Design of Products

4 – 1

Design of Products

Dr. R K Singh

4 – 2

Top organizations typically focus on Top organizations typically focus on core productscore products

Customers buy satisfaction, not just Customers buy satisfaction, not just a physical good or particular servicea physical good or particular service

Fundamental to an organization's Fundamental to an organization's strategy with implications strategy with implications throughout the operations functionthroughout the operations function

Product DecisionProduct Decision

4 – 3

Product Strategy OptionsProduct Strategy Options

DifferentiationDifferentiation Low costLow cost Rapid responseRapid response

4 – 4

New Product OpportunitiesNew Product Opportunities

1.1. Understanding the Understanding the customercustomer

2.2. Economic changeEconomic change3.3. Sociological and Sociological and

demographic changedemographic change4.4. Technological changeTechnological change5.5. Political/legal changePolitical/legal change6.6. Market practice, professional Market practice, professional

standards, suppliers, distributorsstandards, suppliers, distributors

4 – 5

Importance of New ProductsImportance of New Products

Industry Industry leaderleader

Top Top thirdthird

Middle Middle thirdthird

Bottom Bottom thirdthird

Percentage of Sales from New ProductsPercentage of Sales from New Products50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

Position of Firm in Its IndustryPosition of Firm in Its Industry

4 – 6

Product Life CyclesProduct Life Cycles

May be any length from a few May be any length from a few hours to decadeshours to decades

The operations function must The operations function must be able to introduce new be able to introduce new products successfullyproducts successfully

4 – 7

Product Life CyclesProduct Life Cycles

Negative cash flow

IntroductionIntroduction GrowthGrowth MaturityMaturity DeclineDecline

Sale

s, c

ost,

and

cash

flow

Sale

s, c

ost,

and

cash

flow

Cost of development and productionCost of development and production

Cash Cash flowflow

Net revenue (profit)Net revenue (profit)Sales revenueSales revenue

LossLoss

4 – 8

Scope of product

development team

Product Development Product Development SystemSystem

Scope for design and engineering

teams

Evaluation

Introduction

Test Market

Functional Specifications

Design Review

Product Specifications

Customer Requirements

Ability

Ideas

4 – 9

Quality Function Quality Function DeploymentDeployment

Identify customer wantsIdentify customer wants Identify how the good/service will satisfy Identify how the good/service will satisfy

customer wantscustomer wants Relate customer wants to product howsRelate customer wants to product hows Identify relationships between the firm’s howsIdentify relationships between the firm’s hows Develop importance ratingsDevelop importance ratings Evaluate competing productsEvaluate competing products Compare performance to desirable technical Compare performance to desirable technical

attributesattributes

4 – 10

QFD House of QualityQFD House of Quality

Relationshipmatrix

How to satisfycustomer wants

Interrelationships

Com

petit

ive

asse

ssm

ent

Technicalevaluation

Target values

What the customer

wants

Customer Customer importance importance

ratingsratings

Weighted Weighted ratingrating

4 – 11

House of Quality ExampleHouse of Quality Example

Your team has been charged with Your team has been charged with designing a new camera for Great designing a new camera for Great Cameras, Inc.Cameras, Inc.The first action is The first action is to construct a to construct a House of QualityHouse of Quality

4 – 12


CustomerCustomerimportanceimportance

ratingrating(5 = highest)(5 = highest)

Lightweight 3Easy to use 4Reliable 5Easy to hold steady 2Color correction 1

What the What the customer customer

wantswants

What the Customer

Wants

RelationshipMatrix

TechnicalAttributes and

Evaluation

How to SatisfyCustomer Wants

Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

4 – 13

House of Quality ExampleHouse of Quality ExampleWhat the Customer

Wants

RelationshipMatrix


Evaluation


Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

Low

ele

ctric

ity re

quire

men

ts

Alu

min

um c

ompo

nent

s

Aut

o fo

cus

Aut

o ex

posu

re

Pain

t pal

let

Ergo

nom

ic d

esig

n


4 – 14

Lightweight 3Easy to use 4Reliable 5Easy to hold steady 2Color corrections 1


Wants

RelationshipMatrix


Evaluation


Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

High relationshipHigh relationshipMedium relationshipMedium relationshipLow relationshipLow relationship

Relationship matrixRelationship matrix

4 – 15


Wants

RelationshipMatrix


Evaluation


Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

Low

ele

ctric

ity re

quire

men

ts

Alu

min

um c

ompo

nent

s

Aut

o fo

cus

Aut

o ex

posu

re

Pain

t pal

let

Ergo

nom

ic d

esig

n

Relationships Relationships between the between the things we can dothings we can do

