Integrated Product and Process Development

Pankaj Narvekar M1029 SIMSREE

Introduction
Definition a systematic approach to product

development that achieves a timely collaboration of relevant stakeholders throughout the product life cycle to better satifsy the customer needs a management technique and not a specific set of steps to be followed. IPPD simultaneously integrates all activities from product concept through production/field support with the use of multi-functional teams. a process which goes from the recognition of a need to satisfaction of that need.

Need
Responsiveness a winning characteristic Tough competition Price and quality Product Differentiation Increasing costs Better translation of Customer need into Product

Reasons for non-responsiveness Disregard for the customers voice Loss of information Different individuals working for achieving different goals

Multi-disciplinary Product Design

Complex Time consuming High amount of expertise Less Risk Better Product

Low cost of materials, design and production.

Hard to integrate
o o o o Departmentalization Built-in Goals. Disciplinary Design in Big Chunks. Counter-Intuitive Behavior.

Integration in Product Design

Small Design Methods Opportunistic Contribution Cooperation. Least Commitment. Concurrency.

Whatever the solution to the integration problem, it needs to be represented in the form of a set of design methodologies. A design methodology is a scheme for organizing reasoning steps and domain knowledge to construct a solution. It provides both a conceptual framework for organizing design knowledge and a strategy for applying that knowledge

The principles of integrated product design and development

Understand customer needs and manage

requirements Plan and manage product development Use product development teams Integrate process design Manage costs from the start Involve suppliers and subcontractors early Develop robust designs Integrate CAE, CAD, CAM tools Simulate product performance and manufacturing processes electronically Create an efficient development approach Improve the design process continuously

Integrated Product Teams (IPT)

Cross-functional teams that are formed for the specific purpose

of delivering a product for an external or internal customer IPT members should have complementary skills and be committed to a common purpose, performance objectives, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable Members of an integrated product team represent technical, manufacturing, business, and support functions and organizations which are critical to developing, procuring and supporting the product a clear understanding of the teams goals, responsibilities, and authority should be established among the business unit manager, program and functional managers, as well as the IPT Each individual should offer his/her expertise to the team as well as understand and respect the expertise available from other members of the team

Tools of IPPD
Design for Manufacturability and Assembly (DFMA) Concurrent Engineering Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Value engineering CAD/CAM Cost Targeting etc

Benefits of IPPD
Reduced overall time to deliver an operational

product Reduced system (product) cost. Reduced risk. Improved quality Reduced number of changes in design Reduced cost to manufacture, operate and support Smaller product development cycles Higher customer satisfaction

INTEGRATED PRODUCT-PROCESS DEVELOPMENT BY A LIGHT FIXTURE MANUFACTURER

Finelite, founded in 1991, is a relative newcomer

in the market who set out to deliver an indirect lighting product that would compete with parabolics Customers
Owners of project - inexpensive, blend into the interior

design, are easy to maintain, and can be obtained without delaying Designers - Architectural qualities, performance (e.g., the quality of the light and energy consumption), life-cycle issues (e.g., maintenance needs and durability), and cost Electrical contractors -easy, quick, and safe to install. They value timely and reliable delivery, and they appreciate packaging that prevents breakage during handling

INTEGRATED PRODUCT-PROCESS DEVELOPMENT BY A LIGHT FIXTURE MANUFACTURER

Implemented IPPD IPPD lead to product Differentiation
Delivery lead time of 10 days as compared to the competitors

lead time of 4 weeks Rolled Steel Instead of Extruded Aluminum was used to reduce cost and reduce lead time in procurement To improve the installation process for electrical contractors, the manufacturer developed fixtures that are exactly 4-0 or multiples in length Fixtures are pre-wired, so work flow on the building site is more reliable as the electricians do not have to do this work The manufacturer developed a mounting system that attaches directly to the ceiling grid T-bars. Electrical contractors now can install fixtures before the ceiling tiles are brought in, which improves installation flexibility

Integrated Product and Process Development Case Study: Development of the F/A-18E/F
F/A-18 program team at McDonnell Douglas

Corporation (MDC) used IPPD management philosophy supported by a IPT. The MDC team followed several key concepts and principles inherent to IPPD for effective implementation of F/A-18E/F program
Customer focus Concurrent Development of Product and Processes Multi-disciplinary tem

Approach for identifying and managing risk areas

Integrated information environment

Principle Customer focus E/F model should have advanced features than previous model C/D but cost should not exceed that of C/D by more than 25% Concurrent Development of Product and Processes

Implications 12 days meeting of 35-40 people, including people from MDC, GE etc Trade off between cost and features Reduction in no. of parts Variability control Lower cost and rime of production

Outcome E/F changed from something that was gold plated and over cost to something that represented an affordable evolution from the C/D E/F had 42% fewer parts than C/D Sources of variations were tackled Wing design was changed to reduce setup time 5 level organization structure Teams given authority to get job done Weekly reporting of metrics kept teams informed and accountable Team leaders identified critical paths and work aggressively to execute them HornetWeb secure intranet of MDC

Multi-disciplinary tem

Develop teams comprising members from technical, cost, mfg and support organisations

Approach for identifying and managing risk areas

Identify risk early and minimize them Develop risk management plan using formal risk management process Information should be readily available for enhancing decision making

Integrated information environment

Integrated Product/Process Development in the New Attack Submarine Program

The New Attack Submarine (NSSN) program used Integrated

Product and Process Development (IPPD) to reduce acquisition and life cycle costs and develop a safe, effective weapons system IPPD was used for all aspects of the program including the platform, nuclear propulsion, and Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C3I) systems

The program has used important IPPD practices and learned significant lessons in the areas of team organization and behavior, government participation, contracting, planning, scheduling, tracking progress, tools, design processes, specifications, cost growth avoidance, training, and funding profiles

Measured by number of drawings issued at comparable points in

time
NSSN program is 2.5 years ahead of the pace of the predecessor program, SEAWOLF has 64 percent fewer drawings requiring government approvals is projected to require substantially fewer design changes during

Texas Instrument Gen-X development Project

Existing product costly and heavy

Bid to reduce cost by a factor of 4

Created team of 110 members and divided them

among the modules Transition from strong functionally based organisational structure to more empowered team based structure Included DFM and CAD Manufacturing cost of various designs compared by the team

Texas Instrument Gen-X development Project

30% reduction in development cycle time

90% of design completed within the first two

years Factor of 5 reduction in cycle time Factor of 4 reduction in cost Achievement of 4.7 sigma 90% of design changed to bring down thw cost Number of soldering joints reduced from 49 6 reducing he risk of defects

Chrysler LH platform project

Realised that functionally based structure not

sufficient to design replacement for present model Introduced concept of platform teams and supplier management Team combined members from all functional areas necessary to design, develop and test the product Team was broken into sub-groups that focused on major sub-systems Daily sub group meetings, weekly sub group leader meetings, weekly technological and status review and briefing to management every 4 6 weeks Identified suppliers early on - develop relationship with supplier

Chrysler LH platform project

Car design to production cycle was cut from 4.5

to 3.5 years Cost was reduced, performance was increased Manufacturing problems addressed 30 -50 weeks prior to production 70% of car produced by outside supplier First prototype coming at 24 months compared to 16 months before production 80% engineering feasibility at the clay modeling stage

Thank You