Model Up Competitors Products?

Look at them yes model them no I examine what turns up at repair shops and recycling centres to see what failed in practical use though. Quite often fragile detailing ruins a product before it wears out.

Doesn't everyone?

When starting the design of a product for a client, I will ask for a list of their main competitiors and what they believe are their adv/disadv. If there are issues of Patents etc then we tread carefully - but I really only do what is available in the budget. That involves looking at samples and trying to judge get a in the correct order the timeline of all the compromises made to get the competitiors product to market. We then see if we can avoid the worst ones and minimise our own compromises.

I had never thought of modelling the product and then FEAing it etc. I shall have to offer it as a service and see if I can increase the budget. Thanks for the the tip Bo - I genuinly never thought of actually subjecting the competitiors products to such in depth testing and then charging for it.

Jonathan

I have looked at competitors parts in a number of ways and wound up in many cases finding why they didn't achieve the desired performance (fluid flow modeling), strength, or moldability in terms of knit lines and sink marks. Sometimes they could have solved the issues with more careful mold design.

Bo

Hmm- seems like you would be able to glean a lot more data from the actual part. Seems like a lot of effort to recreate somene elses design intent. What kind of parts are we talking here?

Agreed that actual parts are necessary, or at least very very desirable for testing.

Fluid flow through a somewhat complex assembly can reveal more easily why flow resistance is high, in say a plastic flow regulating assembly.

Plastic flow modeling can reveal where high stresses, warp, sink and knit lines will be which can cause problems in the wrong places.

Design decisions which put the parting lines in the "wrong" places can complicate tooling, function & assembly difficulties amongst many things.

Plastic parts with functioning hinges, snaps, undercuts and such are worth looking at in some detail to understand why they are good or bad.

That all brings up:

Bo's Bitch: Mr. Someone wants a molded product project started, where the tooling will be a quarter million dollars, but all they want the "designer" to do is "copy" or "update this design".

Then when you tell/suggest "Mr. Someone" that we ought to examine the competitors, your previous designs, do some molding, cooling and warp analysis and Mr. Someone screams bloody murder that "You are going to make the cost of the project go overbudget." Asking why modeling and testing was not in the budget would be an insult, so...

Try to explain that cooling analysis ALONE, regardless of other issues, might lead to cycle time savings that would more than pay for the analysis and design optimization changes, and if you have a rational manager, you do it. If it is the anonymous Mr. Someone, the guy has no grasp of production economics.

I saw a set of 3 molds done at Baxter for an exhalation valve all done in 16 cavities each over a decade back, for a sum of more than $500,000. Management would not allow for hard prototype plastic, single cavity pre-production or metal modeling and testing, because "The GM says we don't need it."

Well, the flow resistance through the device was 2 times the maximum allowed, and they came to me to fix it. I told them I could, but in 2 critical areas of the design I would need to enlarge the parts to reduce flow restriction. They didn't want rational fixes, they wanted magic that cost a few tens of thousands of dollars. Unfortunately, no actual test prototypes meant they either scrapped all three tools, or would mostly replace at least 32 cavity sets.

That is a fine example of what can go wrong. Rapid Prototyping can take care of part of the early testing issues fairly easily. But finding out if you have a chance for a bubble or knit line right across a sealing area for a diagphragm is damn near impossible to determine accurately without modeling.

Lots of parts are so lightly loaded and non-critical it takes no analysis, but in today's fast time to market, even if you can fix a small mistake, you may cause the project to miss the "launch date", which can be more expensive yet.

Bo

We learn from our own mistakes and the mistakes of others.

That is the gift our forefathers gave us with both language and the written word. Analysis can turn failures into gold.

Another example:

Tipped over a liquid detergent bottle. The cap immediately broke off.

Was it the wrong hinge design physicals, wrong material, wrong processing, or something else.

If you don't know why it failed, how can you prevent your design from doing the same thing?

It is not enough to "think" you know the reason. You need to know THE reason.

Bo

Ah now here you have my attention.. I relate to you a story.. About 2 years ago I decided my existing electric jug was past its use by date. Perhaps you call them kettles? Anyway a trip to a local store presented me with about 12 different choices to choose from.. Making my way along the line I eliminated quite a lot..perhaps they were shoddy or impractical or too expensive but in the end I picked one. ..and it was ok...until last week when I accidently hit the lid (clumbsy imperfect creatures) ..and you guessed it...I broke the hinge.. F***! Right so a perfectly serviceable jug now with a stuffed lid. Should I live with this errant octopus? replace it? or do DIY open heart surgery on it? On closer inspection of the bits it is apparent it is a wonder this lid lasted as long as it did It is just a piddling peice of plastic waiting to break but hidden from shoppers critical eye... There is absolutely no need for this to happen. Sure it worked but it couldnt take a decent bump..it actually only needed an extra sneeze of plastic but alas..no This is why peolpe get annoyed with 'design' and why 'designers' need to be hung ;o)

No. We do tear downs of competitor products and products in related fields that we think we might learn from, but we don't model them. We have a hard enough time getting our own models done fast enough!

Seeing how other people design products and parts is always helpful and I'm sure we would learn even more if we modeled up their designs, but I don't think the added learning would be anywhere near worth the added time spent.

No. I could imagine that we might want to model and analyze some particularly interesting design some day, but it hasn't happened yet.

Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"

I agree Jerry, for the average case.

When you are faced with prior art patented solutions by Fortune 500 competitors and others, though, it suddenly becomes of paramount importance to know everything you can about the "Prior Art".

It also becomes just as important to give the patent attorney the exact models of what doesn't work as well as your new design and why and what prior patents are involved.

Intellectual Property as a percentage of corporate assets has about doubled in the last 15-20 years from my recollection of a Business Week article in the last year, to nearly 66%. Knowing your competition has become critical.

Bo