Design reviews are a critical part of the product development lifecycle. Across the globe, engineers meet regularly, and at key program milestones to undertake review activities such as:
Release status and maturity (and identifying/reviewing gaps therein)
Discussing known/anticipated issues
Detecting new issues (e.g. geometry clash issues, or manufacturing/service access problems)
Resolving integration (interface) problems, including methodologies such as zone management/block management.
Discussing proposed changes
Bringing together the necessary business functions to move decision making as far upstream in the development process as possible (avoiding costly changes)
Product development has increasingly become an end-to-end digital lifecycle. Advances in computer-aided engineering have helped to accelerate development, and reduce the expense of producing physical prototypes that aid review/issue detection. Arguably the downside is an increased gap between engineers and their creations – a fundamental disconnect between the digital data and the physical world.
Psychologists refer to this gap as ‘cognitive distance’. This is both inefficient, and introduces the risk of quality related problems downstream. When it comes to design reviews, it can prove difficult to apply physical context to digital data, and the performance of the event-particularly as it pertains to issue detection and the quality of the associated dialogue between peers-suffers as a result.
Read the Whitepaper: Exploring the Cognitive Gap and the potential of XR technologies
In the lifecycle of a product, once the design reviews have been carried out, and a final design has been decided upon, it makes sense to produce a ...
There are many perceived barriers to adopting XR technologies. Many articles exist talking about developing the use case or getting the business case ...
We all know that the Tech, Engineering and Manufacturing industries are full of acronyms, jargon and terminology. And for those who aren’t in the ...