¿Cómo puede utilizar las revisiones de diseño para mejorar sus proyectos de ingeniería?

The area typically missed in preparation for a design review is consideration for what areas of the design need third party consultation. Custom sub-components should be reviewed with the same scrutiny of the upper assembly. Carefully consider the expertise on the core team. If an area is lacking, consider adding a 3rd party review with an industry expert in that area.

When designing either for a system or a product, design can be aligned to a process. Many organizations as well as design books have developed steps that can guide a design endeavor. The design review therefore should be a step in this process, and it provides the reviewing parties opportunity to check that at each stage, the relevant inputs and expected requirements have been realized by the outcome of the design. In my opinion, it is a very essential aspect of the design process that ensures a qualitative result for all stakeholders.

Acredito que ferramentas de gestão e melhoria contínua com objetivos, escopo e foco claro e mensurável com indicadores igualmente objetivos. Ferramentas de apoio como o famoso PDCA e/ou DMAIC podem apoiar neste processo de revisão e busca da melhoria contínua trazendo eficácia cada vez maior para os projetos em geral. Penso que ferramentas e controle são essenciais para o sucesso em cada revisão, mas a disciplina e o foco contínuo nas revisões e melhoria focada em resultados são, verdadeiramente, o que determina o atingimento do objetivo das revisões.

Design reviews are critical for every successful project or initiative and should be inclusive of all stakeholders from conception to delivery. Including everyone from the “Big Picture” idea developer, to the design team, collaboration with all experienced and younger engineers, to probably the most important component. The end user. In most industries The end user has been there and knows what they need to make something work efficiently. Don’t take for granted the institutional knowledge that is typically an untapped resource in the design and development world we live and work in.

All reviews & inspections as per Quality approach are undesirables in the sense that focus needs to be on the design to be perfect from the very beginning (First time right!) so that minimum reviews & inspections are needed. Design reviews can follow the DMAIC approach i.e. D-Define the objectives of the design & the design review team. M-Measure the gaps in the design as per design objectives A-Analyse the gaps I-Improve on the design by taking appropriate. actions. C-Control the design Repeat DMAIC cycle till the design is acceptable.

1- Assign a facilitator. That person doesn't necessarily need to be the technical lead on the project. ... 2- Clarify the goals for the review. ... 3- Provide context to the team. ... 4- Present the design. ... 5- Keep the discussion productive and focused. ... 6- Create and prioritize the issues list.

Many high-end engineering design consultancies would have their own trademarked or copyrighted process for completing design reviews. These processes are developed over time and could be bespoke to the type of Engineering Project being undertaken. With the advent of BIM, and 3D modelling of designs, reviews can be done virtually. But is still very outcome-based, or for visual aesthetics. Sub-design reviews can and should also include the engineering criteria of that sub-item. For example, a 3D model of the structural elements of a building can reviewed for its 'forces' or 'moments' or 'loads' impacts could be reviewed. Not just for its constructability, operability, functionality and aesthetics.

My personal experience regarding design review is that before doing it, I prepare a checklist of all the things that affect and are the final goal and fill the checklist.

A big failure for a review is not allowing enough time for people to review the meeting materials. A poorly prepared team will greatly impact on the quality of the review.

Some design consultants only submit drawings for review and want to submit the Design report later once the project is done. How do one review drawings without the Design report that shows how u arrived at certain parameters, deliverables must be agreed upfront and the Design SOW should clearly define the expected deliverables.

Reviews should be concise, focused, and time-efficient. All participants should come prepared with progress updates. Thoroughly discuss any project hiccups from various perspectives and address them promptly. Demonstrating empathy and sincerity in problem-solving significantly contributes to successful reviews and, ultimately, project success.

It is important to keep everyone focused. Side conversations are a definite no-no. There must be only one conversation. This is why it is important to assign a chair for the review to keep things on track.

Durante la revisión es muy recomendable realizar el ejercicio declarando las métricas a utilizar según el tipo de proyecto, esto ayudara en demasía a canalizar el enfoque al seguimiento qué se debe de tener para lograr resultados adecuados durante la ejecución y también permitirá detectar posibles brechas y faltantes qué no se hayan detectado en los pasos previos.

If possible, it can be advantageous to hold smaller reviews at various points during the project leading up to the main review. This may be at pre-defined stages, 50% of the design process for example, when a major deliverable arrives, or if there is a fundamental change to the design. Early engagement of stakeholders in this way can prevent a "show-stopper" from occurring at the main review and allows additional input from all parties, meaning the main review is smoother, and generates less reservations.

Do the paticipants know their stuff? Does the review team function in a goal focussed way? What are the outcomes required, and to whom is it issued?

