Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-lqqdg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-30T00:58:22.465Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrated Physical-Digital Workflow in Prototyping – Inspirations from the Digital Twin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

C. Snider ,
L. Kent ,
M. Goudswaard  and
B. Hicks
C. Snider*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
L. Kent
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
M. Goudswaard
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
B. Hicks
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
*
chris.snider@bristol.ac.uk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Prototyping uses many models over its process, with varying strength and weakness offered by those in the physical vs digital domains. Working across domains is necessary but introduces a transition cost, process complexities, and risks lost learning. Drawing from Digital Twinning, this work explores the creation of integrated physical-digital prototyping workflows, where technology enables simultaneous cross-domain working. It contrasts four case-study implementations of integrated prototyping workflow to current practice, exploring feasibility, value, and implementation challenges.

Keywords

prototypingimmersive technologydesign toolsdigital designdigital twinning

Information

Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 1767 - 1776
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

Camburn, B., Viswanathan, V., Linsey, J., Anderson, D., Jensen, D., Crawford, R., Otto, K., et al. . (2017), “Design prototyping methods: state of the art in strategies, techniques, and guidelines”, Design Science, Vol. 3 No. Schrage 1993, p. e13, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.10.Google Scholar
Coutts, E.R., Wodehouse, A. and Robertson, J. (2019), “A comparison of contemporary prototyping methods”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, Vol. 2019-Augus, pp. 1313–1321, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.137.Google Scholar
Deloitte. (2021), Tech Trends 2021.Google Scholar
Erichsen, J.F., Sjöman, H., Steinert, M. and Welo, T. (2021), “Protobooth: Gathering and analyzing data on prototyping in early-stage engineering design projects by digitally capturing physical prototypes”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 65–80, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0890060420000414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gio, N., Brisco, R. and Vuletic, T. (2021), “Control of a Drone With Body Gestures”, ICED 2021: International Conference on Engineering Design, Gothenburg, Sweden, pp. 761–770, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2021.76.Google Scholar
Goudswaard, M., Gopsill, J., Harvey, M., Snider, C., Bell, A. and Hicks, B. (2021), “Revisiting Prototyping in 2020: a Snapshot of Practice in Uk Design Companies”, ICED 2021: International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 1, pp. 2581–2590, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2021.519.Google Scholar
Goudswaard, M., Snider, C., Gopsill, J., Jones, D., Harvey, M. and Hicks, B. (2021), “The prototyping fungibility framework”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 100, Elsevier, pp. 271–276, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.05.066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grieves, M. (2014), Digital Twin: Manufacturing Excellence through Virtual Factory Replication.Google Scholar
Harlan, J., Schleich, B. and Wartzack, S. (2021), “a Systematic Collection of Natural Interactions for Immersive Modeling From Building Blocks”, ICED 2021: International Conference on Engineering Design, Gothenburg, Sweden, pp. 283–292, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2021.29.Google Scholar
Houde, S. and Hill, C. (1997), “What do Prototypes Prototype?”, Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, Second., Elsevier Science B.V., pp. 367–381, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/b978-044481862-1/50082-0.Google Scholar
Jones, D., Snider, C., Nassehi, A., Yon, J. and Hicks, B. (2020), “Characterising the Digital Twin: A systematic literature review”, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, CIRP, Vol. 29, pp. 36–52, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2020.02.002.Google Scholar
Kent, L., Snider, C., Gopsill, J. and Hicks, B. (2021), “Mixed reality in design prototyping: A systematic review”, Design Studies, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 77, p. 101046, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101046.Google Scholar
Kent, L., Snider, C. and Hicks, B. (2019), “Early stage digital-physical twinning to engage citizens with city planning and design”, 26th IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, VR 2019 - Proceedings, https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/VR.2019.8798250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, L., Snider, C. and Hicks, B. (2019), “Engaging Citizens with Urban Planning Using City Blocks, a Mixed Reality Design and Visualisation Platform”, AVR 2019, Salento, Italy, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25999-0_5.Google Scholar
Kent, L., Snider, C. and Hicks, B. (2021), “Mixed Reality Prototyping: Synchronicity and Its Impact on a Design Workflow”, ICED 2017: International Conference on Engineering Design, pp. 2117–2126, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2021.473.Google Scholar
Lauff, C.A., Kotys-Schwartz, D. and Rentschler, M.E. (2018), “What is a prototype? What are the roles of prototypes in companies?”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 140 No. 6, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4039340.Google Scholar
Liker, J.K. and Pereira, R.M. (2018), “Virtual and physical prototyping practices: Finding the right fidelity starts with understanding the product”, IEEE Engineering Management Review, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 71–85, https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EMR.2018.2873792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, I. (1968), “A head-mounted three dimensional display”, AFIPS ’68 (Fall, Part I):, pp. 757–764, DOI: 10.1145/1476589.1476686.Google Scholar
Ulrich, K. and Eppinger, S.D. (2012), Product Design and Development, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Association, XR. (2020), 2020 Augmented and Virtual Reality Survey Report: Industry Insights into the Future of Immersive Technology, Vol. 4.Google Scholar