Product Engineering and Design Thinking

Prof. Pranab K. Dan

Rajendra Mishra School of Engineering Entrepreneurship, IIT KHARAGPUR

E L
P T
N

Module 02: High-Level Design and Fuzzy Front End of Innovation

Lecture 06: FFE Interface with HLD and DT
v High-level and Low-level Design

v Engineering of the Front End Innovation and Development

v Principles of Innovation

L
v Steps followed in Front End Innovation – A Generic Approach

T E
P
v Design Thinking and Fuzzy Front End of innovation and Development

v Conclusion N
v References
 High-level and Low-level Design

v For product engineering HLD plays a crucial role and consequently a discourse
on the Front End of Innovation becomes necessary.

v Design is the primary driver in Product Engineering, and this exercise can be

E L
classified under two task-categories; High Level Design (HLD) and the Low-level
Design (LLD).
P T
N
v The principal function of HLD is to convert the business requirements to a high-
level solution, while the Low-Level Design (LLD) the focus is chiefly on
designing each component in detail.
a) High-Level Design: Briefly speaking is about general system design, meaning it
refers to the overall system design, covering the architecture, functionality and
form description of the application including platforms and relationship among
modules. It is primarily the macro level or the system level design. It is created by
solution architect. It converts the customer (user)/ market requirements into High
Level Solution, which thereafter is followed by the Low-Level Design, taking HLD as

L
a guide.

T E
N P
b) Low-Level Design: Succinctly, it is like detailing for the HLD, that in essence
referring to the component-level design process, describing and designing each
and every module and component, establishing their engineering specifications. It
therefore is a micro-level or detailed design activity.
A pointed comparison of the HLD and LLD is presented below for quick and easy
comprehension:

S.N. HIGH LEVEL DESIGN LOW-LEVEL DESIGN

1.
HLD is the general system design LLD is the detailing for HLD (refers to

L
(refers to the holistic system design) component-level design process.)
E
2.
It is macro level or system design
P T
It is micro level or detailed design.
3.
Overall functional description and N
Detailed description and design of each
architecture of the solution. and every module and component.
4.
Articulates the brief functionality of Clarifies functional details of the module
each module. and components therein.
S.N. High- Level Design Low-Level Design
5. Focused on detailed design
Focused on embodiment and
architectural solution perspective. and development.
6. Participants are design and review Participants are design and Operation
teams, and customers. Teams, and delivery groups.
7. Input criteria are
E L
T
Input criteria is reviewed High Level

8.
Requirement Specification.
Transforms the user/ market N P
Design (HLD).

requirements into High Level Transforms the High Level Solution into
Solution Detailed solution.
 Engineering of the Front End Innovation and Development
v The front end or the earlier part of the activities involved in product innovation and
development is where enterprises often lack critical information regarding rather
several concerning aspects or variable of which the influencing degrees are not
sufficiently known. Or, there is something in the process that turns it as needlessly
complex one, or possibly both.

said to be extended to the pre-development phase.

E L
v This phase is stretched before the full-scale development is undertaken or may be

P T
N
v This characteristic of uncertain or unknown or insufficient information at the front
end makes it hazy or in that sense ‘fuzzy’ and commonly called Fuzzy Front-End due
to this lack of clarity.

q The understanding that HLD (High-level Design) and the Front End of Innovation
and Development are based on a common perspective, it will help in our future
discussions on the methodologies.
 Cost Commitment vs Incurred (Life Cycle Cost)
100 %
Product Cost-committed

80 %

Cost-incurred

60 %
Scope for intervention through
requirement analysis and target

L
specification

T E
% of Total Cost

P
Scope for intervention
through system level
modelling, use of
simulation tools and set-
based design approach N
20 % Scope for intervention Ease of Change
through up-front
analysis-based design
and modular support

Determining Concept Make ( fabrication/manufacturing) Distribution, Installation and Use

Detailed design and early Disposal
customer design Introduction to Early adapters Market introduction , Growth,
prototyping and Testing
requirements Time Maturity and Decline
v Use of the term ‘fuzzy front-end of innovation and development’, by default implies
that the front-end is complex and difficult to understand (fuzziness) and can instill a
predisposition for not addressing the issue for streamlining. However, on the
contrary, if the front end issues are determined then the front-end of innovation
would be clear and will be actionable.

v In most of the diagrams, as found in the literature, be it for the ‘fuzzy front-end of
innovation’ or for the ‘new product development process’, one similarity essentially

E L
noticeable and that the front-end is typically characterized by ideas.

