Quantified design space

Quantified design space

analyze and compare s/w designs in specific
application domain
Structured encapsulation of design knowledge
implemented in a software spreadsheet
Based on concepts of quality function
deployment and design space
Translate system requirements into functional
and structural design alternatives and analyze
them
 Quality Function Deployment
Identify customer wants
Identify how the good/service will satisfy customer
wants
Relate customer wants to product hows
Develop importance ratings
Evaluate competing products
Compare performance to desirable technical
attributes
QFD House of Quality
Interrelationships
Customer
importance
How to satisfy
ratings
customer wants

Competitive
assessment
What the Relationship
customer matrix
wants

Target values Weighted

rating
Technical
evaluation
 House of Quality Example

Your team has been charged with

designing a new camera for Great
Cameras, Inc.
The first action is
to construct a
House of Quality
House of Quality Example Interrelationships

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

What the Technical

customer Attributes and
Evaluation

wants Customer
importance
rating
(5 = highest)
Lightweight 3
Easy to use 4
Reliable 5
Easy to hold steady 2
Color correction 1
House of Quality Example Interrelationships

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

Technical
Low electricity requirements
Attributes and
Evaluation
Aluminum components

Ergonomic design
Auto exposure

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants
Paint pallet
Auto focus
 House of Quality Example Interrelationships

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

High relationship Technical

Attributes and

Medium relationship
Evaluation

Low relationship

Lightweight 3
Easy to use 4
Reliable 5
Easy to hold steady 2
Color corrections 1

Relationship matrix
 House of Quality Example Interrelationships

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

Technical
Attributes and
Evaluation

Low electricity requirements

Relationships
between the
things we can do
Aluminum components

Ergonomic design
Auto exposure

Paint pallet
Auto focus
 House of Quality Example Interrelationships

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

Technical
Attributes and
Evaluation

Lightweight 3
Easy to use 4
Reliable 5
Easy to hold steady 2
Color corrections 1
Our importance ratings 22 9 27 27 32 25

Weighted
rating
 Interrelationships

House of Quality Example

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

Technical
Attributes and

Company B
Company A
Evaluation

How well do
competing products
meet customer wants

Lightweight 3 G P
Easy to use 4 G P
Reliable 5 F G
Easy to hold steady 2 G P
Color corrections 1 P P
Our importance ratings 22 5
 Interrelationships

House of Quality Example

How to Satisfy
Customer Wants

Competitors
Analysis of
What the
Relationship
Customer
Matrix
Wants

Technical
Attributes and
Evaluation

Failure 1 per 10,000

Panel ranking
Target

2 circuits
values
(Technical

2 to
0.5 A
attributes)

75%
Company A 0.7 60% yes 1 ok G
Technical Company B 0.6 50% yes 2 ok F
evaluation
Us 0.5 75% yes 2 ok G
 House of Quality Example

Low electricity requirements

Aluminum components

Ergonomic design
Auto exposure

Company B
Company A
Paint pallet
Auto focus
Completed Lightweight 3 G P
House of Easy to use 4 G P

Quality
Reliable 5 F G
Easy to hold steady 2 G P
Color correction 1 P P
Our importance ratings 22 9 27 27 32 25

Failure 1 per 10,000

Panel ranking
Target values
(Technical

2 circuits
attributes)

2 to
0.5 A
75%
Company A 0.7 60% yes 1 ok G
Technical Company B 0.6 50% yes 2 ok F
evaluation Us 0.5 75% yes 2 ok G
 House of Quality Sequence
Deploying resources through the
organization in response to
customer requirements

Quality
plan
Production
process

Production
Specific

process
components House

components
4

Specific
Design House
characteristics

characteristics
3
House
Design
requirements

2
Customer

House
1

Figure 5.4
Implementing a design space on
a QFD framework
Rules in the design space shows the
correlation between different aspects of
product
QFD captures design knowledge in
relationship
Between realization mechanism and customer
needs and
Among realization mechanisms
QUANTIFIED DESIGN SPACE
CALCULATOR
 The QDS technique originated in Japan
to make sure that no time is wasted on
developing something that customer
doesnt need
to not overlook some of the requirements.
 Design Solutions
include all possible ways in which the
problem faced could be reasonably
resolved
considering competitors ways of dealing
with the given problem
Enter rating to indicate to which degree
given design solution will help answer a
given customer requirement
 fully understand the problem before
starting developing solutions

Do not be wasteful but dont ignore

customers demands.
 Requirement
include all of customers needs and desires
that will, possibly, be resolved by the
software being developed
consult with the customer to assure that the
problem is fully understood
Depending on the size organization and the
nature of the problem different techniques
should be used for information gathering.
 http://groups.engin.umd.umich.edu/CIS/tiny
tools/cis375/f00/qds/
Score of quantified design space
 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
TECHNIQUES
For analyzing designs with a quantified
design space
Spectrum analysis
Contribution analysis
Design selection analysis
Direct comparison analysis
 Spectrum analysis
Based on position of a particular set of
design choices within range between best
and worst designs
Evaluate overall goodness of a set of
design choices
Procedure
Design a model system
Sb : score of model system
Sw : score of worst possible set of design choice
S : score of set of design choices to be analyzed
Spectrum index of S is:
Is= ((S-Sw) / (Sb-Sw)) *100

Is = 100 indicates set of choices is ideal

 Contribution analysis
To identify reasons that one set design
choices gets a lower score than another
Based on difference between 2 sets of score
comes from difference between individual
choices of each design
Procedure
Compare best design with a particular design
Identify the dimensions where two systems
differ
For each dimension identified
Replace dimension of ideal system with
dimension of the particular system
Calculate new score
Contribution factor of dimension i is difference
between best score and new score obtained
Contribution index Ci= Fi/(Fn)
 Design selection analysis
Compute no of dimensions where a
design implements best choice
Procedure
Ns: no of dimensions where a s/m
implements same choice as ideal s/m
Na: total no of dimensions of design
Design selection index
d=(Ns/Na)*100
 Direct comparison analysis
Based on spectrum analysis
Compare 2 design choices to determine
the amount by which one is an
improvement over another
Improvement index
Imp=I1-I2