Water cooler analysis using tools including Voice of customer, functional analysis, process maps, quality function deployment, Failure Mode effect & analysis, Customer value chain analysis, Kano matrix, NUD analysis, DFMA analysis, concurrent costing, pareto plots.

1. Product Process Design &
Development
Group: 7 Primo Water Cooler
Rochester Institute of
Technology

2. Executive Summary
Primo is a young company that started in 2005. The main products that Primo sells are
both water coolers and water canisters with a range of 3 to 5 gallons. It caters to the customer’s
needs by providing clean and pure bottled water. In order for a company to maintain its success,
it needs to make a complete study on its product in order to improve it. The purpose of this report
is to analyze the current Primo water cooler and to provide possible redesign ideas in order to
give Primo a competitive edge in the market.
Before analyzing the product, the customer needs are identified in order to deliver a
product that meets the customer’s expectations. As a team we gathered and decided on the
customer needs with the important ones being affordable cost, less effort, aesthetics, time taken
to heat or cool water and energy efficiency. All these needs have been addressed in our final
hybrid concept, in addition we have added various other functions have been added to the
product such as facilitating for portability be skipped which add more value to the product. The
product developed can be summarized as a product with good design features and the one can
that can be successful in market.
The next approach we had to do was to understand how Primo as a company works with
respect to both internal and external stakeholders. The CVCA gives us an idea on how the
product flows within and outside the company. The last approach that needs to be done before
analyzing the product is benchmarking. This is an important step as this allows us to see how the
current Primo water cooler measures to other products within the market. It is benchmarked
against two products, one that has higher standards and one that has lower standards. With all the
data being gathered, we can now initiate the design process and ultimately provide an improved
product.
1

3. Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Background: .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Process Flow Chart: .................................................................................................................................. 5
Analysis and Discussion: ............................................................................................................................. 11
Optional Analysis: ....................................................................................................................................... 56
Product Definition ....................................................................................................................................... 64
Concept Development: ............................................................................................................................... 68
Conclusions and Future Work: ................................................................................................................... 76
Acknowledgements:.................................................................................................................................... 78
References: ................................................................................................................................................. 78
List of Figures:
Figure 1 Bottled Water Cooler ........................................................................................................ 4
Figure 2 Water Fountain ................................................................................................................. 4
Figure 3 Process Flow Chart ........................................................................................................... 5
Figure 4 Market Locations .............................................................................................................. 7
Figure 5 Internal and External CVCA .......................................................................................... 11
Figure 6 Parties involved .............................................................................................................. 12
Figure 7 Function Tree.................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 8 Hardware Tree ................................................................................................................ 17
Figure 9 Mapped Function Tree ................................................................................................... 20
Figure 10 Mapped Engineering Matrix......................................................................................... 21
Figure 11 Functional Analysis Flow ............................................................................................. 23
Figure 12 Phase 1 of the QFD....................................................................................................... 25
Figure 13 Phase 2 of the QFD....................................................................................................... 26
Figure 14 Pareto Plot for Water Cooler's expensive parts ............................................................ 28
Figure 15 Cost-Worth Plot for water cooler ................................................................................. 29
Figure 16 QFD & Cost Worth Analysis ....................................................................................... 33
Figure 17 Schematic Diagram of the water cooler ....................................................................... 37
Figure 18 Pareto Chart for assembly time for main subassemblies .............................................. 40
Figure 19 Pareto Analysis on individual parts of outer body assembly ....................................... 41
Figure 20 Pareto Analysis on individual parts of Heating Unit Assembly ................................... 41
Figure 21 VOC and Function based FMEA Analysis .................................................................. 47
Figure 22 Polar Plot ...................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 23 AT&T Matrix ............................................................................................................... 52
2

4. Figure 24 Comparison between extraction and recycled materials .............................................. 53
Figure 25 Weight breakdown of materials.................................................................................... 53
Figure 26 carbon emissions from product .................................................................................... 54
Figure 27 Detailed stages and tools of DFSS. Source Geoff Tennant, Design for six sigma, 2002
....................................................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 29 Critical to Quality tree of two selected customer requirements ................................... 60
Figure 30 Statistical Control Chart for design phase. Source: Geoff Tennant, Design for Six
Sigma, 2002. ................................................................................................................................. 61
Figure 31 Process mean compared to customer expectation ........................................................ 62
Figure 32 Process specification limit compared to customer limits ............................................. 63
Figure 33 mean response .............................................................................................................. 67
Figure 34Hybrid diagram .............................................................................................................. 74
List of Tables:
Table 1 SWOT ................................................................................................................................ 6
Table 2 Comparisons of various water coolers ............................................................................... 8
Table 3 Comparison between Primo & its competitors .................................................................. 9
Table 4 Comparison of Primo to the High and Low Performance Competitor ............................ 13
Table 5 Cost Worth Ratio ............................................................................................................. 31
Table 6 Assembly Times .............................................................................................................. 38
Table 7 Carbon emissions within the water cooler ....................................................................... 54
Table 1 Customer needs and importance levels ............................................................................ 58
Table 8 Project Priority Matrix ..................................................................................................... 64
Table 9 Target Sheet ..................................................................................................................... 68
Table 10 Morphological Analysis ................................................................................................. 69
Table 11 Summary of Concepts Developed ................................................................................. 71
Table 12 Pugh Analysis 3rd iteration............................................................................................ 72
Table 13 Final Concept ................................................................................................................. 73
3

5. Background:
A water cooler is a device that we see in our everyday lives. Its primary use is to provide
the user with hot and cold water. This device can be widely seen in both the residential and
commercial areas.
There are two main types of water coolers, bottle-less water coolers and bottled water
coolers. The water fountains that we see around campus are an example of a bottle-less water
cooler. They are connected to a continuous supply of municipal water and electricity. The bottleless water cooler dispense chilled water, which is stored in a small tank after passing through a
refrigeration cycle.
The bottled water cooler on the other hand is a free standing water cooler with a 5 gallon
water canister. They are portable water devices with a replaceable treated water canister. They
dispense cold water through a refrigeration cycle and hot water through a heating process. The
pictures below depict an example of a bottle-less water cooler and a bottled water cooler.
Our project will be focusing on the bottled water cooler specifically the one presented in
figure 1 below.
Figure 2 Water Fountain
Figure 1 Bottled Water Cooler
4

6. Process Flow Chart:
A simplified process flow is shown below. This flow chart depicts how a bottled water
cooler dispenses either hot or cold water depending on the user’s choice.
Figure 3 Process Flow Chart
The process flow chart in figure: 3 shows how a water cooler works. The first step is to
load the canister onto the water cooler. When the user add his or her input through pressing the
hot or cold buttons, either the heating or cooling system will work. Once the buttons are also
pressed by the user, the water flows from the either the heating or cooling storage tanks through
the piping system and to the taps. Lastly, once the water reaches the internal taps, it is dispensed
to the user through the external tap.
5

7. Intended market segment to be targeted:
At the end of the day, the goal of any company would be to have a successful product and
to make profits. Designing a product having all the features within the given budget range isn’t
enough to make the product successful, estimating or calculating the geographical area or the
market environment in which the product has to be released matters a lot to the success of the
product. This section of the report helps in estimating the locations or the environments in which
the product has to be released. For estimating the above mentioned, a lot of information
gathering and constant study of the market is required. In addition to that SWOT analysis which
helps the teams in acknowledging their strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats has to be
made, given below is the SWOT analysis,
Table 1 SWOT
Strengths
Weakness
Affordable cost
Weight of the product
Good design
Noise levels(not very high)
High on performance
Usage of large number of electrical
Portable
components
Less power consumption
Dimensions of the product
Aesthetics
Water purifier
Less user effort
Spilt water recycling
Opportunities
Threats
With affordable price the product can creep
Copying of the design or features by
into countries whose per capita income is low.
competitors (or) Chinese companies, who by
unethical business means can manufacture the
Can be a very good competitor in countries
product at a much lower price.
like UK and Australia with high
6

8. (Performance/cost) value.
Establishing the product into a new market
environment and competing with well-
Can look appealable to all age groups with the
established companies.
provision for touch-screen, also adding
aesthetics.
Financial constraints within the management.
Increase in market share value, basing on the
advantages or strengths of the product,
compared to others.
Basing on the above analysis, there was a lot of brainstorming done by the team members
and a whole of information on the various companies in various market environments. The data
collected and the research made by the team members helped in finalizing the five prime
locations to market and sell the product. All the five locations are shown in the figure below,
Figure 4 Market Locations
7

