42629 lecture 3 pt2

Integrated Product Development Integrated Product Development Process Thomas J. Howard https://sites.google.com/site/thomasjameshowardhomepage/ thow@mek.dtu.dk

Unless otherwise stated, this material is under a Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution–Share-Alike licence and can be freely modified, used and redistributed but only under the same licence and if including the following statement:

“Original material by Thomas J. Howard for course 42629 – Innovation and Product Development Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Technical University of Denmark”

2012 Original material by Thomas J. Howard for course 42629 – Innovation and Product Development Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Technical University of Denmark

The three Key disciplines of Integrated Product Development (IPD)

Market Product

Production Business

The IPD model

Purposes, uses and limitations of the IPD model

Purposes: The model will help you to understand IPD and will help you interpret progress and in NPD projects as well past projects

Use: The model can be used as a checklist to identify the relative position of a project and any phases that may have been left out

Limitations: The model will not tell you what to do next or which phases are most important to consider

But mainly... it helps you an IPD mindset!

Case Study

This case study will help you to relate the IPD model to a real situation

It is also give you some idea of the type of

documentation produced during a real development project

(SLIDES WITH GREEN TITLES)

Setting the scene

Thank you to Crown Packaging for case study material !

Project Brief

Follow your integrated Product Development Process throughout this

brief to understand how the development project is structure.

Team Members

• Jerry Stimpson Closures Business • Jason Hegarty Closures Business • Brian Sequeira Closures Business

Brainstorm team: • Chris Smith CT closures • Keith West CT closures • Chris Ramsey Innovation CT • Henry Ellis-Paul Innovation CT • Alexandre Paris Innovation CT • Thomas Howard Innovation CT

Mission statement

“To produce an add-on component to enable a

drizzle pouring function.”

Competitive advantage

• Shape and functional differentiation. Unique with metal closure.

• Salad dressing, marinades, sauces, honey, maple syrup closure with integral pourer (note that this is already on the oil or vinegar market).

Project approval • Issue 2 • Date ****** • Project number 824 765 0899 5300

• Customer Companies like Craft and Nestle. • Brands Companies like Netto and Irma • Business contact Jason Hegarty • BI Ian Bucklow • CT team Thomas Howard (Project Lead) Chris Ramsey

Background - Objective

•High interests have been elicited from customers like Craft and Nestle for an integrated pourer for the packs using metal closures.

•It would allow them to offer a product with much more functionality while keeping their current capping facilities.

Existing oil/vinegar pourers

Market info • Products Salad dressings, honey, maple syrup, Asian sauces, chilli

sauce… • Existing packaging Glass bottle with 43mm 38mm and 30mm Twist Off

closures: – 43mm: RTO, RTB – 38mm: Regular RTB, RTP, medium MTB, MTP, deep DTB, DTP – 30mm: MTP, MTB, MTO – Pasteurisable compound – Tamper evidence shrink sleeve, tag, button – Decoration Decorated cap, sleeve – Serving size from sprinkle to pour. – Serving time Serving time variable.

• Other packaging on market Glass and plastic bottles with/without integral pourers, metal &plastic caps, ROPP aluminium closures with insert.

***** is the only customer using insert in glass with a metal closure.

• Market location launched in the UK, applicable to Europe • Outlets Supermarkets • Current market size 5-10 M p.a. ( between the 3 sizes / more 38mm than

30 MTO

Launch info

• Target market +XMpa from plastic injection moulding in glass (also potential large increase from plastic on plastic market if adaptable)

• Target additional cost ~£XX/1000 increase on existing closure. Current 38 deep sold at ~£YY/1000.

< 30-40% increase on existing closure.

• Target launch Short term solution (6-8months): insert pushed in / longer term solution (few years): pourer integrated in cap.

Musts • Easy and obvious to open and use.

