ME343 Design for Manufacturability

Final Report
Handheld Vacuum Cleaner DFM

Submitted to Professor Dr Xiu-min Fan () by

Group 1 Name Foong Yi Wen Lau Hong Jin Ong Zhe Jeremy Raymond Sutjiono Student No. 7080209032 7080209033 Min 7080209034 Email yiwen@nus.edu.sg Hongjin@nus.edu.sg Jeremy.ong@nus.edu.sg Mobile Phone No. 15821972964 15821972304 15821970904

7080209004

rsutjion@purdue.edu

13761117320

Table of Contents
Executive summary .......................................................................................................................... 4 Description of the product ................................................................................................................ 5 Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Information on intended use, target customers and production volume........................................ 5 The redesigned product ................................................................................................................ 5 Description of the redesigned product ............................................................................................. 6 Design for manual assembly ........................................................................................................ 7 Redesign of the motor holder for manual assembly .................................................................. 7 Redesign of the dust compartment subassembly for manual assembly .................................... 9 Design for injection molding ........................................................................................................ 11 Redesign of the motor holder for injection molding ................................................................. 11 Details of modifications............................................................................................................ 13 Redesign of the dust-stopper subassembly for injection moulding .......................................... 18 Design for variety ........................................................................................................................ 19 Variant of the original product identified .................................................................................. 19 Differentiating and non-differentiating functions ...................................................................... 19 Components that would realize the non-differentiating functions/features .............................. 19 The redesigned main housing ................................................................................................. 20 Analysis of the redesigned product ................................................................................................ 21 Assembly analysis ...................................................................................................................... 21 Bill of materials (BOM) Annex A .......................................................................................... 24 Component cost estimation before and after redesign ............................................................... 25 Functional analysis system technique (FAST) ............................................................................ 28 Kanos method of complaint collection (Annex B) ....................................................................... 29 Discussion...................................................................................................................................... 29 Choice and type of redesign ....................................................................................................... 29 Potential effects on other components........................................................................................ 29 Trade off assembleaility and robustness ................................................................................. 29 Coupling between manufacturability and robustness .............................................................. 29 Potential effects on product cost and functions .......................................................................... 30 Effects on cost ......................................................................................................................... 30 Effects on functions ................................................................................................................. 30 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 30 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 31 2

Annex A ......................................................................................................................................... 34 Bill of Materials (BOM) ................................................................................................................ 34 BOM before DFA ..................................................................................................................... 34 BOM after DFA ........................................................................................................................ 35 Annex B ......................................................................................................................................... 36 Results from Kanos Method of complaints collection ................................................................. 36 Annex C Master list ..................................................................................................................... 39

Executive summary
This report aims to provide an overview of the redesign of a handheld vacuum cleaner, which results in manufacturing cost reduction. The 3 main areas of Design for Manufacturability, namely Design for Assembly, Design for Process and Design for Life-Cycle Quality, are analyzed to realize the cost reduction. In Design for Assembly, the focus is on improving the assembly efficiency of manual assembly. Manual assembly is chosen for the assembly of the handheld vacuum cleaner because it is a low cost product. The use of automatic assembly cannot be justified as it will increase the cost of the product. The assembly efficiency is improved through addressing the following issues: (a) handling of small parts; (b) installing parts at inaccessible locations that have low visibility. Upon analysis, the following problems are identified: (a) motor holder has to be installed at an inaccessible location inside the main housing (b) dust stopper has to be installed at an inaccessible location inside the dust compartment. The redesign of the components was executed in response to the problems identified. Firstly, the mechanism for trapping dust is modified. Secondly, the motor holder is redesigned so that the screws positions are shifted for greater accessibility and visibility. In Design for Process, the redesign of components is based on improving the injection molding process. Injection molding, rather than machining, is chosen because the material used for manufacturing is thermoplastic and the use of machining for thermoplastic is uncommon. In total, 5 modifications are made onto the motor holder based on the 5 design guidelines for improving injection molding process: (a) adopt all projections with 1/2 ~ 2/3 thickness of main (b) adopt projections // to molding direction or _|_ to molding direction and on parting surface (c) incorporate draft (d) keep main wall with uniform thickness (e) use of ramps and gussets for support. In Design for Variety, a variant design aimed at enhancing portability has been conceptualised to maximise product value. The redesign involves incorporating battery operation into the vacuum cleaner, hence enabling it to function without electrical cord connecting to main power supply. In order to increase the number of common components for non-differentiating functions, the main housing is redesigned to fulfil the requirements of both the original and variant designs. A battery holder socket is incorporated into the main housing so that both the original and variant products can share the same main housing. As a result of redesign, the improvements to the manufacture of the vacuum cleaner can be summarized as follows: (a) 29.7 % improvement in assembly time (b) 42.7 % improvement in assembly efficiency (c) for the injection molding of the dust compartment, there is a 19% cost reduction and 11 % improvement in injection molding time (d) redesign for manual assembly alone reduces the manufacturing cost by 28.3%. In conclusion, with greater savings in manufacturing cost, a higher profit can be achieved to lower the price for better competitiveness. This generates a lot more opportunities for increased sales and hence achieves the objective of redesigning.

