James L Adams—People and Products

New Venture

I seem to have written posts for this blog for over 5 years (over 300 of them). I began the blog to discuss product quality, since it is as topic that has always interested me, and after a heroic and successful effort in the U.S. to improve manufacturing quality (which of course reflects on overall product quality), industry drifted off into other traditional directions (profit, grow-the-organization, etc.). As I mentioned in my last post, the manufacturing quality goals were nicely described in a classic paper written by David Garvin and published by the Harvard Business review in 1987, when quality was the hot word.

In 2012 I wrote my book Good Products, Bad Products, published by McGraw Hill, to pay more attention to such critical “dimensions” of quality that even though difficult to deal with quantitatively, are very important to human users. It is also mentioned in my last post, and discussed at more length earlier in the blog.

 I wrote my book partly as a text that I used to teach a course in the Stanford Engineering school (Good Products, Bad Products), that was taken over by Professor Dave Beach when I retired, who did a wonderful job with it until last year, when the course too was retired. The book suffered from lack of publicity, and perhaps a decreased interest in product quality in the U.S. Surprisingly (or not), although the book’s sales in the U.S. have been disappointing, it is doing much better in India, China, South Korea, and Japan —countries that perhaps are presently more sensitive to the value of quality in products. After all, it was Japan that awakened us in the 1970’s and 80’s. China, India, and South Korea are coming up fast.

But over the years, I also wrote posts on subjects I was also thinking about which ranged from the fit between the directions of technology and people, the joy of working with the hands, engineering, management, and so on.

I never sought wide distribution of these posts, as I wrote them to force myself to think more deeply about my areas of interest, and I did not want to become involved in a full-fledged conversation with large numbers of people, although the responses to my posts were thoughtful and flattering. But now I have been talked into a project that sounds difficult, but worth doing, by Tim Keely, a friend of mine who is an IT person of amazing talent at Stanford. The project is for me to go through these posts, pick the ones I think are the best, organize them, edit them, and allow him to make an e-book (or several) from them. I am going to try.

This will make my posts even fewer in number and perhaps more wandering in nature as I come up with new thoughts for the book(s), but I am looking forward to the attempt and hope you will bear with me. I will continue to write posts when I need more material for this project, or when I can’t bear not to —like commenting on ridiculous wastes of technology and money such as Trump’s proposed wall on the Mexican border, which hopefully will never happen, but should it, will set an all time record for lack of overall product quality.

So wish me luck. I’ll post progress reports as I go.

The Attraction of the Small

Why are we so attracted by small things? At one point in our marriage, my wife somewhat wistfully told me that when she was a little girl she never had a doll house. Well, this would not do, so I built her a doll house, complete with furniture and electric lights, and she crocheted tiny blankets and painted oriental rugs. I even had my mother, a water colorist, paint a few pictures at the proper scale (1 inch = I foot), and she loved doing that. Of course, I had a great time with the project and my wife loved it, so it was a win all around.. The doll house still lives in an honored position in our house (see photo), and now all of our woman friends, who tend to be in their 70’s, love it.

What is the attraction of small things. My wife collects folk art, and the next photo shows some tiny examples. But we have full size pots and such things. Why does she like little ones so much?

    

 

 

Gender thing? Not at all. I am writing this in my office at home surrounded by models I have built. The next photo is a British warship, made from plans available from the Admirably Museum in Greenwich, England – hand planked, rigged, and outfitted by me—no plastic. I do not even like oceans and ships that much, but I became entranced with the history of the British navy, decided to build a model of one of their historic ships, and  was hooked. I finally had to force myself to quit (after I built six or eight of them) because they take an unreal amount of time and I was getting behind in life. My insight came from meeting a  model builder who was building wonderful model ships in a glassed-in shop on the Queen Mary in Long Beach. His story was that he was a physician who had a large successful practice, but was ruining his health by staying up all night building ship models. His wife finally told him that if he didn’t quit building models he would have to give up the practice of medicine. To her amazement (and I guess unhappiness) he quit his practice.

I have made models of many other things,. The following photograph is of a shelf in my office and maybe in the middle you can see a small figure of a welder, which I carved years ago when I was working in an oil field. Why? I was surrounded by real welders!

As an extreme example of miniaturization, there are a large number of mostly men in the world making working models of engines, equipment, etc. The photo below shows a friend of mine who has been terminally bitten by model railroading. His train is a perfect replica, down to the stove in the caboose. If you look on the internet for "miniature running engines",  you will see more of the tip of the iceberg.

I have a working full size antique steam tractor dating from approximately 1900. A working model would be worth more than my real one, as well it should be, because it would be rarer and require an absurd amount of time to make. And yes, there are many people out there either owning or building one.

And this love of small things extends well beyond models. For a long time, I could not figure out why I didn’t get better at typing on my iphone. But I finally did a study and realized that my thumb overlapped six keys. I am good at typing with a full size keyboard, okay on a large pad, but still pathetic on my iPhone.   Also its screen size is ridiculously small, so it cannot deliver nearly as much as my desk top. But I like it because it is capable of doing so much for its size Also, it fits in my pocket, so I can break its glass protector with my keys. And flashlights, now that they sport LEDs and ion batteries, are shrinking so that they are easier to lose.

Maybe we like small things because they make us feel big and powerful. I used to love watching little girls reprimanding their dolls. Instant adulthood. And if I become really annoyed at my iphone I can throw it very far away.

Wired Magazine—in my Opinion, a Good Product Gone Bad

As you may know, I am very interested in the quality of industrially made products. Certainly magazines qualify. I do not set myself up as an arbiter of taste, and do not usually question other people’s likes and dislikes, but sometimes I am amazed at the direction some products take,I guess in order to make more money. Wired, which used to be both fun to read and informative, had the good judgment to jump early into things digital. It featured articles on new and exciting technological developments, explained the way things worked and had interesting statistics about applications. But then Conde Naste bought it, and the result might be an improvement if you are looking for luxury goods such as ten thousand dollar watches and three thousand dollar bicycles, graphics that make the text much more difficult to read, and yet more news and interviews about and with movie actors and other wealthy glitterati.

I let my prescription lapse at that time, but I seem to continue to receive it with various inducements to re-join the subscriber list. This seems to be an ear mark of many magazines, especially those who carry a large amount of advertising. They seem to want to continue to be able to add you to their subscriber list, probably to boost “readership” and demographics to maintain and increase advertising income. Conde Naste seems to excel at this. Perhaps I will turn them in for putting trash in my mail box. But just to make sure I am not making a mistake I opened the last edition (rather than just throwing it into the trash) and did not change my mind. It has little left for me.

The cover article has to do with General Motor’s re-entry into the electric car business. Not exactly new news, and I wish them luck, but I plan to wait and see (yes, one of my sons was an early Tesla employee). Ads for Kit and Ace (luxury athletic clothing ), and TAGHeuer (luxury watches) follow, On the back cover is the Lincoln Black Label MKX (a Detroit Luxury car) and inside is an ad for Morgan Stanley. None of these are widely sought after by the people I know involved in digital devices or applications.  In between are lots of full page ads (including the kind that fold out), articles such as one about the 20 most politically influential “Tech Insiders”, an article on the GM electric car (the Chevrolet Bolt) and one on trends in transportation (bold face statements taken from text turned sideways and put in the middle of the page on both). And of course, suggestions for the well-appointed techie, including a $2000 table and a $870 office chair. The articles end with one treating a bizarre brain operation that I guess was intended to make the person owning the brain (who paid for the operation) more susceptible to being hooked up to a computer?????

I perhaps am not being fair to Wired, but I miss the old emphases, and don't seem to get much from the new. I admit I have a bias against Conde Naste magazines, except for the New Yorker, which has done a good job of holding onto tradition , and one expects luxury ads in it. It is difficult to escape these magazines, as they tend to end up in doctors offices, dentist offices, and other places where one encounters waiting rooms—they are especially worrisome in doctor’s offices because they feature models who clearly have eating disorders. And they even appear in my house. As an example, my wife subscribes to Architectural Digest (she refers to it as a “guilty pleasure”), and I hate it. First of all, there is little in it about architecture. It occasionally contains impressive houses (usually owned by celebrities) , but the emphasis is on the furnishings and decorations in the rooms.  The items are all identified by source, and can be bought from dealers often listed in the magazine if one has a large amount of money to spend on such things. But the three reasons it annoys me the most is the staggering amount of advertising in the magazine (they should pay me to read it), the fact that very few of the spaces in the magazine show any signs of human habitation (no toys on the floor, magazines on the table, glasses on the drainboard, bicycles on the porch, or butt-dents on the couches), and third, the letters seldom of ever fall short of raving about the magazine and its contents. I admit that I have never written a letter to the magazine, and maybe I will to see what happens. I will have no trouble at all in finding something that I consider awful, and I suspect they will not print my letter. If they do, I will write an apology to them and a retraction to this post (maybe).

Big Shows of Outstanding Products

I am a fan of huge shows —the kind that leave you sure that you haven’t seen everything  no matter how much time you spend.  I have been to many of them—the War and Peace Show and the Farnborough Air Show in England, the Tri State Gas Engine and Tractor show in Portland, Indiana, COMDEX, the AACA annual antique car show in Hershey, Pennsylvania, the Iowa State Fair, the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Michigan, and so on.

 But strangely enough, for years I have been neglecting one in my own back yard – the annual historic car races/show in Monterey California. Many people I know are regular attendees and participants, but they tend to possess rare and valuable show cars, and lots of money, so I figure it would be a playground for extreme show car snobs.

 But I was wrong.  It does have a few of them, but the very large attendance is mostly people like me (car fans, but drivers of several year old usually dirty Toyotas and such things). I do like cars. I grew up and lived in Southern California and  during the 1950’s and 60’s I was a fan of all sorts of automotive competitions, from oval track racing, to road racing, to destruction derbies, to drag racing. I have also put my time into “sports” cars.  I have owned 1956 Austin Healey, a 1960 Triumph TR3, a 1959 Porsche 356a, a 1975 Alfa Romeo Spider, and a 1970 E-type Jaguar. I bought them all used and needing a bit of work, and they were all fun. I still own the Alfa and the E-type (definitely not ready for Monterey), and put in my allotted time nursing them.  In fact both of them need work right now, so I will probably renew my intimate acquaintance with them in a week or two.  I must admit that I like to work on ailing cars, and cars like these give one the opportunity.

 If you like cars, and people who like cars, and can visit this event, it is well worth it, although you should be prepared to bite your lip when you pay the admission price (you need the "pit" pass).  I was motivated to attend the show by a friend/ex office partner/ex student, named Matt Ohline, who is a serious car buff, and always drives responsive machinery.  He has a wife, two kids, and a good job as an engineer, but no fortune that would enable him to own the cars he drools over.  He contacted me and invited me to be his guest at the show  and was clearly the best of all guides, since he attends each year.   I drooled with him.   Suffice it to say I will be there next year, because, guess what, when we left at the end of the day I felt that I had not seen everything.

 The photos in this post are of swell cars that were at the show.  The first one is Matt's choice for the most beautiful car in the world. The final one is a huge racing machine outfitted with a Hall Scott engine (also huge).  I was particularly interested, since I own one of the engines, which saw its original service in a fire truck.  I could build a ………………….. No Jim, don’t go there—just go to car shows with Matt.

Nostalgia

My oldest son has some farm-land in the Sacramento valley in California.  He works at U.C. Davis and is very involved in sustainable agriculture.  He also grows vegetables a well as usual crops such as wheat, tomatoes, etc.  A year or so ago he acquired four work horses (Belgians – about a ton each) and set about integrating them into his farm.  It is close to the farm where I fiddle with old machinery, and yesterday I took a visiting friend up to check out the area.  Bob was spreading manure with his horses (who had produced it) and we stopped by to say hi and maybe give him a hand.  We could not stay long, but it was long enough to help him load a few loads into the manure spreader and ride around with him.

 My grandfather worked 20 acres of oranges with horses in Southern California jointly owned by my parents and grandparent  when I was a little boy,  but  I was so young I don’t really remember much about the horses. But visiting Bob with his horses made me remember much about farming when I was a kid.

 Work horses have some similarity to huge dogs.  They like to be scratched and petted and talked to, eat, and be around people.  But they have differences.  They have been bred to be unflappable, love to pull heavy loads, and are extremely well trained (they have to be, or the owner not only would have trouble doing his/her work, but would probably spend quite a bit of time recovering from bruises, broken bones, and other such inconveniences). 

 Of course the pace of horses is far slower than that of modern tractors. As a result, the pace of farming when I grew up was much slower and simpler than modern farming.  Not only do horses move more slowly, but horse drawn equipment is straight forward to understand and repair should it need it—no panic calls for the repair van.  And riding on the spreader behind the horses on a beautiful day was in many ways the opposite of working inside in a university.  Plenty of time to look at the scenery, think, listen to the birds, soak up the sunshine, and feel like something worthwhile was being accomplished. Although I was too young to become involved with my grandparent’s horses, I did get lots of chances to help spread  sweepings from Santa Anita racetrack stables onto the grove from the bed of the  family Ford Model B 1-1/2 ton truck.  Same thing – no critical deadline, no interruptions from one’s cell phone, no need to be highly visible in the world or have a great deal of money.

I certainly do not want to be a farmer, horses or not.  I fled the bucolic life as soon as I was able.  But I very much like farmland, farmers, and now work horses (although  I have no use at all for riding horses).  And it is interesting to me to recall how two families could at one time live off of 20 acres of citrus (a beautiful, fragrant, easy-to-raise crop that tasted good) when now 1000 acres is considered a small farm.  True, my parents and grandparents had little cash, shared one very used car, and were without such things as TV, computers, micro-wave ovens, air conditioning, and central heating. And since I did not live in town, I was not surrounded by people my age.  And I was definitely expected to do my chores.  But there were advantages to traditional country life, and I am glad my son can experience some of them. And I have to say, horse-drawn equipment was so simple and so well tested, that to me much of it is downright elegant. I finished restoring my McCormick mower (red machine in photo), and it is an example.

 

 

 

The Perfect Gift —An Old Rusty Tractor

The photograph  shows another project that will keep me from getting in trouble.  It is a model K 20 Cletrac tractor, probably manufactured about 1930.  It was given to me by the family of one of my best friends, Chuck Whitcher, described here,  who originally hooked me on the hobby of restoring old farm machinery, and who sadly recently died.  Chuck had wanted to give it to me but I resisted because my cup is overflowing with projects of this sort. 

However, I finally could not resist it, because it so perfectly fulfilled my requirements, such as:

1. I have had no hands-on experience with Cletracs, a very successful run of machines made by the Cleveland Tractor company.  I grew up around Caterpillar tractors, and my oldest son and I have several older models.  But Cletracs have fanatic and organized fans and fan clubs, and the owners of them delight in pointing out the advantages of them over Caterpillars of the same age. Obviously a chance to learn something here.
2. It is in my favorite condition – completely, but not terminally rusted, seemingly complete, and although not running, and probably not run for many many years, boasts an engine that with a large amount of effort, can be turned with the crank.
3. In its present state has low value (except to me), and therefore I can happily accept it as a gift.
4. It has that “Cletrac” look, from its Snoopy-doghouse engine compartment to its steering wheel (can you believe a steering wheel for a track layer?).  Also lots of track wheels, which will help make up for the local loss of Jacque Littlefield’s tank collection.
5.  In restoring it, I will meet large numbers of very likable people, who are not only owners and restorers of these machines, but know the way to replacement parts, if necessary.
6. It was owned by Chuck who was both a wonderful man and a mentor of mine.

The photograph to the left gives an indication of its present patina, and I plan to give the tractor special treatment to preserve it.  Ordinarily, I tend to de-rust old machines and paint them in original colors.  For this one, I will get it  running well, figure out how to smooth out the rust, and give it some kind of coating to retain it. I want it to be proud of its age, just as I hope Chuck was when he died at the age of 91. 

