More Like this

1. Assessing the Manufacturability of Students’ Early-Stage Designs Based on Previous Experience With Traditional Manufacturing and Additive Manufacturing

   https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2022-91101  

   Pearl, Seth; Meisel, Nicholas (August 2022, ASME 2022 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference)

   Abstract As additive manufacturing (AM) becomes more mainstream in industry, the newer design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) considerations must be distinguished from the older design for traditional manufacturing (DfTM) considerations. Designers who wish to maximize additive manufacturing’s potential must reconsider the traditional manufacturing axioms they may be more familiar with. While research has previously investigated the potential influences that can affect the designs produced in concept generation, little research has been done explicitly targeting the manufacturability of early-stage concepts and how previous experience in manufacturing affects this. The research in this paper addresses this gap in knowledge, specifically targeting differences in concept generation due to designer experience with additive manufacturing and traditional manufacturing. In this study, participants were given priming content on DfTM and DfAM considerations and then asked to complete a design challenge centered on concept generation. The participants’ final designs were evaluated for manufacturability as suited for traditional and additive manufacturing. Results show that students with low manufacturing experience levels create designs that are more naturally suited for traditional manufacturing. Additionally, as designers’ manufacturing experience levels increase, there is an increase in the number of designs suited for additive manufacturing. This correlates with a higher self-reported use of DfAM axioms in the evaluation of these designs. These results suggests that students with high manufacturing experience levels make a subconscious decision for which manufacturing process to design for. 

   more » « less
2. Favoring Complexity: A Mixed Methods Exploration of Factors That Influence Concept Selection When Designing for Additive Manufacturing

   https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4050303  

   Prabhu, Rohan; Leguarda, Rainmar L.; Miller, Scarlett R.; Simpson, Timothy W.; Meisel, Nicholas A. (October 2021, Journal of Mechanical Design)

   null (Ed.)

   Abstract The capabilities of additive manufacturing (AM) open up designers’ solution space and enable them to build designs previously impossible through traditional manufacturing (TM). To leverage this design freedom, designers must emphasize opportunistic design for AM (DfAM), i.e., design techniques that leverage AM capabilities. Additionally, designers must also emphasize restrictive DfAM, i.e., design considerations that account for AM limitations, to ensure that their designs can be successfully built. Therefore, designers must adopt a “dual” design mindset—emphasizing both, opportunistic and restrictive DfAM—when designing for AM. However, to leverage AM capabilities, designers must not only generate creative ideas for AM but also select these creative ideas during the concept selection stage. Design educators must specifically emphasize selecting creative ideas in DfAM, as ideas perceived as infeasible through the traditional design for manufacturing lens may now be feasible with AM. This emphasis could prevent creative but feasible ideas from being discarded due to their perceived infeasibility. While several studies have discussed the role of DfAM in encouraging creative idea generation, there is a need to investigate concept selection in DfAM. In this paper, we investigated the effects of four variations in DfAM education: (1) restrictive, (2) opportunistic, (3) restrictive followed by opportunistic (R-O), and (4) opportunistic followed by restrictive (O-R), on students’ concept selection process. We compared the creativity of the concepts generated by students to the creativity of the concepts they selected. The creativity of designs was measured on four dimensions: (1) uniqueness, (2) usefulness, (3) technical goodness, and (4) overall creativity. We also performed qualitative analyses to gain insight into the rationale provided by students when making their design decisions. From the results, we see that only teams from the restrictive and dual O-R groups selected ideas of higher uniqueness and overall creativity. In contrast, teams from the dual R-O DfAM group selected ideas of lower uniqueness compared with the mean uniqueness of ideas generated. Finally, we see that students trained in opportunistic DfAM emphasized minimizing build material the most, whereas those trained only in restrictive DfAM emphasized minimizing build time. These results highlight the need for DfAM education to encourage AM designers to not just generate creative ideas but also have the courage to select them for the next stage of design. 

   more » « less
3. Exploring the Manifestation of Design for Manufacturing Axioms in Students’ Early-Stage Engineering Design Concepts

   https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2023-116667  

   Pearl, Seth; Meisel, Nicholas (August 2023, American Society of Mechanical Engineers)

