{"id":3421,"date":"2026-08-29T12:43:50","date_gmt":"2026-08-29T12:43:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/?p=3421"},"modified":"2026-08-29T12:50:59","modified_gmt":"2026-08-29T12:50:59","slug":"10-engineering-decisions-npd-project","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/10-engineering-decisions-npd-project\/","title":{"rendered":"Most NPD Problems Start Before the First Tool Is Built"},"content":{"rendered":"

The 10 Engineering Decisions That Can Make or Break an NPD Project<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

A new product development project often looks straightforward on paper:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concept \u2192 CAD \u2192 Prototype \u2192 Tooling \u2192 Validation \u2192 Mass Production<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But in real manufacturing, problems rarely follow such a neat sequence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A dimensional problem discovered during T1 may have started with a tolerance decision months earlier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A molding problem may have originated from material selection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An assembly failure may have been caused by a feature that was never identified as functionally critical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And an expensive tooling modification may simply be the consequence of a design decision that was made before anyone from manufacturing was involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This leads to an important NPD principle:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

The earlier an engineering decision is made, the more expensive it can become to change later.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Here are 10 engineering decisions that deserve serious attention before a product reaches tooling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

01 \u2014 Define What the Product Actually Has to Do<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The first engineering decision should not be:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cHow should we manufacture this part?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It should be:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhat does this part need to do?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before detailed CAD development, the engineering team should understand:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • Functional requirements<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Operating environment<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Mechanical loads<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Temperature exposure<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Chemical exposure<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Expected service life<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Interfaces with other components<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Assembly requirements<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    A plastic housing, for example, may need to protect electronics, maintain a seal, locate a PCB, support a connector, and survive repeated assembly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Those requirements will eventually determine geometry, material, tolerance, tooling, and validation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    If the function is poorly defined at the beginning, the CAD model may simply become a detailed representation of an unclear product.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    (Engineering design review)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    02 \u2014 Choose the Material for the Application, Not Just the Datasheet<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Material selection is often treated as a specification exercise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Engineers compare:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • Tensile strength<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Impact resistance<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Temperature resistance<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Chemical resistance<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Cost<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

      But for an injection molded component, the material also becomes part of the manufacturing strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Engineers need to consider:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      • Flow behavior<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Shrinkage<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Warpage<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Fiber orientation<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Mold temperature<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Processing window<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Dimensional stability<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Availability and supply consistency<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

        For example, a glass-filled engineering plastic may provide excellent stiffness but introduce directional shrinkage and warpage considerations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        A material that looks excellent on a datasheet may therefore create significant manufacturing challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The right question is not simply:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n

        \u201cWhich material has the best properties?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

        It is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n

        \u201cWhich material provides the required performance and can also be manufactured consistently?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

        \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

        (Different engineering plastic components)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        03 \u2014 Identify the Critical-to-Function Features<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

        Not every feature on a component is equally important.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Some features may be cosmetic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Others may determine whether the product works.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Examples include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        • Mounting hole locations<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Connector interfaces<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Sealing surfaces<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Locating pins<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Bearing seats<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Snap-fits<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Critical clearances<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Interfaces with metal components<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

          These should be identified early as critical-to-function features<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          This is also where tolerance strategy begins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A mounting hole position may be more important than the overall length of the housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A sealing surface may be more important than an external cosmetic dimension.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A connector interface may be more important than several non-functional dimensions combined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n

          Good engineering does not treat every dimension equally.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

          It identifies the dimensions that control the function.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

          04 \u2014 Decide How the Product Will Be Assembled<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

          A component can be perfectly designed as an individual part and still be difficult to assemble.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Why?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Because assembly is a system problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Before tooling begins, engineers should consider:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          • Assembly sequence<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Fasteners<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Snap-fits<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Press-fits<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Inserts<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Connector engagement<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Accessibility<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Automation<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Serviceability<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Error-proofing<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

