1.

Identify 6 to 8 opportunities for innovation for a powered two-wheeler (ecycle /ebike etc) which you would like to consider for exploration
and development.
Generic Factors for Innovations

Mileage Performance Related Connected Systems

Areas for Innovations

4 8 9
1 2 3 5 6 7
Lightweight Impact High Strength to Weight Rapid Thermal High Brightness, High Mutiple Data Collections
Charge Storage Battery Lightweighting Motor Safety
Absorption Design Materials Dissipating Materials Strength Robust Displays Sensors for Telematics

Impact Absorption Low weight novel

Battery Endurance Thermal Dissipators Performance Motor Vehicle Safety Displays Telematics
Composite Casing materials

Heated Jacket for Fibre Reinforced CNT/Graphene IGZO Based Engine, Tyre, Temp,
Origami based conductive High Torque Motor Braking
Charge retention Plastics Displays Battery Sensors etc.
polymer paint/spray

Polymer Lithium Nano Coatings for Polymer screen

High Density Low
Batteries with CNT/ Honeycomb CNT/Graphene Low Noise Motor ABS/EBD displays for all GPS Tracking
Weight Plastics
Graphene Super encapsulated by weather protection
Capacitance metal nano films
Resistive Displays to
Asymmetically Brushless Direct Mobile/Wearable/
Petrol Bunk Metal Foams Brake Design avoid mis-touch
Porous Speciality electronic Drive Desktop App for
Swappable batteries input
paints tracking, unlocking,
monitoring etc.
Electric Mechanism Rapid Thermal Material
for quick storage Truss Dissipation for low
using Level 1 current
charging consumption Anti - Theft
Crash Worthiness
Major Relation

Alternative Major Relation

Can be achieved by

Can be achieved by

Aesthetics and Aerodynamics are assumed to be a basic need for any electric vehicle for a futuristic consumer feel
2. List some advantages and disadvantages involving customer in the requirements process

Involvement of customers in the requirement process

Usually, products and services are intended to be customer driven for any thriving market to be
sustainable. It is essential that organisations understand the outcomes of a product by using certain
metrics. They must design based on the technologies and features that is most sought after by customers.
Customers do not provide the design or rather they provide input to what is required in their final
product which is the outcome. It is quintessential that companies capture these requirements to achieve
an outcome driven paradigm which will be the driving factor to build better products. However, it is
advised that the organisations should not brainstorm with a bunch of ideas with the customer and test
which ones are received well by the consumer, as they have proven to because of most product failures.

Advantages:

Customers could usually provide the following data:

i. Provide their emerging need

ii. Test early prototypes and provide their feedback
iii. Product differentiation – how customers perceive a product with respect to competitors
iv. Functional requirement identification
v. Any other features that would provide an exhilarating experience
vi. Customers could provide their feedback with their experience using competitor’s products.

Disadvantages:

i. Could have a biased opinion

ii. May not be exposed to “New to Market” products

Case Study (Involving customers): Bose and Camera companies

Bose is a leading hi-end audio system manufacturing American company. Bose reviews every
customer’s feedback on a product on their website and selects a few reviewers, and include them in
their new product development process. They provide their new prototypes to these selected reviewers
and ask them their opinion before they launch the product.

A very similar technique is followed by photography equipment companies specifically, Nikon, Canon,
Leica and Panasonic. They provide their unlaunched cameras to reknowned photographers for
reviewing the product. Based on that tweaks are made with respect to post processing, operational
experience, interface etc.

Case Study (Not involving customers): Driving the desire in customers – Apple
Typically, in 2007 2G based internet communicators had dominated the luxury phone market by Nokia
and Blackberry. Both companies had a keypad and a resistive touch with pen which were slightly
cumbersome, yet, were well established solutions. A breakthrough happened, when Apple launched
their first iphone with a full screen capacitive multi touch display which allowed a user to browse
internet on a small computer screen, take high quality images, using multiple fingers and the touch was
the input to the phone. This was huge success and 3,00,000 phones were sold in the first week of launch.
However, customers were not involved during the requirements and design process of the product as
they lacked exposure to such technology. Also, this is a good example for hidden design concept.

3.Could a great opportunity identification process result in a product that fails in the market?

Yes, a great opportunity identification resulting in a good product could also fail in the market.