9. The main and primary area of concentration would be to establish a strong market basis
within USA and Canada, based on the information collected Oasis Aqua Bar11 which is the
leading and top water cooler in North America, the cost of it is way higher($539) than our
product, by this it means that the product cannot be affordable to the a middle class user. With
the cost of our product as low as $125 and complying to majority of the customer requirements,
the probability is very high that the product makes good market impact.
Aquaport, Water Star and Royal Springs are the major water cooler manufacturing companies in
Australia, table given below show the comparison of all these with our product
Table 2 Comparisons of various water coolers
Criteria
Aquaport
Water Star
Royal Spring
Primo
Cost
$318
$250
$565
$125
Value
0.8
0.75
0.9
0.85
The value of each of the product was estimated by calculating performance of the product
upon its cost, the performance of each product was determined by the team by analyzing all the
functions of the product and then relating them with the customer requirements. It can be seen
from the table that the value for our product is higher compared to few others also with the cost
of our product being low, there is a high probability that our product can be successful in the
market [1,2,3].
In UK the major water cooler manufacturing companies are Mount marble and Oasis, the
costs of the products are higher and the value is lower compared to our product which means a
part of distribution can be made to the UK market and can initialize the establishment of market
share with in the country. In India, Tata Voltas and Blue star constitutes for most of the market
share for water coolers. India being a country with low per capita income, users for water coolers
are less. Most of the consumers are either BPO’s or Major IT or outsourcing companies, a
contract can be made with all these companies and an initial establishment of the product in the
Indian market can be made, since the water cooler manufactured by Tata costs $200, which is
higher than the cost of our product, a significant amount of market share can be gained with this
8

10. establishment. Since the cost of labor and manufacturing is less in India, hopefully with regards
to the development of the company in India a manufacturing site can be set up in India.
Aqua Gefei co. Ltd, a company based in Moscow is a leading water cooler supplier in
Russia , this might be a risk taken by Primo to establish their market in Russia, as Aqua Gefei is
well is established in Russia there is a certain amount of risk in exploring the market, as both
products have similar performance levels and the only advantage for Primo is that their product
is cheaper than the local product. The risk being taken can turn any way round, if the product
receives appreciation in the market then it is good for the company, if it does not work in worst
case then a small amount of loss can be incurred, this is done because a firm has to certain level
of risk to explore the market and to establish their base as a successful company. The table given
below shows the comparison of Primo with respect to various competitors around the world [4,
5, 6].
Table 3 Comparison between Primo & its competitors
Company/Product
Location
Cost
Value
Primo
USA
$125
0.85
Aquaport
Australia(Findon)
$318
0.8
Water Star
Australia(Riverwood)
$250
0.75
Royal Springs
Australia(Adelaide)
$565
0.9
Voltas
India
$200
0.85
Blue Star
India
$145
0.8
Mount Marble
UK
$99.99
0.8
Aqua Gefei
Moscow
$145
0.85
Oasis
North America
$560
0.9
Ragalta
USA
$60
0.8
The value of the products was determined by calculating performance of the product
upon the cost. The performance level of each product was determined by various functions of the
product and then relating them to the customer requirements [7, 8].
9

11. Key Assumptions:
- The cooling system is assumed to be working on a standard refrigeration cycle.
- It is assumed that the heating tin acts as a heating vessel (tin is a good conductor of heat),
which heats the water, and then delivers it to the hot water tap.
- The flow from the canister to the storage tin is due to a pressure difference between the canister
and the probe.
- The heating and cooling process of the water are assumed to be continuous for the product’s
life cycle.
- Electric power is supplied to the water dispenser by the user.
10

12. Analysis and Discussion:
Customer Value Chain Analysis (CVCA) :-
Figure 5 Internal and External CVCA


Before starting the development of the product, the most important thing is to capture the
insight of those people who are related to the product, with regards to its use, investment,
development and supervision. The CVCA tool helps us to understand what are the
elements with regards to the product that we should work upon to create “VALUE” for
the customer.
Simultaneously, we need to keep in sight the constraints on our design parameters with
regards to the needs of those bodies who are investing in product development and,
regulating its performance (eg:- to meet predefined environmental factors).
11

13. Stakeholder
& Partners
Customers
Regulatory
bodies
Pertinent parties
involved
Figure 6 Parties involved

The CVCA helped us to understand the following,
 Capture the structure of the stakeholders (the level of their intimacy in development
of the product and their investments)
 Types of customers involved ( this initiates the need to manufacture different designs
for different types of customers in different regions)
 Values of the customer and there related requirements.

Keeping ourselves into the shoes of our customers made us realize that the success of a
product depends upon,
 Aesthetic appeal.
 Fundamental expectations from the product.
 The pleasure it creates for the user, due to its satisfactory performance.
This created a proper base to chart down the actual needs of our customer (in nontechnical terms).




Benchmarking:Benchmarking is useful to a product design team because it gives an idea about where
they stand with regards to the current market scenario (market share occupied and
monopoly of others competitors)
Before beginning a product design, we get to understand our starting point and makes us
capable of formulating a goal to achieve (by assessing ourselves against a high
performance leader)
PRIMO Benchmarking:
12

14. Table 4 Comparison of Primo to the High and Low Performance Competitor
Oasis Water
Parameters
Primo Water
Dispenser
Dispenser
Ragalta hot and cold
water dispenser
Price
$99 + tax
$581 + tax
$ 59.99
Style
Top Loading
Top Loading
Top Loading
Dispenses
Cold and hot
Cold and Hot and
Hot and Cold
Ambient
Water Bottle size
3-5 Gallons
3-5 gallons
3-5 gallons
Cold Output Range
37°F to 50°F
30-50 deg F
45-60 deg F
Hot Output Range
185°F to 210°F
adjustable
185-205F
Voltage
110-120V/60Hz
220-240V/50Hz
110V/60Hz
Child Safety Latch
Yes
Yes
Yes
LED Night Light
Yes
Yes
Yes
Energy Saving
Yes
Yes
No
None. No safety
Yes, thermostat with
None
Limiter used
safety limiter
Storage compartment
None
Yes
None
Float System
No
Dual Mechanical
No
(Degrees)
Switches
Temperature Control
Float System
Filtration System
No
Yes- Green Filter
No
triple stage system
Reservoir Tank
Fixed
Removable
Fixed
Drip Tray
Small
Large
Small
ENERGY STAR
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Qualified
UL Safety Listing
13

15. CSA certified
Yes
Yes
No
ETL Safety Listing
No
Yes
Yes
NSA certified
Yes
Yes
No
Height (Inches)
36.4
44.75
19
Width (Inches)
10.8
12.75
11.5
Depth (Inches)
11.7
16.75
12.38
Weight (in pounds):
29.65
60
15
Aesthetics
Nothing
Digital clock
Nothing
Warranty
1 year
3 years
1 year
Comparison of Our Product, High Performance, low cost
Analysis:1. Benchmarking helped us to understand our product inside out. With this noted down, we
could decide what kind of improvement we need.
2. Benchmarking with a High Performance Leader helped us to understand the competition
for us in the market, with respect to products which are offering a better quality than us at
a higher cost, but greater customer satisfaction, along with incorporation of additional
features. For example, the high performance leader chosen above, has additional features
which add to its net value.
3. These are features like,
 Bottle-less water cooler
 Better heating and cooling rates (faster)
 Tri temperature dispensing of hot, cold and ambient temperature water
 Automated overload protector for compressor
 Ultraviolet light water purification

These additional features explain the reasoning behind the difference in price.

We benchmark against this company so that we can include additional features to
increase customer satisfaction and maybe try and add a few more unique features, which
work in our favor.
14

16. 
Benchmarking with a Low Cost Leader helps us to understand “how to provide
satisfactory quality (not necessarily completely satisfactory) at comparatively Lower
costs”.

For example, using the Ragalta water dispenser as a low cost leader we can clearly see
that, for a very low price Ragalta can give performance parameters, which are very much
similar to performance parameters of PRIMO.

This indicates the presence of a cheaper and almost the same (performance wise)
competitor in the market. Such a presence can very easily attract attention of the lower
economic group or of those who are ready to compensate quality to some extent while
saving on a lot of money.

From these two benchmarking studies we try to DEVELOP our product so that it can,
“Deliver high performance to increase customer satisfaction at a cost which is very much
lower than what the customers expect, in accordance to the Value of our product”.

