Introduction
Design reviews are a critical part of the engineering design process. They provide structured opportunities for engineers, designers, and key stakeholders to thoroughly evaluate a product's design before moving into full production. Conducting effective reviews is essential for identifying and correcting issues early, when changes incur lower costs and cause minimal disruption.
Well-run reviews can uncover assumptions, risks, requirements gaps, and defects at a point when it's still feasible to address them. This prevents companies from incurring the significant expense of fixing problems after the design has been fully implemented. Reviews also facilitate collaboration and alignment between teams working on different components of a complex product.
Overall, investing the time upfront to perform comprehensive design reviews leads to higher quality, more reliable products and more efficient development cycles. Companies that fail to conduct structured reviews or do so in a perfunctory manner often end up with flawed designs that fail in the field, necessitating expensive recalls and redesigns. This guide provides a step-by-step methodology for mechanical engineers to facilitate impactful design reviews that result in precision solutions.
Set Clear Goals and Objectives
The first step in conducting an effective design review is to set clear goals and objectives. This involves carefully defining the purpose, scope, key stakeholders, and intended outcomes of the review.
Identifying the purpose of the design review provides focus and direction for the discussion. Consider whether the goal is an informal progress check-in, formal evaluation of the current design, or gate review to determine readiness for the next stage. Communicate the purpose so all participants understand the intent and context of the review.
The scope should specify the particular aspects or components of the design under evaluation. Avoid an overly broad scope that cannot be thoroughly reviewed within the allotted time. A targeted scope helps frame the discussion around the most critical parts of the design.
Determine the key stakeholders who need to participate, including designers, engineers, project managers, and any subject matter experts relevant to the project. Compile a complete list of attendees and define their roles during the review to ensure you have the right perspectives represented.
Clearly define the intended outcomes you want to achieve, such as getting feedback on assumptions, highlighting potential risks, clearing the design for production, or making a go/no-go decision. Documenting the desired outcomes provides tangible criteria for a successful design review.
With precise goals and objectives, the design review is positioned to generate the insights and decisions needed to move the project forward with clarity and alignment.
Choose the Right Type of Review
There are three main types of design reviews to consider: informal reviews, formal reviews, and gate reviews. Understanding when to use each type ensures efficient and effective reviews tailored to the stage of the design process.
Informal Reviews
Informal design reviews are ad-hoc reviews that provide a quick check on the progress of the design. They do not involve thorough evaluation or formal approval of the design. Informal reviews are useful for getting early feedback from team members when the design is still fluid and under development. They can also help align the team and identify any potential issues early on.
During informal reviews, the design is reviewed at a high level only, to provide guidance and direction. There is no pass/fail criteria. These reviews are more casual in nature and do not require extensive preparation by participants.
Formal Reviews
Formal design reviews are comprehensive evaluations of the detailed design to assess its readiness to proceed to the next phase. All key stakeholders, reviewers and approvers attend formal reviews.
Formal reviews aim to identify defects in the design so they can be addressed before moving into production. Criteria for approval is established upfront, and formal sign-off is required for the design to pass this gate. Extensive upfront preparation is required, including having the design documents, drawings, analysis reports and other artifacts ready.
Formal design reviews are crucial to mitigate risks and prevent costly mistakes before manufacturing begins. They require significant time and resources but save exponentially more by preventing problems in finished products.
Gate Reviews
Gate reviews (also called phase reviews or milestone reviews) determine if the design is ready to move from one stage of development to the next. Common gate reviews include concept reviews, design reviews, and production readiness reviews.
Gate reviews are tied to the company's product development lifecycle and process. Each gate has entrance and exit criteria that must be met to pass through that gate. Gate reviews are formal reviews similar to formal design reviews but focused on evaluating readiness for the next stage of work.
Create a Design Review Checklist
A design review checklist ensures all critical aspects of the design are thoroughly evaluated. The checklist should cover key requirements, specifications, components, analyses, drawings, and interfaces.
