After we were finished with our carabiners we learned about the engineering design process. Out professor said that there are many versions of the process, and one step towards success is simply deciding which process your team will use. He said that Germany has agreed on one process that the whole country will use; I really appreciate the organization and efficiency in German culture.
He started by giving us an archaic version of the engineering design process from the 1950s. This version of the process starts with researching the problem, and then coming up with a concept to solve the problem. Then you figure out the requirements for the concept and decide if the concept is feasible. After that, you design the system, decide how it will be manufactured, and actually manufacture it.
The second version he gave us was different because there were more steps in the beginning. In the second version, you identify the problem, come up with the requirements for the design and then think of many different ideas for a design. Then you select which idea is the best, build a prototype, and then refine the prototype.
The final version of the engineering design process that he gave us was the on that he said was the best. This version focuses heavily on the user. The first step is to observe the user, and analyze areas of opportunity. Then you think of a goal for what the design should do, and ideate. Next, you design the product with the user and come up with specifications for the design.
All of the versions of the process are iterative. Engineers must also consider who will maintain their their product, and how it will be maintained, how successful it will be as a business venture, and its environmental and social impacts.
I am still not convinced that this process is not intuitive. But I do understand the need to document it as you go through the steps. I am also surprised that making sure the user is involved in the design process is a relatively modern concept. It seems like such a no-brainer.
Finally, I came across this article about Nike’s new Flyknit shoes this week and I thought it went well with what we were learning in class. Nike designed these shoes based completely on input from athletes who wanted a shoe with the fit and comfort of a sock. They liked the way socks fit snugly and went unnoticed when they were wearing them, but they needed more support for running. Nike’s initial prototype was simply a sock stitched to a a sole. It took their team of designers, athletes and engineers four years to figure out to design a shoe with a static structure, but the flexibility of a knit sock. They solved the problem by putting cables in the knit upper in strategic locations. The cables were made of a material that allowed them to expand and contract with the athlete’s foot. The team had to make many prototypes to figure out the right combination of fabrics and yarn.
(Image from http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669098/nike-unveils-its-big-new-paradigm-shoes-knit-like-socks)
The shoe has many benefits besides comfort. Because the shoe is knit, it doesn’t need the cutting, gluing and stitching that goes into traditionally produced shoes, so it reduces the waste in manufacturing. Also, it is 19% lighter than the Nike Zoom 3 (the shoe worn by winners of the 2011 World Championship Men’s Marathon.) The new shoe will be worn by marathon runners from the US, Kenya, Russia and the UK in the Olympics . I think the article illustrates the design process that went into the shoe, and I think the shoe itself is beautiful. But I am still left wondering, if your shoe is knit like a sock, do you still wear socks with it?
No comments:
Post a Comment