ASSIGNING WEIGHT'S TO OBJECTIVE'S

SL.NO	OBJECRIVE'S	WEIGHT'S
1	SAFETY	5
2	EASE OF USE	3
3	PORTABILITY	2
4	USE OF STANDARD PARTS	4
5	COST	1

PUGH CHART FOR 4 ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS MENTIONED BELOW

SL.NO	DESIGN OBJECTIVE'S	WEIGHT'S	DESIGN 1	DESIGN 2	DESIGN 3	DESIGN 4
1	SAFETY	5	+	+	+	datum
2	EASE OF USE	3	-	+	+	datum
3	PORTABILITY	2	-	+	-	datum
4	USE OF STANDARD PARTS	4	-	-	-	datum
5	COST	1	+	-	+	datum
6	SCORE (+)		6	10	9
7	SCORE (-)		-9	-5	-6

DESIGN'S SKETCHED BY TEAMMATE'S

JUSTIFICATION FOR SCORES GIVEN

DESIGN.NO	OBJECTIVE	SCORE ALLOCATED	JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SCORE
1	SAFETY	4	The model has the material which are not harmful to the environment
	EASE OF USE	3	It has parts which are ease to use
	PORTABILITY	5	It has the wheels which make the model very easy to move
	USE OF STANDARD PARTS	2	It has the parts which are difficult to find
	COST	1	The material used are costlier than the datum design
2	SAFETY	5	Compared to other designs it is safe to use
	EASE OF USE	4	Fully automated machine
	PORTABILITY	2	It is ease because of wheels which are connected
	USE OF STANDARD PARTS	3	All parts are easily available
	COST	1	Affordable for all farmers
3	SAFETY	4	It is not harmful to environment and humans
	EASE OF USE	5	It is a automated and remote controlled machine
	PORTABILITY	3	The model is bit heavy so it is not that ease to move compared to the datum design
	USE OF STANDARD PARTS	2	The parts used are difficult to find in the market
	COST	1	Due to the parts used the cost would be more
4	SAFETY	Datum
	EASE OF USE	Datum
	PORTABILITY	Datum
	USE OF STANDARD PARTS	Datum
	COST	Datum