Good day all
I wonder if any of you might know of a program to capture or record the specific time spent on a project and if possible per part. We need to know how long it would take us from the beginning of a project to the end.
We have customers who solved this problem with the SharePoint capabilities.
In SharePoint you can send out tasks and project orders and there you can define the max. on time to spend and the time that is needed at the end.
The result is handled in a list and you can have different analysis. GANTT-Table etc.
How you measure dependence on you (hours, days, percentage,...)
All tasks are visible in the task's list of Sharepoint and Outlook. Even the calenders are synced between this two application.
Here is a short view on this.
0:15 min 1:15 minute
It's called a time card.
The real problem is designing is front loaded. I have worked as an isolated design department for many companies. A mid sized project represents the issue the best. 3 days spent collecting information, 1 day organizing and discussing options, then two weeks of CAD work to make the resultant drawings. About 1/3 of the CAD time is wasted to revisions and overcomming CAD limits.
If you want a good design for one off fabrication, that's just kinda how it goes.
I've been studying the time to do projects for about 8 years now, and it's revealed some very interesting, if not amusing, information.
I won't go into my findings, but I will suggest some way to record time, and the number of parts/assemblies that are created. One example I've worked with, was just an Access database that everyone recorded what they worked on at the end of the day. Here, you rely on the "honor system" a lot. Another example I've worked with, we had work orders that you clock in and out of, for any given project.
There are folks that do contract work for drafting and design. They charge you by the print or part. It's really not that difficult to understand, the problem is the difference in time it takes two different individuals. You'd think that experience would get things done quicker, but I've found the complete opposite to be true, in most studies.
That's because the experts do things precily, new people will just get it don'e not even knowing if it is right or not. So the time assement will be true, but quality of results may vary.
The other factor here is younger people are typicaly better with computers. Espically today. In the future this sould be less of a factor.
I have found in design you can spend a lot more time sketching out ideas on paper doing calcs in excels researching from books and on the web than actually modelling in 3d and drafting in 2d.
How do you capture that?
Also how you charge for FEA work when all the user is doing is waiting for the FEA job to be solved?
Usually when you have enough experiance you we be abe to assess the job at the very start and say it will take this many days weeks to do it.
Untrue to 12G comments. What seems more constant, is the older/experienced the user, the less apt they are to learn new/better techniques. I've proven this with just basic tests, everyone do the same test, and review the results. I've also sat in a room with 12 others, the question is asked how long it will take to complete a project/task, and the answer ranges from 8 to 40 hours. Some think they know better, but the better ones will ask questions when they see something that saves steps/time.
Without experience, how do you know where time can be saved relative to the desired end results?
I will agree with the "Better ones" comment. I have seen good and bad at all ages. Any good designer will find the path of least resistance for the given situation.