Look, no hands: Dyson continues to research robotic vacuum cleaners
A keen sense of frustration and a propensity for wrong-thinking are not perhaps the first attributes you would expect a company to look for when recruiting a new engineer. But at domestic appliance maker Dyson, these specific characteristics score very highly indeed.
Dyson likes its engineers to get irked by what they see as the failings of the world around them. And the company positively encourages its people to come up with a better way of doing things, no matter how preposterous their ideas may seem.
This ethos underpins all of the company’s design activities, says Dr Caroline Simcock, global compliance and approvals manager, who is charged with overseeing the smooth transition of ideas into new products.
“A sense of frustration is a key quality for engineers at Dyson. It’s the starting point for many of the ideas. It is the key ingredient for the good product moving forward,” says Simcock.
It’s the same with wrong-thinking. Engineers are encouraged to think against the norm, to challenge convention and to be open to failure.
“Some of the best inventive ideas are actually created through wrong-thinking. It’s about daring to be different, keeping an open mind and not having a fear of failure. There is a key message in all of this: don’t censure your ideas.
“Sometimes the craziest ideas can often prove to be the most fruitful,” she says.
As far back as 1974, the firm’s founder James Dyson was using frustration as the starting point for his inventive ideas. Back then it was the wheelbarrow that irritated him. It was clunky, heavy and unstable, and was prone to getting stuck in the mud. The solution was elegantly simple: replace the wheel at the front with a ball. The design proved immediately popular, grabbing a host of awards around the world, and Dyson went on to use the ball as the basis for future thinking when designing appliances for the home.
Firm's founder, James Dyson, used frustration as inspiration
Wrong-thinking, meanwhile, was the inspiration for the company’s iconic vacuum cleaners. Dyson felt the use of bags and filters was utterly illogical, as the pores clogged, compromising suction from the first use. He turned conventional wisdom on its head by coming up with the idea of using centrifugal force in a cyclone to separate dust for disposal.
“But even the use of a see-through bin to contain the dust was an unconventional idea,” says Simcock. “Market research had showed that consumers thought the clear bin was a bad idea. But James was adamant. His instinct was that consumers would like to see what was being removed from their home. Sometimes imagination proves better than knowledge.”
This approach to design is still followed today, with Dyson’s engineers taking the fruits of frustration and wrong-thinking through an iterative cycle of concept and new product embodiment at the firm’s base at Malmesbury in Wiltshire, before activities such as manufacturing readiness, validation and production are completed in Malaysia.
In the first instance, conceptual thinking is key, and this process sees Dyson engineers carry out a large amount of sketching, in 2D and 3D. “We do a lot of sketching and brainstorming,” says Simcock, a mechanical engineer who graduated with a degree and then a doctorate from the University of Birmingham.
“Good communication is the difference between an idea being pursued or it being parked. Each engineer has their own sketchbook, with their work dated and signed, so if need be we can prove the originality of the design concept if required to do so.”
Modelmaking is also really important, and at Dyson any material goes. Engineers are expected to be proficient in this area, particularly when it comes to the use of cardboard. It’s viewed as a quick way of transporting ideas into 3D. “It’s really cost-effective,” says Simcock. “We can arrive very quickly at something that can be played with and then changed.”
Even at this stage, Dyson’s engineers will be keeping an eye on ergonomics and usability, with weight added to models. This proved to be a useful means of proving-out the development of the DC16, the company’s first handheld cleaner. Conventional handhelds distributed much of the weight towards the end of the machine, away from the body, putting stress on the wrist. “We were looking to move the centre of gravity to the rear,” says Simcock. “The weighted rig enabled us at a very early stage to validate our new concept.”
So where exactly are Dyson’s engineers taking the company’s product range in the near future?
The company has been heavily investing in the creation of its own range of brushless motors, which offer longer life and higher reliability than sourced variants. Better motor performance is leading to greater investment in cordless appliances such as the DC62, a slimline vacuum clearer that was launched in Japan earlier this year.
“That product uses 350W and has a 20-minute run time,” says Simcock. “We believe the future is cordless. And we believe we can maintain the performance of a mains machine in a handheld product.”
Dyson’s rigs moved the centre of gravity on the DC16 to take pressure off the wrist
Another strong trend is the greater use of a ball, rather than wheels, on products such as upright and cylinder cleaners. “We’ve reduced the clutter here,” says Simcock. “The motor, power cable and air ducts have all been housed in the ball itself, making the best use of the shape. It makes the machine easier to steer. It lowers the centre of gravity. It gives greater stability.”
Robotic technology is also coming to the fore. Dyson flirted with a robotic vacuum cleaner, the DC06, in 2011. It had three onboard computers, 2,000 electronic components, 27 separate circuit boards and 70 sensory devices. But the company wasn’t happy with the final design, saying that it wanted one that cleaned properly and guided itself more logically than a human. A truly autonomous machine, rather than a glorified carpet sweeper, remains an ambition, and propulsion and battery will be key.
All the company will say is that it is getting closer. “I can’t talk about future products,” says Simcock. “We are covering all avenues of investigation, turning over every stone and I’m sure the future will be in autonomous vacuuming.”
Another area of intense research activity is in noise reduction, both for vacuum cleaners and hand dryers. The company has a sizeable acoustics department and recently brought out the Airblade dB dryer, which is 50% quieter than earlier models.
But Simcock says there will always be a trade-off. Indeed, in some ways, she thinks a certain amount of noise is desirable.
“Unfortunately the noise generated is a measurement of air movement and, as we have incredibly powerful products, you are always going to get an acoustic profile,” she says.
“I come from a background in motors. So the way I think of it is, do you want power or do you want to reduce the noise profile?
“If you had a machine that was entirely silent would you be happy with it? I don’t think I would. I wouldn’t think it was operating. It’s a very subjective area.”
Cleaning away the counterfeiters
Founder James Dyson has always been a vehement critic of Chinese counterfeiters. The anguish is twofold: first, the company’s products are the result of enormous amounts of research and development and expenditure, and rip-offs impact on profits as well as professional pride. Second, the bogus products can inflict reputational damage: fakes are at best inferior, and, at worst, downright dangerous.
Caroline Simcock, global compliance and approvals manager, says that protecting intellectual property is a constant challenge. The number of infringements involved is sometimes huge.
“With our iconic designs, there are a lot of copycats,” she says. “With the Dyson Air Multiplier fan, for instance, within the first six months we had hundreds of Chinese copies.
“Similarly in vacuum cleaner technology there is a lot of copying. It’s something James is very keen to chase after. IP is a very important aspect of our design.”