Integrated QFD, TRIZ and FMEA

for Product Development Process

Chung-Shing Wang1, Chen-Ren Yu2 and Teng-Ruey Chang3
1

Department of Industrial Design, Tung-Hai University, Taichung, Taiwan, cswang@thu.edu.tw

Department of Industrial Design, Tung-Hai University, Taichung, Taiwan, g923702@thu.edu.tw
3
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Nan-Kai Institute of Technology, Taiwan, t237@nkc.edu.tw
2

Abstract: To shorten products develop time, increase products quality, reduce cost and meet the
requirements of customers have become crucial in todays enterprises competition. The attitude of
product design concept has been changed from passive response to be more aggressive in design process
control. Designers can discuss in advanced and avoid problems during the later develop stages.
There are many design control strategies to evaluate all possible issues and avoid the time and cost
waste from improper design. In this research, QFD (Quality Function Deployment) is as the
infrastructure and AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) is to measure the relative importance weighting of
product requirements. Then, AHP result transfers customer' requirements to engineering parameters of
TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving). The proposed methods integrated the TRIZ inventive
principles can assist designers to find out the rules that can meet customers' requirements and avoid bad
design. After all rules of concept design have been deployed, the products can be proved by applying
FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) and analyzed the weight values of all subsystems. Finally, an
example of the design process of safety catch mechanism in the pneumatic staple gun is implemented to
explain how the strategies of this research for the product development process. AHP is to translate
customers' requirements to engineering parameters. TRIZ is to find the suitable engineering parameters
for the product. QFD is for proving the customer requirement analysis and FMEA is for reliable analysis.
The aim for optimal design parameters can be reached.

Keywords: QFD (Quality Function Deployment), AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), TRIZ (Theory of
Inventive Problem Solving), FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis).

1.

Introduction
Creativity is thought as the source of design. Shigley thought that the nature of design is to look for a

policy-making process which fulfills the requirements of human being [1]. The demands of human beings are
expanding which increase the need of products and indirectly cause an even more complicated policy-making process
for design. For satisfying these complicated policy-making processes for design, the concept of design process has
been raised. Generally speaking, the design process for a product is divided into four phases including statement of
requirements, conception design, detailing as well as production engineering. As shown in Figure 1, the phases of
statement of requirements and conception design act the most important part during the overall design process. The
purpose of statement of requirements is to enhance the market acceptability of the finalized product. In addition,
conception design serves as the leading role during the whole design process since choices of production process
(injection-molding, punching and forming, drawing, etc.) would be made in this phase. Subsequent changes of design
and production cost will be obviously influenced by the phase of conception design.
Through
1.Direct response from customers
2.Market re search
3.Enterprises experience

Customers requirements

Statement of
Requirements

Conception Design

Detailing

Production
Engineering

Call for a new product development

meeting in order to set up its
1.Specifications
2.Appearance
3.Functions, etc.

Evaluate product requirements

collected in the first phase to form
concepts. Select a feasible method .

Elaborate proposed projects

obtained in conception design
phase.

After completing the detailing

phase, continue to make designs for
production engineering .

Final Product

Figure 1

Product Design Process

There are great differences in quantity and functions between todays and past products. The study made by
Ferrendier et al. [2] pointed out that 70% to 80% of the development cost for most products is decided in early design
phases. Viewing from lifecycles of a product, the only approach for an enterprise creating an everlasting product is to
shorten the periods of design and development following the trend of shortened product lifecycles in order to extend
product competitiveness in an open market. Based on quality function deployment (QFD), this study tries to apply
analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to market investigation and customer requirements derived from enterprise
experience so as to further relate customers requirements to 39 engineering parameters of TRIZ principles and obtain
the engineering parameters closest to customer requirements. Afterwards, this study uses the single characteristic in
TRIZ to choose the method avoiding possible subsequent engineering deterioration. Usually TRIZ principles provide a

guideline for engineers to avoid confining their abilities and ideas. Engineers are led to find out solutions. Of course
there will not be only one way to solve problems. However, it is necessary to find out a feasible and quick method by
considering time and cost. The choice made according to failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) could help to find
out a better method as the final outcome of design.

