Short answer

Prioritize the use of full-featured CAD software for design reviews of 3D models to leverage its interactive capabilities and ensure consistent evaluation.

Field
Modelling
Source
Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design (2019)
Method
Survey
Sample
128 participants
Evidence
Strong effect

Design professionals predominantly use native CAD packages over viewers or static representations for assessing 3D models during design reviews. This modelling research insight is drawn from a 2019 study published in Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design. Using Survey with 128 participants, researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: Prioritize the use of full-featured CAD software for design reviews of 3D models to leverage its interactive capabilities and ensure consistent evaluation.

Study
ModellingHigh ImpactStrong effect

Native CAD software is the preferred tool for 3D model evaluation in design reviews.

Design professionals predominantly use native CAD packages over viewers or static representations for assessing 3D models during design reviews.

Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design · 2019

01

Key Findings

  • 01Native CAD packages are the most commonly used tools for reviewing 3D models.
  • 02Designers (product engineers) and non-designers show differences in their access to and preference for CAD software during reviews.
02

Application

Design takeaway

Prioritize the use of full-featured CAD software for design reviews of 3D models to leverage its interactive capabilities and ensure consistent evaluation.

How to apply

When planning design reviews for products with 3D components, ensure that participants have access to and are proficient with the native CAD software used for the model.

Project actions

  • 01When presenting 3D models for review in your design project, aim to use the original CAD software if possible.
  • 02Consider how different team members might access or use the CAD software.
03

Method & Evidence

AimTo understand the tools and methods used by product development professionals for evaluating 3D models during design reviews.
MethodSurvey
ProcedureA survey was administered to 128 product development professionals to gather data on their experiences and preferences regarding design reviews, including the tools used for reviewing 3D models.
Sample128 participants
ContextNew product development in industrial settings.

Variables

IVTool used for 3D model evaluation (native CAD, viewer, fixed views, physical prototype).
DVPreference for tool, effectiveness of review.
CVRole of the participant (designer vs. non-designer), phase of development.
04

Strengths & Limitations

Strengths

  • +Addresses a practical aspect of the design process (design reviews).
  • +Provides insights into tool preferences in a professional context.

Limitations

In a student project, access to specific native CAD software might be limited, requiring the use of alternative viewers or methods.

Reliability & validity

The study's validity relies on the accurate reporting of preferences by a diverse group of professionals. Reliability could be enhanced by exploring the consistency of these preferences across different types of 3D models or projects.

Think critically

How might the preference for native CAD software impact the accessibility and inclusivity of design reviews for team members who are less familiar with complex software?

05

Design Principles

"Interactive digital modelling tools facilitate more effective evaluation of 3D product designs."

This finding highlights the critical role of interactive, dynamic digital models in the design review process. Understanding tool preferences can inform the selection of technologies and workflows that enhance collaboration and decision-making in product development.

06

What This Means for Your Design

When designers look at 3D computer models of products, they like using the main design software (like SolidWorks or Fusion 360) the most, rather than just looking at pictures or simpler viewers.

How to use in your project

  • 1.Reference this study when justifying your choice of software for presenting 3D models in your design project's review stages.
07

Add to My Project

08

Quick Cite

Paragraph starter

In professional new product development, the use of native CAD software for the evaluation of 3D models during design reviews is prevalent, suggesting that interactive and feature-rich digital modelling tools are preferred for detailed assessment. This preference indicates that providing reviewers with direct access to the primary design software can lead to more thorough and effective design feedback.

09

Source

Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design

A Survey of Design Reviews: Understanding Differences by Designer-Roles and Phase of Development

journal · 2019

View source

Questions About This Research

What does the research say about native cad software is the preferred tool for 3d model evaluation in design reviews?
Prioritize the use of full-featured CAD software for design reviews of 3D models to leverage its interactive capabilities and ensure consistent evaluation. Evidence: Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design (2019).
Why does "Native CAD software is the preferred tool for 3D model evaluation in design reviews." matter for design?
This finding highlights the critical role of interactive, dynamic digital models in the design review process. Understanding tool preferences can inform the selection of technologies and workflows that enhance collaboration and decision-making in product development.
How can designers apply this research?
Prioritize the use of full-featured CAD software for design reviews of 3D models to leverage its interactive capabilities and ensure consistent evaluation.
What were the main findings?
Native CAD packages are the most commonly used tools for reviewing 3D models.. Designers (product engineers) and non-designers show differences in their access to and preference for CAD software during reviews.
What research method was used?
Survey with 128 participants.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence strength is rated Strong effect, based on a 2019 journal from Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design.
What should I do differently in my next project?
When planning design reviews for products with 3D components, ensure that participants have access to and are proficient with the native CAD software used for the model.
What are the limitations?
The survey relies on self-reported data and may not capture the full complexity of tool usage across all design review scenarios.