Fig.1: Types of opportunities that could be identified. (Source: Ulrich and Eppinger, Product Design and Development, Fifth
Edition, Page 36, Chapter 3)

The above figure is categorised into 3 zones.

i. Horizon 1: Which is the safest/low risk of all the markets which caters to incremental
improvements to existing products and technological services.

Eg: New vehicle design based on existing standardised inventory. An example would be,
Maruti Suzuki using its existing BSVI Petrol 1.5L engine of Ciaz and Ertiga into new
bodies of SUVs to launch a petrol variant of Vitara Brezza and S-Cross.

ii. Horizon 2: Poses mild to medium risk which caters to the existing need which an
organisation has not previously addressed and decides to address understanding fully well
that they do not have any ready solutions or have an existing solution which could be
tailored to suit the need. This could also mean identifying new generation products in the
market.

Eg 1: Success story 1
Many Chinese/Taiwanese based computer peripheral manufacturers like Asus decided to
get into cell phone market and are sustaining well.

Eg 2: Success story 2
Car manufacturers moving into tech space to create connected cars that could be monitored
using phones and wearables. Car manufacturers like Kia, Hyundai, Nissan etc have now
tied with software companies to achieve connected cars.

Eg 3: Failure story 1
Nokia, a global leader with the first smartphone/communicator decided to shed the
Symbian operating system and get in line with a more user friendly and intuitive interface
OS. Android and Windows mobile were two choices posed to Nokia. Stephan Elop who
became the CEO of Nokia from Microsoft decided to use the Windows Mobile OS and this
move tanked the company to close it in 2014. This was because, Windows Mobile OS was
ported from its desktop edition without offering customisation to mobile devices.

Eg 4: Failure story 2
Amazon who was well known with the e book readers decided to get into the cell phone
market and created a 3D with parallax effect Fire phone. Although the first wave of phones
garnered consumer excitement, eventually, many consumers started complaining of heating
due to excessive processor demand to run graphics resulting in battery drain outs and also
many complained about headaches due to the 3D effect on the smaller screen.
iii. Horizon 3: Poses the highest risk which looks into identifying new demand opportunities,
and providing brand new solutions. These sometimes not only try addressing new or
futuristic demand but also introduce new technologies and act as a market driver in spite of
consumer not knowing its need.

(Source: Completely rewritten and rephrased from: Ulrich and Eppinger, Product Design and
Development, Fifth Edition, Page 34-36, Chapter 3. Examples not a part of the book.)

It is in horizon 3 that in spite of identifying a great opportunity, products could fail in the market.
Although, there have been many success stories like launch of Apple’s MP3 and Capacitive Touch
based Internet Phone which was completely unknown to consumer and ushered a new era of
smartphone business, likewise, there have been several failures.

Some case studies products/technologies/services of market failure though a great opportunity was
identified has been listed below.

Case Study 1: 3D Technology

Opportunity: 3D technology offered a new world of realistic experience. Movies like Avatar made
waves which prompted the cinema industry to make more 3D movies. This pushed the electronics
market to drive to 3D TVs, Blu Rays and even phones.

Cause of Failure: Wearing a spectacle and watching TVs offered an annoying and irritating user
experience (UX). Many people experienced eye and other health hazards due to the frequent
switching of screens at high frequency. Slowly the demand reduced and even the top television
manufacturers have stopped making 3D TVs and other electronics with 3D displays.

Case Study 2: LiFi Technology

Opportunity: Traditional radio frequencies of 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz are used for Wifi transmission.
Based on the power of the antenna (>5dB) health hazards have been associated in the longer run.
Usage of photons (Light) could be used as quantum transmission method of data which supports
over 100 Gbps.

Cause of Failure: Although, LiFi is safer, faster, basic connectivity architecture in houses require
to be changed. Has interoperability issues with devices. More time is required for its adoption.

Case Study 3: Nano coatings on high demand consumer products

Opportunity: Nano coatings offer high endurance and high performance and mass manufacturing
makes it cheaper. It is also environment friendly. High performance race car components use nano
coatings on engine liners, pins etc. Luxury watches, stealth material use nano coatings.
 Cause of failure: High consumption products like knives, surgical blades have not been coated with
nano coatings. Manufacturers suggested that the sales of the knives shall go down not due to hike
in cost, but due to its endurance. Repeating customer base will be diminished drastically. Hence, it
is being coated only on military knives where endurance is a major requirement.

Case study 4: Online grocery delivery services in tier 2 and 3 cities

Opportunity: People in metro cities have no time for important personal activities and spend more
time in commuting. Online grocery delivery works cheaper in terms of time and cost in metros.