   Abstract Additive Manufacturing (AM) is a technology capable of producing designs that challenge those from traditional manufacturing methods. AM is of high interest for advanced capabilities such as leveraging free complexity and having the ability to manufacture multi-part products that are manufactured as a single assembled. By leveraging design heuristics for AM, the final design can be manufactured in a shorter timeframe with less material consumption while still maintaining the initial engineering goals of the design. Despite the promising potential of AM, there is a growing concern that designers are not utilizing the design heuristics that embody successful AM. When designers resort to using design heuristics for Traditional Manufacturing (TM) with the unintentional purpose of translating these heuristics to AM, they are not creating efficient designs for AM and are unable to reap the benefits of using AM. To remedy this problem, intervening early in the design process can help address any concerns regarding the use of AM design heuristics. This work explores the design heuristics that students use in creating designs in the context of TM and AM. Once the common design heuristics students use in their designs are identified, future studies will further investigate the specific features that these students are using to address them through early interventions. This work found that incorporating complex shapes and geometries and considering the minimum feature size are significant axioms for influencing the manufacturability of a design for both TM and AM. 

   more » « less
4. Mastering Manufacturing: Exploring the Influence of Engineering Designers’ Prior Experience When Using Design for Additive Manufacturing

   https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2021-71686  

   Prabhu, Rohan; Simpson, Timothy W.; Miller, Scarlett R.; Meisel, Nicholas A. (August 2021, Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference)

   null (Ed.)

   Abstract Additive manufacturing (AM) processes present designers with unique capabilities while imposing several process limitations. Designers must leverage the capabilities of AM — through opportunistic design for AM (DfAM) — and accommodate AM limitations — through restrictive DfAM — to successfully employ AM in engineering design. These opportunistic and restrictive DfAM techniques starkly contrast the traditional, limitation-based design for manufacturing techniques — the current standard for design for manufacturing (DfM). Therefore, designers must transition from a restrictive DfM mindset towards a ‘dual’ design mindset — using opportunistic and restrictive DfAM concepts. Designers’ prior experience, especially with a partial set of DfM and DfAM techniques could inhibit their ability to transition towards a dual DfAM approach. On the other hand, experienced designers’ auxiliary skills (e.g., with computer-aided design) could help them successfully use DfAM in their solutions. Researchers have investigated the influence of prior experience on designers’ use of DfAM tools in design; however, a majority of this work focuses on early-stage ideation. Little research has studied the influence of prior experience on designers’ DfAM use in the later design stages, especially in formal DfAM educational interventions, and we aim to explore this research gap. From our results, we see that experienced designers report higher baseline self-efficacy with restrictive DfAM but not with opportunistic DfAM. We also see that experienced designers demonstrate a greater use of certain DfAM concepts (e.g., part and assembly complexity) in their designs. These findings suggest that introducing designers to opportunistic DfAM early could help develop a dual design mindset; however, having more engineering experience might be necessary for them to implement this knowledge into their designs. 

   more » « less
5. Favoring Complexity: A Mixed Methods Exploration of Factors that Influence Concept Selection in Design for Additive Manufacturing

   Prabhu, R.; Leguarda, R.; Miller, S. R.; Simpson, T. W.; Meisel, N. A. (August 2020, ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences)

   The capabilities of additive manufacturing (AM) open up designers’ solution space and enable them to build designs previously impossible through traditional manufacturing. To leverage AM, designers must not only generate creative ideas, but also propagate these ideas without discarding them in the early design stages. This emphasis on selecting creative ideas is particularly important in design for AM (DfAM), as ideas perceived as infeasible through the traditional design for manufacturing lens could now be feasible with AM. Several studies have discussed the role of DfAM in encouraging creative idea generation; however, there is a need to understand concept selection in DfAM. In this paper, we investigated the effect of two variations in DfAM education: 1) restrictive DfAM and 2) dual DfAM (opportunistic and restrictive) on students’ concept selection process. Specifically, we compared the creativity of the concepts generated by the students to the creativity of the concepts selected by them. Further, we performed qualitative analyses to explore the rationale provided by the students in making these design decisions. From the results, we see that teams from both educational groups select ideas of greater usefulness; however, only teams from the restrictive DfAM group select ideas of higher uniqueness and overall creativity. Further, we see that introducing students to opportunistic DfAM increases their emphasis on the complexity of designs when evaluating and selecting them. These results highlight the need for DfAM education to encourage AM designers to not just generate but also select creative ideas. 

   more » « less