The process of this research is shown as Figure 2:

Obtain customer requirements by taking the

advantage of questionnaires and experience
derived from existing products .

Use AHP to translate customer requirements

to TRIZ engineering parameters .

Use Single Characteristic in TRIZ to obtain

correspondent inventive principle .

Use inventive principle as minor systematic

deployment to obtain the most fundamental
engineering technical requirements .

Fill translated engineering parameters

in the column of customer requirements
in the House of Quality .

Match technical requirements with

FMEA analysis form .

Fill technical requirements in the

column of engineering characteristic in
the House of Quality .

Calculate priority values for technical

requirements .

Use House of Quality to obtain

weighing values for each item .

Convert risk priority values to

weighing values.

The weighing values derived from these two

methods each other and then the out put is
taken as a reference for policy -making.

Figure 2

Processes of this research

2. Review on Articles:

2.1 Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

QFD was earliest proposed by Dr. Yoji Akao in the article titled New Production Development and Quality
AssuranceQuality Function Deployment in the monthly periodical of Standardization and Management in Japan in
1972 followed by the applications of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Kobe Shipyard and Toyota Motors. In 1983, the
QFD history in the U.S. was started as Ford Motor Company applied QFD to operational mechanism deployment. In
1986, the American Supplier Institute provided complete QFD training for their manufacturers. QFD was introduced to
Taiwan by China Productivity Center and Philips Taiwan in 1988 [3].
Dr. Yoji Akao thought QFD can be defined from a general view and a special view. General QFD means to
decide the quality of design according to customer requirements so that customer requirements could be met in early
design phases. Special QFD values work distribution executing quality assurance within an organization so as to
smoothly complete quality requirements [4]. Different steps of quality function deployment are used by different
industries. However, there are four basic phases. The first phase is product design. This phase mainly turns customer

requirements (obtained from questionnaires for market investigation or other methods) to engineering design. In the
second phase, the requirements of engineering design derived from the first phase will be turned into minor product
requirements and characteristics of parts. In the third phase of planning for production engineering, it is to select
proper production methods or engineering according to minor product requirements and characteristics of parts
resulted from the second phase. The final phase is production engineering control planning. Different production
engineering control methods are selected based on different production methods. The four phases are successive and
coherent as shown in Figure 3.

Design requirements

Production Plan

Requirements
Conversion

Matrix
deployment

Requirements for
production
engineering

Requirements
Conversion

Matrix
deployment

Figure 3

Part
Characteristics

Requirements
Conversion

Matrix
deployment

Design
requirements

Matrix
deployment

Customer
requirements

Requirements
Conversion

Requirements for
production engineering

Part characteristics

QFD Phases Flow

Chang [5] used quality function deployment to obtain critical quality items accompanying setups of design
parameters derived from Taguchi quality engineering as references for noise variances of products and production
engineering stability.

Cheng [6] pointed out that quality function deployment mainly uses team work to proceed with

relevant design and service for products based on customers needs so as to effectively enhance the reliability and
accuracy of design. Cheng [7] applied QFD conversion to calculate design parameters for users of braillewriter for
design improvements. Prasad [8] defined quality from an industrial historical point of view that there should be four
developing phases such as examination, production engineering control, quality assurance as well as strategic quality
management while the application of QFD could shorten the distance between the four developing phases.
Based on the above, the application of QFD on products can help to effectively shorten the development period
by converting vague customer requirements to design necessary for the process of production.

