Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Products Development
Characteristics of
Successful Product
Who Designs and Develops Products?
Development
Marketing
Product quality
Design
Product cost
Development time Manufacturing
Development cost
Development capability
Concept
Development
System Level
Design
Detail
Design
Testing and
Refinement
Production
Ramp-up
Design Process
French (1985) detail model on the
design process
Circle represent the reach/output
Rectangular represent the
activities/work in progress
Conceptual design
Statement of problem and generates
broad solution
Embodied of schemes
Schemes are workout in detail
A final choice is made
Detailing
A large amount of essential point is
decided
Brainstorming of ideas
Selection of concepts
Exercise 1
List main components of your FYP Product
Identify the functions of every components
Sketch simple design products
Establish
Target
Specifications
Test
Product
Concepts
Generate
Product
Concepts
Set Final
Specifications
Select
Product
Concepts
Plan
Downstream
Development
Development
Plan
2.
3.
4.
5.
Exercise 2
1. Identify who are your competence customers
2. Think what are the needs of your customers?
3. Develop questionnaires that representative to
verify the needs of your FYP Product
specifications.
4. Determine the method of marketing need
survey for your FYP product & how many
customer representative enough
5. Identify documents archives.
Establish
Target
Specifications
Test
Product
Concepts
Generate
Product
Concepts
Set Final
Specifications
Select
Product
Concepts
Plan
Downstream
Development
Development
Plan
Product Specifications
Customer needs for the suspension fork and their relative importance
No.
Need
Imp.
The suspension
The suspension
The suspension
The suspension
The suspension
The suspension
The suspension
Is lightweight
The suspension
The suspension
10
The suspension
Is easy to install
11
The suspension
12
The suspension
Instills pride
13
The suspension
14
The suspension
15
The suspension
16
The suspension
17
The suspension
18
The suspension
19
The suspension
20
The suspension
Is safe in a crash
WHEN
The product specifications would establish once early in he development process and
then proceed to design and engineer the product to exactly meet those specifications.
Immediately after identifying the customer needs, the team sets target specifications.
The team revisits the specifications while assessing the actual technological constraints
and expected production costs.
The team must frequently make hard trade-offs among different desirable
characteristics of the product during setting the final specifications.
The target specifications are establish after the customer needs have
been identified but before product concepts have been generated.
Step 1:
Metric No.
Need Nos.
Metric
Imp.
Units
1, 3
dB
2, 6
Spring preload
1, 3
1, 3
N-s/m
mm
Rake offset
mm
kN/m
Total mass
kg
10
kN/m
11
Headset sizes
in.
12
mm
13
Wheel sizes
List
14
in.
15
10
16
11
Fender compatibility
List
17
12
Instills pride
Subj.
18
13
US$
19
14
20
15
k-cycles
21
16, 17
22
17, 18
List
23
19
hr
24
19
Cycles
25
20
Binary
26
20
kN
Need
Metric
Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10 Hz
Spring preload
Maximum value from the monster
Minimum descent time on test track
Damping coefficient adjustment range
Maximum travel (26-in. wheel)
Rake offset
Lateral stiffness at the tip
Total mass
Lateral stiffness at brake pivots
Headset sizes
Steer tube length
Wheel sizes
Maximum tire width
Time to assemble to frame
Fender compatibility
Instills pride
Unit manufacturing cost
Time in spray chamber without water entry
Cycles in mud chamber without contamination
Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance
Special tools required for maintenance
UV test duration to degrade rubber parts
Monster cycles to failure
Industrial Standards test
Bending strength (frontal loading)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Step 2:
Metric
No.
Need
Nos.
Metric
1, 3
Attenuation from
dropout to
handlebar at 10 Hz
2, 6
Units
ST
Tritrack
Maniray
2
Rox
Tahx
Quadra
Rox
Tahx
Ti 21
Tonka
Pro
Gunhill
Head
Shox
dB
15
10
15
13
Spring preload
550
760
500
710
480
680
1, 3
Maximum value
from the monster
3.6
3.2
3.7
3.3
3.7
3.4
1, 3
Minimum descent
time on test track
13
11.3
12.6
11.2
13.2
11
Damping coefficient
adjustment range
N-s/m
200
mm
28
48
43
46
33
38
Rake offset
mm
41.5
39
38
38
43.2
39
Lateral stiffness at
the tip
kN/m
59
110
85
85
65
130
Total mass
kg
1.409
1.385
1.409
1.364
1.222
1.100
10
Lateral stiffness at
brake pivots
kN/m
295
550
425
425
325
650
11
9
in.
1.000
1.125
1.000
1.125
1.250
1.000
1.125
1.000
1.125
1.250
1.000
1.125
NA
mm
150
180
210
230
255
140
165
190
215
150
170
190
210
150
170
190
210
230
150
190
210
220
NA
List
26 in.
26 in.
26 in.
