Case Study: From Prototype to Reality
From Prototype to Reality
A former customer came to us with a new idea for a golf swing training aid—something similar to the Orange Whip. He had a rough version in hand already, pieced together from off-the-shelf components and a few parts he machined himself in his garage.
It was a good concept. We worked with him to refine it and built a functional prototype that looked the part and performed the way it was intended. In-house testing checked out. The swing felt right. The feedback was there. From a development standpoint, it was ready for the next step.
So we sent it into the field.
Where Things Broke Down
It didn’t take long for the first issue to surface. Customers were breaking the interconnect piece—but not under the conditions we had tested. They were using it harder, more aggressively, and in ways that weren’t fully accounted for during development.
Our first response was material-driven. We upgraded the interconnect from 6061 to 7075 aluminum, gaining strength and better fatigue resistance. That change solved the immediate problem. Failures stopped, and the product held up under continued use.
Then the design evolved again.
The Ripple Effect of Small Changes
To improve swing feedback, the customer changed the upper handle from plastic to aluminum. On its own, it was a reasonable upgrade. But it fundamentally changed how the product behaved.
The plastic handle had been absorbing some of the energy from each swing. Aluminum doesn’t. With that change, the energy had nowhere to go but into the interconnect—the same component we had just reinforced.
Failures returned.
This is where many projects get stuck. Each individual decision makes sense, but the system as a whole is no longer the same system that was originally tested.
Solving the Right Problem
At that point, it wasn’t just about increasing strength. It was about managing fatigue under repeated, real-world loading conditions.
We stepped back and looked at material performance more closely, specifically focusing on fatigue resistance rather than just static strength. That led us to 12L14. With that change, the interconnect held up under actual use. The failures stopped, and the product performed reliably in the field.
Lesson Learned
Real users introduce variables you won’t see in a controlled environment—more force, different handling, repeated abuse. And every design change, even ones that seem minor, can shift how stress moves through a product.
If you’re not testing in the field, you’re not testing the real product.
