Soldering Survey

[Enzo]

We designed the survey to focus on needs and frustration and we realized many of these are things that someone who is experience with soldering would brush off. Based on our preliminary conversations with many experienced users, we found that their frustrations tend to be centered on processes or materials, such as frustrations with lead-free solder. At this point we're focusing on redesigning the soldering iron itself.

Then be careful. If experienced users who might be interested in an improved product don't find the premise appealing, then you become a solution looking for a problem. Inexperienced users tend to focus on rationalizations - fears based on ignorance of the system. Novices are convinced they will destroy resistors just by soldering them, and as Stan touched on, they erroneously assume they need cooler tips and lower wattage irons.

One major problem I see with novice soldering is a lack of confidence. They solder a joint then, decide maybe it wasn't "fully" soldered so they reheat the joint, then maybe we need to add a little more solder, and ten minutes later when they tire of messing with it, they still have a weak joint and they have lifted the copper traces from the board.

[km6xz]

I don't think you have done the market research because you are basing your design on an assumption what a hobbyist is and what industry is. Market research, if done effectively solves a real identified known problem and meets the least sales resistance and defines the design most directly. Did you get input from market researchers in how to define the problem to be solved?
Go find 100 people who have used or do use soldering in some of their activities, and watch their activities. Observe as a neutral observer since you don't want to taint your results by showing a bias or leading questions. If you identify an actual problem to be solved, you can then do a much larger survey that would help refine the design goals. The item is half designed by the time that larger survey is done, simply by finding the real problem and how people would feel about possible features.
It is MUCH easier to solve an existing problem and customers than to find a novel technology and educate an entire audience of a new way or new concept. Most startups fail, not because of lack of technology but a lack of education time for a large enough audience to turn the corner to sustainable sales growth. This case is not a new concept but a further development of how people are used to now. So you really need to find out why people think they need a new type. What you as the developer wants or thinks is cool(you are not the customer) but what the customer thinks he actually needs. The less you have to change the customer's habit the easier to sell incremental improvements to existing technology. "Revolutionary" products usually fail in the market place because too much customer-change is needed or because the education cycle does not match the replacement cycle. Some things, like phones have a very short replacement cycle so getting people to adopt to something new within a payback time for investment, than say, coming up with something with a long replacement cycle like a car, even if you can educate customers to see the value of a new car concept, they are not likely customers but once every 8-12 years.

I think the difference between a Maker and hobbyist is wrong, they are the same and even broader, including many who do connection work as their business. Local repair shops and handyman shops are small but common where as industrial soldering is pretty much limited to specialized rework. There is very little hand soldering done in industry and even less of it done in North America by industry.
So what you really have is one market, hobbyist/small shop users. They need the same job done. Most do not care about fume extraction, they don't use an iron 8 hours a day, make 20 minutes of actually soldering a day in a busy shop. Things they need include good temperature regulation, good tip life, ease of replacing tips, hand comfort, unobstructed views and access to the joint when using it, durability and reasonable cost. I can't think of a user who would give up one of those items just to get a new feature so consider those minimum design goals, plus any a new feature that is a selling point. Can you develop a product with those features and still add the selling feature?
I want to encourage you to try new things but I suspect the enthusiasm got ahead of the practical aspects of selling a product into a crowded limited market. By not having experienced users as a focus group, the design missed a few deal breaker items, such as the restricted access to the joint by the large barrel close to the joint. One bit of advice I got 45 years ago: don't get married to a design. That means don't get so emotionally attached to one way of doing it so you won't have to ignore problems or less than optimum aspects of it. To solve that problem, flesh out one solution but before investing too much energy and emotion into selling it to the product management team, put it away and think of 2-3 other ways to accomplish the same goal. That allows you to walk away from designs without being overcommitted to them and be able to adapt to another better solution if you or someone comes up with one.
I just finished a repair that was typical, a combination of surface mount and through-hole and 6 solder joints. Of those 6, 4 could have been done with your model, but two were not. My soldering iron I posted the photograph of the handpiece, could.
Good luck