Some areas to include on a mechanical engineering design review checklist:
Technical Specifications
Do the specifications align with product requirements and intended functionality?
Are tolerances appropriate for manufacturability and performance?
Mechanical Components
Do the components integrate well into the overall assembly?
Can components withstand expected mechanical forces and environmental conditions?
Are components optimized for weight, strength, and manufacturability?
Interfaces
Are sub-systems and components interfacing properly?
Are interconnects, fittings, seals, and fasteners appropriate?
Materials
Are the selected materials optimal for functionality, manufacturability, and cost?
Do materials conform to application requirements like wear resistance?
Design for Manufacturing
Can parts be manufactured with available methods and tooling?
Do the designs minimize difficult-to-machine features?
Can the design be assembled efficiently?
Analysis
Have appropriate analyses been performed (FEA, thermal, dynamic, fatigue, etc)?
Do the results align with design assumptions and product specifications?
Drawings
Do drawings contain the necessary views, dimensions, tolerances, notes?
Do assemblies and parts align properly across drawings?
Testing
Is there a plan for appropriate prototype testing?
Will testing adequately validate analyses and requirements?
By going through a comprehensive design review checklist, mechanical engineers can methodically evaluate all aspects of the design to avoid costly oversights. Having a standardized checklist ensures consistency across all design reviews. The checklist also provides a framework for asking probing questions about the design.
Guide the Discussion
The discussion during a design review needs to be focused and productive to be valuable. Having an agenda and a facilitator can help keep the conversation on track.
Have a clear agenda. The facilitator should create an agenda before the meeting and share it with participants. This keeps everyone aligned on the topics to be discussed and helps structure the conversation.
Appoint a facilitator. Choose someone to serve as the facilitator for the design review. Their role is to move through the agenda, keeping things on track and making sure all perspectives are heard. This allows the design team to focus on the conversation.
Focus on key areas. The facilitator should ensure that discussion stays focused on the critical aspects of the design under review, as outlined in the agenda. This avoids getting sidetracked.
Ask open-ended questions. The facilitator should prepare open-ended questions ahead of time to spur in-depth discussion of the design. This reveals assumptions, challenges, and areas for improvement. Avoid simple yes/no questions.
For example: "What do you think are the biggest risks with this design?" rather than "Do you see any risks with the design?"
Keeping the design review discussion guided, productive, and focused leads to meaningful insights and feedback to improve the design. An agenda, facilitator, focus on key topics, and open-ended questions are all best practices for guiding an effective design review discussion.
Capture Comprehensive Feedback
A thorough design review requires capturing detailed notes on all feedback and recommendations revealed during the discussion. Assign someone familiar with the project to take on the role of notetaker. They should record any concerns, questions, suggestions for improvement, and required changes to the design that come up during the review.
The notetaker should focus on listening carefully, asking for clarification when needed, and accurately documenting the key insights. Having a dedicated notetaker allows the other participants to fully engage in the discussion.
It can be helpful for the notetaker to use a template to capture feedback in a structured way. The template can include areas to note:
Assumptions that need validation
Gaps or issues in the design
Ideas for design improvements
Specific changes required and reasoning
Follow-up actions with owners and timelines
Sharing the detailed review notes with all participants afterward serves multiple purposes:
Ensures everyone has visibility into the key takeaways
Allows participants to clarify or add to the feedback
Creates accountability around required actions
The document of feedback from the review becomes a valuable reference as the design evolves. It enables the project team to validate that all concerns raised in the review have been addressed. Capturing comprehensive insights during design reviews and sharing them across the team is a critical aspect of achieving error-free solutions.
Avoid Redesigning During the Review
The design review is meant to evaluate the current design, not redesign it on the spot. Suggested changes should be noted and documented for follow-up after the review, but not actioned immediately.
Participants need to stay focused on the pre-defined objectives and scope of that specific design review. If the conversation starts to veer into reworking the design at the moment or debating alternative solutions, the facilitator should steer it back on track.