Description of the product

Overview
The handheld vacuum cleaner has 3 major sections. The first section is the dust compartment which contains the compartment itself, dust stopper, and filter bag. The second section is the electrical components which a play major role to how the system of the cleaner behaves. It comprises of the rotor, motor holder, fabricated fan, switch button, and power cable. Finally, the last section is the main housing which has 2 halves with a fastener to hold the connection to the front dust compartment.

Information on intended use, target customers and production volume

The target customers of this product are the household users. In China, most cleaning service still involves conventional devices such as broom and dustpan, which takes considerable time to finish cleaning. One of the main reasons why people are still reluctant to buy the modern automated devices such as vacuum cleaner is the price. It seems that if the conventional way is so much cheaper, they will not change their habits to the modern one. By understanding this behavior, price reduction is one of the important factors to win more customers. As long as the retail price of the handheld vacuum cleaner can be reduced, more household users will start utilising this practical tool. Based on International Trade Commodities of Vacuum cleaner, China is the top vacuum cleaner export country with the sales of $66.1 Million in 2009. This indicates that there are a lot of opportunities for increased sales both in the local arena and the global stage if the product can be redesigned efficiently. Therefore, with a target of 0.5% of Chinas exporting market, a target production volume of 10,000 products in 5 years will result in a total sale of RMB1, 750,000.

The redesigned product

After applying Design for Manufacturability (DFM) concepts onto the product, a redesigned version of the vacuum cleaner has been finalized. The 3 main aspects of DFM, design for assembly, process and life cycle quality have been taken into consideration. Hence, the redesigned product is now much more cost and time efficient for manufacturing and assembling.

Description of the redesigned product

Design for manufacturability encompasses 3 different areas, assembly, process and life cycle quality. For each area, there are 2 sub-areas as classified in the chart below. For assembly, our group has chosen to redesign for manual assembly. For process, redesign is done for injection moulding and for life cycle quality, design has been modified for variety.

Manual assembly For assembly Automatic assembly

Machining Design for Manufacturability For process Injection moulding

Robustness For life cycle quality Variety

Design for manual assembly

Redesign of the motor holder for manual assembly In order to facilitate manual assembly, our group has decided to redesign the motor holder, which secures the motor to the main housing. In the original design, the motor holder is held onto the main housing by screwing at its sides. This process is hindered by restricted access and vision since the screw hole is blocked by the holder itself.

Screwing area is hard to access and see due to its location.

After redesign, the screwing area for the holder has more allowance for access and vision.

The overall radius for access has been increased to facilitate faster assembly.

Inspired by guidelines: 1. Avoid restricted access for assembly operations. .

Redesign of the dust compartment subassembly for manual assembly In the original design, the flap and the stopper strap have to be inserted directly into the dust compartment before fastening is done via screwing. The flap and the stopper strap require holding down inside while screwing is done. This process is difficult since the opening of the dust compartment is small. Both access and vision is highly obstructed.