[Alex R]

If you can make a better iron than those fast slim powerful little Pace jobs I'd be interested. But I think you're up against the laws of physics there - they are light and powerful and quick to heat up and stay cool really close to the tip, when I got one (and a Pace solder sucker) all my soldering frustrations disappeared and have not returned.

eta I guess in the USA solder rhymes with otter? Sodder Odder. It's hilarious how entirely it doesn't in the UK

[Chuck H]

I have to back other antagonistic posts on this. Juan is spot on about trying to child safe or fool proof any such tool. Stan is spot on about practical application negating changes to the designs we currently use. I think Enzo said it well... Reinventing the wheel.

If you really want to make a better/safer iron, ok then. I think your(clearly smart and capable) team may do better pursuing a different design goal now that the grade is bagged. Pursuing this further ends in one of two ways. Disappointment for you and your team or, if your team is very good at marketing and knows how to bamboozle, you might be able to convince some safety agency that the world NEEDS these irons or life on the planet will be compromised. In which case their use would be mandated and we would all hate you for making us use that iron.

We don't want that iron any more than we want to drive around in Nerf cars that only go 50MPH and have soft rubber tires that need to be replaced every 5000 miles, but won't hurt anyone. It's just impractical (and I hope I haven't given you any new ideas )

The safety level of a product for children and fools has to match the market demographic. ie: A BigWheel DOES need a high safety consideration WRT potential misunderstanding or improper implementation of the product. Not so much with WRT chef knives because they couldn't do their job if they were made safe. I'll wager your safety considerations for soldering irons is something like the childproof cap on an aspirin bottle. That is, only someone with acceptable understanding and skill would be able to access the hot end. Or, worse yet, you have to depress some tricky device and wait for the "fast heat tip" to come up to temperature for every joint. Both very unacceptable notions for professional use of this tool. And since only professionals and enthusiasts use them the point becomes moot. There are plenty of household items that can hurt kids and dummies (And I am occasionally hurt by them). Electricity comes from easily penetrated holes set at a low height on walls. They still make sharp cut edge can openers. A glass coffee table is always a nice idea This doesn't even consider all the power tools you can find in my garage! A soldering iron is a tool. Already made relatively safe through a clever ergonomic design feature called a HANDLE that allows the user to hold the cool end of the device. The world really doesn't need Hello Kitty soldering irons.

[eschertron]

We're also considering designing with children in mind, so if you have any input in that regard, we'd love to hear that too.

If the goal is to make the solder otter SAFE for children to use, then by all means, make a PLAYSKOOL otter or other gadget. If every school district in North America buys just one, you'll all be insanely rich! Just know that what could be made safe for a child will render it unusable for a pro (as mentioned above). So who is really the target market? If the answer is 'everybody', then you haven't even begun your market research.

If the goal is to make soldering fun and enjoyable for kids, then you need to ask how many members here consider soldering FUN? It's not really a hobby all unto itself, it's a technique used by hobbyists to reach other, more satisfying goals. The closest thing to soldering for fun I can think of is stained-glass-window making. A different set of problems, maybe the solution you have fits that market better?

[g1]

I get the impression that what you guys are saying is that this would be about as usable as an Easy-Bake oven in a restaurant .

[Justin Thomas]

I think my first introduction to a soldering iron was ye olde woodburner... recommended for ages 10+. I put that thing to all sorts of nefarious uses... I guess what I'm thinking is, if they trust 10-year-old me with that, I can handle the old Weller... The stained glass kit was second. And, I knew how to solder pipes at five.

The problems with safety aren't always in the device - they're in the people using them.

Justin

[Alex R]

We don't want that iron any more than we want to drive around in Nerf cars that only go 50MPH and have soft rubber tires that need to be replaced every 5000 miles, but won't hurt anyone... The world really doesn't need Hello Kitty soldering irons.

lol that makes my Pace a Ducati

eta come to think of it, it would be damn hard to do yourself any serious damage with a soldering iron. You'd be up against some deep reflexes there. A blackly comic scene presents itself to the imagination, sodder odder management trying to show how dangerous an iron could be. You'd have to tie someone to a chair reservoir dogs style. Eek.

entertaining thread all the same and I do wish you guys well, maybe a schools forum or something?

