DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

Introduction: Design is all too often considered as an end in its own right, rather than as a process with a specific and unique aim in mind. The conception of design as an end in itself runs parallel to the making of assumptions and omissions and an inadequate understanding of the problem. Solutions are sought before the full extent and implications of the design problem are fully grasped. Designs specified from this type of groundwork are generally of poor quality and fail to meet the requirements in the most effective way - at least the first time round! Below are the main considerations that iDer feel are imperative to good design, a lack of regard for which results in a design of poor quality: < < < < inadequately defined PDS - sometimes even a complete absence of one little consideration of manufacture and assembly of product over-design due to pursuit of excellence inaccurately defined bought out parts

A traditional conception of design, regarding design as one isolated element of the design to manufacture process, fails to see how what in these terms is called design - in fact applies at all stages of the process, right up to manufacture of the product. This has been a problem associated with algorithmic based CAD systems: the assumption that the designer actually designs the final product does not now fit with the conception of the designer=s role in modern industrial times. His or her strength now lies in the ability to derive a concept guided by a product design specification (PDS), only the basis of the design and not the design itself. This is the situation Design Builder, with its interactive interface and emphasis on communication, simulates - creating a virtual world of industry through multimedia techniques which really enables students to step into the designers shoes without incurring any of the risks involved in real life design and manufacture. Considering the role of CAD in improving the efficiency of engineering design relates to the controversial and ongoing debate regarding the extent to which computers should be allowed to aid humans in their daily lives. But really the concept of CAD should be exempt from such controversy since it aims to optimise the best aspects of both human and computer. For example, the human learns rapidly and can make intuitive leaps - which on the down side leaves us open to error, The computer is more reliable in this latter respect, and can store and assess large and detailed banks of information. Its weaknesses include the extraction of significant or specific information from this vast store, and the editing of that material. Of course, the computer facilitates this job on the part of the human, but it is in the human that these strengths lie. CAD is a technique which seeks to combine and optimise these respective strengths, and if properly implemented, produces the proverbial scenario where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. It implies, by definition, that the computer is not used when the designer is most effective and vice versa. CAD can certainly prove an invaluable resource to the design process. 1

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

Visualisation of complex production geometry through conventional engineering takes aptitude an considerable experience on the part of engineers. Advanced systems, such as solid modelling, allow better visualisation of product geometry and may be considered as a form of electronic model making. Parts libraries allow easy and rapid insertion of standard and frequently used parts and components into assemblies so reducing the tedium and promoting the use of CAD as a means of rapidly trying different design options. CAD itself promotes teamwork in so far as it enables different parts of a design scheme to be produced by different members of the design team and for these components to be assembled electronically when appropriate. But this is not necessarily the type of teamwork iDer exhort through their multimedia CAL system, Design Builder. By themselves, CAD systems, their attributes described as above, could foster the traditional approach to design where each department carries out their contribution to the design in isolation , with no inter-action or communication. Design Builder incorporates many useful elements of CAD, and reflects a similar optimum partnership between man and computer through its interactive interface and the responsibility placed on human input within the virtual industrial environment, and on the user him or herself. By incorporating CAD techniques into a system which reminds the user of the importance of such communicative, interactive teamwork, iDer show the real benefits of properly implemented CAD procedures. Design then relating both to components and manufacturing methods, is a multidisciplinary process, comprising creativity and intimate knowledge of existing resources. Design requires not just the determination of the functional, geometrical and aesthetic characteristics of the product, but also the anticipation of cost effectiveness, ease of manufacture and feasibility in relation to available resources. So, far from being a linear sequence of processes, design is very much an integrated affair that requires the effective communication of all the relevant information from one team to another in a mutually acceptable format. It is a vehicle for merging the skills, experiences and knowledge of both what we commonly term the design and manufacturing teams to optimise cost effectiveness, whilst maintaining a means of control and co-ordination of all related activities. The antithesis of this sort of approach is reflected in the proportional cost of the so-called design phase: an average of between 5-7% of the total life cycle costs. BUT - as a result of decisions made during this initial stage, something like 75% of the total life cycle costs have already been committed. Pareto observed that when 10% of the project time scale has elapsed, 90% of the total cost has been committed. For example, the study carried out at Rolls Royce Ltd. detailed sources of unnecessary cost for both new and well-established products as follows: design schemes 50% detail drawing 30% production engineering 20% The rewards to be gained by improvements made at the products design stage are clearly illustrated by the above findings, and are further demonstrated by the costtime curve.

