Designhandbook

Product Design Hand Book
JAYANTA KUMAR NATH

Professor
Mechanical Engineering Department
Institute of Technical Education and Research

SIKSHA O ANUSANDHAN UNIVERSITY
Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
Contents
Contents i
List of Tables vii
1 Overview of Engineering Design Process 1
2 Student Outcomes, Learning Levels, Grading Rubrics, Checkpoints and Design

Panels 2
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2 Student Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.3 Learning Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.4 Grading Rubrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.5 Checkpoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.6 Evaluation Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7 Students Outcomes Associated with Checkpoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.8 Internal Design Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.8.1 Policy for Internal Design Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.9 External Design Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.9.1 Policy for External Design Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3 Team Allocation, Problem Selection and Guide Selection by Internal Design

Panel 20
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Design Team Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3 Role and Responsibility of a Team Member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.4 Team Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.5 Team Charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4 Customer Needs Recognition 23

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.2 Task Distribution and Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
i
4.3 Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.4 Conducting Interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.5 Focus Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.6 Organizing and Prioritizing Customer Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.7 Problem Statement with Requirements and Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.8 Evaluation (Maximum marks: 20) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.8.1 Grading Rubric for Evaluation of Each Team Member . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.8.2 Evaluation of Team Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.8.3 Grading Rubric for Customer Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.8.4 Evaluation of Customer Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5 Function Decomposition 34
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.3 Function Tree by FAST Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.4 Function Tree by Subtract and Operate Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.5 Function Structure by Energy Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.6.3 Grading Rubric for Function Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.6.4 Evaluation of Function Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6 Product Teardown and Engineering Specifications 42

6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.3 Product Tear-down . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.4 Post-Teardown Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.5 Engineering Specication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.6.3 Grading Rubric for Product Teardown and Engineering Specication . . . . . 49
6.6.4 Evaluation of Product Teardown and Engineering Specication . . . . . . . . 50
7 Product Architecture 51
7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
ii
7.3 Modular Design: Basic Clustering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7.4.3 Grading Rubric for Product Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.4.4 Evaluation of Product Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
8 Concept Generation 58
8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
8.3 Brainstorming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.4 C-Sketch/6-3-5 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.5 Component Sketching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.6 Morphological Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.7 Assembly Sketching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.8 Concept Variants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.9.3 Grading Rubric for Concept Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.9.4 Evaluation of Concept Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
9 Concept Selection 67
9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
9.3 Technical Feasibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
9.4 Application of Knowledge of Mathematics, Science, and Engineering . . . . . . . . . 69
9.5 Using Pugh Chart as Decision Making Tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
9.6.3 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9.6.4 Evaluation of Student Outcome a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
9.6.5 Grading Rubric for Concept Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
9.6.6 Evaluation of Concept Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
9.6.7 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
9.6.8 Evaluation of Student Outcome E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
9.6.9 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
iii
9.6.10 Evaluation of Student Outcome I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
9.6.11 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
9.6.12 Evaluation of Student Outcome j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
10 Product Embodiment 82
10.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
10.3 Rening Geometry and Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
10.4 Systems Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
10.5.3 Grading Rubric for Product Embodiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
10.5.4 Evaluation of Product Embodiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
11 Product Metric Model 90

11.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
11.2.1 Model Selection by Performance Specications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
11.3 Constructing Product Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
11.4.3 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
11.4.4 Evaluation of Student Outcome A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
11.4.7 Grading Rubric for Product Metric Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
11.4.8 Evaluation of Product Metric Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
12 Design for Manufacture, Assembly and Environment 103

12.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
12.3 Design Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
12.4 Manufacturing Cost Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
12.5 Design for Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
iv
12.6.3 Grading Rubric for Design for Manufacturing, Assembly and Environment . . 110
12.6.4 Evaluation of Design for Manufacturing, Assembly and Environment . . . . . 111
12.6.5 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
12.6.6 Evaluation of Student Outcome F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
12.6.7 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
12.6.8 Evaluation of Student Outcome H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
12.6.9 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
12.6.10 Evaluation of Student Outcome I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
12.6.11 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
12.6.12 Evaluation of Student Outcome J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
13 Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions 119

13.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
13.3 Spreadsheet Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
13.4.3 Grading Rubric for Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions . . . . . . . . 125
13.4.4 Evaluation of Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
13.4.7 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
13.4.8 Evaluation of Student Outcome F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
13.4.9 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
13.4.10 Evaluation of Student Outcome K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
14 Physical Prototype 132

14.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
14.3 Mock-up Materials and Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
14.4 Prototype Planning and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
14.5.3 Grading Rubric for Physical Prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
14.5.4 Evaluation of Physical Prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
v
15 Prototype Testing and Improvement 140
15.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
15.3 Design of Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
15.4 Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
15.5 Product Cost and Bill of Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
15.6 Final Product Fabrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
15.7.3 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
15.7.4 Evaluation of Student Outcome B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
15.7.5 Grading Rubric for Testing and Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
15.7.6 Evaluation of Testing and Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
16 Final Report and Presentation 151

16.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
16.3 Guidelines for Final Project Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
16.4 Organization of the Project Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
16.4.1 General Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
16.5.1 Grading Rubric for Evaluation of Project Report (Student Outcome G) . . . 155
16.5.2 Evaluation of Project Report (Student Outcome G) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
16.5.3 Grading Rubric for Project Presentation (Student Outcome G) . . . . . . . . 157
16.5.4 Evaluation of Project Presentation (Student Outcome G) . . . . . . . . . . . 157
16.5.5 Evaluation of Final Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
vi
List of Tables
2.1 Student outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2.2 Blooms taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3 Grading rubric for student outcome a: An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, and engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4 Grading rubric for student outcome b: Graduates have the ability to design and
conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5 Grading Rubric for student outcome c: Graduates have the ability to design a system,
component, or process to meet desired needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.6 Grading rubric for student outcome d: An ability to function on multidisciplinary
teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.7 Grading rubric for student outcome e: An ability to identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.8 Grading rubric for student outcome f: An understanding of professional and ethical
responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.9 Grading rubric for student outcome g: An ability to communicate eectively . . . . 12
2.10 Grading rubric for student outcome h: The broad education necessary to understand
the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal
context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.11 Grading rubric for student outcome i: A recognition of the need for, and an ability
to engage in life-long learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.12 Grading rubric for student outcome j: A knowledge of contemporary issues . . . . . 14
2.13 Grading rubric for student outcome k: An ability to use the techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.14 List of checkpoints, their duration and marks allotted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.15 Evaluation schedule for each section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.16 Students outcomes to be assessed in checkpoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.17 Internal design panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.18 External design panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.1 Team allocation and problem selection for design team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.2 Team charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
vii
4.2 Questionnaire for the product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.3 Interview form for product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.4 Focus group form for product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.5 Rubric: Evaluation of each member of design team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.6 Contribution of member 1 as evaluated by other members of the team . . . . . . . . 29
4.12 Evaluation of team work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.13 Grading rubric for student outcome c: Customer needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.14 Evaluation of Customer Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

5.10 Grading rubric for student outcome c: Function decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.11 Evaluation of Function Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

6.10 Grading rubric for student outcome c: Graduates have the ability to design a system,
6.11 Evaluation of Product Teardown and Engineering Specication . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
viii
7.11 Evaluation of product architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

8.11 Evaluation of concept generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

9.10 Grading rubric for student outcome a: An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
9.11 Evaluation of student outcome A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
ix
9.13 Evaluation of concept selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
9.14 Grading rubric for student outcome e: An ability to identify, formulate, and solve
9.15 Evaluation of student outcome e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
9.16 Grading rubric for student outcome i: A recognition of the need for, and an ability
9.17 Evaluation of student outcome i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
9.18 Grading rubric for student outcome j: A knowledge of contemporary issues . . . . . 81
9.19 Evaluation of student outcome j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

10.10Grading rubric for student outcome c: Graduates have the ability to design a system,
10.11Evaluation of product embodiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

11.10Grading rubric for student outcome a: An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
11.11Evaluation of student outcome a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
11.12Grading rubric for student outcome e: An ability to identify, formulate, and solve
x
11.13Evaluation of student outcome e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
11.15Evaluation of product metric model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

12.11Evaluation of design for manufacturing, assembly and environment . . . . . . . . . . 111
12.12Grading rubric for student outcome f: An understanding of professional and ethical
responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
12.13Evaluation of student outcome f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
12.14Grading rubric for student outcome h: The broad education necessary to understand
the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal
context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
12.15Evaluation of student outcome h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
12.16Grading rubric for student outcome i: A recognition of the need for, and an ability
12.17Evaluation of student outcome i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
12.18Grading rubric for student outcome j: A knowledge of contemporary issues . . . . . 118
12.19Evaluation of student outcome j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

xi
13.11Evaluation of analytical and numerical model solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
13.12Grading rubric for student outcome e: An ability to identify, formulate, and solve
13.13Evaluation of student outcome e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
13.14Grading rubric for student outcome f: An understanding of professional and ethical
responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
13.15Evaluation of student outcome f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
13.16Grading rubric for student outcome k: An ability to use the techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
13.17Evaluation of student outcome k . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

14.11Evaluation of physical prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

15.10Grading rubric for student outcome b: Graduates have the ability to design and
conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
15.11Evaluation of student outcome b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
xii
15.13Evaluation of testing and improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

16.3 Evaluation of project report (student outcome g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
16.5 Evaluation of nal presentation (student outcome g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
16.6 Evaluation of nal product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
xiii
Chapter 1
Overview of Engineering Design

Process
All projects are mandated to be Design Problems. At the outset, the Head of the Department will
constitute two design panels, one internal design panel and one external design panel.
All Students are required to follow the Engineering Design Process as illustrated in the book
Product Design, by K N Otto and K L Wood, Pearson India. Students will be divided into
small design teams of each consisting of 6 students. Each team will be assigned a design problem.
Both the team formation and the design problem needs to be approved by the external design
panel. Each team will employ the engineering design process to design and fabricate a product.
Design teams will rst dene the problem for which they will perform customer needs analysis.
Then they will implement all the stages of engineering design, which includes function decompo-
sition, benchmarking, engineering specication, product architecture, generating concepts for each
module, synthesizing them to build concepts for product, selecting a concept from those many con-
cept variants, carrying out embodiment design, creating analytical and numerical models, solving
those models, fabricating preliminary physical prototype, designing and conducting experiments for
improvement, creating engineering drawings with bill of materials, and fabricating nal product.
A set of Checkpoints have been framed which will ensure timely progress of the design task along
with a proper implementation of the engineering design process. Grading rubrics will be used to
assess each checkpoint.
There will be biweekly evaluations for each design team. The internal design panel will evaluate
all checkpoints except the nal report. The external design panel will conduct nal evaluation
of the Product and the project report. Policies have been dened for internal design panel and
external design panel.
1
Chapter 2
Student Outcomes, Learning Levels,

