04.Concept Generation - Z-div-Engg-exploration-2026-27-odd/Repo-7 GitHub Wiki
CONCEPT 01 CONCEPT 02 CONCEPT 03 CONCEPT 04 CONCEPT 05
For CONCEPT 01
Table 1: Pugh Chart – Fruit Chopping Machine
| Evaluation Criteria | Weight | Manual Press | Motorized Press | Screw-Feed Chopper | Sliding-Blade Chopper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cutting Uniformity | 5 | 0 | + | + | + |
| Ease of Operation | 5 | 0 | + | + | 0 |
| Safety | 5 | 0 | - | 0 | - |
| Low Manufacturing Cost | 4 | 0 | - | - | + |
| Portability | 3 | 0 | - | - | + |
| Ease of Cleaning | 4 | 0 | 0 | - | + |
| Low Power Consumption | 3 | 0 | - | - | 0 |
| Compact Design | 3 | 0 | 0 | - | + |
| Ease of Maintenance | 3 | 0 | - | - | 0 |
| Reduced Manual Effort | 5 | 0 | + | + | 0 |
| Total (+) | - | 0 | 15 | 15 | 19 |
| Total (-) | - | 0 | 18 | 20 | 5 |
| Net Score | - | 0 | -3 | -5 | 14 |
For CONCEPT 02
Table 2: Pugh Chart – Fruit Chopping Machine
| Evaluation criteria | Weight | Manual Press | Motorized Press | Screw Feed Chopper | Sliding Blade Chopper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cutting uniformly | 5 | 0 | ++ | + | + |
| Ease of operation | 5 | 0 | + | - | 0 |
| Safety | 5 | 0 | - | - | 0 |
| Low manufacturing cost | 4 | 0 | - | + | 0 |
| Portability | 3 | 0 | + | + | - |
| Ease of cleaning | 4 | 0 | 0 | - | + |
| Low power consumption | 3 | 0 | - | + | + |
| Compact design | 3 | 0 | + | 0 | - |
| Ease of maintenance | 3 | 0 | - | 0 | - |
| Reduced manual effort | 3 | 0 | + | + | 0 |
| Total(+) | 0 | 25 | 15 | 12 | |
| Total(-) | 0 | 15 | 17 | 9 | |
| Net score | 0 | 10 | -2 | 3 |
For CONCEPT 03
Table 3: Pugh Chart – Fruit Chopping Machine
| Evaluation Criteria | Weights | Manual Press (Datum) | Motorized Press | Screw-Feed Chopper | Sliding-Blade Chopper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cutting Uniformity | 5 | 0 | + | - | + |
| Ease of Operation | 5 | 0 | + | 0 | + |
| Safety | 5 | 0 | - | 0 | - |
| Low Manufacturing Cost | 4 | 0 | - | - | + |
| Portability | 3 | 0 | - | - | + |
| Ease of Cleaning | 4 | 0 | 0 | - | + |
| Low Power Consumption | 3 | 0 | - | - | 0 |
| Compact Design | 3 | 0 | 0 | - | + |
| Ease of Maintenance | 3 | 0 | - | - | 0 |
| Reduced Manual Effort | 5 | 0 | + | + | + |
| Total (+) | - | 0 | 15 | 5 | 29 |
| Total (-) | - | 0 | 18 | 25 | 5 |
| Net Score (+ − −) | - | 0 | -3 | -20 | 24 |
For CONCEPT 04
Table 4: Pugh Chart – Fruit Chopping Machine
| Evaluation Criteria | Weights | Manual Press (Datum) | Motorized Press | Screw-Feed Chopper | Sliding-Blade Chopper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cutting Uniformity | 5 | 0 | + | 0 | + |
| Ease of Operation | 5 | 0 | - | + | - |
| Safety | 5 | 0 | - | 0 | - |
| Low Manufacturing Cost | 4 | 0 | 0 | - | + |
| Portability | 3 | 0 | - | - | + |
| Ease of Cleaning | 4 | 0 | 0 | - | - |
| Low Power Consumption | 3 | 0 | - | 0 | + |
| Compact Design | 3 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| Ease of Maintenance | 3 | 0 | - | 0 | - |
| Reduced Manual Effort | 5 | 0 | + | + | + |
| Total (+) | - | 0 | 10 | 10 | 20 |
| Total (-) | - | 0 | 19 | 14 | 17 |
| Net Score (+ − −) | - | 0 | -9 | -4 | 3 |
For CONCEPT 05
Table 5: Pugh Chart – Fruit Chopping Machine
| Evaluation Criteria | Weights | Manual Press (Datum) | Motorized Press | Screw-Feed chopper | Sliding-blade chopper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cutting uniformity | 5 | 0 | + | 0 | - |
| Ease of operation | 5 | 0 | + | - | + |
| Safety | 5 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| Low manufacturing cost | 4 | 0 | - | + | + |
| Portability | 3 | 0 | + | + | + |
| Ease of cleaning | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Low power consumption | 3 | 0 | - | 0 | - |
| Compact design | 3 | 0 | - | - | 0 |
| Ease of maintenance | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | + |
| Reduced manual effort | 5 | 0 | + | - | + |
| Total (+) | 17 | 7 | 15 | ||
| Total (-) | 23 | 18 | 13 | ||
| Net score (+,-) | -6 | -11 | 2 |