PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS

Sources: 1. Cooper, Product Leadership - Creating and Launching Superior New Products, Perseus, 2000. 2. Ulrich and Eppinger, Product Design and Development, 2nd ed., Irwin McGrawHill, 2000. 3. Pugh, Total Design - Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering , Addison Wesley, 1990. 4. Pugh (with Clausing and Andrade), Creating Innovative Products Using Total Design, Addison Wesley, 1996 1

Product Specifications
Cooper
Part of the product definition Product features, attributes, requirements

Ulrich and Eppinger

What the product has to do, not how Consists of a metric and a value

Coopers Stage 2: Business Case

What is the product and who will it be sold to? (the product definition)
Target market Product concept and benefits delivered Positioning strategy Products features, attributes, requirements

Ulrich and Eppingers Product Development Process

Planning Concept Develop.

SystemLevel Design

Detail Design

Testing And Refinement

Production Ramp-Up

Marketing

Design

Mfg

Other
4

After Ulrich and Eppinger, Exhibit 2-2

Mission Statement

Identify Customer Needs Establish Target Specs. Generate Product Concepts Select Product Concept(s) Test Product Concept(s)

Concept Development Phase (U & E)

Set Final Specs.

After Ulrich and Eppinger, Exhibit 2-3 Plan Downstream Development

Development Plan
5

The Product Specs Process (U&E)

Set Target Specifications
Based on customer needs and benchmarks Develop metrics for each need Set ideal and acceptable values

Refine Specifications
Based on selected concept and feasibility testing Technical modeling Trade-offs are critical

Reflect on the Results and the Process

Critical for ongoing improvement
6

Product Specification Steps

Gather and filter problem information
Establish the customers requirements
7

Convert requirements into specifications

Requirements vs. Specifications

Requirements Define what the customer wants May be subjective, qualitative, difficult to measure Specifications Define what will actually be delivered Respond to: customers needs, organizational capabilities, technology and resource availability Always Measurable
8

Specifications.....
Precisely define the end product or result
Quantify the customers needs and specify the degree to which the needs will be met Should not limit how the customers needs are to be addressed

Consist of:
Metric - Characteristic being measured Value or range of values Unit of measurement
9

Specifications are the yardstick for determining project success

10

Rules for Creating Specifications

1. Focus on the end RESULTS. 2. Do not build your ideas of how to achieve the results into the specifications. 3. Make sure that each requirement is covered. 4. Make sure that the customers interests are protected. 5. Make sure that your interests are protected.
11

Product Design Specifications

Guidelines for developing the Product Design Specification (PDS)
(see Pughs Product Design Specifications)

12

Pause

13

Using Customer Input

Quality function deployment (QFD) Customer input and the House of Quality

14

Quality Function Deployment (QFD) House of Quality

15

Quality Function Deployment

A technique for identifying customer requirements and matching them with engineering design and performance parameters From the Japanese phrase meaning the strategic deployment throughout all aspects of a product of appropriate characteristics according to customer demands

The general arrangement of a QFD table consists of the following 5 regions: 1. Customer requirements 2. Engineering requirements 3. Matrix of requirements relations

4. Competitive benchmarks
5. Engineering targets
Engineering Metrics (Region 2) Competitive Benchmarks (Region 4)

Customer Requirements (Region 1)

Matrix of Requirements Relations (Region 3)

Engineering Targets (Region 5)

Contents of the Regions

Customer Requirements (1)
features or characteristics that the customer indicates as relevant must be in customers own words, not filtered by marketing or engineering

Engineering Metrics (2)

generated by engineering staff quantifiable aspects of system that can contribute to satisfying customer requirements mixture of performance parameters and design parameters

Contents of the Regions

Matrix of Requirements Relations (3) matrixwith rows of customer requirements and columns of engineering metrics each relationship marked with an x Benchmarking (4) opportunity to explicitly compare your design to that of a competitors mark the customer requirements that are met with an o.