2.2 TRIZ Principles

TRIZ is the abbreviation of Theory of Inventive Problem Solving. In the 1950s, the scientist Genrich
Altshuller and his colleagues of the former Soviet Union organized 39 engineering characteristics and 40 inventive
principles by referencing over two million patented products. The reason leading them to do so was that there are often
different fields involved in the process of product development while product design could be delayed and limited due
to the subjective concepts or lack of know-how of the engineers responsible for research and development. Therefore,
TRIZ combines engineering parameters and inventive principles matching with contradiction matrix to list the
problems possibly arising from product research and development. In addition, the design of contradiction matrix is
useful for finding out the deteriorating influence brought by an engineering characteristic under improvement to
another.
In regard to the study on TRIZ principles, Wang [9] has made detailed definitions on 30 parameters and 40
principles. In the contradiction matrix, an analysis of subject v.s. environment was used to redefine vacant matrix
elements. Liu [10] raised integrated and improved TRIZ principles and applied them to green innovation design based

on the study of the relevance of environmental efficiency with 39 parameters. Meanwhile, Liu introduced QFD method
to assist designers for presenting products with green design and market value while making innovative design.

2.3 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a systematic analytical method on reliability used in the phases of
product design and pro-active engineering. This method helps to raise potential failure modes in the process of product
design and production. Analysis is further made on raised failure modes so as to identify weak points of design and
production in early developing process. Shortened period for product development and reduced risk of product in the
market can be achieved after making improvements through FMEA methodology.
Regarding the study on FMEA, Hsu [11] established a synchronized-engineering-oriented product development
system which integrated QFD and FMEA. A product FMEA list is established by using FMEA methodology. The
evaluated risk priority number (PRN) is defined and adjusted by using P value and k value derived from management
requirements. The calculated result of FMEA weighing value ( Fi ) will directly feedback to QFD in order to
successfully achieve a synchronized engineering development mode between QFD and FMEA.

2.4 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

A policy-making process is to select one or more alternatives from many of them based on numerous criteria. It
is not easy to make a rational decision through subjective judgment according to past selective behaviors (that is,
experience) especially while facing complicated or vague conditions. In case there is huge influence on an individual
or an enterprise due to such decision, policy-makers would be challenged with great pressure on policy-making. Teng
et. al. [12] mentioned that the purpose of AHP development is to make complicated problems systemized. Therefore,
those problems are split into different hierarchies and clues are obtained through quantitative judgment for synthesis
and evaluation in order to provide policy-maker sufficient information to select a proper alternative. Meanwhile, risk
of making wrong decision can be reduced. AHP method is to make comparison between factors from the same
hierarchy, that is, to evaluate the relative importance between factors by pair comparisons. The basic measurement is
divided into five categories: same important, slightly more important, very important, extremely important and
absolutely important. The measurement values of 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 are given. The medium values of 2, 4, 6 and 8
between measurement values are also given as shown. The results are derived from the evaluation according to the
measurement as shown in Table 1 by using AHP methodology.

Table 1
Measurement
1
3
5
7
9
2,4,6,8

Measurement Description for AHP Methodology

Definition
Same important
Slightly more important
Very important
Extremely important
Absolutely important
Medium values between
measurements

Description
Two factors are of the same importance.
One factor is slightly more important than the other.
One factor is quite more important that the other.
One factor is extremely more important than the other.
One factor is absolutely more important than the other.
Whenever a compromised value is needed.

3. Research Methods and Structure

From the above, it is learned that the phase of conception design acts as the most important in the overall

conception design process. The design process is divided into three phases: analysis, synthesis as well as evaluation.
These three steps are repeated as design is proceeding till a solution is found. The phase of analysis mainly translates
customer requirements and problems arising from design into readable engineering requirements. Knowing the
engineering requirements through such analysis, related techniques for those pending requirements could be solved by
taking the advantage of various design management. Finally, a variety of techniques meeting the engineering
requirements may be sorted out. In the meantime, it is necessary to assess which technique is the most appropriate for
subsequent production requirements. The most popular method adopted for such assessment in the industries is the
overall QFD raised by Professor Yoji Akao in 1972. The most appropriate technique can be selected based on the
analysis through the four phases. However, there are several questions while practicing QFD.
1.

