Notes from the floor

Leslie Langnau
October 01st, 2007.

One of the advantages editors have at a show is the opportunity to see the industry as a whole. By focusing on the bigger picture, rather than on one company, one product, or one aspect of an industry, we hope to provide information that may help you in your decision making.

–Many conversations with exhibitors at the National Design Show in Chicago last week (Sept 25-27) revolved around “green,” or “sustainable” design, the terms now being used to describe products that minimally affect the planet from “cradle to grave.” U.S. exhibitors see the move towards such practice on the horizon, but few have made large efforts in that direction.

While “green” is desirable, some question whether you can really develop such products. For example, one term used in the designing community is “carbon neutral.” As Dr. Gerhard Antony, President of Neugart noted, “how do you determine the carbon effect of your product, especially when you factor in the manufacturing process, not just the design of the product itself? U.S. industry is at the beginning of this trend and has a long way to go to answer such questions. But it is something designers will be facing if they are not already facing it in product design.

–An interesting question arose during the show. How do you view yourself? Are you a CAD operator or a design engineer? Your answer does not necessarily depend on whether you have a degree in engineering. What seems to matter for some companies is what do you do in your job – design or keystroke data? There are hints that the traditional view of the functions of an engineer are being parsed into smaller parts. Is that a good thing? Let us know if you see this happening in your areas.

–More companies are claiming to offer CAD neutral programs. If true interoperability, along with full function, is possible, this is a development that is overdue. As with other industries that have gone down this path, though, you need to question carefully whether a program or system is truly interoperable. Restraining the competitiveness of others has never been an easy task; just ask those involved with industrial networks.

–Convergence – the meeting of various parts to a common point. While many companies see the need to break down the walls between engineering disciplines, actually disassembling those walls is proving somewhat difficult. Often times, employers and employees are slaves to the process, unable to readily work “outside the box.” Part of the problem is resistance to changing the work flow. (Here we go again.)

Despite that, it is well known that, for example, manufacturing engineers and design engineers must communicate to remove the wasted time needed to redesign products that are not manufacturable. While software can help with the use of design rules for manufacturability, the question remains just how much can or should be automated and how much can be left in the hands of “keystrokers” verses designers.

Let us know your thoughts.