Concurrent Engineering

1,278 views
1,183 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,278
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
38
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
70
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Concurrent Engineering

  1. 1. Multipurpose Duster with Wetting Technology Concurrent Engineering in Aerospace System (MECH6941) Presented To, Dr. Ashok Kaushal Presented by, Group # 3 Asmita Dubey 9796924 Charanpreet Singh Heer 6420753 Dushyant Patel 6940595 Gurpreet Bhatoa 1951645 Rajan Desai 1237225
  2. 2. Project Overview• Introduction• Mission Statement• Market Analysis• Survey Interpretation• Establishing Target specifications• Preliminary Design • Concept Generation • Concept Selection• Final Design• Cost analysis of duster• Design for assembly• Payback analysis• Supply chain model• Review and Progress• Conclusion• Future growth
  3. 3. Introduction• Dusters are well known for cleaning black and white boards• Main end users are universities, collages, schools, coaching classes etc…• Available in different models with different features.• Price generally varies from $1- $ 5. Peelable Duster Duster with marker holder Duster with vacuum pump
  4. 4. Mission Statement LIGHT WEIGHT MULTIPURPOSE DUSTER WITH WETTING TECHNOLOGYProduct Description Secondary Market Exchangeable wet cleaning pad, Coaching classes Chalk holder Domestic Marker holder Office departments (meetings) Aesthetic in look Distributors and resellers Light weight Assumptions and ConstraintsKey Business Goals New exchangeable cleaning pad with wetting technology Serve effectively Environmental friendly Initially to cover 40%-60% market First product introduction 1stQ 2013 Stakeholders Customer satisfactionPrimary Market End users (e.g. Professors, Teaching Assistant’s) Universities, Schools, Coaching Classes etc. Universities Manufacturing operations Collages Schools
  5. 5. Market Analysis Online Survey Group Discussion One to one Interview
  6. 6. Survey InterpretationCustomer Need Statement Customer Need InterpretationIt’s plastic body strength Duster can be sturdyIf I were given a chance to change something in a duster, I Duster can be used for both black and white boardwould like to use a material so that it can work equally wellfor both white and black boards.Holding material Duster can be hold easilyThe dusters currently being used does not absorb chalk Duster can absorb the dustdusts; the dusts fly out in the air and sticks to hands. Itcauses breathing and cleanliness problems. So dusters shouldbe able to grasp the dust it is designed forPrice Duster can be affordableAppearance Duster can maintain aesthetic lookSize will be pocket size, some wetting agent to not leave Duster can be compact and clean properlyimpression on boardColor Duster is good lookingI would have put a handle on it. Duster can be hold easily and firmlyProvide a better cleaning besides spreading chalk Duster can clean properlyThe cleaning efficiency Duster can clean properlyNot about duster. But I prefer to have a color chalk, it would Duster can hold the chalkbe helpful specially when I want to draw diagram for studentI would want a wet duster Duster can absorb the dust and clean properlyAfter cleaning the blackboards, it remains a bit whitish; it Duster can erase properlywould be great if this whiteness can be removedBetter grip durable Duster can be long lasting
  7. 7. Establishing Target specifications• List of MatricesMetrics No. Need Nos. Metric Imp. Units1 1 Min. value from tension and compression strength test 3 Pa2 2,9,11 Dust absorbing capacity of cleaning pad material 5 Lb.3 3,6,9,11 Cleaning pad life cycle 2 Hrs.4 4 Unit manufacturing cost 4 $5 4 Import cost 3 $6 8 Total weight 4 gm7 6 Final dimensions 5 Mm8 5,7 CAD Design tool used 3 list9 2,9 Spring Tension 2 N10 5,7 Aesthetic look 3 Subj.11 8 Fine holding grip design 4 list12 8 Type of material used 4 list13 10 Number Chalk holding capacity 2 Numbers14 10 Number of Markers holding capacity 2 Numbers15 12 Duster life cycle 3 Hrs.
  8. 8. The needs-metrics matrix.
  9. 9. • Competitive Bench Marking Metric Need Metric Imp. Units Art line Peel-able Sure mark Acme Lega master s No. Nos. United 1 1 Min. value from tension 2 Pa NA NA NA NA NA and compression strength test 2 2,9,11 Dust absorbing capacity of 5 Subj. 3 3 2 4 4 cleaning pad material 3 3,6,9, 11 Cleaning pad life cycle 2 Hrs. NDA NDA NDA NDA NDA 4 4 Unit manufacturing cost 4 $ 2.5 6.13 3 3.7 33 5 4 Import cost 3 $ NDA NDA NDA NDA NDA 6 8 Total weight 4 gm 190 217 210 180 277 7 6 Final dimensions 5 DxHxW mm 109×117×45 145 x 35 x 55 100 x 55 x 45 109×117×45 174 x 80 x 98
  10. 10. • Competitive Bench Marking Metrics Need Nos. Metric Imp. Units Art line Peel-able Suremark Acme United Lega- No. master 8 5,7 CAD Design tool used 3 list NDA NDA NDA NDA NDA 9 2,9 Spring Tension 2 N NA NA NA NA NA 10 5,7 Aesthetic look 3 Subj. 3 2 3 3 4 11 8 Fine holding grip design 4 Subj. 2 3 2 2 3 12 8 Type of material used 4 list Plastic Plastic Plastic Wood Plastic 13 10 Number Chalk holding 2 Numbers 0 0 0 0 0 capacity 14 10 Number of Markers 2 Numbers 0 1 0 0 4 holding capacity 15 12 Duster life cycle 3 Hrs NDA NDA NDA NDA NDA
