NINEIDEA：哈哈，今天跟大家聊个有趣的事！ID工业设计和MD结构设计是一对 “欢喜冤家”——ID 想让产品颜值逆天、手感舒服，MD 却总在旁边泼冷水：“这结构实现不了啊！”、“成本太高啦！” 怎么平衡这俩 “大佬” 的矛盾？分享点接地气的经验，都是多年积累的干货～
他俩到底在吵什么？
ID 的脑回路：
“这个曲面得流畅！”，“按钮要藏进机身才高级！”，“材质得有质感，用户摸起来得爽！”（颜值即正义，体验排第一！）
MD 的脑回路：
“曲面？模具开不出来啊！”，“按钮藏进去，内部零件咋装？”，“你选的材质，加工费贵 3 倍！”（得能造出来，还得省钱、耐用！）
核心矛盾：一个追 “感性”，一个讲 “理性”，但最终都得服务于同一个产品 —— 所以必须学会 “吵架前先看底牌”。
早沟通、巧妥协、找替代
从 “掐架” 变 “组队”：项目初期就绑在一起
ID 别闭门造车：
画草图时喊 MD 过来瞅一眼：“这个弧度，结构上能接受不？”，“这里想做个隐藏接口，留多少空间合适？” 别等效果图都出了再被泼冷水，前期改几笔比后期推翻重做省事儿 100 倍！
MD 别只说 “不行”：
别一开口就是 “这不行”，换成 “如果把曲面角度从 30° 改成 45°，模具成本能降一半，效果差多少？” 用建议代替否定，ID 更容易听进去。
举个栗子：
设计一款手持美容仪，ID 想做 “鹅卵石般的圆润机身”，MD 说 “圆弧形卡扣难组装，容易松动”。最后折中：机身主体保留圆弧，但在卡扣位置切出 5mm 的平面，既好看又能卡住零件。
搞清楚优先级，哪些能让，哪些必须刚？
ID 该让的地儿：
非视觉核心的细节：比如底部螺丝孔的位置，ID 可以接受隐藏在脚垫下，MD 装螺丝更方便；
成本敏感型需求：如果产品定位低价，ID 别硬刚 “必须用金属外壳”，换成注塑 + 金属漆，MD说 能省一半成本。
MD 该让的地儿：
用户高频接触的体验点：比如手持产品的弧度，ID 坚持 “必须贴合手掌”，MD 就算增加铣削工序，也得想办法实现（毕竟用户每天拿在手里，手感差了直接影响销量）；
品牌差异化设计：比如某品牌耳机的 “独特耳挂曲线”，就算模具复杂，MD 也得配合优化结构，因为这是产品辨识度的核心。
口诀：用户能看见、能摸到的地方，ID 优先；藏在内部、影响功能的地方，MD 优先。
用 “第三方案” 破局：别非黑即白
材料创新：
ID 想要 “透明渐变效果”，MD 说 “透明件容易缩水变形”—— 试试双色注塑，外层透明软胶 + 内层硬质基材，既好看又耐摔；
模块化设计：
ID 想让机身超薄，MD 说 “电池和主板没地儿放”—— 把电池做成可拆卸模块，机身主体做薄，模块藏在底座里，兼顾颜值和续航；
虚拟 + 现实结合：
ID 想做 “无按键极简设计”，MD 说 “物理按键更可靠”—— 用触控按键 + 震动反馈模拟物理按压，ID 得了极简，MD 也解决了稳定性问题。
怎么让对方听你的？
给 ID 的话术：
“这个弧面确实增加了结构难度，但调研显示，用户愿意为“握感舒适”多花 20% 预算，咱们能不能一起想想办法？”（用数据和用户价值说服 MD）
给 MD 的话术：
“这个卡扣设计虽然简单，但从侧面看会有 2mm 的缝隙，用户可能觉得“做工廉价”，要不试试隐藏式卡扣？我帮你画个示意图！”（用颜值对品牌的影响打动 ID）
终极杀招：
拉着产品经理/总监一起开会：“颜值和结构现在卡这儿了，咱得定个性价比最高的方案 ，是牺牲点外观保成本，还是加预算做极致设计？” 让决策者拍板，别自己死磕。
他俩不是仇人，是 CP！
ID和MD就像 “产品的前脸和骨架”—— 没颜值，用户连看都不看；没骨架，产品根本站不住。真正厉害的团队，会在冲突中找 “甜蜜点”
早期磨合：ID 出概念时，MD 就介入画 “结构可行性草图”；
中期妥协：用 3D 打印手板直接试，哪边不合理一目了然；
后期互补：ID 帮 MD 优化散热孔的形状（比如把圆孔排成品牌 LOGO 图案），MD 帮 ID 实现 “看似不可能” 的悬浮感（比如用隐藏式磁铁结构）。
所以说，别把对方当对手，当成 “一起闯关的队友”，
毕竟最后客户、消费者满意产品大卖，ID 和 MD 都能拿奖金，对吧？
A must-have for designers! Why do ID designers and MD designers always clash!