Grading Rubrics, Checkpoints and
Design Panels
2.1 Introduction
This chapter provides general information about student outcomes associated with B.Tech pro-
gram of Mechanical Engineering. It also describes the Blooms taxonomy, grading rubrics used
for evaluation of the student outcomes, checkpoints set for the engineering design process and the
information about the design panels.
2.2 Student Outcomes
There are eleven student outcomes (ak) for the Mechanical Engineering B. Tech program. Table
2.1 lists these student outcomes.
2.3 Learning Levels
There are six levels of learning as dened in the Blooms Taxonomy. Blooms Taxonomy is a
multi-tiered model of classifying thinking according to the six cognitive levels of complexity. The
levels have often been depicted as a stairway, which encourages the students to climb to a higher
(level of) thought. The lowest three levels are: knowledge, comprehension, and application. The
highest three levels are: analysis, evaluation, and creation. The taxonomy is hierarchical, which
means, each level is subsumed by the higher levels. In other words, a student functioning at the
application level has also mastered the material at the knowledge and comprehension levels.
They are given in Table 2.2.
2
Table 2.1: Student outcomes
Outcome Description
a An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
b An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze
and interpret data
c An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired
needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental,
social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and
sustainability
d An ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
e An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
f An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
g An ability to communicate eectively
h The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering
solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context
i A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long
learning
j A knowledge of contemporary issues
k An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools
necessary for engineering practice
Table 2.2: Blooms taxonomy
Level Name Description

L-1 Knowledge Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge
from long-term memory
L-2 Comprehension Constructing meaning from oral, written, and graphic
messages through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying,
summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining
L-3 Application Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or
implementing
L-4 Analysis Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how
the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure
or purpose through dierentiating, organizing, and
attributing
L-5 Evaluation Making judgments based on criteria and standards through
checking and critiquing
L-6 Creation Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional
whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern or
structure through generating, planning, or producing
3
2.4 Grading Rubrics
Each student outcome will be assessed by using a grading rubric developed for that outcome.
The grading rubrics used for assessing the student outcomes are given in Tables 2.3 through 2.13.
Table 2.3: Grading rubric for student outcome a: An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, and engineering
Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Indicator Improvement - 1
1. Problem is Properly Translated in to Translated in to Insucient in
translated in to translated in mathematical mathematical forms mathematical
mathematical to forms but with but with major forms
form mathematical minor errors errors
forms
2. Execution of Appropriately Suciently Problem solved, but Tried to solve
knowledge of solved and got solved, but got got results with few steps
mathematics to correct results few incorrect major errors
get results results
3. Use of Relevant Scientic Scientic principles Uses very few
scientic/ scientic principles contain contain major error steps/ concepts
engineering principles minor error in scientic
principles correctly used principles
scientic/ solved solved resulting got results with few steps
engineering resulting expression, but major errors
principles to get expression and got few incorrect
results got correct results
results
4
Table 2.4: Grading rubric for student outcome b: Graduates have the ability to design and conduct
experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
Performance Exemplary - 4 Satisfactory - 3 Developing - 2 Needs

1. Clear Sucient Insucient Hardly
Designing understanding of understanding of understanding of understands the
Experi- theory, breaks theory, logical theory, logical theory and
ments into logical steps, breakdown and breakdown and idea logical break up.
nds an idea for idea for for experiment. Fabrication and
experiment. experiment. Fabrication and assembly
Properly Fabrication and assembly contain incomplete
fabricates the assembly contain major errors
components and one or two errors
creates assembly
of experimental
setup
2. Nicely puts One or two tools Many tools not in Can not put
Conducting measuring and not in place. Few place. Major errors measuring /
Experi- recording tools in error in in measurement. recording tools in
ments places. All measurements. Erroneous table place
measurements Repeats
proper. Repeats experiment. Few
experiment. errors in
Correct tabulation
tabulation of
data
3. Correct sample Correct sample Sample calculation Sample
Analyzing calculation. calculation. contains few errors. calculation
Data Draws relevant Minor error in Procedural error in erroneous. Can
graphs using graphs graphs not identify
statistical procedure for
procedures drawing graphs
(Point-wise
curve, straight
line curve,
smooth curve,
best t curve)
4. Inter- Nicely validates Validation Validation contains Validation and
preting experimental contains one or major procedural explanation of
Data results with two procedural errors. Explanation deviation
theory. Explains errors. of deviation between between
deviation of Suciently experiment and experiment and
experimental explains theory is insucient; theory are not
result from deviation of Accuracy assessment included
theory; Assesses experimental is poor
accuracy of the result from
results theory; Accuracy
assessment could
be better
5
Table 2.5: Grading Rubric for student outcome c: Graduates have the ability to design a system,
component, or process to meet desired needs

1. Need Collects Collects customer Customer needs Signicant
recognition customer needs needs data data collection amount of
and problem data; Identies suciently; lacking from some customer needs
denition needs as Identies needs sources; Identies data collection
requirements as requirements needs as lacking or
and constraints; and constraints; requirements and inadequate;
Prioritizes Prioritizes constraints; Requirements
customer needs; customer needs Prioritizes customer and constraints
Denes design with minor error; needs but better insuciently
problem Denes design tools exist; Design addressed; Design
completely problem problem denition problem
accordingly not proper denition
improper
2. Function Identies Identies primary Identies primary Product function
decomposition primary product product function; product function inappropriate;
and function function ; Does but better function Insucient
tree Decomposes to decomposition of exists; Does decomposition of
sub-functions product function; decomposition of product function;
hierarchically; Minor diculty product function; Attempts to
Creates in creating Major diculty in create functions
functions tree; functions tree; creating functions tree and function
Establishes Function tree; Function structure
function structure structure incomplete
structure incomplete
3. Product Lists design Lists design Lists design issues, Improper product
tear down and issues, issues, Diculty in specications
engineering Benchmarks by Benchmarks by Benchmarking,
specications function, Sets function, Product Product
up product specications specications
specications incomplete incomplete
(house of
quality method)
4. Product Groups similar Groups similar Modularisation has Insuciently
Architecture functions into functions into major errors modularised
modules using modules using
basic method basic method
with minor error
in few modules
6
5. Concept Generates two Generates two or Generates two or Generates only
generation or more ideas; more ideas; more ideas; one idea;
Generates two Generates two or Generates two or Generates two or
or more more concepts for more concepts for more concepts for
concepts for each idea; each idea; Sketches the idea but
each idea; Sketches each are imprecise for better concepts
Sketches each concept but with some concepts; exist; Sketches
concept that few procedural Sketches convey are vague and
adequately error meaningfully convey dierent
address the dierent objectives objectives
problem
6. Concept Two or more Two or more Two or more Only one solution
selection alternatives alternatives alternatives is presented and
considered; All considered; Each considered; evaluated;
evaluated is evaluated Evaluation criteria Improper
correctly based correctly based contains minor evaluation
on clearly somewhat on errors; Evaluation criteria used;
dened criteria imprecisely criteria do not Justication is
that adequately dened criteria address the problem vague
address the that partially well; Alternatives
problem; addresses the are not meaningfully
Justies the problem; Justies dierentiated;
choice the choice Justies the choice
adequately imprecisely but better
justication exists
7. Product Applies general Applies general Applies general Product
embodiment process of process of process of product embodiment
product product embodiment but it improper and
embodiment; embodiment; can be made better; signicant
Creates Creates Embodiment amount lacking;
embodiment embodiment checklist insucient; Embodiment
checklist; checklist; Systems modeling checklist
Performs Performs systems insucient improper; No or
systems modeling with partial systems
modeling minor error modeling
8. Product Selects model by Selects model by Performance Performance
metric model performance performance specications specications and
specications; specications; insuciently basic
Constructs basic Constructs basic included in the mathematical
mathematical mathematical model; Basic model are
model; model with one mathematical model improper;
Constructs or two minor contains few concep- Rened model is
rened model errors; Rened tual/procedural vague
that considers model contains errors; Rened
customer needs minor error model insuciently
upto check addresses design
model and problem
display
7
9. Design for Uses design Uses design Uses design Not properly uses
manufacture, guidelines, does guidelines, does guidelines, design guidelines,
assembly and manufacturing manufacturing incomplete insucient
environment cost analysis, cost analysis, manufacturing cost manufacturing
identies identies most of analysis, very few cost analysis and
environmental environmental environmental environmental
objectives objectives objectives identied objectives
(global, regional
and local
issues), designs
for less
environmental
impact
10. Analysis Analysis is Analysis is Analysis is Analysis contains
complete, suciently satisfactory but major conceptual
correct and complete and other more or procedural
consistent with correct but appropriate errors and
assumptions; contains 1 or 2 analytical tools exist incorrect
Assumptions are minor errors; for this problem; computations;
clearly stated Some minor Analysis contains Many
and methods assumptions are procedural errors; assumptions are
selected for omitted or One or more major omitted;
analysis are violated assumptions are Inappropriate
appropriate omitted or violated analytical tools
applied
11. Explores all Explores most Explores materials Insucient
Preliminary range of range of but many are left exploration of
Physical materials; materials; out; Many materials;
Prototype Explores Explores most prototyping Explores few
prototyping prototyping processes missing; prototyping
processes; processes; Better tools exist for processes; Not
Creates modules Creates modules modules creation proper modules
and does nal and does nal and nal
assembly assembly assembly
12. Testing Conducts Conducts Conducts specied Conducts
and specied tests, specied tests, tests, notes results, specied tests,
improvement notes results, notes results, compares with notes results,
compares with compares with theoretical value, improper
theoretical theoretical value, reanalysis done comparison with
value, does does reanalysis, erroneously, gets theoretical value,
reanalysis, gets gets criteria for incorrect criteria for reanalysis done
criteria for improvement, improvement, erroneously, gets
improvement, redesigns with redesigns with incorrect criteria
does redesign, minor error, signicant error, for improvement,
develops nal develops nal develops nal redesigns with
prototype prototype prototype signicant error,
accordingly develops nal
prototype
accordingly
8
Table 2.6: Grading rubric for student outcome d: An ability to function on multidisciplinary teams

