Definition of Design Intent 4

[PrintScaffold]

Hello everyone!

Does formal definition of a term 'Design Intent' exist? I'm interested in the version of it that is related to the parametric CAD models. I found it hard to find a strict definition, perhaps because it is considered a universal knowledge.

http://www.cadroad.com

 

[capnhook]

My experience was MIL-TFD-oh crap..!

Proud Member of the Reality-Based Community..

[green]To the Toolmaker, your nice little cartoon drawing of your glass looks cool, but your solid model sucks. Do you want me to fix it, or are you going to take all week to get it back to me so I can get some work done?[/green]

 

[TheTick]

A handgun that kills a person is functioning within its design intent. A teddy bear that kills a person is not.

 

[drawoh]

TheTick,

Doesn't that depend on who designed the teddy bear? Why hasn't this come up on a James Bond movie?

--
JHG

 

[JohnRBaker]

Yea, I like that one KENET (and drawoh)...

John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without

 

[3DDave]

Design intent doesn't matter. What matters is a clear specification of desired results.

No one intends parts or mechanisms or systems to fail to meet specifications, so nothing meets design intent.

For the most part, it is a vague term to bolster an argument when drawing interpretation is being made by someone who can't read drawings or (less frequently) when the drawing is not clear. But that is why a clear specification is better; no guessing what the 'intent' might have been.

 

[zeusfaber]

And in the wonderful world of in-service-support of small fleets where every one was built differently, we talk about "restoring the design intent" when the post-collision repair, the obsolescence modification or the fix to cope with the fact that the factory put a frame in upside down (or missed it out altogether) results in a system that has the required strength, performance, reliability, level of redundancy or whatever else it was that got mucked up without actually conforming to the detail of the original design.

When we talk about "design intent" that way, we usually manage to narrow the discussion to consideration of just one of those considerations (strength, etc) at a time - guaranteeing us something else to talk about the following week.

A.

 

[DerbyLoco]

In my experience in the context of 3D modeling the term 'Design intent' applies to how the model is interpreted into the drawn item. This is a particular problem when parts are modeled in one place by one team then turned into manufacturing drawings by another, remotely located, team. The designer may have laid a part out using a particular set of intersects to derive the form he requires but this is not always clear to the translating draughtsman and the final drawing may then not be a true reflection of the 'Design intent'.
I have yet to find a satisfactory solution to this issue although I do try and give an explanation up front and in the case of Catia try to have the originating 3D model sketch reflect the final drawing dimension scheme.