This way we work for decreasing differences between our product and the high
performance leader on one side, and low cost performer on the other side.
Benchmarking against a non-competitive company:This kind of benchmarking helped us to understand that,
 Our product can incorporate substitute mechanisms from applications which are not a
part of its market competitors (eg:- using heating coil of a hair dryer to heat water
efficiently and economically)
 This requires a proper understanding of, and a good eye for adapting outside
mechanisms into your system.
 The improvement features added to our product because of such benchmarking’s can
vary a lot on a scale of good to bad depending upon the limits of the benchmarked
product.
15

17. Functional Analysis:-
Figure 7 Function Tree
Now that we have established the needs of our customers and acknowledged our market
position with regards to our benchmarked competitors, its time to move ahead with the design
stage.
Function tree helped us to,
 Understand the main function of our product,
 Plot the sub-functions of various sub-assemblies, and break them into more levels of
sub functions, till the functions cannot be broken down anymore.
 Once this is done, we can plot the key function (by recognizing the key chain of subfunctions)
16

18. Figure 8 Hardware Tree
Hardware tree helped us to,
 Understand how different sub-assemblies come together to perform the main
function,
 Detailed distribution of the various parts of our product
 And more importantly, helped us understand the flow of different subassemblies and
their complexity with regards to the number and the size of the parts
Subtract & Operate Approach:


The understanding of the importance of every element of our hardware tree is enhanced
by using the subtract and operate approach.
This method helped us to understand the effect of the absence of every part from the
working of our product and how it affects the performance of our product.
Studying the subtract and operate method helped us to understand which parts of the
machine body contributed more to the main function of our product, compared to others.
17

19. 


This helps a lot in analysis and R&D, when the design team is planning to improve the
‘VALUE’ of the product. In other words, by understanding the key function of your
product, you can determine which parts help to contribute value to the product, from a
customer’s point of view.
The main aspect of our product and need of the customer is availability of ‘HOT &
COLD’ water. Any other part of the product, which does not contribute to the main
function, is a liability and should be either eliminated or replaced with a more economical
substitute.
While doing the analysis of our product, we came across the following aspects of our
product which can be improved/eliminated or substituted :1. Base plate: - It can be replaced by a substitute which can help to absorb the
vibrations of the compressor, thereby bringing in more stability. Also, we can
incorporate a new design, wherein, the base plate supports the outer body of the water
dispenser rather than just supporting the compressor. Eliminating the base plate is
also an option, if the compressor can be shifted upwards with proper support structure
from the inner sides of the outer body cover. Eg:- a framework which eliminates the
base plate altogether.
2. Drain pipe: - If the level of water remaining in the heating container (tin container) is
reduced to 0, then all fluids entering the tin container will be used completely by the
user. This will reduce wastage of water, and help us to eliminate the machining costs
of attaching a drainage pipe.
3. Keeping the heating and cooling containers at same level:- A lot of smaller parts
come into existence when there is gap between the cooling storage container and the
heating tin. Hence, if we can ‘redesign’ the water storage unit in such a way that it
can accommodate both hot and cold water, then all the parts ( metal pipe, plastic
joints, pipe insulation etc.) which just join the two containers can be easily
eliminated.
4. Metal support plate: - Replacing the metal support plate and the base plate with a
single frame structure, which can handle the load of storage container and at the same
time provide a stable firm structure from the inside to the dispenser, can help
immensely to eliminate the complex base plate with its multiple holes and cavities for
wire movements and connections.
5. Metal strip: - This again serves the purpose of reducing vibrations and keeping the
rear body of the dispenser intact. However, due to the vibration of the radiator and
18

20. compressor, it cannot serve its purpose completely. One single frame structure can
take care of multiple vibration and support issues as well.
6. Drip tray: - The drip tray serves the purpose of collecting spilled water. Instead of
having such a large assembly in the dispenser, we can just connect the spilled water to
either the radiator of the hot copper coil connected to the compressor. “This will serve
two purposes, one of cooling the radiator to some extent, and at the same time the
heat exchange can cause the water to evaporate rather than remain in the water cooler.
This also eliminates the maintenance of the water drip tray, from the user’s point of
view.
7. Top Panel: - Connections of wires and switches should be attached to the lower body
only, as this facilitates easy removal of the top cover, and electrical connections can
be kept away from. Also this helps easy cleaning and maintenance.
19

21. Mapped Function tree and Mapping Engineering metrics to
the function diagram:-
Figure 9 Mapped Function Tree


After understanding the importance of the role played by every part in the products
performance, it is important to understand how these parts and the functions of the
product correlate with each other.
The Mapped function tree helps us to understand,
 Which function requires which body part to perform normally
 Gives us a pictorial representation of how much a particular body part is crucial to
performing more than one functions
20

22.  Load distribution on various body parts, and understanding their criticality to the
main function of the product.
Figure 10 Mapped Engineering Matrix

The mapping of Engineering Metrics with the functions of the products helps us to,
 Understand the correlation between various engineering metrics with the functions to
be performed.
 Just like the function structure mapping, here we get to know which EM’s would
contribute significantly to a particular function.
 That way we can understand which of the EM’s are more critical to the performance
of the main function of the product, and which ones are complementary to the main
function.
 This mapping also explains how to distribute improvement efforts, while improving
engineering metrics, amongst the various functions of the product.

Next comes the Function Chain Diagram & Activity diagram:These two diagrams helped us to understand how a product is used in a customer
environment and how the internal working of the product performs with regards to the
21

23. input for required interfaces and working parts, and the output that every part gives to
make the main function happen.
Function Chain
Diagram
Activity
Diagram
understand
input/output energy,
effort for each function
understand activities
performed in a products
functional cycle
realize the contribution
of sub functions to the
main function
map flow of external
activities with regards
to the user,from
pressing button to
obtaining water
observe activities like
noise generation,
thermal losses, to
eliminate later on.
this pinpoints the
amount of user activity
required & hence shows
possible ergonomical
improvements
Flow of Functional Analysis to understand the product as a whole from
functional and operational point of view:-
22

24. • Function tree
• Hardware tree
Subtract and
approach
• importance of parts
• room for part
elimination?
Draw trees to
understand
structure
• Find all EM's related
to all the functions
• Relate all parts with
main subfunctions
Mapping Functions
v/s Parts, EM's
Figure 11 Functional Analysis Flow
Quality Function Deployment:After understanding the needs of our customers, the main objective function of our product,
and the correlation between the physical parts and the actual functions of our product, we need to
formulate which customer needs should be given how much priority over the others, and what
needs to be done from an Engineering and Design point of view to meet those customer needs.
KANO ASSESSMENT AND NUD ANALYSIS:



These two tools are the first step towards a proper start to the QFD analyses.
They help us to group together customer needs and plot the behavior of considering a customer
needs v/s level of customer satisfaction for embedding the solution to that customer need into your
final product.
These needs gave us an idea as to which needs can we focus of (based upon our products strength
and weaknesses) to increase the value of our product.
The NUD analysis helped us to understand whether our needs are new, unique & difficult. This
analysis helps to categorize which needs are achievable and how much of an impact can it have on
our customers.
23

25. Linear
Satisfiers
Must
Haves
Delighters
Power
regulation
quality of
water (no
plastic taste)
Controllable
temperature
Recycle
Hygienic
water
Sensor
driven taps
QFD I & II:
24

26. Figure 12 Phase 1 of the QFD




The Phase-I helps us to understand the correlation between the customer needs and which
engineering metrics are required to achieve those customer needs.
This way we can transform verbal terms of customer needs into engineering parameters
using the EM’s.
The relative weights give an idea of which EM’s are more important than others, and how
much is their relevance amongst the whole group of EM’s
These EM’s can be further weighed against various parts of the product, to understand
which parts gain how much significance in achieving the main function. (done in QFD-2)
25

27. QFD Phase-2:-
Figure 13 Phase 2 of the QFD
26

28. Short analysis of QFD- I&II :-
Customer
needs
Engineering
metrics
Fast heating/cooling
Body Parts
15% -Compressor
10% - Time to heat/cool
Temperature regulation
Ensure safety
11% - Heating coil
9% - Effort applied
Low cost
15% - Radiator
12% - Copper tube
8% - Energy consumed
Easy to use


10% - Heating tin
This indicates that to achieve the above mentioned customer need (ones with a rating = 9)
the EM’s to be focused upon are the time to heat/cool water, Energy consumed in the
complete operation of the product and the Effort applied by the user to operate, maintain
and move the product.
Also, if we want to increase customer satisfaction we need to do an R&D on the cooling
mechanism (Compressor, radiator, copper coil) and the heating tin.
Cost-Worth Analysis:

The Function–cost–worth analysis is an excellent tool that we used to identify the value
improvement potential in some part functions of our Water Cooler. This tool not only
helped us in identifying the potential for improvement but also developed some creative
ideas as to how could we achieve that.

We performed the cost-worth analysis with the use of relative weights for each
component that was calculated in the QFD phase I. A Pareto Plot, shown in the figure
below is developed in order to comprehend the most costly parts for our water cooler
product.
27

29. Figure 14 Pareto Plot for Water Cooler's expensive parts

From the Pareto plot, it is seen that the 16% of the parts cost around 80% of the total
Water Cooler’s cost. These parts which are the most costly ones are - water taps,
compressor, package, outer body covers, copper coil, connecting wires, radiator and top
panel.

