Design & Manufacturing of Materials Product design:Product development; design core; market analysis...
-
date post
20-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
1
Transcript of Design & Manufacturing of Materials Product design:Product development; design core; market analysis...
Design & Manufacturing of Materials
Product design: Product development; design core; market analysis and competitive benchmarking; product design specification; concept design; detail design.
Materials selection: Development of materials performance indices with and without shape, materials selection maps, case studies of materials selection: oars, springs, pressure vessels, etc.; selection with multiple constraints.
Process selection: Process selection charts, case studies of a fan, ceramic valve; process costs and cost breakdown.
Manufacturing industry: Plant location; plant layout; critical path analysis; production scheduling; materials requirement planning; Just in Time management.
Metal forming in the packaging industry:
Forming limit diagrams; R-curves; forming processes (e.g. deep drawing); Strain path analysis.
6 Lectures, Trinity Term 20032nd year Materials: Engineering Applications of Materials
Dr Ian Stone (5 lectures) & Dr Paul Butler (1 lecture)
Synopsis
Further Reading
S. Pugh Total Design, Addison-Wesley, 1991 (56PUG)
M.F. Ashby & D.R.H. Jones Engineering Materials 1, Pergamon, 1980 (50ASH/1)
M.F. Ashby & D.R.H. Jones Engineering Materials 2, Pergamon, 1986 (50ASH/2)
M.F. Ashby Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, Butterworth & Heinemann, 1992 (56ASH/1)
B. Derby, D.A. Hills & C. Ruiz
Materials for Engineering, Wiley 1992 (50DER)
E.J. Anderson The Management of Manufacturing, Addison-Wesley, 1994 (56AND)
Product Development
Product Development TeamMarketing Provides market assessment
Identifies market opportunities
Manufacturing Assesses production processAssesses manufacturing costs and quality
Design Defines product form and functionEngineering DesignIndustrial Design
Product Development TypeDevelopment time 1-10 years depending on product
Development cost $100k-$5B depending on product
Development type Generic/Market pullTechnology pushTechnology platformProcess limitedCustomised
Company InnovationLarge companies vs SMEs (small and medium size enterprises)
Product Development Team
Finance
Sales
Legal
ManufacturingEngineer
TEAMLEADER
MarketingProfessional
IndustrialDesigner
PurchasingSpecialist
MechanicalDesigner
ElectronicsDesigner
Extended Team(including suppliers)
Product Development TypeGeneric(Market Pull)
Technology Push
Platform Products
Process Intensive
Customization
Description The firm begins with a market opportunity, then finds an appropriate technology to meet customer needs.
The firm begins with a new technology, then finds an appropriate market.
The firm assumes that the new product will be built around the same technological subsystem as an existing product.
Characteristics of the product are constrained by the production process.
New products are slight variations of existing configurations.
Distinctions with respect to the generic process
Additional initial activity of matching technology and market.
Concept development assumes a given technology.
Concept development assumes a technology platform.
Both process and product must be developed together from the very beginning, or an existing production process must be specified from the beginning.
Similarity of projects allows for a highly structured development process.
Development is almost like a production process.
Examples Sporting goods, furniture, tools.
Gore-Tex rainwear, Tyvek envelopes.
Consumer electronics, computers, printers.
Snack foods, cereal, chemicals, semiconductors.
Switches, motors, batteries, containers.