A Plague Of Advertising—More Is Not Necessarily Better

 I may be a bit unusual, in that I don’t think my purchasing habits have ever been much influenced by advertising.  In fact, I have always been suspicious of products that have unusual advertising exposure, because I figure that the makers of the product are desperately trying to get people to pay more for the product than it is worth. Neither have I thought that if I use the coffee maker that Roger Federer promotes I will be a better tennis player, or that if I buy a heavy duty pickup that I will be tougher.  Even more interesting, I now find myself avoiding products because I am tired of being constantly exposed to their ads.  Am I alone?

 There seems to be an explosion in advertising going on.  This is partly due to developments in media (the internet, TV,) which make it possible to “reach” huge numbers of people cheaply, partly because of increased competition to find and influence potential customers, and partly because of growth and increased sophistication of marketing and advertising as business activities.

 But what goes up usually comes down.  Is advertising really worth the money it costs? Do companies realize that people “tune out” ads if there are too many of them?  How many consumers, like me, are tired of  being constantly hustled?  And what is it doing to the aesthetics dimensions of living?  As  you may be aware, I quite often refer to the New York Times Sunday edition in my posts.  This is partly because my wife and I for  years have spent much of Sunday Morning in bed reading it while we drink coffee and munch on various unhealthy pastries.  We have been particularly fond of the Sunday magazine section.  We noticed some months ago, that the Sunday edition began including large slick-page “travel” or “style sections”, which consisted mostly of advertisements for expensive tours, or strangely unflattering and expensive clothes, typically modeled by young anorexic women and men. We instantly recycle these tomes, but I still cannot help but mourn the number of trees executed each week so that I will be able to receive these huge volumes that I never even open. 

 This dependency on full, or even double page ads, seems to be a survival strategy for newspapers and magazines. Some (New Yorker, The Economist) have held the line, but many (Architectural Digest, Wired) have succumbed to the temptation of big bucks.  But to my horror, today we received the much heralded redesign of the Sunday New York Times magazine (February 22, 2015), and guess what, from the three full page Cadillac ads in the front to the one on the back cover, it contains 220 pages, including some interesting articles, but also an incredible number of full color and often full page ads for everything from Carnegie Hall to jewelry, to kidney beans, to Miami hotels. As a comparison, I just picked up a copy of the magazine from a few weeks ago, and it contained 48 pages. Do you suppose that much of the difference consists of ads? Well, yeah!

 Hopefully, this Sunday’s edition was an attempt at a spectacular launch, and since I  have been a regular reader of the magazine, I admit the new version is a bit of a shock.  Will I get used to it?  Some, unless I simply quit reading it because I don’t want to spend the time trying to find the content buried in all the ads.  But it also suffers from graphic designers running wild.  How about two full pages for the title of an article (The Great Divide), turned sideways, yet. 

 This is an obvious attempt to modernize the magazine, and there are some good points in what they are doing, but I am saddened if modernizing means that content should be overwhelmed with ads.  Hopefully they can decrease the number and increase the quality of the ads and the products they represent .  And I love exciting graphics, but not at the expense of readability.

 

 

 

 

Product Quality and Time

Marian and I are extremely fortunate in that we seem to have everything we want in life.  But this causes certain difficulties when times come in which people traditionally trade presents.  Therefore we seem to have reverted to less serious gifts.

 Marian has two dressing modes.  One is levis and work shirt for her gardener and home life with me.  The other is very tasteful and sometimes striking wear for public appearances.  For her last birthday I found a prize in the window of the Stanford bookstore. I initially didn’t know what it was. I finally figured out it was a bright red blanket with sleeves, all covered with various Stanfordish images. It was so awful I instantly bought it for her.  It accomplished its purpose, which was to cause her to laugh a lot and give me a bad time about how men could never properly buy clothes for women.

 But then time passed.  She reads a lot in bed, and found that it was very easy to throw the thing over her and put her arms through the sleeves to  hold her book/pad.  More time passed.  She became very fond of it, and defended it strongly whenever I gave her a hard time about it.  And now, you know how little kids have their “blankey” (often a raggy remnant of something that made them warm and comfortable (and still does))?  Marian has made the awful sleeved blanket into an adult blankey.  Photo proof below.

When I gave it to her I think we would have both agreed it was a product of exceptionally low quality.  But now?  I would certainly hate to try to take it away from her. 

 But this is not unique.  The photo below shows my “every day” shoes.  I occasionally get comments like “those shoes are old and coming apart.  My retort is “but they are my old shoes.  I recently noticed a lady walking an old and beat up dog and staring at my shoes as I passed her.  I hoped that she would say “why don’t you get some new shoes?”  Unfortunately she didn’t, because I would have said “why don’t you get a new dog”

  It is perhaps unfortunate these days that we live in a society where everything is disposable, and people do not keep products as long as they once did, because I think one grows to love products over time, assuming they serve one well.  I had my first car many  years, and although it was not a very good car, I wish I still had it.  As I said in a previous post, I am restoring my father/son’s 1966 Chevrolet pickup, and even though my 2011 Toyota pickup is technically a much finer machine, I am eager to revert to the 1966.  Although I suppose my new OSX version 10.10 is a better operating system than the OSX version 10.6.8, I liked the old one better.  It was an old friend, and we interacted well.  I suggest that interaction time effects one’s perception of product quality, for better or worse. If a product serves you well, it eventually becomes a blankey.

Good Products Last—Oldies but Goodies

The  photo at the left shows two tools that not only do their job beautifully, but are inexpensive and have been around as least as long as I can remember.  The red jack on the wheel of the tractor is a Hi-Lift jack.  It has a tested load of 7,000 pounds, and can lift a load to a height of over three feet.  It can also pull and clamp.  It is extremely simple to operate—kick a lever up and it raises the load, kick it down and it allows you to lower it. 

It is sometimes called a farmer’s jack, since it rapidly does its job , absorbs tremendous punishment without breaking, and has enough capacity and stroke to handle most farm jobs.  I am not a farmer, but I use mine constantly to do household maintenance, work on cars, and pursue my old machinery hobby.  Incidentally, these jacks are manufactured by a number of different companies, but I have had the best luck with those made by Hi-Lift, a company that was started in 1905 and seems to be as dependable as its jacks.

 The silver colored object on the ground is a come-along, called by many other names, since it is widely manufactured. It is a compact cable hoist that is capable of exerting large force for its size and weight.  The one shown is rated at 2 tons and inexpensive.  Of course, it would be easy to get one with more capacity (maybe a four ton one would outpull a Hi-Lift), but although I often need to lift heavy weights, I seldom need to pull that hard.  My 2 ton one will pull any vehicle I own and lift any thing I need to.

  But the real miracle can be seen from the more close up shot on the right of the come-along hanging on the Hi-Lift.  No electric wires, batteries, leaking hydraulic fluid, failing seals, or hidden complicated mechanisms.  I love them for that alone.  They are all hanging out there allowing one to see how they work, and fix if they misbehave.  In particular the Hi-Lift seems to be almost fail-proof, and should something break, replacement parts are easy to get and simple to install. And I must admit, I do like kicking a lever better than pushing a button—especially if I am the middle of a frustrating job.

Product Quality and Capitalism

 In the New York Times Digest last Monday, there were three articles together on the business page that caught my attention.  The first was entitled "G.M. Disconnect between Managers and Engineering". The original article as it appeared in the newspaper is here.  It is concerned with defects that are detected in products at the engineering level and either do not get to the level of the organization that can solve the problem, or do so and are not dealt with, usually either for reasons of time or money.  This is neither new nor newsworthy, but probably we need to be reminded of it once in a while.  Engineers want products to be as perfect as possible.  At “higher” levels of the organization, schedules and profit loom large.  If people are killed (the ignition switch mess at GM, the Challenger explosion), or if the product is highly visible and potentially dangerous (the Three Mile Island shutdown), the media grabs hold of it and the impact is large.  This is especially true if it is found that management knew of the problem before.  It is not likely that product defects can ever be completely banished.  But managers should perhaps be more aware that eventually,  the cause of such things will be discovered, and the cost to the company will be far larger than if they were solved when discovered.   Unfortunately, the punishments at higher levels often seem to be proportionally less than those at the working level.

 The second article, entitled "Japan Seeks to Squelch its Popular Tiny Cars", available here,  concerns effort in the Japanese government to inhibit the production and ownership of keis, small cars that are particularly appropriate to the crowded road conditions,  high fuel prices, and relatively small trip lengths of Japan.  The government is apparently concerned that these very popular vehicles (40% of new cars sold in Japan last year were keis) are distracting the Japanese automobile industry from  more profitable larger cars.  The Japanese people, who have become used to the convenience and low cost of these small cars are rightfully annoyed.

 The third article is "Music for Nothing, at Least While it Lasts" (here).  It focuses upon the increasing amout of services and entertainment available over the internet and television either free or for very low cost (not counting the monthly payment to internet service and TV providers and the time spent blotting out advertisements and junk).  The concern is that this “boon” will be at the cost of the quality of the material.  It has an interesting and revealing comment from the musician Van Dykes Parks that appeared in The Daily Beast concerning a song he recently wrote with Ringo Starr.  He stated that in the good old days, the song would have provided him “with a house and a pool”, but at current royalty rates he and the former Beatle would make less than $80.  I must admit that I would like to finish a couple of books that I think could make a lot of people think about such things as creativity vs. control, innovation vs. tradition, and quality vs. profit, but probably won’t in the present scene of information overload and the need to market one’s own work.  Writing books is hard work and requires a lot of time.  I am not looking to spend even more time publicizing them through endless hours on the internet and doing book tours, especially since the book-reading population is decreasing.

 These three articles caused me to continue to wonder about the effects of unbridled capitalism on the quality of products.  Obviously high quality products should not injure or kill people.  G.M.’s safety problems are being blamed on its “cost culture”, a corporate attempt to minimize costs and therefore maximize profit and competitiveness—clearly good things in a capitalistic system.  Similarly, high quality products should fill people’s needs.  Perhaps cutting down on small cars in the country might protect export profits by further encouraging work on larger ones, which seems like a good capitalistic thing to do.  But, shouldn’t the Japanese people have the types of cars that fit their culture?  The area in which I live, would certainly benefit from much smaller cars.  It presently contains so many “normal” size cars (often containing one person) that they neither seem to move around so well any more, nor find places to park.

 And if people depend on high quality music, information, and entertainment from the internet, TV, and other media, and the media depend on that to attract us to their advertisements as well as on the money we pay them directly, where does the money come from to allow the people who produce such material to develop? Will the quality hold up?  Where will the future outstanding musicians come from?  Listening to the music floating up from the dormitories below us, drum machines seem to be increasing their presence.  Groups using them are more affordable, because drum machines do not require any practice or particular talent to deliver their rhythms and may be adequate for college dances.  But hopefully they are not a portent of future music, because listening to a simple and unvarying repetitive rhythm too long is a good way to be driven mad.

Stanford Good Products, Bad Products course, ME314, 2014

Winter quarter is almost done, but it does not seem like winter here in California, because the sun continues to shine, and the farmers (including my older son) continue to become depressed.  Perhaps it will never rain again and we will return to desert, where we began before building our immense snow-dependent water system.

 The course good Products Bad Products is also almost done.  The Course outline for this year is here.  But since I discussed the course in previous posts, I won’t go into detail again. If you go to the Categories section on the left of the blog below the Recommended books section, and click on "ME 314 Stanford course 2013, you will get some of it. But the web-site for the students “choose a good product and a bad one” assignments is no longer accessible from outside Stanford. Ashish Goel, who was one of the highly competent Teaching Assistants last year, and was in charge of all things having to do with the internet, was kind enough to put it back on an publicly accessible web site.  The URL is here. If you would like to look at some of the student choices and short discussions, open the URL and have a good time.  If you click on the title of the entries, photographs will appear as well as the complete short description by the student choosing the the products as an example of good or bad.                                      

 The course ends with amazingly well designed media-rich presentations of good products and bad ones based on each of the chapter areas of my books. Stanford students are good at media, and Dave Beach pushes it in the course, as you can see from the outline.

I wrote the book because the issue of product quality is extremely complex, subject to personal tastes and judgements, and in general difficult to define in a sound byte.  But by spending effort judging products and arguing about them, it is possible to become much more sophisticated when dealing with the topic. Try it.

 

The Beauty of the Old

  This is a Bosch jigsaw, a wonderful machine.  It allows careful control, holds many blade widths, has variable speeds, and can be used on ceilings, walls, floors, or metal and wood, on a bench, in a vise, or leaning against a wall.  It is fairly new (for me) and one of my favorite tools.

 The photo below is of a Barnes foot power saw, made in the 1870’s and presently in my living room.  It likes only one type of blade, goes only as fast as one can pedal, and will only cut wood that is lying on its table.  It belonged to my grandfather and was used a great deal not only by him, but also by my mother and me—especially me, since when I was a kid I got great pleasure out of making goofy things out of wood.  When my grandfather died, I restored it, and later, among other things,  happily made replacement pieces for the large wooden picture puzzles kids use in their early years. In fact I was in great demand by pre-schools to do exactly that.

   Now why is this saw in my living room, and the Bosch saw not.  The Bosch saw is well designed, attractive, and a joy to use. But the Barnes saw is BEAUTIFUL, both aesthetically and functionally.  People can’t resist pedaling it, with the result that I have put a small piece of plastic tubing over the blade so they can’t saw off fingers.  Its finest hour might have come during a visit by a wonderful woman named Jing Lyman, the wife of  the then president of Stanford.  Sadly, her memorial service is tomorrow, and the world will miss her.

 Jing was a powerful woman, who apparently when young had wanted to be a carpenter.  In those days, the profession was hoarded by men, but she did wood-working for a hobby and worked as a shop teacher.  When she visited, she was wearing an almost ankle-length rather voluminous dress, but insisted that I find her a piece of wood so she could try the saw.  I did so, and she climbed onto the saw and began peddling.  At the time I had it well greased.  Suffice it to say that her dress became so wound up between the greasy wheels and belts that it suffered terminal damage in the effort to free her. The saw now has no grease, and long dresses are not allowed.

  Much of the saw’s beauty comes from the graceful castings of which it is formed.  Someday I will calculate the stress in some of the members, because they seem surprisingly thin for the loads they carry—almost delicate.  Yet when it was built the knowledge to do that was not available. The curves in the spokes of the pedal wheel are to keep the wheel from deforming as the spokes cool and shrink after the hot metal is poured into the mold during the casting process. But the final effect is elegant indeed. The table is a very nice piece of hardwood, as are the arms that hold the blade.  There was enough paint on the saw when I acquired it to duplicate the color and the striping.  I think even my wife is proud to have it in our living room.

  It must be possible to make visually interesting machines, even if they are electronic.  I laughed when I read about Apple suing Samsung for using round corners on their cell phones like they do.  Do screens and keyboards necessarily have to show no individuality, and can people patent a form so bland, though elegant, as a cell phone?  The final photo is of a Blickensderfer Number 6 typewriter—perhaps the ultimate in small typewriters.   Obviously you wouldn’t want to carry it in your pocket, nor is it particularly elegant, but you should agree that it is more interesting to look at than your present key pad.

 

Concept 2 (all kinds of quality), and the Good Products Bad Products Course

The Good Product Bad Products course continues on its way.  I will continue to report on it.  If you want a preview, if you go to the left sidebar, slide down to “archives” and you will find a series of dates. Click on the word “archives” and you will see more, and if you look at posts I wrote during Stanford’s winter quarter (early January to March) for the years 2012 and 2013, you will find information on the course for those years.  This year will be similar. In fact, if you are new to this blog, and have not looked through the archive, you might enjoy some of the other posts that are there.

 The first lecture last week was devoted to the process of doing field research by use of video and the case of a very successful company,.  One guest speaker was Scott Doorley,  who has a large amount of media experience, showed examples, and talked about story telling and use of video.  The second speaker, Peter Dreissigacker, was a student during my early days on the Stanford faculty, and received a master’s degree in the Product Design program , which was at the time my academic home at Stanford.  I remember him well, as a large, happy, talented,  idealistic person, an Olympic class rower, and an obsessive drawer of nice pictures.  Upon graduation Peter, his wife-to-be Bari, and his brother Dick (also  Olympic rower) went to Vermont, and bought an old run-down farm.  These were the hippie days, and moving to Vermont not only placed one in beautiful and not overly-populated country, it was considered a cool thing to do.