Opening of dust compartment is small and vision is obstructed after hand is inserted.

Stopper strap Flap Screwing operation is done here while stopper strap and flap need to be held down.

After redesign, the stopper strap and flap are replaced by 2 components, the T-shape flap and the matchbox opening. The matchbox opening is first assembled with the T-shape flap, before being inserted into the dust compartment from the front. These components are held on together via friction, with the help of a tapered design.

T-shape flap

1) T-shape flap is first inserted into the matchbox opening.

Tapered design 2) The matchbox opening together with the T-shape flap is slotted into the dust compartment from the front. Matchbox opening

Inspired by guidelines: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Obviously asymmetric Avoid parts that are sticky, slippery, delicate, flexible, very small Use pyramid assembly Avoid holding down for subsequent operation Avoid part release before positive location For fastening, prefer snap fit, bending, riveting screwing in this order Avoid restricted access for assembly operations

10

Design for injection molding

Redesign of the motor holder for injection molding The redesigned motor holder is much more suitable for injection molding. New features were introduced according to the following design guidelines. 1. Adopt all projections with 1/2 ~ 2/3 thickness of main 2. Adopt projections // to molding direction or _|_ to molding direction and on parting surface. 3. Incorporate draft 4. Keep main wall with uniform thickness 5. Use of ramps and gussets for support 1

1) Projections with same thickness as main wall

2) 2 molding directions

1) Projections with half thickness of main wall

3) Negligible draft angle or none

2) Same molding direction with fold 3) Draft angle

11

5) Perpendicular edge with possible warping

4) Non-uniform wall thickness

5) Use of ramp to prevent warping

4) Uniform wall thickness

12

Details of modifications 1) Adopt all projections with 1/2 ~ 2/3 thickness of main

Projection thickness, t Main wall thickness, t

Projection thickness, 0.5t

Main wall thickness, t

13

2) Adopt projections // to moulding direction or _|_ to moulding direction and on parting surface.

2 moulding directions

Only 1 moulding direction

Folding to form finalized product

14

3) Incorporate draft

Negligible draft angle or none

Draft angle

15

4) Keep main wall with uniform thickness

Non-uniform wall thickness

Uniform wall thickness

16

5) Use of ramps and gussets for support

Perpendicular edge with possible warping

Use of ramp to prevent warping

17

Redesign of the dust-stopper subassembly for injection moulding The new component, the matchbox opening, has also been designed accordingly to the guidelines. 1. Avoid undercut 2. Adopt all projections with 1/2 ~ 2/3 thickness of main 3. Adopt projections // to moulding direction or _|_ to moulding direction and on parting surface. 4. Incorporate draft 5. Keep main wall with uniform thickness 6. Use of ramps and gussets for support

1) Undercut avoided when the cut is in molding direction.

2) Projection with half thickness of main.

3) Projection parallel to molding direction

4) Draft angle

6) Use of gusset for support 5) Uniform wall thickness

Molding direction

18

Design for variety

Variant of the original product identified Cordless handheld vacuum cleaner

Differentiating and non-differentiating functions Functions/Features Suck air Filter dust Prevent electrocution Non-differentiating function Sweep dust Extend sucker Reduce noise Add colour Differentiating function Enhance portability Original Product Limited by length of cable Variant

Components that would realize the non-differentiating functions/features Non-differentiating functions/features Suck air Motor Filter dust Collect dust Prevent electrocution Supply electricity Filter Dust compartment Main housing Power cable Common Common Common Uncommon Uncommon Commonness and variant Common to original

Components Fan

19

The redesigned main housing In order to maximise product value, a variant design has been conceptualised to enhance portability. The redesign would involve incorporating battery operation into the vacuum cleaner.