Product Development ExamplesStanley Tools
Jobmaster screwdriver
Rollerblade Bravoblade In-
Line Skates
Hewlett-Packard
DeskJet 500 Printer
Chrysler Concorde Car
Boeing 777 Aeroplane
Annual production volume
100,000units/year
100,000units/year
1.5 millionunits/year
250,000units/year
50units/year
Sales lifetime 40 years 3 years 3 years 6 years 30 years
Sales price $3 $200 $365 $19,000 $130 million
Number of unique components
3 35 200 10,000 130,000
Development time 1 year 2 years 1.5 years 3.5 years 4.5 years
Internal development team size
3people
5people
100people
850people
6,800People
External development team size
3people
10people
100people
1400people
10,000People
Development cost $150,000 $750,000 $50 million $1 billion $3 billion
Production investment
$150,000 $1 million $25 million $600 million $3 billion
Innovation in Firms
Number of employees
1945-9
(%)
1950-4
(%)
1955-9
(%)
1960-4
(%)
1965-9
(%)
1970-4
(%)
1975-80
(%)
Total
(%)
1-199 16 12 11 11 13 15 17 14
200-499 9 6 8 6 7 9 7 7
500-999 3 2 7 5 5 4 3 4
1,000-9,999 36 36 25 27 23 17 14 23
10,000 and over
36 44 50 51 52 55 59 52
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Number of Innovations
94 191 274 405 467 401 461 2293
Total Design Market Assessment
Specification
Concept Design
Detail Design
Manufacture
Sell
is a systematic activity: Identification of the market need → sale of product to meet that need.Product, Process, People, Organization, etc.
Design CoreMarket AnalysisSpecificationConcept DesignDetailed DesignManufacturingSales
Product Design Specification (PDS)Envelopes all stages of the design core
THE DESIGN CORE
The Design Core Market Assessment
Specification
Concept Design
Detail Design
Manufacture
Sell
MARKETASSESSMENT
Interviews, Questionnaires, Focus Groups
Intellectual Property and Literature Searches
Competitive Benchmarkingparametric analysis, needs matrix
Market Analysis: Example 1
Tristar 333
A rough terrain telescopic handler with parallel lift
Market Analysis: Tristar 333
Market Analysis: Example 2
Microm 160
A microscope manipulator for opthalmology
No.
Make and Model
Feature and function
CO
OP
ER
VIS
ION
ZE
ISS
(J) SL
IT L
A.
ZE
ISS
UN
IVE
RS
AL
WIL
D M
S-C
WIL
D M
S-B
WIL
D M
S-F
WE
CK
10
10
8
WE
CK
(CE
ILIN
G)
AM
SC
O,
AM
SC
OP
E
KE
EL
ER
K-3
80
FW
ZE
ISS
E.M
. C
EIL
ING Graphical
representation of percentage
%
1 Coaxial illumination xxxxxx 54
2 Moto. vert. course movement xxxxxx 54
3 Moto. vert. fine movement xx 18
4 X-Y attachment xxxxxxx 64
5 Motorized zoom (microscope) xxxxxxxxxxx 100
6 Motorized zoom (arm) xxx 27
7 Auto. step magnification xxxxxxxx 73
8 Hand switch controls xxxxxxxxxx 82
9 Mouth switch 0
10 Foot switch xxxxxxxxxxx 100
11 Counterbalanced by weight x 9
12 Counterbalanced by spring xxxxxx 54
13 Energized locking xx 18
14 Friction locking xxxxxxxxx 82
15 Stepped locking xxx 27
16 Rotation free around stand xxxxxxxxxxx 100
MATRIX ANALYSIS
No.
Make and Model
Feature and function
CO
OP
ER
VIS
ION
ZE
ISS
(J) SL
IT L
A.
