Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Dianna Deeney Leave a Comment

QDD 083 Getting to Great Designs

Getting to Great Designs

What makes a great design?

It depends.

We talk about the spectrum of designs (from great to spam), the various customers engineers need to design for, and how engineers can work with their team toward defining what a great design should be.

 

View the Episode Transcript

 

Affordability, simplicity and value are measured by our customers, and design engineers have many customers.

It takes a team to make a product happen and engineers can make concept development and design inputs a team activity.

Using quality methods may help with communication, gathering information and being able to make decisions about the concept and design in early phases of development.

Citations:

You’re invited to download a checklist: 12 things you should have before a design concept makes it to the engineering drawing board. Download Here

 

 

Episode Transcript

How do we know we have a great design? We can think about our products, affordability, simplicity, and value, but to whose measurement? Let’s talk more about this after the brief introduction.

Hello and welcome to Quality During Design, the place to use quality thinking to create products others love, for less. Each week we talk about ways to use quality during design, engineering, and product development. My name is Dianna Deeney. I’m a senior level quality professional and engineer with over 20 years of experience in manufacturing and design. Listen in and then join us. Visit quality during design.com.

I have been getting catalogs and links to articles about holiday gadgets and we are back in full swing. I love looking at gadgets, the products that do something old in a new way, and I also enjoy looking through the toy guides. Those interactive robots are not going away and they’re a lot of fun. The other place I love to go is the Made for TV in the mall. Just looking at the inventive gadgets and things that people created and designed and engineered in order to solve a problem.

Some designs are great. They are engineered to be affordable, simple and valuable, and those are the ones that interest me the most because I know it takes real intention and effort during engineering to do this, we don’t end up with great gadgets by chance.

Other designs are not great. They could be affordable but not simple. They may be complicated or require extra steps to get started. Toys or notorious for complicated packaging. When my kids were younger, they would get a fantastic new toy and it would take an adult 20 to 30 minutes to get it out of the packaging. Other designs are not great because maybe they’re affordable and simple but not valuable. And the first category that comes to mind for that is just that they’re made cheaply. Maybe they work once and then they break when they’re not supposed to break after one use. I had picked up a little drone and reading the instructions, it said you can’t fly it outside, it has to stay inside, so we flew it inside and then it quickly got a hair twisted around one of the rotors and then it burned out. I didn’t consider that very valuable. Other products may not be engineered well or to proper use conditions because they don’t work as promised or worst yet, or the worst category of them all is that they are purposefully bad. They don’t work as they promised.

And those are the ends of our balance, the extremes, and there’s lots of gray area in between.

I’ll retell a story from my dad. This is way back when plastic injection molding was just getting started decades ago. He is a designer and an inventor, but more than that he also designed tools. He’s a journeyman tool and die maker. He made the tools and he eventually grew his business to have injection molding equipment, too. Before he had his own place to make tools, he was also a designer and he was approached by a client who wanted a yard spinner, a yard ornament. It’s something that has a stake that you stick in the ground and it spins in the wind. And he designed it to last. He showed it to his client and his clients were happy with how it looked, but then they pushed it back to him and asked him to make it so it would break in a couple of years so people would have to buy a new one.

In this case, we had a product that’s engineered to be affordable, simple, and valuable, and people wanted him to engineer it to be less valuable over its lifetime. This thinking still happens, but I would like to think it’s a bit less. I also think this bothered him because he’d tell me about it a few times, decades after the fact.

In the view of his clients, he over-engineered it even after he changed it. It was the same cost to make it stayed simple. The design didn’t change as much, but to his clients it was less valuable because they wouldn’t get to sell as many over the long term as they’d like.

Now, when I talk about value from a quality professional viewpoint, I’m talking about the end users. I picture a grandma that picked up a pretty yard spinner for her yard. She could afford it. It was simple. Push the stake into the ground. Was it valuable to her? Maybe it was enough value considering the cost.

Today, engineers are expected to consider more end users. Can the yard spinner be recycled? What’s the cost and difficulty of that? What is the cost to our environment of the manufacturing, recycling, and disposal? It may no longer be affordable in those measures.

In the case of the yard spinner, let’s give the clients the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps they were creating a financing plan to be able to afford what was needed for the group to start making yard spinners in the first place in which many people were employed. I don’t know the answer. It was before I was born.

I can tell you that years later, while I was young, my dad invented, produced, and sold his own yard spinner. That is virtually indestructible and in my opinion, much prettier. He’s looking to sell them, again, if you’re in the market for a yard spinner! He engineered them for grandmas and everyone to be affordable, simple and valuable.

If some great designs like gadgets are meant to be affordable, simple, and valuable, how do we know we’ve got it? How do we know we have a well-engineered design?

