Contents

1 Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 2
2 External background analysis ........................................................................................................... 3
2.1 SWOT-analysis................................................................................................................................................ 3
2.2 PESTEL analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Market opportunity analysis .................................................................................................................... 5
2.4 Role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) ....................................................................... 5
2.5 Conclusion on the external background analysis ............................................................................ 6
3 Internal background analysis ........................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Strengths and weaknesses ........................................................................................................................ 7
3.2 Role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) ...................................................................... 7
3.3 Conclusion on the internal background analysis ............................................................................. 7
4 Challenge analysis ................................................................................................................................. 8
5 Intended recipient ................................................................................................................................. 9
6 Team analysis........................................................................................................................................ 10
6.1 Team contract .............................................................................................................................................. 10
6.2 The competence triangle ......................................................................................................................... 10
6.3 The collaboration processes .................................................................................................................. 11
6.3.1 Collaborameter .................................................................................................................................. 11
6.3.2 GAIT analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 13
7 Solution space ....................................................................................................................................... 14
8 Ideation ................................................................................................................................................... 15
8.1 Ideation process.......................................................................................................................................... 15
8.1.1 Empathizing ........................................................................................................................................ 15
8.1.2 Focus ...................................................................................................................................................... 15
8.1.3 Generate - Brainstorm and brainwriting ................................................................................ 15
8.1.4 Sort - Summarizing and Idea Sieve............................................................................................ 17
8.1.5 Evaluate ................................................................................................................................................ 17
8.1.6 Conclusion ideation phase ............................................................................................................ 19
9 Plan for phase 2 .................................................................................................................................... 20
Appendix 1 - Documentation and feedback for phase-1 presentation ..................................... 21
Appendix 2 - Documentation and feedback for phase-2 presentation ..................................... 40
Appendix 3 - Elaborations on changes in our understanding ...................................................... 53

1 / 53
1 Introduction
The following Experts in Teams (EIT) project works with a problem posed by the company Dinex.
With coming Euro-7 emission restrictions, Dinex is working on developing a new valve for their
exhaust treatment system of diesel engines. The posed problem is thus to develop a two-way
valve that can redirect exhaust gases in one of two directions, controlled via an actuator.
Furthermore, the valve system must be able to live up to pre-defined parameters set by Dinex
regarding durability, dimensions, and performance.
During phase-1 of the EIT course, we’ve been introduced to a wide range of tools, with the
purpose of defining the external and internal environment we’re tasked to design the valve to
integrate into. Furthermore we’ve been given tools to help analyse the overall challenge, and how
to define/analyse the intended recipient. With regard to the ideation process, tools were also
introduced, to make sure everyone had a say and could bring their individual competences and
backgrounds to the table.
Most importantly phase-1 has focused on furthering our understanding, of how teams work in
efficient ways, and we’ve been given tools to help our understanding of how to deal with potential
conflict within teams, as well las tools for reflecting on what was done in good, bad, optimal or
non-optimal ways, and afterwards learn and improve with basis in the reflection.

2 / 53
2 External background analysis
In the external background analysis, the task is to get an understanding of the external
environment, that Dinex is facing, when designing the product. To get an overview of the external
environment, the team uses different analysing tools, to help get an understanding, of the
different outside areas, that influences the product.

2.1 SWOT-analysis
The team conducted a SWOT-analysis to get an overview of the group and the project. This
analysis shows both the internal and external factors that might have an impact on the project or
the team collaboration. Internal section shows strengths & weaknesses, the external shows
opportunities & threats. The threat section focuses on threats for the project, and functions to
prepare the team for these potentialities. The team used these threats to discuss what to do in the
scenario that they became real. The opportunities can be used to remind the team of what sources
they must use as help along the way when need be.

Figure 1: Screenshot of the conducted SWOT analysis.

The SWOT-analysis, Figure 1, about the team was conducted very early on in the EIT phase-1
process of the project, but at the time of writing the report, the above analysis still holds.