P T
v These ideas are about how an enterprise or industry might solve or satisfy a
N
customer or user need. It is a problem-solving idea, that is being talked of and an
idea is an infusion of technology, design features, functionalities and processes
focused at one or more customer needs. When an enterprise is evaluating several
ideas, it has to evaluate, consequently, many times more in respect of the inherent
customer needs.
v Now, the prime question is as to how the enterprise would know if those needs
are the right ones to pursue, or how does the enterprise know if the solution
being tested is catering to the actual need of the customer. There are situations
when ideas are paired with customer needs during the front-end of innovation,
the resultant is unclear.

v The question raised at this stage is whether the innovation-development

process should begin with ideas or with the problems or the challenges. To

E L
settle this, let us look at the innovation process that starts with ideas and
T
such are often characterized (R. Schade) by the following:
P
N
q Low confidence in pursuing of one or more of many ideas generated
q Innovation development projects piloted based on intuition instead of hard
evidence
q Incremental innovation while producing suboptimal results
q Trying hard to validate both the rudimental customer need and the solution
design with many PD iterations
According to a viewpoint the Principles of Innovation can be regarded as below:
v The paradigm of the front-end of innovation is based upon two principles,
popularized by Anthony W. Ulwick. According to the first principle, customers buy
solutions (products and services) to help them get ‘jobs’ done, and is postulated
as Jobs-to-Be-Done (JTBD) theory.

v The second principle is concerning the metrics, perceived by the customer, for

L
measuring success in getting a job done. These success metrics (called outcomes)

T E
describe the appropriateness in the execution of the job. Both jobs and outcomes
are discernible and measurable and determines what it takes to succeed in a target
market.
N P
It is argued by some that the ‘Needs’, Not Ideas Drive the Front-End of Innovation

According to this surmise, the first part of the innovation process should be
characterized by and be considered for the needs alone. In this front-end phase of
development, an enterprise should be in a position to understand:
1. Where (in which market) should the enterprise grow and the space includes the
customer (called job executor) and their job.

2. How will the enterprise succeed entails a deep understanding of the customer’s
(job executor’s) metrics for success (outcomes) on doing the job?

3. What should the enterprise do relates to only the best ideas that address high-
value outcomes at the lowest cost, effort and risk.

E L
T
4. How would the Job executor (customer) measure the outcome (metrics)
P
N
v By undertaking research (both qualitative and quantitative) research upfront, the
enterprise can ascertain where to create value and it need not spent much time
devising a large number of ideas that is unlikely to fructify. Instead creative
resources are to focus on finding unique solutions only for the underserved
requirements with worthy outcomes.
Steps followed in Front End Innovation – A Generic Approach
1. Preliminary analysis and assessments - on ‘market’ (high-level and not market
research involving detailed investigation of market size and market segments),
‘technology’, and ‘industry’.
2. Demand understanding and refinement - entails customer discovery (to garner
evidence behind a presupposed product-market fit, a customer-centric, scientific
process is involved and has been termed as ‘customer discovery’; a version of
voice of the customer) .
E L
P T
[The approach in customer discovery is of a scientific fervour as the innovator is

N
admitting evidence only to lead to a solution, not permitting any personal bias, like
a scientist’s approach to a hypothesis.]

Four rudimentary hypotheses regarding the potential innovation are to be tested

with actual customers during the discovery phase; these are: (a) Problem
Hypothesis, (b) Solution Hypothesis, (c) Price Hypothesis and (d) Go-to-Market
Hypothesis.
3. Translational research – encompasses, developing PoC (Proof-of-Concept),
developing digital prototype, building ‘low’ and ‘high’ fidelity prototypes (often
called alpha and beta) and continuing research in related domains, designed to
demonstrate a key aspect of an otherwise early-stage technology.
4. Technology discovery and development - constitutes searching and identifying
early-stage technologies; external and internal, and testing the concept
with ‘minimum viable product’. This step can be performed through customer
feedback, individually, or through focus groups, early on.
E L
P T
5. Portfolio analysis and prioritisation - engages scrutiny of potential innovation with

N
criteria that differ substantially from the computational analysis undertaken. The
main goal is to prioritize potential innovations and enhance understanding of the
concept.