 Their dream of working a couple of days a week as bartenders or in equivalent jobs, upgrading the farm, skiing and rowing, was interrupted by the need to make money.  They decided to make oars and sell them.  For  various reasons, they decided to experiment with fiberglass, and after the usual experimentation and contemplation, worked their way up to oars reinforced with carbon filaments, at the time new on the market, but seemingly made to order for strengthening oars.  Their present oars are far beyond wood.

 The result was not only a very successful company, but one that receives an outstanding grade as to be a place to work—as Peter said, if you want to live in a small town and if you like rowing.  Their web page is here.

 The company began as a family company, and still is, although it has 60 employees (a large family).  It provides oars to a very large fraction of the teams competing at international competitions and to top school rowing teams, It also makes perhaps the world’s highest quality ergonometer for rowers and others looking for exercise devices.  The ergonometer has become a feature of well equipped gymnasiums,  It not only provides excellent exercise, but it has spawned a large following who compete remotely and in winter gatherings in areas where it is not much fun to row on top of the ice, using their scores on the sophisticated electronics in the machine.  Finally, they produce exercise machines for competitive skiers, or if you are a skier, for the gym or home.

 Why are they so wonderful?  It is a company built on life-style, not profit or growth.  It is after perfection in its products.  It has kept a focus on its markets and listens closely to its customers.  It benefits from extremely long employment and devoted employees, and Peter and Dick and Bari are wonderful people and take very good care of them.  It is also very proud that although it has only 60 employees (a size where it is possible to operate informally and in which everyone knows everyone else), it provides two or three hundred other jobs in the area by outsourcing to individuals and small companies to produce components for its product.  No China—just Vermont.

  It is always a real upper to me to visit the company, or to have the pleasure of Peter and Bari’s company.  Happily we will get to see more of them, since one of their daughters, Marlo Kohn, runs a lab for “makers” (open to any student and providing tools ranging from 3d printers to sewing machines) at Stanford,  and she is on the verge of  having a grandchild for Peter and Bari.  In the midst of the Silicon Valley with its manic desire for growth and money, Concept 2 looks like a very good business model indeed.  If you are ever in their area in Vermont visit them, especially if you are interested in starting a company.  You might consider basing it on what you love, being patient in becoming wealthy, staying away from venture capitalists, and hiring people who love what you do.

  Peter Dreissigacker is still a large, happy, talented, idealistic person who rows disturbingly well for someone his age, and not only still draws nice pictures, but includes his sketches in his PowerPoint presentations along with text and photographs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stuff, Treasures, Realtors, and Life-Style

I recently spread a bunch of old newspapers on a bench in my shop to protect it from some painting I was doing, and on the top was an article in the Realty section of the October 13^th New York Times entitled The Trouble With Stuff, by Contance Rosenblum.  It is here.  I usually don’t look at the Realty section, but I read this, because this increasing attack against “stuff” is starting to annoy me.  What one person calls stuff is often another person’s treasure.

 The article is about the problem that realtors have in selling homes in which people (often old) have accumulated such large amounts of objects and materials that realtors have to work to get it removed.  Poor realtors — they can’t just move in their tacky “staging” and instantly make a sale (the writer is talking about New York, and even points out that it is a “tight” (good for realtors) market).

 The  author throws around the word hoarding, and points out that hoarding is now listed as a distinct disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (a controversial document) and an estimated 3 to 5 percent of Americans suffer from the condition (she doesn’t say who came to this grand conclusion and how).  And as an example she digs up the story about the Collyer brothers, who received national notice for dying with 120 tons of books magazines, and other objects in their mansion in 1947—over 65 years ago.

 According to my handy Dashboard Dictionary,  hoarding refers to (1) amassing money or other valuable objects and hiding and storing them away (museums?  The wealthy?),  (2) accumulating a supply of  (something) in a time of scarcity,  (3) reserving in the mind for future use.  Those don’t seem to be too evil or unnatural.  And I think that in most cases, the problem Ms. Rosenblum has is that strangers (perhaps especially realtors who love blank space), or even family members can’t understand that the material in question has (or had in the case of death) such high value to the persons who accumulated it—probably even the Collyer brothers.

 Ms. Rosenblum would probably consider our house “cluttered” (photo shows typical shelves in my home office).  We love it  the way it is, as do most people who visit us.  My wife and I have lived in it for many years, raised four kids in it, are leading a full and wonderful life, and like to be surrounded by objects that provoke fond memories and please us aesthetically,  And we are not about to “unclutter” it in order to simplify the life of a future realtor.

 “Uncluttering” can also be dangerous to one’s well being.  I watched two situations in which elderly distant relatives, having lost their wives, allowed things they loved and that reminded them of good times to escape the boundaries of closets, shelves, and drawers and fill the house.  In both cases the houses were then “organized” by professional neatness nazis hired by their immediate families to do so.  In both cases my elderly relatives died soon after.  Coincidence?

 But the realtors were probably over-joyed with the cleanliness and orderliness of their homes.  Probably they radically reduced their commissions.

Participation or Observation —Technology, sports, and athletics

 Some time ago I spent ten years chairing, teaching, and doing research in the Stanford University program in Science, Technology, and Society, which focuses on attempting to understand the interaction between the three.  I caught the habit, and think about this relationship every time I come up on an obvious change in one.

 The present Americas Cup races are a case in point.  The boats and the TV coverage are amazing. If you haven’t been watching, the capsizing of one of the Oracle boat six months ago is shown here. It gives  you some idea of the complicated and sophisticated nature of these boats. A long video of a race between the Italian boat and the New Zealand boat, which won the Vuitton cup in race #8 with the necessary help of GPS technology, since the race was run partly in heavy fog, is here (search through the video for the actual racing footage).

 The boats are at the edge, if not over the edge, of technology—hydrofoil catamarans with a vertical wing rather than a fabric mainsail, 72 feet long, 7 tons, 134 foot mast, and the latest in carbon fiber and titanium fittings, capable of 50 knots speed in a 15 knot wind.  But over the edge in cost, dependability, and skill and strength requirements for the crews.  They are huge, but relatively delicate, tending to get in trouble if winds are too strong or water too rough, but wonderful to watch—and apparently it costs on the order of 100 million dollars to participate in this event. 

 My wife and I probably will make the short trip  up to San Francisco and watch one or two of the races between the U.S. and New Zealand boat, but as in most major sports, we will miss the superimposed information and various up-close and overhead camera angles of the TV.  And I will be entertained, but not feel part of the game, since I will certainly never be on the crew of, or probably even ride on one of these superboats. If I owned a traditional sail boat, I don’t know whether they would inspire me or kind of spoil my fun.

I often wonder whether increasing technology and investment in sports/athletics and other activities is turning us slowly into a nation of watchers, rather than participants.

When I was in high school, our crummy cars were a big deal to us.  The “sport” of informal drag racing from stoplights, or on empty sections of lightly used roads, was part of the game.  I don’t remember any accidents due to this, because traffic was much lighter then than now, and our cars wouldn’t go all that fast. 

 There had been specially built cars competing for speed over a quarter mile on various desert dry lakes, but no precise timing available in informal competitions.  In 1950  an “official” drag strip was started in Santa Ana, California, and the sport of professional (pay to participate) drag racing began.  Originally it was possible to enter these races with modified production cars because entry fees were low, and car expenses consisted to gasoline to drive to Santa Ana. 

 But now, amateurs can’t play.  It once was considered noteworthy to get ones car up to 60 miles an hour in a quarter mile. Top dragsters are breaking 300 miles per hour in an elapsed time of under four seconds.  To put this in perspective, if a car traveling at 100 mile an hour passed the starting line and a waiting dragster and tripped the green light signaling the dragster to go, the dragster would catch up with the 100 mph car 1/3 of the way down the quarter mile course.  By the time the 100 mph car reached the half way point of the course, the dragster would have crossed the finish line. Another interesting number—the 500 cubic inch engine of a top fuel driver produces about 7000 horsepower during its brief run, more than the first eight rows of cars at the NASCAR Daytona 500.This kind of performance requires very high technical sophistication and vast amounts of money.

 If you never have seen an example, click here and turn your volume up.  It is a very short video of a race between two people,  John Force, who  is one of the all time heroes of drag facing and who has several kids now racing, and his daughter Courtney —a sweet father-daughter experience that my daughter and I cannot duplicate—too expensive and the technology is too sophisticated (also we would kill outselves).

 This is clearly a different world from my high school days.  After the sport became professionalized, and laws tightened up, street drags became much rarer, if not nonexistent in areas such as the one in which I now live. For a while,  I went to races to watch the action and be amazed at the equipment.  But then the cars became so fast that I quit going, because I couldn’t identify with the cars or the drivers any longer.  So I, like many people, ended up watching them on television or the internet.  Interestingly, my grandchildren and their friends seem to have little interest in owning or driving a car—  Perhaps because automobiles are so sophisticated that they are boring?  Certainly they are more difficult to modify than old ones, and it is more difficult to find and legally drive cheap old relative wrecks such as we had in high school.

The same thing has happend in athletics.  When I was in college, it was not such a big deal to play inter-collegiate athletics (especially in schools with crummy teams like the one I attended) because this was before the days of recruiting, sports scholarships, and big TV money.  I certainly was never an outstanding athlete, but I spent a lot of time playing basketball and other sports.

But now it is essentially impossible to “walk onto ” the varsity team of a major sport in universities such as Stanford, and equipment continues to become more expensive and facilities more difficult to find,   so people who are very good athletes are reduced to watching sports on TV or the internet and observing people wearing and using the latest equipment including vast stadiums and arenas outfitted with the latest communication equipment (and if in college enjoying an athletic scholarship or if professional a few million dollars a year), and try to get their exercise in gyms full of stale air and expensive high-tech equipment that looks like it should be in a rehabilitation center and gives us little sense of accomplishment or joy of being part of a competing team. Great strides have been made in arranging team sports accessible to kids.   Maybe we need to put more effort into amateur sports for adults, complete with less formidable financial and technological barriers to entry and participation.

 

 

 

 

Product Quality—Tesla Motors and How to Make an Impact

Tesla Motors was incorporated in 2003.  One of my sons. a green engineer who loves small companies and working on exciting things, but who had not worked in the automotive industry, joined them in 2005.  I have therefore been following the company, I must say with increasing pleasure.  When my son joined the company, it consisted of people who were highly motivated to convince the world that electricity was a feasible and in fact very attractive way to power automobiles.  In fact, electrically powered automobiles had been a long ambition of Elon Musk, one of its founders, its leading investor, and now its CEO.

 Due to the dismal performance of attempts to start car companies (Fisker, DeLorean), I suspect many people thought they would not succeed, especially because the employees were more Silicon Valley than Detroit.  Even I thought they had picked a very large challenge, although certainly a worthy one. But the company is succeeding beautifully, and in the process changing opinions and values in a very conservative industry with very conservative customers.  Even now, there are rumors of troubles and problems with the cars and the company running around, but these are founded on love of large V-8 engines. the smell of gasoline, and on nostalgia, not on reality. Reality can better be seen by the awards and enthusiasm the model S is getting, by its sales and back orders, and better yet, by driving one.

Last Sunday my son took my wife and I out riding in a model S that he was acquiring some data on, and it is very difficult to criticize.  It is beautiful, luxurious, handles magnificently, reaches 60 mph in slightly over 4 seconds, and has a range of over 200 miles.  If you are not familiar with the car, here is its Wikipedia write-up.

 The only concern I would have if I owned one is that the digital opportunities are so lavish that one might worry about driver distraction.  The company is building rapid charging stations and battery swapping stations as fast as it can to augment the basic process of charging the battery through 220 volt house current. And it is exporting to Europe and about to start exporting to Asia (but built in California).

 The Model S is pricey.  But that is reasonable to expect from a radically new product.  The first Tesla product, the roadster, was relatively more expensive, since it was a simpler and a less luxuriously finished machine.  It received a great deal of attention, not only because of its energy saving, but also because if its performance, its striking appearance, and perhaps because only 1000 of them were made.  The model S will be followed by the model X, which will be a crossover (a combination of a sports sedan and a minivan) built on the same platform with the same performance. Following that the company plans to release what they call Generation 3, which is targeted to cost approximately half of the price of the Model S, and be aimed for mass market sales—one of Tesla’s original goals.  Musk promises that it will be consistent with the Model S —a unique, advanced, and exciting machine with no desire for gasoline.

 Say what you will, but in only ten years, Tesla has produced two sensational automobiles, is producing electric drive trains for other manufacturers (Daimler and Toyota), and has changed the attitude of many doubters of the attractiveness and desirability of electrically powered cars.  And it has done so through undeniably high quality products.

 

 

 

Craftsmanship, Guy Watson, Ole Fahlin, and Propellers—Post #2

I am not  an extreme airplane freak, although I must admit I like them a lot—and I did serve a brief tour in the Air Force at Edwards A.F.B. after college, and worked at the Jet Propulsion Lab for a number of years.  But I have always been particularly fascinated by propellers, because they combine sophisticated function with elegant beauty.  So it was easy to be caught in the spell of   my friend Guy Watson and his mentor Ole Fahlin (see my post of July 22), due to their combination of knowledge, enthusiasm, experience, and skill.

 You can find an old short interview with Guy about making propellers here.   The person doing the interview is clearly trying to avoid technical material and asks very naïve questions, but it gives a bit of insight into manufacturing at the Ole Fahlin Memorial Propeller Shop.  Commercial and high production propellers are made with numerically controlled machines and duplicating machines.  But at the propeller shop, they are essentially hand-made one at a time using such basic machines as a drill press, bandsaw, belt and orbital sanders, and various hand tools, and when I first encountered the process, a frightening cutting tool driven by a flexible shaft.  It was the process of making these highly precise and sophisticated devices from wood by hand that particularly caught my attention.

 Another thing I found attractive was the quality of the wood needed to make propellers—  straight grain, no knots, no flaws.  A far cry from what one can get at Home Depot, or even at a major lumber yard.  It seemed an honor to be able to work with such material.

 In order to learn more about the process of making propellers, I commissioned Guy to make me one, and requested that he  work on it only while I was present so I could watch.  Step one was to find the wood and a glue a number of boards together under very high pressure.   Step two, as the video shows, was to drill a hole in the middle.  So far, so good.  He then drew a profile of the propeller on the blank with a template and used the band saw to cut close to the line—still fairly straight forward.  Then, to my amazement, Guy drew some rudimentary lines on the sides of the blank, and proceeded to push  it through the band saw time and time again, until he had a rough propeller form that was within ¼ of an inch or so of the final shape.  I had never seen a band saw used in this way—as a large carving tool—and it was clear that not only had he done this many, many  times, but he had a very clear three dimensional vision of what the propeller would look like.  He reminded me of the teacher of a sculpture course I once took.  When he worked by removing material, say from a stone or block of wood, he would begin by removing very large chunks. When I once asked him whether he wasn’t afraid he would take too much off with these initial chunks, he replied “Oh no. My sculpture is in there and I know exactly where it is”.

 Guy then used a large protractor device and a number of cross section templates at various stations along the propeller  to reduce it to the final shape using the previously mentioned frightening cutting tool and the sanders.  The process was both fast and slow—fast because of his skill, but slow because cutting too much means throwing away the valuable blank and the time spent. And the shape must be extremely accurate, not only for aerodynamic reasons, but also because the propeller must be perfectly balanced.  In fact he did the final balancing with the varnish that was applied to the finished wooden form along with the metal leading edge protection.

 The result was beautiful, but since I did not have an airplane to put it on, and since it was only six feet long, I took it home and hung it on the wall of my home office, where it still resides, as can be seen in the following photo.

But I was hooked.  I needed to make a propeller myself.  Looking through the many plans and templates in the shop, I found an eight foot propeller with a very interesting curve used on the Spad, a well known World War I fighter.  Guy agreed this was an excellent one for me to make, and so he found me the wood, we glued it together, and away we went.  I say we, because I had not spent years doing this, and was afraid that I would screw up this wonderful piece of wood.  So Guy hung over my shoulder and told me what to do and encouraged me until it reached close to the final form.  He then added a bit of skillful work with a balance stand and a thick coat of varnish and pronounced it beautiful, a finding that I agreed with 100%.  It is now inside the entrance hall to my house  over the front door—see photo below.