• Unique, giving brand differentiation. • Drip free pouring. • Suits existing capping line with minimal changes (line speed 40-300 cpm). Small

m/c to fit between filler and capper. 400N capping load. • Shelf stable for 2-3 years max. • Suits hot filling 85degC max. • Clean • Able to hold low vacuum. • Adaptable to a range of viscosities • Recyclable. • Organoleptic and alimentary approval – no effect from tainting or scalping. • No changes to the glass finish • Premium look (keep current high image of metal cap on glass). • Be customisable – flexible design. • Comply with current and future food contact regulations

Desirables • Require no extra processes on the filling line for longer term solution. • Principle could be applied across a range of closures. • Patentable. • Suits steam flushing filling to pull vacuum. • Consumer can vary flow rate in a controlled way. • Integral TE

Project plan Idea phase • Brief • Research • Brainstorm • Ideas • Review meeting • Gate End October 2008

Concept phase (skipped if we select just one concept at Idea gate) • CAD design • FEA modelling & trials • Models & consumer sales research • Manufacturing routes & costs • Concept gate (select 1 concept) Supplier selection

Project plan Feasibility phase • Customer approval • Design for manufacture • Pilot tooling • Tooling iterations • Working prototype

Development phase • ROI & Customer funding • Production tool • Customer approval • Launch

END OF BRIEF

Thank you to Crown Packaging for case study material !

Design work from the ideas phase to the concept phase

Rejected Solutions • Restrictive aperture for controlled flow of product. • Air hole to create smoother flow. • Uses existing cap and it totally concealed. – Messy due to dripping. – Insecure housing.

Rejected Solutions • Air tube for smoother pouring. • Premium, sophisticated appearance. • An addition rather than an integrated solution. – Gives an unfamiliar brand image. – Difficult to position on product. – Expensive.

Rejected Solutions • Spring loaded, retractable spout. • Air flow tube for smoother pouring. • Concealed beneath product packaging. – Too many components.

– Too expensive.

Concept Alternatives...

Channelled Aperture • Post filling insertion. • Channelled aperture for a controlled flow. • Non drip rim.

Centre Spout

• Uses existing cap. • Post filling insertion. • Channelled aperture for a controlled

flow. • Non drip rim.

Insertion options

Pre-fill – Inserted in the bottle before filling. Post-fill – Inserted into the bottle after filling. During capping – Inserted in cap and engaged into bottle during capping.

Bottles Filling

Capping Distribution

Flexible star • Deeper metal cap • Flexible lips allowing pre-filling insertion. • Angled aperture for controlled flow. • Non Drip pouring spout. • 1 Point pouring.

Extended Spout

•Post filling insertion. •Multi angle pouring. •Premium look spout. •Non drip rim.

Extended Spout

Two Piece • Both parts placed in cap, insertion during

capping. • Holding rim remains in cap after its

removal. • Non drip pouring rim. • Concealed beneath cap.

Break Away • Single part placed in cap and is

inserted during capping. • Holding bridges break away when

inserting into cap. • Non drip pouring rim. • Concealed beneath cap.

Break Away • Single part placed in cap and is inserted

during capping. • Holding bridges break away when inserting

into cap. • Non drip pouring rim. • Concealed beneath cap.

Folding Arms • Deep cap • In-cap solution, inserted during capping. • Non drip pouring rim. • Concealed beneath cap.

Plastic rim • Attached to cap and engaged during capping. • Push-over notch to secure in position. • Large centre spout (non drip). • Plastic rim exposed on exterior. • Option to remove complete closure.

Selection Criteria

END OF CASE

Where did the value lie?

Cheaper, quicker and easier production

Lighter, more sturdy, cheaper, better functioning product

No market differentiation or wow factor

$$$$ $

Where did the value lie?

Cheaper, quicker and easier production

Less functionality and convinience product

Less market differentiation $ $

Questions

42629 lecture 3 pt2

Education

42629 lecture 12 pt2

42629 lecture 2 pt2

42629 lecture 3 pt3

42629 lecture 11 pt 2

42629 lecture 4 pt2

42629 - lecture 10 - pitch training

42629 lecture 1 pt4

Propulsion Pt2

41631 lecture 3 pt2 lean startup

42629 lecture 2 pt4

41631 lecture 6 pt2 arduino

42629 lecture 1 pt3

42629 lecture 1 pt2

Catalogue Pt2

42629 lecture 3 pt4

42629 lecture 2 pt5

42629 lecture 1 pt1

Employment pt2

41631 lecture 4 pt2 open design

Camera Basics Pt2 Composition4 CameraBasics pt2.notebook 1 January 28, 2021 Camera Basics Pt2 Composition 4 CameraBasics pt2.notebook 2 January 28, 2021 4 CameraBasics pt2.notebook