The results of engineering requirements translated from customer requirements would often be inclined to
certain criteria due to the influence of the subjective concepts carried by engineering or designers.

2.

The purpose of an existing requirement mainly serves for achieving a new function. However, there would
be no obvious innovation when an innovative design is conducted under an old idea. Therefore, it would be
difficult to develop a new technique to solve the problems arising from related requirements.

3.

Generally speaking, there are not detailed evaluations and comparisons for production process of new parts
though the execution of QFD does consider the deployment of production process.

Based on the above problems, this study raises the approach of integration of TRIZ and FMEA with QFD. The
study structure is divided into two phases as shown in Figure 4. The first phase is the integration of TRIZ and QFD.
The main purpose of the integration is to find out a solution for design. In TRIZ principles, all of the engineering
problems are related to 39 engineering parameters and moreover customer requirements are the sources of engineering
problems. Therefore, it could be presumed that customer requirements are relevant to 39 engineering parameters.
Apply AHP to figure out engineering parameters based on the evaluation criteria according to customer requirements.
Fill the engineering parameters in the most left column of engineering requirement in the House of Quality. In addition,
technical requirement is commonly figured out with the application of KJ method in QFD. The basic application of KJ
method is to execute deployment according to the experience of engineers. A great number of technical requirements
occur in this part which could cause a waste of time for subsequent evaluations. Furthermore, the subjective concept of
engineers will place great influence on the results produced. Therefore, after using TRIZ to find out correspondent
engineering parameters, the Single Characteristic principle can be introduced in order to find out the solution for
improving the engineering parameters as well as reducing the deterioration of other parameters. After finding out a
relevant principle, fill the principle in the upper column of technical requirement in the House of Quality. The
engineering parameter and inventive principle obtained in this part mainly serves for the purpose of providing
engineers a criteria and limitations to a certain degree instead of free development of design. Such results obtained will
meet customer requirements and decrease the complication of subsequent evaluation on strategic design. Engineers
will get some innovative ideas due to TRIZ inventive characteristics.
The second phase is the integration of QFD and FMEA. The main purpose of this phase is to evaluate the design
strategy obtained from the first phase. The factors influencing production speed and cost will become the keys to
success for todays enterprise. Therefore, finding out design strategy does not necessarily mean such strategy meet
the internal requirements of an enterprise. It still needs detailed evaluation to know which design strategy meets the
internal requirement of an enterprise. FMEA is frequently used by enterprises for evaluating the reliability of parts
design and production process. Find out factors influencing the reliability of parts in advance and evaluate them by

giving marks from 1 to 10. Since this study focuses on the feasibility of design strategy in an enterprise, three different
situations are given for re-evaluation. Refill in the QFD form with the weighing values finally obtained and find out
the design strategy with the highest value.

1st Phase: Search for Design Strategy

2nd Phase: Evaluation on Design Strategy

Customer Requirements

AHP method

QFD Weighing Analysis

in House of Quality
easy to
produce

39 parameters

Engineering
requirements
Single Engineering
Characteristic

easy to
assemble

easy to use

FMEA
weighing

40 principles

Technical requirements

Figure 4

Final Design Strategy

Systematic phases of the research

4. A Case Study
The combination of QFD/TRIZ/FMEA raised by this study for constructing product conception design pattern
mainly serves the purpose of discussing how design management methods raised in early phases of design influence
the overall speed, cost and reliability of product development. Therefore, this study provides the example of an
innovative design on safety assembly of a pneumatic staple gun to verify the effect of such pattern.

4.1 Principles of Pneumatic Staple Gun

The most common method for human beings to connect two different objects is to use a staple-like object to
combine things together. We often observe products using staple-like object for connection. It is a waste of time and
energy if simply manually striking a staple. Therefore, pneumatic staple gun driven by air-pressure is invented. A
pneumatic staple gun as shown in Figure 5 comprises top seat assembly, firing pin assembly, cylinder assembly, switch
set, shooting assembly, rear plug set, safety assembly and staple groove assembly.