3 / 53
2.2 PESTEL analysis
The team conducted a PESTEL analysis to get an understanding of the external factors and more
generally the external environment facing Dinex. In the PESTEL analysis, the team tries to get an
understanding of what factors, opportunities, and threats, Dinex might be facing regarding
specific areas, such as political, technological, and environmental.

When using the PESTEL analysis method, the team found that recurring factors, such as
regulations regarding reducing emissions and development costs, are present factors across most
of the areas of the PESTEL analysis. The same can be said for the opportunities part of the analysis,
where the most frequent opportunity was to be the first mover and therefore, it could be possible
to patent the technology and sell leasing rights and have the opportunity to be the main
distribution source, of a valve that meets the requirements of the Euro-7 regulation.

The main threat that the team found during the analysis, is the fact that the motor industry is
slowly phasing out diesel engines, which means that in time the product will not be viable. The
other main threat is the cost, which includes both the production cost, and the
consumer/customer cost.

Using the PESTEL analysis, the team gained an understanding of the external factors that Dinex
are facing, which gives the team an idea of why the product is necessary, by the fact that emission
regulations are getting stricter.

The team decided to use the PESTEL variant of the basic PEST-analysis, to analyse the
environmental and legal areas, which the team deemed useful in the case given. Especially given
that the problem Dinex is trying to solve, is meeting the Euro-7 regulations. There could be made
an argument, of not analysing the socio-cultural area of the PESTEL analysis, and thereby leaving
it out of the analysis because the valve won’t have a direct effect on the consumer.

The following figure depicts the groups PESTEL analysis results:

Figure 2: Table-form depiction of the PESTEL analysis.

4 / 53
2.3 Market opportunity analysis
Conducting a market opportunity analysis will help the team to predict the potential success after
launching a product. Prior to starting the development of a new product, it is crucial to know,
what state the market is in, whether it be growing, stagnating, or diminishing, and from that
decide if it is worth investing money into the project.

During the research, the team discovered an annual worldwide tendency of increasing
investments in technology related to global emission reduction. From this, it can be concluded
that this is a safe market, and thus potentially profitable, to invest in, as if Dinex will capture a
certain market share, the currency equivalent will keep growing. Data on annual diesel
consumption also proves market potential. In 2019, world diesel consumption increased by 1.3%,
and throughout the period from 2015 to 2019 it kept increasing. According to recent studies, it is
expected to grow even more. However, due to the lack of information at the beginning of the
project, it was not possible to find more specific numbers regarding the potential market share,
or the market size of this kind of valve, because it remained unknown what the valve is going to
be used for, besides the fact that its purpose is to be implemented in diesel engines, which is not
enough to draw any conclusions.

One of the tools that has been used during the market opportunity analysis was the SDU library's
database. The database contains a plethora of information about thousands of both Danish and
non-Danish companies. Information that can be found there aids a in predicting the market
movement. Second, are the science journals, they were used in order to prove teams points and
get some additional information. The impact of the market analysis in the project was minimal.
This was mainly due to that team was assigned to work on a specific valve and cannot pivot from
this task, in case if there is no market opportunity for this product.

2.4 Role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The Expert in Team course focuses on correlating the themes with the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) that were put forward by the United Nations (UN) in 2015. To work towards a
sustainable future, these goals are important. Regarding the goals, the design of the product
appeals most to the 13th goal - limit the impact of global warming, and thus avoid irreparable
damage to the climate. Sustainable development must be ensured to combat climate change.
Climate change is caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases, which have led to
numerous restrictions on emissions from internal combustion engines. Diesel engines produce
the most harmful NOx emissions and understanding the reasons for this allows engineers to be
able to reduce NOx emissions sufficiently. Global Goal 11: Sustainable cities and local
communities are also appealed to this project, as reducing the emissions of polluting substances
is of great importance due to their impact on the air quality in the cities.

Other associated SDGs goals that go through: SDG 3, regarding “good health and well-being”,
ambient air pollution is responsible for many deaths each year and therefore must be reduced.
Therefore, the product must be developed and produced with the idea of reducing the health
effect of excess diesel NOx emissions. This also links to SDG 12, entitled “responsible consumption
and production.