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

Costs

Committed cost curve : Decis ions taken early in the design process commit you to the actions taken later

Accumulated cost curve : Manufacturing incurres high cost and hencewhere cost reductions are demanded

Specification Concept Design

Detail

Manufacture Time

Production Planning

Fig1. Costs v Lead Time of Design to Manufacture

These proportional values indicate the fundamental importance of that initial phase in a products life that is referred to as design. iDer perceive this initial phase as the definition of a need; its relation to the outcome, i.e. the product, and the human is expressed in two ways. The first regards the product, the response to a need, as mans response to changes in the environment: the second account designates a more active role to the human, whereby the man understands his present environment and is able to predict certain things about it. Thus, under this exposition of need, man is able to effect change in his environment by design. The recognition that a need exists and constitutes a design problem is the first stage of creativity in the design process. A design is not successful unless it fulfils a need: it may be fully functional, cost effective, aesthetically pleasing, etc. - but its functionality, and all these design aspects, are inextricably bound up with the role it is to perform - which translates as the need it is to fulfil. The concept of need and the subsequent design of a product to meet it are very complex issues. The media and advertising are often condemned for creating a need; making people dissatisfied with what they have, or suggesting they lack something fundamental to their health, comfort or happiness. Some advertisements appeal unashamedly to our subconscious, colours and packaging of products attract and seduce us, juxta-position of music and image moves us. In the engineering field, need becomes less a question of psychological analysis, but retains its double-edged complexity. The customer pinpoints a need, which in the case of Design Builder is expressed as a demand - the call for a specific product to satisfy that need. But in many instances the customer is not sure how to satisfy the need; as suggested earlier in relation to TV advertising - is sometimes not even aware of a need at all! Often it is a case of recognising a problem on the customers part: the awareness of a need, but translated as a want, a more ambivalent desire simply to satisfy that need. The creative aspect of the designers role is to produce a means of fulfilling this need through the generation of a concept for a specific 3

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

product. The concept of a need highlights the three-fold phase of the design to manufacture process: underlining the importance of a clear understanding of the problem before possible solutions are sought: a sequence paralleled in Design Builders virtual industrial environment by the compilation of a detailed PDS leading into the generation of concepts. The third phase - detail design - reflects the pooling of all pre-established data and the construction of the product which will go out to the customer. The subconscious, or perhaps simply indeterminate, aspects of a need are also reflected in Design Builder. Although the customer letter specifies a particular need and involves a demand for a specific product, the questioning of customer and experts is intended to convey the fact that certain necessities, either sub-divisions, corollaries or consequential factors of the customers need remain implicit. The customer is not an expert in this field any more than the designer is an expert in the domain of manufacturing or sales - his or her expertise encompasses the ability to interpret the customers request, the creative capacity to produce potential solutions; possible means of fulfilling the need, and good interpersonal and communication skills that enable him/her to pool the expertise of all departments in the design chain. Despite all the evidence uncovered by research, and everyday instances of iteration, resulting from poor communication and necessitating irritating changes to your own deadlines, the importance of this initial phase in the design to manufacture process is overlooked. There are many incidences of designs requiring modification at late stages of the design to manufacture process; sometimes even after the product has reached the customer. Such a situation raises the related questions: if a design has undergone several modifications throughout its life cycle, 1) how good was it on its initial release? - and 2) after several modification cycles, how well does it now satisfy its functional requirements? The cost incurred through modifying a design increases as the process nears completion. Thus changing a tolerance, dimension or even shape prior to manufacture costs relatively little - but effecting such changes during manufacture could incur costs of hundreds of thousands of pounds, as well as time delays that risk losing a company its clientele. A simple decision pertaining, for example, to basic shape, determined from basic pencil sketches can have far reaching consequences. Take for instance a chain of decisions that results in a defined shape being a sharp cornered cube, to be produced in large quantities and cheaply. These two latter factors contribute to the choice of polyethylene as a material and the method of production as injection moulding. Do you foresee any problems? The discipline of engineering is extremely diverse, covering a large range of very different subjects. However, although knowledge in a number of these fields may be required in order for sound decisions to be made during the design process, we still tend to view design as isolated and carried out by an individual: the designer. Sound design decisions leading to a right first time approach to manufacturing output demands a team approach as reflected in Design Builder. A good design considers all aspects relating to a products life cycle, both technical and non-technical, and taking into account right from the start what it really is the customer requires. Thus interaction between members of the design team and communication with the customer throughout the design to manufacture process are imperative elements of a successful 4