ZE
ISS
UN
IVE
RS
AL
WIL
D M
S-C
WIL
D M
S-B
WIL
D M
S-F
WE
CK
10
10
8
WE
CK
(CE
ILIN
G)
AM
SC
O,
AM
SC
OP
E
KE
EL
ER
K-3
80
FW
ZE
ISS
E.M
. C
EIL
ING Graphical
representation of percentage
%
17 Vert. course mov. of assembly
xxxxxx 55
18 Course mov. in horiz. plane xxxxxxxxxxx 100
19 Vertical mov. of the arm xxxxxx 55
20 Tilt of microscope attachment xxxxxxxxxxx 100
21 Rotation of micros. attachm. xxxxxx 55
22 Yaw of micros. attachment xxxx 35
23 Connection facil. for attachm. xxxxxxxxxx 91
24 Stand levelling facilities x 9
25 Stand braking facilities xxxxxx 55
26 Fibre optic illumination xxxxxxx 64
27 Down limiting stop xxxxx 45
28 Manual step magnification xxxxxxxx 73
29 Slit illumination xxxxxxx 64
30 Manual zoom 0
31 Horiz. mov. on plane of arms xxxx 36
32 Floor mounted xxxxxxx 63
MATRIX ANALYSIS cont’d
The Design Core Market Assessment
Specification
Concept Design
Detail Design
Manufacture
Sell
SPECIFICATION
Product Design Specification (PDS)
Develop Specification (8 stages)1. Construct customer needs matrix2. Develop performance measures3. Cross correlate (needs-measures matrix)4. Construct competitive benchmark chart to
assess market position (based on customer needs and performance measures)
5. Define an initial set of target specifications6. Carry out engineering design analysis to assess
technical feasibility7. Develop a bill of materials for initial cost
assessment8. Redefine the set of specifications
Product Design Specification (PDS)PatentsEnvironment
Materials
Shelf life
Packing
Competition
Weight
Disposal
Shipping
Size
Processes
Customer
Timescale
Ergonomics
Aesthetics
Installation
Performance
Service life
Quantity
Safety
Testing
Legal
Maintenance
Politics
Plant
Standards
Quality assurance Storage
DESIGN CORE
Partial PDSPatentsEnvironment
Materials
Shelf life
Packing
Competition
Weight
Disposal
Shipping
Size
Processes
Customer
Timescale
Ergonomics
Aesthetics
Installation
Performance
Service life
Quantity
Safety
Testing
Legal
Maintenance
Politics
Plant
Standards
Quality assurance Storage
DESIGN CORE
Element to be considered:
In
Out
For individual components, sub-assemblies, different stages of the design core.
Design Specification: Stage 1
No. Need Importance(1-5)
1 The product must ….. 4
2 The product is ….. 5
3 The product allows ….. 3
4 The product can ….. 1
5 The product lasts ….. 5
etc. etc. etc.
Stage 1: Customer needs matrix
Design Specification: Stage 2
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Importance(1-5)
Units
A 1,2 Cost 5 £
B 2 Total mass 5 kg
C 3 Compatibility 3 list
D 4 Assembly time 1 s
E 5 Fatigue life 5 cycles
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Stage 2: Develop performance measures
Design Specification: Stage 3
A B C D E
METRIC
NEED
Cost
Total m
ass
Com
patibility
Assem
bly time
Fatigue life
1 The product must …..
2 The product is …..
3 The product allows …..
4 The product can …..
5 The product lasts …..
Stage 3: Cross correlate (needs-measures matrix)
Design Specification: Stage 4
No. Need Importance(1-5)
Comp1
Comp2
Comp3
Comp4
1 The product must ….. 4 x xxx xx xxxx
2 The product is ….. 5 xxx xxxx x xxx
3 The product allows ….. 3 xx xx xxxx x
4 The product can ….. 1 xxxxx x x xx
5 The product lasts ….. 5 xx xxx xxx xxxx
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Stage 4: Construct competitive benchmark chart to assess market position (based on customer needs)
Design Specification: Stage 4 cont’d
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Importance(1-5)
Units Comp1
Comp2
Comp3
Comp4
A 1,2 Cost 5 £ 60 80 70 90
B 2 Total mass 5 kg 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.3
C 3 Compatibility 3 list w,x w,y w,x,y,z w
D 4 Assembly time 1 s 70 90 90 85
E 5 Fatigue life 5 cycles 22k 23k 23k 24k
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Stage 4: Construct competitive benchmark chart to assess market position (based on performance measures)
Design Specification: Stage 5
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Importance(1-5)
Units MarginalValue
IdealValue
A 1,2 Cost 5 £ <80 <60
B 2 Total mass 5 kg <2.4 <2.2
C 3 Compatibility 3 list w w,x,y,z
D 4 Assembly time 1 s <90 <70
E 5 Fatigue life 5 cycles >23k >24k
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Stage 5: Initial set of target specifications
Design Specification: Stage 6
Fatigue Model
Geometry
Materials Properties
Fastening Methods
Surface finish
Cycles to Failure
DESIGN MODELS(Model Inputs)
METRICS(Model Outputs)
Stage 6: Engineering design analysis to assess technical feasibility
Design Specification: Stage 7
Component Qty/Part High
(£ ea.)