Being now fully challenged I requested that I be allowed to make another one.  This time I chose an 10 foot one that fit a 400 horsepower Liberty engine—also World War I vintage, and built in large numbers.  I did not have a Liberty engine, but I seemed to have managed to use my first two propellers to advantage to add beauty to my house, and I had my eye on a bare 10 foot stretch of wall in the upstairs hall over a couple of doors.

 This time, Guy stood further away from me, and even pretended that I was working on my own, even though I knew he was watching me like a hawk.  But everything went well, and I finished it in only about ten times the number of hours he would have required—see the photo.

What next.  Guy told me that at one time sixteen foot diameter four bladed propellers had been used on dirigibles and he thought he could get the plan for them.  But I think he was kidding me, and I had to admit that I would never have a dirigible and that a propeller that size could not fit in my house unless I removed the roof.  And also I realized I was up against one of my old problems, one that had arisen when I got on a run of making ship models (see terrible photo below—I didn’t want to take the glass off of the case) and found that this interest was eating up a frightening amount of my time.  After deep thinking and some valuable input from my wife Marian (what—are you crazy?), I decided to continue my career at Stanford rather than trying to qualify as Guy’s assistant.

 But it was sure fun, and now I like  propellers even more.

 

Craftsmanship, Guy Watson, Ole Fahlin, and Propellers —Post #1

The photo at the left shows Guy Watson, a friend of mine, with his P38 which he flew in the Pacific theater during World War II.  The one below shows him two days ago with Charlie, his perfectly restored MG.  The P38 went faster, and was more aerobatic, but the MG uses less gas and is cheaper to maintain. 

 After World War II Watson resigned from the Air Force, finished his engineering degree at U.C.Berkeley, worked as an engineer for the Coleman company , served as President of Midwest Plastic for three years, and then spent 25 years with the Lockheed Missiles and Space Division.  I met him during these Lockheed  years because he completed an M.S. and an Engineers Degree at Stanford, and took one of my courses—the kind of student you dream about.

 At Lockheed he met Ole Fahlin , who was one of the world’s experts at making wooden propellers, and in the early 1970’s he began to work with Ole on a Lockheed project, and also to learn the skills and the knowledge necessary to be a propeller expert.  I met Fahlin while visiting Guy at Ole’s propeller shop, which was then in Morgan Hill, California, in a round glass building at the entrance to an extremely airplane-oriented golf and country club which featured a restaurant called the Flying Lady (the wife of the owner) in which large models of airplanes continually flew over one's head on an endless chain as one ate one’s meal., several barns full of collections including a Ford Tri-Motor, and a runway down the middle of the golf course,

 Ole by then had become not only a legend, but a very amusing character.  Once I tried to find out from him how he had learned so much about propellers, and he informed me that he tested them after he built them, and had been learning since he had begun his business (by the time he died in his 90’s he had been building them for over 65 years).  But when I asked him what he learned by testing them, he simply would reply “whether they were right”, or “how to improve them”.  He not only had all the data, but clearly unprecedented “feel”.

 When Ole retired, Guy took over the business and began manufacturing and repairing propellers for experimental and antique airplanes.  When the Flying Lady went out of business, the Wings of History Museum  in San Martin California offered Guy and his crew space, and the result is now the Ole Fahlin Memorial Propeller shop, the only one of its kind licensed by the F.F.A.on the west coast.

 In the time that he has spent  building propellers, Guy has replaced Ole as the go-to-man in the field.  Although he retired last year, he now consults for the group, and is often found in the shop. The Photographs at the bottom of the post show a Watson propeller he built for the man on the left, who owns a Fokker D-VII.  The second shows  one he built for a Jenny.  The third  shows one that is on a Sopwith Snipe that hangs in the World War I area in the National Aerospace Museum in Washington D.C.

 Not only are these propellers extremely technically sophisticated products, but they are beautifully made and not only functional, but beautiful forms.  This is craftsmanship of the highest level.  In my next post I will tell you a bit more about Watson and the making of wooden propellers, and my narrow escape from dropping my professor job, my consulting, and my income, and going to work as a beginning  apprentice with him.  As I have mentioned, I love working with my hands, and what he does is the ultimate, with high level technology thrown in for good measure. 

 

 

 

 

Product Quality—More Old Machines With Soul

In my last post I talked about two reasonably small machines I have restored.  I received a question as to whether I had restored larger ones.  Sure.  Many.  Here are photos of three.  The first is a John Deere Model 55 Harvester, produced in the late 1940’s.  A nice feature is that all mechanisms are exposed, rather than being hidden behind sheet metal, as is the case of modern harvesters.  Perhaps a bit unsafe, but you can see what it does by looking at it

 The second is an Austin road roller built around 1914 and weighing about 15 tons.  It is powered by a large single cylinder engine equipped with huge 5-1/2 foot diameter flywheels intended to smooth out the power to the wheels.  It was eventually replaced with a roller using a two-cylinder engine and smaller flywheels, a combination that could be better balanced and therefore have less tendency to leave ripples in the asphalt.  It is a work in progress and I am now planning to fit it with it’s
emergency brake and an a compressed air starting system.

 Finally the third is a Northwest crane, built in the 1930’s and capable of being used not only as a crane, but to move dirt and rocks when equipped with a drag line or clamshell bucket, or rigged as a power shovel.  I have the buckets but  unfortunately I am missing a winch and a clutch necessary to rig it as a power shovel, but I will eventually find (or make) them.

 The crane is a particularly interesting machine because of the mechanical gadgetry necessary to get all of the necessary motions (front and back travel and turns, boom swing and position, winch functions) out of a single engine.  It depends on a complicated collection of gears, clutches, and brakes, and operating it requires many more levers and foot pedals than the operator has hands and feet.  It is particularly challenging to work on, not only because of its complexity, but also because most of the parts seem to be slightly heavier than I can lift.  In a sense the older steam powered machines were mechanically simpler because they utilized a single boiler that fed steam to separate engines that powered the necessary motions.  But my gasoline engine does not require heating up, cooling down, or cleaning out when I operate it.

 Why do I do this kind of stuff?  I love old heavy machinery, and for me, finding it, learning about it,  restoring it, and fiddling with it has always been a terrific balance to being a professor. I am better at thinking esoteric thoughts if my fingernails are dirty.  I suspect Marian sometimes thinks I am weird for doing this sort of thing, but I suspect  she knows how really weird I would be if I didn’t. 

An Outstanding Product – the Porsche 911

The first Porsche model 911 was sold in 1963.  Although it has been upgraded many times, and the model number internal to the Porsche company has changed several times, it is still sold as the model 911.  The photographs show the 1963 model and the 2013 model and  illustrate the slow and steady change of something that Porsche had gotten right in the beginning. Over 800.000 of the model 911 have been sold, The 911 is discussed on the automobile page of the May 26 New York Times, in an article entitled "Timeless, but Not Frozen in Time”  It is here.  you want more history, click here for the Wikipedia page. 

I drove a 1959 model 356A Porsche for 20 years, and loved it, although it had some shortcomings.  It was a souped up and more luxurious Volkswagen Beetle, and inherited the Volkswagen swing-axle suspension, which could become a bit scary at times.  The engine had been modified to include aluminum cylinders and pistons, which wore enough to produce an unacceptable amount of piston slap (I replaced them with iron) . I never made the switch to the 911 because of burgeoning family and possessions, but the 356 was sure fun, and I have from time to time admired the 911.  My older son had a 911 for a while, and now has my old 356.

The reason I admire this car is the success of the original one followed by a slow progression of changes which has allowed it to retain its position for 50 years.  The original 911 was a much better car of its type (sports car) than was the 356, which was in turn considered outstanding if compared to its competition in its early days.  The 911 had a much improved suspension, a 6 cylinder rear mounted air-cooled engine designed for the job, and other improvements, although it obviously was a descendent of the 356.  Since that time it has become a bit larger, a bit heavier, and “modernized” to include many features that continually improve its performance and satisfy the modern-day customer. Some features have been lost (air cooled engine), but it still retains its unique personality and its 6 cylinder flat rear mounted engine.

I cannot help but be impressed by an automobile that has been a leader in its class for 50 years and retained as much of its identity and appeal.  Many other sports cars available in 1963 are no longer manufactured.  The Corvette was around then, and is certainly still available, but has never quite been considered a sports car.  It  goes fast, but never has had the charisma or agility of the Porsche.  When I bought the model 356, it was considered by many to be the best sports car available within the reach of people like me (aerospace engineer).  It still has that reputation among enough people to maintain its mystique.  A tribute to Ferdinand Porsche and the often admired “German Engineering”.

 

Product Quality - Bicycles

My wife and I recently had dinner with a couple of friends who are in their late 80’s, and move slowly in their walkers, but still ride their bicycles.  In fact one of them still has an office at Stanford and and regularly commutes there to work on his bicycle.  I was talking with him about good products and bad products, and he stoutly maintained that the common bicycle is one of the all-time great products – that people had gotten it right many years ago, and give or take new versions, new materials, new approaches to such things as brakes, gears, saddles, and pedals, and challenges from such things as recumbents, the bicycle has not changed significantly in his memory.

 This made me think, and I realized that I have ridden bicycles ever since I can remember, and probably now take them for granted.   I Started with a balloon tired, single speed, typically heavy version, which took me to school and back, and let me ride with my friends until it was eclipsed by a car (although the bike still hangs in my basement).  I then left bicycles until after college and the Air Force, but rediscovered them when a friend and I spent a few months  touring Europe on duplicates of a bicycle that had done well in the Tour de France the year before.  After I became use to riding a bicycle again, to say nothing of ten speeds, very light weight, an initially  painful seat, dropped handlebars, and an entirely new bodily position, I fell madly in love it (it hangs in my older son’s garage).  I have ridden bicycles consistently ever since, and am now dependent on them for getting around the local area, riding in the hills for exercise, and especially getting around the Stanford campus.  And I must admit I find it satisfying to ride past automobiles that are fighting their way through local traffic.

 Without bicycles, Stanford would not work nearly as well.  The campus is large and continues to expand, administrative offices are far apart, dormitories are far from classrooms, and although classrooms are far apart, the University still clings to ten minute class breaks.  Although retired, I maintain an office on campus and still attend various meetings and functions.  Walking everywhere might be good for me, but life is short.  Bicycle traffic on campus is heavy and seems disorganized and perhaps hazardous to those not riding, but actually is surprisingly free of accidents and fun to be part of.  The bicycles cover the spectrum from high performance to low and expensive to junk, and from single speed to many.

This photo is me on my present bicycle returning home from my office (a short trip).  I realize I am not wearing a helmet, which is stupid and dangerous, but unfortunately I take many short trips while on campus, am not used to wearing a hat, and therefore tend to lose helmets and generally spend too much time putting them on and taking them off. I wear them when riding longer distances fast on roads full of cars, and endure the censure (especially from grand children and my wife) of not wearing one all of the time.  The only person I have ever known who wore  his helmet all of the time (including while lecturing and in meetings) is a Nobel Laureate.

 The ideal campus bicycle is rugged, performs well, and shows enough wear not to be considered worth stealing.  Mine qualifies.  It needs to be a bit more beat up, but will get there.  It is a mountain bike, even though I do not ride it in mountains, but it has the advantages of outstanding brakes (very important), does not mind jumping curbs (convenient), and is highly maneuverable.   It has more gears than I need, but that was part of the package.  I bought it new for a very reasonable price because it was painted green, and apparently the dealer had difficulty selling it, because green was not cool that  year.

 And I agree with my friend.  Granted that they vary over many parameters, bicycles in general are an outstanding product.  Traffic and air pollution were much more reasonable in Beijing before cars began replacing bicycles.  And people probably got more exercise and reached their destinations more quickly.

Product Quality and Nostalgia.

Looking at the automobile page in the Sunday April 7^th New York times, I read an article by Jim Koscs about how a 1966 Cadillac was left to a 17 year old boy named Ray Knox in 1976 by an elderly lady who he helped in life and who in return treated him like an adopted grandson. He still has it, it is in great shape, and he obviously loves it deeply.  I am sure it reminds him of wonderful times and a wonderful woman. 

 My wife and I are reminded of past pleasures by objects, and seem to have surrounded ourselves with them.  My shop is full of old hand tools I don’t use, my office with things I have collected in various travels, and my basement with products that I no longer use, but that have served me well, or that I am fond of for other reasons. 

  This photograph is of a couple of Apple computers I used to use, that I keep because they are visually interesting.  I don’t have any fond memories of using them.  But today’s computers although elegant in appearance, are not very interesting in appearance.  These two were, and are, fun to look at, although I will never use them again.

 Some of these pleasures are vicarious. The photo below is os a 1975 Alfa Romeo that was my oldest son’s first major purchase upon graduating from college, and then became the entree to my wife's sport car period.  I have never driven it much because I don't really fit into it but it is fun, and  I keep it because  it reminds me of my son’s happiness to be on his own in Colorado with a new job and of my wife’s pleasure at zipping around in something Italian with the top down.  Beside, it will make a great car for a grandkid some day—maybe for the daughter of the very same son.

 Nostalgia for products can definitely cause one to fill up a lot of space.  But there are advantages to doing so.  Old products definitely remind one of past good times and experiences, which are usually even better in memory than they were when experienced.  My yard full of tractors is an example (one to the left).  It reminds me of the pleasure of growing up on a farm, even though I obviously didn’t want to be a farmer. To stay with vehicles as an example, older products also can furnish old-time luxury (the 1966 Cadillac), thrills (my 1970’s motorcycles), novelty (there is a similarity among modern automobiles), a culture (collectors of antique cars), and even be good investments (my XKE Jaguar if I restored it).

 But in order for products to produce nostalgia, they must be of noteworthy quality.  One tends to bond with such products over long periods of time, during which they serve one and one serves them.  Many products I am nostalgic about both required maintenance, and were straightforward to maintain.  My first car was a 1941 Chevrolet, and I drove it for many years, during which I repaired it many times. We became one, I loved it, and I should have kept it. 

 I do not feel strongly about throw-away products.  I am not nostalgic about computers for instance.  I don’t keep them long enough to become attached to them, and hate them when they cease working and I can’t fix them or they are no longer competitive and become e-trash (except for the two above).  But I still use the hammer I used to put an addition on my parent’s house while in high school, and have lovingly replaced the handle and de-rusted it several times.

 

 

 

The Oxy-Acetylene Tank Set—A Good Product

The  photo shows my now classic middle-sized gas welding equipment.  Big enough to cover my needs, but also small enough to lift into the back of my pick-up.  It consists of the usual — Victor torch with cutting head and heating and welding tips, hose, tanks of oxygen and of acetylene, pressure regulators, and assorted related stuff (goggles, torch cleaning tips, spark igniter, cart, etc.) The equipment is sometimes loosely called a tank set.  I recommend that all households have one.

I use it not only for welding, brazing, and soldering, but also for a broad range of usages requiring controlled heat.  I have even occasionally used it to reheat my coffee on cold days when I am working out of doors.

The rusty mechanism on the table next to it on the old wagon is part of a very vintage McCormick Reaper (the one in the  history books) that I am restoring.  It is a crucial part, since it contains the shaft that rotates the arms that sweep the grain into the cutter and then onto the ground, and all sorts of pivoting parts that allow the arms to move up and down as they swing. The reaper is probably 130 years old, and has spent a good bit of that time outside, so when I acquired it the shaft had rusted quite firmly to the castings in which they turn.  I soaked the whole mess first in penetrating oil, then in old diesel oil, and even in used brake fluid, but the parts remained rusted together.  So I used the ultimate answer in such cases, which is to heat the castings red hot with my torch.  Since heat weakens rust and expands holes, the rust gave up with the result that the shaft now rotates happily and the arms go through their motion.  One of many uses for my tank set .

 The tank set qualifies as a very good product according to the criteria in my Good Products Bad Products book.  Costs are low for the capability it gives me, and it has never failed to do what I want it to do.  It is easy to use and fits me well, is nicely made, and fills me with positive emotions, ranging from nostalgia to an instant sense of accomplishment whenever I use it.  It is elegant in its simplicity, and lets me mingle with the welding culture. Environment?  One generally uses a so-called neutral flame (no particulates) with this device, I am stingy in my  use of acetylene, and I don’t use it that often.  It certainly is not in the league of my furnace, water heater, or gas stove.