Contents of the Regions

Engineering Targets (5) list numerical values established for each engineering metric (2), along with units target may be the value that the requirement must achieve in order to compete with the benchmarked products

Variations to QFD Tables

A region can be inserted next to (1) for weighting the relative importance the customer places on his/her requirements A roof can be put over (2) and used to show relationships between metrics (+ or -) Numerical values indicating relative weights may replace the xs and os in the matrix

21

QFD House of Quality

Weighting Factors Technical Correlations Engineering Metrics (2)

Customer Requirements (1)

Relationships between Customer Requirements and Engineering Metrics (3)

Competitive Benchmarks (4)

Engrg Targets (5)

22

Example
Goal
Design an improved automobile bumper

Objectives
Design an inexpensive front bumper to withstand a 5 mph head-on collision (concrete wall) Bumper must be easily recyclable

Constraints
must be installed 18 up from ground weight < 50 lb must attach to mounting brackets on targeted automobile frames

House of Quality for Automobile Bumper

Product Specifications Example: Mountain Bike Suspension Fork

25

ST Tritrack
26

# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension

NEED Imp reduces vibration to the hands. 3 allows easy traversal of slow, difficult terrain. 2 enables high speed descents on bumpy trails. 5 allows sensitivity adjustment. 3 preserves the steering characteristics of the bike. 4 remains rigid during hard cornering. 4 is lightweight. 4 provides stiff mounting points for the brakes. 2 fits a wide variety of bikes, wheels, and tires. 5 is easy to install. 1 works with fenders. 1 instills pride. 5 is affordable for an amateur enthusiast. 5 is not contaminated by water. 5 is not contaminated by grunge. 5 can be easily accessed for maintenance. 3 allows easy replacement of worn parts. 1 can be maintained with readily available tools. 3 lasts a long time. 5 is safe in a crash. 5

Maniray 2

Start with the Customer Needs

Establish Metrics and Units

Need #s Metric #

1 1,3 2 2,6 3 1,3 4 1,3 5 4 6 5 7 5 8 6 9 7 10 8 11 9 12 9 13 9 14 9 15 10 16 11 17 12 18 13 19 14 20 15 21 16,17 22 17,18 23 19 24 19 25 20 26 20

Metric Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10hz Spring pre-load Maximum value from the Monster Minimum descent time on test track Damping coefficient adjustment range Maximum travel (26in wheel) Rake offset Lateral stiffness at the tip Total mass Lateral stiffness at brake pivots Headset sizes Steertube length Wheel sizes Maximum tire width Time to assemble to frame Fender compatibility Instills pride Unit manufacturing cost Time in spray chamber w/o water entry Cycles in mud chamber w/o contamination Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance Special tools required for maintenance UV test duration to degrade rubber parts Monster cycles to failure Japan Industrial Standards test Bending strength (frontal loading)

Imp Units 3 dB 3 N 5 g 5 s 3 N-s/m 3 mm 3 mm 3 kN/m 4 kg 2 kN/m 5 in 5 mm 5 list 5 in 1 s 1 list 5 subj 5 US$ 5 s 5 k-cycles 3 s 3 list 5 hours 5 cycles 5 binary 5 MN

27

Link Metrics to Needs

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

Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance

Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10hz

Cycles in mud chamber w/o contamination

UV test duration to degrade rubber parts

Time in spray chamber w/o water entry

Special tools required for maintenance

Damping coefficient adjustment range

Minimum descent time on test track

Nee d 1 reduces vibration to the hands. 2 allow s easy traversal of slow, diff icult terrain. 3 enables high speed descents on bumpy trails. 4 allow s sensitivity adjustment. 5 preserves the steering characteristics of the bike. 6 remains rigid during hard cornering. 7 is lightweight. 8 provides stiff mounting points f or the brakes. 9 f its a w ide variety of bikes, w heels, and tires. 10 is easy to install. 11 w orks w ith f enders. 12 instills pride. 13 is af fordable for an amateur enthusiast. 14 is not contaminated by w ater. 15 is not contaminated by grunge. 16 can be easily accessed for maintenance. 17 allow s easy replacement of w orn parts. 18 can be maintained w ith readily available tools. 19 lasts a long time. 20 is saf e in a crash.