Low
(£ ea.)
High Total
(£/Part)
Low Total
(£/Part)
Handle
Subframe
Housing
Seal
Bolt
Nut
Assembly @ £10/hr
Overhead @25% of direct cost
2
1
1
1
4
4
5.00
35.00
25.00
1.50
0.30
0.15
6 mins
3.50
28.00
18.00
1.00
0.20
0.10
4 mins
10.00
35.00
25.00
1.50
1.20
0.60
1.00
18.58
7.00
28.00
18.00
1.00
0.80
0.40
0.67
13.97
TOTAL 92.88 69.84
Stage 7: Develop a bill of materials for initial cost assessment
Design Specification: Stage 8
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Importance(1-5)
Units Value
A 1,2 Cost 5 £ <70
B 2 Total mass 5 kg <2.3
C 3 Compatibility 3 list w,x,y
D 4 Assembly time 1 s <80
E 5 Fatigue life 5 cycles >24k
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Stage 8: Refined set of specifications
ExampleNo. Need Importance
1 The suspension reduces vibration to the hands. 3
2 The suspension allows easy traversal of slow, difficult terrain. 2
3 The suspension enables high-speed descents on bumpy trails. 5
4 The suspension allows sensitivity adjustment. 3
5 The suspension preserves the steering characteristics of the bike. 4
6 The suspension remains rigid during hard cornering 4
7 The suspension is lightweight. 4
8 The suspension provides stiff mounting points for the brakes. 2
9 The suspension fits a wide variety of bikes, wheels and tyres. 5
10 The suspension is easy to install. 1
11 The suspension works with mudguards. 1
12 The suspension instils pride. 5
13 The suspension is affordable for an amateur enthusiast. 5
14 The suspension is not contaminated by water. 5
15 The suspension is not contaminated by mud and dirt. 5
16 The suspension can be easily accessed for maintenance. 3
17 The suspension allows easy replacement of worn parts. 1
18 The suspension can be maintained with readily available tools. 3
19 The suspension lasts a long time. 5
20 The suspension is safe in a crash. 5
Stage 1: Customer needs matrix
A Mountain Bike Suspension Fork
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Imp. Units
A 1,3 Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10 Hz 3 dB
B 2,6 Spring preload 3 N
C 1,3 Maximum value from the Monster test 5 g
D 1,3 Minimum descent time on test track 5 s
E 4 Damping coefficient adjustment range 3 Ns/m
F 5 Maximum travel (26 in. wheel) 3 mm
G 5 Rake offset 3 mm
H 6 Lateral stiffness at the tip 3 kN/m
I 7 Total mass 4 kg
J 8 Lateral stiffness at brake pivots 2 kN/m
K 9 Headset sizes 5 in
L 9 Steertube length 5 mm
M 9 Wheel sizes 5 list
Stage 2: Develop performance measures
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Imp. Units
N 9 Maximum tyre width 5 in
O 10 Time to assemble to frame 1 s
P 11 Mudguard compatibility 1 list
Q 12 Instils pride 5 subj.
R 13 Unit manufacturing cost 5 US$
S 14 Time in spray chamber without water entry 5 s
T 15 Cycles in mud chamber without contamination 5 k-cycles
U 16,17 Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance 3 s
V 17,18 Special tools required for maintenance 3 list
W 19 UV test duration to degrade rubber parts 5 hours
X 19 Monster test cycles to failure 5 cycles
Y 20 Japan Industrial Standards test 5 pass/fail
Z 20 Bending strength (frontal loading) 5 kN
Stage 2: Develop performance measures (cont’d)
METRIC
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
NE
ED
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Stage 3: Cross correlate (needs-measures matrix)
No. Need Imp.
