1

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Final Report: ME 452
Design for
Manufacturability
Redesign of a Hand-held Vacuum Cleaner

Daniel Cheng, Hrushit Dave, Rosanna Zhang and Adithya Varadarajan
12/14/2009

Fall 2009
Instructional Staff:
Professor Donald Malen
GSI Josh Bishop-Moser




2

1. Executive Summary

i. Background and motivation: Black and Decker CHV7202 hand held vacuum cleaner
was selected as our product to be re-designed because of its many flaws. Based on online
customer reviews and personal use we determined the main complaints of the vacuum
cleaner were that it lacked suction power, directed dirty air in users face and had poor
battery life which motivated us to provide an improved product.
Mission statement: Create a hand held vacuum cleaner which has increased suction
power and increased battery life at a reduced product cost through better
manufacturability
ii. Design methods and tools employed to improve the design
Preliminary design methods included making a containing system map and Kano
questionnaire methods to assess the main requirements. Competitive and Lateral
benchmarking were used to determine the product design specification. Additional
requirements were determined based on requirements of the secondary customers. A
QFD was created to transform user demands into design quality, to deploy the functions
forming quality, and to deploy methods for achieving the design quality into related
subsystems. Multiple concepts were generated by selecting seven primary principles,
creating various concepts for each principle and then selecting the best combination of
the concepts selected. Modular designs were created to address the specific needs of
different target markets and to specify which parts would be different for each product.
Design for assembly methods including using the Boothroyd-Dewhurst charts were used
to make minor changes to the design to reduce cost and improve assembly time.
iii. Resulting improvements in quality, cost and value to the customer and the
manufacturer.
The above tools and methods helped us develop an improved hand held vacuum cleaner
having increased suction power. The increased suction power and the reduced number of
sweeps required to clean are mainly facilitated by a better motor and a newly designed
rotating brush at the mouth of the vacuum cleaner. A telescopic handle with a tactile
rubberized grip has replaced the original handle to improve the handling and the user
experience. Additional features include guide light, battery charge signal and a new
switch with high or low power options to improve the efficiency of the vacuum cleaner.
The battery pack is now made to snap fit in order to make it easily replaceable if required.
The materials and manufacturing methods used to make the new products will be easily
available for the manufacturer as they are already being used in the current product. The
customer will receive increased quality, better features and an overall improved
experience because of the added functionality.

3

2. PICTORIAL SUMMARY


ORIGINAL PRODUCT
RE-DESIGNED PRODUCT
4

3. PRELIMINARY WORK
Preliminary work included the identification of parts and their required materials. This was followed by
creating a function diagram to determine the main working principles and the interacting components of
our product.
3.1 Product Dissection and Material List
An exploded view of the disassembled product can be seen in figure 2 below followed by Table 1 (next
page) detailing part name, material, function and method of manufacture.

Figure 1: Exploded view of Black & Decker CHV7202
Index:
Part Number Part Name Part Number Part Name
1.1 Main Housing Right 7 Filter Mount
1.2 Main Housing Left 8 Button
2.1 Battery Housing Left 9 Squeegee Attachment
2.2 Battery Housing Right 10 Crevice Attachment
3 Foam Filter 11 Motor
4 Charger 12 Batteries
5 Charging Stand 13 Switch
6 Nozzle 14 Battery Support

5

3.1.1 Part details- Materials and Manufacturing methods

Part
Number
Part Name Materials Method Of
Manufacture
Function
1.1 Main Housing
Right
High Impact Polystyrene Mold casted Device handle & Cover
internal parts
1.2 Main Housing
Left
High Impact Polystyrene Mold casted Device handle & Cover
internal parts
2.1 Battery
Housing Left
Polypropylene Injection Molding Provide cover for
battery unit
2.2 Battery
Housing Right
Polypropylene Injection Molding Provide cover for
battery unit
3 Foam Filter low-density polyether
Foam
Chemical processing
of cellulose
Filter exhaust air
4 Charger Rubber, Polypropylene,
Copper
Injection molding Charge the batteries
5 Charging
Stand
Polypropylene Injection molding Charging dock where
charger and Dustbuster
connect
6 Nozzle Polypropylene Injection molding Collects dust and
directs air
7 Filter Mount Polypropylene Injection molding Redirects dust into
Nozzle(7) & Holds the
Filter(2)
8 Button Polyoxymethylene Injection molding Helps toggle switch
9 Squeegee
Attachment
Low density Polyethylene
& Rubber
Injection molding Assists in cleaning
liquid spills
10 Crevice
Attachment
High Impact Polystyrene Injection molding Assists in cleaning
narrow openings
11 Motor Copper, Steel Ready-Made Provide suction power
12 Batteries Nickel, Cadmium Ready-Made Provide energy to
motor
13 Switch Polypropylene & Copper Extrusion Turns device on/off
14 Battery
Support
Polystyrene Stamping Provide support to
Battery