However, it is important to decide out of these parts which parts could be used for cost
reduction and which parts could be used for worth enhancing. In other words, we can find
alternatives for current costly parts (like refrigeration cycle) and replace them with
cheaper parts without compensating the quality of product, and without diminishing the
expected performance by the user. In some scenarios, the customer would have to pay
more for those parts which contribute to enhanced features for the product (eg:- Water
filter system)

. To identify this cost difference, Cost-Worth Plot was created as shown in figure 11.
28

30. 40
35
RELATIVE COST (%)
30
25
Cost Worth
20
Ylower
15
10
15
11
10
Diagonal
Yupper
10
6
5
44 4 4 4
3
3
2 22
22
1111 1
11
0
0 0
0
0
5
10
5
5
15
20
25
30
35
40
RELATIVE WORTH (%)
Figure 15 Cost-Worth Plot for water cooler

From this graph, we came to know that parts like water taps, radiator, storage tin, base
plate, front and side cover, upper panel, top panel should be redesigned to reduce their
costs. This could be done by replacing them with new parts, other alternatives or
changing their manufacturing processes to reduce their cost.

The copper coil is cheap to manufacture, but its effect on the environment is immense
and hence needs to be worked upon prior to anything else.

Radiator, storage tin, base plate, front and side cover, upper panel and top panel are the
manufactured processed parts. So, their cost could be reduced by improving their
manufacturing processes which includes designing and manufacturing of precise part
geometry, reducing machine uptime and reducing labor costs by improving their
respective manufacturing line.

By reducing the costs of these four components, the total cost of the Water Cooler would
be highly reduced. It is important to note that while reducing the costs of these
components keeping in mind the customers’ needs; it should not hamper the quality and
efficiency of water cooler.
Cost-Worth Analysis from design for Manufacturing and Assembly:29

31. 
The cost-worth analysis of our product (with regards to its assembly and manufacturing)
give us a clear insight into the cost for manufacturing every part of our product and the
cost for assembling these parts together.

The tools of DFA and DFM help in following ways,
 Allow building prototypes by using variable materials and processes
 Understand the probability of number of defects occurring while using a particular
manufacturing process.
 Thus we can plan manufacturing process by assessing the time and cost for using
certain dies, tools and nos of operators.
 Knowing the operation time for a particular process helped us to select which process
is the optimum one with regards to performance and quality of product.
 The design for Assembly tool helps to understand the effect of assembly time on the
overall cost of the final product with regards to the fixed labor costs.
 Thus a suitable easy to assemble design can be made for ease of operation, reduction
in complexity and quicker maintenance and service work.
Example :- Detailed costing for storage tank
30

32. Table 5 Cost Worth Ratio
Part Name
Compressor
Copper Coil
Part Cost ($)
17.3
15
Relative Worth (%) Worth Cost/worth
15
5.6
3.08928571
5
2
7.5
Storage Tin
Front and Side Cover
Package
Hot Water tap
Water Dispensing Tap
Cold Water Tap
Base Plate
9.99
6.71
4.9
4.4
4.4
4.4
3.69
10
4
2
4
2
3
5
3.9
1.6
0.7
1.5
0.8
1.1
1.8
2.56153846
4.19375
7
2.93333333
5.5
4
2.05
Connecting Wires
Front Upper Panel
Metal Pipe
3
2.69
2.3
1
4
0
0.3
1.5
0
10
1.79333333
NA
31

33. Radiator
Top Panel
2
1.86
11
2
4.2
0.8
0.47619048
2.325
Heating Tin
Rubber Washers
T-Shaped Plastic Tube
Drip Tray
Black Panel
1.79
1.4
1.19
1.15
0.89
10
1
2
3
0
4
0.5
0.8
1.2
0
0.4475
2.8
1.4875
0.95833333
NA
Plastic Strip
Metal Support Plate
0.89
0.89
0
1
0
0.3
NA
2.96666667
Heating Pipe
0.86
4
1.5
0.57333333
Baffle
Level Indicator
Screws
Metal Strip
Electric Cord
Switches
Buttons
Drain Pipe
Probe
Insulating sheet
Styrofoam for package
Styrofoam
Led Light
0.84
0.76
0.7
0.69
0.45
0.4
0.4
0.35
0.31
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.035
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
6
2
4
1
0.2
0.3
0.5
0
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.2
0.2
2.2
0.7
1.5
0.2
4.2
2.53333333
1.4
NA
1.5
1.33333333
0.8
1.75
1.55
0.13636364
0.42857143
0.2
0.175
32

34. QFD and Cost-Worth helped us with the following aspects of product design:-
Understand needs of customer
Assess the psychology of the end
user and needs to satisfy
Develop strategies
to stay 1 step ahead
of your competitors
Maximize positive qualities to add
value
Spend funds for research on
quality systems to meet user needs
Figure 16 QFD & Cost Worth Analysis
Fish Bone Assembly Sequence:




The fish bone assembly clearly indicates how a particular product will be assembled step
by step.
We could do this analysis by reverse engineering the procedure of disassembly of the
product.
It helped us to understand which manual process(turning, press fitting, winding coil)
takes how much time, and understand its level of difficulty (for a manual operation).
Helps to find operations which are time consuming and costly and tedious for operators
to do.
For example, we have 2 internal taps for dispensing hot and cold water from their
respective heating and cooling systems into the T shaped rubber hose which finally
transfers the water from either tap into the final delivery tap. From a cost analysis point
of view, this is an extremely expensive operation. Since small component such as taps etc
are outsourced to other manufacturers, the cost of acquiring taps is high (4.4 -4.9$ per
33

35. 

unit). Hence there is an added approximately 10$ cost just for the 2 internal taps. This can
be mitigated by removing the taps and replacing them with gate valves which open as
close as per the user input.
Using the cost worth analysis and the subsequent time for assembly analysis, we will be
able to determine the sub assembly or fixtures and the precise steps where cost and time
are being used disproportionately consumed while manufacturing the product. For this,
the fishbone diagram is extremely essential as on its bases the time for assembly data can
be generated.
This points out certain important points like: More small parts implies more time to assemble
 Preferable to have one big part than more nos of small parts
 Reduction in assembly time can very well improve productivity during assembly
34

36. Fishbone Assembly Sequence:
X4 Rubber stoppers
BASE PLATE
X4 screws
F
COMPRESSOR SUBASSEMBLY
A
STORAGE TIN SUBASSEMBLY
A
HEATING UNIT SUBASSEMBLY
A
X4 screws – to storage tin
Support plate
Grounding wire
F
Threaded screw
Metal Support
plate
A
OUTER BODY SUBASSEMBLY
X4 screws
Back panel
F
FRONT PANEL SUB
ASSEMBLY
A
Level indicator
J
Porous steel frame
Drip tray unit
PF
F
Top panel
PF
PF
35
FINAL ASSEMBLY
Leak proof cover
Receiving nozzle

37. Legend:Symbol
W
PF
S
J
C
Meaning
Welding
Press fitting
Soldering
Simple joint
Clamping
Fitted from top
Fitted from the side
Rotation / tightening
operation
Design for Assembly:





The design for assembly helps to analyze and understand the way a product has been
assembled to arrest all degrees of freedom, of immovable parts inside the product and
how they are supported to balance their mechanical forces.
This gives an insight into features for simple designs and options for redesign with
regards to structural features.
It also tells us the nature of attachments which are used to assemble the product together.
At the same time you can find the mechanical errors in assembly as well.
For example holding a metal plate and plastic body together using a metal screw is not
feasible because the threading on the plastic will come off due to difference in hardness
of metal and plastic.
Internal assembly of the product:-
Dis-assembled water cooler
36

38. Storage unit
Tap sub
assembly
Copper coil
carrying coolant
Heating unit
Base Plate
Figure 17 Schematic Diagram of the water cooler
Analysis of disassembly:



We followed a top to bottom approach while disassembling because the base was more
stable and well supported than the top assembly.
Disassembly process made us conclude that while assembling, the original manufacturers
made sure that the assembling procedure is easy to do, and has least cost of joining two
parts together. For example the whole outer body cover was supporting the inner
structure by just a snap fit. Also the screws and nut bolt arrangement at various places
was too easy for anyone to detach.
It took us a long time to dismantle the outer body cover, even after applying physical
effort, because there was incomplete visibility of the inner joints. This indicated that, the
joints are well secured and no layman can easily dismantle it, without getting help from a
proper technician.
Enough space is provided in between two different parts (internally), to avoid any friction
when the part is in transportation.
37

