King Abdulaziz University

Faculty of Engineering
2015
Section: C5
Introduction to Engineering Design-1 (IE201)
Assignment L3-c

(Artifact Selection)
Team 1(Elite)
1)
Allah Mohammad Ibrahimi
(1414316)
2)
Ghassan Mohammed
(1414800)
3)
Sefatullah Omar Khan
(1414314)
4)
Ammar Ali Al-Ammari
(1414555)
5)
Hani Mubarak Alghamdi
(1409833)
6)
Anas Ali Aumara
(1406960)
Instructor Name

Dr Ghaffer Kiani
Team Email
Elite_team1@hotmail.com

Team: 1 (Elite)
Date: 26/November/15
Section: C5
Assignment: L3-c

Abstract
This is the third assignment in L3 assignments series after musts
and wants have been generated for our future project in L3-B. It was
decided which artifact from the top six artifacts generated in L3-A
assignment to select. And face mask fan project has been chosen by
using musts and wants steps. In this assignment, Kepner-Trego decision
analysis (KTDA) was performed or applied on the top six artifacts
obtained in previous assignment to select the best artifact for us,
because it is being worked through this semester. In addition, other
techniques were utilized in this assignment, which called Adverse
Consequences technique on the best two artifacts which were obtained
from KTDA, helped us to explore the risks related to our project. Then,
cost estimation was made for our requirements and artifacts parts.

Work
Task 1: KTDA Analysis
After finishing assignment L3-B, the lists of top ten Musts and
Wants have been gotten. In this step, the method of Kepner & Tregoe
Decision Analysis (KTDA) will be applied. KT decision analysis table is
an effective technique used to eliminate and reduce artifacts according
to Musts and Wants. Weight (1~10) was put for each want, then, put a
rate on each artifact (1~10) according to the want, and the score will
be multiplication result of weight with the rate. Finally, the highest total
of scores of two artifacts will be chosen to apply Adverse Consequence
on them.

1 | Page

2 | Page

Discussion
After the KT decision analysis has been done, it is clear, how to
take decisions with this analysis. Also, it was known that what the best
artifact fits with our Musts and Wants. Applying KTDA table was very
useful way to reduce the number of artifacts in an organized and fast
way. By looking above to the results of the table the three artifacts that
meet all our musts for the project which are face mask fans, fan has
sensor for smoking and emergency light. Then the Wants will be visible
when weight is put for them and calculating how every artifact fulfill
our Wants, so the score of the three artifacts were gotten to find out
the top two of them in order to apply an adverse of consequences for
them. The top two artifacts are face mask fan and fan has sensor for
smoking. The next step of this assignment will be the adverse of
consequences table for the top two artifacts.

Task 2: Adverse Consequences

After completing the first step, which is KTDA Table, two top rated
artifacts were gotten for our final project. The first one is face mask
with fan and the second one is fan has sensor for smoking. For
choosing the final project, the information from KTDA Table is not
enough, so in this part a list of all the problems will be made that
probably faced. Through this step the alternative which has the
minimum and maximum threat will be known. Threat is the product of
probability of occurrence of a problem and its seriousness. So an
alternative with minimum threat means that this alternative is less
dangerous than another one. After getting the result from this table an
alternative with a minimum threat and high score from K.T. decision
analysis table will be chosen.

3 | Page

Table 2.1: Adverse Consequences

Adverse
Consequences
Probabili
Consequence
Seriou
ty of
sness
Occurre
Artifact (A): Face Mask Fans

Thr
eat

A1. Fan broken

A2. The battery doesn't work

A3. The electrical tape might get
loose
A4. Wire damaged
Total
Threat
Artifact (D): Fan has Sensor for

28

49

48

B1. The sensor not working

63

B2. Fan broken

30

B3. The wires might be cut

63

B4. Energy of power weak

49

Total
Threat

Smoking

13
1

20
5

Discussion
After completing the adverse consequence table, it was learned
that sometimes at first glance to an alternative, that alternative might
not reveal any problem that potentially may go wrong, but after
considering the things that might go wrong, that alternative will be
seen having dangerous effects on people and environment. In this step
an adverse consequence table was drawn for two alternatives. The
table consisted of the problems that potentially may go wrong for each
alternative, also the probability of occurrence and its seriousness. Then
to evaluate the probability from (0-10) that the adverse consequence
could occur and the seriousness from (0-10) of this consequence if it
were to occur. From Table 2.1, it could be seen that the first artifact,
face mask with fan has got a total threat of 131, while the second one,

4 | Page

fan has sensor for smoking, has got 205 total threat. This means that
the first artifact is the lees dangerous compare to the second one. In
addition to that, in the KTDA Table, that the first alternative has a score
of 426, while the second one has a score of 364. Finally, according to
sore and threat of these alternatives the first alternative which is a
mask with fan for as our final project in this course has been chosen.