Shooting Assembly

Top seat assembly

Cylinder assembly

Rear plug set

Safety assembly
Firing pin assembly
Staple groove
assembly
Figure 5. Assemblies of a Pneumatic Staple Gun

4.2 Statement of Problem

A pneumatic staple gun carries the characteristic of turning air pressure into to reciprocating impact. It is often
used for constructing wood house. Most of the time, the accuracy of aiming point is not required. However, designer
has been asked to pay attention to the strength and durability of the structure as dynamics involved. It is requested that
an aiming point should be at its accurate position or a certain position should be connected with a reinforced iron sheet.
This indicates that alignment will become a compulsory function for a staple gun in the future. In addition, a pneumatic
staple gun is usually equipped with safety mechanism. However, it is possible for users to press the trigger by mistake
which might cause shooting action as the switch is driven due to slight retraction when the outer end of safety
mechanism seated at external ejection assembly touches an object (instead of the aimed object). Anything could
happen at the construction site. A pneumatic staple gun is a powerful hand tool easily causing serious injuries.
Therefore, it is very important to take the design of safety mechanism into consideration.

4.3 The Applications of AHP Methodology

According to the above descriptions, we understand that the customer requirement lies in alignment function and
single shot function. However, it is a kind of vague expression which shall not be directly taken for design. Therefore,
the first necessary step is to convert the requirement into engineering parameters for analysis. Before such conversion,
the requirement is generally analyzed. It is necessary to set up design criteria for such requirement first. For example,
staple groove is set as the design criteria regarding the alignment function through the discussions of engineers. And
safety assembly is set as the design criteria regarding single shot function. There are a total of 39 engineering
parameters to describe design problems in TRIZ. However, not all engineering parameters are necessary to solve
design problems. Consequently, some parameters have to be deleted according to the requirements of design. The
inventive principles remained after such deletion will be applied with AHP methodology due to its characteristic of
multiple targets evaluation to select the parameters as shown in Figure 6.

Problems

Evaluation
Criteria

Inventive idea s

Alignment
Function

Single Shot
Function

Engineering parameters after deletion meeting

the requirements of alignment and single shot
functions

Obtain engineering paramete rs

Figure 6

Ideas

Contents

Results

AHP Analysis Flow

First, there are two requirements in the current phase and the design for the two may interfere with each other.
Therefore, weighing between the two requirements should be compared as shown in Table 2 so as to identify which
one is the prior. Coming up with comprehension from internal experienced engineers of industry to figure out engineer
parameter which could be feed the need from 39 ones Then, choose 3.- length of moving object; 12.- shape and 14. -

strength meeting the requirements from 39 engineering parameters and conduct analysis as shown in Table 3-1 and
Table 3-2. In the first step, the priority for each of the three engineering parameters regarding the alignment function is
obtained. In the second step, the priority for each of the three engineering parameters regarding the single shot function
is obtained. After obtaining the priority of the three engineering parameters, an integrated analysis is organized as
shown in Table 4. Respectively time the required weighing values with priorities of engineering parameters derived
from the two functions and then add the values. Divide the addition by 2 and the engineering parameter with a higher
chance to satisfy the two requirements at the same time can be obtained.
Table 2