 Also it is fun to weld.  It never ceases to amaze me how easy to turn two pieces of metal into one with a simple flame. I must admit I generally use electrical equipment to weld these days, since it is fast, more easily controlled, and allows one to avoid oxidation by using an inert gas.  But welding with a gas flame strikes me as a somehow purer experience. It's just me and the fire!

 

 

 

 

More Stanford Good Products Bad Products course presentations

This post covers four more presentations in the course on companies/products that students consider to produce good products, or at least provocative ones.  They were on the Symbolism and Cultural fit, Aesthetics, Elegance, and Sophistication, and Global Fit chapters of my book.  Once again the presentations were excellent.  I never cease to be impressed by Stanford students.

 The first presentation was on the cultural significance of the “fixie”, or fixed gear bike – light weight, one speed, no free wheel (pedals cannot be stopped while bike is moving), often only one or no brakes. (see the Wikipedia page here).  The pure form is used in track racing, less exotic ones (originally hand assembled from available parts) became symbolic of New York messengers, then hipsters, and now of a more widely spread culture, including quite a few Stanford students. “Fixies”can now be purchased in all formats from “pure” to including brakes, and even gears concealed in the rear hub (if you are in the culture, you may hiss).

 The second was on a startup named Radian (description here), which produces a nifty camera addition that allows time-lapse and scanned photography.  The culture is of course people who like photography. Each year this course costs me money since I discover a product I need, and this is my 2013 investment.

 The third was Cloud Nine olive oil (Elegance and Sophistication).  This is a small family owned and run business in Monterey county California, that produces very high grade olive oil. The presentation included not only samples to taste, but detailed instructions on how to properly taste olive oil. Website here.

 The fourth was on the Brompton folding bicycle (here) and concerned with the environmental advantages of such transportation.  This is an expensive, but extremely high grade machine that easily folds and unfolds to an amazingly small and easily carried package.  It was demonstrated by a person from a bicycle store, who claims that at one time he felt a bit uncomfortable riding it in public (small wheels and frame, etc), but now loves it so much he doesn’t care what other bikers think about him—he feels sorry for them because they don’t have one.

 

Another good day!

 

Needs, Emotions, Aesthetics, and Electricity

  I’m a bit late on this post because of a power outage during  the late afternoon and evening, which caught me with an uncharged portable and a dead desktop.  But it gave me a chance to think about our increasing dependency upon electricity, and the aging state of much U.S. infrastructure.  As to dependency, I can remember  power outages when I was a kid, and we would ignore them during the daytime, and light a few candles if at night.  But my normally fast moving wife is slowed down due to some recent surgery, and has been entertaining herself watching movies on the TV and working on her computer.  And I, of course, have become computer dependent.  Throw in our major dependency on such things as the microwave, the coffee maker, and other such modern marvels, and without electricity, we are much less impressive animals, and perhaps are less amused sitting around in the dark talking to each other.

 As to infrastructure, our power outages probably have something to do with a large construction project going on close to our house. A couple of years ago there was a gas main explosion in San Bruno, a town fairly close to where we live.  Eight people were killed and a number of homes burned.  As a result Pacific Gas and Electric (our supplier) has been doing a survey of gas pipelines, and guess what, a fairly main street close to our house has been ripped up for several months to replace  a large gas pipeline (looks like 18 inches in diameter or so), which of course is buried close to other utilities. the job is requiring massive amounts of huge equipment and numbers of people.  As I wait to be waved through the often one-way traffic, I cannot help but think about the many other elements of U.S. infrastructure that need upgrading, and the cost of doing so.

 Back to the Stanford Good Products Bad Products course.  The quarter is coming to an end and the student groups continue to report on businesses that produce products that they feel demonstrate the elements of quality in my book.  On March 7, reports were delivered on three products that have high emotional impact and fulfill various needs.  The first was Gatorade (website here), which has evolved over time from being seen as a functional replacement of electrolytes, to being a symbol of heroic accomplishment (often consumed in victorious glee and sometimes thrown on coaches).   The second was Klutz (here), a company that produces products that are both educational and fun and show a profitable use of humor.  The third was perfume, the presentation focusing on the making of perfume, but mentioning several companies that have become famous for a particular scent (Chanel #5?)

 The fourth presentation focused on aesthetics and on a Kickstart funded startup that makes a pillow entitled the Ostrich Pillow, which is intended for better nap-taking during normally awake times.  This resulted in some excellent class discussion ranging from the advantages of better support and comfort to take such naps (in class?) to the rather strange appearance of the pillow.  You can see the reasons by looking at the website here.  I guarantee you will have a reaction!. All in all another excellent day of presentations – lots of products to pass around, good use of media, etc. 

  I will write a couple more posts on presentations and then a final wrap up of the class, and then go on to other product quality comments.  I once again recommend the blog site here containing a large number of individual student nominations of good and bad products for an insight to present university student values,  some interesting and provocative products, and the range of quality in our industrial output. 

A Product I Hate

One of the reasons I hate to shop for groceries, aside from the ever-increasing size of grocery stores which makes it increasingly difficult to find what I want, and the profusion of marketing, “deals”, and other would-be enticements to buy things I don’t want, are the toilet paper style produce bags, available in either  low mount or high mount as seen in the photographs.  They are shown in their at-rest position, just waiting to anger the innocent.

  Like old toilet paper rollers, these devices are capable, (especially if low on bags), of not only unrolling more bags than desired, but of actually leaving their housing to festoon the bags across the floor.  The bags themselves are difficult to properly tear off the roll, confusing as to which way is “up”, and challenging indeed to open so that the payload can be inserted.

The photographs below give a hint of this, but you have probably experienced the frustration of trying to use them many times yourself.  If not, I would appreciate knowing where you shop. 

The first photo shows the bags lying flat (notice lack of marking where you tear them apart).The bags are folded in a strange  manner, and the next photo shows what you see as you try to figure out how to open one.  The photo after that is an indication of the opening when/if you succeed.  How about trying to put a head of lettuce into that confusion of thinner than tissue plastic.  And even if you do succeed in opening it, the next photo of the bottom of the fully open bag shows that they are diabolically designed so that the bottom is not obvious.

They are not only functionally a nightmare, they have a sleazy feel, an ugly look, and despite the optimistic note encouraging returning them to the store, probably are not very favorable to the ecology.  Also they are so thin that I have a few times succeeded in dropping a purchase through the bottom, which is non-relaxing to other shoppers.

 As a positive, they result in the opportunity to meet nice people.  I usually shop during the day, when many of the other shoppers seem to be mothers with children who would rather be somewhere else.  Today, I got to know a nice lady who had an unhappy child in a stroller and was carrying a baby who was having a temporary meltdown.  How about trying to open one of these bags and put produce in it with one hand while trying to calm down a couple of unhappy kids?  I  helped her with the bags (not the kids) and she was so obviously grateful that it alleviated the anger I had accrued from my own previous bag experience.

Another good piece of news is shown in the last photograph (apple by mirror).  Upon reaching home and emptying one of said bags I found that I had won an apple with three of the pesky little labels that you have to either swallow, spit out,  or peel off.  Wow!  Must have been because I am a member of the Safeway club.

 

Tegu, Honduras, and a quality product

Chris Haughey, the founder and head of Tegu Toys was the speaker in the course last Thursday, and did a remarkable job of not only telling a compelling story, but discussing the interaction of product quality and economics.  Tegu toys is located in Honduras, but sells its products mostly in the U.S. and other developed countries.  The website for Tegu Toys is here, and it not only describes their products, but also gives information on the story and goals of the company.  There are other websites about Tegu, because it has caught the attention of many people because of its idealistic goals and determination to produce high quality products. An article about Chris is here.

 In brief, Chris graduated with an engineering degree from Stanford and went to work for the Boston Consulting Group.  A business trip to Hondurus along with a deep interest in helping the economy of a poor country made him decide to quit his job, move to Honduras, and attempt to do something about their extremely high unemployment rate by starting a company to make jobs. After some thinking he decided that since excellent hardwood was available, and since there seemed to be a demand for high quality wooden toys in places such as the U.S., high quality wooden toys would be an excellent product, so with some help from his friends and his brother, he started Tegu.Their products are kits of beautifully finished wooden building blocks that contain internal magnets, allowing  them to be combined as desired.

 Chris did an excellent job of telling the story of not only starting a toy company, but doing so by employing people who had little education and few skills, and trying to keep the product both extremely high in quality and also affordable.  Like many company founders, he consistently discovered expenses and  problems he had underestimated, and had to cut costs over time,  but as of now, the company is in good shape and gaining visibility.  And the product, although expensive by many standards, is very effective.  Chris passed out a number of samples to the students, which resulted in an appreciable noise level of clicks and clacks as they happily played with them, even though they were intended for people fifteen years younger.

Tegu is a fascinating combination of idealism and economics, and experiences both the benefits and advantages of operating a factory in a poor country.  It is taking advantage of low labor costs, but bearing the weight of slow government responses and the complexity of international business.  The class was very positive about his presentation, but afterwards, I overheard several of them discussing the differences and similarities between operating a factory in Hondurus for products to be sold in countries such as the U.S., and outsourcing products to China.  Neither helps unemployment in the U.S.  but they tended to think that building products in Hondurus is better than building products in China — complicated, these international issues.  My reaction was one of being impressed.  I think I need to go visit them.

The Stanford Good Products Bad Products course again

Since my last post on the course (Feb 3). the students have read Chapter 7 of my book, entitled  “Aesthetics, Elegance, and Sophistication: Wisdom Through Experience.”.  The subsections are Aesthetics and Industrial Products, A Bit of Background on Industrial Design, Elegance and Sophistication, Product Form and Function”, and Some Concerns on Today’s Aesthetics”.   Once again I would like to refer you to the blog containing students assignments and comments that is here.  It will let you know what these words mean to the students.  This blog is being maintained by Ashish Goel, one of the two Teaching Assistants in the course, and who from my viewpoint is adding greatly  not only to the student exercises, but to the content of the course through the blog. It is stimulating discussion and the students are definitely understanding the messages of each chapter of the book,  Also the student groups that are summarizing the individual choices are doing an exceptional job not only of emphasizing the message, but coming up with additional questions for the class to discuss.

           As is often the case when seeking examples of beauty, elegance, and sophistication, the students are lured toward high cost products.  Certainly such qualities are to be found in many (not all) luxury items.  But I am always pleased when they find examples of  utilitarian articles that display such characteristics. The photos show three that I happen to think qualify —an airplane propeller, a small incredibly low-priced Japanese garden tool, and a human femur.

 

The femur is not manufactured in a factory, and therefore does not directly qualify for the course (although were I a student I might submit it just to "enrich" the discussion), but it is certainly elegant and sophisticated and you can be  proud of owning one in your very own leg.

The class also continued to review the student discovery videos and talk about product quality in general.  But the speaker of the week unknowingly did an excellent job of bringing up the topic of chapter 8 In my book— Symbolism and Cultural Values— which I will say a few words about in my next post.  His name is Michael Topolovac,  a Stanford graduate who has spoken to the class several times and become a good friend of Dave Beach.  He calls himself a serial entrepreneur, and certainly deserves the title. He first founded and served as CEO of Light and Motion, a company that  produced underwater photo equipment. It was motivated by his interest in diving and in photography.  But having developed software for handling the materials and scheduling of this company, he became co-founder and CEO of Arena Solutions,  a company developing product lifecycle management( PLM)  solutions for manufacturers and their global supply  chains.  He told the story of both of these companies, including not only what he did right, but also in hindsight what he did wrong—a rare and valuable input from people who speak to classes about their accomplishments. 

     But as to  culture, he is now co-founder of Crave (his co-founder being Ti Chang, an industrial designer with a history of designing products for women). The Crave websight is here.  It will tell you something of the company and something of Michael.  Its first products are vibrators for women, sex toys if you would, but what sex toys.  They are based on serious market research, a great deal of prototyping and testing, and are designed and manufactured with an eye toward elegance and beauty.  The goal of the company is to facilitate women’s pleasure in a way that is 180 degrees removed from present day vibrators, the seamy image they portray, and the tacky environment in which they are sold.  The company is, if you would, going for extreme quality.

 I truly enjoyed watching the class response to Michael, because he was talking of a topic that was awkward in the typical Stanford classroom culture.  They students were interested, but not totally involved in his discussion of the first two companies.  But they definitely woke up when he turned to Crave.  One of the women in the class described the phenomenon well.  She claimed than when he began his discussion of Crave, every woman in the class blushed and looked away from him.  But by the middle of the class, all of the students, women and men, were highly interested, because Michael is an extraordinarily bright person, and with his co-founder, is serious about his mission.  The Duet, the initial product of the company, might also be considered a luxury item, but I would bet that even though it was not his reason for talking to the class, he might have sold a few of them.  And he definitely gets my award for guest lecture bravery above and beyond the call of duty.

 

 

Product Quality and High Heeled Shoes

  For those of you following the class discussion blog , which contains the student choices for good products and bad products in the various categories covered in the course—if you double click on the titles, you will get the complete write-ups including the “comment” space, should you care to enter the discussion. Over the quarter, the discussions wll follow the flow of my Good Products Bad Products book.

  The last class consisted of small groups of students commenting on the assignments to date followed by general discussion, and brought up a number of interesting points.  Several comments were made that in many cases human fit and craftsmanship are often neglected because other elements of quality are seen as more important by marketing.  But it is often, if not usually the case that they can and should be improved.  Several examples were in the area of fashion products and cheap knock-offs of same.  The emotional and cultural aspects of such products were seen to often swamp the functional,  and such things as comfort, durability, maintainability, and craftsmanship often suffer. 

  The case of high-heeled shoes came up, as it usually does in this course.  I know women who have spent many years in jobs in which high heeled shoes were standard wear, and, like many people, gained pleasure in following the path of fashion.  But they are now paying the cost of having spent so much time having their toes stuffed into an inadequate and artificially shaped container, and walking with their ankles bent at an unnatural angle.  The cost includes such things as hammer toes, bunions, sore ankles and other miscellaneous foot problems.

 Being a man who has never been accused of being a fashion plate, and one who would probably wobble in high heels, I don’t quite understand the love women have for Jimmy Choo and his colleagues, but I accept that many would, if properly funded, challenge the shoe collection that made Imelda Marcos famous (or infamous).  In fact, I would go further and suggest that looking at history from the binding of feet through the success of en pointe in classical ballet, to the size of Barbie doll feet and the staying power of spike heels high enough to leave the foot almost vertical, some women might be happier with no feet at all, or at least smaller versions relative to the leg, such as those possessed by horses.

 But I won’t go into this obviously unsophisticated male viewpoint, because I have learned that I always lose in the following discussion.  To me, it seems that it should be possible to produce woman’s shoes that not only fit and otherwise do their job well (athletic shoes, boots), but that are extraordinarily beautiful, lead in fashion, and are consistent with the plumage involved in “dressing up”.

 At the end of my Good Products Bad Products book is a simple matrix suggesting that products can be scored according to their success in all of the quality elements in the book.  My sentiments are clear.

 

The Stanford University 2013 Good Products Bad Products Course

January 8^th, 2013, is the first day of the winter quarter Good Products, Bad Products course (ME 214, 314) at Stanford University.  I began this course in the 1980’s, and it has gone through several changes in name, course number, and department base since then.   David Beach has been teaching it since I retired in 1999, and has changed it in many ways, although he has kept the intent of the course the same.  He has continued to use my notes, and now that they have been published as a book, he is using it as a text in the course.  Although it is listed as a graduate course in the school of engineering, it will include students from other parts of the campus as well.  The majority of the class will consist of regular Stanford students, although there will be some part-time students who will be taking it remotely over the internet. 

 Classes will include a number of guest speakers representing companies and individuals concerned with and producing high quality products, lectures from David Beach, and discussions of the reading material, the speakers, and whatever other product-quality related concerns arise during the quarter. They will not only be reading and discussing my book, but will be  doing exercises similar to the ones listed at the end of the chapters.  They will write short papers on each, and I will talk about them and include some of the more interesting ones on this blog. I will attach a rough schedule to my next post to give  you an idea of what occurs in each class meeting.

