11/26/07 Page 1 Improving Education and Agility in Product Design: A Story of ArvinMeritor/CCS/UM-D Team Project in Modular Automotive Roof System Design Vivek Bhise, Roger Shulze and Ghassan Kridli University of Michigan-Dearborn, Dearborn, Michigan Clyde Foles and Bryon Fitzpatrick, College of Creative Studies, Detroit, Michigan John Grace and Erik Roeren, ArvinMeritor, Detroit, Michigan ABSTRACT A new unique approach involving teams of industrial design and engineering students, veteran engineers from industry and faculty from industrial design and engineering colleges was implemented to develop future automotive roof systems. Four teams of four industrial design students and one graduate engineering students were asked to design new modular roof concepts under a highly competitive environment within a semester. Each member of the winning team would receive a scholarship or a paid internship. The industrial design and engineering students met weekly to understand product needs, constraints and requirements. They visited manufacturing facilities, reviewed existing products, discussed functional design and manufacturing issues with the team and faculty, and presented their work at three gateway design reviews. The winning design was chosen by a panel of design executives from the big three domestic automobile companies. The resulting designs not only received high praise from the industry experts but the team members gained valuable experience and understanding of the roles and issues faced by each discipline. The method of industrial design and engineering students working together with industry partners has the potential to give the industry and the colleges exactly what they want designers and engineers who understand each others needs and a low cost way to produce more feasible design concepts in a relatively short time period. INTRODUCTION The well-known formula for success in product development practiced over the past two decades is to involve multidisciplinary teams, co-locate them and have them perform simultaneous engineering. However, very few Industrial Design and Engineering schools have actually implemented the methodology to improve the education and product development speed. This paper presents a relatively simple but very effective approach developed and used by the team of faculty and an industry partner. ArvinMeritor (AM), an automotive supplier, approached the Engineering College of the University of Michigan-Dearborn (UM-D) and the College of Creative Studies (CCS) in
11/26/07 Page 2 Detroit to develop a unique approach to improve quality and speed of student projects in designing new modular roof concepts for automotive products. The project goal was come up with a win-win situation, i.e. to design new product concepts that have high manufacturing feasibility, meet customer and industry acceptance, and promote better understanding of the design process among students in industrial design and engineering. Another motivation of the project was to provide the students with actual work experience, and hence, promote early understanding of their roles and teamwork so that many of the problems experienced in actual product development projects can be minimized. Discussions with industry experts suggested that product design projects are fraught with a multitude of problems such as: Management feels that a "good" design was not developed Took too long to design a product Many changes had to be made to initial design after the design left the studio Many designs are rejected because of poor understanding of the customers wants, as well as of engineering and manufacturing needs Lack of communication among designers and engineers OBJECTIVE The objective of the project presented in this paper was to develop a method or an approach that will allow faster and more feasible development of early product concepts and greatly improve education of future industrial designers and engineers. METHOD For years, many corporations have been sponsoring product design projects at industrial design colleges to generate new design concepts. The young industrial designers usually come up with exciting designs. However, actual implementation of these designs takes a lot more further development to assure that the design meets the majority of customer and corporate needs (i.e. meets engineering feasibility and can be manufactured with least tooling and capital investment). Realizing many of such short comings, a team of engineering executives from AM and faculty members from the CCS and UM-D brainstormed different approaches and arrived at a plan just prior to the beginning of fall semester. It was decided the junior industrial design class will be divided into four teams (Team Red, Team Green, Team Blue and Team Orange). Each team will be responsible for its own concept, design and feasibility. The concept shall be based on an SUV version of the Low Mass Vehicle (LMV developed by the Institute of Advanced Vehicle Studies IAVS, UM-D) and with focus on a light weight interior/exterior roof opening with kinematics. Each team will meet the required elements of 3 Gate Reviews. Gate Review criteria will be established by the AM representatives and the course instructor. At the final review, a panelist from the automotive industry will vote to determine the best project and the winning team will