v These steps are often not done exactly in this sequential order but vary
depending on discovery through iteration that signals for a re-evaluation and
check during the progress.
v The purpose is to discern the fuzziness and bring clarity into it and streamlining the
same for a smooth systematic, structured and predictable product innovation and
development framework and the process is called ‘defuzzification’ and it starts with
a detailed understanding of customer needs. However, with starting with the ideas
first, the front-end innovation becomes rather complex. A funnel (exhibited by R.
Schade) of activity flow or stages would look like something as below:

E L
P T
N
v The consideration of customer needs, not immediately hooking with ideas paves the
innovation and development process to ensue as lean since it saves both time and
cost by reducing iterations.

v Even without a series of iterations, at the very beginning itself, in the front-end of
the innovation and development process, and only by carrying out the initial
research and strategy evolvement, planning around the afore mentioned four
questions like issues will be possible.

E L
P T
v With more concretely freezing this part, iterations required during the concept

N
development and testing phase will not only reduce the effort necessary but also
make it more streamlined, precise that is likely to succeed better and that too at
much lower cost.

v It is important to note that such iterations are required well after the validation
regarding the customers, their job, and the outcomes they need to satisfy with the
innovation, which is more focused and thereby ore failsafe.
v It is known that there are propositions about building for failing fast and quickly
iterating to develop a minimal viable product, however, they are suitable in specific
context and such approach of applying them too early to the innovation process will
only increase the time and cost requirement, which can be avoided. The proposal
helps in:
Screening and rejecting the non-workable ideas quickly and inexpensively.

E L
q Sharing of customer’s needs and view points between marketing, design &

P T
development, manufacturing & quality and sales & distribution groups within the
enterprise for collaborative and comprehensive decision making.
N
q Faster development due to less iteration and hence quick launching in the market

q Better possibility of spotting new areas of growth

q Mitigating the causes inducing fuzziness and focused for complete defuzzification’

q Higher success rate for the innovation

This session brings in the context of Design Levels, both high and low, in the context
of product innovation since the former, that is the High-level design has direct
bearing on the front end part. The engineering of the front-end is consequently
discussed along with the principles of innovation. The steps followed for front end
development and innovation programme is also addressed.

E L
P T
N
1. Product Engineering and Design Thinking Lecture Notes by Pranab K Dan and Prabir
Sarkar.

E L
P T
N
N Thank
E
P
L
T you…
 Product Engineering and Design Thinking
Prof. Pranab K. Dan
Rajendra Mishra School of Engineering Entrepreneurship, IIT KHARAGPUR

E L
P T
N

Module 02: High-Level Design and Fuzzy Front End of Innovation

Lecture 07: High Level Design in the Context of Front End Innovation
v High-Level Design (HLD): DT and FFE Context

v The FFE Process Phases

v Objective of HLD (High-Level Design) in Product Architectural Context

v The HLD Process: Functional and Physical Decomposition

E L
P
v Product Family Architecture and a System ExampleT
N
v Salient aspects of functional and physical decomposition: HLD Context

v Conclusion

v References
High Level Design (HLD): DT and FFE Context
v Particularly in the context of HLD, many enterprises in the recent past have v Here, the initial
adopted the Design Thinking (DT) Methodology, and allied approaches like GE discussion will be
Healthcare, Netflix, Procter and Gamble, Apple, Amazon, Google, IBM, Tesla, held on the
interrelationship
Braun (Oral B), PepsiCo, Toyota, Nike, Uber, SAP, and several others besides IDEO
between FFE and
and this list is growing exponentially. DT, and then the

E L
v DT aims to manage creativity and channelizing it towards innovative solutions and
context of HLD will
be brought in for

P T
bares similarity with the process for New Product Development (NPD) used in better clarity.

N
scores of enterprises.

v It is reported that the Fuzzy Front End (FFE) stage in NPD, notably uncovers a
significant correlation with design thinking. Based on the analysis of literature on
DT and FFE, it can be inferred that not only do both display similarities between
them but they can symbiotically be enriched by the other.

v This is derivable from work on design thinking by Brooke M Davis and on the Fuzzy
Front End (FFE) by Yung-Ching Ho and Ching-Tzu Tsai.
The two approaches presented briefly, below, will help in evaluating the similarity and
their symbiotic capabilities. According to an analysis (Davis 2010), the design process,
in the context of DT, can be divided into seven phases, running iteratively as non linear
process, with a human centered approach and are as follows:

1. “Problem identification”: Research based approach in instituting clarity to the

problem.