1. Design review Design Review Design review Design Review
Participation documentation documentation documentation documentation
and shows fair and includes largely includes non- ideal contains
Contributions even distribution satisfactory task assignment ineective task
as a team of work between contributions assignment
member all team members from some/ all
team members
2. Shares Always does the Usually does the Rarely does the Always relies on
equally assigned work assigned work assigned work others to do the
without having to rarely needs often needs work
be reminded reminding reminding
3. Personal Acts as an active Acts as a leader Never takes Neither takes
conduct leader in major in a few activities initiative or leadership nor
(Knows when activities of the of the project and leadership but is a actively
to assume a project, and acts as an active good follower in all participates in
leadership role allows others to participant in all activities activities
and when to lead when other activities
let others to required
assume that
role)
4. Team Reaching Reaches Some places takes Poor in taking
decision conclusions based conclusion by decision based on decision, poor in
making upon clear analyzing only gut-feel rather than judging
through analysis of facts some of the facts facts and not alternative
Consensus and ideas, and and agrees to interested to analyze solutions
alters solutions so others point of and listen to others
that all can view point of view
support it.
9
Table 2.7: Grading rubric for student outcome e: An ability to identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems

1. Identify Highly procient Suciently Has diculty in Connot identify
Engineering at recognizing recognizes recognizing problems or their
Problem problems and problems and problems and source
linking them to links them to linking them to their (component,
their source their source source structure,
process)
2. Formulate Readily applies Suciently Has diculty in Neither can
Engineering principles and formulates formulating problem independently
Problem theories to dene problem statements and create a problem
a clear problem statements and linking theory to statement nor
statement and links theory to practice can link to
link theory to practice known theory
practice
3. Solve Adept at Suciently Has diculty Does not develop
Engineering generating generates generating and appropriate
Problem multiple potential potential implementing most solutions to
solutions, solutions, appropriate solution identied and
selecting most develops formulated
appropriate evaluation problems
solution based on criteria, and
well developed implements most
criteria, and appropriate
implementing solution
solution using
appropriate tools
and techniques
10
Table 2.8: Grading rubric for student outcome f: An understanding of professional and ethical
responsibility

1. An application A moderate A little knowledge of No knowledge of
Demonstrates of total knowledge of engineering ethics is ethics is applied
knowledge of knowledge of ethics is applied applied for arriving for an engineering
professional ethics in for engineering at an engineering solution
code of ethics solution of solution solution
engineering
problems
2. Ability to Understands Demonstrates fair No knowledge to No knowledge to
evaluate the the problem amount of analyze the ethical solve the ethical
ethical signicantly knowledge in dimensions for the dimensions of any
dimensions of and evaluates evaluating the solutions of the engineering
a problem in systematically ethical dimension problem problem
the discipline on the context of any
of ethical engineering
dimensions problems
3. Demonstrate an Demonstrates an Applies an ethical Does not
Demonstrate ethical practice ethical practice practice for arriving demonstrate any
ethical for a total for a solution of at a solution of an ethical practice
practices solution of the the engineering engineering problem in arriving at a
engineering problem solution of an
problem engineering
problem
4. Understands Understands the Understands the Does not
Consequence fully the consequence of consequence of understand the
of unethical consequence of unethical actions unethical consequence of
actions/ unethical ac- /behaviors and actions/behaviors unethical
behavior tions/behaviors tries to prevent but not concern for actions/behaviors
because of the failure its recurrence and its
engineering resurfacing in
failures and future
prevents its
occurrence
11
Table 2.9: Grading rubric for student outcome g: An ability to communicate eectively

1. Ability to Writing reports with Very little Improper Incomplete
communicate correct grammar and grammatical sentence report with
information, vocabulary which error in writing structure and improper
ideas, and expresses exact report in lack of proper sentence
concepts in meaning, clarity of addition to meaning of structure and no
written form test, table and gure clarity of test, sentence for clarity in test
table and gure writing report, table and gure
clarity of test,
table and gure
2. Ability to High uency with High uency of Moderate uency No uency in
communicate eective use of presentation of presentation presentation,
information, grammar and with little with many erroneous use of
ideas, and vocabulary during grammatical grammatical english
concepts in the presentation though error errors
form of oral PPT
presentation
(through PPT)
3. Ability to Data presentation in Understanding Understanding of No idea of
communicate appropriate graphs of data data presentation graphical
information, like line, bar, area, presentation but improper presentation
ideas, and etc., correct selection with correct selection of axis
concepts in the of axis range for data selection of axis range pattern,
form of with clarity in graph, range but style and weight
graphical proper selection of improper
presentation pattern, style and selection of
weight for better pattern, style
clarity and visibility and weight
12
Table 2.10: Grading rubric for student outcome h: The broad education necessary to understand
the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal context

1. Impact of Great ability Reasonable Did not gain much Less ability in
engineering in discussing ability in (average) the ability discussing impact
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in global context
global context global context in global context in global context
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in economic
economic economic in economic in economic context context
context context context
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in environmental
environmental environmental in environmental in environmental context
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in societal
societal context societal in societal in societal context context
context context
13
Table 2.11: Grading rubric for student outcome i: A recognition of the need for, and an ability to
engage in life-long learning

1. Able to Has inquiring mind, Has inquiring Has inquiring Used improper
indepen- self-directed, mind, mind, Many of the sources of
dently nd identied relevant self-directed; Most sources of information.
and use sources of of the sources of information Reference not
technical information. Used information lacking. Reference given or
and scientic correct data and identied and given for few partially given
information giving its reference used. Reference information
at appropriate place given at
appropriate place
2. Able to Knows what to seek Reasonable Did not have much Unable to
plan own and how to seek; knowledge of what knowledge of what identify what to
policy Has logical and to seek and how to to seek and how to seek and how to
independent thought seek; Has mostly seek; Less ability seek; No logical
logical and of logical and and independent
independent independent thought
thought thought
3. Able to Analyzes the Suciently Has diculty in Unable to Less
assess and learning plan, analyzes the analyzing learning ability of
monitor own assesses resulting learning plan, plan, assessing analyzing
policy outcomes, keeps assesses resulting resulting learning plan,
himself updated by outcomes, keeps outcomes, self assessing
periodically himself updated updation to resulting
consulting by periodically information not outcomes, no
information sources consulting regular self updation
information
sources
Table 2.12: Grading rubric for student outcome j: A knowledge of contemporary issues
Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - Needs

Indicator 2 Improvement - 1
Understand Fully understands the Good Marginally Does not
contemporary technological issues understanding understands understand the
technological issues in for example: of the the technological
the relevant eld overheating, district technological technological issues
through the case heating, thermal issues issues
studies accumulation
14
Table 2.13: Grading rubric for student outcome k: An ability to use the techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

1. Properly employs Suciently employs Has diculty in Unable to
Engineering techniques of techniques of employing understand
drawing orthographic orthographic techniques of relations between
(Manually projection and projection and orthographic views (front, top
or Solid- obtains views obtains views (front, projection and and side)
Wroks) (front, top and top and side) at obtaining views
side) at proper proper places (front, top and
places side) properly
2. Use of Able to create Suciently creates Has diculty in Insuciently
SolidWorks complete solid the solid model of creating the solid creates solid
model of required required complexity, model of required model,
complexity, make makes assembly of complexity, incomplete
assembly of parts, parts, generates 2D assembly of assembly, 2D
generate 2D drawing and parts parts, generating drawing and
drawing and parts list 2D drawing and parts list
list parts list
3. Use of Completely Suciently Has diculty in Vaguely
MATLAB understands understands understanding understands
expressions and expressions and expressions and expressions and
control structures, control structures, control control
creates script le, creates script le, structures, script structures,
creates function creates function le, le and function unable to identify
le, runs the runs the program, le are not clear, a script le and a
program, generates data le, data and gures function le, no
generates data le, plots gures, not clear, poor data les and
plots gures, analyzes and analysis and gure les, no
analyzes and interprets the results interpretation of analysis, no
interprets the results interpretation
results
4. Use of Does complete Suciently does Modeling and Inappropriate
SIMULINK modeling and modeling and simulation has modeling and
simulation, simulation, two or more simulation, vague
interprets results interprets results errors, faulty or no
interpretation interpretation
5. Use of Discretizes into Sucient Does Marginal
FEM elements, Uses discretization, local discretization but understanding of
shape functions, and global stiness it can be made discretization,
creates local and matrices contain one better, local and local and global
global stiness or two errors, global stiness stiness matrices
matrices, obtains obtains solution matrices contain are ambiguous,
solution using using boundary many errors, no solution
boundary conditions, employs Many errors in
conditions, post-processing solution
employs
post-processing
15
2.5 Checkpoints
The product design goes through a number of phases. Each phase is divided into a number of
steps. These steps must be properly executed and evaluated. Checkpoints are used as the point of
evaluation of those design steps. The checkpoints ensure a systematic and timely completion of the
design product. These stages are called here as checkpoints. The nal product will be demonstrated
by each team at the time of nal presentation. These checkpoints are shown in Table 2.14 and each
design team must pass through each checkpoint. The internal design panel will allot the number
of weeks required for each checkpoint.
Table 2.14: List of checkpoints, their duration and marks allotted
Checkpoint Number of Maximum

weeks marks
1 Customer Needs Recognition 20
2 Function Decomposition 20
3 Engineering Specication 20
4 Product Architecture 20
5 Concept Generation 20
6 Concept Selection 20
7 Product Embodiment 20
8 Product Metric Model 20
9 Design for Manufacture, Assembly and Environment 20
10 Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions 20
11 Physical Prototype 20
12 Testing and Improvement 20
13 Project Report, Presentation and Final Product 20
2.6 Evaluation Schedule
The checkpoints will be evaluated bi-weekly as specied in the evaluation schedule given in Table
2.15. Grading rubric will be used for every evaluation. The progress of each design team will be
assessed every second-week (bi-weekly). There will be two panels for evaluation of product design,
namely, an Internal Design Panel (IDP) and an External Design Panel (EDP), constituted by the
Head of the Department.
2.7 Students Outcomes Associated with Checkpoints
The appropriate student outcomes will be evaluated at appropriate checkpoints in the due course
of evaluation. They are given in Table 2.16.
16
Table 2.15: Evaluation schedule for each section
Sl. No. Section Evaluation Day Evaluation Time Room

1 Section A Monday
2 Section B Tuesday
3 Section C Wednesday
4 Section D Thursday
5 Section E Friday
6 Section F Saturday
Table 2.16: Students outcomes to be assessed in checkpoints
Student outcomes
Checkpoints A B C D E F G H I J K

1 Customer Needs Recognition

2 Function Decomposition

3 Engineering Specication

4 Product Architecture

5 Concept Generation

6 Concept Selection

7 Product Embodiment

8 Product Metric Model

9 Design for Manufacture, Assembly
and Environment

10 Analytical and Numerical Model
Solutions

11 Physical Prototype

12 Testing and Improvement

13 Project Report, Presentation and
Final Product
17
2.8 Internal Design Panel
The IDP will evaluate each checkpoint of the product design except the nal presentation which
will be evaluated by the EDP. The internal design panel is constituted by the Head of the Depart-
ment and is given in Table 2.17. It is mandatory for each faculty of the internal design panel to
have a thorough understanding of the engineering design process as illustrated in the book Product
Design by Otto and Wood in order to bring out the best judgement in assessing the design stages
and to give justice to each design team.
Table 2.17: Internal design panel
Sl. No. Name of faculty Designation