Task 3: Cost Estimation

After used KTDA tables to select the best two artifacts and found
the adverse consequences of them, cost estimation was used to make
budget to the two artifacts to know how much they will cost when
making them. The main parts and tools of each artifact were
determined and the prices have been collected in tables (See tables
3.1 and 3.2). Many shops and markets were visited to find the best and
cheapest parts and tools. Also, the cost of transportation and
telephone were calculated. Finally, total cost of the two artifacts has
been calculated and the best and cheapest artifact has been chosen.
Table 3.1: Cost Estimation of Artifact A (Face Mask Fans)

NO
.

Description

Small fan
Mask
Battery
Filter
Switch off/on
Copper wire
Microcontroller of
speed

Cost
(SR)

Quantity

Main Parts
45
2
50
1
10
3
15
2
15
1
5/meter
2
20

Total

Total
Cost
(SR)

Percent
age

90
50
30
30
15
10

21.63%
12.06%
7.28%
7.28%
3.69%
2.49%

20

4.88%

250

59.31%

10
20
3
15
48

2.49%
4.88%
0.72%
3.69%
11.78%

20

4.88%

Tools
2

Bucket of screws
Screwdriver
Glue
Welding gun

5
10
3
15

2
2
1
1

Total
3
Transportation

Other Cost
5/Hours
4 Hours

5 | Page

Telephone

30

Total

30
50

7.28%
12.16%

70

16.75%

418

100%

Overhead
4

It is a 20% from the total (348).

Final total

Table 3.2: Cost Estimation of Artifact D (Fan has Sensor for Smoking)

NO
.

Description

Cost
(SR)

Quantity

Main Parts
Medium fan
75
1
Sensor
30
1
Battery
40
1
Light of sensor
20
1
Copper wire
5/meter
5 meters
Filter
20
1
Switch off/on
15
1
Total
Tools
Bucket of screws
5
4
Screwdriver
10
2
Pliers
20
1
Welding gun
15
2
Total
Other Cost
Transportation
5/Hours
6 Hours
Telephone
30
1
Total

Total
Cost
(SR)

Percent
age

75
30
40
20
25
20
15
225

16.66%
6.66%
8.88%
4.45%
5.56%
4.45%
3.34%
50.00%

20
20
20
30
90

4.44%
4.45%
4.44%
6.67%
20.00%

30
30
60

6.67%
6.67%
13.34%

75

16.66%

450

100%

Overhead
4

It is a 20% from the total (375).

Final total

6 | Page

Dissuasion
After the calculation, the total cost of artifacts were found (A)
which is face mask fans approximately 418 S.R. The other artifact (D)
which is fan has sensor for smoking approximately 450 S.R. So the face
fan mask must be chosen because it is better and cheaper. It was very
hard to find appropriate shops, some experts were asked to help us to
get some information about prices of parts.

The Comparison between the Final Artifacts

In the following table, a small comparison between final two
artifacts and list the scores that was gotten from the previous
techniques were made.
Table 4: Comparison between the Two Artifacts
Artifact (A): Face
Artifact (D): Fan
Method / Artifact
Mask Fans
has Sensor for
Smoking
426
364
KTDA

Adverse
Consequence
Cost Estimation

131

205

418

450

The table above, Table 4, benefited us a lot comparing our two

artifacts in the purpose of deciding which artifact must be chosen to
work on. As it could be seen, the first artifact (A) face mask fans got a
total score of 426 in the KTDA table which is higher than the second
artifact (D) fan has sensor for smoking by 62. In addition, the total
number of artifact (A) of adverse consequence (131) is less than
artifact (D) (205). Finally, the cost estimation of artifact (A) (418) is less
than artifact (D) (450). As a result, our final artifact is ''A Face Mask
Fans.

Conclusion
By doing this assignment, L3-C, the top six artifacts were
evaluated in order to reach the only one that is being worked on. In

7 | Page

fact, this assignment benefited us a lot in terms of evaluating artifacts

using many techniques, being aware of adverse consequences that
might occur either in the near or far future, doing cost estimations by
asking costs of parts and knowing the total estimated costs for the
artifact, and finally comparing between artifacts by applying some
techniques, which were learned from the lessons on the book. In the
process of doing this assignment, firstly Kepner-Trego decision analysis
(KTDA) was used as shown in tables and in order to evaluate and filter
the artifacts by our top ten Musts that was generated from the
previous assignment, L3-B. So, three artifacts were chosen. Those,
which got all GOs, and then to apply our top ten Wants on those three
artifacts we moved in order to get the total score of each one. After
that, the adverse consequences was applied to know the
consequences of each one of the top two artifacts. Their probability of
occurrence and seriousness getting the total of each artifact by
multiplying the probability by the seriousness. After that, a cost
estimation was made by applying cost estimation sheet. Finally, the
comparison between the two artifacts was made using the total score
that was gotten from the Kepner-Trego decision analysis KTDA tables
and the total number from the adverse consequences table. So, the
artifact which got highest total score in the Kepner-Trego decision
analysis (KTDA) and lowest total number in the adverse consequences
is the artifact which will be chosen because it is safer compare to the
another one. At the end of this assignment and from the comparison
and results, it is clear that our final project is face mask fans. After
selecting our final project, hope that the project will benefit us so do
others, in addition to achieve the goals of IE 201 course.

8 | Page