5. CONCEPT EVALUATION AND PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE - O-division-2021-2022-Even/Repo-01 GitHub Wiki

5.1 ASSIGNING WEIGHTS TO OBJECTIVES

Design Objectives	Weights	Design 1	Design 2	Design 3	Design 4
High quality print	4	+	Datum	+	+
Attractive	8	+	Datum	++	++
Portability	8	0	Datum	++	-
Automatic	9	+	Datum	++	+
Light weight	6	-	Datum	--	-
Score(+)		21	0	54	29
Score(-)		6	0	12	14
Total	35	15	0	42	15

Design no.	Objective	Score allocated	Justification for the score given
1	High quality print	4	Squeegeeing mechanism is better
	Charismatic	8	Look was better than the reference design
	Portability	0	It has same portability as that of the reference design
	Automatic	9	No provision for holding and pouring the ink
	Light weight	-6	As machine is of wood so it is heavy
2	High quality print	0	Considered as reference design
	Charismatic	0	Considered as reference design
	Portability	0	Considered as reference design
	Automatic	0	Considered as reference design
	Light weight	0	Considered as reference design
3	High quality print	4	Squeegeeing mechanism is better
	Charismatic	16	Look was much better than the reference design
	Portability	16	Machine is smaller in size
	Automatic	18	All the functions are automatic
	Light weight	-12	Many components are used so machine is heavy
4	High quality print	4	Squeegeeing mechanism is better
	Charismatic	16	Look was much better than the reference design
	Portability	-8	Machine is large in size
	Automatic	9	Screen pressing is not automatic
	Light weight	-6	As machine is of wood so it is heavy

SUBSYSTEMS