We must do the upfront work and do it well: concept development and design inputs. Because we can’t do it by ourselves, we need a team of people to help. It takes many people to make a product a reality.

We have our customers or customer facing coworkers who can help define criteria from our customers. What would grandma have wanted most with her yard spinner? What do they think is affordable, simple, and valuable? How are we going to set up our engineering design inputs to match with that? Customers are number one. Without them, why are we designing anything?

Supplier management and manufacturing are needed to help cost out parts, components and figure out manufacturing, and there’s usually tradeoffs involved. We’re limited with the supplier list because of their capability or maybe there’s stance on global initiatives. For example, we may be limited with our choice of material in the first place. We can’t package grandma’s yard spinner in foam because she lives in California and we can no longer ship foam to California. Or we can no longer source the resin and colorant that we wanted.

Quality engineering can help with the quality across the product development and delivery process and within engineering design.

Reliability engineering can help us design with quality of the product over time.

We may also look to our company to help us define our customers and what they want. We’re working for a company and it should have a quality statement. Sometimes they’re worded more for stakeholders than employees, but there should be a sense or a statement or a mission or a vision about what it’s important to that company’s customers. What defines quality for them when using or buying products from our company? Is it style? Longevity in use? Dependability? It depends on what we’re designing for whom and that may be defined by the company that we work for.

Our customers could also be baked in as part of the regulations in our specific industry.

Engineering with a team takes effort and intent, just like engineering a great design. Most of the effort with a team means being proactive, involves communication, and uses our understanding of how other people affect the design choices we make. We can’t rely on our team to feed us information or just hand us a tidy memo of what they think is important. It’s not enough for great designs. We need to proactively reach out to get that information for ourselves and for our team because we want to engineer with intent, we need access to that information close to real time.

As design choices are made, our goal for touchpoints and meetings is to learn, discuss ideas, and decide on actions to move the project forward. And it can be iterative communication. It doesn’t have to be a full day of offsite meetings. In many cases, iterative would be better.

A way for engineers to iteratively communicate and get the information they need is through quality and reliability methods and tools, which is what I coach and have developed courses to help teach and what I podcast about.

So what’s today’s insight to action? Affordability, simplicity and value are measured by our customers and design engineers have many customers. It takes a team to make a product happen and engineers can make concept development and design inputs a team activity. Using quality methods may help with communication, gathering information and being able to make decisions about the concept and design in early phases of development.

If you want to see if you’re getting a great start with design with your team, sign up for a free checklist: The 12 things you should have before a design concept makes it to the Engineering drawing board. You’ll gain access to a portal where you can explore more about what’s on that list and why, with short modules. It’s free! Click the link on the homepage at qualityduringdesign.com.

If you like this topic or the content in this episode, there’s much more on our website including information about how to join our signature coaching program. The quality during design journey consistency is important, so subscribe to the weekly newsletter. This has been a production of Deeney Enterprises. Thanks for listening.

 

Filed Under: Quality during Design

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quality during Design podcast logo

Tips for using quality tools and methods to help you design products others love, for less.


by Dianna Deeney
Quality during Design,
Hosted on Buzzsprout.com
Subscribe and enjoy every episode
Google
Apple
Spotify

Recent Episodes

QDD 100 Lessons Learned from Coffee Pod Stories

QDD 099 Crucial Conversations in Engineering, with Shere Tuckey (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 098 Challenges Getting Team Input in Concept Development

QDD 097 Brainstorming within Design Sprints

QDD 096 After the ‘Storm: Compare and Prioritize Ideas

QDD 095 After the ‘Storm: Pareto Voting and Screening Methods

QDD 094 After the ‘Storm: Group and Explore Ideas

QDD 093 Product Design with Brainstorming, with Emily Haidemenos (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 092 Ways to Gather Ideas with a Team

QDD 091 The Spirits of Technical Writing Past, Present, and Future

QDD 090 The Gifts Others Bring

QDD 089 Next Steps after Surprising Test Results

QDD 088 Choose Reliability Goals for Modules

QDD 087 Start a System Architecture Diagram Early

QDD 086 Why Yield Quality in the Front-End of Product Development

QDD 085 Book Cast

QDD 084 Engineering in the Color Economy

QDD 083 Getting to Great Designs

QDD 082 Get Clarity on Goals with a Continuum

QDD 081 Variable Relationships: Correlation and Causation

QDD 080 Use Meetings to Add Productivity

QDD 079 Ways to Partner with Test Engineers

QDD 078 What do We do with FMEA Early in Design Concept?