Trying to redesign aspects of the solution during the review meeting can lead to confusion, loss of focus, and failure to fully evaluate the current design. It also wastes valuable time that could be better spent methodically assessing the design against requirements.
All proposed modifications to the design that come up during the review should be logged. After the meeting, these can be prioritized and assigned to engineers to incorporate into the next design iteration.
However, the review itself should concentrate only on identifying issues, risks, areas for improvement and determining if the current design meets the objectives laid out for that particular review. Keeping a tight focus avoids getting bogged down in the details and ensures you get the necessary feedback to approve or revise the design.
Follow Up and Close the Loop
A design review is only effective if the feedback and suggested changes are actually implemented in the next design iteration. The work cannot stop after the review meeting itself. It's crucial to have a plan to follow up on the feedback, prioritize the required changes, assign owners, and verify the updates through another review.
To close the loop, schedule a follow-up working session soon after the initial design review to go over all the notes and feedback collected. Review each item and come to a consensus on which changes should be prioritized first based on factors like risk, level of effort, and impact on the design.
Assign clear owners for each of the required design updates or corrections. Having individual responsibility ensures accountability for making the updates promptly. Owners should have expertise related to the change and adequate bandwidth to implement it
Set target dates for when design changes need to be completed based on the priority level. This keeps the rework moving forward at the necessary pace. Schedule follow-up reviews once changes are made so that stakeholders can evaluate the design again and confirm their feedback has been satisfactorily addressed.
Closing the feedback loop is vital for design reviews to improve the end product. It's not enough to just identify issues - those insights need to translate into concrete design iterations through structured follow-up plans and review cadences. Consistent verification ensures the design steadily evolves until it is ultimately approved and ready for production.
Include the Right Participants
The participants in a design review can make or break its effectiveness. Reviews should include cross-functional experts and stakeholders that represent diverse perspectives and can provide valuable insights into the design.
Bring Together Cross-Functional Experts
Include team members with expertise in all relevant areas - engineering, manufacturing, quality, procurement, service, marketing, etc. Gathering input from different disciplines helps uncover issues and opportunities that may be missed with a narrower focus. Cross-pollination of ideas leads to more robust designs.
For complex products, you may need separate reviews focused on particular subsystems or components. Make sure to loop back experts that weren't involved in the initial reviews.
Involve Customers and Stakeholders
Don't just include your internal team. The end-users and other stakeholders of the product should have a seat at the table.
Involving customers directly provides firsthand perspectives on how well the design meets their needs. They may point out use cases or requirements that were overlooked. Active customer participation leads to greater buy-in.
Engage stakeholders like service technicians and partners that will interact with the product downstream. They can identify potential issues with maintainability, support, or integration early on.
Broad participation results in more scrutiny and greater confidence in the readiness of the design.
Continuously Improve the Process
Design reviews are an iterative process that must be refined and improved over time. After completing a review, take time to assess how effective it was and what could be done better next time. Here are some tips:
Review how effective the design review was and make improvements
Gather feedback via surveys and discussions with participants on what worked well and what didn't. Look at whether the review achieved its intended goals and objectives.
Identify any shortcomings in the preparation, participation, follow up or other aspects of the review process.
Brainstorm ways to improve deficient areas for future reviews.
Update templates, checklists, procedures as needed
Based on feedback and lessons learned, make changes to any templates, guidelines or processes used for design reviews.
Ensure tools like design review checklists stay up-to-date and get modified when needed.
Document best practices and tips that come up to continually enhance how reviews are conducted.
Provide training to help participants be more effective
As pain points are identified, consider providing training to participants on how to be productive contributors in design reviews.
Offer guidelines on giving constructive feedback, conflict resolution tactics or other areas that need improvement.
Have team members share best practices during reviews to multiply learning across the organization.
By regularly tweaking and upgrading the design review process, mechanical engineering teams can achieve continual improvement in producing flawless solutions. Treat every review as a chance to get incrementally better.
Comments