            For example, a snap-fit may look perfectly reasonable in CAD.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            But can an operator assemble it repeatedly without excessive force?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Can an automated system locate it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Can it survive repeated assembly?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Can it be serviced later?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            These questions should be answered before the tooling strategy is locked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            05 \u2014 Perform DFM Before the Design Becomes Expensive<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

            DFM is sometimes treated as the final checkpoint before tooling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            That is too late.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            A proper DFM review should happen while design changes are still relatively inexpensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Engineers should review:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              \n
            • Wall thickness<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Draft<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Ribs<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Bosses<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Undercuts<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Parting line<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Gate location<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Ejection<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Venting<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Cooling<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Critical dimensions<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Cosmetic surfaces<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

              The objective is not to make the CAD model \u201cmoldable\u201d at the last minute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              The objective is to make the product manufacturable by design<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              A small geometry change during CAD development may take minutes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              The same change after mold steel has been cut may require:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \n
              • Insert modification<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Welding<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Re-machining<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Re-polishing<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Re-validation<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                The earlier DFM happens, the more options engineers have.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                (A DFM review screenshot showing a CAD part with draft analysis.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                06 \u2014 Decide What Really Needs Tight Tolerance<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                One of the easiest ways to increase manufacturing cost is to tighten tolerances without understanding why.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                A drawing full of \u00b10.02 mm dimensions may look highly precise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                But precision should have a purpose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                The engineering team should ask:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                What happens if this dimension moves?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Does it affect:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n
                • Assembly?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • Sealing?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • Connector alignment?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • Mechanical movement?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • Electrical performance?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • Structural performance?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                  If not, the tolerance may not need to be extremely tight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  On the other hand, a relatively ordinary-looking dimension may be critical because it controls an interface.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  This is why:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n

                  Tolerance should follow function.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                  The objective is not to make every dimension extremely precise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The objective is to make the right dimensions precise enough<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n\n\n\n

                  07 \u2014 Understand the Difference Between Prototype and Production<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                  A successful prototype can create a dangerous sense of confidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  A prototype may demonstrate that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The concept works.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  But that does not automatically mean:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The production process will be stable.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Prototype manufacturing may use:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n
                  • CNC machining<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • 3D printing<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • Soft tooling<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • Low-volume processes<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                    Production injection molding introduces another set of variables:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n
                    • Material shrinkage<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Mold cooling<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Filling behavior<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Packing<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Tool wear<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Cycle variation<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Process capability<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                      A prototype can therefore answer:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n

                      \u201cDoes the design work?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      while production validation must answer:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n

                      \u201cCan we manufacture this design repeatedly and consistently?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      Those are different questions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      08 \u2014 Involve Manufacturing Early<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                      One of the most expensive patterns in NPD is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      Design \u2192 Handoff \u2192 Manufacturing Problem \u2192 Engineering Change<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      By the time manufacturing sees the design, many decisions may already be locked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      A better approach is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      Engineering + Manufacturing + Quality + Tooling<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      working together earlier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      A tooling engineer may identify an undercut.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      A molding engineer may identify a flow problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      A quality engineer may question a measurement strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      A manufacturing engineer may identify an assembly problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      These inputs are much more valuable when changes are still inexpensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      This is why early supplier involvement can be valuable for complex molded components.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      The goal is not to let manufacturing dictate the product design.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      The goal is to make engineering decisions with manufacturing reality visible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                      (A cross-functional engineering meeting around a CAD model, mold design)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      09 \u2014 Define Validation Before Tooling<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                      Another common mistake is to build the tool first and decide how to validate the product later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      For critical components, validation requirements should influence engineering decisions from the beginning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      Before tooling starts, the team should know:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        \n
                      • Which dimensions are critical?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • Which functions need to be tested?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • What environmental conditions matter?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • What constitutes failure?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • Which characteristics need capability studies?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • What inspection equipment is required?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • How will the production process be validated?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                        For a fluid-control component, this might include pressure or leakage testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        For a connector, it may include mating force, retention, or dimensional inspection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        For an automotive electronic housing, it may include sealing, assembly, dimensional, and environmental requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        The validation plan should reflect the actual function of the product.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                        (CMM Inspection)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        10 \u2014 Control Engineering Changes<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                        Engineering changes are inevitable in NPD.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        The problem is not making changes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        The problem is making changes without understanding their consequences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        A seemingly small CAD revision can affect:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \n
                        • Mold inserts<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Cavity geometry<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Core geometry<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Cooling<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Gate location<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Ejection<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Inspection fixtures<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Assembly<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Validation<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                          For this reason, an engineering change should trigger an impact assessment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          At minimum:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          What changed?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Why did it change?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          What other features are affected?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Does tooling need to change?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Does inspection need to change?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Does validation need to be repeated?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Which revision is now the production reference?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Good revision control is not administrative overhead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          It is part of manufacturing risk management.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                          (An engineering change)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          The Bigger Picture<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