The course concludes with a series of consistently impressive presentations on the material in my book.  Groups of students select the topic areas, do appropriate research, and being a bright and talented bunch with a love of media, come up with presentations that are entertaining as well as educational.  I obviously cannot deliver the entire course in a  blog to those of you reading my posts, but not taking the course.  But I will keep you in touch with the course, forward student work when appropriate and interesting to you, and in doing so hopefully expose you a bit to the thinking of present day Stanford students.  I will also continue to write posts on aspects of product quality design and manufacturing, and other topics not covered in the course.  Please comment  on my course-related posts, and I will forward the comments to the class, should they fit the activities that are under way.  The more diversity in input to the students, the better, and any comments you make should result in lively discussions.

Although I have been retired from active teaching for many years, I continue to occupy an office on campus, drink the coffee,  and heckle the people who continue to do the work.  I still find the opening of winter quarter to be exciting.  Although California weather is hard to complain about, it becomes a bit wetter in the San Francisco area, and the general energy level of the academic enterprise picks up a bit because it is not as much fun to go out and play. Hopefully I can convey a bit of this to you.

Welcome aboard!

New Year's Resolution for People Making Industrial Products

I resolve to do what I can to improve the product I am working on —in fact to strive to help it become the best of its kind in the world—or if I think it is already is the best of its kind in the world, to work on improving it anyway, because someone is close behind.

 In doing so, I resolve to consider not only the more easily measurable aspects of quality discussed by David Garvin in his now classic November 1987 HBR article (performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability) but also the more qualitative aspects covered in the Adams Good Products Bad Products book (perceived performance, performance/cost ratio, craftsmanship, consistency with human users and cultural values, aesthetic issues,  sensitivity to finite resources and the environment, and finally emotional appeal. (Garvin did mention aesthetics and perceived quality in his article, which was entitled Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality, but brushed over them as being functions of individual judgment—Adams says hooray for individual judgment).

 Finally I resolve to remain aware of the two cultures (the scientific and humanistic) mentioned in the Adams People and Products post of  Nov 1, 2012, and to the extent that I have a bias, for instance, toward quantitative reasoning and logic (which are good)  and away from aesthetics and feelings (which are not only good but powerfully affect people’s judgment of quality), or vice versa,  I will do my best to get over it.

Product Quality and Balance

Oliver Wendell Holmes once wrote a poem entitled “The One Hoss Shay”, that still is referenced by people associated with product design and development.  It is about a mythical vehicle that is so well designed and crafted that it lasts 100 years without failing in any way, and then completely collapses as all of the parts simultaneously reach the end of their life span.  If you want to read it, look here.

 More of such balance in reliability and durability would be nice in modern products.  Many products are annoying because some parts fail much earlier and more often than others, until finally these parts are no longer available and the whole product is junked.

  But there is another type of balance, having more to do with quality.  The photo is of my wife Marian in her 2004 Acura TSX, leaving early in the morning to control the world.  We bought the car new to make up for a beloved Honda CRX that she drove for 18 years, until an evil person roared out of a driveway and destroyed it. She didn’t want a big car, needed to drive grand-kids and friends around, likes nimble and responsive cars, and at times can be a mild hot-rodder.  The TSX is neither the fastest, the most beautiful, the most luxurious, the roomiest, or the best handling automobile available, but it is pretty good on all fronts. She has loved it absolutely for eight years. For her (and actually for me) it is an extraordinary blend. It is based on the so-called European Accord body (a bit smaller than the Accord sold in the U.S.)  It has front wheel drive and the engine produces about 200 horsepower and is easy on fuel.  It goes faster than either of us needs it to and is fitted with plenty of digital gadgets—Navigation system, climate control, sound system— but not so many that we will die messing with them while driving (a friend of mine has ceded the driving to his wife while he attends to the much more elaborate navigation system, the cell phones, the doors and windows, the TV, the climate control and sound system, and so on.) The TSX is also clearly a product of Honda, and we have always liked such things.

 I spoke of David Garvin’s now classic article in the Nov 1, 1987 Harvard Business Review, entitled “Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality” in my post of  Nov. 1, 2012. The dimensions he discusses are performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality. The TSX gets high grades on all of them.  In my book Good Products, Bad Products, I discuss performance and cost, human fit, craftsmanship, emotional response, aesthetics, cultural fit, and global fit.  The TSX also gets high grades on all of them.

 In the design, development, and marketing of many products, we often tend to emphasize only a few components of quality.  These days we are excited about digital control.  I just bought a new dishwasher.  Since the old one failed in its rather complicated control circuitry, and since I couldn’t find replacement parts that I considered reasonably priced, I bought a new one with the fewest cycles and options I could find.  I finally found one with only(?) five possible cycles, three options, a delay, and a large row of warning lights.  Of course, we only use the “normal” button.  The dishwasher will probably fail because of the circuitry necessary to allow it to do something we don’t ever use.  As people used to say when I worked at the Jet Propulstion Lab, “Reliability is fewer parts”—that's electrical as well as mechanical.

 Good Products should rate high in all components of quality—just like the One Hoss Shay did in reliability and durability.

 

 

Good Products—A Beauty and a Beast

The product on the left of the photo makes a miraculous froth of milk. In discrete letters, it states Bonjour, Primo Latte on the side, so we can assume that it is French.  It requires two AA batteries and does its job beautifully on fat free milk, low fat milk, and other healthy versions that my wife prefers on top of her coffee.  I am fascinated by it because it doesn’t require cream,  does its job so fast, and is so easy to clean.  It is also extremely attractive.  Its only downside seems to be that one must be very careful, or the plastic case breaks when changing batteries. 

 The product on the right creates whipped cream rapidly in large quantities.  No batteries, not breakable, and far from beautiful, but surprisingly enough, containing few worrisome chemicals.  The propellant is nitrous oxide  which is often called laughing gas, and can react with oxygen and form nitric oxide, which is a pollutant (both a green house gas and  a reactant with ozone). But pressure cans are a tiny source of this compared with industrial and agricultural processes, to say nothing of automobile emissions.

 The pressurized whipped cream (or topping, as it says on the can), is particularly miraculous if you happen to like whipped cream (which most people do) and have experienced making it from fresh cream, an activity which occupies quite a bit of time, and requires cleaning a bowl and the complex device used to whip it and figuring out how to store that which is left over.  Perhaps the pressure can variety it is not quite as good as “real” whipped cream. And I suppose its health benefits can be questioned from the standpoint of consumption. But it is certainly convenient.

 My rather large family was over for Thanksgiving dinner, and several of the members are justly proud of their pie-making abilities.  The adults in the family are usually careful to restrict themselves to healthy foods and caloric intake.  I equipped the table with a couple of pressure cans of whipped cream, and like everyone else, happily partook of the pleasure of dolloping huge quantities of it on the many pieces of pie needing sampling.  Several of the younger guests could be seen surreptitiously squirting it on their hands and licking it off.  As a result of these pressure cans, I have developed a need for whipped cream on an amazing number of foods that I did not used to know required it.

 Perhaps a sin, but a mild one—not even a jailable offence.

Metropolitan Opera HD Simulcasts - an outstanding product

I have always occasionally listened to an opera recording at home, and have seen a few operas live, but never considered myself an opera fan.  I never much liked sopranos and was not thrilled by the traffic, the cost, and the crowds involved with live opera, and could hardly believe that people actually sat through Wagner’s Ring cycle, a couple of the operas being some five hours long.  But I must admit I did not sit very close to the stage.  In fact, one might say I occupied the cheap seats.

Two years ago some friends of ours suggested that my wife and I attend one of the New York Met Simulcasts , and now I am an extreme opera fan.  Purist friends of mine claim that these simulcasts cannot compare with being at a live production, but maybe there is an analogy between being at a live football game and watching one televised with high definition onto a huge screen with outstanding sound, except met simulcasts are not interrupted by commercials, action is continuous, and the camera work and sound are to my mind far superior to those bringing you football games.  Also, the subtitles are superior to haranguing football announcers, and the behind the scenes interviews and insights into the productions are wonderful.  There is something to be said for live events, but also a great deal to be said for these simulcasts.

 To mention a few related advantages, the theater where we watch these is only a couple miles from our home, parking is plentiful and free a hundred feet from the entrance, seats are large and comfortable with immense leg room and arms with cup holders, everything from popcorn to ice cream and coffee are available in the lobby, and extreme informality in clothing is welcomed.  Finally, tickets are $20 or so. In my personal opinion these productions are much superior to the cheap seats at live performances.

 What have I learned?  Opera performers are incredible actors if watched up close, modern technology and huge screens do justice to the productions, and the subtitles and information that are available at the productions make operas easy to follow.  I am now most fond of Wagner’s Ring cycle, and I now like sopranos.  Finally, the productions do an excellent job of humanizing the performers and give insight into the impressive staging required. 

 To me, these simulcast performances are a use of technology I have difficulty criticizing (a  unique experience for me).  I often curse my computer, sometimes my car and leaky toilets, and always automobile traffic, but never these performances.  To me they are miracles worth far more than $20, and I cry when the hero/heroine dies—which is usually.   

 

Good Can Opener, Bad Can Opener

The photo shows two can openers that live in my kitchen,  One is an electric model designed by Michael Graves (a very famous designer) as part of a line of kitchen utensils for Target and manufactured by Black and Decker, the one in the foreground is a traditional hand operated one made by Norpro.  The Michael Graves design has a sleek, sophisticated shape,  is easy to clean (the cutting unit slips off and into the dish washer),  and has a cute/humorous look about it (note pink and blue knobs).  My wife loves it, and in fact has our kitchen liberally equipped with Michael Graves designed utensils,   The Norpro one is a mechanism that has been around for many years, now outfitted with larger, easier to use handles.  I would describe the Graves can opener as a delight to have on one’s sink, and the Norpro one as an honest and perhaps brutally functional design.

But, the Norpro device opens cans beautifully, and the Graves machine does not.  The Norpro version allows one to clamp the rim of the can tightly between the blade and the serrated drive wheel as the blade does its work.  The blade rotates along with the drive wheel, helping the process and delivering a rotary cut.  The Graves version requires that the can be held rather skillfully against a stop as the smaller drive wheel drives the can against a stationary blade.  My wife has learned the necessary skill to hold the can in exactly the proper position in the Graves can opener so that the can will behave.  I have not learned the necessary skill, and have to put up with re-starting the cut several times as the can is rejected, hopefully into my hand rather than onto the floor.

To me, two great lessons are apparent from these two can openers.  The first has to do with the power of the more emotional aspects of product quality discussed in my Good Products, Bad Products book.  For my wife, these are more important than the crummy can opening job the Graves model does.  The second is that good performance should be required before a product can be called good.  Designers are often justifyingly criticized for exciting and beautiful products that don’t do their job well.  For me, the Norpro can opener does its job so well in comparison with the Graves can opener that it is an excellent product, independently of its lack of sophisticated form.  Furthermore, the Norpro model costs less and has fewer parts to break.—and it opens bottles to boot.

Finally, why do we need electric can openers?  Years ago, cans were heavily used to preserve and distribute food, but now we have gone toward plastic containers and packages,  frozen food,  and rapidly delivered fresh food.  We use much less canned food than we used to, so the can opener does not see nearly as much service.  The hand-operated device can easily be dropped into a drawer when not used, dropped as a unit into the dish washer, and does not require an outlet plug or use electrical energy (not that energy for electric can openers ranks high among global problems).

 I have an old electric lunch box in my office.  It is made of aluminum and shaped like a standard lunch box, except it has a heating element in the base and an electric cord coiled in a compartment.  Above the heating compartment is a chamber with a lid to heat soup or other hot food, and a small surface to make toast or grill a sandwich.  I show it to people because most of them have never seen such a thing, and it invariably makes them laugh, because it seems like a foolish thing.  But I don’t think it is as foolish as an electric can opener.

C.P. Snow, the Two Cultures, and Product Quality

C.P. Snow, a scientist turned novelist, is remembered partly for a talk he gave (the Rede Lecture of 1959 ) entititled "The Two Cultures", in which he made the point that the intellectual life of western society was split into two cultures, the humanistic and the scientific, and that this hindered our ability to solve many problems. This was followed  by a widely read book of the same title. I talked about this in my post of 07/29/2012.

 From my experience in industry and in academia, the issue is very much alive.  The illustration by Matt Collins is from a column by Lawrence Kraus in the 07/29/2009 Scientific American, which celebrated the 50^th anniversary of the Snow’s Rede Lecture. His column can easily be applied to the present election campaigns. I am personally a believer in Snow's thesis, and since I enjoy both of these cultures, I have been often frustrated by people’s tendency to join one and criticize the other.

 The outlooks of both cultures are necessary to secure high product quality.  In a classic article entitled Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality in the November 1987 Harvard Business Review, David Garvin discussed the topic of product quality, and then listed the following necessary elements— Performance, Features, Reliability, Conformance, Durability, Serviceability, Aesthetics, and Perceived Quality.  This was a time when U.S. industry had spent great effort on, and achieved great success in radically improving the quality of its products, spurred on by Japanese competition and the realization that improved quality led not only to added value, but decreased costs.

 But although recognizing the importance of the final two elements, Garver did not emphasize them as hard as the others, because as he explained, he felt that judgment was not as universal in the case of aesthetics, and intangibles, such as advertising and brand names, influenced the customer"s perception of quality. The first six of his topics are  easier to quantify, and be handled in a more scientific way (measured), but aesthetics and perceived quality certainly play a large role in the decision process of the consumer. 

 When I wrote my Good Products Bad Products Book I suggested a number of elements that were perhaps more on the humanistic side than the scientific—perception of performance and cost, human fit, craftsmanship, overall emotional impact, aesthetics, elegance and sophistication, symbolism and cultural fit, and finally consistency with global limits ( a topic both scientific and humanistic).  I did so because I felt that they received less attention than they deserved in Industry, compared with the first six listed by David Garvin.

 Although both scientific (if you would technical and quantitative) thinking and humanistic thinking are required for high product quality, continual effort is necessary to cause such a thing to happen.  Even in the relatively large design activity in the Stanford Engineering school, where my office is located and where everyone would probably claim they support the merging of Snow’s two cultures, a walk around shows local areas where the  white boards are covered with equations, and others where they are covered with sketches and post-it notes—not many with both.  Much of the university, like much of the world, seems to tend to divide over mathematics.  A few years ago, the  Stanford Anthropology Department actually formally split into those who worshipped such things as probability and statistics, and those who did not.  Fortunately, it has now been put back together, and can resume arguing about which of two equally necessary approaches is more important.

 In many companies with which I am familiar, the split is even more apparent.

 

Good Products —the Joy of Stapling

This is my Arrow Heavy Duty T-50 Staple gun.  I have owned it for many years, and it must qualify as a classic as it is still being made.  Although powered staplers are available, they require wrestling with either pneumatic lines, electric cords, or discharged batteries, and I don’t need one, since I do not drive staples all day long.  This stapler drives staples ranging from l/4 to 9/16 inch long, and such staples are invaluable for doing things such as fastening fabric or screening to wood, fastening panels to frameworks,  and accomplishing other tasks in which nail and screw heads are too small.

 It definitely qualifies as a good product by the criteria in my Good Products, Bad Products book.  It is reasonably priced, seems to be highly reliable and long lived, since I have owned it many years and it has never failed me, bangs staples home with a vengeance, fits me very well,, is extremely well made, and is highly thought of in the culture of amateur, but capable builders and repair and maintenance people (of which I am a member). Although I am not aware that it is the Museum of Modern art in New  York, it is a clean and functional design, and its unusually bright plating allows it to be easily found if its owner has a shop in which tools hang on nails, but usually do not return to the nails which they have previously occupied (me again). The stapler is easily understood, simple to load and use (no video or confusing manual required), mechanically elegant, and gentle on the environment.

