3. CONCEPT EVALUATION AND SELECTED CONCEPT - H-Division-2020-2021-Even/Repo-05 GitHub Wiki
WEIGHTAGE GIVEN TO EACH OBJECTIVE
Table 6.1
| SL NO |
DESIGN OBJECTIVE |
WIGHTAGE ASSIGNED |
| 1 |
SAFETY |
6 |
| 2 |
EASE OF USE |
7 |
| 3 |
PORTABILITY |
8 |
| 4 |
USE OF STANDARD PARTS |
5 |
| 5 |
COST |
4 |
| 6 |
HOLDIND PARTS TIGHTLY |
9 |
PROJECT SELECTION (PUGH CHART)
Table 6.2
| DESIGN OBJECTIVES |
WEIGHTS |
DESIGN 1 SMITHA |
DESIGN 2 SNEHA |
DESIGN 3 ABHISHEK |
DESIGN 4 VINAY |
| SAFETY |
6 |
+ |
0 |
0 |
Datum |
| EASE OF USE |
7 |
+ |
+ |
+ |
Datum |
| PORTABILITY |
8 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Datum |
| USE OF STANDARD PARTS |
5 |
+ |
0 |
+ |
Datum |
| COST |
4 |
+ |
0 |
+ |
Datum |
| HOLDING PARTS TIGHTLY |
9 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Datum |
| SCORE + |
|
26 |
8 |
19 |
0 |
| SCORE - |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| TOTAL |
|
26 |
8 |
19 |
0 |
CONCEPT SELECTED: DESIGN 1
Design 1 is selected as it has the max points ie. 22, though its costly but the safety and ease of use are prior.
https://github.com/H-Division-2020-2021-Even/Repo-05/blob/f434d75f7ce1b4fbf6795b3a185a63ba0e48894a/smitha%20.pdf
COMPARING DESIGN 1 WITH WRT DESIGN 4(ie. DATUM) :-
1)Safety is added as the design contains the sensors which detect the obstacles and take decisions accordingly.
2)Easy to use due to Bluetooth.
3)All designs are same when we talk about portability and holding the parts tightly.
4)Cost of designing is a bit more due to extra sensors.