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

design outcome, elements which use of Design Builder will foster and encourage. The aim of this workbook is to help you as tutor/lecturer to optimise the use of Design Builder as a teaching aid and learning resource. It will suggest ways of integrating the software into current engineering design courses, as well as highlighting the different ways in which the system can be made use of, for example: during formal design sessions to assist the teaching of design in student groups as a basis for assignment and project work by individual students for assignment and project work

Use of Design Builder in lectures and tutorials can be supported and supplemented by the private use of the Student Edition of the system, available to individual students at a lower price than the academic version. iDer are concerned that, as engineers, it is important that we all become less involved in the maintenance of domain boundaries and a great deal more involved in a multidisciplinary role. The team members embrace a concurrent approach to engineering design and recognise that such a change to industrial practices as the concurrent philosophy brings, will necessitate parallel changes in the educational experience. Perhaps you have felt that academia is slow to adopt the changes many businesses are putting into practice; maybe you have first hand experience that undergraduate engineers are rarely provided with the required knowledge, expertise, communication and interpersonal skills necessary to work concurrently in an effective manner - but are frustrated with the similar physical limitations of your own range of expertise - and the economic inviability of the alternative team teaching approach. Engineering design has always been a notoriously difficult subject to teach, for this very reason: that the range of knowledge and expertise required in the design to manufacture process is simply too vast for any one individual to master. This is something we want to get across in Design Builder - whilst at the same time emphasising to students the importance of their contribution to a team effort and the parallel importance of each departments input in the design chain within industry. Industrialists report that undergraduates do not grasp the importance of their own endeavours when involved in a small portion of a major project; nor do they appreciate the infrastructure of inherently multidisciplined organisations. Both these vital, yet undeveloped, aspects of an engineering undergraduates education are targeted by iDers Design Builder. The system also spells a way out of the vicious circle created by the poor team working and communication skills exhibited by many students, and the consequent difficulty creating an atmosphere of concurrency - which would facilitate, encourage and show to advantage those communication skills. It is a chicken and egg argument: which comes first - the poor communication skills - or the difficulty of creating the concurrent environment? Either way, iDer hope the integration of Design Builder into your engineering design courses will create that atmosphere of concurrency, enabling interaction between system experts and user, demonstrating the advantages of a parallel interaction between departments in the design chain within industry and with the customer - and therefore encouraging students to employ similar interaction in their 5

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

own design projects. We hope you agree and that you find Design Builder an invaluable aid for you and your students. In order for students to find their way about the bookshelf and to be able to optimise its use both as a stand-alone resource and an aid to decision making in the design process within Design Builder, we have compiled a sample assignment: Bookshelf Assignment 1: A company is seeking, using cost as their main criterion, the best combination of power unit and transmission system to suit the following criteria: maximum output speed output power 1500 r.p.m. 28 kW

Use the catalogues supplied in the bookshelf to make a recommendation, providing information on the primary power source, power transmission type/model and total cost. Comments: The problem is admittedly much simplified, with the intention of providing a simple context within which the student can explore the bookshelf. Combinations may be built using various heat engines, electric and hydraulic motors coupled with v-belt drives. Consideration needs to be given to the required power output value when the appropriate service factor is taken into account. A point for discussion could be the advantages of multi-belt drives against a single belt drive, with particular reference to belt failure. Bookshelf Assignment 2: Parametric analysis is a powerful tool for establishing a products relative merits in comparison with competitors products. Information on carrying out a parametric analysis may be found on the bookshelf under marketing. Using the manufacturing data contained in the bookshelf catalogue, carry out a parametric analysis. Examples to use as a basis for the analysis are: I) drive transmissions ii) primary power sources and iii)materials power capabilities v. cost power output v. weight power output v. cost tensile strength v. density

The definitive expression of the term concurrent engineering has posed problems: iDer have come up with a working definition which they feel encompasses the holistic nature of the concurrent philosophy. Thus they perceive a designer of the concurrent engineering school as one who takes into account a wide range of downstream considerations that have an influence on the overall life cycle of the 6