L
2. “Problem statement development”: Post problem identification the purpose for
E
P T
solving it needs to be ascertained, that would resulting in a statement, even
though in a specific area, but still the scope is broad enough so the end result isn’t
fixed.
N
3. “Ideation”: The generation of ideas based on the problem statement framed,
leading to a workable concept.
4. “Evaluation”: The ideas are screened with the filters of desirability, feasibility and
viability for assessing the potential of a concept for further development.
Contd to next slide….
Contd from previous slide…..

5. “Visualization”: Making the select concept tangible and testing with potential
target groups to ascertain if such is valuable enough.

E L
6. “Analysis”: After turning the concept into a viable solution a validation of the
same is accomplished, usually through SWOT analyses, to assess the

P T
innovativeness viewed from the market perspective for launch ability.

N
7. “Final Concept Direction”: Presenting the final concept to the user or the
market and proceeding for the final prototype
The FFE process is expounded by six phases (from a reference of Ho et al. on the
study by Khurana, A., & Rosenthal, S. R.) describing that during the front end stage
the enterprise formulates concept that leads to a product and an assessment in
respect of that determines if it is a valid business opportunity or not. The phases are
as below:

i) “Product strategy formulation and communication of the same”

ii) “Opportunity identification and evaluation”
E L
P T
iii) “Idea Generation”: Creation of the multiple product ideas

N
iv) “Product definition”: Researching the potential of the product and its design
v) “Product creation planning”
vi) “Design and management reviews”

The phases, as illustrated, are not precise as in the case of design thinking.
Nevertheless, the essence conveyed by the terminologies is not too different.
Objective of HLD (High Level Design) in Product Architectural Context:

v The HLD construes the product centric architecture of the system. This architecture
fixes the sub-systems to be built, internal and external interfaces to be developed.
v Where, ‘Design’ may well refer to the characteristics of a system or components
that are decided upon by the product developer with regards to the requirements
of the user, and
E L
P T
v ‘Architecture’ would be defined as the organizational structure or composition of a
N
system as embodiment, distinguishing its components, the interfaces, and a logical
construct of interaction among them.
Objective of HLD (High Level Design) in Product Architectural Context:
v The HLD is the stage where the sub-system requirements are determined and it
also identifies, the principal or key components that may be used in the product-
system that particularly is available as off-the-shelf items, and constitutes the
configuration design.

E L
v ‘Requirements’ is expressed as the comprehensive consideration with regard to

P T
what it has to accomplish or specifically what functions it has to perform, how well

N
the performance should or has to be and under which conditions it has to operate,
be that environmental oriented or even not directly associated with the functional
aspects.
The HLD Process:
.
v HLD is the intermediary proceeding between the requirements for sub-
systems (or the ‘Whats’ that the System does) and the architecture and
interfaces (or the ‘Hows’ of the system) that will match to cater to the
requirements.

L
v This approach involves subdividing or breaking the ‘product-system’
E
T
requirements down into alternative scheme architectures, known as
P
N
‘decomposition’ and then evaluating the scheme architecture, for
determining whether it meets specified criteria, and conform to optimal
performance, functionality, cost, and allied technical and other issues.

v Involvement of the stakeholders, both external and internal are rather

decisive at this stage. Now, to briefly note, there are two major
decomposition aspects; functional and physical.
v This session brings in the context of High-Level Design (HLD) and its
consequence on FFE along with the congruence with DT, explicating the
FFE Process Phases. The objective of HLD (High-Level Design) in the
Product Architectural Context and the HLD process, namely the
Functional and Physical Decomposition is addressed here.

E L
P T
N
1. Product Engineering and Design Thinking Lecture Notes by Pranab K Dan and Prabir Sarkar.