1 Coordinator
2 Member
3 Member
4 Member
5 Member
6 Member
7 Member
8 Member
9 Member
10 Member
2.8.1 Policy for Internal Design Panel
The Internal Design Panel has following duties and responsibilities.
1. The panel will choose the Projects and verify that the chosen projects are based on design
problems.
2. The panel will assess every second week the stages (identied here as Checkpoints) of the
design process. They will go through the project report of each design team, assess the
report and will provide appropriate remarks/suggestions in the report, which the design
team will include in the report to improve that part and will then write the next part that
os due for the next assessment.
3. Each Checkpoint will be assessed by using the grading rubric.
4. The Panel will generate Evaluation Report for each bi-weekly assessment, will keep the
report with him, and will submit a copy of this report to the Head of the Department,
within two days of completion of the assessment week.
5. It is mandatory for each faculty of the design panel to go through the book Product
Design by Otto and Wood, Pearson Education Publisher.
18
2.9 External Design Panel
The External Design Panel, constituted by the Head of the Department, will consist of Faculty
from prominent national Institutes. The external design panel is constituted of following faculty as
given in Table 2.18. The panel has expertise in the areas of design, manufacturing and thermo-uids.
This panel is formed by the Head of the Department within the rst week of the commencement
of the project.
Table 2.18: External design panel
Sl. No. Name of faculty College / Institute Designation

1 Coordinator
2 Member
3 Member
4 Member
5 Member
6 Member
7 Member
8 Member
2.9.1 Policy for External Design Panel
The External Design Panel shall be responsible for the following.
1. All Projects and Project Teams are to be approved by the External Design Panel.
2. The nal Thesis and Presentations will be graded by the External Design Panel. The
grading shall be done using grading rubrics.
19
Chapter 3
Team Allocation, Problem Selection

and Guide Selection by Internal
Design Panel
3.1 Introduction
Students in a Section will be divided into a number of design teams, which will be formed by the
Internal Design Panel. The panel will attach a faculty to each team, who will be the project guide
for that team. The team will choose a team leader for one checkpoint, the next checkpoint will be
assessed with another team leader. This means, each team member will perform as a team leader
in course of rotation. Each one in the team must understand the role of a team member and the
role of the team towards the achievement of the team goal.
3.2 Design Team Selection
At the outset the internal design panel (IDP) will divide students into small teams, specify or
approve the design problem and will allot a guide for each team. This is given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Team allocation and problem selection for design team
Design Problem
Member 1:
Member 2:
Member 3:
Member 4:
Member 5:
Member 6:
Project guide (If Any) Signature of IDP with Date
20
3.3 Role and Responsibility of a Team Member
1. Take responsibility for the success of the team. Without this commitment, you should not
be in the team.
2. Always deliver on commitments since your membership to the team is worthwhile.
3. Carry out and complete the task given to you. If due to any reason you can not complete
a task, always inform to the team leader as soon as possible so that other arrangements
can be made.
4. Give full attention to whoever is speaking during team discussions, demonstrate this by
asking helpful questions. Never do distracting things like reading unrelated material, using
your mobile phone, walking around, etc. during team work.
5. Always speak in a loud, clear voice. Always have a positive message.
6. Respect opinion of others. If you do not agree, say it politely.
7. Do not impose your decision on the team, always take decisions by consensus.
8. Learn to give and receive useful feedback. Derive benet from the collective knowledge
and experience of the team.
3.4 Team Dynamics
1. Orientation: You are new to the team. Meet all members, do tentative interactions,
acquire and exchange information with them.
2. Dissatisfaction: Dierences in personalities, working style, learning style, time available

to meet, etc., appear. Overcome them by accepting and respecting individual freedom.
3. Resolution: Establish group norms, especially, in writing to guide the design process, to
resolve conicts and to focus on team goals.
4. Termination: After you complete the design task, discuss among yourselves how your team
accomplished the task and how was the functioning of your team.
3.5 Team Charter
The team will create a Team Charter (format as given in Table 3.2), agree to it by putting their
signatures. This document will be attached as an Appendix in the Project Report.
21
Table 3.2: Team charter
Team Charter of Team Number of Section

Our Objectives (Dene the purpose and mission of your team)
We Are Involved (Name and Registration Number of Team Members)

Member 1:
Member 2:
Member 3:
Member 4:
Member 5:
Member 6:
Our Project Guide (Do not attach Dr. or Mr. or Mrs, etc)
Name of Guide:
Designation: (Write the name and designation in full)
Our Goals (Dene how you will know that your goal has been achieved)
Declaration: We, the members of the Design Team , Section , Department

, ITER, Siksha O Anusandhan University, hereby declare that we have created our
own Team Charter, understood it, and agree to abide by it.
Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
22
Chapter 4
Customer Needs Recognition
4.1 Introduction
Each design team will collect customer requirements using various techniques, like, Question-
naire, Conducting Interview, Focus Group Discussion, and Be a Customer. They will place similar
requirements into groups to get numbers of unique requirements. They will also identify needs and
constraints. The nal outcome will be a prioritized needs list, as described in Chapter 4 of Product
Design by Otto and Wood.
4.2 Task Distribution and Monitoring
Choose your team leader for this stage. Prepare a table of what to do for this stage in consultation
with your Guide. List the tasks. Then divide these tasks among the members. Set timeline for
each member that he/she will take to accomplish the task. Periodically self-monitor your progress.
If you face any major diculty in accomplishing your task, do inform your team leader in time.
The team leader will take a decision for it, so that the team progress is not hindered. Complete
the Table 4.1 and submit.
23
Table 4.1: Work done by each team member
Work Done by Each Member of Team Number of Section

Team Leader (Write Name and Registration Number)
Tasks to be performed Task Assigned To Assigned Date Completed on

Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:
Task completed with alternative arrangement
Task Number Originally Assigned To Reason for Noncompletion Who completed it
Signature of Team Members

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
24
4.3 Questionnaire
Prepare questions relating to product criteria. Sit together, discuss all these questions, choose,
modify, and prepare the nal questionnaire. The questionnaire should contain at least 15 and
a maximum of 20 questions. Circulate this questionnaire to at least 15 customers by email or
physically, and collects their response. Use the format as given in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Questionnaire for the product
Qn. Description
No.
1 Question
4 Choices
2 Question
4 Choices
3 Question
4 Choices
4 Question
4 Choices
5 Question
4 Choices
6 Question
4 Choices
7 Question
4 Choices
8 Question
4 Choices
9 Question
4 Choices
10 Question
4 Choices
25
4.4 Conducting Interview
Conduct one interview per team member at the place where the customer uses the product. A
about likes, dislikes and suggestions for future improvement. Fill out column 2 of the interview
form. Submit the interview form as given in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Interview form for product
Customer Name: Interviewer:

Address: Date:
Question Customer Statement Interpreted need Importance
Typical uses
LIKES
DISLIKES
Suggested
improvement
26
4.5 Focus Group
Arrange a group of customers and moderate a discussion. Submit the customer requirements by
lling up the Table 4.4.
Table 4.4: Focus group form for product
Customer Name: Interviewer:

Address: Date:
Question Customer Statement Interpreted need Importance
Typical uses
LIKES
DISLIKES
Suggested
improvement
27
4.6 Organizing and Prioritizing Customer Needs
Use anity diagram. Determine need importance. Prepare and submit customer needs docu-
mentation. Create and submit tables similar to Tables 4.12, 4.14 of product design book. From
this list, determine what can be requirements and what can be constraints from designer point of
view.
4.7 Problem Statement with Requirements and Constraints
Dene your design problem clearly by stating the requirements and constraints for your product.
4.8 Evaluation (Maximum marks: 20)

4.8.1 Grading Rubric for Evaluation of Each Team Member
The performance of each member of a design team will be evaluated by using the grading rubric
as given in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5: Rubric: Evaluation of each member of design team

Task Even Slight imbalance Major No task
assigned distribution of in task imbalance in distribution
task distribution task distribution
Task All assigned Most assigned Few assigned No task carried
carried out task carried out task carried out task carried out out in time
in time in time in time in time
Regularly Always in touch Mostly in touch Rarely in touch Never in touch
in touch with team with team with team with team
with team leader leader leader leader
leader
His con- 100% More than 60% Between 40 to Less than 40%
tribution to contribution contribution 60% contribution
the team as contribution
evaluated
by other
team
members
Use following Table to evaluate this criterion (Table 4.6 4.11 )
28
Table 4.6: Contribution of member 1 as evaluated by other members of the team
List of Evaluated Evaluated Evaluated Evaluated Evaluated Final

contributions by other by other by other by other by other score
member member member member member
1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
List of contribu- Evaluated Evaluated Evaluated Evaluated Evaluated Final

tions by other by other by other by other by other score
1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
29

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
30
4.8.2 Evaluation of Team Work
The internal design panel will evaluate each student in the time and schedule as stated in Chapter
2 using the evaluation format as given in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12: Evaluation of team work
Team No: of Section: -

Registration No. of Rubric marks obtained
Performance Indicator
Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time
Regularly in touch with

team leader
His contribution to the

team as evaluated by
other team members
31
4.8.3 Grading Rubric for Customer Needs
The grading rubric for customer needs evaluation is given in Table 4.13
Table 4.13: Grading rubric for student outcome c: Customer needs

1. Need Collects Collects customer Customer needs Signicant
recognition customer needs data data collection amount of
and needs data; suciently; lacking from some customer needs
problem Identies Identies needs sources; Identies data collection
denition needs as as requirements needs as lacking or
requirements and constraints; requirements and inadequate;
and Prioritizes constraints; Requirements
constraints; customer needs Prioritizes customer and constraints
Prioritizes with minor error; needs but better insuciently
customer Denes design tools exist; Design addressed; Design
needs; Denes problem problem denition problem
design accordingly not proper denition
problem improper
completely
4.8.4 Evaluation of Customer Needs
The evaluation of customer needs will be done by internal design panel using Table 4.14.
32
Table 4.14: Evaluation of Customer Needs

Student 4 3 2 1
Questionnaire
Conducting interview
Focus group
Grouping needs:
Anity diagram
Prioritized needs list

with requirements and
constraints
Problem denition with

requirements and
constraints
33
Chapter 5
Function Decomposition
5.1 Introduction
After we know what the customer wants from a product, we develop a model of how a product
should function. It is needed to clarify and design the product architecture. Functionally all
products do something. Products accept inputs and operate to produce outputs. The output is
the desired performance. We can model any product, assembly, sub-assembly, or component as a
system, with inputs and outputs that traverse a system boundary. The essence of such a model
is the need-function-form denition of engineering design, where our focus is on translating the
customer needs for a product to the product functions.
34