28

Bending strength (frontal loading)

Maximum value from the Monster

Lateral stiffness at brake pivots

Japan Industrial Standards test

Maximum travel (26in wheel)

Metric

Time to assemble to frame

Lateral stiffness at the tip

Monster cycles to failure

Unit manufacturing cost

Fender compatibility

Maximum tire width

Steertube length

Spring pre-load

Headset sizes

Wheel sizes

Instills pride

Rake offset

Total mass

Benchmark on Customer Needs

Gunhill Head Shox

Rox Tahx Quadra

Rox Tahx Ti 21

ST Tritrack

# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension The suspension

NEED Imp reduces vibration to the hands. 3 allows easy traversal of slow, difficult terrain. 2 enables high speed descents on bumpy trails. 5 allows sensitivity adjustment. 3 preserves the steering characteristics of the bike. 4 remains rigid during hard cornering. 4 is lightweight. 4 provides stiff mounting points for the brakes. 2 fits a wide variety of bikes, wheels, and tires. 5 is easy to install. 1 works with fenders. 1 instills pride. 5 is affordable for an amateur enthusiast. 5 is not contaminated by water. 5 is not contaminated by grunge. 5 can be easily accessed for maintenance. 3 allows easy replacement of worn parts. 1 can be maintained with readily available tools. 3 lasts a long time. 5 is safe in a crash. 5

29

Tonka Pro

Maniray 2

Benchmark on Metrics
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1,3 2,6 1,3 1,3 4 5 5 6 7 8 Metric Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10hz Spring pre-load Maximum value from the Monster Minimum descent time on tes t track Damping coefficient adjustment range Maximum travel (26in wheel) Rake offset Lateral s tiffness at the tip Total mass Lateral s tiffness at brake pivots Imp 3 3 5 5 3 3 3 3 4 2 Units dB N g s N-s/m mm mm kN/m kg kN/m
8 15 10 15 9 550 760 500 710 480 3.6 3.2 3.7 3.3 3.7 13 11.3 12.6 11.2 13.2 0 0 0 200 0 28 48 43 46 33 41.5 39 38 38 43.2 59 110 85 85 65 1.409 1.385 1.409 1.364 1.222 295 550 425 425 325 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.125 1.000 1.125 1.000 1.125 1.250 1.125 1.250 1.125 150 180 210 230 255 140 165 190 215 150 170 190 210 13 680 3.4 11 0 38 39 130 1.1 650

11

9 Headset s izes

in

NA

12

9 Steertube length Wheel sizes Maximum tire width Time to ass emble to frame Fender compatibility Instills pride Unit manufacturing cos t Time in spray chamber w/o water entry Cycles in mud chamber w/o contamination Time to disass emble/assemble for maintenance

5 5 5 1 1 5 5 5 5 3 3 5 5 5 5

mm lis t in s lis t subj US$ s k-cycles s lis t hours cycles binary MN

13 9 14 9 15 10 16 11 17 12 18 13 19 14 20 15 21 16,17

26in 26in 26in 1.5 1.75 1.5 35 35 45 Zefal none none 1 4 3 65 105 85 1300 2900 >3600 15 19 15 160 245 215

22 17,18 Special tools required for maintenance 23 19 UV test duration to degrade rubber parts 24 19 Mons ter cycles to failure 25 20 Japan Industrial Standards test 26 20 Bending s trength (frontal loading)

hex hex hex 400+ 250 400+ 500k+ 500k+ 500k+ pass pass pass 55 89 75

150 170 150 190 190 210 210 230 220 NA 26in 700C 26in 26in 1.75 1.5 1.5 45 35 85 none none all 5 3 5 115 80 100 >3600 2300 >3600 25 18 35 245 200 425 hex, long pin hex hex w rnch 400+ 400+ 250 480k 500k+ 330k pass pass pass 75 62 102