39. 
Table 6 Assembly Times
No.
Main Assembly
Sub-assembly
1.
Compressor
Base Plate
Compressor
Radiator
Total
Assembly time
(sec)
4.55
10.50
6.40
21.45
2.
Storage Tin
Heating pipe
Baffle
Rubber Gasket
Copper Coil
Cold water tap
Total
3.45
7.85
10.35
9.60
11.35
42.60
3.
Heating Unit
Heating pipe
Hot water tap
Rubber gasket
Electric cables
Thermocouples
Insulation Sheet
Apply adhesive
area
Total
3.45
10.65
6.90
22.92
26.30
8.50
28.00
106.72
Screws
44.54
Grounding wire
Total
22.23
66.77
Screws
86.18
Washers
Electrical cables
Switches
Power receiving
box
Power chord
Total
27.80
119.36
12.69
7.15
4.
5.
Metal Support
plate
Outer body
assembly
14.65
267.83
6.
Back Panel
Screws
44.54
7.
Front Panel
Buttons
16.90
38

40. Piston system
T-shaped house
Apply grease to
area
Final delivery tap
Totals
5.65
10.65
7.50
Porous steel plate
Level Indicator
Total
6.51
6.95
13.46
Leak proof cover
Receiving nozzle
Totals
Total for
WATER
COOLER
Total estimated assembly time = 625.27 seconds
6.30
11.15
17.45
625.27
8.
9.
Dip tray
Top Panel
39
3.75
44.45

41. Pareto plot using Design for Assembly:


The DFA tool gives a proper idea of how much time a particular part takes to assemble,
and how much time a complete sub-assembly takes to assemble.
These time readings when plotted give us an idea as to which part takes how much time
to assemble and what percentage of the total assembly time it accounts for.
Thus when these timings are compared to the worth of the product then we can
understand whether a subassembly or a part is worth putting in the effort that we are
currently investing in its assembly.
300
120
250
100
200
80
150
60
100
40
50
20
0
0
Time (sec)
Cumulative Percentage
Figure 18 Pareto Chart for assembly time for main subassemblies



In order to identify most time-consuming subassembly operations, an initial Pareto
analysis is conducted on major subassemblies.
After identifying three major subassemblies that require longer time of operation, a
second level of Pareto analysis is conducted on individual operations of the major
subassemblies.
For example, in our product initial Pareto analysis showed that three of the most time
consuming operations are Outer Body Assembly, Heating Unit Assembly and Metal
Support Plate Assembly. Together, these assembly operations account for 68% of the
total assembly time.
40

42. 140
120
120
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
Time (sec)
20
20
Cumulative Percentage
0
0
40
Figure 19 Pareto Analysis on individual parts of outer body assembly
30
120
25
100
20
80
15
60
10
40
5
20
0
0
Time (sec)
Cumulative Percentage
Figure 20 Pareto Analysis on individual parts of Heating Unit Assembly
41

43. Failure Mode Effective Analysis (FMEA):



FMEA helps to analyze the end quality of the product, during the design stages, by using
a thoughtful approach to avoid all possible ways in which our product can fail.
This ensures that all the possible defects can be removed before the product reaches the
customer thus reducing the nos. of customer complaints.
This process helps to ensure satisfaction for,
 Customers
 Design team
 Stakeholders and partners
 Regulatory bodies, ensuring that requirements of all the following are met during
design stages.
It encourages us to provide customer to provide an ethically sound design to the
customers.
42

44. Function based and VOC based FMEA:- The following are the excel sheets:
43

45. 44

46. 45

47. 
The Function based and VOC based FMEA both contribute to understand the failure
modes possible with regards to the performance of the product parts (while they perform
their individual functions to complete the main function) and with regards to failure of
meeting the needs of the customers.
46

48. 
Analysis of VOC and Function based FMEA:-
VOC based
FMEA
Function
based FMEA
understand effect of
failure to satisfy
customer need
understand effect of
failure of a particular
function
understand body parts
causing this failure
and make sure they
are operational
Understand how and
where can a functions
performance go
wrong
making improvements
in needs and the
procedure to achieve
them help lower
preliminary costs
making technical
changes at design
stage help reduce cost
of rejects
understand the most
important customer
need to work upon
(rating 9)
helps understand part
worth and hence
optimize distribution
of funds for R&D
Figure 21 VOC and Function based FMEA Analysis
47

49. Design for Environment:Environmental Impact matrix is based on different environmental measures through
different life stages. The impacts for each life stage are assessed by considering the product
features that are observed during product testing, disassembly procedure
48

50. 49

51. 50

52. 





The Function Impact Matrix helped us to understand that the various factors which are a
part of the complete manufacturing cycle of the product are also the drivers for bad
impact on the environment.
This tool helps us to understand which of these contributes the MAXIMUM to the total
environmental impact.
Alongwith this we also understand which function is having a larger impact on the
environment.
This provides us with the analysis to back the removal of a particular material or
manufacturing process or main sub-function from our product
In other words, it gives us an almost accurate insight into which body parts need to be
altered with regards to their manufacturing processes, transportation methods and
material selection.
This is good from the environmental point of view, as it help reduce greenhouse gases.
Polar plot:-
Figure 22 Polar Plot
51

53. Figure 23 AT&T Matrix




Analysis:The Polar plot tells us which of the five columns and which of the five rows is
responsible for maximum impact on the environment
We get to know the particular process of the product manufacture cycle(product
manufacture) (from raw material to finished good, till it reaches customer) and the
specific environmental damage cause (material’s choice), for our product, which are
causing maximum environmental impact.
For our product the materials of manufacturing of the product are causing more
impact with regards to their nature and the pollutants that they release.
We did an additional Carbon footprint calculation for these materials to understand
which material is more hazardous to the environment.
CARBON FOOTPRINT OF PRIMO WATER COOLER:




Every product undergoes several operations in its element or raw material form before it can be
finally put to use. Operations such as material extraction (mining) manufacturing (plastics,
chemicals, synthetics) treatment (alloy and steel manufacture), mechanical process (forging,
forming, rolling, heat treatment etc) are commonly carried out to make the final parts that are
assembled to make the final product.
These processes generate their individual carbon footprint which is the kgs of co2 emitted per
kg of material used. From an environmental point of view it is very essential to monitor the
carbon footprint generated by each material used in the product. An aggregate of the total
carbon footprint of the product will help us analyse where there is a need for improvement in
terms of materials and processes employed to manufacture the product.
Recycling and reusing materials substantially reduces the carbon foot print generated from the
processes. Thus it is highly desired to use as much as recycled.
We have found out the approximate Kg/Kg carbon footprint of each material that is being used
in the product. From our bill of materials we have found out the aggregate weight of each
52

54. material in the final product. Thus multiplied by the kg/kg emissions of each material give us the
total carbon emitted for the entire product.
14
12
10
8
Extracted (and manufactured)
from source (kg co2 / kg
material)
6
4
Recycled material (kg co2 / kg
material)
2
0
Figure 24 Comparison between extraction and recycled materials
MATERIAL WEIGHT's
Aluminium
Copper
Steel
Cast iron
Rubber
Polypropylene
Figure 25 Weight breakdown of materials
53

55. 50
45
40
35
30
PRODUCT MADE FROM NEW
MATERIALS
25
PRODUCT MADE FROM
RECYCLED MATERIALS
20
15
10
5
0
carbon emissions of product
Figure 26 carbon emissions from product
Carbon emissions of PRIMO water cooler made from extracted v/s recycled materials
Table 7 Carbon emissions within the water cooler
Material
Weight Of
Material In
Our Product
(Gms)
Recycled
(Kgs Of Co2
/.Kgs Of
Metal)
700
300
2061
6100
100
2955
Extracted
(Manufactured)
From Source
(Kgs Of Co2
/.Kgs Of Metal)
12
5.5
2.82
1.91
13
6
Aluminum
Copper
Steel
Cast iron
rubber
Polypropylen
e
Glass
Activated
Carbon
1.7
1.4
0.5
-0.124
3.5
-75
8.4
6
0
0.45
0
0.3735
47
54
Carbon
Foorprint
Contribution
Of Recycled
Materials (Kgs)
1.19
0.42
1.0305
0
0.0124
10.3425
1.4
4.98
CARBON FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCT
Carbon
Footprint
Contribution
Of Each New
Material(Kgs)
8.4
1.65
5.81202
11.651
1.3
17.73
13.37

56. Conclusion:

After observing the approximate data generated from the above study we as a team
observed that there is a huge reduction in carbon footprint of the overall product when
new extracted materials are replaced by same recycled materials. This serves as a dual
advantage, both to the environment and to the manufacturer (in terms of cost savings).
Thus where ever it is technological feasible recycled materials should ne utilized.