Cause of failure: Although, it started well in tier 2 and tier 3 cities, the interest slowly reduced as
the businesses surveyed and found that tier 2 and tier 3 cities find grocery shopping in supermarkets
as “family outing/bonding time” in India.

Case study 5: A low cost, 600 cc small car, from a reputed Indian Auto Manufacturer

Opportunity: Quality small car for every family at a cost of a high-cost two-wheeler.

Cause of failure: Although, conceived as a brilliant idea, the establishment of factory took a long
time due to beaurocracy issues. By the time manufacturing and quality issues were sorted out, raw
material costs increased. This led to the hike of the overall car equalling to the cheapest 800 cc car
in market. Value for Money was lost.

Great opportunities not necessarily mean success in market. In summary, the following reasons
could be attributed to the same:

1. Demographics and culture – Not all consumers are willing to adapt to same. Product may not
be suited to consumers of a particular age group, geographical area etc. eg: Aggregator services
for taxis, groceries etc.
2. Scalability – Products that are good at a batch operation may not be viable when scaled to large
scale manufacturing. eg: Low cost or frugal innovation products
3. Usage scenario – A product used in one scenario which is proven to be successful need not be
successful in another application sector (Failure in Horizon 2). eg: Nano coatings
4. Time of launch – Being too early (Failure in horizon 3) or too late to launch a product could be
problematic for the product’s success. eg: Lifi technology

4.How can multiple rooms of the House of Quality be linked to develop specifications?

House of Quality translates customer requirements into quantifiable design variables, called
engineering characteristics.
The engineering characteristics that will be addressed are:
• System-level specs determine whether we can meet the customer needs.
 • Sub-system specs determine how to meet the system specs.

• Component specs determine how to meet the sub-system specs.

• Manufacturing specs determine how to meet the component specs.

• Process specs determine how to meet the component specs.

Fig. 2: House of quality, Slide 7, From Lecture 8-9

For the specified example given in House of Quality, “Development of micro 3D printing system”, the
following table states the characteristics required for considering development along with the metrics.

Table 1: Characteristics and respective metrics for a micro 3D printing system

Sl. No. Build Characteristics Metrics/Parameters

1. Build Volume 25 mm – 100 mm stroke per stage on 2 or 3
axes.
2. Light Source (Anyone) (λ = 365 nm) LED/Mercury Bulb/Laser with Energy
2.a. LED 10 W/m2
2.b. Mercury Bulb 10 W/m2
2.c Laser 1 W/m2
 3. Build Accuracies 0.5 – 3 µm
4. Stage Repeatability 1 – 2 µm
5. Monomer Any UV curable monomer
6. Photoinitiator Any UV activated photoinitiator.
Concentration will vary from 0.5 – 4% Vol
Wt.
7. Beam Focusing
7.a. Reduction optics 3-10 x
7.b. Aperture 0.1-1 mm (Iris Diaphragm)
7.c. Expansion optics 8-12 x
7.d. Acoustic Optic Modulator 1-5 V while addressing 1st order beam
7.e. Focusing optics 1-2 x
TM
7.f. Digital Mirror Device For projection micro 3D printers only at
Full HD resolution UV light – monochrome
compatible
7.g. Beam Steering Columns Elliptical
7.h. Coating All optics must have UV transmission
coating between 240-420 nm wavelength
bandwidth.
8. Software Open Architecture, Special Post Processor
required for simplification of input. (STL-
less preferred)

Table 2: Characteristics and respective metrics for a product from micro 3D printing system

Sl. No. Product Characteristics Metrics/Parameters

1. Smallest feature size < 1000 µm
2. Material Based on application. Processing Bio
Materials is an added advantage
3. Feature Repeatability 5% of least feature dimension possible
QFD: House of Quality
Project: Micro 3D Printer
Revision:
Date:

Correlations
Positive +
Negative −
No Correlation

Relationships
Strong ● +
Moderate ○ + +
Weak ▽ + + + +
Direction of Improvement
+ + +
+
Maximize ▲
− + + + +
Target ◇
+ − + + +
Minimize ▼
+ + + + + + +
Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Direction of Improvement ◇ ▲ ▼ ▲ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ▲ Customer Competitive Assesment

Enclosure System (Granite/BreadBoard)

Requirements

Photoinitiator Conc. (Vol Wt. %)

