Managing Change Requests in Electronics Design Projects

As the rate of technical change increases year-on-year, the frequency of design change requests and the resulting reworks keeps designers in a position of anticipation. Not knowing the kinds of adaptations to come down the pipeline—for a variety of reasons—makes it increasingly challenging to meet requirements at the required rate. 

This is where process and transparency come into play as designers benefit from proactive communication—a mechanism that preempts upcoming design changes—to reduce the number of last-minute change requests. This frees up time to action the urgent cases where a customer’s bottom line or reputation could be impacted by product defects. 

In light of this, there are common challenges to consider, methods of analyzing and acting on design changes, and procedural elements and tools to help become proactive in the face of design rework. 

Common Electronic Design Change Requests

With electronics becoming outdated faster than ever before, designers face some common challenges when delivering relevant and compliant PCB blueprints to manufacturers. While a product may stand the test of time in a constantly evolving industry, the internal makeup that allows for continuous technological improvement of current models is necessary to extend their lifecycles. 

This is either driven by upstream (supplier) or downstream (buyer and consumer) influences, and the result could be one of the following: 

• Functional Changes: Modifications to features of existing products to enhance technical performance, largely due to the need for greater power capabilities, integration of high-demand technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), and general updates that ensure competition with other market players. 
• Client or Stakeholder Requests: Non-technical, business-driven changes. These could be adjustments to schematics, PCB layouts, or components due to a number of factors. This could often be a result of reported defects or simply a client’s desire to push more power and functionality through their products. 
• Compliance Updates: Adjustments to regulations require manufacturers and designers to revisit PCB component composition to adhere to evolving standards. This can often be related to the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive and Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), which impact the use of materials based on their environmental and potential social impact.

While a number of requirements could change or problems occur, obsolescence is a growing concern within the electronics sector and can be the result of these changes. 

Rising Obsolescence Causes PCB Redesign

PCB obsolescence is a prominent concern within the electronics sector. The pace of change has rippling effects on entire value chains, and designers alone are having to adopt a preemptive approach. 

It’s not only a challenge for designers but a threat to upstream and downstream stakeholders, as either can facilitate the need for rework. While this is a condition of electronics evolution, there can be some detrimental effects to poor management of obsolescence, particularly when it comes to the defense and aerospace sectors, which were covered in a previous article. 

Obsolescence in consumer supply chains can only mean all manner of things—largely in the event of poor management—such as disruption to the production line, loss of production capacity, increased lifecycle costs, and potentially reduced profit to downstream companies. 

In the event of this, obsolescence management can make or break a company’s ability to manage adaptations. They do this by encouraging communication with suppliers and customers to determine when new components will be expected and aligning them with the requirements of buyers. 

Best Practices for Handling PCB Design Changes

Designers must be able to, first and foremost, determine the cause of the problem, follow up with a feasibility study based on available parts and solutions, and rationalize the cost and timeframe of the rework process. 

Establish a Clear Change Management Process

Define the protocols for considering and approving design changes and the measures put in place to efficiently communicate rework requirements in advance of adverse scenarios, such as obsolescence. As for product defects, the mechanism for communicating such problems determines the successful turnaround of design changes. 

Conduct Impact Analysis and Evaluate Response

Deeper knowledge of the change requirement will determine the course of action. It’s important to understand the reasons for a design change, firstly, to know the cause of a particular defect, and secondly, to understand the motivations for developmental changes. 

Defining the reason for a change will spark the next phase, which involves analyzing the cost implications, the time required to redesign and added time in production, and how technical changes could affect the product’s function. 

Devise a System to Prioritize Changes

This step is important for first acting on the necessary components and design requirements. As further constraints are considered, such as the cost and time to rework, designers must be able to quickly visualize the urgent changes and whether they can fit the budget. 

This step involves seamless collaboration with procurement teams, leveraging tools like Octopart’s component search engine to understand the components available and the cost range for redevelopment.

Use Change Request Tools and Protocols

Leveraging change request tools will allow greater communication between parties, whether they are customers or suppliers, and provide version history to assess past models and previous changes. In the example of a product defect, change records can often help distinguish the previous problems found in a certain area of the PCB. 

However, in the event of a short, the problem could lie with a single component or group of them. Something as simple as a poorly placed component could cause malfunction, which could only be assessed through quality assurance and physical inspection of the circuit board itself. 

As designers leverage change request tools and processes, they notice the ease of recalling information as well as sharing information with customers and suppliers—depending on the problem identified—to engage the relevant stakeholders, speeding up the rework process and looping in downstream customers. 

Key Technologies to Action PCB Change Requests

The final step in the process is choosing the right tools that integrate these best practices into the change management process. Alongside Octopart, designers can leverage a whole host of functions through Altium 365, including:

• Design Tools with Version Control: Altium 365 uses version control to manage requirements and ensure a clear record of past design changes based on the evolution of product requirements. 
• Collaboration Platforms: Tools for real-time communication and documentation, including BOM Management, which integrates with Octopart and creates a quick and easy bill of materials visible to all the right stakeholders. 
• Project and Supply Chain Management Software: Recognizing the impact of changes on the wider supply chain, designers can use the supply chain management tool hand-in-hand with up-to-date BOMs to be fully transparent about rework timelines, costs, and the origin of parts. 
• Engineering Project Management Tools: By connecting Altium 365 with Jira, teams bridge the gap between hardware design and project management workflows. This integration enables real-time synchronization of design tasks and updates, streamlines task management, and fosters collaboration between hardware engineers, project managers, and cross-functional teams.

To manage frequent design changes in electronics, the communication of said changes and transparency processes are essential for reducing the number of reworks required in the future and ensuring the timely completion of new designs. As the pace of technological evolution continues to increase, designers are hard-pressed to ensure that their response to component obsolescence is a rapid turnaround of new revisions.

This is where data comes into play, and accessibility to insight provides designers with a clear picture of the product’s lifecycle in order to avoid previous errors and functional blunders, and reevaluate for greater performance.