STTritrack
Maniray2
RoxTahx
Quadra
RoxTahxTi 21
TonkaPro
GunhillHeadShox
1 reduces vibration to the hands. 3 x xxxx xx xxxxx xx xxx
2 allows easy traversal of slow, difficult terrain. 2 xx xxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx
3 enables high-speed descents on bumpy trails. 5 x xxxxx xx xxxxx xx xxx
4 allows sensitivity adjustment. 3 x xxxx xx xxxxx xx xxx
5 preserves the steering characteristics of the bike. 4 xxxx xx x xx xxxxxxxx
6 remains rigid during hard cornering 4 x xxx x xxxxx x xxxxx
7 is lightweight. 4 x xxx x xxx xxxx xxxxx
8 provides stiff mounting points for the brakes. 2 x xxxx xxx xxx xxxxxxx
9 fits a wide variety of bikes, wheels and tyres. 5 xxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx xxx x
10 is easy to install. 1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx x
11 works with mudguards. 1 xxx x x x x xxxxx
12 instils pride. 5 x xxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx
13 is affordable for an amateur enthusiast. 5 xxxxx x xxx x xxx xx
14 is not contaminated by water. 5 x xxx xxxx xxxx xx xxxxx
15 is not contaminated by mud and dirt. 5 x xxx x xxxx xx xxxxx
16 can be easily accessed for maintenance. 3 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx x
17 allows easy replacement of worn parts. 1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx x
18 can be maintained with readily available tools. 3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx x
19 lasts a long time. 5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx x
20 is safe in a crash. 5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
Stage 4: Construct competitive benchmark chart to assess market position (based on customer needs)
Specification: A Mountain Bike Suspension Fork
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Imp Units STTritrack
Maniray2
RoxTahx
Quadra
RoxTahxTi 21
TonkaPro
GunhillHeadShox
A 1,3 Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10 Hz
3 dB 8 15 10 15 9 13
B 2,6 Spring preload 3 N 550 760 500 710 480 680
C 1,3 Maximum value from the Monster test
5 g 3.6 3.2 3.7 3.3 l.7 3.4
D 1,3 Minimum descent time on test track 5 s 13 11.3 12.6 11.2 13.2 11
E 4 Damping coefficient adjustment range
3 Ns/m 0 0 0 200 0 0
F 5 Maximum travel (26 in. wheel) 3 mm 28 48 43 46 33 38
G 5 Rake offset 3 mm 41.5 39 38 38 43.2 39
H 6 Lateral stiffness at the tip 3 kN/m 59 110 85 85 65 130
I 7 Total mass 4 kg 1.409 1.385 1.409 1.364 1.222 1.100
J 8 Lateral stiffness at brake pivots 2 kN/m 295 550 425 425 325 650
K 9 Headset sizes 5 in 1.0001.125
1.0001.1251.250
1.0001.125
1.0001.1251.250
1.0001.125
N/A
L 9 Steertube length 5 mm 150180210230255
140165190215
150170190210
150170190210230
150190210220
N/A
Stage 4: Construct competitive benchmark chart to assess market position (based on performance measures)
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Imp Units STTritrack
Maniray2
RoxTahx
Quadra
RoxTahxTi 21
TonkaPro
GunhillHeadShox
M 9 Wheel sizes 5 list 26 in 26 in 26 in 26 in
700C
26 in 26 in
N 9 Maximum tyre width 5 in 1.5 1.75 1.5 1.75 1.5 1.5
O 10 Time to assemble to frame 1 s 35 35 45 45 35 85
P 11 Mudguard compatibility 1 list Zefal none none none none all
Q 12 Instils pride 5 subj. 1 4 3 5 3 5
R 13 Unit manufacturing cost 5 US$ 65 105 85 115 80 100
S 14 Time in spray chamber without water entry
5 s 1300 2900 >3600 >3600 2300 >3600
T 15 Cycles in mud chamber without contamination
5 k-cycles 15 19 15 25 18 35
U 16,17 Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance
3 s 160 245 215 245 200 425
V 17,18 Special tools required for maintenance