5 / 53
2.5 Conclusion on the external background analysis
The external background analysis has the purpose of giving the team an understanding, of the
outside factors, market, and the environment, that influences the product the team has been
assigned to design. Through the SWOT analysis, the team gained an understanding of the threats
and opportunities, regarding both the team and the overall development of the product.

In the PESTEL analysis, the team further analysed the opportunities and threats, as well as the
factors that are of interest when developing this product. These points were analysed regarding
six different sub areas, to give an understanding of the overall environment.

In the market opportunity analysis, the team found sufficient evidence to conclude that the
market is safe to enter, by looking at tendencies of globally reducing the carbon footprint.

When looking at the role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the team found
correlation between the product and some of the goals from the SDGs. The goals that correlate
with our product, are mainly focused on lowering the impact of global warming, by reducing
emission of greenhouse gasses, but also reducing air pollution, which are a problem in major
cities, causing health risks.

6 / 53
3 Internal background analysis
The internal background analysis was made to get a complete understanding of the people and
organizations involved in the project. This gives valuable information about possible resources
the team might use in the project and the person or group that holds power over the project. This
person or group is the intended recipient, their intentions and goals for the project are some of
the most important things to keep in mind.

3.1 Strengths and weaknesses

From the SWOT analysis described in section 2.1, the strengths and weaknesses of the team are
taken as part of the internal background analysis. This will be considered in the challenge
analysis.

3.2 Role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s)

The project is directly tied to the SDG’s environmental focus such as climate action and
innovation. This is because the project is part of an aftertreatment system that aims to comply
with the European vehicle emission standards proposed in the Euro-7 restrictions.

The world is moving toward the hard task of transitioning to sustainable zero emission vehicles.
Though electric vehicles exist, it is still not the best solution for many, especially in heavy vehicles
and machinery. Dinex recognizes that these vehicles will still be generation emissions into the
foreseeable future and has therefore put their effort into limiting the amount of these emissions
that will go into the atmosphere.

The team will use this as a basis for the solution. The solution should not be manufactured in a
way that would not align with these goals.

3.3 Conclusion on the internal background analysis

The internal background analysis comes together so that the team now has an understanding of
the knowledge possessed, as well as what might come to challenge the project, from the SWOT-
analysis. The team understands what the intended recipient values and what motivations they
have. This is applied so that the final solution will align with what is wanted by them. The
sustainable development goals that the project follows are applied in the entire process of the
project, so that a solution that would support these goals, is not damaging it inadvertently.

The information gathered in the internal- and external background analysis is considered in the
challenge analysis.

7 / 53
4 Challenge analysis
For the challenge analysis, the team looked at the information that had been gathered from the
internal and external background analyses. This was done to ensure the challenge of the project
was properly understood and that the team had the necessary skills to solve it. The challenge
analysis highlighted the fact that the initially posed challenge should be looked upon critically, so
that the problem or possibility is met in the best way possible.

Though the intent of the challenge analysis was clear to the team, the given information from Jim
Elkjær Bebe, issuer of the challenge, had made it so that there were no clear holes in the challenge
that required analyzation or question. For this reason, part 1 of the questions of the challenge
analysis were answered without much trouble, and it was concluded that the given challenge
made sense. This made the questions of what to do if the challenge did not make sense obsolete,
though a case where that happened was explored by the team, allowing discussion and further
learning.

The ideation process, described later in the report, highlighted that although the question:

• Are we sure, that we understand the challenge the same way that the organization
does? As our intended recipient does?

Was considered and answered in the challenge analysis, the group had different understandings
about some of the deeper mechanics involved in the challenge. These mechanics were never
brought up during the challenge analysis. From this the team learned that the understanding of
the challenge had not been discussed at a deep enough level at that stage to answer the question
properly.

The team concluded that the tool could have helped the group come to a deep and complete
understanding of the challenge, that would have influenced the project, though that was
unfortunately not the case as described above. The team also agreed that the tool would have its
biggest effect on a challenge that has overlooked aspects requiring investigation. Especially if it
was determined that the challenge did not make sense.