11/26/07 Page 3 receive $2000 per student (except for the engineering student who will be offered a sixmonth internship at AM). The entire class (every student) will receive a $200 stipend for the materials (except for the engineering students who functioned and were paid as graduate student research assistants). The time schedule of project activities and the process was as follows: August 27 th : AM executives and faculty from CCS and UM-D met one week before the beginning of 2003 fall term. They discussed ways to come up innovation designs with greatly improved design quality, short time frame, low investment and incentives to motivate team s members. The result of the meeting was to create a design competition within four multi-disciplinary teams consisting of design and engineering students guided by practicing engineers from industry and faculty. September 9 th : Four teams with four industrial design students in each team were formed. The teams met on every Tuesday until December 9 th from 9:00am-4:00pm for lectures and team projects. The objectives of the project were explained by the CCS instructor and later reiterated by AM engineers. The objectives included the following: AM Corporate wants: -- Low weight (20 kg max) -- lighter materials -- Modular design -- flexible, more versatile (can be adapted to any automotive product) -- Features --Exterior: spoiler, sunroof, storage --Interior: Lighting, storage, sun shades, power hook-ups to modules, new devices, headliner -- Functionality: Durability, rigidity, safety, wind noise, water tightness -- Low investments -- Short design cycles -- Cost (Less than $ 1000) UM-D IAVS Wants: -- Create a roof module for the SUV version of the Low Mass Vehicle -- Promote better understanding of the design process among students from different disciplines -- Provide students with actual work experience to prepare them better for the complexities of product design in the business world September 16 th : Four engineers from AM joined the four teams. One AM engineer was assigned to each team to provide background information on needs and requirements of the new modular roof systems.
11/26/07 Page 4 September 25 th : Six UM-D graduate engineering students based on their interest and background were selected to attend September 30 th class at CCS. The students were asked to attend the session and develop a two-page action plan on how they can serve in one of the teams. September 30 th : The engineering students participated in the CCS class to understand the modular roof project and to review early design concepts proposed by the design students. October 3 rd : October 7 th : UM-D engineering faculty members met with each student individually and reviewed their two-page action plans. Four students were selected. The four selected engineering joined the CCS class. The four design teams made presentations to the entire group of students, faculty members and AM engineers. The presentations included ideas from each design student in each of the four teams. The AM engineers and faculty asked questions on issues such as operation of the roof units, types of modules, water management/sealing, assembly, etc. and provided suggestions on additional considerations. October 14 th - Nov 18 th : Students met regularly on every Tuesday in the class and also made visits to an ArvinMeritor plant to understand current roof designs, manufacturing facilities and assembly considerations. Since the teams were in competition, they only exchanged general considerations and issues without revealing their specific concepts. The students were given a Checklist of documents required for the Gateway Reviews. The checklist covered: Engineering/Manufacturing Feasibility (Document) Product Specifications & Characteristics (Drawing) - Exploded View - Bill of Material - Description of Roof Concept (How it functions) Component Process Characteristics List - Description of Sun Roof Assembly Line - Description of Sun Roof Assembly Work Vehicle Process Characteristics List - How the Sun Roof is Assembled into the Vehicle - Description of the Assembly Line November 25 th : Each team made a 20 minute presentation of their overall roof module concept, customer needs, and some details about components, subsystems and issues related to functionality, manufacturing, assembly, etc. The AM engineers and faculty reviewed the presentations, asked questions (on issues such as specific deliverables, high-risk issues,
11/26/07 Page 5 degree of confidence in achieving the design objectives, etc.) and provided feedback on improving their presentations and project work. December 9 th : February 5th: The students made final project presentations to the entire class. A panel of four industry experts (a VP from AM and design executives from Ford, GM and DaimlerChrysler) served as the jury. They were given a pre-developed rating form for evaluation of each team project. The red team was declared the winner. The winning team was recognized and congratulated by AM CEO Larry Yost at AM s annual engineering awards banquet. The evaluation scheme consisted of total of 70 points. The points (presented in parentheses below) were distributed as follows: - Market Study (10) - Concept Selection (20) -- Completeness of concepts (5) -- Representation of concepts (5) -- Aspects of originality (5) -- Originality with respect to line, surface utilization (5) - Operation of the system (25) -- Engineering of the concept (5) -- First order satisfaction of the laws of physics (5) -- Structural feasibility and integrity (5) -- Kinematics behavior (5) -- Feasibility study (5) - Presentation (20) -- Clarity of presentation (5) -- Identification and addressing of principal features and concerns of the design (5) -- Discussion of the design, engineering and manufacturing tradeoffs considered (5) -- Quality and visual presentation materials (5) - Teamwork (15) TEAM OUTPUTS The modular roof concept designs developed in this project included:
11/26/07 Page 6 Removable modular roof panels (one to multi-piece louvered glass panels, solid metal inserts, inserts with add-on in-vehicle gadgets [e.g. entertainment units, navigation systems], storage systems, roof racks for luggage, bikes, etc.) Mechanisms for latching/locking/unlocking modules, opening/closing glass panels/sun screens, power distribution system with motors and switches Sealing systems for water and air tightness In addition, each team prepared a number of documents and drawings to document: Product Design Specifications Design Feasibility by considering functional, manufacturing, human factors, costs, reliability and repair/service and aesthetics. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate some of the outputs of two of the teams. OBSERVATIONS The faculty observations during the project work and items pointed out by the students during debriefing sessions revealed the following points: All members of each ream worked in harmony as a "team" and not just individuals representing their own discipline. Both the designers and engineers learnt the value of teamwork and understood the needs and roles of each profession. Emphasis was not just on design (as contrasted with earlier design projects) but a design that is feasible to manufacture and that can be produced quickly without serious changes. Designers alone would not have come with such detailed designs with integrated considerations of usability, sealing/water management, connectivity, mechanisms, etc. Competitive environment allowed development of many innovative ideas/features Teamwork facilitated quick start in concept development -- Many ideas were brought in by team members early in concept generation Good business sense (balance between acceptable to the customers and acceptable to the producer) was achieved in concept development. More concreteness in the thought process; many issues considered and incorporated early. Engineer and designers work under non-confrontational atmosphere Introduced real world issues by practicing engineers from ArvinMeritor made this a real set of projects and not just a design exercise. A novel approach for Detroit area where new product features are constantly developed by automotive OEMs and their suppliers. Plug-ins -- more versatile product with different features can be purchased according to the needs of the customers; can introduce new technology as new features are available Engineering students said that they gained real industry project experience. They learned about AM s products and processes.
11/26/07 Page 7 Designers understood the value of practical engineering constraints and this prevented them from generating just the blue sky type design concepts (that in most cases are discarded as impractical. ) The designers realized the importance of CAD (most learned to use RHINO3D quickly to detail their parts and assemblies), the need for bill of materials and the need to understand manufacturing and assembly considerations. (The engineers helped the designers in understanding these). Market research work conducted by each team was weak. (Future projects should include more time and resources (e.g. business students) for this activity). Each team was able to produce a feasible roof module concept, one that theoretically could be developed for production without serious changes, in three months. CONCLUSIONS By all accounts, the project was a great success! The team approach to product design described in this paper demonstrated substantial potential for providing valuable experience and background to both design and engineering students. Future replication of this approach should consider: a) Adding one engineering undergraduate student to work with a graduate engineering student in each team. This will allow the undergraduate student to gain valuable experience and also to support graduate engineering student in sharing engineering work and to improve ability of engineers to communicate their issues more convincingly to the designers. b) Recruit business students to incorporate marketing, product planning and financial analyses. c) Assemble the entire teams at the project kick-off. Two new product design projects are currently being planned for our 2004 fall term. We plan to use similar approach and incorporate many of the above-described lessons learnt in this project. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank ArvinMeritor management and engineering personnel for technical and financial support, the Institute of Advanced Vehicle Studies of the College of Engineering and Computer Science of the University of Michigan for engineering activities support, and the College of Creative Studies for the use of Product Design Class of juniors to participate and for providing creative environment, state-of-the-art design facilities, and outstanding design and consulting support during this project.
11/26/07 Page 8 Figure 1. Illustrations of Modular Roof Concept, its Modules and Components (Developed by the Red Team). Figure 2. Illustrations of Some of the Roof Modules and Assembly Process Developed by the Green Team