Concurrent Engineering TIE 3119 Module

Faculty of Industrial Technology
Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
B Eng Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
Concurrent Engineering TIE 3119

Concurrent Engineering
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ ii
Table of Figures ......................................................................................................... iii
LECTURE ONE : INTRODUCTION ............................................................................5
1.1 The life cycle of a product ...............................................................................5
1.2 Global competition ..........................................................................................6
1.3 Characteristics of a competitive product .........................................................6
1.4 Research and development: its role in product development .........................7
1.5 Exercises ........................................................................................................9
1.6 Reading list .....................................................................................................9
LECTURE TWO :CONCURRENT ENGINEERING ................................................. 10
2.1 Organizing for Concurrent Engineering ....................................................... 12
2.2 Concurrent Engineering Toolbox ................................................................. 12
2.3 Executing the product development process ............................................... 16
LECTURE THREE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT .................................................... 20
3.1 Concept Development ................................................................................. 20
3.2 The Mission Statement ................................................................................ 20
3.3 Identifying Customer Needs ........................................................................ 21
3.4 Quality Function Deployment ....................................................................... 21
A - Customer Needs/Benefits ............................................................................. 22
B- Planning Matrix .............................................................................................. 24
C - Technical Responses ................................................................................... 25
D - Relationships (Between Customer Needs and Technical Reponses - Whats
vs Hows) ............................................................................................................. 25
E- Technical Correlation or Sensitivity Matrix (Hows vs Hows).......................... 26
F- Technical Matrix (How-Muches):.................................................................... 26
3.5 Beyond the House of Quality ....................................................................... 27
3.6 Limitations of QFD ....................................................................................... 28
LECTURE FOUR CONCEPT GENERATION .......................................................... 31
4.1 The task of Concept Generation .................................................................. 31
4.2 The five-step methodology .......................................................................... 31
Step 1 -Clarify Problem ...................................................................................... 32
Step 2 - Search Externally .................................................................................. 34
Step 4 - Explore systematically .......................................................................... 36
Concept classification tree.................................................................................. 36
4.3 Concept Combination Table ........................................................................ 38
LECTURE FIVE CONCEPT SELECTION ............................................................... 41
5.1 Concept selection an integral part of the product development process ..... 41
5.2 Structured Concept Selection Methodology ................................................ 44
5.3 Concept Selection Methodology .................................................................. 44
5.3.1 Concept Screening .................................................................................... 44
5.3.2. Concept Scoring .................................................................................... 47
Exercises ............................................................................................................ 50
LECTURE SIX PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE ......................................................... 51
6.1 What is product architecture? ...................................................................... 51
6.2 Implications of the architecture .................................................................... 52
Product change .................................................................................................. 52
Product variety.................................................................................................... 52
ii
Component standardization................................................................................ 53
Product performance .......................................................................................... 53
Manufacturability ................................................................................................ 53
6.3 Establishing the Architecture ....................................................................... 54
Exercise .............................................................................................................. 54
Reading List ........................................................................................................ 54
LECTURE SEVEN INDUSTRIAL DESIGN .............................................................. 55
7.1 Industrial design and its importance to products ......................................... 55
Ergonomic Needs ............................................................................................... 55
Aesthetic Needs ................................................................................................. 56
7.2 Industrial design process ............................................................................. 56
7.3 Management of the industrial design process ............................................. 58
Technology • Driven Products ............................................................................ 58
User - Driven Products ....................................................................................... 58
Technology-and- User-Driven Products ............................................................. 58
Table of Figures
Figure 1.1 Life cycle of a product ..................................................................................5
Figure 1.2 Benefits of investing in R&D ........................................................................7
Figure 1.3 Life-cycle of a product (office printers) ..........................................................8
Figure 1.4 Introduction and withdrawal of products (A - E ).............................................8
Figure 1.5 Technology push and market pull forces .........................................................9
Figure 2.1 Pahl and Beitz phase model of product development. ........................... 11
Figure 2.2 Manufacturability System Model ............................................................. 11
Figure 2.3 Integrated Product Development (IPD) model ........................................ 12
Figure 2.4 A product development process ............................................................. 13
Figure 2.5 A generic product development process ................................................ 16
Figure 2.6 Sequential product development model ................................................. 17
Figure 2.7 Manufacturability system model ............................................................. 18
Figure 2.8 Simultaneous Engineering- using concurrency to develop fast cycle
capability in product development ............................................................................ 18
Figure 3.1 Concept Development ............................................................................ 20
Figure 3.2 Mission statement for a new product ...................................................... 21
Figure 3.3 The House of Quality .............................................................................. 22
Figure 3.4 Affinity Diagram....................................................................................... 23
Figure 3.5 Tree Diagram .......................................................................................... 24
Figure 3.6 Planning Matrix ....................................................................................... 25
Figure 3.7 Relationships Whats vs Hows ................................................................ 26
Figure 3.8 A completed QFD chart (Houses of Quality) for Mouse Trap ................. 27
Figure 3.9 QFD - the Houses Beyond ...................................................................... 28
Figure 4.1 Five step concept generation methodology ............................................ 32
Figure 4.2 Problem decomposition - "overall" "black box" ....................................... 33
Figure 4.3 Problem decomposition into sub-functions ............................................. 34
Figure 3.4 Classification tree for nailer energy Product Design, Development and
Management ............................................................................................................ 37
Figure 4.5 Electrical energy source sub-problem .................................................... 38
Figure 4.6 Concept combination table ..................................................................... 39
Figure 4.7a Combination of: Solenoid - Spring - Multiple Impacts ........................... 39
Figure 5.1 Narrowing of concept options ................................................................. 41
iii
Figure 5.2 Concepts for outpatient syringe .............................................................. 42

Figure 5.3 Concept Screening Matrix ...................................................................... 46
Figure 5.4 New and Revised Concepts for Syringe ................................................. 47
Figure 5.5 Concept Scoring ..................................................................................... 48
Figure 5.6 Hierarchical decomposition of selection criteria ..................................... 49
Figure 6.1 Bicycle brake and shifting controls on the left-modular and on the right
integral architecture.................................................................................................. 52
Figure 6.2 Swatch uses a modular design ............................................................... 53
Figure 7.1 Concept sketches showing two of the early concepts in the MicroTAC
development project ................................................................................................. 56
Figure 7.2 Hard model - after further refinement and final concept selection .......... 57
Figure 7.3 !AC - Control drawing showing the final shape and dimensions ............ 57
Figure 7.4 Classification of some common products on the continuum from
technology-driven to user-driven .............................................................................. 58
iv
LECTURE ONE : INTRODUCTION
After this lecture you should understand the following:

• Stages in the life cycle of a product
• Characteristics of global competition
• Characteristics' of a competitive product
• Role of research and development in the design of products
• Factors influencing forward move of a product
1.1 The life cycle of a product

With customer requirements changing over time, demand for particular product eventually
falls and the organisation should stop making it (e.g. computer software - upgraded every
year, motor vehicles modified year after year). As a result almost all products have a limited
life span. Demand for most products follows a standard life cycle. This has five stages as
shown in Figure l .1
Figure 1.1 Life cycle of a product
I - Introduction
A new product appears on the market and demand is low while people learn about it, try it
and see if they like it (e.g. colour photocopiers, colour laser printers etc), at this stage the
marketing department has a task of promoting the product and ensuring that sales growth
begins.
II - Growth
New customers buy the product and demand rises quickly (i.e. the new product is accepted
by the market and experiences exponential growth. During this period however, competitors
will have observed the success of the new product and this stimulates them to produce their
own competing design.
III-Maturity
Most potential customers know about the product and are buying it in steady numbers.
Demand stabilises at a constant level for instance motor vehicles, colour televisions sets.
IV-Decline
Sales fall as customers start to buy new alternative products that become available.
5
V- Withdrawal
Demand declines to the point where it is no longer worth to make the product (e.g. black and
white television sets, three wheel cars.
1.2 Global competition

Up until the 60s when international competition was less fierce, product design from both
the technological and operations point of view was relatively simple. Engineers designed
what they felt the customer needed. They had the notion that the customer was not part and
parcel of the design process. With time the scale of human activities has multiplied many
fold bringing with it enormous business opportunities. This naturally provoked competition
among manufacturers, forcing design to be customer driven.
Many manufacturers in developed countries decisively responded to this fierce competition

by incorporating strategies which would ensure success within a competitive environment,
where the buying public has come to expect near perfect products with a high degree of
dependability. Less industrialised regions have been slow to incorporate such strategies for
several reasons, hence their poor showing on both the domestic and international markets.
Highly specialised fields such as the automotive sector are dominated by products from
regions such as Japan. This is because they have advanced product development systems in
place. Their good performance is due to the fact that they attach great importance to
scientific and technological education - an inevitable precondition to compete successfully.
1.3 Characteristics of a competitive product

