Reflection for Design Thinking    Frederic Singh

“Visualization”                                                                                                                                           10-18-2018

Challenge & Selection  "You know those linear actuators we need in 4 months? They just went to 12 month lead time. I think  we have an alternate." The Project Manager hadn't been at my desk for more than 30 seconds and my  stomach already felt like I'd checked a text as the driver took our car over an unexpected hill. In the  semiconductor manufacturing equipment company where I work as an engineer, supplier part delays  (and substitutions) in the recent booming economy are a common occurrence. Typically, it's for a minor  component with several alternates of similar shape or "form factor" and handled by a single designer.  Think "all-weather" instead of "snow" tread for your car tires. This one, however, was more involved.  The linear actuator is a central part, a sliding component used as the backbone of a lifting robot, and the  one thing that everything else (motor, brackets, sensors, base stand, etc...) attaches to. No, this was not  choosing a tire, this might be swapping wheels from 14 inch to 16 inch rims or maybe 6 lug to 5 lug nut  hole pattern! This was going to require the "What is?" and "What if?" of Design Thinking, a design  review relying heavily on Visualization.      Application  Not surprisingly, in manufacturing engineering you use a wide variety of visual tools and resources. The  "back of the napkin" doodle is alive and well in industry. One also comes across technical diagrams on  supplier "datasheets", color pictures in parts catalogs and designs 3D models and creates 2D  documentation 'prints' using computer aided design (CAD) software. For this design review, we used all  of these and more.     A meeting was scheduled for the following week to review the details of the current design and  determine the feasibility of the alternate supplier's replacement linear actuator. Design reviews in  manufacturing often include technical and semi-technical people. This design review was no exception.  Invited to the meeting were a couple of attendees from Purchasing, a mechanical engineer (me), an  engineering technician, a couple of manufacturing technicians and the Project Manager.     I had booked a room with a digital projector and plenty of dry erase white boards for doodling. To be  sure we all got our hands dirty, both literally and figuratively, I brought an old (greasy) linear actuator  from the lab for "show and tell" around the table. Each seat received a printout of the old and new  datasheets/catalogs showing dimensions and technical information. I find it's helpful to have printouts  in front of everyone for note taking, for reference and again for doodling.     At my company, many of us have to work remotely, so I had set up a WebEx emeeting and started off by  screen sharing a PowerPoint slide show with the Project Manager (now traveling out of state on  business) and with the people in the room via projector. After a short discussion of the slides and  challenge at hand, we went free form and handed off the presentation to the engineering technician  manning a CAD program called CREO. The following hour plus was spent determining the "What Is?" and  some of our "What If?" challenges and advantages of using the alternative actuator and its impact on  our current design and parts.            Insight & Approach  The design review was very productive due to Visualization used: WebEx and PowerPoint slides, video  projectors, CREO CAD models, samples, whiteboards and datasheet/catalog handouts. Visualization was  key here, since it communicates more than just language, where the technical terms may not be familiar  to all and the discussion revolves around shapes and fit between parts. The saying, "A picture speaks a  thousand words", was very, very, true.

Reflection for Design Thinking    Frederic Singh

“Visualization”                                                                                                                                           10-18-2018

"Linear actuator??", say the Purchasing buyers. "Oh, it's a 'SLIDE'. Got it." Seeing and understanding the  technical terms in use would help them know what to look for and communicate with the alternate  supplier(s).  The introduction PowerPoint slide show explained the situation to all the participants and  primed the discussion. The Project Manager was able to see and participate from offsite. Looking at the  CAD and catalog diagrams of the alternate linear actuator, the technicians and I identified its different  shaped features and drew on the white boards some basic design concepts to accommodate those  features.    The visual aids, especially the linear actuator sitting on the desk, spurred a lot of discussion of the "What  Is?" and "What If?" of the current designs. "The screws are larger…" and "That flange feature really isn't  needed on the original design and can actually go away…" and "What if we used their industry standard  motor mount and not our custom one?" Participants often pointed to a feature on the physical part,  then pointed out the significance of that feature in the "where-used" example CAD models on the  projector screen.  The engineering technician was able to rotate or explode the views in CAD projection  to show how parts connected and to better make the point.     The time constraints and scope for this first design review meeting did not allow it, but follow-up  meetings would continue the "What If?" redesign with new concept parts modeled in CAD. Seeing the  engagement of having an actual, physical object on the table to see and touch, I want to use that as a  Visualization tool going forward. I might ask for a sample alternate linear actuator or buy one from the  supplier so that people can see and handle it. Also, our company just purchased a 3D printer, a Fusion3D  F410, for rapid prototyping. It can "print" plastic mock-ups (up to 14x14x12.4 inch) from CAD of some of  our concept parts for hands on discussion and validation.

