Friday, June 26, 2009

New Website

Frankly speaking, I was under immense stress for the last two years or so. However, I was not suffering from the usual type of stress that doctors could diagnose and treat. The stress was caused by 'creative tension'. And it was sort of killing me -- internally at least!


I desperately wanted to create something that would help many. But I kept wondering for months on end as to what that might be. I tried to imagine many things and write down many ideas till my notebooks were full and overflowing.

Then a few months back it occurred to me that I was completely defying what I have been preaching. That is to get a solid idea one need not imagine very hard. We only need to look all around us and intently observe the present to gain meaningful insights. And then with a few months of patience I hit upon the right idea which I thought exactly answered my questions.

But what were the questions? The all important question that filled my mind was "what are the most important things that are missing in the manufacturing industries of India?" and "how can the idea be practically implemented for the benefit of all and India becomes more competitive -- improving the material standard of living of the masses?"

Though we have a lot of brain power behind us, our education system does not encourage ‘original thinking’ (Design) and ‘respect for material things’ (Maintenance). So, this is what I found: we sadly lack in Design and Maintenance. And strangely, these two vital things are really really holding us back. And what is stranger is that they two vital aspects are related to each other a lot. They are just the mirror image of each other. Though the terms apparently look different the underlying thinking process involved remains the same.

The problem is that traditionally we have looked at these two subjects separately and treated them so and perhaps unequally. This is because the subject of Maintenance does not even appear in the course of our undergraduate studies. Young graduate engineers learn the ropes after they join industries and everyone seems to develop a perception of their own. While this may prove very useful for creative evolution of the subject the danger is that practical learning in this manner often happens without any solid thinking framework. Left to fend for themselves, the young people soon become disillusioned and frustrated. They simply can't see the big picture or see an industrial system holistically.

However, with Design the story is quite different. Though the subject has an exciting aura about it, young people don't go for it since opportunities in design is extremely rare in India. So, the initial inspiration quickly dies out in the first few years into an industrial job. After all, engineering on the whole is a creative profession that needs a lot of 'practice' to develop the right skills to flourish. The proficiency diminishes with the lack of 'practice'. Therefore, it is not uncommon to find that we are always looking 'west' or 'far east' for the next shot of creative engineering inspiration. Interesting the Central Government's present business tagline is 'Look east policy'.

I got a shock of my life to learn that in and around Berlin there are about 6000 design engineers serving industries. How many design engineers work around our four major metros? No wonder the Industry Minister of Germany (in his recent speech in Kolkata) boasts that 70% of German exports are made up of engineering items. Britain is also not far behind. They have a well operating Design Council for years while India only recently (2007) announced its first National Design Policy though implementation is yet to see the light of the day. Interesting, the 'Made in India' tag for Indian garments now stand for high quality so much so that it has kept the Chinese busy pasting, on the sly, the ‘Made in India’ tags onto their garments to boost sales of their textile products.

So, what makes the basic difference between the more developed countries and India? Simply put it lies in the 'ability to design' and the ability to maintain'.

Therefore, to my mind the fundamental question is whether these subjects of 'Design' and 'Maintenance' can be brought together, since one can't live without the other, and then create a new engineering and management discipline around it?

Fortunately, the answer is yes! And that exactly is the answer to my creative tension. Thank God! It is over at last and I may from now on lead a more healthy life. I have with love christened the new subject as ‘Design and Maintenance Innovation’ since innovation is common to both subjects.

But how do I give it a practical shape? I don't know. Probably it would evolve with time and patience. But I have made a small beginning. The beginning is in the form of a website: www.reliabilityconsultant.net .

The idea behind the website is simple. Over the centuries, real knowledge and education have been free. And I strongly believe that knowledge should be free but skills developed through such knowledge can be sold. This is the exact phenomenon that propelled India to rapidly achieve the superpower status in computing and software. People learnt from each other for free. And look what wonderful thing it did for India.

So, why can't the same be done for ‘Design and Maintenance Innovation’ when we know for sure that is what we need to urgently develop our country. Everyone can't go for software and computer engineering. But almost anyone, given the right amount of elementary training and education can go for manufacturing industries. And we badly need this to come up on top of the ‘BRICS’ league. Presently, we are nowhere near the top.

Therefore, the objective of the website is to promote the subject for free as much as possible and to create an awareness about the subject as to how it can really be useful to industries in creating 'competitive impact' to earn more profits and raise the general material standard of Indian living.

But as with everything I do or did so far, the growth would be organic in nature (develop as needed) and develop collaboratively (too many cooks without spoiling the broth) and develop it for people who are really dying to excel. So, I need a lot of volunteers to back up the project simply because I can’t walk the path alone, nor do I wish to. No financial donations are needed (I hope so). But ideas and thoughts and contributions are surely needed. The website should become useful to many and they should also taste similar success of the few who have already gained from implementing the ideas.

Please take time to go through the site: www.reliabilityconsultant.net and suggest changes, improvements and modifications. Any good thought would be highly regarded and of course appreciated.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and with best regards,

dibyendu




   

Saturday, June 6, 2009

Design Policy, Designers and New Skill for Difficult times

Under the new national policy introduced in 2007, design is expected to tbe worth 1% of India's GDP by 2009. If the target is met, the value of Indian design will have grown by 1000% by 2015. Under the plan India aims to produce 5000 to 8000 designers a year through investments in new design centres.

Western companies which recently invested in Indian designs include IBM, Texas Instruments, Cisco, Philips and Whirlpool. But this represents a very small portion of the big thing which is yet to come.

Indian fashion design is now worth around $ 2000 million a year. A new 'Designed in India' tag has been launched as a mark of quality.

This is what Sir Cox, the head of the British Design Council had to say about India's design efforts: "What you're seeing is an enormous effort going into industrial design capabilities".

This is good news for India and Indian Designers. But what is better is that companies regularly look for talented people. And who are these talented people? They are specifically people with 'Design Thinking' capabilities. People who see challenges and opportunities in everything they observe and then create opportunities for greater wealth for the companies, greater wealth for themselves and prosperity for the society at large.

Design Thinking would now be the new skill -- especially in such difficult times.   

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

The Whole is not equal to its parts

The concept that a system behaves differently than its parts is a concept which many often find it difficult to understand. By our education and training we are naturally prone to look at parts rather than the system as a whole. The idea is that the property of a system is distinctly different to the individual properties of its parts.

Let us illustrate this concept that a system would always behave differently than its parts through a simple example. We would take a physical parameter and then see how this physical parameter, which is a distinct property of a part, would change as soon as two parts are made to work together. For our purpose we would take 'natural frequency' as a physical parameter and see how it changes. And we would take the turbine-generator combination -- a prime example  to illustrate this phenomenon of system behaviour.

The first natural frequency of the turbine, which is a property of the turbine, when taken alone is 2433 cycles per minute (cpm). Similarly the first natural frequency of the generator, when taken alone is 2124 cycles per minute (cpm).

What happens when we connect the turbine and the generator together through a coupling and make them work together? The natural frequencies of both the turbine and that of the generator would change altogether! Remember that natural frequency is a distinct property of a part.

The combined natural frequency changes in the following manner:

The first natural frequency of the turbine becomes 2028 cpm (drops by 17%) while that of the generator becomes 1806 cpm (drops by 15%). So the first natural frequency of the parts have changed as soon as the parts were put together.

Hence, it is always true that the WHOLE is never equal to its PARTS. Therefore, while designing, maintaining or operating or examining a problem, fault or a failure we would always gain a better understanding by observing a system as a whole rather than its parts.