Gunhill Head Shox

Rox Tahx Quadra

Rox Tahx Ti 21

ST Tritrack

Tonka Pro

Maniray 2

Need #s

Metric #

30

Assign Marginal and Ideal Values

Marginal Value

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Metric Attenuation from dropout to handlebar at 10hz Spring pre-load Maximum value from the Monster Minimum descent time on test track Damping coefficient adjustment range Maximum travel (26in wheel) Rake offset Lateral stiffness at the tip Total mas s Lateral stiffness at brake pivots

Units dB N g s N-s/m mm mm kN/m kg kN/m in

11 Headset sizes

12 Steertube length 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Wheel siz es Maximum tire width Time to assemble to frame Fender compatibility Instills pride Unit manufacturing cost Time in spray c hamber w/o water entry Cycles in mud chamber w/o contamination Time to disassemble/assemble for maintenance Special tools required for maintenance UV test duration to degrade rubber parts Monster cycles to failure Japan Industrial Standards tes t Bending s trength (frontal loading)

mm list in s list subj US$ s k-cycles s list hours cycles binary MN

>10 >15 480 - 800650 - 700 <3.5 <3.2 <13.0 <11.0 0 >200 33 - 50 45 37 - 45 38 >65 >130 <1.4 <1.1 >325 >650 1.000 1.000 1.125 1.125 1.250 150 150 170 170 190 190 210 210 230 26in 26in 700c >1.5 >1.75 <60 <35 none all >3 >5 <85 <65 >2300 >3600 >15 >35 <300 <160 hex hex >250 >450 >300k >500k pass pass >70 >100

Ideal Value

31

Set Final Specifications

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 METRIC Attenuation f rom dropout to handlebar at 10hz Spring pre-load Maximum value f rom the Monster Minimum descent time on test track Damping coef ficient adju stment range Maximum travel (26in w heel) Rake of fset Lateral stiff ness at the tip Total mass Lateral stiff ness at brake pivots Units
dB N g s N-s/m mm mm kN/m kg kN/m in

Value
>1 2 65 0 <3 .4 <1 1.5 >1 00 43 38 >7 5 <1 .4 >4 25 1.00 0 1.12 5 15 0 17 0 19 0 21 0 23 0 26 in >1 .7 5 <4 5 Ze fa l >4 <8 0 >3 600 >2 5 <2 00 he x >4 50 >5 00k pa ss >1 00

11 Headset sizes

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Steertube length Wheel siz es Maximum tire width Time to assemble to frame Fender compatibility Instills pride Unit manufacturing cost Time in spray chamber w /o w ater entry Cycles in mud chamber w /o contamin atio n Time to disassemble/assemble f or main tenance Special tools required for maintenance UV test duration to degrade rubber parts Monster cycles to failu re Japan Industria l Standards test Bending strength (frontal loading)

mm l ist in s l ist subj US$ s k-cycles s l ist ho urs cycl es bi na ry MN

32

ENHANCED QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT

(EQFD)

33

The Basic Process of Enhanced QFD (EQFD)

SPECIFICATIONS DESIGN PRODUCTION PROCESS

HOQ System Expectation Matrix

Concept Selection (TSA)

Concept Selection Final Assembly

Total System Design Matrix

Final Assembly Matrix

Final Assembly Operations Matrix

Notes: HOQ House of Quality TSA Total System Architecture SS Subsystem PP Piece-part
Subsystem Design Matrix Subsystem Assembly Matrix Subsystem Assembly Operations Matrix Concept Selection (SS) Concept Selection Subsystem Assembly

Concept Selection (PP)

Concept Selection Piece-Part Processes

Piece-Part Design Matrix

Piece-Part Processes Matrix

Piece-Part Production Operations Matrix

34

HOQ

DESIGN

PROD. PROCESS ENGR. PROD. OPER. PLNG.