 And I have come to love it.  I have an open barn, which as well as holding a great deal of wonderful objects my wife categorizes as junk, also contains a sprinkling of restored vehicles and other equipment and a few motorcycles and go-karts.  It seems to be very attractive to owls, especially in the rainy season.  I like owls, and they are nice to have in barns because rats and mice, who like to eat and use as nest materials such things as wiring harness insulation and seat cushions, stay away..  But owls are large animals, and they seem to have made the roof trusses in my barn into the official owl rest-room in the area.

 Owl poop is seriously awful, since it is sticks to everything, seems to be impervious to water and most common solvents, and when finally removed, takes a bit of paint with it.  So I decided to interfere with their pleasure by making it more difficult to roost on the truss members.  The barn is 20 feet high, but I have a friend who owns a large forklift that is capable of reaching a 15 foot height, so I spent a few hours happily standing in a fruit box on the forks stapling bird netting to the appropriate truss members while he  whirled me around the barn.  It was really fun.  The weather was perfect, the ride was exhilarating, and my stapler gave me the power to put the netting exactly where I wanted to.  I don’t know if I have won the battle, because  owls are indeed very wise, but I wouldn’t mind at all if I had to do more of the same.  Tools are to extend the capability of your body, and the stapler certainly did (of course the fork lift did also).  I would have looked pretty foolish trying to handle heavy sheets of netting 15 feet in the air while working a hammer or screw driver with one hand and holding nails or screws with the other.

But upon writing this post, I realize am also very fond of my Swingline model 747 desk stapler in this photo. I have also had it for many years, initially acquiring it for no cost after it was unclaimed after a large office move.  It too is reliable, long-lived, elegant in operation, humble but pleasing in appearance, easy to operate, and gentle on the environment. And it always responds and never argues with me.  In fact looking at this picture makes me realize that my desk is mostly covered by digital things that are always requiring and often frustrating.  The stapler simply sits there and responds beautifully to having paper stuffed into its mouth and being hit on the head.   I probably sometimes take out my frustration with my electronic equipment by hitting my stapler much harder than is needed, even though it is a most  faithful servant.

 

And looking at the photograph, I also notice a few paper clips on my desk—even simpler classic products that do their jobs beautifully.  And they are also useful for many other tasks, from cleaning fingernails to opening the spouts of old glue bottles.

 

 

Hangar Number 1, Moffett Field and its Museum

I seem to be drawn to buildings that are very large, and have for years been a fan of the large hangar at Moffett Field (no longer in commission) in Mountain View, California.  NASA Ames occupies part of the Moffett Field land, and is presently responsible for use of the flight facilities. At one time I directed various studies there during the summer, and always managed to find reasons to visit the hangar.

 The hangar (Hangar Number One) and associated facilities were built in the early 1930’s as a Western base for the U.S. Navy’s proposed use of dirigibles to provide long range reconnaissance.  The Macon, the first user of the Hangar, was 785 feet long, powered by eight 560 horsepower engines, equipped with accommodations for 100 officers and crew, and kept aloft by helium, rather than flammable hydrogen.  It carried five fighter planes for protection.  The Hangar is 212 feet tall, but the dirigible cleared the structure by only some 12 feet.  This old photo shows the hanger swallowing the Macon. 

 The Navy experiment with large dirigibles was short lived.  The Macon crashed in 1935, and due to changes in strategy, improvements in aircraft, and problems with the dirigible program, the hangar was diverted to other purposes.  Over the years it had developed leaks in the covering, and asbestos had been found in its roofing.  There was talk of taking it down, but happily there was a great deal of resistance because of its historical and landmark value.  The cover has now been removed (and hopefully will be replaced), and the bare structure can be seen from Highway 101. it is wonderful indeed.  Here is a photo from the frontage road after the doors were stripped. The hangar is now completely stripped

 But recently I wanted to observe it more closely, and Moffett field now being a “government facility”, I approached the guarded gate, and inquired whether I could get on the base.  I was told that that would not be possible unless I had business with someone there.  Merely wanting to look at the hangar structure would not cut it.  But, said the guard, why didn’t I go visit the Moffett Field Museum (sometimes called the Navy Museum — not to be confused with a spacecraft museum in the NASA Ames buildings), which was directly adjacent to Hangar One.  I did so, and managed to entertain myself and my camera by acquiring some up-close and personal time with a structure that will probably never be duplicated, and the museum was swell.  Here is a closer shot of the structural detail (note size of pickup parked beside it).  

 I am a fan of small museums, and wish people would visit them more, because they are always interesting, and operated by dedicated volunteers.  This one traces the history of Moffettt Field, and of course Hangar #1 and the Macon, with lots of good displays that are attractive to both adults and kids, with eager volunteers to help.  If you are in the area, I would recommend you check it out along with the hangar in its present naked form.  The museum is not open every day, so check its website, which is here.

 

Visual Clarity of Function, Kids, and Us

A bit more about my fondness for restoring old machinery.  I used to teach Product Design at Stanford with a man named Bob McKim.  Whenever someone would say “form follows function” to him, he would say no, the real win is for function to be obvious when looking at a product.  Perhaps a bit more difficult in these days of software, the cloud, and electronic boxes, but worth thinking about.  Perhaps the reason I liked the book Tubes I mentioned in my post of July 3rd is that the author went and found out what the “cloud” looked like—not very ethereal, but much more satisfying than the miraculous “heaven-based” force for good being promoted by computer companies.

  This photograph is a “before picture”.  It shows the majority of the parts for a post drill, a very common tool used to drill holes before the advent of fractional horsepower electric motors.  It had belonged to the grandfather of a handyman who works in the area, and he had found out that I like to rescue old machinery and wanted to know if I wanted to restore it.

The next photograph shows the parts de-rusted, painted, and equipped with a few missing ones and a bit of welding. It is difficult to see in the photos, but the workings of the drill are obvious, and when the crank (or wheel) is turned, the drill spins, and can be set to automatically advance itself with much interesting motion and clicking of gear and ratchet teeth.  Young kids love it, and quickly figure out how it works and how to use it to drill holes. I love it too.  In fact, I sometimes use it to drill holes, despite that fact that I own a modern drill press and several drill motors.  I find it elegant in its simplicity, and satisfying in that I know exactly what every part of it does. I also feel good about rescuing it from the scrap pile.

The last photo shows a larger machine I restored — a 1910 steam tractor— which is even more of a kid magnet. In fact I think it may outdraw most playground equipment, partly because it is more challenging to climb on,  and once again, kids seem to love it and rather rapidly figure out how it works (what does this do? What is this? What makes the wheels turn?  What are these gears for?) 

I believe that there is something innate in us (especially when we are kids) that makes us respond positively to products of industry that we can understand by looking at them, to say nothing of  the fact that if we can understand them, we can and want to fix them when they are ill. It is annoying, but I don't mind turning in a broken computer for "recycling".  But no way would I do that to my bicycle.

Classic Products and Product Quality

My wife brought not only her wonderful self to our marriage, but also a classic Kitchenaid mixer.  They both become even more wonderful as the years pass.  But let’s talk about the mixer here.  This is a photograph of it.  It was originally light green, but at one time she was so in love with her Honda CRX, that I painted the mixer to match, even though it did not go around corners as fast. It is a product that is often called iconic, and after its birth in 1919, it arrived in pretty much its present form in the mid 1950’s.  Its Wikipedia based history is here. It will undoubtedly outlive both my wife and me.

 We both cook, and from time to time I try to perfect bread, so we do quite a bit of heavy-duty mixing.  The mixer never even breathes hard.  The top locks down, and the speed is variable.  No other controls—none needed. The mixing tools skim the bowl inner surface, and everything is easy to clean.  It is heavy enough that it does not move around the counter, the bowl secures to the base with a simple part-turn, its form screams  MIXER, and no instruction book is needed to operate it.  Also it  has never broken in its 50 years of life.

 It is easy to use, reliable and serviceable, beautifully made, elegant, makes one feel like a big-time chef, and does not involve disposable items.  I love it.  It gets high grades on all of the items in my Good Products, Bad Products book.  The present version is definitely relatively expensive compared to the lower mixer prices at Walmart or even Target, but to me well worth the money, since obviously this older model does its duty magnificently and will continue through at least one human lifetime.  Since we haven’t owned a new one for 50 years, I can’t vouch for their quality, but I am hoping Kitchenaid hasn’t succumbed to lowering the quality to reduce their costs.

 Of course, by producing a mixer like this, Kitchenaid gives up the opportunity to produce a cheaper new model with “advanced” features and a shorter lifetime every few years, thereby opening up marketing opportunities and a chance to hook customers into buying new ones more often.  Undoubtedly it would be easy to include a bit of digital memory that held all known recipes—and for all I know someone is doing that.  But come on……….

 I always think hard when I like something that I have grown up with or had a long time, to try make sure that I am not giving up a better option by giving too much credit to sentiment and what I am used to.  But I usually conclude that if products stay around in near to their original form for long enough to be called “classic”, or “iconic”, there is something going on there.  If you are a consumer, it is worth figuring out what it is, and demanding it from industrially produced products,  If  you are a producer, focus on making such products.  They are better for  your brand than all the advertising you can buy.

Legos: The Toy With Legs

The Lego company has been around since 1916, although they did not begin building their  iconic “blocks” until 1947.  By the early 1960’s they had reached their present design and use of material.  If you are interested, more details on the history of the company are here.

My children and grandchildren, ranging in age from 50 years old to one, have all loved to play with Legos.  In fact, when the entire family occasionally convenes, even the adults can be found digging through the now huge quantity of components we seem to own. And the whole town turns out when one of our museums invites a Lego club in to build an entire city for Christmas.

Legos seem to be ever fascinating, as they should be. They can be easily combined in limitless ways.  The photograph is of a house our ten year old grand daughter is making.  Out ten year old grandson takes the same materials and creates intergalactic raiding vessels and monsters. (Legos are a good way to view gender differences that are stronger than parental pressures).

The Lego company itself seems to be surprisingly buoyant.  It has gone through great growth, and typical downturns when they expanded too rapidly outside of their strength (theme parks, toy characters that required little if any construction, kits with parts that were not compatible with other products), but it has come back strong with its Mindstorms line of robot kits. What are its secrets?  Quality is certainly one.

Lego products can be considered expensive, especially their Mindstorm kits, but they are handed down, given away, and traded, so that they are have an almost unlimited life. The blocks neither break nor emit worrisome chemicals. To me, a major advantage is that not only do they not need repairing, but the blocks themselves do not require batteries (of course the final constructions often do - you can't escape).  Environmentally, although the blocks and other plastic components are made of a plastic that is difficult to recycle, they never reach a landfill.  If you saw a box of lego parts in a dumpster you would probably take it out and give it to a kid (or take it home and nostalgically play with them) .  

Although plans and directions are available, they are not usually needed, except for the Mindstorms line,   Legos are more fun without them.  It is satisfying to use ones imagination. The parts are beautifully made, and can be assembled into fairly realistic looking combinations.  Unlike vintage blocks, they cling together nicely.  Lego parts also go together rapidly, resulting in rapid feelings of accomplishment. What’s not to like about them?

I believe that products that have been around relatively unchanged for a long time, especially if they are successful in the market place and seem like they could be killed by knock-offs and cheaper copies, must be of high quality. Legos definitely qualify.

 

Product Packaging and Quality

Packaging has a strong impact on the customer’s impression of products. An extreme example is Apple, who enclose their products in a package that from a design sense, is as elegant as the product itself.  And they have done this so successfully, that they hardly even need to put their name on it.  My wife and I recently received a gift from Anna Rabinowicz, one of my favorite former teaching assistants who is the founder of Rablabs, and an associate professor of design at Parsons School of Design.  It was a large and beautiful fruit bowl,  and the packaging (for ground shipment) simply screamed “don’t even think of criticizing me.  I am at least as important than you are”.

On the other extreme are the majority of products one buys.  I am so fed up with most of them that I tend to lean toward products because the packages are minimal, easy to open, convenient to keep the product in after opening, and are not oversize advertising platforms for blaring advertising not only for the manufacturer, but for other people who clearly are willing to pay to be included.  A couple of days ago, after an attempt to open a gallon of milk wth a new cap design, I wrote the following tweet:  “Encountered new type of cap on our milk . Must be safer. Required water pump pliers to loosen. Pipe wrench would also have worked”  But then I remembered the day that I encountered a package so resistant that I went to a mat knife, which slipped on the plastic and cut my hand, and wrote another tweet:   “Hell just for packaging designers —all food is in sealed bubble packs and they have no scissors, knives, or other tools.” 

Today’s encounter was the opening of a package of four padlocks, sealed at a number of points, with the two keys that opened them loose inside the package.  I had no tools at hand.  I found on attempting to pull them apart, that although the two sides were not totally sealed together, I could not.  But I was out of doors at the time, and I did succeed in pulling them apart sufficiently that the keys fell out into a large pile of dried oak leaves.  By the time I had sorted through the oak leaves to find the keys, and hunted down a scissors strong enough to cut through the plastic, I thought much less of both the locks and the maker of same.

Of course, the package did boast a large logo of the maker, and a small one for another company, (who apparently was in charge of rust-proofing them) and a good bit of pointing out the advantages of the product.  And probably the packages were cheap and convenient to ship, run through self-checkout machines, and hang on hooks, and large enough to discourage shop lifters.  But the customer does not benefit directly from such things.

But I have another annoyance that I cannot blame on the manufacturer.  I recently ordered one hundred of  a somewhat uncommon type of small machine screw over the internet. The good news wass that they arrived in a nice cardboard box that was easy to open and close and had the type and size of the screw plainly printed on the top.  But when it arrived, that box of screws was contained in another box.  The photo above shows the two.

The rather large space between the boxes was filled with the now familiar plastic bags of gas.  The good news was that no peanuts were involved.  And of course the larger box gave plenty of area for a large label containing my name, address, and other cryptic shipping and handling information, and undoubted decreased the sender’s inventory problem by allowing the use of fewer box sizes.

But jeez!  When you receive such packages, don’t you wonder why a society as advanced as we think we are is shipping all of this cardboard and gas around?  If the size of packages is not an issue because shipping is weight constrained, smaller packages would at least permit the use of smaller trucks that it did not take so long to pass each other on the highway.

And finally, I certainly do not consider myself an environment fanatic, but when I see the empty cardboard containers waiting for our recycling pickup each week, I do feel like going out and hugging a tree.

 

 

 

Mars Science Laboratory and Curiosity

 

This Weekend the Mars Science Laboratory spacecraft lands the Curiosity rover on Mars.  There is  information on media coverage on the internet, and lots of information on the mission and hardware here. It is a big deal.

It looks especially big to me, since I worked on the first Mars flyby spacecraft at JPL in the 1960’s.  It was called Mariner 4 , was launched in 1964, and successfully gathered data and sent the first detailed photographs of the Martian surface home. These photographs showed that Mars was nothing like we humans thought it would be — no canals, no traces of life, just craters and desolation. I was involved with the mission from the preliminary design through fabrication, testing, , and mission control, and we kept our fingers crossed for nine months during its journey.  Nervous making.

I am at least as nervous now, even though I haven’t worked at JPL or on a spacecraft since 1966.  This mission is an incredible endeavor.  Placing a roving vehicle the size of Curiosity on the Martian surface requires a very large number of things to go right.  The Mariner 4 simply flew by the planet and returned its data at a leisurely 8.3 bits per second.  Curiosity, the size of a small automobile,  is meant to amble around the surface for two years, carrying out a very large amount of scientific experiments and relaying photographs home.  In comparison to the Mariner 4, it can communicate directly with earth at 500 bits per second, but can send information to the Mars Reconnaisance Orbiter at rates up to 2 megabits per second, and to the Odyssey orbiter at up to 256 kilobits per second, for much more rapid transmission home.

Perhaps I am so nervous because when I was involved in the “space race”, there were many more failures than is now the case.  But the technical tricks necessary to get Curiosity down and running are mind blowing.  Some indication of this is in the nice little video shown here, narrated by some of the JPL engineers involved

The best of luck,  Mars Science Laboratory and Curiosity.    

