5. CONCEPT EVALUATION AND PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE - E-division-2021-2022-odd/Repo-12 GitHub Wiki

PUGH CHART

Task 1: Assigning weights to objectives-

Objectives	Weights
Safety	7
Ease of use	6
Portability	5
Use of standard parts	4
Cost	6

Task 2: Scores for every design

Design Objectives	Weights	Design 1	Design 2	Design 3	Design 4
Safety	7	Datum	-	0	+
Ease of use	6	Datum	-	0	-
Portability	5	Datum	0	+	-
Use of Standard parts	4	Datum	-	0	0
Cost	6	Datum	-	-	--
Score(+)		0	0	5	12
Score(-)		0	23	6	18
Total		0	-23	-1	-6

5.1 JUSTIFICATION FOR SCORE GIVEN

Design no.	Objective	Score allocated	Justification for the score given
1.	Safety	Datum	-
	Ease of use	Datum	-
	Portability	Datum	-
	Use of standard parts	Datum	-
	Cost	Datum	-
2.	Safety	-7	Heavy metal finger might damage the keys
	Ease of use	-6	Complex design not user-friendly
	Portability	0	Same as Datum
	Use of standard parts	-4	Not easily available in market
	Cost	-6	Expensive part make it costly
3.	Safety	0	Same as Datum
	Ease of use	0	Same as Datum
	Portability	5	It occupies less space
	Use of standard parts	0	Same as Datum
	Cost	-6	coslier components than others
4.	Safety	7	It's box design makes it safer to use
	Ease of use	-6	Complex circuits
	Portability	5	Box is Easy to carry
	Use of standard parts	0	Same as Datum
	Cost	-12	Extra body cover parts are used

5.2 SELECTED DESIGN

5.3 PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE

Sl.no.	Subsystems
01.	Tune Playing Unit
02.	Working Unit
03.	User Input Unit

5.4 FUNCTION CLUSTERING

5.5 INTERACTION BETWEEN SUBSYSTEMS

1. Tune Playing Unit-

Tune Playing Unit	Working Unit	User Input Unit
Material Interaction	Yes	Yes
Data Interaction	Yes	Yes
Spatial Interacion	Yes	Yes

2. Working Unit-

Working Unit	Tune Playing Unit	User Input Unit
Material Interaction	Yes	Yes
Data Interaction	Yes	Yes
Spatial Interacion	Yes	Yes

3. User Input Unit-

User Input Unit	Working Unit	Tune Playing Unit
Material Interaction	Yes	Yes
Data Interaction	Yes	Yes
Spatial Interacion	Yes	Yes