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

produc. This holistic nature is what distinguishes CE design from more traditional design procedures, where decisions at each stage in the process are made in isolation and without a sense of their implications and relation either to the initial design brief or the finished product. Such an approach results in iteration, as the developing product must be returned to earlier stages for modification, and a subsequent increase in product lead-times and costs. There is little doubt that industry needs to adopt a concurrent philosophy of engineering design - and iDer feels it is vital that academia responds accordingly. At the moment, a great many graduates enter their industrial careers with little experience, and therefore appreciation, of the advantages of a concurrent philosophy of engineering design. This then, is the situation iDer aim to alleviate with their system Design Builder. The team members became aware that the conventional educational environment was not conducive to an understanding of the CE approach. Having highlighted three aspects of concurrent engineering, they then had to produce a system which expressed, but most importantly, enabled the user to implement, these aspects. These are the already-mentioned holistic nature of the philosophy; the necessity of interaction and communication between individuals and departments along the design chain=; and the fact that design is ultimately a compromise. This third aspect perhaps requires further elucidation: design is a compromise partially because it must take into account all aspects of the customers requirements - yet in cases where those requirements conflict (e.g. in the design for a motor car, where the desire for speed competes with a desire to keep running costs low) - the designer must employ his or her own judgement. There are also other requirements, such as manufacture, assembly, standards, disposal, etc, to be met which may not be perfectly reconcilable without similar intervention on the designers part. How does the system convey these aspects of CE? Design Builder simulates a concurrent engineering environment, enabling students to experience and implement a concurrent approach to engineering design. Domain specific experts, integrated within the system as knowledge bases, provide a valuable resource, as well as exemplifying the CE approach. The nature of these experts diverges from both traditional methods of design and of teaching design, and from traditional knowledgebased systems. The experts provide an important means of interaction between user and system, reflecting the necessary interaction between team members and departments, their advice available both on demand and unprompted. Their presence and role also emphasises the holistic nature of CE design: they are all present throughout the program, all available for advice at any stage in the process. Whether the advice is in response to a direct question from the user, an unexpected piece of information provoked by a users decision, or as result of a difference of opinion between experts, the advice can be over-ridden at any stage by the user. This reflects the third aspect of CE design referred to above, whereby the designer must exercise his or her own judgement in a situation where conflicting statistics, facts and/or advice demand a compromise of sorts. This sense of compromise should not be understood as something negative: it does not imply the product falls below the high expectations of todays market led economy, or outside the requirements stated by the customer. On the contrary, CE design as compromise ensures a product which best fits those criteria laid down in the 7

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

product design specification (PDS), and therefore the customers requirements as stated in the initial system-generated letter. The ranking of the questions asked and answers received in the first phase of the program is an integral part of compiling the PDS and reflects 1) this compromise, 2) the importance of the designers own informed judgement, and 3) his/her interaction with colleagues along the design chain which will ensure that judgement is adequately and comprehensively informed. This act of ranking information in compiling the PDS reflects the questioning approach to engineering design that iDer aim to emphasise throughout Design Builder. The system-generated customer letter which presents a design scenario; a basic design brief - is expressly vague, stating only the minimal requirements and omitting certain factors (such as environment, labour source, etc. ) and consequently containing implicit requirements which it is the users job to draw out and state explicitly in the PDS. This reflects the essential aim of the PDS phase in Design Builder, which is to underline the importance of a thorough understanding of the problem before a solution is sought. An incomprehensive and therefore ambiguous PDS and a leaping in to the concept design stage results, in the long term, in increased product lead-time as the finished product may be found insufficient for the customers need. In a worse case scenario, the lack of or a poorly constructed PDS may result in the manufacture of a product for which there is no need at all and hence no market. An example of such a product could be the innovative, yet ill-received, Sinclair C5. A more thorough survey would have established whether or not such a product would be well-received by the public - i.e. would have highlighted a need and a market. The ranking of the information collated from the customer and expert responses is a further stage of the questioning approach since the user must consider whether a particular element of the design is really necessary - as well as the order of importance of each element, in view of the data he/she has already collected. It is important to stress that the systems rankings, effected by the experts, are only correct for this company and this product. This section is designed to challenge students rather than present them with a definite paradigm design solution. Thus a student may disagree with an experts ranking and still be able to produce a feasible and appropriate concept. The vital point here is that the student who does disagree gives careful thought as to why this is the case. At the second phase, where the user is required to generate a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 6 concepts, he/she is also required to choose materials, joining and processing methods relating to each component and their assembly. This ensures that the user keeps the PDS constantly in mind, relating all future decisions regarding the product to the customer requirements it aims to meet. Design Builder encourages the user to recognise the inter-relation of all design decisions through the intervention of its domain experts, who will react to the users decision or answer any queries regarding the implications of certain decisions. Thus the second phase - concept design - emphasises the 3 highlighted aspects of CE design: the interaction of team members and customer, the holistic nature of the design process, and the compromise that is made through selecting certain combinations of materials and processes. In the second phase - concept design - when possible solutions to the now fully understood problem are sought, similar interaction occurs. Concept design is a gradual honing down of information, involving decisions on several levels. For example, the student must choose how to arrange the various components (motor, transmission, 8