E L
P T
N
N Thank
E
P
L
T you…
 Product Engineering and Design Thinking
Prof. Pranab K. Dan
Rajendra Mishra School of Engineering Entrepreneurship, IIT KHARAGPUR

E L
P T
N

Module 02: High-Level Design and Fuzzy Front End of Innovation

Lecture 08: Functional and Physical Decomposition and QFD
v Functional and Physical Decomposition

v Product Family Architecture and a System Example

v Salient aspects of functional and physical decomposition: HLD Context

E L
T
v Functional Design

N P
v Quality Function Deployment (QFD): An Aid in Conceptual Design

v Conclusion

v References
Functional decomposition is about breaking a function down into its lowest level components

v The Function Breakdown Structure (FBS) of an electrical toothbrush, for instance,

would be described by the root functional module ‘teeth cleaning’, which when
are further decomposed would refer as ‘moving’, ‘manipulating, ‘operating’, etc.

v The term ‘functional decomposition’ is drew on to describe a set of steps in which

L
the overall function of a device or system is broken down into its elementary parts
E
P T
or basic functions, based on due consideration and analysis and usually is
presented in the form of a chart or tree diagram that describes the entities in
increasing detail. N
v A function basically is a task that is performed by a device or a system. Overall
function requires other functions to perform so that the former is realized. A
‘function’ may also be a sub function, since it may both depend on and be
depended on by other functions. Functions are expressed with two words; a verb
and a noun (object).
Physical decomposition sets out the physical elements needed to effectuate the function.

v The root node designated in the Physical Breakdown Structure (PBS) would be the
toothbrush itself, composed of the ‘holder’, ‘housing’, motor, ‘sensor’etc.

v It is purported that the following are known:

E L
(i) sets of functional, physical attributes, of the product family architecture

P T
therefrom in accordance with the customer requirements.
N
(ii) product variants belonging to the product (family), and

(iii) set of customer requirements i.e. the attributes for individual market segment.
v Now, the condition is that the functions and the physical components are to be
compatible. This intertwining is commonly depicted through the product
architecture, consisting:

(i) hierarchical order of functionalities and components into modules and/ or

sub-modules,
(ii) allocation of physical components to elementary or basic functions,
(iii) functional interfaces between modules and
E L
(iv) physical interfaces between components.
P T
N
v The degree of intertwining of functional and physical interfaces defines the
systems as in the range from completely modular product architecture
(independent attributes) to wholly integral product architecture (complex and
coupled attribute interfaces).
v Module characteristics, such as the target cost, are guided by the functional
attributes. Customer requirement attributes, such as the performance or
durability etc., thrust upon the requirements on the functional attributes by
the target market.

v Attributes can belong to even more than one domain, be it physical, functional

L
or customer requirement; such as the volume or weight can fall in the above
E
three attributes.
P T
N
v The set of physical components is called the bill of materials (BOM).

v A product family architecture is presented below, where individual variants are

marked in a specific colour and it is defined by two interlinked hierarchical
structures, namely the FBS and the PBS and is presented in the following
figure.
 E L
P T
N
Example of a Mechanical System (Bicycle): FBS and PBS

E L
P T
N
Example of a Mechanical System (Bicycle): FBS and PBS

E L
P T
N
 Salient aspects of functional and physical decomposition: HLD Context

v Aids in problem solving and generating concepts for and beginning with
smaller and basic individual elements after the concept for the whole
complex system has been established.
v The complex assembly cannot be successfully built without resolving the

L
lower level modules, sub-assembly or component issues.
E
v

P T
Provides guidance in matching function with the assembly, commonly

N
allocating similar functions in the same assembly.
v Helps to explore parts which may perform common functions.
v Aids in integrating or making assemblies modular, in making an important
design decision.
Functional Design
v Functional design refers to mapping a set of customer requirements (needs) to
a set of functional requirements. This, in the context of product development,
is a vital design activity.

v Designers have to extract pertinent information from huge, diverse,

unstructured, and even inconsistent customer responses and needs to

E L
formulate a set of functional requirements that are primarily intangible,

P T
solution-neutral, and rather subjective and consequently its outcome that is

N
functional design influences heavily in the formation of innovative design
thinking, especially in the front end.

