2. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 1 Product Specifications

3. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 2 Product Specifications Perform Benchmarking Establish target specifications Finalize specifications

4. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 3 Benchmarking The continuous process of measuring products against the competitors or those recognized as industry leaders. Benchmarking Approach Step 1: Make a list of design issues example – coffee mill Identify design issues: price, grind time, fineness of grind, noise level, size

5. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 4 Benchmarking Step 2: Make a list of competitive products example: coffee mill Krups, Braun, Cuisinar, Bosch, …. Step 3: Conduct an information search Gather as much information about the product as possible (functions they perform and targeted market) Sources: Internet, Trade Mag., Consumer Reports Mag., Thomas Register of Comp., Moody’s Industry Review, National Bureau of Standards, Patents.

6. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 5 Benchmarking Comparison of coffee mills – Consumer Report Magazine

7. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 6 Benchmarking Step 4: Teardown the competitor’s product select competitive products that are leaders on some aspect, disassemble and make a list of all components.

8. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 7 Benchmarking Teardown method – Subtract and Operate Procedure (SOP) 1.Disassemble (subtract) one component of the assembly or subassembly 2.Operate the product, if possible, through its full range. 3.Analyze and document the effect. SOP determines the functionality and/or redundancies in an assembly.

9. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 8 Benchmarking Step 5: Compare competitive products Summarize the comparison by component function and /or by customer needs importance. Step 6: Establish best-in-class competitor For each function, determine the highest performance solution. Also, determine the least expensive solution.

10. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 9 Benchmarking Step 7: Manufacturing and Assembly cost Analysis. Coffee mill example

11. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 10 Comments on Benchmarking Generally speaking, benchmarking can be effective for understanding the market. It can identify key innovations and technologies. It will not uncover new innovations being developed by competition., provides lagging information. Do not benchmark all competitive products, stay away from loser products. If a company is a clear market leader, benchmarking may not offer much insight. Benchmarking requires wisdom and judgment.

12. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 11 Product Specifications Target specifications are set before conceptual design. Specifications are refined after product concept has been selected. Specifications are frequently revisited and modified during the design process. A set of engineering targets that a product has to satisfy. Specifications are measurable criteria, goals for the design team. metricvalue metric value Specification consists of a and a : total weight, torque, speed, …. : between 5-7 lbs., 100 in-lb minimum …

13. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 12 Different Forms of Value A particular number – load capacity, 2000 lbs. A range – weight between 10-20 lbs. An inequality – speed less the 10 ft/sec. Or speed more than 5 ft/sec. “It is desired to make the product as light as possible” is a wish requirement not an engineering specification.

14. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 13 Functional Requirements vs. Constraints Functional Requirements State the specific performance of the product, what the device should do. transfer torque, lift weight, increase speed,... Constraints state the limitations on the design, not directly related to the function (cost, size, weight, safety issues, material, …) Constraints can drive the solution of many products. Engineering requirements fall into two categories:

15. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 14 Example – loudspeaker, qualitative specifications vs., quantitative

16. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 15 Process of Establishing Specifications Prepare a list of metrics  Use customer needs  Use the design team knowledge and experience  Use specification breakdown list

17. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 16 Specification breakdown list

18. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 17 Quality Function Deployment, QFD QFD is a methodology for defining the customer’s desires in the customer’s own voice, prioritizing these desires, translating them into engineering requirements, and establishing targets for meeting the requirements. QFD was developed in 1972 at Mitsubishi, introduced into US by the Xerox Corp. and has been adopted by a number of industries, automobile, electronics,….

19. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 18 QFD 1.Identifying the Customer(s) Goal: Determine who will use the product 2.Determining Customer Requirements Goal: Develop a complete list of all requirements 3.Determining Relative Importance of the Requirements Goal: Evaluate importance of each requirements

20. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 19 QFD 4.Competition Benchmarking Goal: Determine how the customer perceives the competition’s ability to meet the requirements 5.Translating Customer Requirements into Measurable Engineering Requirements Goal: Develop set of engineering requirements (design specifications) that are measurable 6.Setting Engineering Targets for the Design Goal: Determine target values for each engineering requirements

21. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 20 The House of Quality A summary of the product specifications and supporting data consisting of benchmarks, target values, and technical issues.

22. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 21 Customer requirements Competitor rating Functional requirements Engineering targets The House of Quality automatic ice tea brewer Correlation matrix The + sign shows a strong positive relationship which indicates that as one metric is improved, the other improves significantly as well The (-) sign shows a conflict, if one metric improves the other one deteriorates.

23. Ken YoussefiMechanical Engr. Dept., UC Berkeley 22 Comments on House of Quality It provides a large quantity of information in a very concise and well organized form. The intent of the House of Quality is consensus building. The matrix should not be too large. The matrix does not generate specification, it documents them.