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

winch drum, side plates, base plate) as well as deciding which type of motor, transmission, materials, processes and joining methods to use. Details of how to assemble the components are available on the bookshelf (icon at the toolbar at the bottom of screen) under layout of concepts. Once again, experts are available to advise prior to choice, but also comment unprompted, activated by the students decisions. They remind the student of the disadvantages of his/her choice of material or method, and the system allows the student to reassess his/her design in view of this information. However, the experts do not only intervene to criticise or highlight problems: the student also receives positive feedback and encouragement throughout the program. This can mean though, that a student receives commendation from one expert on one particular design decision, but is alerted to a potential problem regarding the same decision by another expert. This aspect of Design Builder emphasises 1) the compromise involved in design, 2) the importance of referring to the PDS to aid decisions in such situations 3) the necessity for the intervention of the designer and the employment of his/her judgement 4) the importance of interaction with experts to ensure that judgement is informed, and 5) how Design Builder reflects real life situations in industry. The second half of the concept design phase is another example of how Design Builder encourages the student to take responsibility - whilst emphasising the necessity of interaction at all times. It is also an element of the system which enables self-evaluation: a vital aspect of the learning process in any field. In order to select an optimum concept - one that best fits the requirements stated in the PDS - the technique employed is a form of matrix analysis. The system selects one concept as the benchmark - against which students are required to measure the appropriateness of their other concept designs. Continuation is achieved by the division of the criteria to be met into the 5 already mentioned categories of materials, cost, manufacture, assembly and marketing. These categories are weighted by the system to represent their relative importance in the overall design. Even at this stage of self-evaluation, experts intervene if the students scoring of a concept does not agree with their own. Once again students have the opportunity to modify their rating in the light of expert opinion, but are able to override advice at any time. This occasion for self-assessment is supported by further opportunities in the concluding feedback section of the system. The third phase - detail design - reflects the convergence of all the information accumulated during the design decision making process undertaken up to the present stage. Knowledge and understanding of mechanical related sciences, manufacturing technology, marketing information, assembly skills and experience, cost awareness must be brought together and put into effect in order to specify and select components of a suitable size, type, dimension, material, etc. that will result in a final design to comply with the previously compiled PDS. It is a process of analysis whereby the student builds up specific details relating to each component, with the constant overview of the design solution as a whole and its accordance with the PDS. Many of the components, and assembly devices such as bolts, will be bought in. At this stage it is advisable to check upon what materials and components the company holds in stock - and which have to be bought in. This information will have bearing on product lead time since bought-in parts may incur delays of up to a week. The optimum time 9

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

for checking is during concept design when decisions can be taken and changes made accordingly, without huge increase to product lead time. The necessary data is to be found on the bookshelf under company policies. In the industrial environment, the design engineer must select the most suitable component from reams of manufacturers catalogues and data, aware, as always, of the conception of design as a compromise between different aspects of its function. Integrated within Design Builder is considerable store of specific data pertaining to individual components displayed in the form of manufacturers catalogues. Once again, the student is required to interact with the system and make decisions and selections in a manner analogous to a design engineer in industry. As the various aspects begin to merge into the final design outcome, Design Builder continues to emphasise the importance of concurrency: of communication between departments and interaction with the customer through reference to the PDS, in making that outcome successful. As throughout the program, the systems experts will comment, unprompted, on students decisions, and are available for advice at any time. The opening screen displays nine individual component icons, representing the constituent parts of the final design. Although the components are not displayed in a specific order, the fact remains that selection and refinement of one provides the basis for decisions regarding another, underlining the holistic nature of the design process. For example: once you have decided on the length, type and material from which to make the rope , other decisions must be made relating to whether it will comprise a large number of small strands or a small number of large strands. Any decision made requires consideration of a number of factors and influences future decisions, in this case the details pertaining to the drum. It is however up to the user to judge in piecing together the parts; the system will respond to each suggestion or attempt on behalf of the user. For example, casing design has to be carried out last, whilst some components can be altered prior to this final decision (e.g. bearing/transmissions) The system emphasises that there is little point in considering the components in isolation; this approach only leads to iteration in the design decision making process and an extension of product lead time. Clicking on each component icon activates the relevant manufacturers catalogue. Each entry is preceded by an introduction explaining how to calculate the necessary dimensions, etc. and the student can return to this introduction at any time during the selection of a specific component by clicking on the tab at the right of the catalogue. As well as these summative introductions, there is more detailed and indepth information pertaining to the components available on the bookshelf. It is recommended that the student refer to this and other virtual design aid tools in compiling his/her detail design. Design Builder continues to emphasise its concurrent message through the function and availability of these aids. For example, the filing cabinet is a particularly useful resource at this stage, not only enabling the student to refer back to the customer letter and PDS, but also to his/her chosen concept design and any components already designed in detail. Selecting current selection from the list activated by clicking on filing cabinet displays the students current concept design. There is also the opportunity to change components or even concepts at this late stage (simply click on change concept icon) - but such last minute alterations are not encouraged, since they go against the whole message of Design Builder: to preclude 10

