Concept Selection And Product Architecture - N-Division-2018-19-even/Repo-7 GitHub Wiki
Weights assigned to prioritized objectives:
- Automatic working
- Storage
- Portability
- User friendly
- Cost
| Objectives | Weightage |
|---|---|
| Portability | 6 |
| Storage | 7 |
| Automatic working | 8 |
| User friendly | 8 |
| Cost | 4 |
PUGH Chart
| Objectives | Weightage | Design Idea 1 | Design Idea 2 | Design Idea 3 | Design Idea 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Portability | 6 | 0 | 0 | Dataum | + |
| Storage | 7 | 0 | 0 | Dataum | 0 |
| Automatic Working | 8 | - | 0 | Dataum | 0 |
| User friendly | 8 | 0 | + | Dataum | + |
| Cost | 4 | - | + | Dataum | + |
| +score | 0 | 12 | 0 | 18 | |
| -score | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | -12 | 12 | 0 | 18 |
The Best concept selected is: Design 4.
Justifications
| Design Idea no | Objective | Score given | Justification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Portable | 0 | Design idea1 is easily portable as that of datum |
| 1 | Storage | 0 | It has same storage capacity as that of datum |
| 1 | Automatic working | - | It involves some manual interaction with arm(crane) |
| 1 | User friendly | 0 | Mechanism involved are similar compared to datum |
| 1 | Cost | - | It involves some complex parts. |
| Design Idea no | Objective | Score given | Justification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Portable | 0 | Design 2 is smaller and less complicated than datum. 2 is more portable |
| 2 | storage | 0 | Design 2 has same storage capacity as that of datum |
| 2 | Automatic working | 0 | All the parts are automatic working as that of datum |
| 2 | User friendly | + | Mechanism involved are simple compared to datum |
| 2 | Cost | + | Materials used and mechanisms are less complex compared to datum. |
| Design Idea no | Objective | Score given | Justification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Portable | 0 | It is less portable compared to other design |
| 3 | Storage | 0 | It has same storage capacity like other designs |
| 3 | Automatic working | 0 | All the parts are automatic |
| 3 | User friendly | 0 | Less user friendly compared to other designs |
| 3 | Cost | 0 | The cost is more compared to design 2 and 4 |
| Design Idea no | Objective | Score given | Justification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Portable | + | Design is more simple than datum,so it is easily portable. |
| 4 | Storage | 0 | It has same storage capacity like other designs |
| 4 | Automatic working | 0 | All the parts are automatic |
| 4 | User friendly | + | More user friendly compared to datum |
| 4 | Cost | + | The cost is very less compared to datum,due to simple design |
Sub-Systems Identified List
| Sl. No. | Sub System Name |
|---|---|
| 1 | Storage of the object |
| 2 | Place object from storage |
| 3 | Sensing & Sorting |
| 4 | motion of the circular disc according to the colour detected |
| Sub System 1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| - | Sub-System 2 | Sub-System 3 | Sub-System 4 |
| Energy Interaction | ❎ | ❎ | ❎ |
| Data Interaction | ✅ | ❎ | ❎ |
| Material Interaction | ✅ | ❎ | ❎ |
| Spatial Interaction | ✅ | ❎ | ❎ |
Explanation:- Sub-System 1 has data interaction, material interaction as well as spatial interaction with Sub-System 2 as their will be exchange of data about the amount of object present in the sorage box while there is material interaction as the object is taken from the storage compartment.The Sub-System 1 has data interaction with Sub-System 5 as the amount of object can be displayed.
| Sub System 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| - | Sub-System 1 | Sub-System 3 | Sub-System 4 |
| Energy Interaction | ❎ | ❎ | ❎ |
| data interaction | ✅ | ❎ | ❎ |
| material interaction | ✅ | ❎ | ✅ |
| spatial interaction | ✅ | ✅ | ❎ |
Explanation:- The sub-system 2 has data interaction with sub-system 1 as the information of the object from the storage is needed to be send. The system also has material interaction with sub-system 1 & 4 as the object is picked form the storage and forwarded for the sorting process. spatial interaction is also their as system 1&3 are connected with each other.
| Sub System 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| - | Sub-System 1 | Sub-System 2 | Sub-System 4 |
| energy interaction | ❎ | ❎ | ❎ |
| data interaction | ❎ | ❎ | ✅ |
| material interaction | ❎ | ✅ | ✅ |
| spatial interaction | ❎ | ✅ | ✅ |
Explanation:- Sub-system 3 has data interaction with sub-system 4 as data is sent by sub-system 3 to sub-system 4 for the process of sorting.The sub-system 3 has material interaction with sub-system 2&3 as the object is passed through sub-system 2and then through 4.There is spatial interaction with sub-system with 2&4.
| Sub System 4 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| - | Sub-System 1 | Sub-System 2 | Sub-System 3 |
| energy interaction | ❎ | ❎ | ❎ |
| data interaction | ❎ | ❎ | ✅ |
| material interaction | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| spatial interaction | ❎ | ✅ | ✅ |
Explanation:-
The sub-system 4 has data interaction with sub-sytem 3 it also has material interaction with sub-system 1,2 & 3 as the object is taken from the storage and then moved on the conveyor for the sensing and sorting porcess.