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
35
5.3 Function Tree by FAST Method
Create FAST diagram, similar to the Figure 5.5 in Product Design book.
5.4 Function Tree by Subtract and Operate Procedure
Create function tree by employing Subtract and Operate procedure. Create Table 5.1 and Figure
5.6 of Product Design book.
5.5 Function Structure by Energy Diagram
Create function structure through activity diagrams, task listing, rened function structure and
assemblying by producing Figures 5.10, 5.11, and 5.12. Generate function hierarchy as in Figure
5.16 of Product Design book.


leader
evaluated
by other
team
members
36

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
37

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
38

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
39
5.6.3 Grading Rubric for Function Decomposition
The grading rubric for function decomposition is shown in Table 5.10.
Table 5.10: Grading rubric for student outcome c: Function decomposition

Function de- Identies Identies primary Identies primary Product function
composition primary product function; product function inappropriate;
and function product Does but better function Insucient
tree function; decomposition of exists; Does decomposition of
Decomposes to product function; decomposition of product function;
sub-functions Minor diculty product function; Attempts to
hierarchically; in creating Major diculty in create functions
Creates functions tree; creating functions tree and function
functions tree; Function tree; Function structure
Establishes structure structure incomplete
function incomplete
structure
5.6.4 Evaluation of Function Decomposition
The evaluation of function decomposition will be done by internal design panel using Table 5.11.
40
Table 5.11: Evaluation of Function Decomposition

Student 4 3 2 1
Identifying primary
product function
Identifying
sub-functions by FAST
method
Creating function tree

by FAST method
Identifying
sub-functions by SOP
method
Creating function tree

by SOP method
Establishing function
structure by energy
diagrams
41
Chapter 6
Product Teardown and Engineering

Specifications
6.1 Introduction
To benchmark a product against the competition, product tear down is required. The current
version must be analyzed and this analysis must be transformed into information that can be used
as a part of the new redesign. After teardown is completed, engineering specication is created for
the product.
42


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
43
6.3 Product Tear-down
Perform product tear-down. Do the following.
1. Create Table 6.2 of the book by applying subtract and operate procedure.
2. Create Figure 6.13 of the book by using force ow diagrams.
3. Use measurement method and create Figure 6.17, Table 6.4, Figure 6.18, Table 6.5, Figure
6.19.
6.4 Post-Teardown Reporting
Summarize the results of teardown activities into some key documents. Obtain the following.
1. Create a document of disassembly plan. Create table as in the Figure 6.20.
2. Create a document of bill of materials. Create table as in the Figure 6.21.
6.5 Engineering Specification
1. Employ benchmarking process.
2. Apply basic method of Specication Sheets. Create Tables 7.3 and 7.4.
2. Apply basic method of House of Quality. Create Figure 7.13.

44

leader
evaluated
by other
team
members

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
45

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
46

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
47

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
48
6.6.3 Grading Rubric for Product Teardown and Engineering Specification
The Table 6.10 gives the grading rubric for evaluation of product teardown and engineering
specication.
Table 6.10: Grading rubric for student outcome c: Graduates have the ability to design a system,

Product Lists design Lists design Lists design issues, Improper product
tear down issues, issues, Diculty in specications
and engi- Benchmarks Benchmarks by Benchmarking,
neering by function, function, Product Product
specica- Sets up specications specications
tions product incomplete incomplete
specications
(house of
quality
method)
49
6.6.4 Evaluation of Product Teardown and Engineering Specification
The internal design panel will evaluate the product teardown and engineering specication using
Table 6.11.
Table 6.11: Evaluation of Product Teardown and Engineering Specication

Student 4 3 2 1
Lists design issues
Does benchmarking
Prepares specication
sheet
Employs house of
quality
50
Chapter 7
Product Architecture
7.1 Introduction
It is the stage where we begin to take key decisions on how the product will physically operate.
It starts the creation of eective layouts of components and subsystems.
51


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
52
7.3 Modular Design: Basic Clustering
The goal is to translate customer needs into rough layout of a product. Follow the following
steps.
1. From the function structure created earlier, group the subfunctions into chunks which will
serve as modules or assemblies for the product. Create Figure 9.12.
2. Create a rough geometric layout as given in Figure 9.14 by using component hierarchy as
given in Figure 9.13.
3. Dene interactions and detail performance characteristics.


leader
evaluated
by other
team
members
53

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
54

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
55

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
56
7.4.3 Grading Rubric for Product Architecture
The grading rubric for product architecture is given in Table 7.10.

Product Groups similar Groups similar Modularisation has Insuciently
Architec- functions into functions into major errors modularised
ture modules using modules using
basic method basic method
with minor error
in few modules
7.4.4 Evaluation of Product Architecture
Internal design panel will evaluate the product architecture using Table 7.11.
Table 7.11: Evaluation of product architecture

Student 4 3 2 1
Forms modules of the

product
Creates rough
geometric layout of the
product
57
Chapter 8
Concept Generation
8.1 Introduction
This stage provides a forum for designers to apply creativity and contribute their personal air.
It also represents the time when technology is chosen or developed to full the customer needs.
Employ dierent techniques as listed below to generate various concepts for your product.
58


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
59
8.3 Brainstorming
1. Create Figure 10.5 by employing brainstorming.
2. Create Figure 10.6 by employing mind mapping.
8.4 C-Sketch/6-3-5 Method
1. Create Table 10.1.
3. Create Figure 10.7 and 10.8.
4. Create Table 10.3 for idea generators.
8.5 Component Sketching
Generate at least three sketches for each component by naming each sketch a gure.
8.6 Morphological Analysis
1. Assemble the alternative architectural layouts to get overall alternatives by employing

morphological analysis. Create Tables 10.12 and 10.13.
8.7 Assembly Sketching
Generate sketches of all possible assemblies by combining all the component sketches one by one
by naming each sketch a gure.
8.8 Concept Variants
1. Create concept variants while disregarding combined solutions that have intrinsic incom-
patibilities.
2. Create Table 10.14 which is detailed in Table 10.15 and 10.16.
3. Create concept variants as shown in Figures 10.22, 10.23, 10.24, 10.25, 10.26 till all variants
are sketched.

60

leader
evaluated
by other
team
members

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
61

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
62

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
63

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
64
8.9.3 Grading Rubric for Concept Generation
The grading rubric for concept generation is given in Table 8.10.

Concept Generates two Generates two or Generates two or Generates only
generation or more ideas; more ideas; more ideas; one idea;
Generates two Generates two or Generates two or Generates two or
or more more concepts for more concepts for more concepts for
concepts for each idea; each idea; Sketches the idea but
each idea; Sketches each are imprecise for better concepts
Sketches each concept but with some concepts; exist; Sketches
concept that few procedural Sketches convey are vague and
adequately error meaningfully convey dierent
address the dierent objectives objectives
problem
65
8.9.4 Evaluation of Concept Generation
The evaluation of concept generation will be done by internal design panel using Table 8.11.
Table 8.11: Evaluation of concept generation

Student 4 3 2 1
Employs brainstorming
to generate at least
three ideas for each
component
Employs
C-Sketch/6-3-5 Method
to generate at least
three sketches for each
component
Carries out
morphological analysis
Generates sketches for

all possible assemblies
Generates concept
variants by
disregarding
incompatibility of
components
66
Chapter 9
Concept Selection
9.1 Introduction
Each concept variant developed earlier must be evaluated, compared and one feasible concept
must be chosen. The order of magnitude estimation should be employed to determine the technical
feasibility of a product concept. Then, to select a concept among the concepts that pass the order
of magnitude analysis, a more rened decision making analysis must be applied. A basic method
intended for this is called Pugh chart.
67


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
68
9.3 Technical Feasibility
1. Estimate technical feasibility of each concept variant by employing the 4 steps of imagine,
model, compare and judge.
9.4 Application of Knowledge of Mathematics, Science, and Engineering
1. Apply the knowledge of mathematics to evaluate the concepts.
2. Apply the knowledge of science to evaluate the concepts.
3. Apply the knowledge of engineering to evaluate the concepts.
9.5 Using Pugh Chart as Decision Making Tool
1. Create Tables 11.2, 11.3 and 11.4.


leader
evaluated
by other
team
members
69

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
70

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
71

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
72
9.6.3 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome A
The grading rubric for student outcome A to be assessed in concept selection is given in Ta-
ble 9.10.

forms
get results results
scientic/ solved solved resulting got results with few steps
engineering resulting expression, but major errors
principles to get expression and got few incorrect
results got correct results
results
73
9.6.4 Evaluation of Student Outcome a
The evaluation of student outcome A will be done by internal design panel using Table 9.11.
Table 9.11: Evaluation of student outcome A

Student 4 3 2 1
Problem is translated
in to mathematical
form
Execution of knowledge
of mathematics to get
results
Use of scientic/
engineering principles
Execution of scientic/
engineering principles
to get results
74
9.6.5 Grading Rubric for Concept Selection
The grading rubric for concept selection is given in Table 9.12.

Concept Two or more Two or more Two or more Only one solution
selection alternatives alternatives alternatives is presented and
considered; All considered; Each considered; evaluated;
evaluated is evaluated Evaluation criteria Improper
correctly correctly based contains minor evaluation
based on somewhat on errors; Evaluation criteria used;
clearly dened imprecisely criteria do not Justication is
criteria that dened criteria address the problem vague
adequately that partially well; Alternatives
address the addresses the are not meaningfully
problem; problem; Justies dierentiated;
Justies the the choice Justies the choice
choice imprecisely but better
adequately justication exists
75
9.6.6 Evaluation of Concept Selection
The evaluation of concept selection will be done by internal design panel using Table 9.13.
Table 9.13: Evaluation of concept selection

Student 4 3 2 1
Estimates technical
feasibility of each
concept variant
Uses Pugh chart as

decision making tool
76
9.6.7 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome E
The grading rubric for student outcome E to be assessed in concept selection is given in Table 9.14.

process)
practice
3. Solve Adept at Suciently Has diculty Does not develop
Engineering generating generates generating and appropriate
Problem multiple potential potential implementing most solutions to
solutions, solutions, appropriate solution identied and
selecting most develops formulated
appropriate evaluation problems
solution based on criteria, and
well developed implements most
criteria, and appropriate
implementing solution
solution using
appropriate tools
and techniques
77
9.6.8 Evaluation of Student Outcome E
The evaluation of student outcome E will be done by internal design panel using Table 9.15.
Table 9.15: Evaluation of student outcome e

Student 4 3 2 1
Identify Engineering
Problem
Formulate Engineering
Problem
Solve Engineering
Problem
78
9.6.9 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome I
The grading rubric for student outcome I to be assessed in concept selection is given in Table 9.16.

appropriate place
thought thought
information
sources
79
9.6.10 Evaluation of Student Outcome I
The evaluation of student outcome I will be done by internal design panel using Table 9.17.
Table 9.17: Evaluation of student outcome i

Student 4 3 2 1
Able to independently
nd and use technical
and scientic
information
Able to plan own policy
Able to assess and

monitor own policy
80
9.6.11 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome J
The grading rubric for student outcome J to be assessed in concept selection is given in Table 9.18.