8 / 53
5 Intended recipient
To determine the intended recipient and empathize with them, the team answered a series of
questions, allowing input and discussions from each member. From these questions, the team
initially identified Dinex the company as the intended recipient. From class discussions, this was
later specified as Jim Elkjær Bebe the contact from Dinex, and the issuer of the problem.

The team determined that many of the empathizing questions had been answered either in
previous discussions and information given about the project or from the presentation delivered
by Jim Elkjær Bebe about Dinex and the problem. A solution to the framework already given for
the project was determined to be the most valuable thing the group could provide for Jim Elkjær
Bebe. Though factors such as developing markets in China and India were interesting motivators
to explore, this would require more direct contact with Jim Elkjær Bebe, as well as a deep
understanding of not just the entire exhaust system but the company. The group, therefore,
concluded that these options were well outside the possibilities of the timeframe for the project.

Since much of the information gathered from the empathizing questions was already known by
the group prior to the analysis, the questions themselves did not provide much value to the
project. The team recognizes that had there not been answers to the questions, they would
provide value by ensuring the project provides value for the intended recipient. This applies even
though the intended recipient was initially determined to be Dinex, as the company and Jim
Elkjær Bebe could be interchanged regarding the way the team answered the questions about
motivation and value.

9 / 53
6 Team analysis
When working with a more complex project such as this, it is both important and advantageous
to analyse the team composition and dynamic. The reason for this is that a team analysis can
highlight each team member's individual skills, as well as what they feel they must bring to the
table. Furthermore, and importantly, it helps give an indication of who would be ideal for taking
charge of certain aspects of the project, purely from a skill and competence perspective.

The specific tools used for the team analysis are the Team contract, The competence triangle,
Collabrometer, and GAIT analysis, which will be described in following section.

6.1 Team contract

One of the first tasks the team did was to make a team contract to set the boundaries and
expectations for the collaborative group work that was to come along the timeline of the project.
The team contract is important to have in an early stage of a project as it ties every team member
to the expected responsibilities that the team in consultation agrees upon. The team contract
brings structure and a foundation to the project and team as it sets both guidelines for the work
structure with meetings, deadlines and chosen communication tools to ensure every task is done
in time and no task is left behind or neglected.

A well-made team contract is important as it can always be taken up along the way as the project
progresses if need be. The need could, for instance, be problems or conflicts amongst the team
members and because every team member seals the contract with their signature there is no
going about the rules and structure that the team agreed upon when making the contract. This
prohibits wasted time on certain problems and therefore the team chose to make the team
contract as early as possible and then it got updated later on as certain additions were seen to be
useful to include in the contract. The team has not yet had to make use of the contract in such a
direct way as the team members have been following the agreement of the contract so far.

6.2 The competence triangle

The competence triangle was a helpful tool for the team to easily get an overview of the different
skillsets and competencies of each member and their background and education. This is beneficial
knowledge as it quickly gives an idea of the expertise of every team member and that is helpful
when tasks are to be distributed throughout the project although it might be better for phase 2
as that focuses more on problem-solving and solution development whereas phase 1 has been a
more general phase about learning the team members, how to collaborate, knowledge about the
indented recipient and all the preparation necessary to gain a more efficient solution in the end.

10 / 53
 Figure 3: Table of contents of the competence triangle analysis.

6.3 The collaboration processes

The collaboration process was analysed internally to get a sense for the group’s collaborative
competences, goals, and team coordination. The team utilized two tools or analysing the
collaboration process, specifically the collabrometer and the Group Activity Impact Tool (GAIT).

6.3.1 Collaborameter
The collaborameter tool is a simple, but effective tool for the group to get an overview of how well
each individual group member think the groups is functioning. Furthermore, the individual
results can be averaged together and thus create a general overview of the entire group.

11 / 53
The collaborameter works by asking each individual group member a set of five main questions,
each with 5 sub-questions. The 5 main questions pertain to the following topics:

1. Goal (aims and direction for the teamwork)

2. Solutions - Problem solving
3. Management (team coordination and management of the teamwork)
4. Group meetings
5. Collaboration (social aspects)

As an example, the following spider-wed diagram depicts the group’s results from the first
analysis using the collaborameter:

Group total
1. Goal
25
20
15
2. Solutions -
5. 10 Problem
Collaboration 5 Solving
0

4. Group 3.
meetings Management

Figure 4. The group total from the first collaborameter analysis.