4 – 16


Weighted Weighted ratingrating

What the Customer

Wants

RelationshipMatrix


Evaluation


Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

Lightweight 3Easy to use 4Reliable 5Easy to hold steady 2Color corrections 1Our importance ratings 22 9 27 27 32 25

4 – 17


Com

pany

A

Com

pany

B

G PG PF GG PP P

Lightweight 3Easy to use 4Reliable 5Easy to hold steady 2Color corrections 1Our importance ratings 22 5

How well do How well do competing products competing products meet customer wantsmeet customer wants

What the Customer

Wants

RelationshipMatrix


Evaluation


Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

4 – 18


Wants

RelationshipMatrix


Evaluation


Interrelationships

Ana

lysi

s of

Com

petit

ors

Target values(Technical attributes)

Technical evaluation

Company A 0.7 60% yes 1 ok GCompany B 0.6 50% yes 2 ok FUs 0.5 75% yes 2 ok G

0.5

A

75%

2’to

∞

2ci

rcui

ts

Failu

re 1

per 1

0,00

0Pa

nel r

anki

ng

4 – 19


Completed Completed House of House of QualityQuality

Lightweight 3Easy to use 4Reliable 5Easy to hold steady 2Color correction 1Our importance ratings

Low

ele

ctric

ity re

quire

men

ts

Alu

min

um c

ompo

nent

s

Aut

o fo

cus

Aut

o ex

posu

re

Pain

t pal

let

Ergo

nom

ic d

esig

n

Com

pany

A

Com

pany

B

G PG PF GG PP P

Target values(Technical attributes)

Technical evaluation

Company A 0.7 60% yes 1 ok G

Company B 0.6 50% yes 2 ok F

Us 0.5 75% yes 2 ok G0.

5A

75%

2’to

∞2

circ

uits

Failu

re 1

per 1

0,00

0Pa

nel r

anki

ng

22 9 27 27 32 25

4 – 20

House of Quality SequenceHouse of Quality Sequence

Des

ign

char

acte

ristic

s

Specific components

House 2

Cus

tom

er

requ

irem

ents

Design characteristics

House 1

Spec

ific

com

pone

nts

Production process

House 3 Pr

oduc

tion

proc

ess

Quality plan

House 4

Deploying resources through the Deploying resources through the organization in response to organization in response to customer requirementscustomer requirements

4 – 21

Organizing for Product Organizing for Product DevelopmentDevelopment

Team approach (Used in USA)Team approach (Used in USA)Cross functional Cross functional –– representatives representatives

from all disciplines or functions from all disciplines or functions (Concurrent Engg)

Product development teams, design Product development teams, design for manufacturability teams, value for manufacturability teams, value engineering teamsengineering teams

4 – 22

Design TeamDesign Team

4 – 23

Design Review•• Review designs to prevent failures Review designs to prevent failures

and ensure valueand ensure value– Failure mode and effects analysis

(FMEA)• a systematic method of analyzing product

failures

– Fault tree analysis (FTA)• a visual method for analyzing

interrelationships among failures

– Value analysis (VA)• helps eliminate unnecessary features and

functions

4 – 24

FMEA for Potato ChipsFMEA for Potato ChipsFailureMode

Cause of Failure

Effect ofFailure

CorrectiveAction

Stale moisture contentexpired shelf lifepoor packaging

tastes badwon’t crunchthrown outlost sales

add moisture cure longerbetter package sealshorter shelf life

Broken too thintoo brittlerough handlingrough usepoor packaging

can’t dippoor displayinjures mouthchockingperceived as oldlost sales

change recipechange processchange packaging

Too Salty outdated receiptprocess not in controluneven distribution of salt

eat lessdrink morehealth hazardlost sales

experiment with recipeexperiment with processintroduce low salt version

4 – 25

Fault tree analysis (FTA)

4 – 26

Value analysis (VA)

• Can we do without it?• Does it do more than is required?• Does it cost more than it is worth?• Can something else do a better job?• Can it be made by

– a less costly method?– with less costly tooling?– with less costly material?

• Can it be made cheaper, better, or faster by someone else?

4 – 27

Value analysis (VA) (cont.)Value analysis (VA) (cont.)

•• Updated versions also include:Updated versions also include:–– Is it recyclable or biodegradable?Is it recyclable or biodegradable?–– Is the process sustainable?Is the process sustainable?–– Will it use more energy than it is worth?Will it use more energy than it is worth?–– Does the item or its byDoes the item or its by--product harm product harm

the environment?the environment?