6

3.2 Function Diagram

We chose the hierarchical function diagram because our process was not sequential in nature. There were
several independent functions that were happening or needed to happen simultaneously. This diagram is
more suited to showing how our components come together and what functions each one serves at
present.
















7

4. DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

Our mission statement was developed based on a Kano questionnaire. The main questions for the Kano
method were developed based on the primary complaints we generated based on personal use and online
customer reviews. Target product design specification were created based on results obtained from
competitive benchmarking.

4.1 Customer Complaints
4.1.1 Complete List of Complaints
A list of complaints was generated based on personal use and available data on online shopping websites
(Please refer to Appendix A):
Air is released through the side vents while vacuuming directly into users face
Air released through the side vents has foul odor
Hard handle end does not provide a good grip
Handle end not big enough
Insufficient suction and does not provide 100% results in cleaning
Charging dock is flimsy and hard to use with a bulky adapter
No Battery indicator or charging status indicator
Battery cannot be replaced and does not last over a year
Dirt gets stuck to the foam in the dust storage which means that the foam needs to be manually
cleaned after using the vacuum
Hard to clean as dirt is lodged in the nose
Too much noise for the size and power generated
Not earth friendly
High repair costs
Stores dirt up in the sides of the nozzle so dirt falls out if tilted wrong
Thick nose hard to get between crevice even after using attachment
Poor reach- Need to bend down to access corners, floor
Not effective as a wet vac
Performance degrades as battery is used
Charging time is hugely disproportionate to charge duration

4.1.2 Primary Complaints
Air is released through the side vents while vacuuming directly into users face
Charging dock is flimsy and hard to use with a bulky adapter
Insufficient suction and does not provide 100% results in cleaning
Charging does not last long










8

4.2 Containing System Map

A containing system map was created to help visualize the main requirements of our product and all the
elements which affect the product.

4.3 Mission Statement based on Kano methods
4.3.1 Kano Questionnaire and Results
Functions corresponding to complaints and their Kano Questions (Note : question a is negative and b
is positive)
a) Placement of Air Vents
a. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaners vents blew air into your face?-
Dont Like
b. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaners vents blew air towards the ground?
Dont Care
b) Easier to use Charger
a. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaner had a complicated charging dock?
Dont Like
9

b. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaner had a simple charger wire?
Like
c) Increased Suction Power
a. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaner had sufficient suction to pick up small bits
of paper?
Dont Care
b. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaner had sufficient suction to completely
remove the dust/dirt from surfaces?
Like
d) Increased Battery Life
a. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaner had a battery life of 20 minutes?
Normal
b. How would you feel if the vacuum cleaner had a battery life of 60 minutes?
Like
Kano Method Table
Negative Question Answers
Like Normal Dont Care Dont Like
Positive
Question
Answers
Like D C B
Normal
Dont Care A
Dont Like

Key Delighted , Normal , Expected
Our Kano Method Analysis Survey was carried out by the team as a whole assuming the consumer
mindset. Based on the results in the table above you can see that our analysis gave us 1 expected function,
two normal functions and two delighting functions.
4.3.2 Mission Statement
Create a hand held vacuum cleaner which has increased suction power and increased battery life at
a reduced product cost through better manufacturability.
4.4 Requirements Based on Industry Status
It was determined that the product lies within the static industry and customers
are more attracted by style, brand and quality. (Please refer to Appendix B to see
the questionnaires). A typical rate of improvement for a static product like ours is
a maximum of 10%/year. Since, the product is already being manufactured; new
specifications should be possible to be implemented via current manufacturing
methods. Based on questionnaires, no radical change would take place in the
product, but incremental changes to Black & Deckers range of 46 different hand
held vacuum cleaners. Since it is a static product, the customer is attracted by a
brand like Black & Decker which dominates the market but expects good style
and quality. A main requirement was that quality, style or cost cannot be a
tradeoff with new specifications
10

