Not sure where to start?
Please fill out this form so we can best help you!
Spark Updates
Blog
Growth is usually a sign that something is working. More customers are buying, production is increasing, and the company may be adding people, equipment, or even new facilities to keep up.
But growth can also create a strange kind of frustration when processes that worked well for years start becoming harder to sustain. Engineering may struggle to keep up with the volume of work, manufacturing questions that were once easy to resolve can become recurring issues, and the company may find itself relying heavily on a handful of experienced people who know how things are supposed to be built.
One of the more frustrating problems with a sheet metal assembly is when everything looks right individually, but doesn't work when you put it together.
The drawings may have been reviewed and the individual components may look perfectly reasonable on their own. It’s only when the full assembly comes together that the problems become apparent: holes don't line up, connections are difficult to make, or components don't interface the way everyone expected.
You send a sheet metal part out for a quote and expect comparable pricing back. Instead, one fabricator declines the job entirely, another comes back with questions, and a third sends a quote with no apparent concerns.
We’ve heard many versions of this same story. And having this experience can be very confusing. After all, all the fabricators you’ve reached out to are looking at the same drawing.
When a sheet metal project falls behind, production usually gets the blame. But the delay often started much earlier, before fabrication ever began.
A drawing that needs clarification, a needlessly tight tolerance, an assembly issue no one caught in review, or a manufacturing question that sits unresolved can quietly eat into the schedule long before anyone calls the project “late.” By the time the problem finally shows up on the shop floor, the easiest opportunities to fix it may already be gone.
As hands-on problem solvers, we know that big successes often rely on the foundational work done completely behind the scenes. Recently, the SPARK team traded our engineering desks for high-vis vests and headed over to the Science Museum of Virginia in Richmond to pitch in and get our hands dirty.
One challenge SPARK has encountered while experimenting with AI is that the tool rapidly wants to move toward an answer. In many situations, that is useful. In early-stage product development, however, reaching an answer too quickly can work against the way creative ideation actually happens.
As SPARK continues to explore AI within product development, some of the clearest applications for our Industrial Design team have not necessarily been in generating concepts. Instead, AI has proven useful in supporting familiar, labor-intensive visualization tasks.
When Will Knutson arrived at SPARK at the beginning of the summer, he already knew how he would approach his internship:
Intentionally.
We are hands-on problem solvers who know that big successes rely on the work done out of the spotlight. We might not be athletes, but we know how to do some heavy lifting. At SPARK, tackling the behind-the-scenes details isn't just a step in our engineering process—it’s where we believe the most meaningful impact is made.
Will Knutson did not first encounter SPARK as a college student looking for an internship.
He found SPARK as a high school student when he was trying to get a better sense of what a future in engineering might look like. At the time, his interests leaned more toward physics and pure math, and his picture of engineering was fairly narrow: hard hats, spreadsheets, and factory floors.