Proposed battery holder

20

Analysis of the redesigned product

Assembly analysis
The focus of assembly analysis is mainly on assembly efficiency improvement. Below there are three table : (1) the calculation table for manual assembly time before DFA, (2) the calculation table for manual assembly time after DFA, (3) The comparison of before and after DFA table. CALCULATION FOR MANUAL ASSEMBLY TIME BEFORE DFA No. Handling Handling of code time per items (HC) item (s) Main housing Motor Solenoid Holder Screws (secure holder) Washer Fan Nut Bracket Screw (holds bracket) Motor-SwitchCable Switch Motor Switch-Motor connection Cable Switch-Cable connection Screws securing Motor-SwitchCable Other components in main housing Cable Strap 1 30 1.95 Manual insertion code (IC) 00 Insertion time Total per item (s) operation time (s) 1.5 3.45

1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1

30 30 31 03 10 01 30 31

1.95 1.95 2.25 1.69 1.5 1.43 1.95 2.25

06 00 59 00 00 38 06 38

5.5 1.5 12 1.5 1.5 6 5.5 6

7.45 3.45 57.00 3.19 3.00 7.43 7.45 8.25

1 1 1 1 1 3

30 88 0 82 0 30

1.95 6.35 0 5.1 0 1.95

00 08 95 83 95 59

1.5 6.5 8 5.6 8 12

3.45 12.85 8.00 10.70 8.00 41.85

30

1.95 21

06

5.5

14.90

Screws (securing Cable Strap)

31

2.25

38

16.50

No. Handling Handling of code time per items (HC) item (s) Fastener Main housing 2 Screws (side)(securing main housing) Screws (front)(securing main housing) Assembling in dust compartment Flap Stopper strap Screw (FlapStopper) Other components to main housing Filter Dust compartment 1 1 1 70 40 70 5.1 3.6 5.1 1 1 3 30 30 30 1.95 1.95 1.95

Manual insertion code (IC) 30 06 58

Insertion time Total per item (s) operation time (s) 2 5.5 10 3.95 7.45 35.85

31

2.25

48

8.5

10.75

22 22 48

6.5 6.5 8.5

11.60 10.10 13.60

1 1

30 30

1.95 1.95

30 30

2 2 Total

3.95 3.95 318.12

22

(2). CALCULATION FOR MANUAL ASSEMBLY TIME AFTER DFA No. Handling Handling of code time per items (HC) item (s) Main housing Motor Solenoid Holder Screws (secure holder) Washer Fan Nut Bracket Screw (holds bracket) MotorSwitch-Cable Switch Motor Switch-Motor connection Cable Switch-Cable connection Screws securing Motor-SwitchCable 1 30 1.95 Manual insertion code (IC) 00 Insertion time Total per item (s) operation time (s) 1.5 3.45

1 1 4

30 30 31

1.95 1.95 2.25

06 00 38

5.5 1.5 6

7.45 3.45 33.00

1 1 1 1 1

03 10 01 30 31

1.69 1.5 1.43 1.95 2.25

00 00 38 06 38

1.5 1.5 6 5.5 6

3.19 3.00 7.43 7.45 8.25

1 1 1 1 1 3

30 88 0 82 0 30

1.95 6.35 0 5.1 0 1.95

00 08 95 83 95 59

1.5 6.5 8 5.6 8 12

3.45 12.85 8.00 10.70 8.00 41.85

Other components in main housing Fastener 1 Main housing 1 2 Screws 3 (side)(securing main housing) Assembling in dust compartment

30 30 30

1.95 1.95 1.95

30 00 58

2 1.5 10

3.95 3.45 35.85

23

Matchbox opening T-shape flap Other components to main housing Filter Dust compartment

1 1

30 30

1.95 1.95

30 31

2 5

3.95 6.95

1 1

30 30

1.95 1.95

30 30

2 2 Total

3.95 3.95 223.57

(3). COMPARISON OF ASSEMBLY TIME AND ASSEMBLY EFFICIENCY Before DFA After DFA Percentage Improvement (%) Assembly Time (s) Assembly Efficiency 318.12 0.075 223.57 0.107 29.7 42.7