The collaborameter was deemed useful by the group, due to how it gives a general overview,
based on reflective questions, scored from 1-5, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
It was found to be interesting when looking at the individual group members results, as they
showed they viewpoint, but since the team also only consists of 6 members, the average total
score was interesting for getting an overview of the groups viewpoint. However, should a group
total, akin to Figure 4 above, be made for an even larger group, the analysis would not correctly
represent the groups viewpoints as general statistics would interfere with representability.

The consensus was that the collabrometer would be useful for future projects, but also a tool that
can be utilized multiple times during a project to see if a team’s viewpoint, or this groups, changes
with time. From this, and with basis in the results shown on Figure 4, it can clearly be seen that
the group is highly oriented towards the goal of the project, and thus the problem solving of said
problem. This is interesting in the early phases of a project, as it may hint at the project’s potential
for idea generation and qualification being both plentiful and of quality.

12 / 53
6.3.2 GAIT analysis
The GAIT analysis was started by the team but was not really used to its fully potential as the
group found it difficult to determine the weights of each task as it often is very individual how a
team member would rate the difficulty of the task and the time needed to complete the task. Some
tasks are also more time consuming compared to others and that could lead to members falling
behind on the final rating in the GAIT as other members could “earn” more points from
completing more tasks while one member is stuck with a longer task.

13 / 53
7 Solution space
The solution space defines contains all acceptable solutions. It is limited by what has been found
in the initial analyses. The challenge analysis determined that the given challenge made sense,
from that the solution space is limited to solutions that comply with the given requirements.
The internal background analysis determined that the solution space should be limited to
something that aligns with Jim Elkjær Bebe’s values and motivation.

The internal background analysis also showed that the team had many different competences,
that could all be useful for the solution. Therefore, knowledge is not a limiting factor for the
solution space. The external background analysis concluded that Dinex is a company well-
established in working and manufacturing these types of components, therefore this will not limit
the solution space.

14 / 53
8 Ideation
8.1 Ideation process
The ideation process is where the whole team generates ideas based on different points of view
that can solve the challenge. The selected tools in the ideation phase will be explained in the
following section, followed by a conclusion on what this tool brought to the project.

8.1.1 Empathizing
Before starting to work on a problem, an understanding of who needs the solution. Therefore,
empathy is the first stage in design creation because it permits to understanding of the customer
or user and their needs. A complete understanding ensures that the solution will be the right one.

The team has decided that empathizing was mainly useful for the intended recipient. This part
was completed during the analyzation of the intended recipient, therefore the team felt ready to
move on with the process.

8.1.2 Focus
The first step in the idea phase is Focus. Here the solution space is defined as a question, which
will act as the problem formulation. The problem formulation is defined, and it is ensured that
the entire group has the right focus on the problem. To ensure this, two tools were used: Creative
Focus and Examining Borders. Both tools helped generate new perspectives to solve the problem.

Through Creative Focus, the preferred formulation was formulated as; How can a valve be
designed to direct a gas flow in one of two directions? Thereafter, the most important keywords,
through Examining Borders, were underlined to provide a clear focus on the problem statement;
valve, redirect, gas flow, one of two directions.

The team felt that the tool was very useful for the idea generation because all team members had
agreed on a precise formulation of the problem that should be solved. The key words helped to
direct each member thinking with what would be included in a solution.

8.1.3 Generate - Brainstorm and brainwriting

With the agreed upon problem formulation, the team began generating ideas, to develop the best
solution, Brainstorm and Brainwriting 6-3-5 tools were used. These tools help to find as many
ideas as possible at the start so that you can later use other ideation techniques to sort out the
less good ones.

Below is a performed Brainstorm and Brainwriting 6-3-5 for different ideas for how a valve can
be designed to direct a gas flow in one or two directions.