v This is about managing couplings of Customer needs (CNs) and functional

requirements (FRs), focused on dependency relationships between these two
and often uses Quality Function Deployment (QFD) methodology, a widely
adopted design approach. Designers utilizes QFD in order to assimilate,
examine, and organize the coupling relationships between CNs and FRs.
QFD: An Aid in Conceptual Design
v As illustrated in the following figure (Liu, Lu, 2020) the
desired CNs and formulated FRs are admitted in the “Room
A” and “Room B” of the “House of Quality of QFD”,
respectively. Thereafter, the CN-FR interrelationship based
couplings are admitted in the “Room C-1”, and the
functional interrelationships among FRs are accommodated
E L
in the “Room C-2”. Next, benchmarking analysis is
conducted against select competing products for
P T
N
comparison in respect of the CNs and FRs, and the
observations are placed in the “Room D-1” and “Room D-
2”, respectively. Finally, according to the weightage, a
subset of CNs and a subset of FRs are prioritized, in the
“Room E-1” and “Room E-2”. This helps designers to focus
on addressing the prioritized CNs and FRs in the
subsequent conceptual design.
v This session discusses the Product Architectural issues in the HLD
Context and the functional and Physical decomposition is elaborated
here. The Product Family Architecture and a Mechanical System Example
using a Bicycle (Product) are also explicated for aiding in the
understanding of the same. The salient aspects of functional and physical
decomposition in the context of HLD are delineated. Functional design,

E L
as a critical step, is highlighted along with a framework; Quality Function
T
Deployment that maps the customer requirement to a set of functional
P
N
requirements in the context of product development.
1. Product Engineering and Design Thinking Lecture Notes by Pranab K Dan and Prabir Sarkar.

E L
P T
N
N Thank
E
P
L
T you…
 Product Engineering and Design Thinking
Prof. Prabir Sarkar
Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Ropar

E L
P T
N

Module 02: High-level design and Fuzzy Front End of Innovation

Lecture 09: Product Design Specification
Product Design Specification (PDS)

The product design specification (PDS) is a listing of the critical parameters, specifications and
requirements for the product you are designing.

A list of what the product should be and should do.

E L
The PDS is created during the problem definition activity very early in the design process.

P T
N
Modifications are often avoided but possible.

Much of the product design specification is driven by customer needs.

This is a constantly evolving document. It is subject to change as the

project
progresses and as more information is learned. Detail is added as the
design grows.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

Product Design Specification (PDS)

Ø A product design specification (PDS) is a document that contains all the requirements,
constraints and specifications that a new product must adhere to.

Ø The PDS is a comprehensive document, which contains all the facts relating to the product
outcome, and should contain all the realistic constraints to be imposed upon the design by the

L
client.

T E
N P
Ø Items in the PDS should be as quantitative (in SI units) as possible. (e.g., the device must weigh
less than 2 kg.; the device must fit in a box etc.), and ranked in order of importance.

Ø The PDS is a dynamic document that should evolve as the project scope
develops. This is because frequently at the start of a project it is not
always clear what is achievable and to what extent certain parameters
are essential.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

Product Design Specification (PDS): Example

Surveyor’s Pole Stand

(source: Stuart Pugh, Total Design , Addison Wesley, 1991)

A surveyor’s pole is used in land surveying for level and distance

measurement.

E L
P T
It is held vertically at a distance from a measuring device ]which is

N
operated by a surveyor.

To allow the surveyor to operate independently, a self-supporting

surveyor’s pole is necessary.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

Product Design Specification (PDS): Example

The Product Design Specification (PDS) for the self-supporting pole is as follows:

Ø Performance: To be fixable in position within one minute.

Ø Size: Pole to be 2.1 m long and showing a “face” of 26 mm. To fit in the trunk of an auto 1 m x 0.3
m x 0.4 m.
Ø Cost: Manufacturing cost plus Rs 2000
E L
P T
Ø Quantity: Batches of 2000 – 5000 for domestic and international markets.

N
Ø Maintenance: Minimal (e.g., oiling allowed)
Ø Finish: Corrosion resistant to enable continued usage in environment specified.
Ø Materials: Light-weight–transportable–not easily damaged by impact.
Ø Weight: Five kilograms maximum.
Ø Aesthetics: Must present an image of robustness, reliability, and
compactness.
Ø Product life: Twenty years.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

Product Design Specification (PDS): Example

Ø Customer: Surveyors in government and private sectors, domestic and international.

Ø Standards/specifications: To be checked.
Ø Politics: Not applicable.
Ø Life in service: Five years

L
Ø Reliability: Maximum 3% failure rate over service life.

E
Ø Safety: Should not have sharp projections; should be capable of being set up with gloved hands.
T
N P
Ø Environment: Temperature range -20°C to 100°C; resistant to water, salt, dust, wind, ice, rocks,
common solvents, oil, gasoline and the like; shock proof to 10 g; wind speeds up to 25 mph.
Ø Shelf life: Five years.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

Product Design Specification (PDS): Example

Ø Packing: Standard pallets to appropriate ISO standards.