The detailed calculation table of assembly analysis shows that the assembly time of the product before DFA is 318.12 seconds and after DFA is 223.57 seconds. This implies that the assembly time is improved by 29.7% which means that assuming this product is always sold in markets, we will gain more profit by the improvement of the production rate. Therefore, Design for Assembly should be done to this vacuum cleaner product by the company to improve the manufacture efficiency by manufacture more product and increase sales profit. Through the assembly analysis, deficiency can be found in 2 main parts: motor holder and the dust compartment assembly, which has screw locations highly obstructed. This takes up the most time to assemble. After redesign, the screwing operation for the motor holder is relocated for better accessibility, while screwing for the dust compartment is entirely eliminated.

Bill of materials (BOM) Annex A

This tool allows us to see which of the components cost the most in assembling. It complements the assembly analysis by translating the cost of time for assembly into actual cost in yuan. Summarised below is the comparison of the total cost before and after DFM. Before DFM 137.56 24 After DFM 98.66

Material and process selection

Before every material and process selection is done to one part, shape attribute selection are selected to categorize the shape in which the process is suitable for. From the analysis in the table below, Machining and Injection Molding are the best processes to utilize. Machining, however, has less common usage for thermoplastic. Hence, we prefer to use Injection Molding for this process to manufacture the entire part made of thermoplastic.

Component estimation
25

cost before and

after redesign
All of the components, except those which are assumed to be purchased, are manufactured by injection moulding. Therefore, our calculation is mainly based on injection moulding process. Below is the detail cost estimation of the injection moulding of dust compartment part before and after redesign. From this estimation, the entire manufacturing injection moulding cost of the product is calculated. a. DUST COMPARTMENT BEFORE REDESIGN

Original Dust Compartment Cost Estimation (Details in Annex C) Non-circular cylinder shape with main wall thickness of 2mm 2 holes including semi circular for the dust entrance and one screw hole Weight is 100g with volume of 50cc Ccl =$315000 for 50k with $6.299 / part C material =$ 0.103

TOTAL COST FOR BEFORE REDESIGN = $7.27 PER PART

26

b.

DUST COMPARTMENT AFTER REDESIGN

Redesigned dust compartment cost estimation (Details in Appendix B) Have the same shape except the complexity inside the box is removed( there is no more screw hole) Ccl = $255500 for 50k with $5.11/part( which is 19% cheaper than original cost) Cycle time is 25.9s for each material which is 11% faster than the original design

TOTAL COST AFTER REDESIGN = $5.96 PER PART

c.

COMPARISON TABLE OF DUST COMPARTMENT INJECTION MOLDING PROCESS

DUST COMPARTMENT

Total Cost molding $7.27 $5.96 19% Cheaper

of

injection Cycle time

Before Redesign After Redesign % Improvement

29.1 sec 25.9 sec 11% Faster

From the table above, it can be concluded that the dust compartment redesign reduces the total cost by 19% cheaper and make 11% faster cycle time. This redesign can roughly explain that the whole part injection molding processes is assumed to have cost reduction by about 19% and the cycle time is 11% faster.

27

Functional analysis system technique (FAST)

The FAST diagram helps us keep in mind the different functions our product should fulfill even as we design for variety. It helps designers prioritise between primary and secondary functions, basic and supporting functions.

From this, we can deduce a table to check against our variant design against the original product in terms of functionality. Differentiating and non-differentiating functions Functions/Features Suck air Filter dust Prevent electrocution Non-differentiating function Sweep dust Extend sucker Reduce noise Add colour Differentiating function Enhance portability Original Product Limited by cable length Variant

28

Kanos method of complaint collection (Annex B)

Based on this method, customer requirements and delighting functions can be identified and collated. A cordless vacuum cleaner is one of the customer requirements as identified earlier on. Thus, it is appropriate to work on such a function, which out battery operated vacuum cleaner can satisfy.