26 in.
700C
26 in.
26 in.
Headset sizes
12
Imp.
Wheel sizes
Step 2:
Metric
No.
Need
Nos.
Metric
14
15
10
16
Imp.
Units
ST
Tritrack
Maniray
2
Rox
Tahx
Quadra
Rox
Tahx
Ti 21
Tonka
Pro
Gunhill
Head
Shox
in.
1.5
1.75
1.5
1.75
1.5
1.5
Time to assemble to
frame
35
35
45
45
35
85
11
Fender compatibility
List
Zefal
None
None
None
None
All
17
12
Instills pride
Subj.
18
13
Unit manufacturing
cost
US$
65
105
85
115
80
100
19
14
Time in spray
chamber without
water entry
1300
2900
>3600
>3600
2300
>3600
20
15
Cycles in mud
chamber without
contamination
kcycles
15
19
15
25
18
35
21
16, 17
Time to
disassemble/assemb
le for maintenance
160
245
215
245
200
425
22
17, 18
Special tools
required for
maintenance
List
Hex
Hex
Hex
Hex
Long
Hex
Hex, pin
wrench
23
19
UV test duration to
degrade rubber
parts
hr
400+
250
400+
400+
400+
250
24
19
Monster cycles to
failure
Cycle
s
500k+
500k+
500k+
480k+
500k+
330k
25
20
Industrial Standards
test
Binary
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
26
20
Bending strength
(frontal loading)
kN
5.5
8.9
7.5
7.5
6.2
10.2
Maniray
2
Rox
Tahx
Quadra
Rox
Tahx
Ti 21
Tonka
Pro
Gunhill
Head
Shox
No.
Need
Imp.
****
**
*****
**
***
**
****
***
*****
***
*****
*****
**
*****
**
***
****
**
*****
**
***
****
**
**
*****
*****
***
*****
*****
Is lightweight
***
***
****
*****
****
***
***
*****
**
****
*****
***
*****
***
10
Is easy to install
****
*****
****
****
*****
11
***
*****
12
Instills pride
****
***
*****
***
*****
13
*****
***
***
**
14
***
****
****
**
*****
15
***
**
****
**
*****
16
****
*****
****
****
*****
17
****
*****
****
****
*****
18
*****
*****
*****
*****
**
19
*****
*****
*****
***
*****
20
Is safe in a crash
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
Step 4:
The team may require some iteration to agree on the target. Reflection
after each iteration helps to ensure that the results are consistent with the
goals of the project.
Should the team consider offering multiple products or at list multiple options for
the product in order to best match the particular needs of more than one market
segment, or will one average product suffice?
Metric
No.
Need
Nos.
Metric
Imp.
Units
Marginal
Value
Ideal
Value
1, 3
dB
>10
>15
2, 6
Spring preload
480 - 800
650 - 700
1, 3
<3.5
<3.2
1, 3
<13.0
<11.0
N-s/m
>200
mm
33 50
45
Rake offset
mm
37 - 45
38
kN/m
>65
>130
Total mass
kg
<1.4
<1.1
10
kN/m
>325
>650
11
Headset sizes
in.
1.000
1.125
1.000
1.125
1.250
12
mm
150
170
190
210
150
170
190
210
230
13
Wheel sizes
List
26 in.
26 in.
700C
14
in.
>1.5
>1.75
15
10
<60
<35
16
11
Fender compatibility
List
None
All
17
12
Instills pride
Subj.
>3
>5
18
13
US$
<85
<65
19
14
>2300
>3600
20
15
kcycles
>15
>35
21
16, 17
<300
<160
22
17, 18
List
Hex
Hex
23
19
hr
>250
>450
24
19
Cycles
>300k
>500k
25
20
Binary
Pass
Pass
2.
3.
4.
5.
Suspended Mass
Unsprung Mass
Orifice Diameter
Spring Constant
Oil Viscosity
Dynamic Model of
Suspension Performance
(Analytical)
Support Geometry
Material Properties
Tube Geometry
Mounting Points
Static Model of
Brake Mounting Stiffness
(Analytical)
Fork Geometry
Material Properties
Fastening Methods
Suspension Geometry
Design Variables
(Model Inputs)
Fatigue Model of
Suspension Durability
(Physical)
Attenuation at 10 Hz
Estimated Monster gs
Lateral Stiffness
Cycles to Failure
Metrics
(Model Output)
High
(RM ea.)
Low
(RM ea.)