9.6.12 Evaluation of Student Outcome j
The evaluation of student outcome J will be done by internal design panel using Table 9.19.
Table 9.19: Evaluation of student outcome j

Student 4 3 2 1
Understand
contemporary
technological issues in
the relevant eld
through the case
studies
81
Chapter 10
Product Embodiment
10.1 Introduction
This stage aims to transform product concepts and architectures into realized systems. These
systems must satisfy customer needs, be robust with respect to all environmental and user condi-
tions, and be designed to reduce the likelihood of failure.
82


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
83
10.3 Refining Geometry and Layout
In embodiment design we provide form to the selected concept. It moves the design process
iteratively towards a denitive form that includes geometric layout, material composition, quality
and manufacturability issues, and economics.
1. Create Figure 12.6.
2. Create embodiment checklist as given in Table 12.1.
3. Create embodied designs as given in Figures 12.7 and 12.8.
10.4 Systems Modeling
1. Perform systems modeling by identifying governing physical principles and associated mod-
eling assumptions for each component.
2. Create a balance relationship for the high-level physical model.
3. Convert balance relationships into a set of mathematical equations.
4. Apply mechanical embodiment principles.
5. Apply FMEA method for systems modeling.
6. Create gures similar to Figures 12.20, 12.21, 12.22, 12.23, 12.24, 12.25, 12.26, 12.27,
12.28, 12.29, 12.30, 12.31, 12.32, 12.33, and 12.34.
7. Create tables similar to Tables 12.6, 12.7, 12.8, 12.9, and 12.10.
84

leader
evaluated
by other
team
members

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
85

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
86

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
87

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
88
10.5.3 Grading Rubric for Product Embodiment
The grading rubric for product embodiment is given in Table 10.10.

Product Applies Applies general Applies general Product
embodi- general process of process of product embodiment
ment process of product embodiment but it improper and
product embodiment; can be made better; signicant
embodiment; Creates Embodiment amount lacking;
Creates embodiment checklist insucient; Embodiment
embodiment checklist; Systems modeling checklist
checklist; Performs systems insucient improper; No or
Performs modeling with partial systems
systems minor error modeling
modeling
10.5.4 Evaluation of Product Embodiment
The evaluation of product embodiment will be done by internal design panel using Table 10.11.
Table 10.11: Evaluation of product embodiment

Student 4 3 2 1
Renes geometry and

layout
Performs systems
modeling
89
Chapter 11
Product Metric Model
11.1 Introduction
Developing product models allow us to have and use special tools as engineers and designers.
Insights into mathematics and science have to be brought forward. We seek to understand how a
product will perform under all circumstances and operating conditions.
90


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
91
11.2.1 Model Selection by Performance Specifications
1. Map or relate the customer need weights to the product functions.
2. Identify the functions that relate most strongly to the customer needs.
3. Choose the metrics that may be used to quantify the materials, energy, or signal ows for
these functions.
4. Identify target values for these metrics based on benchmarking results.
5. Create Figure 13.2 and Table 13.1.
11.3 Constructing Product Models
1. Identify a ow for the informal eect.
2. Identify a balance relationship for the ow.
3. Identify a boundary for the balance relationship.
4. Formulate an equation for the balance relationship.
5. Use the resulting model to explore design conguration options.
6. Create gures similar to Figures 13.5, 13.613.13.
92

leader
evaluated
by other
team
members

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
93

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
94

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
95

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
96
11.4.3 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome A
The grading rubric for student outcome A to be assessed in concept selection is given in Ta-
ble 11.10.

forms
get results results
97
11.4.4 Evaluation of Student Outcome A
The evaluation of student outcome A will be done by internal design panel using Table 11.11.
Table 11.11: Evaluation of student outcome a

Student 4 3 2 1
Applies knowledge of
mathematics for
product metric model
science for product
metric model
engineering for product
metric model
98
The grading rubric for student outcome E to be assessed in concept selection is given in Ta-
ble 11.12.

process)
practice
99

Student 4 3 2 1
Identify Engineering
Problem
Formulate Engineering
Problem
100
11.4.7 Grading Rubric for Product Metric Model
The grading rubric for product metric model is given in Table 11.14.

Product Selects model Selects model by Performance Performance
metric by performance specications specications and
model performance specications; insuciently basic
specications; Constructs basic included in the mathematical
Constructs mathematical model; Basic model are
basic model with one mathematical model improper;
mathematical or two minor contains few concep- Rened model is
model; errors; Rened tual/procedural vague
Constructs model contains errors; Rened
rened model minor error model insuciently
that considers addresses design
customer problem
needs upto
check model
and display
101
11.4.8 Evaluation of Product Metric Model
The evaluation of product metric model will be done by internal design panel using Table 11.15.
Table 11.15: Evaluation of product metric model

Student 4 3 2 1
Performs model
selection
Constructs product
models
102
Chapter 12
Design for Manufacture, Assembly

and Environment
12.1 Introduction
A common failure in product development is making products that work but that are also very
dicult to build. Diculty in manufacture makes a product expensive. Design for manufacture and
assembly is the analysis and redesign of a product to make it easier to produce. Society generates
and consumes such a large fraction of the earths resources that we must consider our impact on
the environment in our technical decision making. Design for environment is a product design
approach for reducing the impact of products on the environment.
103


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
104
12.3 Design Guidelines
1. Use DFA (design for assembly) guidelines given in Table 14.1, and in Figures 14.3 14.10.
12.4 Manufacturing Cost Analysis
1. Create Figure 14.14.
2. Break assembly process into an assembly tree diagram as shown in Figure 14.20.
3. For each of these operations, complete the XPI analysis. Create Table 14.10.
4. Obtain cost of individual parts using tooling costs of Figures 14.1514.19 and the estimated
material and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) part costs.
12.5 Design for Environment
1. List environmental issues and guidelines.
2. List global, regional and local issues.
3. Implement design guidelines given in Tables 15.115.4
105

leader
evaluated
by other
team
members

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
106

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
107

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
108

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
109
12.6.3 Grading Rubric for Design for Manufacturing, Assembly and Environment
The grading rubric for design for manufacturing, assembly and environment is given in Ta-
ble 12.10.

Design for Uses design Uses design Uses design Not properly uses
manufac- guidelines, guidelines, does guidelines, design guidelines,
ture, does manufacturing incomplete insucient
assembly manufacturing cost analysis, manufacturing cost manufacturing
and envi- cost analysis, identies most of analysis, very few cost analysis and
ronment identies environmental environmental environmental
environmental objectives objectives identied objectives
objectives
(global,
regional and
local issues),
designs for less
environmental
impact
110
12.6.4 Evaluation of Design for Manufacturing, Assembly and Environment
The evaluation of design for manufacturing, assembly and environment will be done by internal
design panel using Table 12.11.
Table 12.11: Evaluation of design for manufacturing, assembly and environment

Student 4 3 2 1
Uses design for

assembly guidelines
Performs
manufacturing cost
analysis
Implements design for

environment guidelines
111
12.6.5 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome F
The grading rubric for student outcome F is given in Table 12.12.
responsibility

engineering
problems
dimensions problems
problem engineering
problem
failures and future
prevents its
occurrence
112
12.6.6 Evaluation of Student Outcome F
The evaluation of student outcome F will be done by internal design panel using Table 12.13.
Table 12.13: Evaluation of student outcome f

Student 4 3 2 1
Demonstrates
knowledge of
professional code of
ethics
Ability to evaluate the

ethical dimensions of a
problem in the
discipline
Demonstrate ethical
practices
Consequence of
unethical actions/
behavior
113
12.6.7 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome H
The grading rubric for design for student outcome H is given in Table 12.14.
Table 12.14: Grading rubric for student outcome h: The broad education necessary to understand
the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal context

solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in global context
global context global context in global context in global context
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in economic
economic economic in economic in economic context context
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in environmental
environmental environmental in environmental in environmental context
solution in impact in discussing impact in discussing impact in societal
societal context societal in societal in societal context context
context context
114
12.6.8 Evaluation of Student Outcome H
The evaluation of student outcome H will be done by internal design panel using Table 12.15.
Table 12.15: Evaluation of student outcome h

Student 4 3 2 1
Impact of engineering
solution in global
context
solution in economic
context
solution in
environmental
solution in societal
context
115
12.6.9 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome I
The grading rubric for student outcome I is given in Table 12.16.

appropriate place
thought thought
information
sources
116
12.6.10 Evaluation of Student Outcome I
The evaluation of student outcome I will be done by internal design panel using Table 12.17.
Table 12.17: Evaluation of student outcome i

Student 4 3 2 1
Able to independently
nd and use technical
and scientic
information
Able to plan own policy
Able to assess and

monitor own policy
117
12.6.11 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome J
The grading rubric for student outcome J is given in Table 12.18.

12.6.12 Evaluation of Student Outcome J
The evaluation of student outcome J will be done by internal design panel using Table 12.19.
Table 12.19: Evaluation of student outcome j

Student 4 3 2 1
Understand
contemporary
technological issues in
the relevant eld
through the case
studies
118
Chapter 13
Analytical and Numerical Model

Solutions
13.1 Introduction
The concept is modeled, analytically or numerically, so that multiple congurations may be

searched to realize preferred solutions. A number of computational solution methods exist to solve
product models. These methods include nite element method, nite dierence method, modal
analysis, dynamic simulations, optimization, etc.
119


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
120
13.3 Spreadsheet Search
1. create Figure 16.6.
2. Employ spreadsheet method to create Figures 16.8, 16.9 and 16.10.
3. Validate results by performing experiments.
4. Create Figures 16.11 and 16.12.


leader
evaluated
by other
team
members
121

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
122

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
123

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
124
13.4.3 Grading Rubric for Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions
The grading rubric for analytical and numerical model solutions is given in Table 13.10.

