Design review
Review a mechanism with builders and programmers before ordering parts or manufacturing a batch.
A design review is a working session in which teammates try to find problems while they are still inexpensive to change. Bring the requirements, model, load estimates, results, and proposed parts list. Include people who will build, program, and maintain the .
By the end, agree on what happens next and who will make any needed changes. Open the actual during the review so you can move it, measure it, and look inside parts that a screenshot would hide.
Review at useful stages
Review the concept before detailed , the assembly before manufacturing, and the physical result after testing. Each stage answers different questions.
At the concept stage, compare the movement and uncertain contacts. At the detailed stage, inspect , supports, hardware, and tool access. After testing, update the model to match changes that actually worked.
Keep the review proportional. A small bracket may need ten focused minutes with its builder. A new lift and transfer need more time to discuss how they fit together, what loads they carry, and how they move and recover from a miss.
Begin with the job
Show the task from your plan, including where the game piece or mechanism starts and finishes. Point out the mounting positions that cannot move and the dimensions you can still adjust.
For an , show the range of object arrival positions. For a lift, show the payload, reach, and retracted state. For a plate, show the actual wheel, supports, and transmission.
Say which dimensions you have measured and which are still estimates. If you have not tested how much the rollers should squeeze a game piece, plan an adjustable prototype to find out before making the final mounts.
Walk through the movement
Move the full assembly through its useful range. Include the object and neighboring mechanisms. Inspect intermediate positions, open claws, gates, belts, and cables.
Check the stowed state, pickup, transfer, scoring, and return movement. Then try a recovery path after a miss. The route back from a bad handoff can require different from the normal forward sequence.
Use section views for hidden stacks and analysis where it helps. Include screw heads and connectors in the check. A simplified component model should still reserve the space that matters.
Follow the loads
Point to the place where a load enters the mechanism, then follow it through shafts, , plates, , and the frame. Ask what keeps the supports aligned and what happens under a reversal or impact.
Show the and speed estimate for the chosen and ratio. Include the weight of the mechanism and payload, and show the position that needs the most torque. Use the ’s performance at the intended working speed, rather than its .
For printed parts or plates with cutouts, look at the material left around mounting holes and other places that carry loads. If you cannot estimate the bending confidently, test a prototype and measure how far it moves under load at the point that matters to the handoff.
Assemble it in order
Choose a starting part and describe every assembly step. Can the bearing be inserted before the shaft? Can the nut be held after the cover closes? Does a belt need to be installed before the side plates are joined?
Walk through a common repair as well. Remove a motor, wheel, roller, cable, or sensor in the model. Identify the screws and parts that come out, and check where they can move.
Record a discovered problem as a concrete action. “Service access is bad” is vague. “The right roller collar screw is blocked by the guide; add a tool opening and check it with the selected hex key” gives the designer something to fix.
Check the manufacturing package
Review the custom-part files, drawings, material, thickness, quantity, and revision. Compare the with the assembly. Check purchased part numbers and all small hardware.
Choose functional and fits with the fabricator. Confirm that inside corners, thin walls, bend details, and holes can be made by the selected process. Check that someone can measure the dimensions you require.
Open the exports rather than only looking at the source model. Verify units, scale, boundaries, mesh detail where relevant, and the selected configuration. A correct editable model can still have an incorrect or obsolete exported file.
Agree with the programmers
Record the mechanism’s zero position, which direction counts as positive, its travel limits, and where the sensors go. Talk through what tells the code to start each action. That might be a sensor detecting a game piece, an reaching a position, a claw closing, or a delay you have tested.
Discuss jams, missing objects, power loss, and manual override. If a roller should stop when a game piece reaches the waiting area, write that down for the programmer. Go through the planned code sequence alongside the CAD layout so both describe the same movement.
Check whether a mounting change affects camera , encoder references, or motor direction. Update those dependencies before the new parts reach the .
Record the decision
Use a compact review note:
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Design | Document and named version |
| Next step | Prototype, revise, or manufacture |
| Changes | Specific part or interface, action, and responsible person |
| Uncertainty | The test or measurement still needed |
| Recheck | What must be inspected after the change |
For example, if a transfer misses when the object arrives sideways, the next step may be an adjustable centering-guide test rather than a full new outtake. After choosing the guides, check where the game piece arrives and which way it faces.
Create a named version at the agreed release point. Keep the approved drawings, exports, and BOM tied to it. After the build, use CAD teamwork to record physical changes and CAD troubleshooting to repair model problems without losing the design intent.