[km6xz]

Not to pill on too much, but are you mischaracterizing the target group? If they were not into creating something that did not exist before, it might be assumed they are a passive group which needs or wants to minimize risk and skill adoption. I am not part of that hobby group of makers, but have been conceiving new items in electronics, designing them, and building them for 56 years, mostly for fun but sometimes for profit so I suspect some would label me a "Maker" nowadays. One of the attractive elements of creating something original is acquiring the various skills that sets makers apart from dreamers and consumers. Would Makers not prefer to learn how to use the tools effectively as part of the creative process? When I started working with Microwave when 14-15 years old, everything had to be made by me because nothing existed to assist. Part of the fun of working with microwave was the building the waveguides and flanges needed for transmission from one device or stage to the next. I had to learn a whole new skill set of metal working, and finding a kindly owner of a machine shop willing to let a kid loose in his business afterhours. Those skilled learned were integral to the excitement and satisfaction of building a full microwave link for signalling between a remote SW receiver and my garage which was fully taken over by my electronics experiments by that time(plus the roof, bedroom, one bathroom and the side yard). I am guessing that the Maker community is much the same but using more off the shelf items. I turned those metal skilled into an interferometer type tracking parabolic dishes antenna system 2 years later into a system that was able to establish 2 way communications by bouncing UHF signals off the moon. Something the US Army spend millions of dollars doing first just a couple years earlier. The other side of the two-way was Cornell University operated Arecibo P.I. 1000ft dia crater dish radio telescope. Needless to say, that was about as Maker'y and hobby could get at the time and was probably attempted with the same spirit and enthusiasm as the modern day Makers building their robots. I sens that they would be as receptive of "training wheels" on their soldering irons as I would have been about being told not to work around HV, not.
That is what market research does, tells you what is wrong about assumptions about what a targeted audience, but it does more, it tells you what they actually want, even if they can't articulate it. Manufacturing is tricky and risky enough without mischaracterizing the audience. One of the key benefits of good market research, besides being much cheaper than gearing up for production of something not wanted, is that it helps identify audiences you never would have thought of, which really could be a viable market.
When I moved to Russia 15 years ago, as semi-retirement and mostly to have fun, I had no plan, no goal except to enjoy myself. It accomplished that in spades. But shortly after arriving I met a man who was just starting the tour company to give tours to cruise passengers, via a contract with some of the largest cruise lines in the world. I knew nothing about cruising, thought it was silly and not the way I had traveled to 86 countries before that time. But it intrigued me because I did not understand the attraction of cruising and why 60-70% of Americans who visit another country do it on a cruise, on their 4-8 hour port calls. St Petersburg was different, they arrived for 2-3 days. I knew so little of what motivated so many people to travel that way they my curiosity got the better of me. I went back the US for a month but stayed 6. The whole time I used to talk to cruisers. I gave talks at travel clubs, answered questions and read comments on cruise forums, gave radio interviews about travel since few people had traveled as much and had spent so much time in "mysterious" Russia. The main point of all that was to learn what cruisers wanted, thought about and their habits. I returned to Russia armed with a whole body of impressions about cruisers and suggested to the owner of the new company that there was a style of touring that would fit the passengers better than what was the tradition. He was skeptical having been in the travel industry all his life as head of sales for North America of Finnair for 25 years before retiring, moving to Russia and marrying a young women. I proposed that I create a separate division with a different model tours and if it did not work, fine, it did not cost him anything and I would go away but if it did as I proposed, double net income in 1 season, I would be allowed to buy in for a highly reduced amount. It took a few months for him to accept but I applied what I learned, and what no one seemed to think would work. It did, a whole new style of tour that did not involve the ship contracts at all. It did represent 50% of the net by the end of the first 4 month season and was easier, with less overhead and more profit per passenger while selling for 1/2 the price the ships were charging for our contracted tours. Within 2 years the net from that net style exceed the multimillion dollar ship contracts(where the ship retained most of the selling price as their commission but had convinced the customers that they could not leave the ship without buying one of their expensive tours) and it spawned competitors. That was 2002 and by 2012 we had 150 competitors copying my exact business plan, even copies names of tours. All because I knew nothing about the industry so went to find out from the very people