Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
What are the time killers in product design?
max_wittstamm089
Member Posts: 9 ✭
Onshape cloud CAD is doing a great job of saving time and trouble. Looking into Tech-Clarities 2020 report engineers seem to spend 33% of their time with non-value adding tasks. However the breakdown shows that the wasted time should mostly be caused by legacy on premise CAD software and is less relevant for cloud CAD Onshape. Cloud CAD (almost) eliminates (i) checking data in and out, (ii) recreating data you couldn't find, and (iii) incorporating changes made by others. Also, cloud CAD facilitates (iv) searching for information and (v) collecting data for other people.
So what are the real time killers for designers in Onshape at the moment? What role does the documentation and communication between different departments play? I want to pick up the discussion that has been elaborated in previous forum posts:
We all know that the design not only defines the users value but also the cost of the product, through materials and manufacturing. Complex product design requires highly specialized competencies, leading to separated product design and production planning teams that use different software. How does this affect your work as a product designer? I am really curious about what you think, see here below a list of time killers. Please add your own items and reflect on it:
Management of Bills of Materials (BOMs):
We need to group parts and subassemblies, associate information with them, and run automation tools for efficient BOM management. The ability to extract or input data such as part descriptions and material properties is crucial, often involving integration with ERP systems for seamless data transfer and updates.
Documentation for Fabrication and Assembly:
There is a need for clear and accessible documentation that outlines the parts, tools, and sequences required for assembly. This includes exploded views and key specifications. While 3D interactive documentation is valued, traditional methods like manuals and notes remain essential for low-volume productions.
Design and Assemble-ability Checks:
It is important to verify the mechanical interfaces and assemble-ability of parts within an assembly. This involves ensuring that parts fit together correctly, taking into account manufacturing variations and using tools to lock and position parts accurately in the design software.
Kinematics and Dynamics Verification:
We have to perform motion studies to verify the kinematics and dynamics of designs. This typically requires exporting mass properties and kinematic data from the model to run through specialized simulation tools, highlighting a need for more integrated and sophisticated in-software motion analysis tools.
Iterative Design and Reuse of Parts:
The design process is iterative, with continuous improvements and frequent changes. There is a strong emphasis on reusing existing parts and assemblies to save time and resources. Proper part numbering and management systems are critical to facilitate easy identification and reuse of parts across different projects and product iterations.
I am very curious about your opinion. We are currently developing Onshape algorithms to automate manual repetitive steps, by extracting the information from the existing CAD data. We focus on deriving the assembly flow and sequence as we think that it is the core for automating further steps. Happy to get your perspective on the main time killers.