                          These ten decisions may appear unrelated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          They are not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          They form a chain:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Product Function<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Material<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Critical Features<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Assembly<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          DFM<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Tolerance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Prototype<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Manufacturing<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Validation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \u2193<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Engineering Change<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          A mistake early in the chain can create consequences much later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          That is why experienced NPD teams do not simply ask:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \n

                          \u201cCan we manufacture this part?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                          They ask:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \n

                          \u201cHave we made the right engineering decisions to make this part manufacturable, testable, and repeatable?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                          \n\n\n\n

                          The Engineering Rule<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

                          A successful NPD project is not simply the result of good CAD.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          It is the result of good decisions made early enough to remain affordable to change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Before the first tool is built, engineers should already have a clear understanding of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          What the product must do.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          What material it needs.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Which features are critical.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          How it will be assembled.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          How it will be manufactured.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          How it will be measured.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          How it will be validated.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          And perhaps most importantly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \n

                          What can still change\u2014and what should already be frozen?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                          Because once tooling starts, engineering decisions become manufacturing decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          And once production starts, manufacturing decisions become business decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Good NPD does not eliminate engineering problems.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          It finds them early\u2014when they are still cheap to solve.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                          The 10 Engineering Decisions That Can Make or Break an NPD Project A new product development project often looks straightforward on paper: Concept \u2192 CAD \u2192 Prototype \u2192 Tooling \u2192 Validation \u2192 Mass Production But in real manufacturing, problems rarely follow such a neat sequence. A dimensional problem discovered during T1 may have started with a tolerance decision months earlier. A molding problem may have originated from material selection. An assembly failure may have been caused by a feature that was never identified as functionally critical. And an expensive tooling modification may simply be the consequence of a design decision that was made before anyone from manufacturing was involved. This leads to an important NPD principle: The earlier an engineering decision is made, the more expensive it can become to change later. Here are 10 engineering decisions that deserve serious attention before a product reaches tooling. 01 \u2014 Define What the Product Actually Has to Do The first engineering decision should not be: \u201cHow should we manufacture this part?\u201d It should be: \u201cWhat does this part need to do?\u201d Before detailed CAD development, the engineering team should understand: A plastic housing, for example, may need to protect electronics, maintain a seal, locate a PCB, support a connector, and survive repeated assembly. Those requirements will eventually determine geometry, material, tolerance, tooling, and validation. If the function is poorly defined at the beginning, the CAD model may simply become a detailed representation of an unclear product. (Engineering design review) 02 \u2014 Choose the Material for the Application, Not Just the Datasheet Material selection is often treated as a specification exercise. Engineers compare: But for an injection molded component, the material also becomes part of the manufacturing strategy. Engineers need to consider: For example, a glass-filled engineering plastic may provide excellent stiffness but introduce directional shrinkage and warpage considerations. A material that looks excellent on a datasheet may therefore create significant manufacturing challenges. The right question is not simply: \u201cWhich material has the best properties?