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

the necessity of alteration at later stages in the design process by compiling a complete and comprehensive PDS and referring to it constantly before making any subsequent design decisions, thus reducing iteration and, consequently, cost and lead-times. If a change is considered imperative at this stage (e.g. if failure to change now would result in impossibility of manufacture or a failed product) - then the system will take this into account - but the necessity for change at this stage should always be avoided in the ways Design Builder has hitherto encouraged and facilitated, hence alterations to the design at the detail design stage will cost the student dear in performance rating - as it would the company in the parallel industrial environment, incurring costly delays to the delivery date. Below are some useful notes on assumptions made, ratios and tolerances used and potentially problematic elements, pertaining to each section of the detail design: safety factor: It may be worth explaining to students that the safety factor is a sort of insurance to build into a design to offset unforeseen occurrences. This presents another good example of how design is a compromise, for whilst raising a factor of safety generally improves the components ability to withstand forces applied by its environment, the increase of materials required in the components design will inevitably raise costs. Perhaps one of the most striking instances of this to date has been the freak wind conditions which obliterated the Tokamotta bridge in the USA. drum design: The system assumes that a drum has to be at least 12 times the rope diameter. This is a rule of thumb estimate used by winch manufacturers to allow the rope to bend around the drum. The ropes used on industrial winches are of a heavy duty type, and this is reflected in the limited size of coil radius they are able to form. If the coil radius for a particular rope is larger than that decided upon for the drum dimension, the rope will not sit properly on the drum. This will result in poor winch performance and possible rope damage. In rope dimensions that result in a portion of a turn being occupied on the drum, the number of turns specified is rounded up to the nearest integer. One rule of thumb for drum manufacture is that the side plate diameter should allow for an extra two layers of rope beyond that specified to prevent it sliding off the winch drum. shaft length: It is assumed that there is an overhang at each end of the drum and a clearance between the drum and side plates. The method for calculating the magnitude of stress applied to the side plate has been simplified: stress in a real shaft would be tri-axle. In Design Builders analysis of these values, shear and tensile stress are considered separately. It is assumed that the load on the shaft is a point load at the centre of the shaft and does not take into account the effect the drum will have on the shaft. Shear stress would be significant due to the forces acting at the contact areas between shaft and drum side plates. Additionally, no account is taken of the fact that the drum adds rigidity. 11

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

The company manufactures to the tolerance N8' and prefers working with steels. The maximum radius of curvature has been taken from bearing manufacturers data.

drive selection: It is assumed that all electric motors, hydraulic motors and engines are fixed speed to ease system design. The reason for such simplification is to preclude the need for individual torque characteristics for the 200+ motors in the systems database. A manual handle is not a recommended choice since the torque required is unlikely to be achieved by manual drive alone. V-belt selection: Information on v-belts stored in the systems database was kindly provided by Fenner Power Transmissions UK. The companys procedure for selecting belts and pulleys has been greatly simplified in Design Builder. However, the revised procedure does allow realistic decisions to be made, without unnecessary distraction from the base process. service factors: Service factor selection for all transmissions has been simplified by ignoring additional situation dependent factors. adhesives: It is assumed that adhesives will fail due to peeling and that they are inappropriate to this design situation. welding: To simplify the process, actual weld bead sizes are not considered; it is assumed that the correct size for the situation is used. calculations using pi: The system uses a value of pi to 6 decimal places. We have experienced times when calculators produce more accurate answers than the system. If the expert reports that an answer is incorrect, recommend to students that they try using a value of 3.14 for pi. coefficients of friction: The system assumes that the bottom of the lifeboat and the runners are made of steel. The information required to select the correct value for the coefficient of friction is available through the customers letter and in the relevant table included on the bookshelf.