Discussion
Choice and type of redesign
Through the various tools of analysis, we discovered that the main problems in high assembly cost are the excessive use of screws, poor accessibility and vision. Thus, there is a high priority in solving these problems before any focus on improving the product functions, material or process. While lowering assembly cost, however, we also seek to integrate the appropriate use of material and processing. In this case, we seek to standardize the material of any new components to be internally manufactured to be the same as the existing ones. The standardizing of material makes production much easier and lowers cost with bulk purchase. Our redesigned components are also designed such that they can be inject moulded without much hassle or secondary machining. The variant design is a much more pragmatic goal we can work towards in satisfying customers requirements, before consideration for customer delighting functions. Design for robustness requires contemplation for many uncontrollable noise factors. It is difficult to eliminate such noise. Hence, redesigning within the controllable factors may not make a big significant difference to the end robustness. Also, redesigning for robustness takes into account redesigning many factors, for example, the environment, and is not restricted to redesign of the physical components. Thus, it might not be too appropriate for this context.

Potential effects on other components

Trade off assembleaility and robustness The new motor holder is less robust as compared to the original design. If the component is accidentally knocked at the tip of the L-shape, the moment exerted could cause it to chip off easily. However, since the motor holder is secured inside the main housing, it is assumed that it will not experience much direct rough handling. Thus, this problem can be deemed insignificant. Coupling between manufacturability and robustness Since the matchbox opening is injection moulded in a direction perpendicular to the direction of slotting, the chances of breakage along the slotting direction is reduced. Also, use of the same material between the matchbox opening and the main housing slows down the consequence of friction wear where it is slotted.

29

Potential effects on product cost and functions

Effects on cost As shown in the analysis of the redesigned product, manufacturing time is saved when the components are done via injection moulding and do not require secondary operations. Assembly time is also reduced when screwing is either eliminated or access and vision for the operation are improved. Hence, assembly cost which include labour wages and factory rental are all lowered together with decreased assembly time. Cost is reduced when components are manufactured using the same material and processes are singular. Effects on functions Functions remain the same after redesign with the enhanced portability.

Conclusion
Theoretically, DFM has shown to be useful in increasing manufacturing efficiencies through reduction in assembly time. This has been evident in the significant savings observed from the BOMs before and after the application of DFM. However, it should also be noted that the original function of the handheld vacuum cleaner should not be compromised in the pursuit of manufacturing costs reduction. Therefore, in practice, prototypes need to be produced and tested repeatedly before the new model can be manufactured in large quantity. It is also important to note that while there are many redesign concepts that can be generated in the application of DFM techniques, each redesign must be consistent with each other so that all components can be integrated as one whole product. Hence, the final product may only adopt a few of the many initial redesigns generated. However, in a large production volume, minor changes can lead to significant reduction in manufacturing costs, which is important for the long term operation of the company. At the same time, in this competitive market, customer satisfaction is an important factor in deciding the profitability of the company. Hence, designing for variety through communization of components is a wise way of minimizing manufacturing costs while achieving mass customization. In conclusion, with greater savings in manufacturing cost, a higher profit can be achieved to lower the price for better competitiveness. This generates a lot more opportunities for increased sales and hence achieves the objective of redesigning.

30

Bibliography
(n.d.). Retrieved 20 April, 2010, from http://www.protomold.com/DesignGuidelines_UniformWallThickness.aspx

Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., & Knight, W. (1994). Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly. Dekker.

Fowler, T. (1990). Value Analysis in Design. Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Honeywell Inc. (2000). Snap-Fit Design Manual. Retrieved from

http://www.asplastic.com/techinfo/litshop/PDF/5350-012-04980GEN070

Ulrich, K., & Eppinger, S. (1995). Design for manufacturing. McGraw-Hill.