AHP Requirement Evaluation Form

Alignment Function

Alignment
Function
1

Single Shot
Function
4

Single Shot Function

1/4

Line vs Column

Geometric Average

Priority

(1 * 4)1 / 2 = 2
1
(1 * )1 / 2 = 0.125
4

2/2.125=0.95
0.125/2.125=0.11

Total = 2.125
Table 3-1
Alignment
Line vs Column
Function

AHP Evaluation Form with Different Appeals

Length of
moving
object

Shape

Strength

Geometric Average

Priority

(1 * 4 * 6)1 / 3 = 2.88

0.69

12

Length of moving
object
Shape

1/4

(1 / 4 * 1 * 7)1 / 3 = 1.21

0.29

14

Strength

1/6

1/7

(1 / 6 * 1 / 7 *1)1 / 3 = 0.07

0.01

Total=4.16

Table 3-2

Line vs
Single Shot
Column
Function
Length of moving
3
object
12
Shape
14

AHP Evaluation Form with Different Appeals

Length of
moving
object

Shape

Strength

Geometric Average

Priority

(1* 2 * 3)1/ 3 = 1.81

0.5

1/2

(1 / 2 *1* 5)1/ 3 = 1.35

0.37

Strength

1/3

1/5

1/ 3

(1 / 3 *1 / 5 *1)

= 0.40

0.11

Total=3.56

Table 4

General Analysis Form

Shape

Strength

Alignment Function (0.95)

Length of Moving
Object
0.95*0.69

0.95*0.29

0.95*0.01

Single Shot Function (0.11)

0.11*0.5

0.11*0.37

0.11*0.11

Decision Parameter

0.355

0.158

0.011

4.4 Design parameters via TRIZ Single Characteristic Principle

In a TRIZ contradiction form, when an inventive principle relative to a single engineering parameter appear at
the highest frequency, it means such inventive principle is the least to cause deterioration of other engineering
parameters. And this is how we apply single characteristic principle. Therefore, the appearance times of each inventive
principle corresponding to each engineering parameter are calculated as shown in Table 5. It is obvious that the most
frequent principle appearing in length of moving object is No. 01 partition and No. 29 application of pneumatic or
hydraulic structure. No. 29 is contradicted to the power source of this staple gun therefore it is not considered to use.
Only No. 1 partition will be conducted with further analysis.
Table 5
Times of principle appearance
Single Engineering

Statistics of Single Characteristic Principle

A
(15 times and
above)

B
(13~15 times)

C
(10~12 times)

D
(7~9 times)

01,29

04,17,35

08,10,14,28

13,19,24,26

Length of Moving Object

E
(4-6 times)
02,07,09,16,34

F
(1~3 times)
05,06,12,18,22,2
3,25,32,36,37,39
,40

4.5 Introduce practical design parameters to QFD and FMEA Forms

The practical design is obtained by using AHP approach and single characteristic principle at the moment.
However, the subject concept of engineers still dominates a policy-making up to now. To avoid sacrificing basic
customer requirement in the process of conversion, it is necessary to calculate if such practical design meets the
original customer requirement with the application of QFD. First, a conversion form of requirements is established.
Now, the partition principle can be used as reference for design requirement conversion as shown in Table 6. The
single principle can be converted to practical design method through group creations. Next, place design criteria
derived from customer requirements in column while placing practical design methods in line in a QFD matrix. More
design criteria a method satisfies means more space for improvement of design to meet customer requirements as
shown in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2.
The practical design methods derived from QFD requirement Conversion are provided by personnel with
different concepts from different departments. Therefore, it is hard to identify if failure would occur in subsequent
design which may cause changes of design. The purpose of failure mode and effect analysis is to positively prevent
changes of design. after the products were designed, the most important factor is design could possibly commercialized
or not, and if design could be realized depends on the management and sales cost of products internal industry In
FMEA, three evaluation criteria including detection difficulty, incidence and seriousness refer to functional failure of
parts and components. However, this study seeks for effects analysis towards different design methods. Therefore, it is
suggested to set up other proper evaluation criteria by senior engineers. The evaluation on preliminary design can be
divided into production, assembly and usability. Evaluation on Production identifies if the parts or components derived
from design is easy to produce which dominates the development speed as shown in Table 8. Evaluation on assembly
takes cost of parts into consideration since wrong design for parts may cause damage on other valid parts. Such
damage becomes a waste of cost as shown in Table 9. Evaluation on usability refers to how different designs make a
product easy to use as shown in Table 10. After setting up new evaluation criteria, introduce the design methods
derived from inventive principles to FMEA analysis form for analyzing feasibility. The outcome of risk priority index
clearly identifies which design can satisfy production, assembly and usability. The lower the risk priority index is, the
more it satisfies the requirements raised. Then, set the lowest risk priority index as 1 and the rest accordingly. Introduce

