From DDL Wiki

Revision as of 19:01, 29 September 2009

Client Comments on Report 1

We received your report, and we have some comments and questions. It sounds like the most prominent opportunity you identified is improving the ability to adjust the bindings easily during use conditions without tools. You seemed to have concluded that for most analyses that product is already designed well and there are no identified opportunities for improvement. This is good to know, but please keep an open mind about possible ways to make improvement as you move into brainstorming to avoid limiting innovation by implicitly assuming that the product cannot be improved. Please respond point by point to the items below. We are looking forward to seeing your ideas in Report 2.

• Executive Summary: Clear summary of major findings.
• Stakeholder Needs: Distinguish needs from implementation - it is not clear that "high quality materials" (what does this mean?) is needed if the end goal, durability, could be achieved in another way. Looks like a good list. Some needs appear to be missing like ease and speed of strapping on and taking off, comfort, and flexibility to work with different boot types.
• Use: Good description. Did you time the user making adjustments and compare with and without gloves? Including quantitative information will help sell the idea if you decide to move in this direction.
• Assembly: Please provide an assembly drawing with all components labeled. Each component should have a part number to uniquely identify it, and part numbers can be used to identify components in the assembly drawing. An exploded image will help identify how components fit together, how bolts are fastened, etc. It is not clear from the documentation how the mounting bolts fasten to the board without leaving protrusions below the board that would interfere with snowboarding.
• Mechanical Function: Okay.
• Mechanical Analysis: There is no free body diagram, and symbols are not defined. There is also no explanation of or conclusions drawn from the analysis. We do not know how to interpret this.
• Bill of Materials: Please include a part number for each component.
• DFMA: Good observations.
• FMEA: The failures you have identified all have to do with excessive force. Are there any other important modes due to, for example, corrosion or mechanical/thermal fatigue? In the event of an extreme fall, it is much better for the binding to fail than the snowboarder's leg. How do you consider this in your FMEA assessment?
• DFE: General assessment seems reasonable, but you didn't answer our question about the implications of a carbon tax.
• If any of your images, figures, or text were taken from another source, please be certain to provide proper attribution.