As well as the knowledge based domain experts, Design Builder contains 12

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

several additional learning resources. The bookshelf is one such facility, where users can access real design-related data to assist decision making during the design process. The information stored on the bookshelf is designed to be of use at each and any stage in the design process, containing information and specific data (e.g. values of coefficients of friction and ergonomic data), manufacturers catalogues of bought out components, as well as more general instructive and background information (such as how to write a PDS and What is Design Builder?) Thus the bookshelf provides a more specific yet also more wide-ranging source of information than the experts alone could offer. Not only is it available throughout the program, it is also an invaluable stand-alone learning resource, accessible via an icon on the Windows Program Manager screen. The information on the bookshelf is grouped under 5 main category headings: books - a set of hypertext documents relating to the important aspects of the design to manufacture process: materials, costing, manufacture, assembly and marketing - as well as instructive information on how to write a PDS and background information on mechanical systems general info. - includes specific data relevant to design decisions on materials and dimensions (values of coefficients of friction and ergonomic data) - as well as background information contrasting the traditional design procedure with a CE approach and highlighting the 5 areas of expertise involved in the design to manufacture process (what is Design Builder?). This section also contains an example specification - which may be of use to students having difficulties compiling their own PDS. standards - a brief list of relevant British standards with functional details under hypertext headings - a wide range of product catalogues based upon information and data supplied by a variety of manufacturers. The products detailed include gear boxes, V-belt drives, heat engines, bearings, couplings, electric motors, hydraulic motors.

catalogues

FEEDBACK: Feedback is available in a variety of forms, at different stages and from diverse perspectives. iDer intend, through this aspect of Design Builder, to optimise learning and improve personal skills of self-evaluation, whilst the diverse nature of the feedback reflects the holistic nature of design and the compromise it necessarily entails. One element of feedback is constantly renewed and updated as the student works. This ongoing report - termed company assessment - is accessible at all times via the filing cabinet under assessment. It also covers the opportunity existing for students to record their own perception of their performance as a self-assessment. 13

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

iDer have highlighted certain points where they feel a hard record of the students movements would be particularly beneficial to tutors, enabling them to pick out areas of weakness in individuals - perhaps perceiving patterns among a group. In this way, the feedback is intended to highlight points for further work and greater emphasis in future sessions. These areas include a hard copy of the list of questions asked by the student in compiling the PDS. A short list may reflect an unwillingness to communicate with the experts or to interact with the customer, or a failure to utilise the example specification and other guidelines available on the bookshelf. The general feedback provides a more definitive analysis of the cause, stating that the student did not ask for advice when writing the PDS or did not check the bookshelf for help on writing a PDS. Final feedback is subdivided into 5 categories representing different aspects of, and perspectives on, the design. These are set out on a menu screen as 5 icons next to a 3-D animated winch, a unique representation of the current students design. The categories are: - final product specification - product manufacture - customer feedback - expert feedback - company assessment The final category is company assessment - mainly because it offers an overview of all aspects of the students progress through the design process, and reiterating the comments provided under the former categories on the menu screen. It is worthwhile noting however, that the opportunity for self-assessment is included here - and hence the student should be encouraged to click here and work through this section before selecting the other categories. At the end of the detail design phase, the student is automatically taken to a screen displaying a final product specification; the manufacturing specification created as a result of the design process gone through by that student. This is equivalent to the first icon on the main feedback menu screen and provides a useful overview for the student, reminding him/her of, and placing in context, all design decisions made. A print out of this screen is available. The comprehensive company assessment is subdivided into several categories, 3 of which cover the three phases of the design process - the fourth giving additional feedback which corresponds to the other three categories. Of the first three categories in the company assessment profile, 1) the design specification is broken down into: i) general feedback ii) the question stage - listing questions asked by the student in compiling the PDS iii) ranking - displays experts comments on students decisions regarding relative importance of questions and related design aspects. The second category - concept design - covers the self-assessment facility. Headings relating to main components are provided: the student is required to account 14