3 list hex hex hex hex long hex hex, pin wrench
W 19 UV test duration to degrade rubber parts
5 hours >400 250 >400 >400 >400 250
X 19 Monster test cycles to failure 5 cycles >500k >500k >500k 480k >500k 330k
Y 20 Japan Industrial Standards test 5 pass/fail pass pass pass pass pass pass
Z 20 Bending strength (frontal loading) 5 kN 5.5 8.9 7.5 7.5 6.2 10.2
Stage 4: Construct competitive benchmark chart to assess market position (based on performance measures) (cont’d)
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Imp Units MarginalValue
Ideal Value
A 1,3 Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10 Hz 3 dB >10 >15
B 2,6 Spring preload 3 N 480-800 650-750
C 1,3 Maximum value from the Monster test 5 g <3.5 <3.2
D 1,3 Minimum descent time on test track 5 s <13.0 <11.0
E 4 Damping coefficient adjustment range 3 Ns/m 0 >200
F 5 Maximum travel (26 in. wheel) 3 mm 35-50 45
G 5 Rake offset 3 mm 37-45 38
H 6 Lateral stiffness at the tip 3 kN/m >65 >130
I 7 Total mass 4 kg <1.4 <1.1
J 8 Lateral stiffness at brake pivots 2 kN/m >325 >650
K 9 Headset sizes 5 in 1.0001.125
1.0001.1251.250
L 9 Steertube length 5 mm 150170190210
150170190210230
M 9 Wheel sizes 5 list 26 in 26 in
700C
Stage 5: Initial set of target specifications
MetricNo.
NeedNos.
Metric Imp Units MarginalValue
Ideal Value
N 9 Maximum tyre width 5 in >1.5 >1.75
O 10 Time to assemble to frame 1 s <60 <35
P 11 Mudguard compatibility 1 list none all
Q 12 Instils pride 5 subj. >3 >5
R 13 Unit manufacturing cost 5 US$ <85 <65
S 14 Time in spray chamber without water entry 5 s >2300 >3600
T 15 Cycles in mud chamber without contamination 5 k-cycles >15 >35
U 16,17 Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance 3 s <300 <160
V 17,18 Special tools required for maintenance 3 list hex hex
W 19 UV test duration to degrade rubber parts 5 hours >250 >450
X 19 Monster test cycles to failure 5 cycles >300k >500k
Y 20 Japan Industrial Standards test 5 pass/fail pass pass
Z 20 Bending strength (frontal loading) 5 kN >6 >10
Stage 5: Initial set of target specifications (cont’d)
Assess Technical Feasibility
Dynamic Model ofSuspension Performance
(Analytical)
Suspended Mass
Unsprung Mass
Orifice Diameter
Spring Constant
Oil Viscosity
Attentuation at 10 Hz
Estimated Monster g’s
Static Model ofBrake Mounting Stiffness
(Analytical)
Support Geometry
Materials Properties
Tube Geometry
Mounting Points
Lateral Stiffness
Fatigue Model ofSuspension Durability
(Physical)
Fork Geometry
Materials Properties
Fastening Methods
Suspension Geometry
Cycles to Failure
DESIGN MODELS(Model Inputs)
METRICS(Model Outputs)
Stage 6: Engineering design analysis to assess technical feasibility
Component Qty/fork High($ ea.)
Low($ ea.)
High Total($/fork)
Low Total($/fork)
Steer tubeCrownBootLower tubeLower tube top coverMain lip sealSlide bushingSlide bushing spacerLower tube plugUpper tubeUpper tube top capUpper tube adjustment knobAdjustment shaftSpringUpper tube orifice capOrifice springsBrake studsBrake brace boltBrake braceOil (litres)Misc. snap rings, o-ringsDecalsAssembly at $20/hrOverhead at 25% of direct cost
TOTAL
1122224222222214221
0.1104
2.504.001.003.002.001.500.200.500.505.503.002.004.003.003.000.500.400.255.002.500.150.25
30 min
2.003.000.752.001.501.400.180.400.354.002.501.753.002.502.250.400.350.203.502.000.100.15
20 min
2.504.002.006.004.003.000.801.001.00
11.006.004.008.006.003.002.000.800.505.000.251.501.00
10.0020.84
$104.19
2.003.001.504.003.002.800.720.800.708.005.003.506.005.002.251.600.700.403.500.201.000.606.67
15.74$78.68
Stage 7: Develop a bill of materials for initial cost assessment
MetricNo.