who were to be customers, no one with experience had ever done such a simple thing. Cruiselines paid market research and advertizing companies millions to tell them what customers wanted, but no one actually asked customers, they were experts and only talked between themselves. Those word or mouth referrals with almost no advertising took over the most profitable portion of the cruise shore excursion market. All it took was someone who did not know anything to ask the only people who really knew, the customers. Now there are 200 profitable companies with almost identical products as I created in 2002-2003, and sales exceed that of the cruise line tour sales. I learned that simple lesson with my recording studio years before and a repair shop that by simply approaching from the customer's point of view because dominate in their niches. My repair shop was a second retirement side business to keep my hand in electronics for music. I approached it differently and the one man shop, in a crowded field of long established larger shops, within 2 years had 23 ful time techs working on 28 fully equipped benches and a support staff of 8. Only because I looked at the process from the customer's and manufacturer's point of view. MARKET RESEARCH....was the difference.
Industry after industry, after it matures, become hidebound and upper management never talks to end users. GM used to be the largest corporation in the world, and sold far more cars than any other. For 30-40 years the customers and car critics tried to tell the company they were blowing it by not listening to buyers. The assumption was that they knew the industry inside and out, owned the industry but the CEO never once stood outside a showroom asking people why they were not buying the cars. The insiders "knew" because they were industry/corporate experts and their consulting companies they hired to tell them what the customers wanted were just as arrogant and convinced they knew more than mere customers. The ad companies raked in billions in ads that fell on deaf ears. Ad budgets just increased year to year but falling sales. The executives of GM accused the Japanese of cheating, of selling below cost for inferior products. But sales kept falling. Still no one asked customers why they did no by GM cars like they used to. Every customer knew exactly why they didn't and anyone paying attention to the end users would have gotten an earful. 40 years of ignoring the customers by experts in the industry. Well, that is the difference between top down driven marketing and bottom up. Executives in the corner offices do not related to end users, not know them, have no interest in knowing them and surround themselves with people who follow the same mode of operation.
How does this relate to your project? It appears to be too top down driven, an idea was thought of and without enough communications with the potential market, finalized a design before asking the questions in this thread. The FIRST step should have been spending 3-4 months talking with hundreds of potential customers, watching how they work, observing what problems they encounter. If you had, I guarantee that the design process would have been faster and different in results. The advantage of starting out unknown is that mistakes do not cost much, make the mistakes when very little is invested and few people know about them. Mistakes later, after a product and promotion are rolled out become fatal for startups, they kill both the budget and reputation.
Just as important as the design, is the design of the manufacturing process. That latter point kills more "good ideas" than bad concepts. Is it easier to make, with less waste, with less dependency on single source items than other designs? How scalable is the assembly process? How expensive and durable are the mold designs. By slight changes a mold can be made easier and last longer. Is it dependent on limited life components. How do production costs or savings scale? What is the cost of the first one(cost of molds, initial minimum orders, graphic design and press runs, automation , jigs and special tools). If you take the true cost of start up, and the true cost of unit 1, and the production costs ongoing, is it even feasible from a financial point of view, the only one that counts in manufacturing. At what production level does it become self sustaining? Is that quantity realistic considering market size at the price point needed to cover all these costs? You may find that it requires 2,000 a month to maintain the projected costs of production, for example, but how many would be sold in a month? What do competitors produce and sell a month. How are most products like this distributed, and if through a distribution channel, have any larger distributors been talked with? Is it on-line sales only? If so, how do you get the first million people to know about you, and after that million know, how scalable is that since even if it is desired in the market, a specialty item needs to continuously increase the market presence to extend sales past the initial pent up desire for it. For example, say, if 1000 people really have been waiting for this to come on the market for 15 years, sales to them will be easy and fast, but where are those who have not been waiting for it, and how to continuously grow that number of converts?
Designing a good product is easier than getting it built and sold at a profit over a sustained period of time. How big is the market, and how big is the market that is willing to try something new, do you have hard numbers?