Ø Time-scale: Production to start nine months from specification date.
Ø Testing: Prototypes to be proven to meet PDS. No testing of production models
Ø Ergonomics: Must be convenient to handle and store, easy to set up and dismantle, and
be capable of set up by one person.
Ø Competition: To be analyzed.
E L
Ø Market: Worldwide. Trends to be analyzed.
P T
Ø Patents: To be checked.
N
Ø Manufacturing facility: Adequate capacity and suitable tools available.
Ø Company constraints: None at this stage.
Ø Processes: Batch production.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

 1. Physical and Operational Characteristics
CONTENTS OF PDS 1. Performance requirements
Title 2. Safety
3. Accuracy and Reliability
The PDS should have all team members names listed, as well
as the title of the project. It should also be dated, to avoid 4. Life in Service
conflicts arising from different versions. 5. Shelf Life
6. Operating Environment
7. Ergonomics
Function
8. Size
A general statement of what the device is supposed to do.

E L 9. Weight

Client requirements
P T 10. Materials
11. Aesthetics, Appearance, and Finish

about his / her needs

N
May be an itemize what you have learned from the client 2. Production Characteristics
a. Quantity:
b. Target Product Cost:
Design requirements 3. Miscellaneous
This device description should be followed by list of all a. Standards and
relevant constraints, with the following list serving as a Specifications
guideline. b. Customer
c. Patient-related concerns
d. Competition
Indian Institute of Technology Ropar
Class exercise

Create needs and wishes for a wearable computer

Generate product specification document

E L
P T
N

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar

 IIT KHARAGPUR | IIT ROPAR

N Thank
E
P
L
T you…
 Product Engineering and Design Thinking
Prof. Pranab K. Dan
Rajendra Mishra School of Engineering Entrepreneurship, IIT KHARAGPUR

E L
P T
N

Module 02: High-Level Design and Fuzzy Front End of Innovation

Lecture 10: FAST in Functional Design
v Introduction and Objective of Function Analysis

v Classification of Functions and its purposes and Higher and Lower Order Function

v FAST Diagramming

v FAST’s Working Principle

v To develop a FAST Diagram

E L
P T
N
v Supporting Function

v FAST Diagram for Torch Light and Digital PC Projector

v FAST and its importance in the phase of Value Engineering

v Diagramming Conventions

v Conclusions
Introduction of Function Analysis

v Function analysis is a mainstay in the new product design stage, which includes
abstraction of function, its standardization, classification and decomposition,
and so on.

E L
v Functional analysis primarily entails the process of instituting the functional
T
structure and model, which are salient parts in innovative design.
P
N
v Their cardinal purpose is to decompose the whole functionality of the product
into small functional elements, from which an in-depth investigation about
each of the elements is to be made and through this the designer can create
and implement suitable interrelationship to fulfill the important characteristics
in the complex product design process.
Objective of Function Analysis
v The objective of the ‘Function Analysis’ is to understand the project from a
function perspective; what should rather be done and it is concerned with spotting
unnecessary costs and specific requirements and ascertaining the value of the
project.

v Where, ‘Function’ may be defined as the primordial intent or purpose that a

measurable noun (object) form.

E L
product is expected to perform and it is expressed in a two-word; active verb and

P T
N
v A function is that which makes a product work or sell and for which the customer
buys the product. Functions must be methodically specified so as the associated
costs may properly be determined and duly assigned, to achieve best value.

v Function Analysis would be stated as the process of defining, classifying and

evaluating functions.

v A Common Activity concerning this is the deployment of the methodology;

‘Function Analysis System Technique (FAST)’
Classification of Functions and its purposes
v Functions are classified in order to ascertain which of those are absolutely
necessary to achieve the required performance and they are; Basic Functions,
Secondary Functions (Required or Unwanted), Higher Order Functions and Lower
Order Functions

v Basic Functions

E L
P T
q The basic function is the precise reason for which something exists and refers to
what it must do, meaning, a performance feature that must be attained.
N
v Secondary Functions

q A secondary, often called supporting, function also defines performance features

of a product besides those are absolutely essential and it refers to what else does
it do. Such as that the wood holds the graphite in a pencil.
Higher and Lower Order Function

v Higher Order Functions

q These represent the particular need that necessitates the existence of the basic
function(s) and defines the outcome of the latter.

v Lower Order Functions

E L
P T
N
q Lower order functions describe the required inputs.
 FAST Diagramming

v Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) is a structured tool used to

systematically identify and analyze function with intuitive logic to spur on
creative and innovative thinking, with distinct objective to improve value of
functions of a product. In 1964, Charles W. Bytheway developed FAST as the
Value Engineering and Cost Reduction purposes.