15 / 53
 Figure 5: Brainstorm for valve design.

Figure 6: Brainwriting with basis in the 6-3-5 model for valve design.

The brainstorming allowed members to discuss ideas in an open forum, and improve on
suggestions from others, the ideas also helped inspire others with new ideas.

16 / 53
The 6-3-5 tool created many ideas because it forced each member to come up with ideas in a
limited time. This allowed more creativity and less time to critique one’s own ideas. The passing
around of the ideas also allowed for more inspiration and different evolutions of the same idea.

8.1.4 Sort - Summarizing and Idea Sieve

The brainstorming and brainwriting came up with a lot of ideas, and to end up with a final design,
sorting is required. With the team having a clearer view of the design's limitations as well as the
problems it faces, the sorting process could begin. The sorting was done with the Summarizing
tool. This tool consists of forming groupings of the same ideas, this allowed the team to find
overlapping ideas and remove the extras.

Afterward, the Idea Sieve tool was used, and the group decided to discuss each idea, and ask the
questions: Is this idea feasible? Is this idea useful? Were the answer to any of these questions “no”.
The idea was removed. The team liked using these tools in tandem, they helped make the
evaluation process, less overwhelming by removing a lot of ideas from the total pool.

The following Figure 7 shows the sorting process.

Figure 7: Sorting process

8.1.5 Evaluate
Finally, the sorted groups of ideas from the idea generation were evaluated. The Novelty
Attractiveness Feasibility (NAF) tool was used here. The reason for this tool was chosen is that it
is a simple method to evaluate the solutions to the challenge, where a score out of 10 should be
given from the 3 criteria: novelty, attractiveness, and feasibility. To create the most optimal score,
it was necessary to give each criterion a score from 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest) from each group
member, and together found the average of our scores.

17 / 53
The table of evaluation using NAF:

Figure 8: Evaluation with The Novelty Attractiveness Feasibility (NAF) tool

The tool concludes that idea 10, Open butterfly valve, is the best as it received a total score of 20,
leaving idea 1 in a second place, with a total score of 19, as depicted on Figure 8.

Figure 9: The two best criticized ideas

Since the two ideas are so close, the team considered moving forward with either idea, as they
may both be the final design. The team continues with this through phase-2. So, the NAF tool
provided a possible way to determine which idea to move forward with. The scoring was affected
by some bias, as some members might be better suited to answer the question than others, as
well as having personal favourites. It was also discussed if the novelty factor was an important
thing to include, as some ideas that are less novel might mean that they are more reliable. The
team will investigate what removing this factor means for the selected idea in phase-2.

18 / 53
The assessment tool was also attempted for the evaluation, though from the requirements the
team intended to apply to the solutions, all the solutions would get the same score. Therefore, the
team decided to use the NAF tool instead.

8.1.6 Conclusion ideation phase

An innovative process can be done in many ways, with many factors playing a role, making it
difficult to find the perfect recipe. Experts in Team Innovation toolbox has many good innovative
tools, but not all of them have been used in this report. This could affect our result on the ideation
process. The team could spend a little more time on research and gathering knowledge about the
subject, as this way the decisions could be made with theory in mind instead of more biased
thinking. Overall, with the above description of the idea, the first phase of the project can be
concluded. The team has defined a problem and generated an idea about whether the problem
can be answered.

19 / 53
9 Plan for phase 2
For phase 2, the team plans to go further with idea development, specifically with qualifying ideas
and developing them into potential solutions to the problem. During the ideation phase, multiple
potential ways to solve the problem formulated and given by the intended recipient were
generated, sieved through, developed, and at last evaluated.

The next step of the EIT project, and thus phase 2, is to adjust the idea concepts with the goal of
having them conform to, and preferably also satisfy, the given product requirements such as
lifespan/durability, the pressure it can withhold, pricing, etc. However, the most important factor
is to qualify the functionality of the idea concept. Once all technical aspects of the design are
fulfilled, and requirements satisfied by the remaining possible solutions, the business perspective
of the project will play a larger role.