From an investor's perspective, a successful product development process must yield
products that can be produced and sold profitably, yet profitability is often difficult to assess
quickly and directly. Five specific dimensions, all of which relate to profit, are commonly
used to assess the performance of a product development effort.
 Product quality - how is the product resulting from the development effort? Does it
satisfy customer needs? Is it robust and reliable? Product quality is ultimately
reflected in market share and the price that customers are willing to pay
 Product cost - what is the manufacturing cost of the product? This cost includes
expenditure on capital equipment and tooling as well as the incremental cost of
producing each unit of the product. Product cost determines how much profit accrues
to the firm for a particular sales volume and a particular sales price.
 Development time - how quickly did the team complete the product development
effort? Development time determines how responsive the firm can be to competitive
forces and to technological developments, as well as how quickly the firm receives
the economic returns from the team's efforts.
 Development cost - how much did the company have to spend to develop the
product? Development cost is usually a significant fraction of the investment required
to achieve the profits.
 Development capability - are both the team and firm are better able to develop future
products as a result of their experience with a product development project?
Development capability is an asset the firm can use to develop products more
effectively and economically in the future.
6
High performance along these five dimensions should ultimately lead to economic success
however, other performance criteria are also important.
1.4 Research and development: its role in product development

The role of research and development (R&D) in a company setting is essentially to enhance
overall performance by ensuring that new products are developed and existing ones
redesigned to match changes in levels of technology and customer requirements. Companies
that commit substantial resources towards R&D naturally keep abreast with the latest
technologies. Such technologies in turn support the development of great products. Investing
in R&D has numerous advantages as can be seen in Figure 1.2.
BUSINESS AS USUAL INVESTMENT IN R&D

 Shrinking Markets  Increased Market share
 Higher Costs  Lower Costs
 Loss of Profits  Greater Profitability
Current Position
Figure 1.2 Benefits of investing in R&D
R&D is a process via which a company identifies market requirements and uses these ideas
to design new products. Such a process improves overall company productivity and ensures
a substantial rise in total turnout. Research and development achieves this via a wide range
of its functions. To understand some of these functions, we take a look at the life cycle of a
product - office printers, Figure 1.3.
7
Figure 1.3 Life-cycle of a product (office printers)
As can be seen from Figure 1.3, while typewriters were a hit in the printing industry, today
they are the oldest technology and slowest, not very user friendly as compared to the other
ranges of printers. Investing in R&D enabled companies to come up with more versatile and
reliable printing machines (e.g. laser printers)
Theoretically, a company which delays to launch new products after the decline and
withdrawal of older products must run out of business. Figure 1.4 illustrates product life
cycle by looking at related products that are at different stages. The need to keep a range of
products at different stages is also apparent. This gives long-term stability with new
customer driven products being introduced while older ones are declining and being
withdrawn. As s result overall production is smoothed rather than fluctuating as shown in
Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.4 Introduction and withdrawal of products (A - E )
R&D maintains stable total output by on the one hand carrying out surveys to establish
market requirements in terms of product specifications which determine phasing in of new
products, redesigning of already existing products and withdrawal of older and declining
products. On the other hand it researches on the latest trends of development in terms of
product design techniques.
Clearly, as illustrated in Figure 1.5, two sets of forces influence the forward move of a
product:
• Technology push
• Market pull
8
Figure 1.5 Technology push and market pull forces
1.5 Exercises
1 Discuss the phases in the life cycle of a product and say what implications they have in
the design activity.
2 Discuss the role of R&D in product development and say what its bottom line
implications are in a manufacturing enterprise
3 What are the major characteristics of a competitive product?
4 Give a brief description of technology push factors in product development and say how
they influence the forward move of a product
5 Give a brief description of market pull factors in product development and say how they
influence the forward move of a product
1.6 Reading list

1 D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.
2 S. D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
3 B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
4 B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
5 S. Kambani, N. J. Kwendakwema, The Role of R&D in Economic Development, The
Engineering Institution of Zambia, 1995.
9
LECTURE TWO :CONCURRENT ENGINEERING
The definition of concurrent engineering is a much-disputed subject. The essence of

concurrent engineering is the simultaneous rather than serial, execution of various phases
in the product development process. The most important aim of concurrent engineering is
shortening the development lead-time. Shortening development lead-time is in itself not a
goal. A short development time has to be combined with competitive advantages. These
advantages determine the success of a product in the market place. Consequently, better
customer orientation is a second goal of concurrent engineering. Most of the time this
means improved quality. Lower development cost is a third goal of concurrent
engineering. This, of course has a strong relationship with a shorter development lead-
time. These three goals are the basic elements of the definition of concurrent engineering
Definitions of concurrent engineering vary, but most agree that the key concepts include:
 The use of a team approach to represent all aspects of the life cycle of the design
 A focus an customer requirements, and
 Use of concurrent design process that includes early design of production and field
support systems.
Design methodology literature shows that the concept of concurrent engineering has not
yet been fully understood. Most phase models present the product development process as
a serial chain of activities.
Figure 2.1 shows the descriptive model of Pahl and Beitz that is representative for most of
the phase models of the product development process.
10
Figure 2.1 Pahl and Beitz phase model of product development.
The concurrent engineering model can be represented by the model in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2 Manufacturability System Model
More recent literature deals with the concurrency of various phases. The integrated
Product Development (IPD) model of Andreasen and Hein (see Figure 2.3). This model
clearly shows the concurrency of market development, product development and process
development.
11
Figure 2.3 Integrated Product Development (IPD) model
The IPD-model still distinguishes different phases in the development process. It shows,
however, also concurrent flows of activities. Each flow is dealing with specific subjects,
resulting in one goal: putting a great product on the market fast.
2.1 Organizing for Concurrent Engineering

Implementing concurrent engineering implies restructuring the product development
process. The order of activities in time has to be reconsidered. An analysis can indicate
which tasks can be carried out in parallel. The interaction between the various tasks has to
be defined. These interactions provide the necessary consensus and a check on the
integrity of the product.
2.2 Concurrent Engineering Toolbox

Taking into account all life cycle perspectives requires structured working methods.
Various tools have been developed to support these working methods:
 Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a tool to translate customer demands into
functional requirements.
 Rapid prototyping is a tool to produce prototypes in a matter of hours instead of
weeks.
 Failure mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is a method to detect possible failures of
the product as early as possible in the product creation process.
 Value Analysis / Engineering
1) Quality assurance - if a development process wisely specifies the phases a

development project will pass through then following the development process is clearly
one way of assuring the quality of the resulting product.
2) Co ordination - a clearly articulated development process acts as a master plan which
defines the roles of each of the players on the development team.
3) Planning - a development process contains natural milestones corresponding to the
completion of each phase. The timing of these milestones anchors the schedule of the
overall development project.
4) Management - a development process is a benchmark assessing the performance of an
ongoing development effort. By comparing the actual events to the established process, a
manager can identify possible problem areas.
5) Improvement - the careful documentation of an organisation's development process
often helps to identify opportunities of improvement.
12
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5

Concept System-Level Detail Testing and Production
development Design Design Refinement Ramp-Up
Figure 2.4 A product development process
A typical product design process, generic product development process, is illustrated in

Figure2.5. The process consists of five phases. The input is a mission statement and the
output of the process is the product launch. One way of imaging the product development
process is as the initial creation of a wide set of alternative product concepts and then
subsequent narrowing of alternatives and increasing specifications of the product until the
product can be reliably and repeatedly produced by the production system.
Figure 2.5 also identifies the key activities and responsibilities of the different functions of
the organisation during each development phase.
The testing and refinement phase involves the construction and evaluation of multiple pre-
production versions of the product. Prototypes are usually built at this phase. Usually these
prototypes come in two versions:
 Alpha prototype - which are built with production intent parts i.e. parts with the same
geometry and material properties as intended for the production version of the product
but not necessarily fabricated with the actual processes to be used in production. Such
prototypes are used to determine whether or not the product will work as designed and
whether or not the product satisfies the key customer needs.
 Beta prototypes - usually built from parts supplied by the intended production
processes but not necessarily assembled using the intended final assembly process.
The goal of beta prototypes is usually to answer questions about performance and
reliability in order to identify necessary changes for the final product.
In the production ramp-up phase the product is made using the intended production
system. The purpose of the ramp-up is to train the workforce and to workout any
remaining problems in the production processes. The artifacts produced during production
ramp-up are sometimes supplied to preferred customers and are carefully evaluated to
identify remaining flaws. The ramp-up is soon followed by the launching of the product
and an increase in production.
The generic development process is most likely the process to be used in a market-pull
situation. A firm begins product development with a market opportunity and then seeks out
whatever technologies are required to satisfy the market needs (i.e. the market pulls the
product development decisions). Besides the market pull process several other variants are
13
common and these correspond to technology push products, platform products, process-
intensive products and customised products.
 Technology push products - the firm begins with a new technology, then finds an
appropriate market in which to apply this technology. This approach is however
perilous. Unless the assumed technology offers a clean competitive advantage in
meeting customer needs, the product is unlikely to succeed.
 Platform products - the firm assumes that the new product will be built around the
same technological subsystem as an existing product ( e.g. computer operating
systems, instant film technology used in Polaroid cameras) huge investments went
into these projects and therefore every attempt is made to incorporate them into
several different products. To some extent platform products are similar to
technology push products in that
 the team begins the development effort with an assumption that the product concept
will embody a particular technology.
 Process intensive products - examples here include foods, chemicals and paper. In
such products the production process places strict constraints on the properties of
the product, so that the product design cannot be separated from the production
process design. In many cases these are high volume products as opposed to
discrete products. Usually a new product is developed simultaneously with the
process e.g. snack food, potato crisps etc
 Customised products - these are products developed in response to a specific order
by a customer. When a company requests an order the company executes a
structured design and development process to create the product that meets the
particular customer's needs.
14
Concept System- Detail Testing and Production

