Content area
Full Text
Concurrent engineering (CE) design and build principles were first adopted over 15 years ago in the consumer electronics and automotive industries. In the design and manufacture of market driven volume products, their application has been a prerequisite to the ongoing development of better, lower cost products. Add to this the necessity for a product to hit a "window of opportunity" for its success to be maximized and it becomes apparent why concurrent engineering techniques have been viewed as vital by any company geared towards developing more competitive products and bringing them to market faster.
Of late, the benefits of such design and build principles have gone beyond the latest four door saloon or flatter squarer tube. Aerospace companies in particular, including Shorts and Boeing -- have adopted concurrent engineering techniques for the design and build of a relatively short production run aircraft. Such companies have been quick to realize that the benefits of CE for volume products hold equally true for their own products.
In the evolution of CE tools and techniques, the logical next stage on from volume or low production products is how they can be applied to one-off or bespoke products such as capital electro-mechanical plant or machinery -- an area which Ricardo Hitec is pioneering for customers in the general manufacturing and nuclear industries.
The case for applying CE to bespoke product development is as relevant to that of applying it to volume or low production run products. CE design techniques are every bit as important if that piece of capital equipment is to match accurately the customer's criteria and is to reach the market in time to begin manufacturing the customers' concurrently developed mass market product.
Why concurrent engineering? The case is further supported when we consider the fundamental reason why CE is adopted by companies. Basically CE helps to get to the first article faster and that the first article satisfies all design criteria -- as opposed to traditional design methods which required prototypes that proved to be less than perfect. In this case, the only way to iron out design "glitches" was through a re-work loop - resulting in a second, third or even fourth prototype being developed (Figure 1).(Figure 1 omitted)
Though, prior to current-day market pressures...