Dear RP list,
Given all of the wonderful technical things that RAPID prototyping can do,
I think we get carried away with the technology and forget about how the
speed of RP can really benefit our businesses.
Certainly, making production parts to high precision with end-materials is
nice. However, there are many opportunities where just getting a
relatively crude model into the hands of your marketing people or
customers can save a great deal of design time and effort later. Much
time is wasted in the overall development cycle in the front end just
getting agreement on what the proper design concept should be.
If overall cycle time is important to the business and its profitability,
and if we really analyze where the time goes today, we are likely to find
that concept modelers have more time-to-market potential than some of the
higher precision but slower RP and CNC techniques.
I suggest that these decisions on the type of RP or CNC technology used
should be based on a sound business basis: their impact on total
development cycle time and then cycle time's impact on profitability. A
means of making these calculations is described in our book, Developing
Products in Half the Time, Preston G. Smith and Donald G. Reinertsen, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1995. A new edition of the book will be available in
October, and it will give more details on making these calculations and
their utility in making RP procurement decisions.
#################################
> > Karl R. Denton wrote: > > Having said the above I can't imagine the
> companies listed below ever getting involved in the business. Once the
> hype of the "concept modeler" has long since gone the reality will set
> in and users will want machines that produce parts, not concepts. > >
>
> Dear Karl and list,
>
> I'm fascinated by your point of view. Lately, I've been thinking alot
> about why companies with cnc machines would really want to invest in rp.
> After all their infrastructure is in place. Their people are thoroughly
> trained. The software is advanced. In many cases when a prototype is
> made on a 3 or 4 axis machine it is being tested on the same machine
> which will cut the molds. Accuracies are far and away better on the
> cnc. My conclusion to this round of thoughts was this: Concept modelers
> made more sense as a proving tool than did investing in the more precise
> and way more expensive rp machines. You can buy several 3 axis cnc
> including the software and hardware to run it for the same price as 1
> sla 350. And cut high precision molds with it.
>
> . . .
>
> I worked for a while in a product design company. The qualities of form,
> fit, and a beautifully finished model were primary to the sales effort.
> All the models that we produced using cnc, rp, and silicon molds were
> further benched by hand to an excellent finish. For these sales
> purposes, proving a concept and handing the client the right look was a
> suitable task for the lower precision rp machines. The models were cost
> effective and provided an excellent armature which could be further
> developed. At the same time, 3 or 4 3D iterations could be presented to
> the client which typically impressed them.
>
> michael rees
#######################################
Regards,
Preston Smith
New Product Dynamics telephone: +1 (503) 248-0900
Portland, Oregon USA fax: +1 (503) 294-1192
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:39:51 EEST