35

The Basic Process of Enhanced QFD (EQFD)

SPECIFICATIONS DESIGN PRODUCTION PROCESS

HOQ System Expectation Matrix

Concept Selection (TSA)

Concept Selection Final Assembly

Total System Design Matrix

Final Assembly Matrix

Final Assembly Operations Matrix

Concept Selection (SS)

Concept Selection Subsystem Assembly

Notes: HOQ House of Quality TSA Total System Architecture SS Subsystem PP Piece-part

Subsystem Design Matrix

Subsystem Assembly Matrix

Subsystem Assembly Operations Matrix

Concept Selection (PP)

Concept Selection Piece-Part Processes

Piece-Part Design Matrix

Piece-Part Processes Matrix

Piece-Part Production Operations Matrix

36

Total System Expectations

Jam clearance time Paper damage rate F O O 70+2/-0CPM <100/106 <100/106 <20 sec <50/106 Multifeed rate

Misfeed rate

Copy rate

Jam rate

Voice of the Customer

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Always get a copy No blank sheets No jams to clear Medium speed Copies on cheap paper Copies on heavy paper Copies on light paper Easy to clear jams No paper damage Low cost

A O

B O O

O O O O O

O O

O O

<50/106

Core of House of Quality Example: Xerox Copier

37

<$6000

UMC

System Design Decisions Subsystem Expectations Jam clearance time Paper damage rate

Multifeed rate

A B C D E F G

Total System Expectations Misfeed rate Multifeed rate Jam rate Copy rate Jam clearance time Paper damage rate UMC

<50/106 <50/106 <100/106 70+2/-0CPM <20 sec <100/106 <$6000

1 O

2
O

Paper speed

UMC

Delivery time

Misfeed rate

Copy rate

Jam rate

10

O O O O O

O O

Total System Design Matrix

11.7+3 ips

<$250

141+10 msec 38

70+2/-0CPM

<20 sec

<50/106

<50/106

<30/106

<40/106

Subsystem Design Decisions Piece-Part Expectations Retard friction coefficient Jam clearance strategy I O O O O O 0.880+0.005 in Ref. Y Enhanced stack force

Retard brake torque

TAR surface speed

Normal stack force

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Subsystem Expectations Misfeed rate Multifeed rate Jam rate Copy rate Jam clearance time Paper damage rate UMC Paper speed Delivery time

<50/106 <50/106 <30/106 70+2/-0CPM <20 sec <40/106 <$250 11.7 +3 ips 141+ 10 msec

A O O

B O

C O

D O

E O O

F O O

TAR action time

Trigger time

H O

40+4 in-oz

11.7 +0.3 ips

1.50+0.25

100 msec

120 msec

Subsystem Design Matrix

39

Ref. Z

0.3 lb

0.7 lb

UMC breackdown

Retard radius

Piece-Part Design Decisions, Production Process Requirements Friction brake 3 O O Brand C Retard radius 4 0.880+ 0.005 MPU density 2 D 20 lb/ft3

A B C

Piece-Part Requirements Retard friction coefficient Retard brake torque Retard radius

1.50+0.25 40+4 in-oz 0.880+0.005 in

1 O

Piece-Part Design Matrix

Grade X

MPU

40

HOQ

DESIGN

PROD. PROCESS ENGR. PROD. OPER. PLNG.

41

The Product Specs Process Summary

Set Target Specifications
Based on customer needs and benchmarks Develop metrics for each need Set ideal and acceptable values

Refine Specifications
Based on selected concept and feasibility testing Technical modeling Trade-offs are critical

Reflect on the Results and the Process

Critical for ongoing improvement
42

The End

43