QDD 077 A Severity Scale based on Quality Dimensions

QDD 076 Use Force Field Analysis to Understand Nuances

QDD 075 Getting Use Information without a Prototype

QDD 074 Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Supplements Test

QDD 073 2 Lessons about Remote Work for Design Engineers

QDD 072 Always Plot the Data

QDD 071 Supplier Control Plans and Design Specs

QDD 070 Use FMEA to Design for In-Process Testing

QDD 069 Use FMEA to Choose Critical Design Features

QDD 068 Get Unstuck: Expand and Contract Our Problem

QDD 067 Get Unstuck: Reframe our Problem

QDD 066 5 Options to Manage Risks during Product Engineering

QDD 065 Prioritizing Technical Requirements with a House of Quality

QDD 064 Gemba for Product Design Engineering

QDD 063 Product Design from a Data Professional Viewpoint, with Gabor Szabo (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 062 How Does Reliability Engineering Affect (Not Just Assess) Design?

QDD 061 How to use FMEA for Complaint Investigation

QDD 060 3 Tips for Planning Design Reviews

QDD 059 Product Design from a Marketing Viewpoint, with Laura Krick (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 058 UFMEA vs. DFMEA

QDD 057 Design Input & Specs vs. Test & Measure Capability

QDD 056 ALT vs. HALT

QDD 055 Quality as a Strategic Asset vs. Quality as a Control

QDD 054 Design Specs vs. Process Control, Capability, and SPC

QDD 053 Internal Customers vs. External Customers

QDD 052 Discrete Data vs. Continuous Data

QDD 051 Prevention Controls vs. Detection Controls

QDD 050 Try this Method to Help with Complex Decisions (DMRCS)

QDD 049 Overlapping Ideas: Quality, Reliability, and Safety

QDD 048 Using SIPOC to Get Started

QDD 047 Risk Barriers as Swiss Cheese?

QDD 046 Environmental Stress Testing for Robust Designs

QDD 045 Choosing a Confidence Level for Test using FMEA

QDD 044 Getting Started with FMEA – It All Begins with a Plan

QDD 043 How can 8D help Solve my Recurring Problem?

QDD 042 Mistake-Proofing – The Poka-Yoke of Usability

QDD 041 Getting Comfortable with using Reliability Results

QDD 040 How to Self-Advocate for More Customer Face Time (and why it’s important)

QDD 039 Choosing Quality Tools (Mind Map vs. Flowchart vs. Spaghetti Diagram)

QDD 038 The DFE Part of DFX (Design For Environment and eXcellence)

QDD 037 Results-Driven Decisions, Faster: Accelerated Stress Testing as a Reliability Life Test

QDD 036 When to use DOE (Design of Experiments)?

QDD 035 Design for User Tasks using an Urgent/Important Matrix

QDD 034 Statistical vs. Practical Significance

QDD 033 How Many Do We Need To Test?

QDD 032 Life Cycle Costing for Product Design Choices

QDD 031 5 Aspects of Good Reliability Goals and Requirements

QDD 030 Using Failure Rate Functions to Drive Early Design Decisions

QDD 029 Types of Design Analyses possible with User Process Flowcharts

QDD 028 Design Tolerances Based on Economics (Using the Taguchi Loss Function)

QDD 027 How Many Controls do we Need to Reduce Risk?

QDD 026 Solving Symptoms Instead of Causes?

QDD 025 Do you have SMART ACORN objectives?

QDD 024 Why Look to Standards

QDD 023 Getting the Voice of the Customer

QDD 022 The Way We Test Matters

QDD 021 Designing Specs for QA

QDD 020 Every Failure is a Gift

QDD 019 Understanding the Purposes behind Kaizen

QDD 018 Fishbone Diagram: A Supertool to Understand Problems, Potential Solutions, and Goals

QDD 017 What is ‘Production Equivalent’ and Why Does it Matter?

QDD 016 About Visual Quality Standards

QDD 015 Using the Pareto Principle and Avoiding Common Pitfalls

QDD 014 The Who’s Who of your Quality Team

QDD 013 When it’s Not Normal: How to Choose from a Library of Distributions

QDD 012 What are TQM, QFD, Six Sigma, and Lean?

QDD 011 The Designer’s Important Influence on Monitoring After Launch

QDD 010 How to Handle Competing Failure Modes

QDD 009 About Using Slide Decks for Technical Design Reviews

QDD 008 Remaking Risk-Based Decisions: Allowing Ourselves to Change our Minds.

QDD 007 Need to innovate? Stop brainstorming and try a systematic approach.

QDD 006 HALT! Watch out for that weakest link

QDD 005 The Designer’s Risk Analysis affects Business, Projects, and Suppliers

QDD 004 A big failure and too many causes? Try this analysis.

QDD 003 Why Your Design Inputs Need to Include Quality & Reliability

QDD 002 My product works. Why don’t they want it?

QDD 001 How to Choose the Right Improvement Model

© 2023 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.