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

for his/her choices at this stage. This provides useful reflection upon, and hopefully therefore reiteration of, reasons behind design decisions for the student, and for the tutor an invaluable aid for pinpointing areas of weakness and further work. The third category - detail design - involves more general feedback pertaining to decisions taken (calculations made, dimensions selected, etc.) during this phase. The remaining category headed other feedback covers: 1) manufacture - relating to decisions taken at this stage of the process and corresponding to the product manufacture icon on the main feedback menu. 2) customer feedback - reiterating the information available from this category on the main menu. 3) overall assessment - equivalent to the technical managers overview given under expert feedback on the main menu. An exposition of the other categories recaps and reiterates what type of feedback is available in each:

final product specification

A manufacturing specification created as a result of decisions made throughout the design process; displays itemised criteria of individual components and calculates total mass, cost, time taken, etc. Displays a 3-D animation of the students design being assembled; having once established whether chosen materials and/or components are in stock, this section displays, for each component, the cost incurred by, and the time required for, its manufacture. It will report whether the student thought to consult company policies on the virtual bookshelf to verify which components would have to be bought in. A report of the products performance: how well it carries out its function, plus any problems encountered. Major failures can include the following, and are often attributable to the following causes: - rope breaking - a low safety factor used - over-stressed side plate - wrong interpretation of the stress and shear graphs, or a low safety factor - an under-powered motor - an over budget winch Gives an overview from the perspective of the technical manager with regard to overall general success or otherwise.

product manufacture

customer feedback

expert feedback

15

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

Acknowledgements:
iDer wish to thank the following companies for assistance provided during the development of Design Builder: Bridon International Ltd. Brook Hansen David Brown Radicon David Brown Special Products Ltd. Davy International Fenner Power Transmissions Hydrostatic Transmissions Ltd. LGH Group Renold Gears The Royal National Lifeboat Institution Unisys Corporation The Wellman Bibby Co Ltd. ider team members include: Robin Barker Paul Hudson Brian Parkinson Richard Senior Chris Short Special thanks to Jan and Gemma Baxter for their patience and advice and to the evaluation team for the time they spent and feedback provided during the systems development. Also to TLTP for their continued support and assistance throughout. WARNING The software contains compression/decompression capability covered by Unisys Patent No 4,558,302 and corresponding foreign patents. No use, sale, lease, disclosure, copying, modification, distribution or transfer of this software, either directly or indirectly, is permitted. Information provided in the Design Builder Network Edition is accurate for the purpose of carrying out an assignment using the system. However, adjustments have been made to some of the values used, and, as a result, they should not be included or used for any design calculations outside of the system. The developers or their collaborators accept no liability for the accuracy of such information.

16

DESIGN BUILDER WORKBOOK

Design scenarios
In the network edition of Design Builder, the problem as presented to a user is based upon 21 different scenario=s. The standard setting for Design Builder is for any problem to be presented randomly, however, a setting can be made to ensure that all users on a network receive the same problem. The table below provides details of the 21 individual sets of criteria.

Letter Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Key

Lifeboat Ramp Lifeboat Weight Length Name (tonnes) (m) Severn Trent Mersey Tyne Brede Thames Waveney Arun Tees Exe Wear Clyde Medway Dee Forth Tweed Spey Tamar Orwell Humber Swale 37.5 26.5 14 26 9 22 19 31.5 5 9 12 35 11 15 21 40 45 8 6 16 24 100 110 80 130 85 50 90 120 100 150 150 80 200 100 150 80 100 200 150 125 150

Ramp Angle 15 20 30 30 25 20 25 16 20 20 10 12 10 20 20 12 10 15 20 25 20

Time Required (mins) 5 7 5 7 4 4 6 5 5 3 1 4 1 5 3 6 5 1 1 7 6

Batch Size 1 1 37 40 12 1 22 46 1 24 26 28 30 32 34 1 1 37 40 35 27

Target Delivery Time Winch (days) Colour 21 21 45 f / 11 s 35 f / 12 s Grey White Blue Black

Target Cost (,) 46400 42000 25000 38000 25500 35500 30000 49000 16000 26000 34000 32000 31500 25500 32500 37000 40000 35000 36000 30500 39000

45 f / 12 s Yellow 35 46 f / 16 s Green Blue

42 f / 14 s Green Blue 35 34 f / 12 s 35 f / 10 s 25 f / 14 s 22 f / 28 s Red Red White Blue Blue

35 f / 13 s Yellow 36 f / 9 s 44 35 41 f / 14 s Black Green Green Blue Grey

36 f / 13 s Green 39 f / 16 s White

27 f / 12 s Green

f - The delivery time for the first winch in a batch s - The subsequent delivery time for each winch in the batch

17