Japan and Quality

In the June-16-22^nd issue of The Economist, the Schumpeter page has an interesting article entitled Zen and the art of carmaking .  After spending over half of the page extolling the traditional craftsmanship, fine engineering, and high quality of Japanese-built products, the author abruptly moves to criticizing the Japanese for poor marketing, excepting Nissan, which apparently has a marketing budget as large as their R &D budget.  The article comments on Toyota’s response to this by saying that “Toyota’s officials shake their heads at such flim flam.  It is as if Japan’s two largest carmakers, one run by a diffident scion of the founding family, the other by a fast-talking French-Brazilian, were as different as East and West”.

How long can the “West” continue to encourage the “East” to act like they do?  Detroit companies certainly have put a great deal of emphasis on marketing, as opposed to major innovations in their products, and look at what  it did for them? The article mentioned Honda as an example of a traditional Japanese company.  Honda has never acted as though it wanted to be an “American-style” automobile company. I am a long-time Honda fan, and my wife is more of one, having had a long love affair with a Honda CRX, and now an Acura TSX.  The cars are reliable, nicely designed and finished,  and hugely fun to drive. Honda’s  hold on the motorcycle market has been strong for many years and they have moved nicely into outdoor power equipment including outboard marine engines, general purpose engines, generators, lawnmowers, pumps, snow blowers, tillers and trimmers for commercial, rental and residential applications..

I am not against marketing, but I would rather be Honda than General Motors.  The Schumpeter article states “In emerging markets such as China, Japanese products and considered either over-engineered for the budgets of ordinary people, or lacking the baubles that delight the newly rich”.  My response is that maybe there is a bit of sour grapes here.  Historically, China does not love Japan, and it perhaps wishes that the ordinary people had more money and that the newly rich had less.

The “West”s attitude towards the “East”, has always been warped by lack of understanding. We are comfortable with eastern institutions that act more like the West, such as large global businesses.  But when things approach Zen, or any other philosophy that is unique to the East, we can’t figure out why people don’t copy our values.  I first visited Japan in 1956. I was in the Air Force, and a friend of mine and I had saved up a month’s leave, so we caught a military hop to Tokyo, ditched our uniforms, and played wandering college kid for a month.  Having been raised midst anti-Japanese propaganda, and the villainous nature of the attack on Pearl Harbor, (I later learned it was only villainous if viewed through “Western” eyes.  According to many philosophies of war, it was brilliant) I was unprepared for a culture with the history, sophistication, and aesthetic values of Japan – nor one that ate fish for breakfast, did not go to Church on Sunday, and could be so warm and friendly to representatives of those who blew away Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Also I was amazed at the success they were having in recovering from the war, especially in re-tooling their industries.  A very impressive group of people, and I would hate to see them become as frantic about growth, short-term profit, and the selling of mediocre products as we have.  A while ago I bought an aluminum step ladder at a reputable hardware outlet.  The good news is that it is very light weight.  The bad news is that it is incredibly fragile, and the pivots are all rivets that were set too tightly, so the process of putting it up or taking it down requires large forces which tend to bend structural members.  It was made in Mexico.  The name (brand?) of the ladder is Louisville – a common Mexican name?  It is less  than a mediocre product.

Although I certainly understand the importance of marketing to keeping the economy stirred up and allowing fast growth and large size for companies, I am pretty fed-up with marketing as it effects me right now, and am not at all looking forward to increasingly annoying pitches based on information-based utilizing data culled from myriads of sources and reduced by large mysterious companies such as Acxiom Corporation .  The Schumpeter article reminded me of why I like Japan and its people, and other cultures that make outstanding craftsmen into National Living Treasures.  Go-Honda.

Hammers and Quality

Tools that have evolved over many years tend to be of high quality and often survive breakthroughs in technology.  Think of the common hammer, one of my favorite tools.  It has certainly benefited from many years of development, and still holds its own despite the presence of nail guns, which have captured a large piece of the “commercial” market because of their speed.

I was introduced to “hand” tools early in life, as my family used few power tools and did all of its own construction.  Here is a photo of me at 21 months of age, helping build the family house.

I had my own small hammer, and was attacking a nail that was a bit beyond my size, but I was definitely encouraged to learn to use tools.  And I did.  And the basic skills have served me very well indeed.

One advantage of the common hammer, is that not only does it perform its job well, but it has not changed a great deal over my life.  The two hammers in the photo below are one used by my grandfather, which I acquired upon his death 60 years ago and have used constantly since then, and one I acquired a few years ago because it is heavier and better suited for framing. 

Evidence of maturity can be seen because there is not a lot of difference between the two, even though the one with the wooden handle may be pushing 100 years of age.  Having trained on my little childhood hammer, I seem to be able to pick up any hammer—new, old, mine, my neighbor’s, one in our student shop or belonging to anyone in my family— and use it equally well with no training, no short course, and no manual/video.  It is a hugely flexible tool, useful for everything from driving nails to demolishing unwanted structures, preventing pieces of paper from blowing around, and scratching my back. And it does not need time to boot, deliver spam to me, post advertisements, crash, or die.

Examining the hammer in the context of my Good Products, Bad Products book, it certainly delivers great value for its cost, fits me, is nicely made, is a beautiful, elegant, and sophisticated device, gives me membership in a culture I respect (those who work with hand tools), is very easy on the environment, and I obviously love it.  Happiness to me is building things, and nothing surpasses banging on things with my hammer.

The Digital Revolution and Quality

We are overdue a backlash toward our concept of an “information economy”, and it may be beginning to happen.   I run across more and more columns and articles such as the ones I referenced in my last blog. Maybe an opportunity to think more about quality.

There is no doubt that digital electronics in all of their many applications have brought and are bringing major changes to individuals and our societies.  As an engineer, and therefore being suspected of being a nerd/geek, I have been pleased for some years to see engineers and scientists becoming famous, getting rich, making the society pages, and being followed by paparazzi.  I was made happy for weeks by the movie “Revenge of the Nerds in 1984, just as I cheered for Mark Zuckerberg in “The Social Network”.

I am probably not a typical user of digital devices and the internet because I tend to use them as tools to accomplish specific tasks rather than for entertainment.  From my standpoint,  digital equipment and software, and the internet itself,  have a ways to go, before they can be considered high quality products.  Their positive impacts on my life are dimmed  by demands on my time and questionable effects on personal and social traditions that I am used to and value (privacy? elections?).

To me, computers are tools to do many things, and tools should not take so much time outside of being used for their purpose.  I just bought a new Apple Powerbook pro, and it is requiring the usual hours and expense of upgrading applications that the new (to me) operating system does not like, and identifying and replacing (upgrading?) software and hardware features I have developed facility with over the years. I have used Apple computers since the Apple 2, but I am wearying of hardware and software changes which force me to learn new tricks, but do not add appreciably to performance. And some very useful features disappear each time.  Obviously Apple is trying to move the desktop operating system toward that used in handheld devices, but for instance, it took me a bit of time to find that scan bars  can be made to remain independently of cursor position.  And apparently the small useful arrows at the bottom of the scan bar are gone forever.  Give me a break!

I spent the last few days happily entertaining myself by working on a swell 1948 two ton Chevrolet truck that I acquired from a friend.  Here is a photo so you can share its beauty.  Wrenches take no preparation (they don’t even need to be booted up), and the truck is amazingly straight forward mechanically and easy to work on compared to my wife’s highly digital car (or the internet).  Obviously mature technology.

I find that the internet becomes more time consuming to use as it fills with ads, junk, and redundant and questionable information.  How about quality of information?  And as I said in an earlier post, I am belatedly entering the world of social networking, and will probably get used to it, but wow!  Talk about information overload— or maybe word overload, since much of the information is certainly far from earth shaking.   Many people I know have  a twitter account and a Face Book page, but few of them make much use of them.  Of the 900 million (or however many) people are on Facebook, I wonder how many of them actively use it.  The same for Twitter.  The next bubble may be a social networking bubble, as marketing moves on to its next big thing, and the novelty of communicating with hundreds, if not thousands of people one will never know wears off. 

I will probably write an apology post later when. I become addicted to social networking.  But I presently consider the software and hardware associated with communications and computing to be miraculous, but not yet of astonishing quality. I was recently treated to a gigabit per second internet service by Google (swell), but the router that came with the service  seems to like to be rebooted often (not swell).

I am enthusiastic and optimistic about the digital revolution, but still considering it to be the digital experiment, and hoping for a conclusion that empowers us while demanding less from us.

 

 

 

Two More Dave Beach Questions

In Dave Beach and my “conversation” described in my April 16 post, the next two questions from him, after “why is manufacturing important”, were “why is product quality important”t, and “how are the chapter concepts in your Good Products, Bad Products book related”.

Product Quality is  important for three reasons:

     1.  Competitiveness

     2.  The Quality of Life

     3.  Motivation and Self Image

For the foreseeable future, businesses will continue to compete, probably globally, and hopefully material well-being will rise, at least in poorer nations.  It is also probable that businesses in wealthier countries will have continuing problems competing with businesses in poorer countries in the production of  lower quality products,  Also higher quality products have a marketplace advantage and are both more attractive at the same cost (Toyota automobiles), and offer higher profitability at a higher cost (Apple iPhones),

Technology is hopefully for the purpose of benefiting us humans.  It should satisfy our needs, make our lives more interesting, keep us healthier,  maintain our environment,  and decrease hardship. If it does not do such things, it fails.  In a sense, overall product quality can be measured by how much a product improves the quality of life.

It is extremely rewarding to be involved in the production of use of an outstanding product.  Organizations producing such products and the people working in them are proud of their role.  People  associated with them become more involved in their work and more productive.  The United States used to be very proud of the label “Made in America”.  Wouldn’t it be nice to get there again – to feel that whatever we produced, it was the best in the world?

The Chapters in my book have to do with the performance, cost, and price of industrial products, compatibility of the products with the human user, craftsmanship in the production of them, emotional reaction to them, aesthetic appeal of them, the symbolism and cultural fit of them, and consistency of the products with global constraints (environment, etc.)  These factors are related in that they are all essential in the production of them and benefits to the user, and difficult to handle quantitatively.  At first glance such things as performance, cost, and price, seem easily measurable, but it is more difficult to do so over the lifetime of products and when the subtleties of perception are included.  As one proceeds through the chapters, metrics become more and more difficult to describe the quality of the product and the reaction of the user.  Love?  Beauty?  Elegance?  Symbolism? When it comes to global constraints, it becomes simpler to attach numbers to such things as supply of resources, severity of pollution, global warming, and loss of species, but for many (most?) people there seems to be a good bit of resistance to using these numbers and the desire to  collectively bury our heads in the sand and hope the problems are not real. 

I will delve further into this in a future post. 

General Topics on Manufacturing and Product Quality

Since the Stanford ME 314 Good Products, Bad Products course is now over, I will leave the topic.  Should any of you reading this blog be teaching a similar course, or if you would like to do so, contact Dave Beach ([email protected]), and he will be glad to send you information or conspire with you.

I am scheduled to give a few talks on my book, as part of the routine of bringing it to people’s attention.  Dave and I did a “conversation” on the topics contained in the book to a couple of hundred people on the Stanford campus last week, and it was fun.  The format called for Dave to ask me questions, and for me to answer them as best as I could.  I actually had the easier role, because I had the option of muttering a few words and then saying “what do you think, Dave?”. 

I thought it might be of interest to discuss a few of the questions and answers (?) with you.  The questions are here.  Look through them and think about how you might answer them.  I thought that beginning with the next post, I would give you my personal, perhaps biased opinion on some of them.  But just so you know that the U.S. is not alone in worrying about such questions, here is an interesting article on Japanese concerns about the topic of manufacturing that was on the front page of  the April 16 edition of the New York Times.

Final post on Stanford ME314 Good Products, Bad Products course

Since my last post, the final two sets of  “good product, bad product” examples were submitted and student groups wrote summaries and gave presentations on them. The first of these was aesthetics, elegance and sophistication, and the second had to do with products that were consistent with a finite earth.  For the first, students were asked to choose a product that they thought was simply beautiful and one that they thought was unbelievably repulsive.  Also to choose a third product that they believed to be extremely elegant and sophisticated.  They were  then asked to justify their choices, and conjecture upon how they could be improved, and what the improvement might do to the cost of the product.  A student paper summarizing the products is here.  Examples of beautiful products from the 2011 course, are shown here;.  Repulsive ones are here.  Ones showing elegance and sophistication are here.

The student groups chose Cartagas (two companies of this name produce “Cuban” cigars, but only one of them is in Cuba), Tesla Motors, Ziiro watches, and Victoria’s Secret.

For the second, the students were asked to think of products that that harmed the earth's environment, and changes could lessen their negative impact .  A student summary of the responses is shown here.  And examples from the 2011 course are shown here. I missed the final student presentations, as I was out of town.  However, Professor Beach and Julie Shryne, the teaching assistant in the course, had many positive things to say about them.  And judging from the quality of the students and the preceeding presentations, I am sorry I missed them.

Speaking of Professor Beach, those of you not having taken the course might be interested in knowing a bit about him, since is not only a superlative teacher, but has been responsible for turning what were the traditional student shops into not only vastly improved facilities, but an extremely exciting and innovative center at Stanford (the Produce Realization Laboratory).  He has an interesting back ground which includes study in the liberal arts, manufacturing experience, engineering degrees, and a strong dedication to video production. He best of all, a wonderful person, filled with good spirits, high motivation, and a dedicated and hard worker.  I am proud to count him among my friends.   A good overview of David Beach and his interests can be seen here.

Stanford Good Products Bad Products course (ME 314) update #3

The students continue to read my Good Products, Bad Products book and for each chapter submit examples of good and bad products, guesses as to why the bad ones might be bad, and ideas of improving them.  Since the class is large, the amount of information is too large to include in  this blog.  But each of the student groups that will present the final summaries is reading all of the submissions having to do with their topics and giving us a short summary of them.  I will include one of the summaries for Craftsmanship here, one for Emotions and Needs here, and one for Aesthetics, Elegance and Sophistication here.

I will not include any of the good and bad product write ups from the students here, but I will include summaries of good and bad products from the 2011 class. Products showing good craftsmanship are here, and poorly crafted products are here.  Examples of good products as far as Emotions and Needs are here, and bad ones are here.  Some products considered beautiful are shown here. And some thought to be elegant are here.  Finally, here is a list of products that the students found to be repulsive!

During this time period, Peter Mondavi, the Co-proprietor of the Charles Krug Winery, was a guest speaker.  This is one of the older wineries in the Napa valley,  and is noted for the quality of its wine. The Krug home page is here. The class also read from the book Natural History of the Senses, by Diane Ackerman (Knopf Doubleday).  This is one of my favorite books, and I have added it to my recommended list to the right.    She is a wonderful writer and not only talks about the senses, but is able to convey their power through words and stories.

The class also took a field trip the Littlefield Collection of restored military vehicles.  Jacques Littlefield, who unfortunately died a couple of  years ago, was one of my favorite people.  I had the opportunity  to get to know him well because he was a student at Stanford when I joined the faculty in the 1960's, and one of the most regular customers of the student shop.  As projects, he made radio controlled model army tanks.  Upon graduation, he accepted a job in manufacturing at Hewlett Packard.  When he decided to retire in his late 20's, I realized that perhaps he had access to money, and indeed he did, being the son of Ed Littlefield, a billionaire. 

Jacques spend most of his life, effort, and quite a bit of money collecting and restoring military vehicles, especially tracked one.  By the time of his death he had put together not only the largest private collection of tanks in the world, but probably the most beautifully and accurately restored ones.  The collection consists of approximately 100 tanks, and another 100 military vehicles of other types.

The field trip was for several purposes.  The collection shows an amazing level of craftsmanship.  It also demonstrates the love of a person for machines.  Jacques had access to enough money to do anything he wanted to, and he elected to spend much of his life working on and understanding a particular tpe of industrial product.  The collection results in strong, and sometimes mixed, emotions, on the part of the students.  And finally, although brutal devices of war, the mechanisms involved often demonstrate a high degree of elegance.  Jacques also loved trains and other equipment, and his home was complete with one of the largest 7-1/2 inch gauge  model train layout on the west coast.  The San Francisco Live Steam club continues to hold forth there.  And he donated the beautiful organ in the Stanford chapel, and liked it and the people who manufactured it that he had one installed in a specially built addition to his house.  As usual, the trip was most successful.