Important elements such as risk analysis and business plan are crucial, if the product is
considered marketable, and successful, or not. From this, all the perceived risks must be defined
to know what must be avoided. Afterward, the marketing strategy and business model can be
established. Furthermore, the product is of course meant to be profitable for Dinex, otherwise it
will not make sense for Dinex to add it to their product portfolio.

20 / 53
Appendix 1 - Documentation and feedback for phase-1
presentation
Feedback from Group 1 for Group 5:

Notes for team 5:

- Great ideas
- Make only the top move, then solid bottom in Open butterfly?
- Good reflections on the ideation phase, that no choice have been made yet.
- Could you see the different study lines in the different ideas in the brainstorm?
- Did you consider skipping the “novelty” in the evaluation table. You could in
principle reverse it.
- Good that in your NAF that you all evaluated your solutions for your specific study
program (you could make sub-categories).

Feedback from the class:

• Modify our evaluation chart, to have the sub sections weighted according to the
importance of the sub section.
• Design of the valve.
• If we have considered that our valve, will be open on both sides when switching.
• If we have considered the disturbance in airflow, as a consequence of the pipe
design.

PowerPoint slides:
The following are the PowerPoint slides from the Phase-1 presentations, presented on the 12th of
October 2022:

21 / 53
EIT
PHASE 1 PRESENTATION

Theme 9 - Group 5

Frederik A.B. Ørnvang

Frederik J.H.B.B. Lunding
Nisrin J. El-Ahmad
Nikita Markevics
Thomas B. Molsted
Thomas M. Antonsen

1
 1 Ideation Step 1: Focus

OUTLINE 2 Ideation Step 2: Generate

3 Ideation Step 3: Sort
4 Ideation Step 4: Develop
5 Ideation Step 5: Evaluate

Number of slides: 18

2
DINEX: VALVE
DESIGN FOR
EXHAUST
TREATMENT
SYSTEM

3
IDEATION STEP 1: FOCUS

Tools:
Creative Focus & Examining Borders

Challenge:
How can a valve be designed to direct
a gas flow in one of two directions?

4
IDEATION STEP 2: GENERATE
BRAINSTORM & BRAINWRITING

5
 IDEATION STEP 3: SORT

Purpose: Limiting the amount of ideas to be considered.

Tools applied : Idea Sieve and Summarizing.

6
 SUMMARIZING

Relevant steps from the tool:

 Grouping
 Overlapping
 Elaboration

7
 IDEA SIEVE

Ideas were discussed one at a

Choice of criteria
time
Choose 1, 2 or 3 simple assessment
criteria that fit this specific task. Ideas not making fulfilling the
Examples: questions were removed
 - Is the idea feasible?
 - Is the idea useful?
 - Is the idea new?
 - Is the idea competitive?

8
 IDEAS
Idea 1. Piston rod Idea 2. Half circle

A piston rod moves up or down depending The half circle rotates 180° to
on which direction the exhaust gas should go. direct the exhaust gas.

9
 IDEAS

Idea 3. Ball valve Idea 4. Two-way plug

A two-way plug is pushed forward or
The ball rotates to direct the exhaust gas. retracted in order to direct the exhaust gas

10
 IDEAS

Idea 5. Seesaw plug.

An actuator pushes on the lever arm,

acting as a seesaw, this will open one
while the other closes.

11
 IDEAS
Idea 6. T-pipe butterfly valve. Idea 7. Door valve (Y-pipe).

The valve rotates on the corner on a T- The valve rotates on the corner on a
pipe to direct the exhaust flow. Y-pipe to direct the exhaust flow.

12
 IDEAS

Idea 9. Gate valve

A gate slides in to close of

one of the directions. One
of the areas has an open
section to enable the
functionality of the
mechanism.