Analysis Analysis is Analysis is Analysis is Analysis contains
complete, suciently satisfactory but major conceptual
correct and complete and other more or procedural
consistent correct but appropriate errors and
with contains 1 or 2 analytical tools exist incorrect
assumptions; minor errors; for this problem; computations;
Assumptions Some minor Analysis contains Many
are clearly assumptions are procedural errors; assumptions are
stated and omitted or One or more major omitted;
methods violated assumptions are Inappropriate
selected for omitted or violated analytical tools
analysis are applied
appropriate
125
13.4.4 Evaluation of Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions
The evaluation of analytical and numerical model solutions will be done by internal design panel
using Table 13.11.
Table 13.11: Evaluation of analytical and numerical model solutions

Student 4 3 2 1
Employs method of
spreadsheet search
Does experiment and

validates results
126
The grading rubric for student outcome E is given in Table 13.11.

Solve Adept at generating Suciently Has diculty Does not develop
Engineering multiple potential generates potential generating and appropriate
Problem solutions, selecting solutions, develops implementing solutions to
most appropriate evaluation criteria, most identied and
solution based on well and implements appropriate formulated
developed criteria, and most appropriate solution problems
implementing solution solution
using appropriate tools
and techniques

Student 4 3 2 1
Solve Engineering
Problem
127
13.4.7 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome F
The grading rubric for student outcome F is given in Table 13.14.
responsibility

engineering
problems
dimensions problems
problem engineering
problem
failures and future
prevents its
occurrence
128
13.4.8 Evaluation of Student Outcome F
The evaluation of student outcome F will be done by internal design panel using Table 13.15.
Table 13.15: Evaluation of student outcome f

Student 4 3 2 1
Demonstrates
knowledge of
professional code of
ethics
Ability to evaluate the

ethical dimensions of a
problem in the
discipline
Demonstrate ethical
practices
Consequence of
unethical actions/
behavior
129
13.4.9 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome K
The grading rubric for student outcome K is given in Table 13.16.
Table 13.16: Grading rubric for student outcome k: An ability to use the techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice
PerformanceExcellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

1. Engi- Properly employs Suciently employs Has diculty in Unable to
neering techniques of techniques of employing understand
drawing orthographic orthographic techniques of relations between
(Manually projection and projection and orthographic views
or Solid- obtains views at obtains views at projection and
Wroks) proper places proper places obtaining views
2. Use of Able to create Suciently creates Has diculty in Insuciently
Solid- complete solid model the solid model of creating the solid creates solid
Works of required required complexity, model of required model,
complexity, make makes assembly of complexity, incomplete
assembly of parts, parts, generates 2D assembly of assembly, 2D
generate 2D drawing drawing and parts parts, generating drawing and
and parts list list 2D drawing and parts list
parts list
3. Use of Completely Suciently Has diculty in Vaguely
MATLAB understands understands understanding understands
expressions and expressions and expressions and expressions and
control structures, control structures, control control
creates script le, creates script le, structures, script structures,
creates function le, function le, runs le and function unable to create
runs the program, program, generates le are not clear, script le and a
generates data le, data, plots gures, data and gures function le
plots gures, analyzes and not clear, poor
analyzes and interprets the results analysis and
interprets the results interpretation
4. Use of Does complete Suciently does Modeling and Inappropriate
SIMULINK modeling and modeling and simulation has modeling and
simulation, interprets simulation, interprets two or more simulation, vague
results results errors, faulty or no
interpretation interpretation
5. Use of Discretizes into Sucient Does Marginal
FEM elements, Uses shape discretization, local discretization but understanding of
functions, creates and global stiness it can be made discretization,
local and global matrices contain one better, local and local and global
stiness matrices, or two errors, global stiness stiness matrices
obtains solution obtains solution matrices contain are ambiguous,
using boundary using boundary many errors, no solution
conditions, employs conditions, employs Many errors in
post-processing post-processing solution
130
13.4.10 Evaluation of Student Outcome K
The evaluation of student outcome K will be done by internal design panel using Table 13.17.
Table 13.17: Evaluation of student outcome k

Student 4 3 2 1
Engineering drawing
(Manually or
SolidWroks)
Use of SolidWorks
Use of MATLAB
Use of SIMULINK
Use of FEM
131
Chapter 14
Physical Prototype
14.1 Introduction
A physical prototype is an object or set of objects that is fabricated from a variety of materi-
als to approximate an aspect of how a product concept will perform. It is a simplication of a
product concept. It is tested under a certain range of conditions to approximate the performance,
constructed to control possible variability in the tests and is ultimately used to communicate em-
pirical data about the product so that development decisions may be made with high condence
and reduced risk.
132


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
133
14.3 Mock-up Materials and Processes
1. Explore prototyping materials and choose one.
2. Create Tables 17.2, 17.3, 17.4, 17.5.
3. Explore prototyping processes and choose one.
14.4 Prototype Planning and Design
1. Prepare list of standard components you have to buy from market and list of components
you have to manufacture.
2. Fabricate the components
3. Create the assembly of all components.


leader
evaluated
by other
team
members
134

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
135

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
136

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
137
14.5.3 Grading Rubric for Physical Prototype
The grading rubric for physical prototype is given in Table 14.10.

Preliminary Explores all Explores most Explores materials Insucient
Physical range of range of but many are left exploration of
Prototype materials; materials; out; Many materials;
Explores Explores most prototyping Explores few
prototyping prototyping processes missing; prototyping
processes; processes; Better tools exist for processes; Not
Creates Creates modules modules creation proper modules
modules and and does nal and nal
does nal assembly assembly
assembly
138
14.5.4 Evaluation of Physical Prototype
The evaluation of physical prototype will be done by internal design panel using Table 14.11.
Table 14.11: Evaluation of physical prototype

Student 4 3 2 1
Explores prototyping
materials
Explores prototyping
processes
Fabricates modules
Creates assembly
139
Chapter 15
Prototype Testing and Improvement
15.1 Introduction
The key issues in prototype fabrication and testing are how many to build, what variables to
vary, how to control noise and experimental uncertainties, and how to formalize the results of
testing. These issues give rise to the subject of design of experiments. It provides a statistical basis
for monitoring and analyzing the inherent noise in an experiment. Perform experiments iteratively
and bring out improvements in the product.
140


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
141
15.3 Design of Experiments
1. Identify performance metrics, noise variables (uncontrolled factors) , and controlled factors
(design and tuning variables).
2. List high-level physical principles.
3. Specify a target value for each performance metric.
4. Design the experiment.
5. Perform tests in random order adhering to the design matrix.
6. Analyze the results using statistical concepts.
7. Discuss your test results and the meaning they have for your design. This should ad-
dress not only product performance but also the physical environment and requirements
mentioned above.
8. Create Table 18.3, Figures 18.8, Table 18.4, Figure 18.9, Figure 18.10.
15.4 Improvement
1. Use the results of testing and improve the product.
2. Perform nal experiment and analyze the result.
15.5 Product Cost and Bill of Materials
1. Estimate Product Cost: Develop a product cost per unit based on your estimated annual
production. It is not necessary to estimate capital equipment costs (e.g. machinery),
however, product specic costs (e.g., molds, tooling, materials, labor, design) must be
included in the model. Use an overhead (or burden) rate of 85%. This will cover all
non-product specic costs.
2. Prepare parts list and bill of materials (this should be included as a separate table)
1. Indicate if part is made or purchased.

2. Include supplier and model number for purchased parts.
3. Include material and manufacturing process for all parts that are not outsourced.
3. Prepare individual part drawings with tolerances
4. Create key sub-assembly drawings (with tolerances)
5. Create product assembly drawings (with tolerances)
142
15.6 Final Product Fabrication
1. Fabricate the nal product.
2. Describe the manufacturing processes involved in fabricating the product.


leader
evaluated
by other
team
members
143

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
144

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:

1 2 3 4 5
1:
2:
3:
4
5:
145

Student 4 3 2 1
Task assigned to a
member
Task carried out in

time

team leader

other team members
146
15.7.3 Grading Rubric for Student Outcome B
The grading rubric for student outcome B is given in Table 15.10.
Table 15.10: Grading rubric for student outcome b: Graduates have the ability to design and
conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
Performance Exemplary - 4 Satisfactory - 3 Developing - 2 Needs

1. Clear understanding Sucient Insucient Hardly
Designing of theory, breaks understanding of understanding of understands the
Experi- into logical steps, theory, logical theory, logical theory and
ments nds an idea for breakdown and idea breakdown and idea logical break up.
experiment. for experiment. for experiment. Fabrication and
Properly fabricates Fabrication and Fabrication and assembly
the components and assembly contain assembly contain incomplete
creates assembly of one or two errors major errors
experimental setup
2. Nicely puts One or two tools not Many tools not in Can not put
Conducting measuring and in place. Few error place. Major errors measuring /
Experi- recording tools in in measurements. in measurement. recording tools
ments places. All Repeats experiment. Erroneous table in place
measurements Few errors in
proper. Repeats tabulation
experiment. Correct
tabulation of data
3. Correct sample Correct sample Sample calculation Sample
Analyzing calculation. Draws calculation. Minor contains few errors. calculation
Data relevant graphs error in graphs Procedural error in erroneous. Can
using statistical graphs not identify
procedures procedure for
(Point-wise curve, drawing graphs
straight line curve,
smooth curve, best
t curve)
4. Inter- Nicely validates Validation contains Validation contains Validation and
preting experimental results one or two major procedural explanation of
Data with theory. procedural errors. errors. Explanation deviation
Explains deviation Suciently explains of deviation between between
of experimental deviation of experiment and experiment and
result from theory; experimental result theory is insucient; theory are not
Assesses accuracy of from theory; Accuracy assessment included
the results Accuracy assessment is poor
could be better
147
15.7.4 Evaluation of Student Outcome B
Evaluation of student outcome B will be done by internal design panel using Table 15.11.
Table 15.11: Evaluation of student outcome b

Student 4 3 2 1
Designing Experiments
Conducting
Experiments
Analyzing Data
Interpreting Data
148
15.7.5 Grading Rubric for Testing and Improvement
The grading rubric for testing and improvement is given in Table 15.12.
Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs Improvement

Indicator -1
Testing and Conducts Conducts specied Conducts specied Conducts specied
improve- specied tests, tests, notes results, tests, notes results, tests, notes results,
ment notes results, compares with compares with improper
compares with theoretical value, theoretical value, comparison with
theoretical does reanalysis, reanalysis done theoretical value,
value, does gets criteria for erroneously, gets reanalysis done
reanalysis, gets improvement, incorrect criteria for erroneously, gets
criteria for redesigns with improvement, incorrect criteria for
improvement, minor error, redesigns with improvement,
does redesign, develops nal signicant error, redesigns with
develops nal prototype develops nal signicant error,
prototype prototype develops nal
accordingly prototype
accordingly
149
15.7.6 Evaluation of Testing and Improvement
Evaluation of testing and improvement will be done by internal design panel using Table 15.13.
Table 15.13: Evaluation of testing and improvement