Metric Units Value
A Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10 Hz dB >12
B Spring preload N 600-650
C Maximum value from the Monster test g <3.4
D Minimum descent time on test track s <11.5
E Damping coefficient adjustment range Ns/m >100
F Maximum travel (26 in. wheel) mm 43
G Rake offset mm 38
H Lateral stiffness at the tip kN/m >75
I Total mass kg <1.4
J Lateral stiffness at brake pivots kN/m >425
K Headset sizes in 1.0001.125
L Steertube length mm 150170190210230
M Wheel sizes list 26 in
Stage 8: Refined set of specifications
MetricNo.
Metric Units Value
N Maximum tyre width in >1,75
O Time to assemble to frame s <45
P Mudguard compatibility list Zefal
Q Instils pride subj. >4
R Unit manufacturing cost US$ <80
S Time in spray chamber without water entry s >3600
T Cycles in mud chamber without contamination k-cycles >25
U Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance s <200
V Special tools required for maintenance list hex
W UV test duration to degrade rubber parts hours >450
X Monster test cycles to failure cycles >500k
Y Japan Industrial Standards test pass/fail pass
Z Bending strength (frontal loading) kN >10.0
Stage 8: Refined set of specifications (cont’d)
The Design Core Market Assessment
Specification
Concept Design
Detail Design
Manufacture
Sell
CONCEPT DESIGN
Concept GenerationClarify problem analyse into sub-problems
determine basic requirementsExternal search interview users, consult
experts,patent search
Internal search brainstorming, analogy, inversion,
staff consultationCombination
Concept AnalysisControlled convergenceRating & weighting method
Concept Design: Car Horn
Concept Design: EvaluationCriterion Concept 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Ease of achieving 105-125 DbA S - + - + + - - - - S +
Ease of achieving 2000-5000 Hz S S N + S S + S - - - S +
Resistance to corrosion, erosion and water - - O S - - S - + - - - S
Resistance to vibration, shock and acceleration S - T S - S - - S - - - -
Resistance to temperature D S - S - - - S S - - S S
Response time A S - E + - - - - S - - - -
Complexity: number of stages T - + V S + + - - - + + - -
Power consumption U - - A + - - + - - - - S +
Ease of maintenance M S + L + + + - - S + + S -
Weight - - U + - - - S - - - - +
Size - - A S - - - - - - - - -
Number of parts S S T + S S - - + - - S -
Life in service S - E + - S - - - - - - -
Manufacturing cost - S D - + + - - S - - - -
Ease of installation S S S S + - S - - - S -
Shelf life S S S S - - S S S S S S
Σ+
Σ-
ΣS
0
6
10
2
9
5
8
1
7
3
9
4
5
7
4
3
12
1
0
11
5
2
8
6
2
13
1
2
13
1
0
8
8
4
9
3
Concept Design: Evaluation/Generation
Initial number of concepts based
on PDS
Initial number reduced
New ones added
Further reduction (FR)
Further addition (FA)
FR
FA
CC
CC
CC
CG
CG
Apply controlled convergence (CC)
Apply concept generation (CC)
CONCEPT SELECTED
Concept Design: Rating & Weighting
Objective
Weight Factor
Rating Rating x Weight Factor
C’pt 1
C’pt 2
C’pt 3
C’pt 4
C’pt 1
C’pt 2
C’pt 3
C’pt 4
Make 20,000 brushes per 8-hour shift
4 5 5 0 5 20 20 0 20
End of brush safety 5 0 5 5 5 0 25 25 25
Ease of manufacture of machine
3 4 0 3 4 12 0 9 12
Reliability of operations
5 4 2 4 4 20 10 20 20
Overall size of machine
2 3 4 3 3 6 8 6 6
Cost 3 3 2 3 3 9 6 9 9
Good filament density 4 3 5 5 5 12 20 20 20
Total 79 89 89 112
Example: Design of a machine to make bottle brushes
The Design Core Market Assessment
Specification
Concept Design
Detail Design
Manufacture
Sell
DETAILDESIGN