Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT & PROCESS DEVELOPMENT
ISQA 511 Dr. Mellie Pullman
Overview
Design for “…” Protocols Herman Miller
Case Tool
Demonstration EQFD (QFDE)
Sustainability Product and Process Protocols and Frameworks
1970s & 1980s• Pollution Control• Pollution
Prevention
1990s• Eco-Efficiency• Design for
Environment• The Natural Step• Industrial Ecology
2000s• Cradle to Cradle• Life Cycle Analysis• Biomimicry
Design for…
Manufacturing and Assembly
Disassembly Recycle Reuse
Logistics Or Design for
Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Sustainable Design & Supply Chain Aspects of sustainability can pervade all design
activities affecting the product during its life time: Social, economic, and environmental aspects of
Raw materials Production Packaging Transportation Redistribution Disassembly Recycling
Measures (Carbon Footprint) and Methods (EQFD)
Internal competition to reduce unnecessary air in their product packaging to lower logistics cost and increase efficiency in transportation and warehouse
Example: Ikea’s Air Hunting CompetitionGlimma tea candle
Air= Packaging Space
How does this effect: Transportation loads Vehicles Warehouse Environment
Design for Environment Flow and Support Tools
DfE Project Development*
Project Concept
Development (QFDE Tool)
Conceptual Design
Qualitative design review
on sustainability
aspects
Design Detail
Quantitative design review
on sustainability
(LCA)
Production
* Initially, a philosophy or framework may create
guiding principles such as C2C or Natural Step
The Natural Step Approach
How does the how the step or material conforms to each of the system conditions:
eliminate our contribution to the progressive buildup of substances extracted from the Earth's crust (for example, heavy metals and fossil fuels)
eliminate our contribution to the progressive buildup of chemicals and compounds produced by society (for example, dioxins, PCBs, and DDT )
eliminate our contribution to the progressive physical degradation and destruction of nature and natural processes (for example, over harvesting forests and paving over critical wildlife habitat)
eliminate our contribution to conditions that undermine people’s capacity to meet their basic human needs (for example, unsafe working conditions and not enough pay to live on).
Cradle to Cradle Philosophy
Biological
plants
animals
decomposes
soil nutrients
Technical
Manufacturing &Assembly
Product
Customer Use
Materials
Environmental Quality Function Deployment
Quality Function Deployment is a product development tool that comes out of Japan (House of Quality) Typically used to optimally meet customer needs Converts their needs (CN) to measurable engineering
characteristics/metrics (EC/EMs) Targets are then set for EC/EMs Second stage translates the EC/EMs to specific
components parts and design features. (third and forth stage sets up manufacturing process and production process)
EQFD accounts for environmental needs and characteristics
Example QFD (Climbing Harness)* Pullman, Moore & Wardell JPIM 2002
Tutorial on http://www.webducate.net/qfd/qfd.html
EQFD: CNs and EMs (left wall & ceiling)
Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6
Direction of Improvement ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ◇ ▼
Row #
Weight Chart
Relative
Weight
Customer Importance
Maxi
mum Relationship
Engineering
Metrics
concentration of
chemical
biodegradable content
energy
consumption to handle
water
consumption to clean
pollution/toxic
quantity of
chemical
Customer Needs or Requirements
1 |||||||15%
6 9 Little or NO PPE ▽ ● ○ ○ ● ●
2 |||||||15%
2 9 Less Time ● ○ ● ● ○ ▽
3 |||||||15%
5 9 Easy to apply and wash ● ▽ ● ● ▽ ▽
4 |||||10%
4 9 Low Cost ▽ ● ▽ ▽ ▽ ▽
5 |||||10%
2 9 Low environmental impact ▽ ● ▽ ▽ ▽ ○
6 ||||||||||20%
7 9No Impact on surface being
treated▽ ● ○ ▽ ○ ▽
7||||||||||||
25%
8 9 Removes Moss completely ● ○ ● ● ○ ●
Relationships
Positive ●
Neutral ○
Negative ▽
Direction of Improvement
Maximize ▲
Target ◇
Minimize ▼
Roof: EM Correlations
+
+
−
+
+
−
+
+
−
−
+
+
+
Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Direction of Improvement ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ◇ ▼
Engineerin
g Metri
cs
concentration of
chemical
biodegradable
content
energy consumption to handle
water
consumption to clea
n
pollution/
toxic
quantity of chemical
Customer Needs or Requirements
Little or NO PPE ▽ ● ○ ○ ● ●
Less Time ● ○ ● ● ○ ▽
