology used hitherto. The iterative design process is both time consuming and limited in its scope Based on the design requirements, input values are assumed and used for design calculations. The results are checked if they are acceptable and meet the design requirement. Let’s take an example where we have to assume the dimensions of the cross section of a boom. We already know the load to be lifted and the principal stress limit. The assumed value of the cross section is used for design calculations (Stresses, etc.). The calculated value of principal stress is checked if it is within limits. If it is then the design is complete if not the whole process is repeated until satisfactory results are achieved.

However, in the design synthesis methodology, the required design outputs are set as boundary conditions, and design inputs as open variables. Design relations and equations are added as design constraints, the process of determination of the design inputs is done by synthesizing the design for optimum outputs. This is far from iterative and is no more trial and error based. For this process one needs hybrid tools.

Benefits of Integrating Multiple Software into One Software

Delve deeper into design engineering practices. By exploring the gaps in the past, and analyzing the present, solutions for future can be defined. The product development processes of yesteryears and present manage conceptual design, engineering calculations, CAD, CAE and physical prototype phases in one dimension where each phase consumes its time to market along with costly iterations. To be specific, today’s engineering practices use:

• Elaborate and iterative methods to synthesize the geometry
• 3D or 2D CAD software to work out preliminary kinematics to satisfy the reach dimensions
• Another math software to gauge force calculations where two software cannot be dynamically linked

This means by meeting these expectations mentioned above in the shortest possible time simultaneously; maintaining quality, predictability, and engineering integrity solutions for future product development processes can be defined. Design engineers who use 2d drawing tool, 3d sketcher, spreadsheet, popular math software and simulation tools individually are handicapped at the conceptual design engineering phases like concept phasing and concept detailing. For example, math tools do not have the deep graphical capability of a CAD sketcher and the sketcher cannot do explicit math. Are they not handicaps in product development?

This calls for integrating all the above mentioned software in one software. A unique software called Ceaddeveloped by CADVision Engineers, Hyderabad, India claims nearly 90% of reduction in iterations by integrating CAD, CAE and Math tools. Such integrated software can avoid costly corrections before the metal is cut. Now think what is more ideal for heavy equipment, automobile, aerospace, and many other manufacturers? Opting for iterating the kinematic design between multiple software or use one software that integrates CAD, CAE, and math tools? If the option is second, industries and design engineers can derive maximum mileage by lowering iterations, reducing costly corrections, meeting market specifications, and finally shortening time to reach markets and expand the market share.

2d vs 3d

Why 2d, when advanced 3d solutions are available? A major cause of product development design iterations is due to conceptual designs failing during digital validation (ex: FEA and Kinematic analysis) of the virtual 3d prototype. The reason is finding a geometry that fits the specifications along with manufacturing constraints, forces and moments, and working clearances in 3d modelling is burden-some.

A second reason why 2d is preferred over 3d is the simplicity that allows analysis of complex problems. In 3d, it would be very complex to analyze. The time taken to do a quick 2d design is much faster than 3d allowing more ideas to be evaluated.

Third reason is due to the fact that having invested in detailed 3d modelling, design tends to get locked and rarely other designs are tried. Whereas design in 2d the engineer can evaluate and analyze more concept designs and chose the most appropriate one.

Because of these stronger reasons, 2d design is better for conceptualizing, where many designs need to be evaluated. Working with 2d is like sketching on paper, therefore simpler and faster. On the contrary, investing in 3d in the earlier stages of conceptualization is not only expensive, but in fact restricts the designer to work only on one kind of design while one would prefer working on bulk of ideas.

Finally, for new product development, the conceptual stage is of utmost importance and any manufacturer will benefit with innovative products developed cost effectively and qualitatively. Using integrated design software like the CEAD, many industries like the heavy equipment sector, automobile sector, aerospace, oil and gas sector and many others will immensely benefit, with NPD faster, cheaper, with fewer design iterations.

http://www.cadvisionengineers.com/cead/cead-product-brochure-datasheet/

Shrigopal currently serves as Executive director of product development company at Cadvision,a creator of advanced,innovative technologies designed to efficiently deliver and develop cad software products.