Developmen Level Design Refinement Ramp-Up
t Design
Marketing
 Define  Develop  Develop  Develop  Place
market plan for marketing promotion early
segments. product plan. and launch production
 Identify options materials. with key
lead and  Facilitate customers
users. extended field .
 Identify product  testing.
competitiv family.
e
products.
Design
 Investigat  Generate  Define part  Do  Evaluate
e alternative  geometry. reliability early
feasibility product  Choose testing, life production
of product architectur materials. testing, and output.
concepts. es.  Assign performanc
 Develop  Define tolerances. e testing.
industrial major  Complete  Obtain
design sub- industrial regulatory
concepts. systems design approvals.
Build and and control  Implement
test interfaces. document design
experiment  Refine ation changes.
al industrial
prototypes. design.
Manufactur
ing
 Estimate  Identify  Define  Facilitate  Begin
 manufactu suppliers piece – supplier operation
ring cost. for key part ramp- up. of entire
15
 Assess componen production  Refine production

production ts. processes fabrication system.
feasibility.  Perform . and
make- buy  Design assembly
analysis. tooling. processes.
 Define  Define  Train work
final quality force.
assembly assurance  Refine
scheme. processes quality
. assurance
 Begin processes.
procurem
ent of
long-lead
tooling.
Other
Functions
 Finance:  Finance:  Sales:
Facilitate Facilitate Develop
economic make-buy sales plan.
analysis. analysis.
 Legal:  Service:
Investigat Identify
e patent service
issues issues
Figure 2.5 A generic product development process
2.3 Executing the product development process

The execution of the product development process has evolved from sequential (i.e. each
step conceived of as a unit with clear inputs and outputs), to what is called simultaneous
engineering where all product development steps are started as early as possible
(simultaneously) in the product development process.
Sequential product development
This is an old and costly approach of designing products. The design process in this system
starts from identification of market requirement through to detailed product design,
manufacture, ending up with product launch / introduction as shown in Figure 2.4.
This approach can also be represented with a model as shown in Figure 2.6.
16
Figure 2.6 Sequential product development model
In this system, the primary output is a prototype product delivered to customers, which
meets their requirements. The secondary output is a design delivered to manufacturing for
production. The designer receives very little feedback about how well the product meets
customers' goals downstream when it is being manufactured.
The little involvement the designer has is directed at design modification. The timing of
these product design changes during the product lifecycle has an enormous effect on
overall business objectives. Major changes in a product are cheaply and easily made
during the initial design stages. As the product moves through its development stages, the
cost and difficulty of making changes increases steadily.
Improving effectiveness of new product development requires that the design

manufacturing interface be viewed differently. This approach is known as concurrent
engineering.
Concurrent engineering - a paradigm shift

Concurrent engineering is an approach where the product and all its associated processes,
such as manufacturing, distribution, and service, are all developed in parallel. Typically
this involves cross-functional involvement early in the product development project.
Concurrent engineering has also come to be known as simultaneous engineering.
The major goal of this approach is to progress in the design process concurrently
(simultaneously) to avoid costly modifications downstream. Figure 2.7 shows a
manufacturability system model
Manufacturability system model

In this approach, Figure 2.7, the design function is customer requirements. However the
output is a manufacturable design and the customer of that product is internal - the
manufacturing department. This model has a key feedback loop that provides measures of
the design manufacturability to the design function. The difference from the traditional
approach is that in this model manufacturing is the primary customer of the product
design. Business objectives are directly influenced by manufacturing's ability to meet
customer's product goals.
17
Figure 2.7 Manufacturability system model
Manufacturability measures are the factory's indicator on how well it is producing products
that meet product goals. Design criteria strongly affect product manufacturability. A
product's technical performance is always by design and manufacturing. If a customer
requests a product that has a dimension of 10mm, the product must be designed and
manufactured to that dimension. Other manufacturability measures that are strongly
affected by design include: yield, scrap, inventory, cycle time, manufacturing costs
Overall, all manufacturability measures are interrelated. Yield affects cost and inventory
levels. Defect levels, or defects per unit is one measure that has a strong influence on all
manufacturability measures. It affects product quality, reliability, availability, cost etc.
Figure 2.8 shows how traditional design core has transformed into a simultaneous
engineering based one.
Figure 2.8 Simultaneous Engineering- using concurrency to develop fast cycle

capability in product development
Exercises
1 Describe the phases of a generic product development process
2 Describe the phases of a generic product development process
18
3 Discuss the benefits of a well defined product development process

5 Explain, giving examples, the following terminology with respect to product design
and development:
• Customer driven products
• Technology push products
• Platform products
• Customised products
• Process intensive products
6 With the aid of a manufacturability system model, explain what you understand by
Concurrent engineering
7 Discuss the advantages of Concurrent Engineering over Traditional Design
approach
8 In what way are the following manufacturability measures affected by design
quality:
• Scrap level
• Availability
• Yield
• Defects
• Inventor
• Manufacturing cost
9 Briefly explain how the following manufacturability measures interrelate:
• Yield and cost
• Defect levels and quality
• Defect levels and availability
• Defect levels and reliability
Reading list
2 S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
6 L.Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
7 C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.
19
LECTURE THREE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
At the end of this lecture you should understand the following:

• Stages in the concept development phase
• Importance of mission statement in product development
• Process of identifying customer requirements/needs
• The Quality Function Deployment (QFD) method
3.1 Concept Development

The concept development phase is the starting point of product development. It contains
the distinct activities shown in Figure 3.1.
Mission
Identify Establish Generate Select a Refine
Statement
Customer Target Product Product Specifi
Needs Specifications Concepts Concept cations
Development
Plan
Analyze Perform Plan
Competitive Economic Remaining
Products Analysis Developmen
t Project
Figure 3.1 Concept Development
3.2 The Mission Statement

The mission statement (Figure 3.2) also called a charter or design brief specifies which
direction to go in but generally does not specify a precise destination or a particular way to
proceed. The mission statement could for instance specify a particular market opportunity
and lay out the broad constraints and objectives for the project. It may include some of the
information:
 Brief- usually one sentence giving description of the product. This description
usually specifies customer benefits without necessarily giving product concept.
 Key business goals- these include timing of new product introduction, market share
targets, and desired financial performance.
 Stakeholders- one way to ensure that many of the subtle issues are addressed is to
explicitly list all of the product's stakeholders i.e. all groups of people affected by
20
the product's attributes.
Mission Statement: Screwdriver Project

Product Description A hand-held, power-assisted device for installing threaded fasteners
Key Business Goals  Product introduced in fourth quarter of 1997
 50% gross margin
 10% share of cordless screwdriver market by 1999
Primary Market  Do-it-yourself consumer
Secondary Markets  Casual consumer
 Light-duty professional
Assumptions  Hand-held
 Power-assisted
 Nickel-metal-hydride rechargeable battery technology
Stakeholders  User
 Retailer
 Sales force
 Service center
 Production
 Legal department
Figure 3.2 Mission statement for a new product
3.3 Identifying Customer Needs

The results of this activity are the input into the Needs/Benefits section of the Quality
Function Deployment Technique
3.4 Quality Function Deployment
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a method for structured product planning and
development that enables a development team to specify clearly the customer's wants and
needs and then to evaluate each proposed product or service capability systematically in
terms of its impact on meeting those needs.
The process involves constructing one or more matrices (sometimes called quality tables).
The first of these matrices is called the House of Quality (HOQ). It displays the customer's
wants and needs (Voice of Customer) along the left and development team's response to
meeting these wants and needs along the top. The matrix consists of several sections or
sub-matrices joined together in various ways, each containing information relating to
others. Each of these labeled sections A through F is a structured systematic expression of
a product or process development team's understanding of an aspect of the overall planning
of product or process. The lettering sequence as illustrated in Figure 3.3 suggests a logical
sequence for filling in the matrix.
21
Figure 3.3 The House of Quality
A - Customer Needs/Benefits
This is the starting place for all QFD activities. The common source of customer phrases
representing their wants and needs is the customer interview. The usual steps in identifying
customer needs are:
 Gathering raw data from the customer- this is usually done by conducting interviews,
where the result of such an activity is a set of customer phrases representing the
customer's wants and needs. Most companies have special departments for handling
complaints since they represent a major nightmare to any company - the nightmare of
customer dissatisfaction. Too often companies regard complaint management as their
quality control mechanism. Kano suggests that it is not enough to make a company
competitive - however removing dissatisfies from a product is a necessary if not a
sufficient step to competitiveness. Hence it is very useful to include customer
complaints in the complete voice of the customer.
 Interpret raw data in terms of customer needs - customer needs are expressed as written
statements. They result from interpreting the need underlying the raw data gathered
from the customers. Each statement can be translated into several needs. General
guidelines of expressing the need could be for instance:
o express the need in terms of what the product has to do, not in terms of how it may
do it
o express the need as specifically as the raw data
o express need as attribute of product
 Organise the needs into a hierarchy - the result of the preceding steps is a list of
numerous need statements. This is captured in the affinity diagram - Figure 3.4. such a
large number of detailed statements is awkward to work with and also difficult to
22
summarise for use. The goal of this step is to organise these (statements from affinity
diagram) into a hierarchical list called the tree diagram - Figure 3.5
Figure 3.4 Affinity Diagram
The tree diagram typically consists of a set of primary needs, each of which will be further
characterised by a set of secondary needs. In cases of very complex products the secondary
needs may be further broken down into tertiary needs as well.
23
Figure 3.5 Tree Diagram
B- Planning Matrix
Just as the Customer Needs/Benefits section is a repository of qualitative customer data,
the Planning Matrix, illustrated in Figure 3.6, is the repository for quantitative data about
each customer need. The development team will use this data to decide what aspects of the
planned product or service will be emphasised during the development project.
The Planning Matrix is the tool that helps the development team to prioritise customer
needs. The planning matrix asks the following key questions for each customer need:
How important is this need to the customer?