Easy to apply and wash ● ▽ ● ● ▽ ▽
Low Cost ▽ ● ▽ ▽ ▽ ▽
Low environmental impact ▽ ● ▽ ▽ ▽ ○
No Impact on surface being treated
▽ ● ○ ▽ ○ ▽
Removes Moss completely ● ○ ● ● ○ ●
Correlations
Positive +
Negative −
No Correlation
Complete EDFD With Competitors Evaluation
+
+
−
+
+
−
+
+
−
−
+
+
+
Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6 Direction of Improvement ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ◇ ▼
Row #
Weight Chart
Relative Weight
Customer Importance
Engineering
Metrics
concentration of
chemical
biodegradable
content
energy consumption to
handle
water
consumption to clean
pollution/
toxic
quantity of chemical
Our Product
Competitor #1: Product
Name
Row #
Customer Needs or Requirements
1 ||||||| 15% 6 Little or NO PPE ▽ ● ○ ○ ● ● 3 3 1
2 ||||||| 15% 2 Less Time ● ○ ● ● ○ ▽ 5 4 2
3 ||||||| 15% 5 Easy to apply and wash ● ▽ ● ● ▽ ▽ 1 2 3
4 ||||| 10% 4 Low Cost ▽ ● ▽ ▽ ▽ ▽ 2 3 4
5 ||||| 10% 2 Low environmental impact ▽ ● ▽ ▽ ▽ ○ 3 1 5
6 |||||||||| 20% 7 No Impact on surface being
treated▽ ● ○ ▽ ○ ▽ 3 3 6
7||||||||||||
25% 8 Removes Moss completely ● ○ ● ● ○ ● 5 4 7
8 8
Target 1%50%
100 kw
100 gal
55
gal
Our Product 1% 8% 300150 4 10
Competitor #1: Product
Name 2% 0% 300 50 8 6
Customer Needs Roof Moss Remover Product
Row #
Weight Chart
Relative Weight
Custome
r Importance
Customer Needs
1 ||||||| 15% 6 Little or NO PPE
2 ||||||| 15% 2 Less Time
3 ||||||| 15% 5 Easy to apply and
wash4 ||||| 10% 4 Low Cost
5 ||||| 10% 2 Low environmental impact
6 |||||||||| 20% 7 No Impact on surface
being treated
7 ||||||||||||25% 8 Removes Moss
completely
Engineering Metrics Roof Moss Removal Product
Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6Direction of Improvement ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ◇ ▼
Engineerin
g Metri
cs
concentration of
chemical
biodegradable
content
energy consumption to handle
water
consumption to clea
n
pollution/
toxic
quantity of chemical
Sample of Environmental Needs and Engineering Metrics
Environmental Needs
Less material usage Less energy & water consumption Easy to transport and store Easy to process and assemble High durability Easy to reuse Easy to disassemble & sort Easy to maintain Easy to compact Safe to incinerate Easy to dispose of or safe to landfill Harmless to biosphere Safe emissions
Environmental Engineering Metrics
Weight Volume Number of parts Variety of materials Likelihood of getting dirty or
oxidizing Hardness Physical lifetime Energy consumption Rate of recycled material Sensory impact (noise, visual, etc.) Emissions mass (air, water, soil) Biodegradability Material Toxicity
Class Demonstration of EQFD
EU direction requires EuPs to incorporate life-cycle-based environmental considerations into product development process
EuP: Energy Using Products Green Product Design for Mobile Phones
Life Cycle Analysis ScopeExtracti
ng & processing raw
materials
Manufacturing
Packaging
Transportation &
Distribution
Useful life, maintenance & reuse
Recycling
Disposal at end of life
Voice of Customer issues
Cheap/quality Lightness Additional services &
accessories Operates safely Operates easily Repairable/updateable Reliable Aesthetic appearance Durable
Safe Emission Less material usage Renewable/reusable Resource use efficient Harmless to living
environment Safe Disposal More recycled Material
usage Easy to disassemble
Typical Needs (pick 3) Needs related to Environment (pick 3)
Rate the importance of each on a scale of 1-5 for your 6 items
Go to Template, put down your 6 and give rating of importance (1-5) where 5 is very; 1 is low.
Engineering Metrics for producers & environmental view
Development Time Tooling cost Energy cost Physical lifetime Weight Volume Number of parts Number of types of
material
Energy Resource (battery types and renewables)
Rate of recyclable materials Rate of standardized
components Mass of air pollution Mass of water pollution Mass of soil pollutant Mass of valuable materials Toxicity of Materials
Mobile phone EMs(pick 3)Environmental EMs(pick 3)
Go to Template, put down your 6 and looking at the CNs and EM, provide relationships between the two, then calculate the weighted importance of each EM
Looking at your weight-importance scores
What is more important, environmental EMs or phone Ems?
What should the producer focus on here? Are any of these related factors (roof of
house)? Right side of house and basement,
competitor’s situation > strategic insights?