Light Source (LED/Bulb/Laser)
Build Accuracies (micrometer)
Functional

Optics Numerical Aperture

Build Size/Volume (mm3)

Controller Axis (2,3 etc)

Stages used (1,2,3)

Build time (min)
Energy (mW)
Maximum Relationship

Nano Scribe, Germany

Customer Importance

Microlight 3D, France

Our Product: Sukshm
Customer importance

Envisiontec, USA
Relative Weight

Acculas, Japan
Weight Chart

Customer
Requirements
(Explicit and
Row #

Row #
Implicit) 0 1 2 3 4 5

1 ||||| 11% 8 8 9 Size of Component ● ● ● ▽ ○ ● ● ● 3 3 4 1 5 1

2 ||||| 12% 9 9 9 Materials ● ● ● ▽ ● 3 2 1 2 4 2

3 |||| 9% 7 7 9 Speed ● ● ● ▽ 4 4 4 0 2 3

4 ||||| 11% 8 8 9 Application Area (Bio/Mech) ○ ▽ ▽ ● ● ● ● ● ● 3 3 3 4 5 4

5 |||||| 13% 10 10 9 Reasonable cost ● ● ○ ● ● ● ● ● ● 5 2 3 3 2 5

6 ||| 8% 6 6 9 Component Strength ● ▽ ▽ ● ▽ 4 5 4 4 3 6

7 ||| 7% 5 5 9 Aesthetics ▽ ● 3 5 5 5 5 7

8 ||| 8% 6 6 9 Dimensions ● ● ▽ ● ● 3 4 3 4 4 8

9 ||||| 11% 8 8 9 User Software ● ● ● ● ▽ 4 4 5 5 5 9

10 ||||| 12% 9 9 9 Feature Size ● ● ○ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 4 4 3 4 5 10

11 11

12 12

13 13

Our Product
14 14
Competitor #1
Competitor #2
15 15
Competitor #3

16 Competitor #4 16
Optics Numerical Aperture
Build Size/Volume (mm3)

Photoinitiator Conc. (Vol

Controller Axis (2,3 etc)

(Granite/BreadBoard)
Stages used (1,2,3)

Enclosure System
(LED/Bulb/Laser)
Build Accuracies
Build time (min)
Energy (mW)

(micrometer)

Light Source

Wt. %)

Target

Max Relationship 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
Technical Importance Rating 600 507.9 294.7 611.8 425 517.1 517.1 609.2 272.4 467.1
Relative Weight 12% 11% 6% 13% 9% 11% 11% 13% 6% 10%

Weight Chart
||||||

||||||

||||||
|||||

|||||

|||||
||||

||||
|||

||

Our Product: Sukshm 3 3 4 2 4 4 4 4 2 3

Acculas, Japan 5 5 3 4 4 4 3 3 2 3
Envisiontec, USA 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3
Technical Competitive Assesment

Microlight 3D, France 3 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3

Nano Scribe, Germany 2 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 4 4
5

Our Product
4

Competitor #1
3

Competitor #2
Competitor #3
2

Competitor #4
1
0

Template Revision: 0.9 Date: 24.2.2021

Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ankit. K
5. Affordable, ergonomic schoolbag cum writing table problem.

Understanding voice of the customer

Sl. No. Customer Statement Need Statement

1. "Back aches while bending to write" Writing posture is comfortable
2. "Seeing the books too closely while Reading posture is relaxed and comfortable
writing"
3. "Unable to afford desk and chair” Furniture is affordable
4. "Unable to carry extra luggage apart from Furniture is portable and light
school bags and lunchbox"
5. “School does not provide any furniture” Furniture is desired in school
6. “Must be able to place books and write on Furniture is able to support low weight
some support” objects and forces

Organized list of customer needs

1. Writing posture is comfortable.

a. Writing is ergonomic without bending much.
b. Writing heights are adjusted according to student's height.
2. Reading posture is relaxed and comfortable.
a. Reading is ergonomic without bending much.
b. Reading heights are adjusted according to student's height.
c. Appropriate reading angle is maintained while studying.
3. Furniture is affordable.
a. Furniture is low cost priced.
b. Furniture mechanism is simple with less joints.
c. Funiture is of decent quality.
4. Furniture is portable and light.
a. Furniture can be carried easily even by little children.
b. Furniture is portable and is easily movable.
5. Furniture is able to support low weight objects and forces
a. Furniture is mildly rigid
b. Furniture is firm
The Kano model for the same is as given below: