case study
- This is an actual ●●●RAPID® development process case study from more than 15 years ago. Shown below is the best selling table-top device of that era used to mix dental impression materials. The client wanted a small hand-held version of this device. Sounds straight-forward but it isn't. The machine has to be able to mix light, medium and heavy body materials well for high quality dental impressions. There is a very large difference between the physical properties of the light and heavy body materials!
Previously, the client had hired another firm who developed the device shown below on the left. It performed very poorly compared to the table-top unit. It was slow, noisy, and left voids in the mixed material particularly with heavy body materials. So it was unusable by a dentist. That is when the client came to us. Shown below on the right is the unit we developed using our ●●●RAPID® process. It performed superbly - fast, quiet and produced a great mix even with heavy body materials!
Why did the other firm get such poor results? In an attempt to please the client, they went straight into detailed design of a production unit using a carpenter's drill as a template. Thats how they ended up with a single motor coupled to a complex transmission which had inherent power loss that made the machine slow. To compensate they used a high rpm which made the machine noisy. It still wasn't enough to handle the dynamic range needed to perform equally well with light, medium and heavy body materials.
We performed the analysis work first. In fact we modeled the entire device and all the operating parameters. We tested our model at each sprint and revised it if needed. We knew what our machine's performance would be long before we reached the finish line. The science underlying the machine has been around for a long time but it does require theoretical and mathematical abilities obviously lacking at the other firm. Below are some of the operating parameters from our model.
Our model confirmed that a single motor coupled to a complex transmission will have poor performance. It suggested a dual motor system will have better performance. We used that insight to proceed. Shown below is our Engineering Unit which we built very quickly using many off-the-shelf components. At this early phase, we showed mastery of the technology. The Engineering Unit mixed very well, did it fast and was almost whisper quiet. Its performance equalled and exceeded the table-top unit. The client was ecstatic and commissioned the next phase - Demo Unit.
Shown below is our Demo Unit. It was small and handheld and still used some off-the-shelf components. Like the Engineering Unit it too mixed very well, did it fast and was almost whisper quiet. All of the "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns" had surfaced by this time and had been addressed.
It was only after the Demo Unit that we put resources into the "knowns", such as user interface and ergonomics. Shown below is our Production Unit. It was user friendly with a display, sensors and error detection. It was also styled for customer use.
Shown below is our Production Unit being used in a clinical test.
