Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Technology and the Product Development Process

Everyone seems to have an opinion about CAD technology and what is best – including me. But I often question what it all really means to product development. In my current position at PTC I get to review and analyze the product development processes of many companies – all of which have a different mix of technologies that support, to some degree, their product development process and product characteristics.

In every product development organization there are vocal users that think they know best – and in many cases they do. There are even IT professionals that think they know best. But I also find that many of these people are focusing their arguments and discussion based on their own individual circumstance, experience and needs. Many times I find that we are ignoring the bigger process picture. Although the user experience is important, there is much more to consider when evaluating our product development tools.

Consider the process of innovation or perhaps "concept design", and also consider the process of detail design. There is a significant difference between innovating and detailing. There is no hard line that separates the two, and innovation may actually occur throughout the entire process. However, these are two different disciplines – or “processes”. Consider the technologies that might be best suited for these different disciplines. What technologies best support the requirements? Of course to have a real meaningful discussion we would also need to know what the overall business drivers are and how they impact the process of developing products. We would also need to know much about the characteristics of the products that are being developed as well as the dynamics and structure of the product development organization itself.

If you are person primarily involved with innovation and concept design, you have different requirements than someone that is more involved with detailing and documenting a design. If your company is dependent on innovating products there will be different requirements than that of a company that is more focused on configuring products. Some CAD tools may support both disciplines but many don’t. Some PDM tools may support one process better than the other. Consider some of the requirements for innovation and concept design (just to name a few):

  • The ability to consider many different ideas (flexibility)
  • Reviewing old ideas to come up with new ideas (leverage, reuse)
  • Interacting with others at the idea level (teamwork, collaboration)
  • Analyzing and comparing ideas

What type of CAD system would do best in supporting the above requirements? It is true that with history-based modeling you are strongly encouraged to “plan ahead” - for a variety of very good reasons. Another term for “planning ahead” is “concept design”. What about detail design? Perhaps your history-free tool doesn’t have the desired capability for capturing design intent or “documenting” the design. Depending on your processes and product characteristics, this capability may bring value.

What about your data management practices and tools? Do they support the requirements of innovation? How do they support the need for flexibility, access and teamwork? For detail design, do the practices and tools provide the proper control?

Next time you are having a discussion about which tool is best, please consider and clarify the context of your evaluation and opinion. It can make a big difference. If not, your opinion could actually lead to a serious mismatch between tools and process. If the tools fail to support the process, the process will fail to support the business.



bcourter said...

So it's concept design in SpaceClaim and detailed design in CoCreate, right?


Paul Hamilton said...

Uhhh – nice one, Blake. Not exactly what I had in mind, but certainly workable. :)

Nolton Johnson said...

Working solo, I have to do all the inventing, sketching, modeling & 2D mfg. drawings. This "tool" issue has been an ongoing quest since I bought into CAD 27 years ago. That was after 21 years on the drafting board. I switched from Mac computers 9 years ago so I could use SolidWorks. I have used sketchUp and big whiteboards to get started on a new idea before the formal design & drafting.

Just last year I found a good combination to get back on the Mac (instant doubling of productivity), while adding a high end solid modeler and drafting solution, NX 6.

For fast idea work up, I bought bonzai3D (sketchUp with more exports). I kept the PC with SW and it acts nicer with the Mac next to it! Now I can operate at any level and move concept/design work up the chain & out to anyone with any OS or hardware.

Anonymous said...


Multiple software (& hardware) tools, that's the answer. Where is everybody? This is an interesting issue.

Here is what I am doing in product development: www.MANMachinery.com

Yes, it is simple stuff, doesn't even use electricity but it is an automated machine.

Anonymous said...


I know it is coming out in bits and pieces, but at SolidWorks World there is a good deal of reporting about solidworks enhanced direct editing, and even some speculation that solidworks is switching to the catia kernal. What would this indicate about the future of direct modeling, and cocreate's place within it

Paul Hamilton said...

Great question!! I will give you my answer in my next blog post. Give me a few days.

My short answer: The future of direct modeling is bright and growing brighter every day, (just don’t confuse what you see in SolidWorks with Direct Modeling). More to come on this…

And the Catia Kernel?? From a "geometry kernel" point of view- nothing special there! What's all the hype? I don't get it.