How well are we doing in meeting this need today?
How well is the competition doing in meeting this need today?
How well do we want to do in meeting this with the product or service being developed?
If we meet this need well could we use that fact to help sell the product?
24
Figure 3.6 Planning Matrix
C - Technical Responses
Just as the Voice of the Customer had qualitative and quantitative components (entered
into the Customer needs/Benefits section and Planning Matrix) so does the translation of
the Voice of the Customer into the Voice of the Developer. This will be placed in
qualitative form on top of the relationship Matrix, and in quantitative form at the bottom
(Target Values and Competitive Benchmarks). In simple terms Technical Responses -
Hows are a set of quality characteristics through which a set of Customer Needs - Whats
can be realised. Hows thus represent an array of design variables or alternate solutions,
which may or may not be independent.
D - Relationships (Between Customer Needs and Technical Reponses -

Whats vs Hows)
To get a relationship between market requirements and quality characteristics a matrix is
created by placing the Whats list along the column of a matrix and the Hows list along its
rows as illustrated in Figure 3.7. The intersection of the rows and the columns then depicts
the relationships between the set of Whats and the Hows. The matrix thus developed is
called a Relationship Matrix. It correlates what customers want in a product and how an
enterprise can achieve those objectives. Relationships within this matrix are usually
defined using a level procedure:- strong, medium, weak, or none. The matrix maybe
densely populated ( more than one row or column affected). This results from the fact that
some of the quality solutions may affect more than one customer Need (What).
25
Figure 3.7 Relationships Whats vs Hows
E- Technical Correlation or Sensitivity Matrix (Hows vs Hows)

This is the matrix firming the roof of the "House of Quality" i.e. QFD chart. The purpose
of this matrix is to identify the qualitative correlation between the technical responses
(Hows). This is a very important feature of the quality house since, at times the possible
solutions could be redundant and may not add much value to customer wants. At times it
may be at cross purpose (in disagreement) with each other. If two Hows help each other
meet their target values (How-Muches), they are rated as positive or strong positive. If
meeting one How target value makes it harder or impossible to meet another How target
value (How Much), those two Hows are rated as negative or strongly negative. A case in
point is where 0-100 km/h time and fuel economy are two quality items. Efforts to
decrease 0-100kmh time would have an adverse effect on the fuel economy item. In this
case, the two Hows have a negative correlation? Fuel economy and gross weight have a
positive correlation because reducing gross weight will increase fuel economy keeping all
other remaining parameters constant. These relationships are weighted, and standard QFD
uses the weights (for strong, 3 for medium and 0 for none). After all relationship matrices
are developed, care is taken in reviewing its constructs. Blank rows or columns call for
closer scrutiny. A blank row implies a potential unsatisfied customer and emphasises the
need to develop one or more Technical responses for that particular customer requirement.
A blank column implies that the corresponding Technical Response does not directly relate
to any of the customer requirements.
F- Technical Matrix (How-Muches):

This is a list vector and normally identifies the bounds on the feasibility on Technical
Responses (Hows). These represent the target values for each Technical Response. In other
words for each technical (How) the e I a co7espondi Q 2 for a How - Much entry. The idea
is to quantify the solution parameters into achievable ranges’ or specifications, thereby
creating a criterion for assessing success. This information is often obtained through
market evaluation and research.
26
What are target specifications- Customer needs, in the manner they are expressed, leave
too much margin this reason, development teams usually establish a set of specifications,
which spell out in precise, measurable detail what the product has to do.
Figure 3.8 A completed QFD chart (Houses of Quality) for Mouse Trap
3.5 Beyond the House of Quality

Most organisations that use QFD stop after developing their customised version of the
House of Quality. Some groups however extend their analysis to an additional matrix in
which performance measures from the matrix are deployed against features of a product or
service. One of the reasons for not exploiting the full possibilities of QFD is the lack of
specificity in the literature as to how to use downstream QFD matrices.
The trick is to turn the technical responses (engineering characteristics) into the desired
attributes (side of a new matrix) for the parts characteristics (top of the new matrix). Full
extension of this concept then allows the "Voice of the Customer" to be cascaded down
through the product introduction process via process planning to production planning, as
illustrated in Figure 3.9. at each level the matrix relates the important elements of 'How' to
the important elements of 'What' needs to be done. New, difficult to meet and important
27
requirements are passed from one matrix to the next, thereby keeping effort correctly
focused.
Figure 3.9 QFD - the Houses Beyond
3.6 Limitations of QFD

When many Japanese producers became successful in bringing cars to market in record
time, many automotive world leaders mistakenly assumed that their success was solely
because of technical tools. This explains the initial flurry of activities ( QFD, Taguchi,
Pugh, Kaizen etc) that American industries went through during the 1980s. As many
companies failed on this front. They discovered that many of the barriers to global
competitiveness were rooted in their assumptions that are, basing their PD3 decisions on
quality while ignoring other important aspects such as cost, design for X-ability, tools and
technology, and infrastructure that have not been deployed simultaneously.
QFD does not specifically address the cost, tools and technology, responsiveness (time-to-
market), and organisational aspects in the same vein as it addresses the quality aspect.
While some consider the product design process as being independent from technology,
design for X-ability, cost and responsiveness, the reality is that these are tied together by a
common set of product and process requirements. The design process only provides a
product design from the perspectives of performance (i.e. quality). The product design
performance requirements drive the product selection process, including system,
subsystems, components, parts and material selection, and influence the selection of the
fabrication method, process and production. Others have argued that while performing
Quality FD, designers could choose to include requirements that belong to considerations
other than quality in the original customers' list of HOQ. Accomplishing this through a
conventional deployment process is not simple. Working on the multiple lists of
requirements as part of a single function deployment is much tougher problem.
 First, it would be a complex undertaking considering just the size of the resulting
relational matrices
 Second, deploying them serially would be a long, drawn-out process
 Third, cascading the requirements all together as we did in the case of Quality
functions would be so large that it would be difficult to handle.
 Fourth, there is no way of insuring that the design obtained through this
combinatorial Quality FD process would not result in a sub-optimised design, that is
28
a product particularly designed for characteristics related to quality.
What is required in optimising an artifact is designing with respect to all important

functions that characterise a world-class product today. Major pitfalls of QFD approach
are:
 Conventional deployment is mainly Quality focused: one of the pitfalls of
conventional deployment is that it is based on a single measurement, which has
mostly been quality. Today manufacturing sectors are more fiercely competitive
and global than ever. Consumers are more demanding, competition is more global,
fierce, and ruthless, and technology is advancing and changing rapidly. The quality
based philosophy inherent in Quality FD style does not account for the time factor
inherent in today's complex PD3 process. Competitors are always finding better
ways of doing things-catching up in quality is not enough. It only makes a company
at par with its competitors in terms of inheriting some of their product
characteristics. What is required is a total control of one's process - identifying and
satisfying the needs and expectations of consumers better than the competitors and
doing so profitably faster than any competitor.
 Conventional deployment is a phased process: the conventional deployment process

prescribes a set of structured cross-functional planning and communication matrices
for building quality as specified by customers into a product. This is often
represented in a cascade time bound process where characteristics of a prior phase
feed as requirements for a subsequent phase. The serial nature of deployment tends
to make the QFD process sequential. If each phase of deployment is a multi-part
process, the elapsed time can be significantly large. This elongates the total time
this QFD would take for an artifact realisation process
 Conventional deployment is one-dimensional: the roles of the organisation and
engineers are changing toady, as are the methods of doing business. Competition
has driven organisation to consider concepts such as time compression (fast-to-
market), concurrent engineering, design for X-ability, and tools and technologies
(such as Taguchi, Value engineering) while designing and developing an artifact.
Quality FD addresses major aspects of quality with reference to the functions a
product has to perform but this is one of the many functions that need to be
deployed during product development. With conventional deployment, it is difficult
to address all aspects of total values management (TVM) such as X-ability, cost,
tools and technology, responsiveness and organisation issues. It is not enough to
deploy Quality into the product and expect the outcome to be b world-class. TVM
efforts are vital in maintaining a competitive edge in today's world marketplace.
The question is how to deploy all the aspects of this TVM.
The method of deploying many competing values simultaneously is called Concurrent