High Total
(RM/fork)
Low Total
(RM/fork)
Steertube
Crown
Boot
Lower tube
Lower tube top cover
1
1
2
2
2
7.50
12.00
3.00
9.00
6.00
6.00
9.00
2.25
6.00
4.50
7.50
12.00
6.00
18.00
12.00
6.00
9.00
4.50
12.00
9.00
2
4
2
2
2
4.50
0.60
1.50
1.50
16.50
4.20
0.54
1.20
1.05
12.00
9.00
2.40
3.00
3.00
33.00
8.40
2.16
2.40
2.10
24.00
2
2
2
2
1
9.00
6.00
12.00
9.00
9.00
7.50
5.25
9.00
7.50
6.75
18.00
12.00
24.00
18.00
9.00
15.00
10.50
18.00
15.00
6.75
Orifice springs
Brake studs
Brake brace bolt
Brake brace
Oil (liters)
4
2
2
1
0.1
1.50
1.20
0.75
15.00
7.50
1.20
1.05
0.60
10.50
6.00
6.00
2.40
1.50
15.00
0.75
4.80
2.10
1.20
10.50
0.60
10
4
0.45
0.75
0.30
0.45
4.50
3.00
3.00
1.80
30.00
62.52
20.01
47.22
312.57
236.04
Component
Assembly at RM 60/hr
Overhead at 25% of direct cost
Total
30 min
20 min
Metric
No.
Units
Value
dB
>12
Spring preload
600 - 650
<3.4
<11.5
N-s/m
>100
mm
43
Rake offset
mm
38
kN/m
>75
Total mass
kg
<1.4
10
kN/m
>425
11
Headset sizes
in.
1.000
1.125
12
mm
150
170
190
210
230
13
Wheel sizes
List
26 in.
14
in.
>1.75
15
<45
16
Fender compatibility
List
Zefal
17
Instills pride
Subj.
>4
18
US$
<80
19
>3600
20
kcycles
>25
21
<200
22
List
Hex
23
hr
>450
24
Cycles
>500k
25
Binary
Pass
26
kN
>10.0
Metric
Exercise 3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Establish
Target
Specifications
Test
Product
Concepts
Generate
Product
Concepts
Set Final
Specifications
Select
Product
Concepts
Plan
Downstream
Development
Development
Plan
Exercise 4
Generate minimum 5 product concepts of your
FYP.
Establish
Target
Specifications
Test
Product
Concepts
Generate
Product
Concepts
Set Final
Specifications
Select
Product
Concepts
Plan
Downstream
Development
Development
Plan
Concept selection
The process of evaluating concepts with respect to
customer needs & other criteria.
Comparing the relative strengths and weaknesses
of the concepts.
Selecting one or more concepts for further
investigations, testing, or development.
The process of narrowing the set of concept
alternatives under consideration.
Convergent process; frequently iterative and may
not produce a dominant concept immediately.
Concept selection
methodology
Concept screening
Concept scoring
The decision making is supported by the decision matrix
and can be used by team to rank, rate and select best
concepts.
Concept generation
Concept screening
Concept scoring
Concept testing
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Concept screening
Normally based on the group decision. All the
short list criteria may used in the paper or for the
flip chart for the larger group.
First step prepare the selection matrix
Rate the concepts
Rank the concepts
Concept screening
Concept screening
Concept screening
Concept screening
Concept screening
Concept screening
Combine and improve the concepts
After rated and rank the team should verify the results
question is the results make sense or not or it is a way to
combine and improve certain concept.
Which is general good concept which is degraded by
the bad feature? Can a minor modification improve
the overall concept and yet preserver a distinction from
others concepts?
Are there two concepts which can be combined to
preserver the better than qualities while annulling the
worse than qualities?
Concept screening
In the example the team noticed that concepts
D and F could be combined to remove several
of the worse than ratings to yield a new concept,
DF.
Concept screening
Select one or more concepts
For more refinement and analysis
Concepts A and E to be considered along with
G+ and new concept of DF
Concept screening
Entire team should agree with the decision
Exercise
Perform concepts generation for the product
below (Pencil Holder)
Concept scoring
Prepare the selection matrix for the selected
concepts
Concept scoring
Rate the concepts
Relative performance
Rating
Same as reference
Concept scoring
Rank the concepts
The total score for each concept is the sum of
the weighted scores:
Number of criteria
Concept scoring
Combine and improve the concepts
The team looks for changes or combinations that
improve concepts
Most creative refinements and improvements occur
during concept selection process.
Concept scoring
Selection one or more concepts
The team should explore the initial evaluation by
conducting sensitivity analysis.
The team can vary weight and ratings to determine
their effect on the ranking
The team can test the concepts
Concept scoring
Reflect on the results and the process
Point of return for the concept development process
It is a useful to do the reality check to review the
concepts that are to be eliminated from further
consideration
Exercises 5
How can the concept selection methods be used
to benchmark or evaluate existing product?
Perform such an evaluation for five automobiles you
might consider purchasing.
Propose a set of selection criteria for the choice of
a battery technology for use in a portable
computer.
Perform concept screening for the four pencil
holder concepts shown below. Assume the pencil
holders are for a member of a product
development team who is continually moving from
site to site.
Repeat previous exercise, but use concept scoring