Student 4 3 2 1
Performs design of
experiments
Identies and
incorporates
improvement
Obtains product cost

and bill of materials
Prepares part drawings

and assembly drawing
with tolorances
Fabricates nal product
150
Chapter 16
Final Report and Presentation
16.1 Introduction
The nal report should be one cohesive document. It must be a complete and thorough de-
scription of the design process that culminated in the presented design product. The nal report
must include adequate explanation, justication, and supporting information for all decisions that
aected the outcome of the nal design and the methods of producing it. 10% of this assignment
grade is devoted to professionalism of the report and adequacy of updates requested.
151


Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Task 8:
Task 9:
Task 10:
Task 11:
Task 12:

Member 1: Member 2:
Member 3: Member 4:
Member 5: Member 6:
152
16.3 Guidelines for Final Project Report
Any student must adhere to the rules and guidelines that have been laid down in the following
sections while writing their nal report. It must also be kept in mind that the soft copy of the report
of each design group will have to be submitted to the Internal Design Panel for future reference.
16.4 Organization of the Project Report
This project report shall be presented in a number of chapters, starting with the Introduction
and ending with Conclusions. Each chapter will have a precise title reecting the contents of the
chapter. A chapter can be divided in to sections, subsections and subsubsections to present the
contents with due emphasis.
16.4.1 General Guidelines
The design group has to strictly follow the following guidelines for the nal project report.
1. The project report should be bound in spiral binding with a clear front cover and back
cover in the format specied by the Department.
2. One report should be submitted by one design team for evaluation.
3. Within 5 days of evaluation each team will prepare a number of nal reports, one report
per each team member and one report per each Project Supervisor, by incorporating any
modications suggested by the External Design Panel.
4. Margins should be set at 1 inch (3.75 cm) for left margin and 1 inch (2.5 cm) for other
margins.
5. The report should be typed on one side of the paper.
6. The report should be double-spaced, times new roman font with font size 12.
Following components should be included in the report.
1. FRONT COVER PAGE
2. INNER COVER PAGE (same as front cover page)
3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PAGE that expresses appreciation to any individual, agency, or

group that supported the project.
4. DECLARATION PAGE signed by all team members.
5. REPORT APPROVAL PAGE (to be included in the hard bound copies which are submitted
after the successful viva voce examination).
153
5. A ONE PAGE ABSTRACT that gives description of the project containing purpose, back-
ground, methods, results and discussion.
6. TABLE OF CONTENTS: This should include acknowledgement, abstract, certicate of dec-

laration with page numbers in Roman numerals, and Chapters, References and Appendices
with page numbers in Arabic numbers. The Chapters should contain their headings and sub-
headings with the rst page of rst chapter starting with page number 1.
7. LIST OF TABLES: This should include all tables included in the report with numbering
like Table 1.1, Table 1.2, Table 3.1, etc., and having appropriate caption. A table must be
mentioned in the main text before it appears. There must not be any dangling table.
8. LIST OF FIGURES: This should include all gures included in the report with numberings
like Figure 1.1, Figure 1.2, Figure 3.1, etc., and having appropriate caption. A gure must be
mentioned in the main text before it appears. There must not be any dangling gure.
9. The List of Tables and List of Figures must contain page numbers where they can be found.
10. LIST OF SYMBOLS along with their descriptions.
11. CHAPTERS
Chapter 1: Introduction: Include a brief description of your design project, team allocation
and team charter in this chapter.
Chapter 2: Customer Needs Recognition
Chapter 3: Product Function Decomposition
Chapter 4: Benchmarking and Engineering Specication
Chapter 5: Product Architecture
Chapter 6: Concept Generation
Chapter 7: Concept Selection
Chapter 8: Product Embodiment
Chapter 9: Product Metric Model
Chapter 10: Design for Manufacture, Assembly and Environment
Chapter 11: Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions
Chapter 12: Physical Prototype
Chapter 13: Testing and Improvement
Chapter 14: Final Product
Chapter 15: Conclusions
Chapter 16: Individual and Group Learning
1. Write what you learned as a member in the design team.

2. Write what you learned as a team.
154
12. References
13. Appendices
The project report carries 20 marks, project presentation carries 20 marks and the nal product
carries 20 marks.
16.5.1 Grading Rubric for Evaluation of Project Report (Student Outcome G)
The project report of each design team will be evaluated by using the grading rubric as given in
Table 16.2.

Indicator Improvement -
1
1. Ability to Writing reports with Very little Improper Incomplete
communicate correct grammar and grammatical sentence report with
information, vocabulary which error in writing structure and improper
ideas, and expresses exact report in lack of proper sentence
concepts in meaning, clarity of addition to meaning of structure and
written form test, table and gure clarity of test, sentence for no clarity in
table and gure writing report, test table and
clarity of test, gure
table and gure
2. Ability to Data presentation in Understanding Understanding of No idea of
communicate appropriate graphs of data data presentation graphical
information, like line, bar, area, presentation but improper presentation
ideas, and etc., correct selection with correct selection of axis
concepts in the of axis range for data selection of axis range pattern,
form of with clarity in graph, range but style and weight
graphical proper selection of improper
presentation pattern, style and selection of
weight for better pattern, style
clarity and visibility and weight
155
16.5.2 Evaluation of Project Report (Student Outcome G)
The evaluation of project report will be done by external design panel using Table 16.3.
Table 16.3: Evaluation of project report (student outcome g)

Student 4 3 2 1
Ability to communicate
information, ideas, and
concepts in written
form
concepts in the form of
graphical presentation
156
16.5.3 Grading Rubric for Project Presentation (Student Outcome G)
Grading rubric student outcome G associated with nal presentation is given in Table 16.4.

Indicator Improvement -
1
Ability to High uency with High uency of Moderate uency No uency in
communicate eective use of presentation of presentation presentation,
information, grammar and with little with many erroneous use
ideas, and vocabulary during grammatical grammatical of english
concepts in the presentation though error errors
form of oral PPT
presentation
(through PPT)
16.5.4 Evaluation of Project Presentation (Student Outcome G)
The evaluation of student outcome G from nal presentation will be done by external design
panel using Table 16.6.
Table 16.5: Evaluation of nal presentation (student outcome g)

Student 4 3 2 1
concepts in the form of
oral presentation
(through PPT)
157
16.5.5 Evaluation of Final Product
The evaluation of working of nal design product will be done by external design panel using
Table 16.6.
Table 16.6: Evaluation of nal product

Student 4 3 2 1
Product is working able

to meet customer
requirements
Product has pleasant

appearance
Product does not have

sharp projections
Product is environment
friendly
Product is user friendly
158
(TITLE OF THE PROJECT)
Project report submitted
in partial fulfillment for the degree of
Bachelor of Technology in Mechanical Engineering
By
Name of the students, Registration Numbers
(University LOGO)
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Institute of Technical Education and Research
SIKSHA O ANUSANDHAN UNIVERSITY
Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

(Month and Year)
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report titled being
submitted by (Name of students and Section) to the Institute of Technical Education and Research,
Siksha O Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar for the partial fulllment for the degree of Bachelor
of Technology in Mechanical Engineering is a record of original bonade work carried out by them
under my/our supervision and guidance. The project work, in my/our opinion, has reached the
requisite standard fullling the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Technology.
The results contained in this thesis have not been submitted in part or full to any other University
or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma.
(Name of Guide) (Name of Guide)
Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering
ITER, SOA University ITER, SOA University
Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar
160
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In this page, express your gratitude to anybody or any Institute for using its facility in making
your project happen.
Signature of students
161
DECLARATION
We declare that this written submission represents our ideas in our own words and where others
ideas or words have been included, We have adequately cited and referenced the original sources.
We also declare that we have adhered to all principles of academic honesty and integrity and have
not misrepresented or fabricated or falsied any idea/fact/source in our submission.
WE understand that any violation of the above will be cause for disciplinary action by the
University and can also evoke penal action from the sources which have thus not been properly
cited or from whom proper permission has not been taken when needed.
Signature of students
Registration Numbers
Date:
162
REPORT APPROVAL
This project report entitled - by (Name of students) is approved for the
degree of Bachelor of Technology in Mechanical Engineering.
Examiners
Supervisor(s)
Chairman
Date: -
Place:
163
References
Number all the references.
Each listed reference must be cited in the text of the report.
For a book give the name(s) of author(s), title of book, edition, chapter number, and page
numbers, publisher, location and year of publication.
Example: [25] Norton, R.L., Machine Design, 2nd Ed., Ch. 3, pp. 119-120, Pearson Education,
New Delhi, 2014.
For a journal/conference paper, give the name(s) of authors, title of paper, name of journal/
conference, volume and issue number (for journal), page numbers, year of publication.
Example: [23] Dumir, P.C., Nath, J.K., Kumari, P., and Kapuria, S., Improved ecient
zigzag and third order theories for circular cylindrical shells under thermal loading, Journal of
Thermal Stresses, 31, 343367, 2008.
164

Designhandbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Designhandbook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Designhandbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Product Design Hand Book

JAYANTA KUMAR NATH

Institute of Technical Education and Research

List of Tables vii

1 Overview of Engineering Design Process 1

2 Student Outcomes, Learning Levels, Grading Rubrics, Checkpoints and Design

3 Team Allocation, Problem Selection and Guide Selection by Internal Design

4 Customer Needs Recognition 23

6 Product Teardown and Engineering Specifications 42

11 Product Metric Model 90

12 Design for Manufacture, Assembly and Environment 103

13 Analytical and Numerical Model Solutions 119

14 Physical Prototype 132

16 Final Report and Presentation 151

2.1 Student outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.1 Team allocation and problem selection for design team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

5.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

6.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

8.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

9.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

10.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

11.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

12.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

13.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

14.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

15.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

16.1 Work done by each team member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

Overview of Engineering Design

Student Outcomes, Learning Levels,

2.2 Student Outcomes

2.3 Learning Levels

Table 2.2: Blooms taxonomy

Level Name Description

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Exemplary - 4 Satisfactory - 3 Developing - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - Needs

Performance Excellent - 4 Good - 3 Satisfactory - 2 Needs

Table 2.14: List of checkpoints, their duration and marks allotted

Checkpoint Number of Maximum

2.6 Evaluation Schedule

2.7 Students Outcomes Associated with Checkpoints

Sl. No. Section Evaluation Day Evaluation Time Room

Table 2.16: Students outcomes to be assessed in checkpoints

Table 2.17: Internal design panel

Sl. No. Name of faculty Designation

2.8.1 Policy for Internal Design Panel

The Internal Design Panel has following duties and responsibilities.

Table 2.18: External design panel

Sl. No. Name of faculty College / Institute Designation

2.9.1 Policy for External Design Panel