Function Deployment. The intent of QFD is to incorporate Voice of the Customers into all
nine phases of the product development cycle, through mission definition, concept
definition, engineering and analysis, product design, prototyping, production engineering
and planning, production operations and control, manufacturing, and finally into
continuous improvement, support and delivery. In other words QFD is a customer driven
PD3
29
Exercises
1. In QFD there are 4 phases that deploy Voice of the Customer (VOC) to get to an
improved product. What are the components of QFD? Explain each of the four
QFD phases and give examples
2. How can the Kano model be used to prioritise a set of customer requirements
(CRS)? How does a CR shift character? When dose this happen
3. What are the rooms of HOQ? Why are Technical Importance Ratings (TIRs) listed
under a HOW-MUCH list vector
4. What is the significance of weighting factors in computing TIRs? How can
manufacturers use TIRs to prioritise the quality characteristics of a product yet to be
launched.
5. What are the limitations of deploying QFD? What is required in optimising an
artifact to be recognised as the best in every class
6. In what way is QFD a concurrent engineering tool?
7. What is CFD? How does it differ from QFD?
8. Prepare a Quality Function Deployment chart for a commercial product of your
choice and comment on the results.
Reading List
1) S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
2) B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
3) D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.
4) B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
5) L.Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
6) C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.
7) J.R. Hauser and Don Clausing, The House of Quality, Harvard Business Review,
1988
30
LECTURE FOUR CONCEPT GENERATION

• Concept generation methodology
• Problem decomposition scheme
• Importance of patent search as an information source
• Application of the concept classification tree
4.1 The Task of Concept Generation

A product concept is an approximate description of the technology, working principles,
and form of the product. It is a concise description of how the product will satisfy the
customer needs. A concept is usually expressed as a sketch or as a rough three-dimensional
model and is often accompanied by a brief description. The degree to which a product
satisfies customers and can be successfully commercialized depends to a large measure on
the quality of the underlying concept. A good concept is sometimes poorly implemented in
subsequent development phases, but a poor concept can rarely be manipulated to achieve
commercial success. In most cases, depending on the capability of the development team,
numerous concepts are generated. Of these only a few merit serious consideration during
the concept selection activity.
Thorough exploitation of alternatives early in the development process greatly reduces the
likelihood that the team will stumble upon a superior concept late in the development
process or that a competitor will introduce a product with dramatically better performance
than the product under development.
Common dysfunctions exhibited by development teams during concept generation include:

 Consideration of only one or two alternatives often proposed by the most assertive
members of the team.
 Failure to consider carefully the usefulness of concepts employed by other firms in
related and unrelated products.
 Involvement of only one or two people in the process, resulting in lack of confidence
and commitment by the rest of the team
 Ineffective integration of promising partial solutions
 Failure to consider entire categories of solutions
Concept generation methodology usually follows a five step methodology as illustrated in
Figure 4.1
4.2 The five-step methodology

Different product development teams can always modify it to match their own
requirements. The methodology breaks complex problems into simpler sub-problems,
which are easier to analyze.
Solution concepts are then identified for the problems by external and internal search
procedures, Classification trees and concept combination table are used to explore
31
systematically the space of solution concepts and to integrate the sub-problem solutions
into a total solution.
1. Clarify the Problem

 Understanding
 Problem decomposition
 Focus on critical sub-problems
Sub-problems
2. Search externally 3. Search Internally

 Lead users  Individual
 Experts  Group
 Patents
 Literature
 Benchmarking
New Concepts
Existing Concepts
4. Explore systematically
 Classification tree
 Combination table
Integrated Solutions
5. Reflect on the solutions and the process

 Constructive feedback
Figure 4.1 Five step concept generation methodology
Step 1 -Clarify Problem

Clarifying the problem consists of understanding the problem and then breaking it down
into sub-problems where more focus is placed. Most designs are too complex to solve as a
single problem and hence the need to divide them into several simpler sub-problems. The
breaking down of a problem into sub-problems is called problem decomposition approach.
The first step in decomposing a problem functionally is to represent it as a single black box
as shown in Figure 4.2. The black box represents the overall function of the product.
32
Input Output
Energy(?) Energy (?)

Hand-Held Nailer
Material (nail) Material (driven Nail)
Signal (tool “trip”) Signal (?)
Figure 4.2 Problem decomposition - "overall" "black box"
The next step is to divide the single black box into sub-functions to create a more specific
description of the functions of different elements in the product. See Figure 4.3. Each sub-
function can be further broken down until it is simple enough to work with. The goal of
these decomposition techniques is to divide a complex problem into simpler problems such
that these simpler problems can be tackled in a focused way.
33
Store or Convert energy to

accept translational
Energy
external energy
energy
Store nails Isolate nail Apply

Nails translational Driven
energy to Nail
nail
“Trip” Sense trip Trigger tool

of Tool
Figure 4.3 Problem decomposition into sub-functions
Once the decomposition is complete, the team chooses the sub-problems that are most
critical to the success of the product and that are likely to drive the overall solution to the
problem.
Step 2 - Search Externally

External search is aimed at finding solutions to both the overall problem and to the sub-
problems identified during the problem clarification step. Although it comes as a second
step in the methodology, external search actually occurs throughout the development
process. Implementing an existing solution is usually quicker and cheaper than developing
a new solution. Using the existing solution allows the team more time to focus on the
critical sub-problems, which have no existing solutions. External search is an information
34
gathering process. Five typical ways of gathering information from external sources
include:
Lead user interviews: lead users are those users of a class of product. Usually, lead users
go out of their way to modify, if a product does not fulfill a given design function.
Sometimes they could simply modify the product to accommodate a function initially not
designed into the product. These lead users stand to benefit substantially from product
innovation.
Consulting experts: experts with knowledge of one or more of the sub-problems not only
can provide solution concepts directly but also can redirect the search in a more fruitful
area. Generally experts may include professionals at firms manufacturing related products,
professional consultants, university faculties and technical representatives of suppliers.
While finding experts consumes time, it is less time consuming than re-creating existing
knowledge.
Search patents: patents are a rich source of technical information containing detailed
drawings and explanations of how products work. Their disadvantage however is that
concepts found in recent patents are protected, so they may be a royalty involved in using
them. They are however very useful to see what concepts are already protected and hence
must be avoided or licensed. Concepts contained in expired patents or patents without
global coverage can be used without paying royalties.
Search published literature: published literature includes journals; conference

proceedings; trade magazines; government reports; market, consumer, and product
information, and new product announcements. Electronic database searches are also
available for search purposes.
Benchmark related products: benchmarking is the study of products with functionality

similar to that of the product under development by the team. Benchmarking provides
information on the strengths and weaknesses of the competition. In the process of
benchmarking teams can even go on to obtain and disassemble most of the related
products in order to discover the general concepts on which they were based, as well as
other more detailed information, including names of suppliers of specific components.
Step 3 - Search Internally
Internal search is the use of personal and team knowledge and creativity to generate
solution concepts.
Guidelines for improving both individual and internal search include:
 Suspend judgment - because we have to live with the consequences if product
concept decisions for years there is need to take time to evaluate our concepts. A
better approach is for individuals perceiving weaknesses in concepts to channel
suggestions into improvements or alternative concepts.
 Generate a lot of ideas - the more ideas a team generate, the more likely the team is
to explore fully the solution space.
 Welcome ideas that may seem infeasible - ideas that initially seem infeasible may be
improved by other members of the team
35
 Use graphical and physical media - reasoning about physical and geometric
information with words is difficult. Text and verbal language are inherently
inefficient vehicles for describing physical entities.
Abundant sketching is necessary. Foam, clay, cardboard, and other three- dimensional
media may also be appropriate aids for problems requiring a deep understanding of form
and spatial relationships.
Individual and group sessions - formal studies of group and individual problem solving
suggests that a set of people working alone for a period of time will generate more and
better concepts than the same people working together for the same time period ( McGrath
- 1984). Group sessions are more ideal for building consensus, communicating information
and refining concepts.
Step 4 - Explore systematically

The result of the search activities are a collection of hundreds of concepts fragments -
solutions to the sub-problems. Systematic exploration is aimed at navigating the space of
possibility by organizing and synthesizing the solution fragments. In a typical product
development project a team may come up with many concept fragments to each sub-
problem. One approach to organizing and synthesizing these fragments would be to
consider all of the possible combinations of the fragments associated with each sub-
problem. This approach would be very tedious. Let’s suppose there were three sub-
problems to be considered and for each of these sub-problems fifteen fragments are
generated. This implies that 3375 combinations of fragments will have to be considered by
the team. Among these, many of the combinations might not make sense. There are two
specific tools for managing this complexity and organizing the thinking of concept
generating team:
 Concept classification tree
 Concept combination table
Concept classification tree

The tree helps the team divide the possible solutions into independent categories. Dividing
the solutions into several distinct classes facilitates comparison and pruning. Figure 4.4
shows an example of classification tree for the hand held nailer. The branches of this tree
correspond to different energy sources.
36
Chemical Fuel-Air Systems
Explosive Systems
Pneumatic
Store or
Accept
Energy
Hydraulic
Wall Outlet
Battery
Nuclear
Electrical
Fuel Cell
Figure 3.4 Classification tree for nailer energy Product Design, Development and
Management
The classification tree has a number of benefits which include:

 Pruning of less promising branches - if a solution approach does not appear to have
much merit, then this solution approach must be "pruned" allowing the team to
focus its attention on more promising branches of the tree. Pruning must be done
with a high degree of evaluation and judgment.
 Exposure of inappropriate emphasis on certain branches - once the tree is
constructed, the team is able to reflect quickly on whether the effort applied to each
branch has been appropriately allocated. In the nailer example, the team realized
that they had applied very little effort to thinking about hydraulic energy sources
and conversion technologies. This recognition guided them to focus on this branch
of the tree for a few days.
 Refinement of the problem decomposition for a particular branch - sometimes
problem decomposition can be usefully tailored to a particular approach to the
problem. Consider the branch of the tree corresponding to the electrical energy
37
source. Based on additional investigation of the nailing process, the team

determined that the instantaneous power delivered during the nailing process was
about 10 000 watts for a few milliseconds and so exceeds the power which is
available from a wall outlet, a battery or a cell (of reasonable cost, size and mass).
They conclude that energy must be accumulated over a substantial period of the
nailing cycle (say 100 milliseconds) and then suddenly released to supply the
required instantaneous power to drive the nail. This quick analysis led the team to
add a sub- function -accumulate translational energy- to their function diagram as
indicated in Figure 4.5. The sub- function in this case was added after the
conversion of the energy to mechanical energy. Figure 4.5 identifies sub-problems
of the electrical energy source.
Electrical Energy
Energy Convert Energy Accumulate Apply Applied
to Translational Translational Translational to Nail
Energy Energy Energy to Nail
Figure 4.5: Electrical energy source sub-problem
4.3 Concept Combination Table

The concept combination table provides a way to consider combinations of solution
fragments systematically. Figure 4.6 shows an example of a combination table that the
nailer team used to consider the combinations of the fragments for the electrical branch of
the classification tree. The columns in the table correspond to the sub-problems identified
as indicated in Figure 4.5. The entries in each column correspond to the solution fragments
for each of these sub-problems derived from external and internal search. For example, the
sub-problem of converting electrical energy to translational energy is the heading for the
first column. The entries in this column are a rotary motor with a transmission, a linear
motor, a solenoid, and a rail gun as illustrated in Figure 4.7a-4.7d
Potential solutions to the overall problem are formed by combining one fragment from
each column. In the nailer example there are 24 possible combinations. The combination
of fragments must be developed and refined before an integrated solution emerges.
Convert Electrical Energy Accumulate Energy Apply Translational

to Translational Energy Energy to Nail
38
Rotary motor with Spring Single impact

transmission
Linear motor Moving mass Multiple impacts
Solenoid Push nail
Rail gun
Figure 4.6 Concept combination table
Figure 4.7a Combination of: Solenoid - Spring - Multiple Impacts
Figure 4.7b Combination of: Rotary Motor - Spring - Single Impact
39
Figure 4.7c Combination of: Rotary Motor - Spring - Multiple Impacts
Figure 4.7d Combination of: Linear Motor - Moving Mass - Single Impact
Exercises
1. What do you understand by problem decomposition with respect to the concept
generation methodology? Discuss one scheme by which a problem can be
decomposed.
2. Decompose the problem of designing a new coffee/ tea maker. Try using the
functional decomposition approach.
3. Develop a classification tree for any two sub-problems for the coffee/tea maker
4. Explain the purpose of the concept combination table and draw up the same for a
sub-problem of the coffee/tea maker
5. What are the prospects of computer support for the concept generation activities?
6. Discuss the five step concept generation methodology
Reading List
1) D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.
2) S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
3) B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
4) B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
5) L.Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
6) C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.
40
LECTURE FIVE CONCEPT SELECTION

• The importance of concept selection in the concept development process
• Concept selection methodology
• The six-step concept screening process
• The six-step concept scoring process
• Advantages of a structured concept selection methodology
5.1 Concept selection an integral part of the product development process

After identification of customer needs, the product development team generates alternative
solution concepts in response to these needs. Concept selection is the process of evaluating
the generated concepts with respect to set criteria. The process involves comparing the
relative strengths and weaknesses of the concepts, and selecting one or more concepts for
further investigation or development.
While many stages of the concept development process benefit from unbounded creativity
and divergent thinking, concept selection is the process of narrowing the set of concept
alternatives under consideration. The concept selection process is iterative and usually
does not produce a dominant concept immediately. Large set of concepts is initially
winnowed down to a smaller set, but these concepts may subsequently be combined and
improved. Through several iterations, a dominant concept is finally chosen. Figure 5.1
illustrates this successive narrowing and temporary widening of the set of options under
consideration during the concept selection activity.
Figure 5.1 Narrowing of concept options
Whether or not the concept selection process is explicit, all teams use some method to
choose among concepts. Even those teams generating only one concept are using a
method: choosing the first concept they think of. Figure 5.2 shows several concepts
41
generated by a design firm for a medical supply company. The medical supply company
tasked the design firm to develop a reasonable syringe with precise dosage control for
outpatient use. To focus the development effort, the first step was for the supply company
to identify major problems with its current product:-
 Cost - existing model was made of stainless steel

 Accuracy of the dose metering - existing model did not have a very accurate dose
metering system.
 Target market- the company also requested that the product be tailored to the
physical capabilities of the elderly, an important segment of the target market.
To summarise the needs of its clients and intended users, the team established seven
criteria on which the choice of a product concept would be based:-
• Ease of handling
• Ease of use
• Readability of dose settings
• Dose metering accuracy
• Durability
• Ease of manufacture
• Portability
Figure 5.2 Concepts for outpatient syringe
42
Figure 5.2(cont) Concepts for outpatient syringe
43
5.2 Structured Concept Selection Methodology

All of the early phases of product development are influential on eventual product success.
A structured concept selection process helps to maintain objectivity throughout the concept
phase of the development process and guides the product development team through a
critical and difficult process. The structured concept selection methodology offers the
following potential benefits:
• A customer-focused product
• A competitive design
• Better product-process co ordination
• Reduced time to market
• Effective group decision making
• Documentation of the decision process
5.3 Concept Selection Methodology

A two-stage concept selection methodology, (proposed by Ulrich and Eppinger) is
discussed. This methodology is illustrated in Figure 5.2. The first stage is called concept
screening and the second is called concept scoring. Each is supported by a decision matrix
which is used by the team to rate, rank and select the best concept(s). The methodology of
concept selection helps to manage the complexity of evaluating dozens of product
concepts. Screening is a quick, approximate evaluation aimed at producing a few viable
alternatives, while scoring is a careful analysis of these relatively few concepts in order to
choose the single concept most likely to lead to product success.
During concept screening rough initial concepts are evaluated relative to a common
reference concept using the screening matrix. At this stage detailed quantitative
comparisons are difficult to obtain and may be misleading, so a comparative rating system
is used. After some alternatives are eliminated, the team can then move on to concept
scoring and conduct more detailed analysis and finer quantitative evaluation of the
remaining concepts using the scoring matrix as a guide.
Throughout the screening and scoring process, several iterations may be performed, with
new alternatives arising from the combination of the features of several concepts. Both
stages, concept screening and concept scoring follow a six-step process which leads the
team through the concept selection activity. The steps are:-
• prepare the selection matrix
• rate the concepts
• rank the concepts
• combine and improve the concepts
• select one or more concepts
• reflect on the results and process
5.3.1 Concept Screening
Concept screening is based on a method developed by the late Stuart Pugh in the 80s -
Pugh Concept Selection. The purposes of this stage are to narrow the number of concepts
quickly and to improve the concepts. Figure 5.3 shows the screening matrix used during
this stage.
44
Step 1 - Prepare the selection matrix

Here a matrix similar to one illustrated in Figure 5.1 may be used. Selection criteria are
chosen based or customer needs the team will have identified as well as on the needs of the
enterprise (e.g. Low manufacturing cost or minimal risk of product liability). After careful
consideration, the team chooses a concept to become the benchmark or reference concept
against which all other concepts are rated. This reference is generally either an industry
standard or an obvious solution to the problem. It can be a commercially viable product, an
earlier generation of the product, any one of the concepts under consideration, or a
combination o subsystems combined to represent the best features of different products.
Step 2 - Rate the concepts

A relative score of "better than" (+), "same as" (0), or "worse than" (-) is placed in each
cell of the matrix) depending upon how the concept rates in comparison to the reference
concept relative to the particular criterion.
Step 3 - Rank concepts

After rating all the concepts, the team sum the number of "better than", "same as" scores
and enters the matrix sum for each category in the lower rows of the matrix. A net score
can be calculated by subtracting the number of" worse than" ratings from the "better than"
ratings.
Once this summation is completed, the team rank-orders the concepts and hence concepts
with more pluses than minuses are selected.
Concepts
Selection A B C D E F G
Criteria Maste Rubbe Ratch (reference Swash Lever Dial
r r et ) Ring Set Screw
Cylind Brake Plunge
er Stop
Ease of 0 0 - 0 0 - -
handling
Ease of use 0 - - 0 0 + 0
Readability of 0 0 + 0 + 0 +
settings
Dose 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0
metering
accuracy
Durability 0 0 0 0 0 + 0
Ease of + - - 0 0 - 0
manufacture
Portability + + 0 0 + 0 0
Sum +’s 2 1 1 0 2 2 1
Sum 0’s 5 4 3 7 4 3 5
Sum –‘s 0 2 3 0 1 2 1
45
Net Score 2 -1 -2 0 1 0 0
Rank 1 6 7 3 2 3 3
Continue? Yes No No Combine Yes Combine Revise
Figure 5.3 Concept Screening Matrix
Step 4- Combine and improve the concepts