4.5 Requirements based on Primary and Secondary Markets

a. Typical secondary customer: A young couple with a baby: Age: 25-35
A young couple with a baby or a toddler might find this product useful cleaning up food mess and
spills. They would want a vacuum that is easy to hold, powerful and efficient, able to pick up both dry
and wet spills. They would also want something thats quiet, so it wont disturb their baby. Its important
for the vacuum to be easy to clean regardless of the kind of garbage it had picked up.
b. Difference between primary and secondary customer needs.
A primary customer is a single male/female in their 20s, who expects the vacuum to be easy to
use and durable. They need the vacuum to clean their apartments, so the vacuum has to be efficient
picking up dirt and small trash. The vacuum should be able to reach in narrow space and tight corners.
The secondary customer as described in part a would mainly focus on the kind of trash the vacuum is able
to pick up, and how easy it is for them to later clean the vacuum. Its also important for the vacuum to be
quiet and attractive since it would be used in a typical home environment.
Single male/female
18-30 yr
Young couple with
baby/toddler
Normal & Expected
functions
Easy to use
Durable
Reach in corners
Apartment cleaning
Powerful
Quiet
Picks up dry and wet
food spills
Easy to clean
Delighting functions Inexpensive
Easy to store
attractive
Attractive
Several settings for
different types of trash


4.6 Competitive & Lateral Benchmarking
Competitive benchmarking helped us understand how our product compared with that of our
competitors. It was concluded that some of the competitors provided additional features such as a
rotating bristled brush, better filtration system, LED charging indicator and many more which are
summarized in the tables below.

a) Table a: Competitive benchmarking with products at the same price level
b) Table b: Competitive benchmarking with products at different price levels
c) Table c: Lateral benchmarking with (Appendix C for patents)






4.6.1 Competitive Benchmarking : Table A: Same Prices
Product Name Black & Decker CHV7202 7.2-
Volt Cordless Wet/Dry
Dustbuster
OUR SELECTED PRODUCT
Eureka 79B The Boss
Cordless Rechargeable
Handheld Vacuum Cleaner

BISSELL 33A1 Pet Hair
Eraser Corded Handheld
Vacuum Cleaner

Hoover S1120 Hand Held
Wet/Dry Hand Vacuum
Cleaner

Product Image



Specifications 7.2-volt handheld vacuum
cleaner for both wet and dry
messes
sleek rechargeable cordless
design
6-ounce removable bin
empties easily
17 air watts
wet/dry filter
wall-mountable charging
base
Includes squeegee attachment
and crevice tool for tight
spots
Price $29.99

3.6 V power
Clean Air System helps
protect the motor
On-board crevice tool
Easy-to-empty dustbin
2-1/2-inch-wide cleaning
path
Lightweight design
Fingertip on/off control
switch
Wall-mountable charging
base included
Dry Vac
Price $29.99

Washable hepa media filter
and filter screen
Interchangeable hard nozzle
and flexible rubber contour
nozzle
4-inch-wide cleaning path
Easy-grip handle
Lightweight Design
Fingertip-access on/off
switch
1 Year Warranty
16-foot power cord with a
cord-wrap system
Price $29.99

Cleans both wet and dry
messes
7-1/5 volts of cordless
power
Push-button power switch
3-inch-wide nozzle
Easy-empty dirt cup;
washable
Reusable filter
Rechargeable battery;
Wall-mountable charging
stand included
1-year limited warranty
Price:$29.99


12

4.6.2 Competitive Benchmarking: Table B: Different Prices

Product Name Black & Decker CHV7202 7.2-Volt
Cordless Wet/Dry Dustbuster
OUR SELECTED PRODUCT
Black & Decker PHV1800CD 18V
Pivoting-Nose Cordless Energy-Star
Handheld Vacuum Cleaner

Shark SV736K 15.6-Volt Cordless
Handheld Vacuum Cleaner with
Motorized Brush

Product Image


Specifications 7.2-volt handheld vacuum cleaner for
both wet and dry messes
sleek rechargeable cordless design
6-ounce removable bin empties easily
17 air watts
wet/dry filter
wall-mountable charging base
Includes squeegee attachment and
crevice tool for tight spots
Price $29.99