the weighing values back to QFD form to get the design meeting customer requirements, reducing production and
assembly costs and decreasing changes of design. Regarding the alignment function, it indicates as shown in FMEA
analysis form that staples at an exposed position is the best design at the moment since hanging staples having the
highest mark in usability may cause injuries and death.

Table 6

Item

Customer
Requirement

Design
Criteria

Single
Engineering
Parameter
Length of moving
object
Staple

Alignment
Function

Staple
Holder

QFD Requirement Conversion

Inventive Principles
Partition

Expose staples for an aiming point by separate them from staple groove.

Staple Groove

Separate to hang staple groove assembly originally contacting aiming objects for
alignment.

Switch Assembly Divide the switch assembly into external and internal seats in order to fix switch position
Setup
after shooting for no more shot.
II

Single Shot
Safety
Function Assembly

Certain distance is developed between the switch assembly and the inner plate of trigger
to avoid second shot.

Trigger
Safe Length

Divide safety assembly and use spring to achieve two mechanic reactions.

Table 7-1. QFD Form 1

Technical
Requirement
Customer Requirement
Customer
Requirement
Alignment
Function

Table 7-2. QFD Form 2

Inventive Principle
Hanging
Expose
Staple
Staples
Groove

Staple Holder

Staples

Staple groove

12

Weighing Value (A)

Technical
Requirement

Customer requirement
Customer
Requirement

Single Shot
Function

FMEA Weighing (F)

Safety
Assembly
Switch
Assembly
Setup

Separation
of Safety
Assembly

Trigger

Safe Length

Weighing Value (A)

Final Weighing (AXF)

Inventive Principle
Develop a certain
Divide switch
distance for inner
assembly to
plate of trigger
internal and
connecting the
external seats
switch assembly

11

14

18

FMEA weighing (F)

Final Weighing (AXF)

Table 8
Easy to produce
Most difficult
More difficult
Difficult
Less difficult
Middle
Easy
Easier
Easy to produce
More easier to produce
Easiest

Easy to Produce

Phenomenon
Second processing and special treatment are needed.
Second processing is needed.
Special treatment is needed.
Manual adjustment is needed after finishing a product.
Both manual and automatic production lines are needed to finish a product.
Automatic production line is needed to finish a product.
More than two molds are needed to finish a product.
One mold is needed to finish a product.
Only a processing master is needed to finish a product.
No processing master is needed to produce a product.

Level
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

Table 9. Easy to Assemble

Easy to assemble

Phenomenon

Level

Slightest

Destroy a product is needed before assembling or disassembling.

10

Slight

Possible damage may cause while assembling or disassembling a product.

Low

Possible damage may cause while assembling or disassembling a product.

Lower

More than half of parts could not be used after assembling or disassembling.

Middle

More than one part could not be used after assembling or disassembling.

Upper

Special equipment is needed to assemble or disassemble a product.

Less higher

Auxiliary tools are needed to assemble or disassemble a product.

High

A professional is needed to assemble or disassemble a product.

Higher

General staff are needed to assemble or disassemble a product.

Highest

All-in-one product without assembling or disassembling.

Table 10. Usability

Usability

Phenomenon

Level

Worst

Dangerous matters create to jeopardize a user while in use.

10

More Worse

Long-term use may cause discomfort of a user.

Worse

Improper use will cause instant damage.

Bad

Additional parts are needed to use a product.

Lower

A user feels uncomfortable due to great chances of reaction caused by shooting.

Middle

A user does not feel uncomfortable due to great chances of reaction caused by shooting.

Upper

A user does not feel uncomfortable due to few chances of reaction caused by shooting.