Having rated and ranked the concepts, the team verifies that the results make sense and then
considers if there are ways to combine and improve certain concepts. Two issues considered
in concept combination
are:-
 Is there a good concept which is degraded by one bad feature? Can a minor
modification improve the overall concept and yet preserve a distinction from the
other concepts?
 Are there two concepts which can be combined to preserve the "better than"
qualities while annulling the "worse than" qualities?
From the example in Figure 5.3 concepts D and F could be combined to remove several of
the "worse than" ratings to yield a new concept, DF, to be considered in the next round.
Concept G was also considered for revision. The revised concepts are shown in Figure 5.4.
Step 5 - Select one or more concepts

Once the team members are satisfied with their understanding of each concept and its
relative worth, they decide which concepts are to be selected for further refinement and
analysis.
46
Figure 5.4 New and Revised Concepts for Syringe
Step 6 - reflect on the results and the process

All of the team members should be comfortable with the outcome. If an individual is not in
agreement with the decision of the team, then perhaps one or more important criteria are
missing from the screening matrix. An explicit consideration of whether the results make
sense to everyone reduces the likelihood of making a mistake and increases the likelihood
that the entire team will be solidly committed to the subsequent development activities.
5.3.2. Concept Scoring

In this stage, the team weighs the relative importance of the selection criteria and focuses on
more refined comparisons with respect to each criteria. The concept scores are determined
by the weighted sum of the ratings. Figure 5.6 illustrates the scoring matrix used in this
stage.
Step 1 - Prepare the selection matrix

As in the screening stage, the team prepares a matrix and identifies a reference concept.
Concepts finding their way to this stage are refined to some extent and may be expressed in
more detail. In conjunction with more detailed concepts, the team may wish to add more
detail to the selection criteria. The use of hierarchical relations is a useful way to illustrate
the criteria. For the syringe example, suppose the team decided that the criterion "ease of
use" did not provide sufficient detail to help distinguish among the remaining concepts.
"Ease of use" could be broken down, as shown in Figure 5.7 to include " ease of injection"'
"ease of cleaning"' and "ease of loading".
47
After the criteria are entered, the team adds importance weights to the matrix. Different
schemes can be used to weigh the criteria, such as assigning an importance value from 1 to
5, or allocating 100 percentage points among them, as in Figure 5.5.
Concepts
A DF E G+
Selection Wei (reference) Lever Stop Swash Ring Dial Screw +

Criteria ght Master
Cylinder
Rating Weigh Rating Weigh Rating Weigh Rating Weight
ted ted ted ed
Score Score Score Score
Ease of 5% 3 0.15 3 0.15 4 0.2 4 0.2
handling
Ease of use 15 3 0.45 4 0.6 4 0.6 3 0.45
Readability 10 3 0.3 3 0.3 5 0.5 5 0.5
of settings
Dose 25 3 0.75 3 0.75 2 0.5 3 0.75
metering
accuracy
Durability 15 3 0.45 5 0.75 4 0.6 3 0.45
Ease of 20 3 0.6 3 0.6 2 0.4 2 0.4
manufacture
Portability 10 3 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3
Total Score 3.00 3.45 3.10 3.05
Rank 4 1 2 3
Continue? No Devel No No
op
Figure 5.5 Concept Scoring
The matrix in Figure 5.5 uses concept A as a reference concept.
48
Ease of Injection
EASE OF USE Ease of Cleaning
Ease of Loading
Figure 5.6 Hierarchical decomposition of selection criteria
Step 2 - Rate the concept

As in the screening stage, one way to rate the concept is to compare them to the reference
concept. Because of the need for additional resolution to distinguish among competing
concepts, a finer scale is now used. A scale of 1 to 5 is recommended as below:
Relative Performance Rating

Much worse than reference concept 1
Worse than reference concept 2
Same as reference concept 3
Better than reference concept 4
Much better than reference concept 5
Step 3 Rank the Concepts

Once the ratings are entered for each concept, weighted scores are calculated by multiplying
the new scores by the criteria weights. The total score for each concept is the sum of the
weighted scores:
n
S j  rij wi
i 1
where rij -raw rating of concept j for the ith criterion

wi; - weighting for i th criterion
n- number of criteria
Sj - total score for concept j
Finally, each concept is given a rank corresponding to its total score, as shown in Figure 5.6
49
Step 4 - Combine and Improve the concepts

As in the screening stage, the team looks for changes or combinations that improve concepts.
Although the formal concept generation process is typically completed before concept
selection begins, some of the most creative refinements and improvements occur during the
concept selection process as the team realises the inherent strengths and weaknesses of
certain feature of the product concepts
Step 5 - Select one or more concepts

For the syringe example, the team agreed that concept DF was the most promising and was
likely to lead to a successful product.
Step 6 - Reflect on the results and the process

The final step is to reflect on the selected concept and the concept selection process
Exercises
1. Discuss the concept selection process as an integral part of the product development
process.
2. Discuss the six-step process followed in narrowing the number of concepts
generated during product development.
3. Discuss the six-step process followed in selecting the most promising concept in the
process of developing a product. What is the purpose of a reference concept?
4. Using the concept selection methodology, select the most promising from concepts
you generated in proceeding exercise (concept generation).
5. What are the prospects for computer support of concept selection activities
6. Outline the concept selection methodology, with particular reference to concept
screening and concept scoring matrices.
50
LECTURE SIX PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE

After this lecture you should understand the following :
• Product architecture
• Implications of product architecture on the enterprise
• Procedures for establishing architecture
6.1 What is product architecture?

A product is always thought of in both functional and physical terms. The functional
elements of a product are the individual operations and transformations that contribute to the
overall performance of the product. Functional elements are usually described in schematic
form before they are reduced to specific technologies, components or physical working
principles.
The physical elements of a product are the parts, components, and subassemblies that
ultimately implement the product's functions.
The physical elements of a product are typically organised into several major physical
building blocks, which we call chunks. Each chunk is made up of a collection of components
that implement the functions of the product.
The architecture of a product is therefore the scheme by which the functional elements of
the product are arranged into physical chunks and by which the chunks interact.
A very important characteristic of a product's architect is its modularity. A modular

architecture has the following two properties:-
 Chunks implement one or a few functions
 Interactions between chunks are well defined
Such a modular architecture allows a design change to be made to one chunk without
generally requiring a change to other chunks for the product to function correctly. The
chunks may be designed quite independently of one another.
The opposite of a modular architecture is an integral architecture. An integral architecture

exhibits one or more of the following properties:-
• Functional elements of the product are implemented using more than one chunk
• A single chunk implements many functional elements
• Interactions between chunks are ill-defined
An example of modular and integral architecture is shown in Figure 6.1
51
Figure 6.1 Bicycle brake and shifting controls on the left-modular and on the right
integral architecture
6.2 Implications of the architecture

Decisions about how much modularity to impose on the architecture are linked to several
issues of importance to the entire enterprise:-
• Product performance
• Product change
• Product variety
• Component standardisation
• Manufacturability
Product change
Chunks are physical blocks of the product, but the architecture of the product defines how
these blocks relate to the function of the product. The architecture therefore also defines how
the product can be changed. Modular chunks allow changes to be made to a few isolated
functional elements of the product without necessarily affecting the design of other chunks.
Changing an integral chunk may affect many functional elements and requires changes to
several related chunks. Some of the motives for product change include: - product upgrade,
add-ons, adaptation and wear. In each of these cases a modular architecture allows the firm
to minimise the physical changes required to achieve a functional change.
Product variety
Variety refers to the range of product models the firm can produce within a particular time in
response to market demand. Products built around modular product architecture can be more
easily varied without adding tremendous complexity to the manufacturing system. A good
example is the swatch range of watches.
Swatch produces hundreds of different watch models, but can achieve this variety at
relatively low cost by assembling the variants from different combinations of standard
chunks (Figure 6.2)
A large number of different hands, faces and wristbands can be combined to create endless
combinations.
52
Figure 6.2 Swatch uses a modular design
Component standardization
Component standardisation is the use of the same component or chunk in multiple products.
Such standardisation allows the firm to manufacture the chunk in higher volumes than would
otherwise be possible. This in turn leads to lower costs and increased quality. Component
standardisation may also occur outside the firm when several manufacturers’ products all use
a chunk or component from the same supplier. A good example is the battery of the watch in
Figure 6.2, made by a supplier and standardised across several manufacturers' product lines.
Product performance
Product performance is how well a product implements its intended functions. Typical
performance characteristics are speed, efficiency, life, accuracy and noise.
An integral architecture facilitates the optimisation of those performance characteristics that

are driven by the size and mass of a product. Such characteristics include; acceleration,
energy consumption, aerodynamic drag, noise and aesthetics. The practice of implementing
multiple functions using a single physical element is called function sharing. An integral
architecture allows for redundancy to be eliminated through function sharing and allows for
geometric nesting of components to minimise the volume a product occupies. Clearly
material utilisation is minimised and so are manufacturing costs.
Manufacturability
One important design of manufacturing (DFM) strategy includes the minimisation of the
number of parts in a product through component integration. However, to maintain a given
architecture, the integration of physical components can only be easily considered within
each of the chunks. Component integration across several chunks is different, if not
impossible, and would alter the architecture dramatically.
53
6.3 Establishing the Architecture