NINEIDEA: Ha ha, today I want to talk to you about something interesting! Industrial design (ID) and structural design (MD) are a pair of “happy enemies” – ID wants to make the product look stunning and feel comfortable, but MD always pours cold water on the side: “This structure cannot be achieved!” and “The cost is too high!” How to balance the contradiction between these two “big shots”? Sharing some down-to-earth experiences is a valuable accumulation over the years
What are they arguing about?
Brain circuit of ID:
This surface is smooth! “” The button needs to be hidden in the body to be advanced! “” The material must have texture, and the user feels comfortable to touch! “(Appearance is justice, experience is the top priority!)
MD’s brain circuits:
Curved surface? The mold cannot be opened! “,” How to install the internal parts when the button is hidden? “,” The material you have chosen is three times more expensive in processing fees! “(It must be able to be made, but also cost-effective and durable!)
Core contradiction: One pursues “sensibility” and the other emphasizes “rationality”, but ultimately both have to serve the same product – so we must learn to “look at our cards before arguing”.
Early communication, skillful compromise, and finding alternatives
From ‘fighting’ to ‘teaming up’: tied together from the beginning of the project
Don’t work behind closed doors with ID:
When sketching, ask MD to come over and take a look: “Is this curvature acceptable structurally?” “How much space is suitable for creating a hidden interface here?” Don’t wait until the renderings are out before pouring cold water. Making a few changes in the early stage is 100 times easier than overturning and redoing in the later stage!
MD, don’t just say ‘no’:
Don’t just say ‘this doesn’t work’ when you speak, replace it with ‘if we change the surface angle from 30 ° to 45 °, the mold cost can be reduced by half, how much difference can the effect be?’ Use suggestions instead of negation, ID is easier to listen to.
Take a chestnut as an example:
Design a handheld beauty device with an ID that wants to have a “pebble like rounded body”, but MD says that “the arc-shaped buckle is difficult to assemble and easy to loosen”. Final compromise: The main body of the device retains the arc, but a 5mm flat surface is cut at the buckle position, which looks good and can hold the parts.
Clarify priorities, which ones can be prioritized and which ones must be prioritized?
The place where ID should be given:
Non visual core details: such as the position of the bottom screw hole, the ID can be hidden under the foot pad, and MD screws are more convenient to install;
Cost sensitive demand: If the product is positioned at a low price, the ID should not be rigid and “must use a metal shell”, and should be replaced with injection molding and metal paint. MD says it can save half of the cost.
Where MD should give up:
Experience points that users frequently come into contact with: for example, the curvature of the handheld product, the ID insisting on “must fit the palm”, and even if MD adds milling processes, it must find a way to achieve it (after all, users hold it in their hands every day, and the poor hand feel directly affects sales);
Brand differentiation design: For example, the “unique ear hook curve” of a certain brand of headphones, even if the mold is complex, MD must cooperate to optimize the structure, because this is the core of product recognition.
Mnemonic: Where users can see and touch, ID takes priority; Hidden inside and affecting functionality, MD takes priority.
Breaking the deadlock with the ‘third plan’: Don’t be black or white
Material Innovation:
ID wants a “transparent gradient effect”, MD says “transparent parts are prone to shrinkage and deformation” – try two-color injection molding, with an outer layer of transparent soft rubber and an inner layer of hard substrate, which is both beautiful and durable;
Modular design:
ID wants the body to be ultra-thin, but MD says “there’s no place to put the battery and motherboard” – making the battery into a detachable module, making the body thin, and hiding the module in the base, balancing appearance and battery life;
Virtual+Reality Integration:
ID wants to do a “keyless minimalist design”, but MD says “physical buttons are more reliable” – using touch buttons and vibration feedback to simulate physical pressing, ID has achieved minimalism, and MD has also solved the stability problem.
How do you make the other person listen to you?
Script for giving ID:
This curved surface does increase the structural difficulty, but research shows that users are willing to spend an extra 20% of their budget on “comfortable grip”. Can we work together to find a solution? ”(Persuading MD with data and user value)
Words for MD:
Although this buckle design is simple, there may be a 2mm gap when viewed from the side, and users may feel that the workmanship is cheap. Why not try a hidden buckle? Let me draw a diagram for you! ”(Touching ID with the influence of appearance on brand)
Ultimate killing move:
Pulling the product manager/director together for a meeting: ‘Appearance and structure are stuck here now, we need to come up with the most cost-effective solution. Should we sacrifice some appearance to maintain cost, or increase the budget for ultimate design?’ Let the decision maker make the final decision, don’t stick to it yourself.
They are not enemies, they are CP!
ID and MD are like the “front face and skeleton” of a product – without any appearance, users don’t even look at it; Without a framework, the product cannot stand at all. A truly powerful team will find a “sweet spot” in conflicts:
Early integration: When the concept of ID emerged, MD intervened to draw a “structural feasibility sketch”;
Mid term compromise: directly test with a 3D printed prototype, which side is unreasonable at a glance;
Post complementary: ID helps MD optimize the shape of the heat dissipation holes (such as arranging the circular holes into the brand logo pattern), and MD helps ID achieve a “seemingly impossible” floating feeling (such as using a hidden magnet structure).
So, don’t treat the other party as an opponent, treat them as “teammates who pass the level together”,
After all, if customers and consumers are satisfied with the product and it sells well, both ID and MD can receive bonuses, right?