31

Annex C

Mold Cost(Cmold) Cmold = Cb + Ccl *n^m Cb= 1000+ 0.45*Ac*Hp^0.4 Ac = 150 cm^2 hp = 10cm Cb =

Ccl = R*(Me + Mpo + Mx + 65ns + 150ni +250nu + Ms + Mt + Mtex + Mp) R = $60/hr Me = 2.5*sqrt(Ap) ns 1 Me 0.055902 ni 0 1169.552334 Mpo 5.000009 nu 1 Mx = 45*(Xi+Xo)^1.27 Xi = 0.45 Xo 0.5 Mx = 42.16203 Ms 7.082691 Mt = 6.324304 Mtex = 2.360897 Mp = 0.003354 Ccl ($) 6.29982

C = Cmaterial + Cr *ts/n + Cmold/Nt Cmaterial 0.103 Cr 0.87 Cmold 6.299 C total 7.272

32

Appendix B
Material Cost Weight Material Runner Volume 0.1kg High-density polyethylene 0.15 Cycle Time ts = tf + tc + tr injection time (tf) tf = 2V(1+fr)*n*pj/Pj V= 0.000045 fr = .15 pj = 965 bars Pj = 90 kW tf (s)= 10.54

Cmaterial = Cp * rho * V * (1 + fr) Cmaterial = 0.1035 $ Clamping Force F Ap 500 cm^2 fr 0.15 Pj(bars) 965 F = Ap(1 +fr) *0.5*Pj F(N) 5548750 F(kN) 5548.75 From table 8.4, F approximately 8500 kN Maximum Shot Size Vs(m^3) Volume(m^3) 0.00005 Vs (m^3) 0.0000575 Maximum Clamp Stroke Ls(m) 0.25 OPERATING COST(Cr)108$ / hr

cooling time(tc) k = 2/3 hmax = 2mm alpha = 0.11 Ti = 232 Tm = 27 Tx = 52 tc(s) = 2.502262

mold resetting time(tr) td = 8.6 Ls' = 0.20cm Ls = 32cm tr(s) = 12.89807

ts (s)

25.94033

Mold Cost(Cmold) Cmold = Cb + Ccl *n^m Cb= 1000+ 0.45*Ac*Hp^0.4 Ac = 150 cm^2 hp = 10cm Cb =

Ccl = R*(Me + Mpo + Mx + 65ns + 150ni +250nu + Ms + Mt + Mtex + Mp) R = $60/hr Me = 2.5*sqrt(Ap) ns 0 Me 0.053033 ni 0 1169.552334 Mpo 5.000009 nu 1 Mx = 45*(Xi+Xo)^1.27 Xi = 0.37 Xo 0.5 Mx = 37.70526 Ms 6.413746 Mt = 5.655789 Mtex = 2.137915 Mp = 0.003354 Ccl ($) 5.116152

C = Cmaterial + Cr *ts/n + Cmold/Nt Cmaterial 0.103 Cr 0.75 Cmold 5.11 C total 5.963

33

Annex A
Bill of Materials (BOM) BOM before DFA
Component Main Housing Motor-Cable-Switch Subassembly Motor Subassembly Cable Switch Cable Straps Fastener Filter Dust Compartment Assembly Dust Compartment Flap Stopper Strap Screws Column Totals(Direct Costs) Overhead Charges Total Costs 1 1 1 10 2 0.1 0.1 0.2 36.75 5.507355 2 3.6023 1 0.5 4 4 1.5 22.5 40.5 3.5 4.1 4.1 1.7 1 1.8 500 1000 0.5 4 4.1 4.1 1.7 4 4.1 4.1 17 86.15 51.40966 137.5597 1 1 1 2 1 1 25 5 1 0.1 0.25 1 3 2 1 1 1 0.5 28 7 2 1.1 1.25 1.5 28 7 2 1.1 1.25 1.5 28 7 2 2.2 1.25 1.5 Quantity 2 Purchased Materials 2 Processing (Machine + Labour) 1 Assembly (Labour) 4 Total Unit Variable Cost 7 Tooling and Other NRE, K$ 500 Tooling Lifetime, K units 1000 Total Unit Fixed Cost 0.5 Total Unit Cost 7.5 Total Cost 15