It has been observed that the kg/kg contribution of certain materials is much higher
compared to the others. For example, there is a significant use of copper and
polypropylene in the product and their contributions are 5.5 kg/kg and 6kg/kg
respectively. Thus, the design team needs to think of alternatives for these materials
which will help reduce the overall carbon footprint of the product.
55

57. Optional Analysis:
Architectural Considerations:1.
Problem:- positioning of heating tin.
 Design of baffle is such that, the water coming from the inlet first goes to the
heating tin, fills it up and then spills out from the baffle to fill the storage tin (for
cold water).
 This leads to accumulation of water in heating tin for long times (especially
during summer), resulting in stale water if not used for long time. This is because
of the architectural positioning of heating tin being lower than the storage tin.
 This also causes extra maintainence for users to remove this water from time to
time
Solution:- position heating tin and storage tin at the top (side by side)
Advantages: Eliminates many small rubber and plastic linkages
 Less maintanence for user
 Less occurences of bad quality of water.
2. Problem:- Levelling of taps
 The level of the taps is higher than the bottom level of the storage tin, hence all
water from storage tin is not used by the user
 This results in waste of cold water and improper circulation of water
Solution:- position either taps a bit lower than actual position or storage tin a
bit lower than current position:Advantages: Efficient use of cold water
 Proper structural design
 No wastage of power
Design for Six Sigma
Design for Six Sigma is an approach that can be applied to design and development of new products
or processes. With that aspect, Design for Six Sigma differs from traditional Six Sigma tools which are
generally deployed for improvement of the existing processes. The approach for DFSS is usually related
to DMADV; Define, Measure, Analyze, Design and Verify where the main objective of the DFSS is to
identify and transfer the customer needs to operational level / process metrics in order to design and
56

58. launch high performance products. Although DFSS is a wide approach rather than a list of methodologies,
Geoff Tennant defines the general methodology as the following:





Define
o Define stage is a basis for identifying the customer needs by benchmarking, market
survey etc.
Customer
o This stage is related to identify the customer needs, which was the focus of the earlier
methodologies that were used in the water cooler design process. Quality Function
Deployment can be used in order to transform customer needs to design parameters.
Concept
o In this stage a conceptual model is designed based on the customer metrics.
Design
o The output of this stage is the technical design, usually developed by statistical tools such
as Design of Experiment.
Implement
o Implementation is testing the product before releasing to the market. The aim is to
prevent failure modes before the product is commercialized. The tools deployed in this
stage are small scale applications and Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA).
The detailed processes and tools used in DFSS is represented in Figure 27.
Figure 27 Detailed stages and tools of DFSS. Source Geoff Tennant, Design for six sigma, 2002
57

59. The first stage represents initial project plan that is developed by the design team, this stage
includes a brief benchmarking and customer analysis. The second stage is where the customer needs are
identified and transferred to measureable performance metrics. This stage is crucial, since one of the main
goals of DFSS is to deliver products that the customers actually want. The tool for this stage is Quality
Function Deployment which the team deployed in the earlier stages. Also Critical to Quality is developed
in order to relate customer requirements to performance measures hierarchically. In the third stage,
Critical to Quality metrics are used to update QFD analysis. Later, these metrics are mapped onto Critical
to Process metrics, which represent the inputs of the processes to be used. In this stage, initial failure
mode analysis is completed in order to come up with a design brief. The fourth stage is an iterative stage
in which design is reconsidered with the outcomes of process constraints and failure analysis. Before
releasing the product to market, the product is tested with prototypes and finally commercialized.
However, learning process continues in order to update the project plan and the design.
For DFSS, eliminating possible failures before releasing the product to market is significant. For the
water cooler design process, the failures modes are tried to be identified with Failure Mode Affect
Analysis. For the failure analysis before releasing the product to the market, technical simulations could
be a good way to visualize the product functions.
One of the tools that is used for DFSS is Critical to Quality tree; which connects the customer needs to
measurable performance requirements. CTQ tree analysis is applied to the customer requirements of the
water cooler. The customer requirements and their importance levels were previously identified as the
following:
Table 8 Customer needs and importance levels
Easy to install
Easy to move
Faster rate of cooling and
heating
Temperature regulation
Large capacity to store water
58
3
3
9
9
9

60. 9
1
9
3
9
3
3
9
Ensure safety
Low cost
Low maintenance
Energy efficient
Easy to use
Compact size
Noise level
Stability of structure
The CTQ tree is a hierarchical analysis which translates customer needs to performance
requirements. By determining performance requirements with this analysis, it is assured that these
requirements actually reflect the voice of the customer. This is important because a process may not be
producing desirable parts even if the process itself is in control according to statistical control charts.
Below is the two CTQ tree that are developed for two selected customer needs of the water cooler.
59

61. Figure 28 Critical to Quality tree of two selected customer requirements
60

62. Conventional tools of six sigma to improve an existing process can also be incorporated into design phase
to eliminate future failure modes. For instance, Statistical Process Control (SPC) methods such as control
charts can be used for product specifications from a customer focus. The following figure represents a
control chart that is adapted to analyze product specifications in the design phase.
Figure 29 Statistical Control Chart for design phase. Source: Geoff Tennant, Design for Six Sigma, 2002.
Different from the control charts for the process improvement, the lower and upper limits that are
specified in the design phase are based on customer expectations, not on the capability of the actual
process. The target value is similarly the mean expectation of the customer from the quality metric. For
the water cooler, a quality metrics to be analyzed is the size. The histogram can include historical data
from a similar process or expected future values. By analyzing the estimated levels of the specific quality
metrics against customer expectations, the processes are actually designed to meet the voice of the
customers from the very beginning. The idea is, a manufacturing process might be in control when
analyzed by statistical control charts. However, that is not necessarily mean that process delivers parts or
provides product specifications that the customer needs. In the case of the size of the water cooler,
61

63. Size
Figure 30 Process mean compared to customer expectation
In the above chart, the process seems to be in control. Thus, it is very likely for the manufacturer
to not implement further modifications in order to improve that process. However, if this chart is analyzed
during design phase with the customer expectations incorporated, it might be the case that the process
target is not actually satisfying what the customer expects. If required design changes are implemented
that will shift the process mean through the mean customer target, the process will still be in control, this
time meeting the specifications of the customer. Also, lower and upper process specifications should be
specified according to the customer expectations. For instance, it might be the case that manufacturing
team puts effort to make water cooler smaller by dedicating more time and cost, but the customer does not
actually expect the product to be that small. Thus, it is important to review process specification window
together with the customer limits.
62

64. Figure 31 Process specification limit compared to customer limits
In the above chart, the expected size of the water cooler by the customer is actually greater than what the
process is designed to deliver.
63

65. Product Definition
When designing a product there are three main aspects to look at which are feature, cost
and time. Although in an ideal situation we would like to optimize all three aspects that isn’t
possible. As a team, we have decided to constrain the cost, optimize the feature and accept
any time to release the product into the market. In general, a customer would like to have as
much features as possible provided there is a minimum cost. Keeping the customer’s need in
mind, we decided to focus on increasing the features of our product, PRIMO water cooler,
while keeping the cost as a constraint at $140. We will accept whatever time we get to sell
the product in the market, as this will give us time to research properly on how to provide the
necessary features desired by the customer at an appropriate cost. It will also allow us to
study how our competitors are doing in the market, in order to benchmark our product
against our competitors’. This will give us an upper advantage as when we release our
product into the market, we will have provided the customer with what he or she wants.
Table 9 Project Priority Matrix
Feature
Cost
Time
Constrain
Optimize
64
Accept

66. KEY POINTS OF FOCUS:
In order to make a product more competitive, we as a design team analyzed the products keeping
the customer needs in mind. This directed us to concentrate on features of the product that were lead to
maximum customer dissatisfaction. Factors identified are as follows:
COOLING SYSTEM ANALYSIS:

We identified that the cooling system of the product need to be redesigned because their current
state is contributing to majority needs that are being generated. Need to regulate the temperature
of the output water, to reduce the heating and cooling (30 min for heating and 60 min for cooling)
times etc have to be looked into as redesign concerns since they are a part of the primary function
being delivered to the customer.

From the QFD matrix analysis we established that the cooling system (compressor) acquired the
highest relative weight that is 14%. This symbolizes that there is a large scope for improving the
compressor on parameters such as weight, noise suppression and cost. The cost factor has also
been indicated in the DFM analysis where we concluded that the manufacturing cost of the
cooling system is approximately 42.3$ which constitutes to 42% of the total product cost.
HEATING SYSTEM ANALYSIS:

The heating system is also a potential system for redesign since it also does not meet customer
needs such as time to heat and temperature regulation of hot water. More over from a
manufacturing point of view (from the DFA analysis) we observed that the time to assemble the
heating sub-system was the second worst where hand assembling of fixtures such as the
insulation, thermocouples and wires is required.

