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