34

BOM after DFA

Component Main Housing Motor-Cable-Switch Subassembly Motor Subassembly Cable Switch Cable Straps Fastener Filter Dust Compartment Assembly Dust Compartment Matchbox Opening T-shape Flap Screws Column Totals(Direct Costs) Overhead Charges Total Costs 1 1 1 3 2 0.5 0.1 0.2 37.15 5.567299 2.25 4.052588 1 0.25 0.5 0.1 1 1.5 12.8 23.04 3.5 0.85 1.1 1.7 1 1.8 500 1000 0.5 4 0.85 1.1 1.7 4 0.85 1.1 5.1 64.2 34.45989 98.65989 1 1 1 2 1 1 25 5 1 0.1 0.25 1 2.2 1 1 1 1 0.5 27.2 6 2 1.1 1.25 1.5 27.2 6 2 1.1 1.25 1.5 27.2 6 2 2.2 1.25 1.5 Quantity 2 Purchased Materials 2 Processing (Machine + Labour) 1 Assembly (Labour) 3 Total Unit Variable Cost 6 Tooling and Other NRE, K$ 500 Tooling Lifetime, K units 1000 Total Unit Fixed Cost 0.5 Total Unit Cost 6.5 Total Cost 13

35

Annex B
Results from Kanos Method of complaints collection Complaints 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Movement restricted by the cords Noisy Hard to clean the dust container Suction head cannot reach narrow corners Suction power not strong Heated housing is uncomfortable to hold Cannot suck dust of larger mass

Kano Questionnaire Customer requirement #1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. I like it that way. It must be that way. I am neutral. I can live with it that way. I dislike it that way I like it that way. It must be that way. I am neutral. I can live with it that way. I dislike it that way

If the vacuum cleaner is silent, how do you feel?

If the vacuum cleaner is noisy, how do you feel?

Customer requirement #2 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. I like it that way. It must be that way. I am neutral. I can live with it that way. I dislike it that way I like it that way. It must be that way. I am neutral. I can live with it that way. I dislike it that way

If the vacuum cleaners dust storage unit is easy to clean, how do you feel?

If the vacuum cleaners dust storage unit is difficult to clean, how do you feel?

Customer requirement #3 36

If the vacuum cleaner is cordless so that your movement is not restricted, how do you feel?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

I like it that way. It must be that way. I am neutral. I can live with it that way. I dislike it that way I like it that way. It must be that way. I am neutral. I can live with it that way. I dislike it that way

If the vacuum cleaner is not cordless so that your movement is restricted, how do you feel?

Kano Evaluation Table Dysfunctional Customer Requirements 1. I like it 1. I like it 2. I expect it Functi- 3. Im neutral onal 4. I can tolerate it 5. I dislike it Q R R R R 2. I expect it A I I I R 3. Im neutral A I I I R 4. I can tolerate it A I I I R 5. I dislike it O M M M Q

Customer requirement A: Attractive M: Must be R: Reverse O: One dimensional Q: Questionable I: Indifferent Tabulation of responses of each customer requirement in a Kano Questionnaire about a vacuum cleaner 37

C.R. 1 2 3

A 1 1 7

M 7 6 0

O 1 1 1

R 1 2 1

Q 0 0 1

I 0 0 0

total 10 10 10

grade M M A

Based on the responses, customer requirement 3, i.e. a vacuum cleaner that is cordless, is a delighting function since it is Attractive to the customers, as derived from the Kano Evaluation Table.

38

Annex C Master list

Part No.

Part Name

Part Thumbnail

1.

Dust compartment

2.

Matchbox opening

3.

T-shape flap

4.

Screw (10 mm)

5.

Screw (14 mm)

6.

Screw (14 mm)

39

7.

Bracket

8.

Fastener

9.

Main Housing A

10.

Cable Strap

11.

Screws (10 mm x 2)

12.

Cable

13.

Nut

14.

Fan

40

15.

Washer

16.

Screws (10mm x 4)

17.

Screws (14 mm x 2)

18.

Screws (14 mm)

19.

Holder

20.

Screws (14 mm)

21.

Rotor

22.

Main Housing B

41

23.

Screws (14 mm)

24.

Screws (14 mm)

25.

Filter

26.

Switch

42