13
 IDEAS
Idea 8. Door valve (T-pipe) Idea 10. Open butterfly valve.
Butterfly valve in an open section.

14
IDEATION STEP 4: DEVELOP

15
IDEATION STEP 5: EVALUATE
- IDEA ASSESSMENT TABLE Idea Novelty Attractiveness Feasibility Total score
1 8 6 5 19
2 5 3 4 12
3 2 5 6 13
 How novel is the idea?
4 6 4 3 13
 How attractive is this as a 5 8 3 4 15
solution?
6 4 4 5 13
 How feasibly is it to put this 7 1 5 6 12
into practice? 8 1 5 7 13
9 6 4 3 13
10 5 7 8 20

16
 EVALUATION

Open butterfly valve Piston rod

17
CONCLUSION

18
Appendix 2 - Documentation and feedback for phase-2
presentation
Feedback from Jim Elkjær Bebe (from Dinex)
The specific feedback received from Jim is as follows:

• Look at the steel 444.

• American market jumps into same regulation in 2027, expected lifespan till 2035.
• Bearings for the actuator stem.
• Consider welding some points.

PowerPoint slides:
The following are the PowerPoint slides from the Phase-2 presentations, presented on the 30th of
November 2022:

40 / 53
Valve Idea for Dinex -
Group 5
Members: Frederik Ø, Frederik J, Nisrin J,
Nikita M, Thomas A & Thomas M.
1
Contents
• Valve design and function
• Value of the design
• Manufacturing considerations
• Choice of actuation
• Increasing the value of the solution
• Technology for reducing emissions

2
The valve design
and function
• Butterfly valve
• Center rotation from actuator
• Approximately around 6 Nm

3
 Design value
Lip for at better seal
- Counters thermal expansion
Low angle bend
for best flow

Two halves are bolted

together for
Final design should manufacturing and
include gasket to serviceability
avoid leakage

One side of the door is

bigger to help keep the
valve closed 4
Cross-section-
view
• Rotating axel
• Contact surfaces
• Clamping surfaces
• Stainless bolts and washers

5
Material
• Gasket choice
- Copper = corrosion

- Multilayer, paper (composite) and aluminium.

• Surface finish – smooth

• Steel
- 316 (1-1,5 mm), acid redundant

- 304 cheaper, can give spot rusting

• Deep drawing – free stand

- To remove excess material 6
Actuator choice
and function
• Pneumatic vs Electric
• 24V vs 48V
• Electric actuator
• Linear vs Rotary
• Control System

7
 • We have chosen the idea from these points
• Novelty
• Attractiveness
How will we • Feasibility
• Validating the idea of the valve through
increase the calculations
• We will do a fatigue analysis
value of the • We will be calculating the effects of vibrations
solution • We will be calculating thermal expansion and its
effect
• Doing a financial analysis

8
Finances
Cost-Price Estimation
• Average machinery pricing
• Average raw material cost
• Labour/Testing

Absorption Costing – Target Selling Price

• Average number of units sold in industry
• Variable, overhead, administration cost

CVP Analysis
• Target units to break even

9
Reduce nitrogen oxides emissions

10
SCR technology and AdBlue

11
Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR)
12
Appendix 3 - Elaborations on changes in our understanding
Elaboration on changes in our understanding of various parts of the original phase-1 report
The following points are elaborations on changes we would make in regards to various parts of
the original phase-1 report, with basis in the feedback given for the original phase-1 report:

• Initially, the SWOT analysis was conducted only from the perspective of the team and not
the intended recipient – Dinex. If Dinex was included in the SWOT analysis, the team could
have got a better overview of the given problem, better defined the potential threats, and
potentially adjusted the scope of the project.
• The team had quite a lack of meta-reflections on the processes that were done within the
first phase of the project which led to potential misleading and misunderstanding of some
crucial aspects of the project.
• The intended recipient analysis could have been more elaborate and in-depth, which
would have helped the team to better understand the values and goals of the intended
recipient and assist with creating the solution that fits best with Dinex’s needs.
• It can be mentioned that the team had a feeling that the idea generation was going too
quickly. The team could have spent a few more days developing a better idea with more
background knowledge. The team did not have time for this, and therefore if the team
carries out such a project again, more focus will be placed on the ideation phase. This can
also be supported by the fact that the team did not fully use all the tools that were
available in the ideation phase. If this had been done, the team would have gained a better
understanding of the various tools as well as the limitations of the tools.

53 / 53