E L
P T
N
FAST’s Working Principle

v At first it is to be determined by the design team what it considers as the general

function of the product under study. Extension from that point begins using the
logic of ‘How’ and ‘Why’.

E L
v When the question is ‘How’, the designer is exploring for solutions and
progressing to lower levels of scope.
P T
N
v When the question is 'Why' the designer is trying to find the reasons and stepping
to higher level of scope.

Cont. to next slide………

 Contd………

v Through the progressive investigation of ‘How it is going to do it’ and ‘Why is it

doing so’, one may locate a missing essential functions, or even one may land up
realizing that what initially was perceived to be the Basic Function (primary
purpose) is not truly so in reality.

E L
v Functions that line on this ‘how-why’ line are critical to the performance of the

P T
basic function and are called ‘Critical Function Logic Path’. If one of them is
N
dropped, the basic function of the product would not be accomplished.
However, by removing it if the basic function still can be performed, then
supposedly the function dropped is a supporting function, and not a critical one.
To develop a FAST diagram
v according to the convention, the designer starting with the identified ‘Higher
Order’ function and moving towards the right, seeks the answer, ‘How' is (verb -
noun) would actually be accomplished; which would be met by the next function
to the left. The design team will brainstorm on that and decide on the most
suitable one. Such answer, also expressed in verb-noun form, is the next ‘lower
order’ function on the FAST diagram.

E L
v The headway to the right is carried out by virtue of the continuance of

P T
questioning ‘How’ for each new function placed on the FAST diagram.

N
Attributes to the right of the Basic function are secondary functions, required as
supporting, based on the selected design.

v I order to verify the ‘How’ logic, one has to shift to the ‘lower order’ function and
explore, ‘why’ is it necessary to (verb-noun) and the explanation to that
exploration should be the function in the ‘box’ to the left. However, if the
explanation does not hang together then it likely that a function is getting
missed.
Supporting Functions
v Supporting Functions are those that occur either

(i) all through, or

(ii) at the same time as the other function is occurring, or,
(iii) are caused by the critical functions.

E L
v And, their occurrences are the result of the design plan chosen for accomplishing

P T
the basic function. These supporting or secondary functions are positioned
vertically, as the ‘When’ direction in the FAST Diagram.
N
v The scope of FAST: The FAST Diagram uses the conceived design as a model and
as discussed earlier, it can be expanded extensively to the left, leading up to the
point of verifying why the device is being designed. At locations along the critical
logic path of the functions, a "Scope" line ascertains the limits of the design
investigation. To its right lies the basic function; which remains the subject of the
design investigation.
The figure below illustrates an example of a FAST diagram for the case of Torch light

E L
P T
N
The figure below illustrates an example of a FAST diagram for the case of Digital PC Projector

E L
P T
N
FAST and its importance in the phases of value engineering (VE)

v It is exigent during the ‘Creativity Phase’ in VE, to pay attention to the function
rather than the product itself and therefore tends to divert away the focus from
the object that is the device or the product. But, developing a FAST diagram
provides for a re-evaluation of the design during the ‘Development Phase’.
Reexamination at this stage can bring to light the areas for further savings which
might have been missed.
E L
P T
v A comparison between the original design concept and a proposed alternative,
N
utilizing the FAST diagram would be an effective pitching tool during the
Presentation Phase. It is favourable as a communication tool, since it presents in
function terms that can be understood easily by almost everyone, even though it
is a technical or complex product-system.
Some diagramming conventions (Literature):

E L
P T
N
v This session addresses the objective of Function Analysis, classification of
Functions and its purposes and the Higher and Lower Order Function. This
lecture elucidates on Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) in
reasonable details and illustrates the methodology with examples

E L
P T
N
1. Product Engineering and Design Thinking Lecture Notes by Pranab K Dan and Prabir Sarkar.

E L
P T
N
N Thank
E
P
L
T you…