In my experience design reviews can be used to improve engineering projects in several ways, but I will share two of them : 1. Identify and address design flaws: Design reviews allow multiple stakeholders to examine the design from different perspectives. This helps in identifying potential flaws or weaknesses in the design early on, before they become costly to fix during implementation. 2. Enhance collaboration and communication: Design reviews bring together engineers, designers, and other stakeholders to discuss and evaluate the design. This promotes collaboration and communication, ensuring that everyone is on the same page and working towards a common goal.

El análisis debe ampliarse no solo a los comentarios sino a los puntos detectados en la revisión previa y se debe de enfocar el análisis en la totalidad de usuarios involucrados en el proyecto para afinar el alcance y reducir la posibilidad de adicionales al ejecutar. Una herramienta funcional de ello es realizar check de cumplimiento de los requerimientos de usuario definidos previamente.

Taking feedback from the people who are either directly involved in that area or going to be the main stakeholders in any context are your go to options and their opinion must be quantified and objectified for clear KPI setting.

En importante que, al realizar el ajuste de los cambios autorizados se realice una evaluación de los mismos enfocados en que estos cambios no afecten los alcances ya definidos y cumplan con los tiempos y costos asignados al proyecto, recordemos que, absolutamente todo es mejorable por lo cual se deben de considerar las siguientes cuestiones antes de realizar cambios: El cambio afecta en cosyoyal proyecto? El cambio incrementa el tiempo requerido al Proyecto? Dicho cambio aporta realmente valor al objetivo definido del proyecto? Si este cambio no se realiza el objetivo del proyecto se cumple? Cual es el costo-beneficio del cambio?. Con estas simples respuestas se puede evaluar acertadamente si se ejecuta o no un cambio.

Please notice that when I expressed my point of view on defined the purpose; I’m giving a complete explanation for the other questions presented. My experience showed me that the shorter and concise presentation will be the most impactful.

In my experience, conducting thorough review could help identify minor revisions to the design especially if you are the one implementing the project. It is always important to have commented plans by professionals and also with the end user to deliver best possible design.

Despite importance all of initial steps, i belive that this is the most crucial step. Implementing the required changes, actually bring the desired results to the Project however it often requires consumption of extra resources interms of time and efforts. This is where often Project Managers make compromises in an efforts to save resources, thus limiting the fine tuning of project.

To improve engineering project reviews, you can consider incorporating a structured format, it’s a must to encouraging constructive feedback from the team always focusing on key milestones, and involving diverse perspectives and possible scenarios

Any project define to reach a result. So engineering project also have a result. The result maybe is a design. So in result evaluation shall check the prevent how many percent covered the request/requests. This is after checking that all steps have followed according to rules and standards? In my opinion this step is the main and essential step in design review. And accepting the client or customer is the main measurement for approving this after checking all other steps.

My experience designing, building, & running chemical plants indicate it is absolutely essential to include knowledgeable members of the operations team, maintenance team, and technology experts in periodic design reviews to ensure the final product (i.e. the chemical plant) works safely, properly and can be operated successfully. This usually involved several design reviews -some early to make sure key items are included and some late in the design & construction process to ensure it will all work. Such reviews along the way also ensured ownership of the facility by the operations, maintenance, and technical team left to run the plant.

I think in early phase it would help to arrange design thinking workshops. Integrate design thinking workshops into design reviews, encouraging participants to think creatively, empathize with end-users, and generate innovative solutions to challenges. While designing, keep risks in mind. Use design reviews as a platform for proactive risk identification and mitigation. This involves evaluating potential challenges and developing strategies to address them early in the design phase. Also, utilise interactive prototypes or simulations during design reviews to provide a hands-on experience. After review, it is important to keep the stakeholders in loop by providing continuous updates during development. You may use agile for this.

Reviews tend to have experienced attendees - bang for buck but expensive! Can you get more for it? One of my former teams added less experienced team members to the mix and often someone from the project team but outside our direct discipline. We started getting some incredible input that we would typically not consider. What's in it for them? This is a learning moment for these atypical reviewers. Newbies learn basics of good design practices. The reviewers outside the domain generally leave with a new appreciation of what we do. And yes sometimes you get some confronting feedback 😉 In return, you find yourself invited to other design reviews which complete "a" circle of learning. Long term this improves project outcomes.

I concur with John Kessler's comment above. I would also note that a thorough Design PHA (Process Hazards Review) would provide additional feedback for the team at this time.

The success of any engineering project is based on structured development and constants improvements through iterations. Conceptual, Basic and Detail Engineering, risk analysis for each phase, participation of stakeholders (operations, maintenance, hseq) and of course, analysis sessions between specialized areas: processes, electronics, mechanics, and soon on.