4 – 28

SustainabilitySustainability•• Ability to meet present needs without Ability to meet present needs without

compromising those of future compromising those of future generationsgenerations

•• Green product Green product designdesign

4 – 29

Design for EnvironmentDesign for Environment

4 – 30

Guidelines for Environmentally Guidelines for Environmentally Friendly DesignsFriendly Designs

1.1. Make products recyclableMake products recyclable2.2. Use recycled materialsUse recycled materials3.3. Use less harmful ingredientsUse less harmful ingredients4.4. Use lighter componentsUse lighter components5.5. Use less energyUse less energy6.6. Use less materialUse less material

4 – 31

Manufacturability andManufacturability andValue EngineeringValue Engineering

Benefits:Benefits:1.1. Reduced complexity of productsReduced complexity of products2.2. Additional standardization of productsAdditional standardization of products3.3. Improved functional aspects of productImproved functional aspects of product4.4. Improved job design and job safetyImproved job design and job safety5.5. Improved maintainability (serviceability) Improved maintainability (serviceability)

of the productof the product6.6. Robust designRobust design

4 – 32

Cost Reduction of a Bracket Cost Reduction of a Bracket via Value Engineeringvia Value Engineering

4 – 33

Issues for Product Issues for Product DevelopmentDevelopment

Robust designRobust design Modular designModular design ComputerComputer--aided design (CAD)aided design (CAD) ComputerComputer--aided manufacturing (CAM)aided manufacturing (CAM) Value analysisValue analysis Environmentally friendly designEnvironmentally friendly design

4 – 34

1.1. Product qualityProduct quality2.2. Shorter design timeShorter design time3.3. Production cost reductionsProduction cost reductions4.4. Database availabilityDatabase availability5.5. New range of capabilitiesNew range of capabilities

Benefits of CAD/CAMBenefits of CAD/CAM

4 – 35

Documents for ProductionDocuments for Production

Assembly drawingAssembly drawing Assembly chartAssembly chart Route sheetRoute sheet Work orderWork order Bill of material (BOM)Bill of material (BOM) Engineering change notices (ECNs)Engineering change notices (ECNs)

4 – 36

ReliabilityReliability

•• ReliabilityReliability: : The probability of a product, part, or The probability of a product, part, or system to perform its intended function under a system to perform its intended function under a prescribed set of conditionsprescribed set of conditions

•• FailureFailure: : Situation in which a product, part, or Situation in which a product, part, or system does not perform as intendedsystem does not perform as intended

•• Normal operating conditionsNormal operating conditions: : The set of conditions The set of conditions under which an item’s reliability is specifiedunder which an item’s reliability is specified

4 – 3737

Rule 1 (Series System)Rule 1 (Series System)

.90 .80

Lamp 1 Lamp 2

.90 x .80 = .72

4 – 38

Rule 2 (Parallel System) Rule 2 (Parallel System)

.90

.80

.70

1-[(1-.90)*(1-.80)*(1-.70)] = .9941 – P(all fail)

Lamp 1

Lamp 2 (backup for Lamp1)

Lamp 3 (backup for Lamp 2)

4 – 3939

Example SExample S--1 Reliability1 ReliabilityDetermine the reliability of the system shown

.98 .90

.90 .92

.95

.98 x .99 x .996 = .966

4 – 40

Improving ReliabilityImproving Reliability

•• Component designComponent design•• Production/assembly techniquesProduction/assembly techniques•• TestingTesting•• Redundancy/backupsRedundancy/backups•• Preventive maintenance proceduresPreventive maintenance procedures•• User educationUser education•• System designSystem design

4 – 41

Maintenance Management Maintenance Management Performance Metrics

• Equipment breakdowns– Breakdowns can be measured in terms of the

frequency and the severity• Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF)

– MTBF is the expected time of the arrival of a failure • Mean Time to Repair (MTTR)

– MTTR is the expected time for restoring the equipment back to the working condition

• Availability–– Availability is defined, as the fraction of the time Availability is defined, as the fraction of the time

the equipment is available for productive use the equipment is available for productive use

)( MTTRMTBFMTBFAt

4 – 42

Effective Maintenance ManagementSome requirements

•• Equipment CatalogueEquipment Catalogue•• Maintenance Policy & ManualMaintenance Policy & Manual•• Troubleshooting MechanismsTroubleshooting Mechanisms•• Fault Tree AnalysisFault Tree Analysis•• Maintenance Information SystemMaintenance Information System

–– Equipment History CardsEquipment History Cards

4 – 43

Thank YouThank You

Design of Products

Documents

product howsrelate customer

organizations strategy

new products50

customer wantscustomer

cash flowcost of development

productioncost of development

implications strategy

organizations fundamental