  11. 11. Target Specifications S. No. Metrics Units Marginal value Ideal Value 1 Dust absorbing capacity of cleaning pad Subj. 3-5 5 material 2 Cleaning pad life cycle Hrs. 40 - 60 >60 3 Unit manufacturing cost $ 2.5 - 6.13 <2.5 4 Total weight gm 190 - 277 <250 5 Final dimensions D mm 109 - 174 120-150 W mm 80 - 117 60-80 H mm 45 - 98 50-60 6 Number Chalk holding capacity Numbers 2-4 4 7 Number of Markers holding capacity Numbers 1-2 2
  12. 12. Preliminary Design • Concept Generation Functional Analysis
  13. 13. Decomposing problems into subsystems
  14. 14. Concept Selection Preliminary Sketch
  15. 15. Concepts• For Wetting System Box • Spray nozzle type wetting system • Spring Actuated Sponge wetting • Diaphragm Actuated Sponge wetting
  16. 16. • For Cover • Hinged • Sliding • Snap Fit
  17. 17. Concept Screening Concepts Wetting System Cover Selection Criteria Spray Spring Diaphragm Hinged cover Sliding cover Snap-fit nozzle Actuated actuated cover Sponge Sponge wetting Wetting Ease of Handling + + + + + + Ease of use - + - + + + Durability + + - - - + Ease of Manufacturing - + + - + + Ease of assembly + - - - + + Sum +’s 3 4 2 2 4 5 Sum 0’s 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sum –‘s 2 1 3 3 1 0 Net Score 1 3 -1 -1 3 5 Rank 2 1 3 3 2 1 Continue? Yes Yes No No Yes Yes
  18. 18. Concept Rating on weightage Concept Wetting System Cover Spray nozzle Spring Actuated Sliding cover Snap-fit cover Sponge wetting Selection Criteria Weight Ratin Weighted Rating Weighted Rating Weighted Rating Weighted g Score Score Score Score Ease of Handling 15% 3 0.45 4 0.60 3 0.45 4 0.60 Ease of use 25% 3 0.75 4 1.00 4 1.00 3 0.75 Durability 15% 4 0.60 3 0.45 2 0.30 4 0.60 Ease of Manufacturing 20% 2 0.40 4 0.80 3 0.60 3 0.60 Ease of assembly 25% 4 1.00 3 0.75 4 0.80 4 1.00 Total 3.2 3.6 3.15 3.55 Score Rank 2 1 2 1 Continu No Develop No Develop e
  19. 19. Final Design Specifications of Final Values Design Weight 0.247kg Dimension’s L 120mm B 65mm H 50mm Number of Markers 1 Holding Capacity Number of Chalks Holding 4 Capacity Wetting Technology Spring Actuated sponge Cover Snap-fit Cover Cost to Customer $ 3.00
  20. 20. Cost analysis Components Price Cost per piece Plastic components $0.17/lb. $0.1037 Cost of Duster Cap (rubber ) $0.025/ piece $0.025 Velcro $25.50(1”*25yd ) $0.076 Sponge $5.25/lot(1”*1m*5m) $0.01 Cleaning pad (synthetic felt) $5.50/yd. $0.044 Total $0.2549 Components Cost per piece Fixed and variable Manufacturing and machining (injection molding ) $0.75 cost Import cost ($50000 shipment) [10] $0.20 Labor cost $0.054 Building and electricity $0.045 Miscellaneous $0.50 Total $1.549Total cost of duster to us Total cost to Customer= Cost of duster + Fixed and variable cost = 3.00 (including our margin)= 0.2549 + 1.549= $1.81 /piece
  21. 21. Design For AssemblyAssembly Time Assembly Time Estimation Overall Handling/ Insertion/ Fitting time in seconds (Manual Operation) Part Name Min Max. Avg. Base 2 4 3 Wetting System box 9 14 10.5 Sponge 2 4 3 Spring 7.8 42 24.9 Shell Plate 4 8 6 Cleaning Pad 3 8 5.5 Cap/Lock for wetting system 2 4 3 Cover 3.5 8 5.9 Total 33.3 92 61.8
  22. 22. PAYBACK ANALYSIS Fixed cost = 50000+10000 = 60000$ Variable cost =7000 + 8000+5000 = 20,000$ Cash in hand = 20,000$ Payback =800000/3.00 (selling cost of duster per piece 3.00) = 26667 pieces *We need to sell 26667 pieces to recover our initial investment
  23. 23. Multipurpose Duster with Wetting Technology supply chain model
  24. 24. CONCLUSIONS• Introduction of wetting technology.• capable of holding markers and chalks.• Best concept was chosen after comparing them with existing products on the basis of selection criteria like manufacturing cost, material cost, product weight and customer needs importance.• After selecting the concept, through cost model final specifications were planned.• All the parts from the suppliers from other countries, efforts were made to design the component as simple as possible and less in numbers.• An approximate assembly time was calculated• Finally, an estimation of the cost of product• Overall, at the first look the product seems to attract enough customers because of its unique features and a compatible price among its competitors. But there is always a chance to improve the product by time to suit market needs.
  25. 25. FUTURE GROWTHFurther research can be performed on the improving the wetting technology system better fluid for wetting technology choice of material for the body parts choice of material for the cleaning pad etc.These factors can surely put significant effect in the growth of the product in the future.
  26. 26. Orders are open Hurry up!!!To book your duster

×