Cordless 2-speed handheld vacuum
cleaner with 10-position pivoting
nozzle
Cyclonic action and EZ Clean Wheel
system help maintain suction power
3-stage filtration
Energy Star approved meets EPA
energy efficiency guidelines
Easy-empty system
Folds in half for storing
Includes upholstery brush, small
crevice tool, and wall-mountable
charging base
Price $69.99

Cordless handheld vacuum cleaner
with Twister Cyclonic technology
Detachable motorized brush
removes pet hair and dirt from
upholstery and carpet
Crevice tool for hard-to-reach spots
Washable filter
Convenient dust cup
LED charging and low-battery
indicator
Powerful 15.6 Volt motor
Price $39.99



13

4.6.3 Lateral Benchmarking: 3 Products Selected (Please See Appendix C for Patents)
Product
Name
Black & Decker CHV7202 7.2-
Volt Cordless Wet/Dry
Dustbuster
OUR SELECTED PRODUCT
Above ground pool cleaner:
Hayward 500 Aqua Bug
Above-Ground Automatic
Pool Cleaner
Shop vac:
925-23-10 Industrial 10-
Gallon, 6.5-HP Wet/Dry
Vacuum

Medical Suction Device:
Devilbiss Stationary
Suction Machine

Product
Image



Specifications 7.2-volt handheld vacuum
cleaner for both wet and dry
messes
sleek rechargeable cordless
design
6-ounce removable bin
empties easily
17 air watts
wet/dry filter
wall-mountable charging base
Includes squeegee attachment
and crevice tool for tight
spots
Price $29.99

SmartDrive programmed
steering system
Bottom of the pool is cleaned
quickly and completely
Installs in less than 10
minutes, without tools
Unique turbine system
provides constant balanced
flow assuring quiet operation
and gentle movement across
the pool bottom
Advanced, contoured head
design allows the AquaBug to
complete the steering pattern
in minimal time
Price:$129.00
8" x 1.25" LockOn Hose
Hand Grip & Airflow
Control 10" wet/Dry Nozzle
Crevice Tool
Round Brush, Gulper
Nozzle, Dual Surface
Selector Nozzle
Tool Basket, Cartridge Filter
High Efficiency Disposable
Filter Bag
1 Year Warranty
Price:$245.95

Device for removing
liquids or gases by suction
from the body cavities
High performance
capabilities
Runs on rechargeable
batteries
Vacuum adjustments allow
for 80-550 mm Hgfree flow
of 27 liters/minute
Smallest and strongest
portable suction unit of its
kind.
Price:$190.00

14

4.7 Product Design Specifications

Product design specifications were created based on data available from competitive and lateral benchmarking. These specifications helped us
determine target values for our end product and incorporate these requirements in our final design.

Specification Units competitiveproduct currentproduct targetPrimarymarket worldclass Interactingsystem ConstraintorNeed Kanocategory
electricpower volts 110 110 110 110/220 USpowersupply Constraint
ChargingTime Minutes 40 60 40 40 Consumer/Batterysupplier Constraint Delightful
UseableTime Minutes 30 20 60 30 Consumer Constraint Normal
Sweepstoclean Times 2or3 3or4 1 1 Consumer Need N/A
AttachmentHolder Yes/no yes no yes yes Consumer Need N/A
CreviceAttachment Yes/no yes yes no yes Consumer Need N/A
Warranty Years 1yr 1yr 2yr 2yr Manufacturer Need N/A
DustBinCapacity in^2 5 6 6 6 Consumer Need N/A
EaseofCharging Simple/Difficult Simple Difficult Simple Simple Consumer Need Normal
PlacementofAirVents Away/Toward AwayfromUser TowardUser AwayfromUser AwayfromUser Consumer Need Expected
ParticleSizepickedup Dust/dirt/small dust/dirt dust/dirt dust/dirt/smallpaperbits dust/dirt/smallpaperbits Consumer Need Delightful
BatteryChargeIndicator Yes/no no no yes yes Consumer Need N/A
TelescopicHandlewithTactileGrip Yes/no no no yes yes Consumer Need N/A
RemovalofDustfromFilter Simple/Difficult Simple Difficult Simple Simple Consumer Need N/A
ReplaceableBattery Yes/no no no yes yes Consumer Need N/A
AbilitytoPickUpwater Yes/no no yes no yes Consumer Need N/A
Weight Pounds 2lbs 3lbs 2lbs 2lbs Consumer Constraint N/A
OperationNoise dB 85 85 85 75 Consumer Need N/A








5. QUALITY FUNCTIONAL DEPLOYMENT
5.1 Quality Function Deployment Main System
A main QFD was created to transform user demands into design quality, to deploy the functions forming
quality, and to deploy methods for achieving the design quality into subsystems and component parts, and
ultimately to specific elements of the manufacturing process.


