fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 1 of 27

Quality Function DeploymentQFD

House of Quality (HOQ)

WELCOME TO LECTURE 6

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 2 of 27

COURSE PERT CHART

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 3 of 27

Where we are

We have seen how to define the problem We have seen how to decompose it We have seen how to be creative We have seen how to evaluate solutions Now how can we improve on existing

products? - What does the CUSTOMER want?

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 4 of 27

QFD:Definition

QFD stands for Quality Function Deployment.Derived from six Chinese/ Japanese characters:1. Hin shitsu: Qualities, features or attributes2. Ki no: function3. Ten kai: deployment

QFD:- systematic way for developing products based on the needs of the customer.

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 5 of 27

History of QFD

Originally developed by Yoji Akao of Tokyo in 1966.First implemented at the Kobe Shipyard of

Mitsubishi in 1972.Subsequently adopted by Toyota and other

Japanese Firms. First QFD Training outside Japan at GM and

Ford in 1972.Later by other companies around the world

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 6 of 27

QFD : QUALITY FUNCTION DEVELOPMENT

GOAL:

Recognize the correlations between the customerrequirements and the product characteristics

Identify the product characteristics that affectspecific customer requirements

Recognize the correlations within the engineeringcharacteristics

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 7 of 27

QFD : QUALITY FUNCTION DEVELOPMENT

Paper by Hauser and Clausing in Harvard Business Review 1988 prompted the introduction of the Japanese House of Quality into US companies.

Quality:Basic (unspoken, assumed) expected, typicalPerformance (spoken) one dimensional,

market research resultsExcitement (unspoken, the customer does not

know s/he wants it) pleasant, surprises or delights customer

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 8 of 27

QFD

what

How

what/How

why

what/why

How/HowmuchHowmuch

How/How

# designchanges

Before After

US

Japan

HOUSE OF QUALITY

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 9 of 27

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 10 of 27

QFDHouse of Quality

E

C

1

E

C

2

.

.

.

CA 1 W1 CA 2 W2 ... ...

Engineering Characteristics 3

C

u

s

t

o

m

e

r

A

t

t

r

i

b

u

t

e

s

1

W

e

i

g

h

t

s

2

++

++

- Goal-Conflicts 9

Correlation-Matrix 4

Assessment 5Targets6

techn. Competition compar. 7

C

o

m

p

e

t

i

t

i

o

n

c

o

m

p

a

r

.

I

n

c

u

s

t

o

m

e

r

'

s

v

i

e

w

8

Ex.: 1-10 Ex.: 1-10

PointsStrong relationship 9

Medium relationship 3

Weak relationship 1

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 11 of 27

EXAMPLE

B

o

d

y

m

a

t

e

r

i

a

l

L

e

a

d

m

a

t

e

r

i

a

l

D

e

s

i

g

n

/

C

o

l

o

r

E

r

a

s

o

r

E

n

g

r

a

v

i

n

g

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

.

.

.

.

.

C

o

m

p

e

t

i

t

o

r

1

C

o

m

p

e

t

i

t

o

r

2

O

u

r

p

r

o

d

u

c

t

G

o

a

l

Easy to erase 5 9 9 7 5 5 7Writes forever 10 1 9 4 4 4 6Feels good in hand 5 3 9 6 4 7 7Will not leak 4 9 3 3 4 3 6Not easy to lose 1 1 1 3 3 3 8Cost 5 9 3 3 1 7 6 5 8.....

70 186 61 62 1

2 1 4 3 5

Customer Attributes

Priority

E. Characteristics

Caution: oversimplified! And only top level considered! Check publications

(ref. von Helbling Management)

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 12 of 27

QFD Analysis

Potential for Use of a House of Quality Matrix Technique in Rehabilitation

Engineering

by: Logan, G.D. & Radcliffe, D.F.IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation

Engineering

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 13 of 27

Goal: Improve wheelchair seating to people with disabilities.

Acquired customer requirements through interaction with patients, and videotaped sessions.

Case 1: improving controls on wheelchair Case 2: attaching oxygen tank to wheelchair

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 14 of 27

Case 1 H.O.Q.

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 15 of 27

Case 1 results:

H.O.Q. provided accurate results.

Top 3 ranked items lead to a successful product and had considerably higher totals than the remaining engineering features.