Just some things to consider if developing this as a viable product. Remember, building a better mousetrap has little to do with how an audience perceives whether it is a better trap for THEIR mouse.
Good luck

[solderotter]

eta I guess in the USA solder rhymes with otter? Sodder Odder. It's hilarious how entirely it doesn't in the UK

Hehe that's something we hadn't actually thought of. Thanks for pointing it out!

entertaining thread all the same and I do wish you guys well, maybe a schools forum or something?

Thanks for the well wishes! We've been in contact with some local schools to assess their needs too!

Just some things to consider if developing this as a viable product. Remember, building a better mousetrap has little to do with how an audience perceives whether it is a better trap for THEIR mouse.
Good luck

Slow clap Wow. Just wow. Thank you. We can only imagine how long it must have taken you to put your posts together. Our project started as an engineering design project for school, so while we made a small attempt at conducting user needs analysis, our time was unfortunately largely committed producing a prototype. So you're right- our product thus far is very top-down driven. We are, as you advise, not married to our design. We would be willing to walk away from what we have currently designed, in fact we sort of expect to do so at least in part, if our research deems it necessary. Now that we've graduated and are no longer constrained by academic deadlines, we're trying to take the time these few months to conduct market research, including this survey so that it can guide our business and product design, so we can do it right. Those questions you posed at the end your posts is something that we've begun to think about but haven't quite gotten there yet, so it's definitely helpful to have those pointers. Looking at this response of ours, it feels a bit inadequate in comparison to yours, but we do appreciate your time and thoughts. Thank you!


To everyone else, we'll now be closing the survey later tonight. Thank you all for your input, it's very valuable for us as we move forward. Please do feel free to continue to comment. We'll be sure to stay engaged!

[Chuck H]

...it would be damn hard to do yourself any serious damage with a soldering iron. You'd be up against some deep reflexes there. A blackly comic scene presents itself to the imagination, sodder odder management trying to show how dangerous an iron could be. You'd have to tie someone to a chair reservoir dogs style. Eek.

That's funny! And disturbing. But there are some troubled individuals that may actually be able to do this! I remember eating my lunch at a park in Palo Alto, Ca. when a radio news broadcast reported that police were investigating a man in a parked car on the other side of that park. He used a hammer and a chisel to beat a hole into his own head in an attempt to get the aliens out! A little off topic, but your post made me think of it. Indeed, it would be VERY hard, probably impossible, to do serious harm to yourself with a soldering iron. Well, unless you started a fire with one and became trapped I suppose. I'm not sure how to safeguard against that without detriment to proper use of the tool though. Perhaps a switch that is depressed when the iron is in the holder or in the users hand. I suspect an iron would cool fast enough to avoid most fires if you shut it off before throwing it on the ground and leaving it there.

[Alex R]

I wish I could get the aliens out of a few folks' heads. Not that way though. Well, not necessarily...

Yes the shop could catch fire and trap me that's true. In what I guess is meant to be a helpful way, to minimise fire risk my Pace irons turn themselves off after a period of inaction. Some reasonable period like 20 minutes elapses, then they cool themselves off. However in calculating the period before switch-off they have seriously underestimated how long I spend thinking about stuff. Not to mention making a cup of tea and thinking about it some more. That's why I appreciate the 5-second warmup time

[Enzo]

Now THERE is a product idea. Make a truly safe head chisel. Let the aliens out without damaging the skull.

[dai h.]

wow (lol...). Making me think what a store for the mentally ill (or deranged, I suppose) would look like. Shelves full of seriously strange devices.

[Chuck H]

"C'mon down to the Pink Elephant Market where we have CRAZY prices!"

"Get a Hello Kitty soldering iron for just $29.99! Hole-less chisel's just $8.99 ..."