From the FMEA analysis it was clear that the heating system was the most failure prone subsystem of the product having the top two RPN numbers. Failures related to the wires,
thermocouples and power supply are the significant factors contributing to the failures.
MAJOR COST DRIVERS:

We carried out the DFM analysis for the entire product and found out that the cooling system as a
whole contributes to 42% of cost where the compressor purchased from a supplier makes up 17%
of the cost.
65

67. 
Since the heating system is extremely prone to failures as observed in the FMEA and subtract and
operate analysis it adds to the operation cost to the company as regular servicing of the product
will be required

Also as the heating system takes the 2nd worst manufacturing time of approximately 125 seconds
it further increases the cost the company has to invest in making the product.

The outer body of the product (side and upper panel and top panel) contributes to approximately
10% of the product cost and 280 seconds in manufacturing time which also translates to increased
cost.
Therefore, with the backing of the details that have been mentioned in the discussions above we conclude
that the heating and cooling subsystem are the key features to concentrate on while redesigning. Also
other features such as ergonomics (ease to use, ease to operate and maintain etc) need to be focused on by
making design changes suitable to meet the customer needs.
66

68. Product definition checklist:
Product definition checklist helps in deriving the data that can be used by the team to
develop a successful product that survives in the market. Initially each team member has been
asked to individually assess the checklist, then comparison has been made of all the checklists.
The individual, who has given the highest rating for a dimension compared to others, has been
asked to share the information pertaining to that particular dimension so that every team member
could understand the concepts equally and further work towards progress of the product. Then
the graph has been drawn with Dimensions of product definition on X-axis and scale for mean
and deviation on Y-axis. The dimensions have been rated on a scale 1-5 with 1 representing least
understood and 5 representing understood to a great extent, the reference to the values change
according to the dimensions. The bars with blue color represent the mean of teams rating and the
line in red represents the standard deviation of team from the mean value while rating the
dimensions.
This tool was helpful in understanding the various dimensions of product definition, such
as the environment in which the product has to be released in the market, the various internal and
external factors effecting the definition of the product, customer needs and requirements,
figuring the competitors in a potential market scenario and various other factors that help in
developing a successful product and help understand the limitations of the product.
Given below is the product definition checklist graph,
Mean Response
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Threshold = ‘3’
Mean
Respons
e
Figure 32 mean response
67

69. From the graph, it is clear that most of the dimension of product definition have crossed
the threshold value, which implies that the project has been quiet well understood by the team
members, the ones with larger standard deviation refer that either there was communication gap
among team members or the point made by a team member may not have been heard by the rest.
For most of the dimensions, the standard deviation was less, it assures that all the team members
are on the same page. Thus, by using this tool team has realized mainly two main points (i) the
teams understanding of the product is good enough (can be better) (ii) The product being
developed can be successful in market, as the team understood almost all the dimensions of
product definition.
Concept Development:
The purpose of this project is to design a better and improve concept for out exiting product,
PRIMO water cooler. To achieve this we have used design tools such as the morphological analysis and
the Pugh type selection methods.
STEP1: TARGET SHEET
Table 10 Target Sheet
1
2
3
5
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Criteria
Weight of Product
Dimensions
Selling Price
Manufacturing Feasibility
Temperature Of Hot Water
Temperature Of Cold Water
Time Taken To Heat Water
Time Taken To Cool Water
Product Durability
Maintenance During Operation
Quality Of Water
12
13
14
15
Ergonomics
Noise Levels
Energy Consumption
Ensure User Safety
16
17
18
Water Storage Capacity
Warranty
Portability
Desired values
<= 75 pounds
<= 3 x 1.5 x 1.5 ft
<= 125$
Availability of raw materials
50 – 100 °c
5- 15 ° c
30 min
60 min
5 years minimum
<=2 Times per a 6 month period
As per drinking water quality
standards
Useable by ages 10 and above
<=75 Db
<= 2 Kw
Child protection for < 8-10 yrs of
age
5 gallons
>4 years
Least effort to move
68
Weight
3
3
9
9
9
9
9
9
3
1
9
9
3
3
9
1
3
3

70. 19




Environmental Impact
>2
3
The target sheet is the assimilation of all the important factors such as customer needs, stake
holder’s demands and product feasibility that need to be considered and need to be satisfied to
achieve the new concept design.
Relative weights assigned depict the level of importance of the target.
Time for heating and cooling, temperature range achieved and ergonomics have been given a
rating of 9 which are some of the most important customer needs
Similarly manufacturing feasibility is also given rating 9 because it is an important management
constraint.
STEP 2: MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
The sub-functions from the function tree are used as the criteria for assigning alternatives to the
existing components and assemblies in the product. It also allows us to explore new functions and
components to achieve these functions which were not previously included in the existing product and
their requirement was generated from customer needs, stakeholders needs etc.
The team brainstormed over alternatives that can be employed for each of the functions that have been
listen in the function tree and came up with three new alternatives (existing technologies) for each. These
were plotted against the sub functions in the morphological matrix and three new concepts were generated
as shown below.
Morphological Matrix:
Table 11 Morphological Analysis
SubFunctions
Water
Supply
Current Datum
(1)
Top Loading
Option I
(2)
Bottom Loading
Option II
(3)
Direct Supply
Option III
(4)
None
Accept User
Input
Buttons
Touch Screen
Voice Recognition
Keyboard
Heat Water
Thermocouple
Heating Element
Heat Pump
Peizo Heating
69

71. Cool Water
Compressor
Dry Ice
Nitrogen
Ceramic Cooling
Flow Of
Water To
Taps
Piston System
Gravity
Pump
No Flow Of
Water To Taps
Assure User
Safety
Child Lock
Password
Voice Recognition
Remote Control
Portability
None
Trolley
Remote Control
Light Weight
Temp.
Regulations
Thermocouple
Thermostat System
Rheostat System
None
Power The
Product
Power Cord
Rechargeable
Batteries
Solar Panel
Fuel Cells
70

72. Purify Water
Existing Quality
Of Canister
UV Filtration
System
Ro Filter
Activated Carbon
Aesthetics
White Plastic
Body
Wood Panel
Steel Finishing
Coloring Agents
Spilt Water
Collection
Drip Tray
No Collection Of
Spilt Water
Recycle Through
Filtration
Evaporation
Water
Dispensing
Water From
External Tap
Piston System
Remote Control
Sensor Driven (IR)
Voice
Recognition
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS DEVELOPED:
Table 12 Summary of Concepts Developed
Sub-Functions
Accept Water
Accept User Input
Heat Water
Concept 1
Top Loading
Touch Screen
Piezo Heating
Concept 2
Bottom Loading
Voice Recognition
Heat Pump
71
Concept 3
Direct Supply
Keyboard
Heating Element

73. Cool Water
Flow Of Water To Taps
Assure User Safety
Portability
Temperature Regulations
Power The Product
Purify Water
Ceramic Cooling
Gravity
Remote
Trolley
Thermocouple
Re-Chargeable Batteries
Activated Carbon
Compressor
Pump
Voice Recognition
Trolley
Thermostat
Power Cord
Reverse Osmosis
Aesthetics
Spilt Water Collection
Water Dispensing Water From
External Tap
White Plastic
Recycle
Sensor
Steel Finish
Evaporation
Voice Recognition
Nitrogen Purge
Gravity
Password
Remote Control
Rheostat
Fuel Cell
Existing Quality From
Canister
Wood
Evaporation
Remote Control
STEP 3: PUGH ANALYSIS
The three concepts generated were then scrutinized using the Pugh analysis method were the
concepts were plotted against the parameters listed in the target sheet.
ITERATION 3 OF PUGH ANALYSIS:
Table 13 Pugh Analysis 3rd iteration
Criteria
Weight
Concept1
Concept2
Concept3
Weight of product
Datum
(Hybrid 2)
S
3
+
S
+
Dimensions
Selling price
Manufacturing feasibility
S
S
S
3
9
9
+
+
-
S
-
+
+
-
Temperature of hot water
S
9
S
-
+
Temperature of cold water
S
9
-
S
-
Time taken to heat water
S
9
S
-
+
Time taken to cool water
S
9
-
S
+
Product durability
S
3
-
-
-
Maintenance during
operation
Quality of water
Ergonomics
Noise levels
Energy consumption
S
1
+
S
-
S
S
S
S
9
3
3
3
S
+
-
S
S
S
+
+
72

74. Ensure user safety
S
9
S
-
-
Water storage capacity
S
1
S
S
-
S
S
S
3
1
3
S
S
S
-
-
5
7
7
0
9
10
8
11
0
Warranty
Portability
Environmental impact
Sum of +’s
Sum of –‘s
Sum of S’s
Concept 1 and hybrid 2:




Concept 1 holds close resemblance to the hybrid 2 generated after the second iteration of
the Pugh analysis.
Concept 1 utilizes ceramic cooling which is a natural process. The method of operation
is by an evaporation process where water evaporates from the pores of the ceramic
material (natural or composite).
This process is highly subjective to the ambient temperature thus varying the cooling
temperature achieved also not allowing us to regulate the temperature of the output water
desired.
Use or rechargeable batteries limits to operability of the product as the user may forget to
charge the batteries before use thus leading to customer dissatisfaction.
FINAL CONCEPT DESIGN:
Table 14 Final Concept
Sub-Functions
Accept Water
Accept User Input
Heat Water
Cool Water
Flow Of Water To Taps
Assure User Safety
Portability
Temperature Regulations
Power The Product
Purify Water
Aesthetics
Spilt Water Collection
Water Dispensing Water From External
Tap
73
Features
Top Loading
Touch Screen
Piezo Heating
Compressor Unit
Pumping
Remote Control
Trolley
Rheostat
Power Cord
Activated Carbon
Colored Plastic Body
Recycle
Sensor

75. FINAL CONCEPT SKETCH: (view of front body and internal sub-functions)
Figure 33Hybrid diagram
SALIANT FEATURES OF FINAL HYBRID CONCEPT DESIGN:
The concept is designed to have a bottom loading canister:


Improved ergonomics
Additional pump of 0.5 Hp will be required having added cost of 9%
Concept makes use of the peizo electric heating system:
74

76. 