Paper Conclusions

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 16 of 27

Define the Performance Measures columns on the top

QFD INTENTIONS

Cross Functional Teams

Development of a new product , service, or process

Team fills out a House of Quality

Define the Voice Of the Customer rows on the left

Forces creative thinking and continual evaluation of progress

Refining an existing product , service, or process

Engineering Characteristics Technical Quality Characteristics Quality Specifications Functional Requirements The Hows

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 17 of 27

Parts Specifications

F

e

a

t

u

r

e

s

a

n

d

T

e

c

h

n

o

l

o

g

i

e

s

Manufacturing Processes

P

a

r

t

s

S

p

e

c

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

s

Using QFD to deploy the VOC throughout the development process

One is not enough

Features and Technologies

P

e

r

f

o

r

m

a

n

c

e

M

e

a

s

u

r

e

s

Performance Measures

C

u

s

t

o

m

e

r

N

e

e

d

s

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 18 of 27

UNREALISTICPerformance Measures

C

u

s

t

o

m

e

r

N

e

e

d

s

Features and Technologies

P

e

r

f

o

r

m

a

n

c

e

M

e

a

s

u

r

e

s

Parts Specifications

F

e

a

t

u

r

e

s

a

n

d

T

e

c

h

n

o

l

o

g

i

e

s

Manufacturing Processes

P

a

r

t

s

S

p

e

c

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

s

Eager to get to design Substitute a design matrix for second house 80 - 90% of learning occurs in the initial HOQ

Initial HOQ takes 2 - 6 days to complete

15 - 20 rows

40 - 60 columns

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 19 of 27

QFD software

QFD Capture (free evaluation download)

http://www.gsm.mq.edu.au/cmit/ German, Excel,

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 20 of 27

The House of Quality Construction of the House of Quality (HOQ) is an initial step in

launching Quality Functional Deployment (QFD). The HOQ provides a means to recognize correlation among customer requirements, engineering characteristics, part characteristics, process operations, and production requirements. Additionally, the HOQ can be used atool for comparing existing and potential designs with the competitions designs. Findings from the HOQ can help groups develop targets and understand priorities and goals throughout the development process.

In this exercise, 2 HOQs are considered: Voice of the Customer vs. Engineering Characteristics and Engineering Characteristics vs. Part Characteristics.

The product at hand is a compressed air handheld pump commonly used for inflating bicycle tires.

The first step in building the HOQs is to list the requirements and characteristics pertaining to the product. The table below lists the customer requirements, engineering characteristics, and part characteristics for the handheld pump.

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 21 of 27

Requirements and Characteristics for HOQ

Part CharacterisiticsEngineering CharacteristicsCustomer Requirements

Threaded fittingCompetitive in market

Valve Stem SeatCost

NozzleBe safe in all sporting conditions

MaterialBe recyclable

Seal, cartridge to valveBe reusable

Pressure (40-110 psi)Over-pressure protectionEnvironment

Capacity (12-25g)Offer control of flowMaintenance free

Safety Pressure reliefAdapt to Sxx,Pxx needle valvesReadily available replacements

CartridgeCompressed air retentionMaintenance

MaterialPressure to inflate 40-110 psiPrevent freezing discharge of CO2 from cartridge

Interface w/ valve headOperate in temp range 10F-120FAccommodate threaded or non-threaded cartridges

MassUse of varying cartridge designsAccommodate varying cartridge sizes

LengthVolume for 12-25gr cartridgeInflate mountain bike tires

Inside diameterCompact constructionInflate road tires

Outside diameterLightweightHouse unpunctured cartridge

Cartridge housingImpact resistancePerformance

MaterialConvenient geometryEasy to carry

Lever strokeAccessible trigger locationEasy to store

Lever lengthassbly of valve body to containerEasy cartridge loading

TriggerMinimum trigger forceErgonomics

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 22 of 27

HOQ1 CRs vs ECs

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 23 of 27

HOQ1 CRs vs ECs

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 24 of 27

HOQ1 ECs vs PCs

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 25 of 27

Conclusion: Summary Value of QFDStrengthens current development process - Clear targets defined early based on

market/business demands- simultaneous focus on product and process

technologies- key issues remain visible for prioritizing resource

allocation- communication and teamwork are enhancedDesired output efficiently achieved- Products meet customer needs- Products provide a competitive edge

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 26 of 27

Conclusions

Powerful tool to help you prioritize what to work on.

Powerful tool to allow you to compare your product to the competitions products and target how to better satisfy the customer

Weakness is lack of scientific basis. More heuristic method proven to help companies

fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 27 of 27

Presentations Provide pertinent facts to busy people Be systematic: Carefully prepare

Analyze the audience State your objective Define your main message and support it

Introduction Body Conclusion

Watch presentation skills, do not distract Support your material with facts, references- Make sure they are correct Use professional language, no slang, no excessive acronyms Proper grammar, articulation, loudness Variety in pitch, rate, intensity Eye contact Watch for hesitations, filler words Stay on time Use appropriate number of visual aids, and make them good quality Use clear fonts (Arial), large size fonts (readable from back of room) Do not use distracting color Put the name of each presenter at the bottom of the slide REHEARSE!!!!!! You should not have to look back at the screen