| 1. |
- Schachinger, Peter, 1970, et al.
(författare)
-
Product design efficiency: surface vs. voxel modeling - Lead time and surface quality
- 2005
-
Ingår i: International conference on Computer-Aided Industrial Design and Conceptual Design, CAIDCD´05, Delft, The Netherlands.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Product design tend to keep surface modelling as a major means for creating geometry, where excessive time is spent and specialized professions are needed sometimes. Would a change to voxel modelling increase efficiency without reducing surface quality? A comparison between software for surface modeling and voxel modeling was made. Two objects were modeled side-by-side in the two software, one motorcycle tank demanding high surface quality and one automotive seat having detailed form. Surface quality was evaluated using curvature visualization and lead time from sketch to finished CAD object was measured. The tests showed voxel modeling to be much faster than surface modeling for both objects significant difference. However, there was a difference in surface smoothness in favor of surface modeling, although not visible in real-time rendered reflections. Despite the quality difference, voxel modeling might be accurate enough even for products with glossy surfaces, such as automotive exterior panels.
|
|
| 2. |
- Stylidis, Kostas, 1978, et al.
(författare)
-
Perceived Quality Evaluation with the Use of Extended Reality
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED. - : Cambridge University Press (CUP). - 2220-4334 .- 2220-4342. ; 1:1, s. 1993-2002
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- If designers want to communicate quality aspects of the product, there is a need to bring these characteristics into the measurable space of perceived quality (PQ) attributes. To illustrate the solution for designers' dilemma of the “best design choice” in this study we applied the PQ attributes importance ranking (PQAIR) method, with the example of a bread toaster. We choose for evaluation three PQ attributes which can significantly influence visual quality of a product: Gap, Flush and Parallelism. We performed the experiment measuring subjective preferences over the toaster designs of two respondent's groups - “Designers” and “Customers.” We used sequentially: (i) web-survey (still images); (ii) desktop system; and (iii) fully immersive head-mounted display system (Virtual Reality). Consequently, we conducted a post-experiment survey regarding subjective preferences, related to the PQ communication channels that have been implemented during the study. Our results indicate advantages and drawbacks for each PQ communication method that we applied in this experiment and encourage further research in the area of products' perceived quality assessment.
|
|