Piezo electric wire is wrapped around the heating vessel and then by insulating material.
Low cost wire costing 3.7$ per meter generating temperature range of 65 – 100 deg C and having
power consumption of 15 – 35 watts / month.
Rheostat system will control power to piezo wire thus allowing user to control output
temperature.
The final hybrid concept has an activated carbon filter:


Improved quality of output water as per drinking water standards ( TDS range of 300 – 600 ppm)
The addition of a replaceable activated carbon filter costs approx 10$ per unit
Recycle of spilt water:



The water collected in the spilt tray is periodically pumped via the 0.5Hp pump.
Water is passed through the activated carbon filter where it is purified and then reused in the
system.
Infrared sensor to detect and regulate the dispensing of water from the external tap to minimizes
the spillage of excess water into the drip tray
Compressor cooling unit:


Compressor subassembly was decided to be retained use to impractical applications of nitrogen
purge, ceramic cooling and dry ice cooling in the water cooler.
Rheostat system will regulate the power supply to the compressor, controlling the speed of the
coolant flow and thus the temperature of the cold water.
Improved user (infant) protection:

Integrated remote controlled child lock system which allows the user to avail of hot water only
when he or she activates the hot water dispensing system by the remote control.
Trolley system for portability:


The product has been provided with a trolley and wheel mechanism at the bottom base plate
which allows the user to easily move the product to its intended place of use.
Improved ergonomics.
Team Discussion on final concept generated:



The final concept that has been generated caters to all the targets that have been mentioned in the
target list.
However, the new concept will be priced approximately 40$ above the exiting product.
Additional 10$ for the activated carbon filter, 10$ for the 0.5Hp pump, 4$ for the piezo system
and additional 15 -16$ (approximate) cost for the touch screen, rheostats and trolley system.
75

77. Conclusions and Future Work:
Through the course of the entire project, as a team we have come to realize that all the
tools that have been taught in the course material have been extremely helpful in analyzing our
existing product with respect to several parameters such as the customer, manufacturing,
operation life and the environment. With the help of these tools we have scrutinized every
component and subsystem of the product and have recognized the areas where the product is
failing to meet as the parameters enlisted using which we have made our redesign concept.
We took a fast moving consumer product off the shelf and scrutinized it from the point of view
of the customer to look for opportunities where we can please the customer with what he or she
expects from the product.
The following conclusions were made with respect to the product after the due course of the
project:
1. Our product has serious competitors in the market, OASIS being one of the most
important and world leaders in water dispensers. So our product should be consistently
reviewed for improvements with regards to all of its aspects to be in this competition.
2. We have potential for less cost better features model creation, which can compete with
our competitors.
3. Improvement in carrying out the main function of the product can be facilitated by
changing certain components like refrigeration cycle and heating cycle, and replace them
with cheaper, more environmental friendly and less complicated alternatives.
4. The environmental impact of the product is not significantly high (it has an ENERGY
STAR RATING), but we can find substitutes for aluminum and copper, since their
carbon footprint is very high.
5. Additional customer needs can be accumulated to improve ranges of customers using our
product.
6. Make internal design less complicated by changing the positioning of the heating tin
placing it next to the cooling tin, and removing drip tray along with facilitating
accumulation of spilt water into a tray which is exchanging heat with hot copper coil, so
that the water evaporates.
7. The manufacturing procedure for various body parts can be changed or replaced to
accommodate more easier and cheaper alternatives (eg:- storage tin and heating tin)
8. More appropriate signs can be include on the outer design of the product to warn against
hazards.
76

78. PROPOSED FUTURE WORK:

As a team we have come to a mutual consensus that the cooling system should be our
focus of future work for this project. Even though after the redesign procedure we
concluded that the compressor assembly is the most practical solution. Due to the
limitations in the scope of this project, we did not disassemble the compressor sub
assembly. However, there are several improvement opportunities that can further improve
the performance and reduce power consumption of the sub-system. For this we will have
to further study the compressor’s individual components in details, properties and
alternatives for the coolant R134A used etc.

Several other internal functions and components can be altered or eliminated which add
to the cost of the product. Some of the suggestions that we can make for the future team
are:
a. Improve the positioning of the internal subsystems so that we can minimize the
amount of internal components such as piping, gaskets, internal taps etc which not
only add to the product cost but also increase number of parts and joints prone to
failure thus reducing the durability and quality of the product.
b. Reduction of the overall size of the product is also highly desirable which makes it
more convenient and ergonomic for consumer use yet maintaining all the existing and
new incorporated features during the redesign process.
c. Improve the cooling mechanisms to embed faster more effective cooling, at a lower
cost (an alternative to using refrigeration cycle with a compressor), or do research on
the compressor to reduce its power consumption and environmental impact without
affecting quality of cooling performance.
77

79. Acknowledgements:
We would like to take the opportunity to thank the following companies for assisting us in our
project.
Company Name: Ningbo Anuodan Machinery Co. Ltd.
Contact Person: Mr. Paul Chuh (Marketing Manager); paul@anuodan.com
Contacted for: Compressor
Company Name: Ningbo Koko Electric Appliance Co. Ltd.
Contact Person: Vini Xu; kokotwo@kokoelectric.com
Contacted for: Water taps
Company Name: Jinan Bestar Inc.
Contacted Person: Grace Zhao, Lucy Chen; gracebestar@gmail.com
Contacted for: Copper coil & Condenser
References:
[1]http://www.voltasac.com/index.php?option=com_catalog&view=subcategory&Itemid=12&id
=17
[2]http://www.rbminfocom.com/rbpgroup/electronics/index.php?route=product/product&product
_id=770
[3]http://angelgroup.en.alibaba.com/product/49156495450350344/compresser_cooling_hot_and_cold_water_dispenser.html
[4]http://www.alibaba.com/product/zuberkarim-1085159010647269/Water_Dispenser_Water_Cooler.html
[5]http://www.alibaba.com/product/ru107782449-107260626-101442163/water_dispenser.html
[6]http://www.diytrade.com/china/pd/1787007/WATER_GENERATOR_DISPENSER.html
[7]http://www.oasiscoolers.com/company/oasis-history.aspx
[8]http://www.ragaltausa.com/products/Water_Coolers/RWC-110.html
[9] http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/586705312/LQ100_series_water_pump_0_5.html)
[10]http://www.alibaba.com/productgs/534137691/Industril_intelligent_self_controling_electrical_heating.html?s=p)
78

80. [11] http://www.filterwater.com/docs/pentek/pentek-gac-filters-manual.pdf)
[12]http://www.filterwater.com/pc-291-5-pentek-155109-10-inch-gac-cartridge.aspx)
[13] G. Tennant, Design for Six Sigma, England ; Burlington: Gower Publishing Limited, 2002.
[14]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/61756367/23/FUNCTION%E2%80%93COST%E2%80%93WORT
H-ANALYSIS#page=119
[15]http://www.climatechangewales.org.uk/object/default.asp?id=47
[16]http://www.borealisgroup.com/pdf/global-challenges/IN0159_GB_BOR_2008_09_B.pdf
[17]http://www.greenrationbook.org.uk/resources/footprints-glass/
[18]http://www.cmtirerecyclingequipment.com/Public/14864/FinalRubberTireRecyclingCarbon
Footprint.pdf
[19]http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/16652443/575016920/name/Proofed%2BGHG%2Bfrom%2B
Rubber.pdf
[20]http://timeforchange.org/plastic-bags-and-plastic-bottles-CO2-emissions
[21]http://www.jacobi.net/images/images/Jacobi_Green_Credentials.pdf
[22]https://gin.confex.com/gin/2010/webprogram/Paper3335.html
79