\u201d It is: \u201cWhich material provides the required performance and can also be manufactured consistently?\u201d (Different engineering plastic components) 03 \u2014 Identify the Critical-to-Function Features Not every feature on a component is equally important. Some features may be cosmetic. Others may determine whether the product works. Examples include: These should be identified early as critical-to-function features. This is also where tolerance strategy begins. A mounting hole position may be more important than the overall length of the housing. A sealing surface may be more important than an external cosmetic dimension. A connector interface may be more important than several non-functional dimensions combined. Good engineering does not treat every dimension equally. It identifies the dimensions that control the function. 04 \u2014 Decide How the Product Will Be Assembled A component can be perfectly designed as an individual part and still be difficult to assemble. Why? Because assembly is a system problem. Before tooling begins, engineers should consider: For example, a snap-fit may look perfectly reasonable in CAD. But can an operator assemble it repeatedly without excessive force? Can an automated system locate it? Can it survive repeated assembly? Can it be serviced later? These questions should be answered before the tooling strategy is locked. 05 \u2014 Perform DFM Before the Design Becomes Expensive DFM is sometimes treated as the final checkpoint before tooling. That is too late. A proper DFM review should happen while design changes are still relatively inexpensive. Engineers should review: The objective is not to make the CAD model \u201cmoldable\u201d at the last minute. The objective is to make the product manufacturable by design. A small geometry change during CAD development may take minutes. The same change after mold steel has been cut may require: The earlier DFM happens, the more options engineers have. (A DFM review screenshot showing a CAD part with draft analysis.) 06 \u2014 Decide What Really Needs Tight Tolerance One of the easiest ways to increase manufacturing cost is to tighten tolerances without understanding why. A drawing full of \u00b10.02 mm dimensions may look highly precise. But precision should have a purpose. The engineering team should ask: What happens if this dimension moves? Does it affect: If not, the tolerance may not need to be extremely tight. On the other hand, a relatively ordinary-looking dimension may be critical because it controls an interface. This is why: Tolerance should follow function. The objective is not to make every dimension extremely precise. The objective is to make the right dimensions precise enough. 07 \u2014 Understand the Difference Between Prototype and Production A successful prototype can create a dangerous sense of confidence. A prototype may demonstrate that: The concept works. But that does not automatically mean: The production process will be stable. Prototype manufacturing may use: Production injection molding introduces another set of variables: A prototype can therefore answer: \u201cDoes the design work?\u201d while production validation must answer: \u201cCan we manufacture this design repeatedly and consistently?\u201d Those are different questions. 08 \u2014 Involve Manufacturing Early One of the most expensive patterns in NPD is: Design \u2192 Handoff \u2192 Manufacturing Problem \u2192 Engineering Change By the time manufacturing sees the design, many decisions may already be locked. A better approach is: Engineering + Manufacturing + Quality + Tooling working together earlier. A tooling engineer may identify an undercut. A molding engineer may identify a flow problem. A quality engineer may question a measurement strategy. A manufacturing engineer may identify an assembly problem. These inputs are much more valuable when changes are still inexpensive. This is why early supplier involvement can be valuable for complex molded components. The goal is not to let manufacturing dictate the product design. The goal is to make engineering decisions with manufacturing reality visible. (A cross-functional engineering meeting around a CAD model, mold design) 09 \u2014 Define Validation Before Tooling Another common mistake is to build the tool first and decide how to validate the product later. For critical components, validation requirements should influence engineering decisions from the beginning. Before tooling starts,<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3429,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,23,14],"tags":[22,115,113,112],"class_list":["post-3421","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-advanced-molding","category-engineering-npd","category-precision-tooling","tag-dfm","tag-engineering-decisions","tag-new-product-development","tag-npd"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3421","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3421"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3421\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3432,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3421\/revisions\/3432"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3429"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3421"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3421"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/koreben.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3421"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}