Easier

It is necessary to operate a product within limited space and environment.

Very easy

The operation of a product is not limited by space and environment but needs two or more steps to finish it.

Easiest

The operation of a product is not limited by space and environment and only one step is needed to finish it.

Table 11

FMEA Analysis Form

Item
Potential
Functiona Failure Mode
lity
Separate staples
Exposed
from staple groove staples may
for directly aiming cause injuries
at a point.
to a user.
Separate to hang the
Hanging
staple groove
pneumatic
originally
staple gun
contacting aiming
can not drive
points for better
safety.
alignment.

Potential Failure
Effect

Easy to Classifica
Assemble
tion

Causes for Potential

Failure

Relative
Easy to Usab Risk
Weighin
produce ility Index
g

It is a dangerous
situation and will
cause customer
complaint.

Improper moving position

may cause injuries to a
user.

18

The product will

cause injuries and
death and does not
meet criteria.

A user is jeopardized in
shooting whenever a
trigger is pushed.

10

100

0.5

Table 12. Final QFD Analysis Form

Technical
Requirements
Customers requirements
Customers
requirements

Staple
Holder
Staples
Alignment
Staple
Function
Groove
Weighing Value (A)
FMEA Weighing (F)
Final Weighing (AXF)

Innovative Principle
Hanging Staple
Expose Staples
Groove
1

12
1
12

4
0.5
2

5.

Conclusions

5.1 Final Design

Design suggestion for customer requirement is finally obtained through the establishment of design pattern in the
conception phase by this study. Exposing staples is a better choice for its alignment. Separated safety is the better
choice for single shot function. Next, design verification is conducted. Take single shot function as an example, safety
assembly is generally pushed up by contacting the surface of an aimed object so that the inner plate of trigger can
contact with a switch valve to shoot as shown in Figure 7. A connector with circulating movement is used to separate
the safety assembly into upper and lower parts. When the lower part contacts with the ground, it will form a rigid with
the connector and the upper part. If such contact releases, the power of the upper part will push the connector
backwards to off status as shown in Figure 8. The practical verification of design is shown in Figure 9.

The inner plate of trigger

Safety assembly moves up

to force the switch.

Safety assembly

a. before shooting
Figure 7

b. shooting status
Previous Safety Assembly

Upper part of safety assembly

The connector turns around

under pressure of the trigger.

Connector

Lower part of safety assembly

a. before shooting
Figure 8

b. shooting status

Innovative Design for Safety Assembly

Figure 9 Sample Verification

5.2 General Conclusion

The integrated QFD/TRIZ/FMEA for constructing the pattern of product concept design raised by this study has
been proved by case experiment. This method can be practically used for a design process executed in an enterprise.
Such integration provides engineers an approach to convert customers requirements to engineering parameters by
taking the advantage of AHP methodology. Then TRIZ principles are applied to provide innovative reference principles.
Furthermore, the feasibility of design method is analyzed by taking the advantage of the characteristics of QFD and
FMEA methodology. The above sequences not only help to clearly set up the guidelines of product design but also help

to avoid narrow thinking for products so as to further create new ideas and designs.

References
[1].

Shigley, J.E. and Mischke, C.R., 1995, Mechanical Engineering Design, McGraw-Hill, pp .13.

[2].

Ferrendier, et al, 2002, Environmentally Improved Product Design Case Studies of the European Electrical and
Electronics Industry, Eco life, The Matic Network.

[3].

1995-

[4].

Conti, T, 1989, Process Management and Quality Function Deployment, Quality Progress, Vol. 22, No. 12, pp.
45-48.

[5].

2003

[6].

1999

[7].

2001

[8].

Prasad, B, 1996, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals Integrated Product and Process Organization, Prentice
Hall, New Jersey.

[9].

2002TRIZ

[10]. 2003TRIZ
[11]. 2002 QFD FMEA
[12]. 1992(AHP)()27(6)pp. 1-20