Because the product architecture will have profound implications for subsequent product
development activities and for the manufacturing and marketing of the completed product, it
should be established in a cross-functional effort by the development team the end result of
this activity is an appropriate geometric layout of the product, descriptions of the major
chunks, and documentation of the key interactions among the chunks. A four step
methodology is recommended to structure the decision process:-
1. Create a schematic of the product
2. Cluster the elements of the schematic
3. Create a rough geometric layout
4. Identify fundamental and incidental interactions
Exercise
What are the implications of degree of modularity to product architecture? What do you
understand by product architecture? Explain using suitable examples
Reading List
2 S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
14 L. Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
15 C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.
54
LECTURE SEVEN INDUSTRIAL DESIGN

• industrial design and its role in product design
• the industrial design process
• the management of the industrial design process
7.1 Industrial design and its importance to products

The birth of Industrial Design (ID) is often traced to Western Europe in the early 1980s.
Europeans believed a product should be designed "from the inside out". Form should follow
function. In the United States the product's exterior was held more important and its insides
mattered little. This is evidenced in US products of the 1930s. From fountain pens to baby
buggies, products were designed with non-functional aerodynamic shapes in an attempt to
create product appeal. The auto industry provides another example. The shapes of European
automobiles of the 1930s were fairly simple and smooth, while US cars of the same era were
decorated with such non-functional features as tailfins and chrome teeth.
By the 1970s European influence had strongly influenced American ID thinking. Heightened
competition in the marketplace forced companies to search for ways to improve and
differentiate their products. Increasingly companies accepted the notion that the role of ID
needed to go beyond mere shape and appearance.
Today the Industrial Designers Society of America (IDSA) defines industrial design as the
"professional service of creating and developing concepts and specifications that optimise
the function, value and appearance of products and systems for the mutual benefits of both
user and manufacturer" Clearly the definition is broad enough to include the activities of the
entire product development team. In fact, Industrial Designers focus their attention upon the
form and user interaction of products. Five critical goals that industrial designers can help a
team to achieve when developing new products include:
 utility
 appearance
 ease of maintenance
 low costs
 communication
Most products on the market can be improved in some way or another by good ID, and all
products that are used, operated, or seen by people depend critically on ID for commercial
success. A convenient means for assessing the importance of ID to a particular product is to
characterise importance along two dimensions: ergonomics and aesthetics.
Ergonomic Needs
We ask:
• How important is ease of use?
• How important is ease of maintenance?
• How many user interactions are required for the product?
55
• What are the safety issues?
Aesthetic Needs
We ask:
• Is product differentiation required?
• How important are pride of ownership, image, and fashion? an aesthetic product
motivates the design team?
7.2 Industrial design process

Most companies have internal industrial design departments. Small companies tend to use
contract ID services provided by consulting firms. In either case, industrial designers should
participate fully on cross-functional product development teams. Within these teams,
engineers follow an established procedure to generate and evaluate concepts for the technical
features of a product. In a similar manner Industrial designers follow an established
procedure for designing the aesthetics and ergonomics of a product.
Specifically the ID process is made up of the following phases:

• Investigation of customer needs
• Conceptualisation (see Figure 7.1)
• Preliminary refinement
• Further refinement and final concept selection (see Figure 7.2)
• control drawings (see Figure 7.3) hologram, rapid prototyping
• Co-ordination with engineering, manufacturing, and vendors
Figure 7.1 Concept sketches showing two of the early concepts in the MicroTAC
development project
56
Figure 7.2 Hard model - after further refinement and final

concept selection
Figure 7.3 !AC - Control drawing showing the final shape and dimensions
57
7.3 Management of the industrial design process

Industrial design may be incorporated into the overall product design process at any time
during a development program. The timing of the ID effort depends upon the nature of the
product being designed. To explain the timing of the ID effort it is convenient to classify
products according to the nature of the dominant challenges facing the development team:
achieving technological performance, designing the exterior and user interfaces, or both.
Technology • Driven Products

The primary characteristics of a technology-driven product is that its core benefit is based on
its technology, or its ability to accomplish a specific technical task, while such product may
still have important aesthetic and ergonomic requirements, consumers will most likely
purchase the product primarily for its technical performance.
It therefore follows that for the development team of a technology-driven product; the
engineering or technical requirements will be paramount and will dominate development
efforts. Accordingly the role of ID is often limited to packaging the core technology, which
entails determining the product's external appearance and ensuring that the product
communicates its technological capabilities and modes of interaction to the user.
User - Driven Products

The core benefit of a user -driven product is derived from its interface and/or its aesthetics
appeal. Typically there is a high degree of user interaction for these products. Accordingly
the user interfaces must be safe, easy to use, and easy to maintain. The product's external
appearance is often important to differentiate the product and create pride of ownership.
While these products may be technically sophisticated, the technology does not differentiate
the product; thus, for the product development team, the ID considerations will be more
important than the technical requirements. The role of engineering may still be important to
determine any technical features of the product: however, since the technology is often
already established, the development team focuses on the user aspects of the product.
Technology-and- User-Driven Products

A technology-and -user-driven product is simply the combination of the above two
categories. These products have a high degree of user interaction and have stringent
technical performance requirements. Figure 7.4 classifies a variety of popular products.
Figure 7.4 Classification of some common products on the continuum from

technology-driven to user-driven
Note: rarely does a product fit exactly into a given category. Instead most products fall
58
somewhere along the continuum.

These classifications can be dynamic. For instance, when a company develops a product
based on a new core technology, the company is often interested in bringing the product to
market as quickly as possible. Since little emphasis is placed on how the product looks or is
used, the initial role of ID is small.
However, as competitors enter the market, the product may need to compete more along user
or aesthetic dimensions. The product's original classification shifts, and ID assumes an
extremely important role in the development process.
A walkman provides a good example of a technology-and-user-driven product. The core

benefit of the first Walkman (e.g. Sony) was its technology (miniature tape player). As
competition entered this market, however, Sony relied very heavily on ID to create aesthetic
appeal and enhanced utility, adding to the technical advantages of subsequent models.
59

Concurrent Engineering TIE 3119 Module

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concurrent Engineering TIE 3119 Module

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Faculty of Industrial Technology

Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

B Eng Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Concurrent Engineering TIE 3119

Figure 5.2 Concepts for outpatient syringe .............................................................. 42

LECTURE ONE : INTRODUCTION

After this lecture you should understand the following:

1.1 The life cycle of a product

Figure 1.1 Life cycle of a product

1.2 Global competition

Many manufacturers in developed countries decisively responded to this fierce competition

1.3 Characteristics of a competitive product

1.4 Research and development: its role in product development

BUSINESS AS USUAL INVESTMENT IN R&D

Figure 1.2 Benefits of investing in R&D

Figure 1.3 Life-cycle of a product (office printers)

Figure 1.4 Introduction and withdrawal of products (A - E )

Figure 1.5 Technology push and market pull forces

1.6 Reading list

LECTURE TWO :CONCURRENT ENGINEERING

The definition of concurrent engineering is a much-disputed subject. The essence of

Figure 2.1 Pahl and Beitz phase model of product development.

Figure 2.2 Manufacturability System Model

Figure 2.3 Integrated Product Development (IPD) model

2.1 Organizing for Concurrent Engineering

2.2 Concurrent Engineering Toolbox

1) Quality assurance - if a development process wisely specifies the phases a

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5

Figure 2.4 A product development process

A typical product design process, generic product development process, is illustrated in

Concept System- Detail Testing and Production

 Assess componen production  Refine production

2.3 Executing the product development process

Figure 2.6 Sequential product development model

Improving effectiveness of new product development requires that the design

Concurrent engineering - a paradigm shift

Manufacturability system model

Figure 2.7 Manufacturability system model

Figure 2.8 Simultaneous Engineering- using concurrency to develop fast cycle

3 Discuss the benefits of a well defined product development process

LECTURE THREE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

At the end of this lecture you should understand the following:

3.1 Concept Development

Figure 3.1 Concept Development

3.2 The Mission Statement

the product's attributes.

Mission Statement: Screwdriver Project

3.3 Identifying Customer Needs

3.4 Quality Function Deployment

Figure 3.3 The House of Quality

Figure 3.4 Affinity Diagram

Figure 3.5 Tree Diagram

How important is this need to the customer?

Figure 3.6 Planning Matrix

D - Relationships (Between Customer Needs and Technical Reponses -

Figure 3.7 Relationships Whats vs Hows

E- Technical Correlation or Sensitivity Matrix (Hows vs Hows)

F- Technical Matrix (How-Muches):

3.5 Beyond the House of Quality

Figure 3.9 QFD - the Houses Beyond

3.6 Limitations of QFD

a product particularly designed for characteristics related to quality.

What is required in optimising an artifact is designing with respect to all important

 Conventional deployment is a phased process: the conventional deployment process