Based on the above QFD we determined that maximum weightage was attributed to Motor Power and
Useable time which actually matches our mission statement and thus validating all our preliminary work.
16

5.2 Part Deployment QFD Matrix

Part Deployment QFD matrices were created to help determine the main characteristics required in the
redesigned parts. For our project we concentrated on redesigning the handle for the vacuum cleaner and
designing a rolling bristled shaft for increasing the suction of the vacuum cleaner. Both the QFDs helped
us determine constraints for the design of individual parts. The QFDs also helped us seek the right
materials by researching materials with properties having maximum weightage in the part deployment
QFD
5.2.1 Part Deployment QFD for handle


5.2.2 Part Deployment QFD for rolling Bristled brush



17

6. CONCEPT GENERATION AND SELECTION

Based on the function diagram seven main working principles were determined to be redesigned and also
the components these working principles were related to were identified.

6.1.1 Concepts created for various Working Principles
1. Working Principle Creation We considered the following list of working principles and based
on the best combinations of these working principles we generated a variety of concepts for our
design.
1. Pick up Dirt The below were the options considered as ways to pick up dirt. Based
on our understanding of practicality and feasibility we decided that the lint roller, the
piston pump and the static charge attraction methods are not as good as the motor
suction and the rolling bristled brush options.
a. Static Charge Attraction
b. Motor Suction
c. Piston Pump Suction
d. Rolling Bristled Brush to pick up larger waste
e. Lint Roller type system
2. Filter Picked up Waste The below options were considered as ways of filtering
the waste that passes through the system. The electrostatic precipitation option is the
most unfeasible while the water filter is impractical in a handheld vacuum cleaner
even if it is effective.
a. Mesh Filter
b. Foam Filter
c. Water Filter for Dust
d. Double filter for larger and finer particles (filter tape)
e. Electrostatic Precipitation process
f. Replaceable filters like coffee filters
3. Store Picked up Waste The below options were considered as ways to store the
waste that is filtered out from the system. All of the options are feasible and we will
be deciding on the best one based on its compatibility with the best system design
selected.
a. Dust container
b. Removable Dust Bag
c. Outlet that you can attach a garbage bag to
PickUpDirt
Motor
FilterPicked
UpWaste
Dust
Filter+Holder
StoreWaste
Dust
Container
StoreElectric
Power
Battery
Recharge
Battery
Charger+Dock
TurnOn/Off
Switch
HoldSystem
handle
18

d. Dust container built into handle

e. Collapsible Dust bag storage system
4. Store Electric Power The below options were considered as ways to store the
power in the system. The most practical options will be the batteries which are most
readily available while the most impractical option will be the use of a spring.
a. Standard Battery
b. Lithium Ion Battery
c. Store as Mechanical Energy in a spring
d. Capacitors to store charge
e. Compressed Air to create a vacuum
5. Recharge Battery The below options were considered as ways to recharge the
internal power storage device. We determined that the use of a wireless charging pad
and solar recharging would both be highly inefficient and would not help us achieve
our goal for a quick charging time.
a. Electric Power from Outlet
b. Solar Recharging
c. Dynamo Recharging (convert mechanical into electrical energy)
d. Recharge from USB
e. Wireless charging pad (use induction)
6. Turn On/Off We evaluated the options for controlling the system (On/Off) using
the Pugh chart given in the next section.
a. Switch
b. Rotating Control that controls speed as well (like a fan regulator)
c. Biometric on/off slide thumb to turn on and turn off power
d. Spring Loaded stays on as long as you hold it down
e. Slider with high/low power options
f. Voice Control System
7. Hold System These were the ways that we felt the system could be held during
operation. All of these options are feasible and we decided to determine the best one
based on its compatibility with the overall best design system.
a. Standard Handle
b. Telescopic Handle
c. Folding Suitcase Handle
d. Wraparound Strap to attach to arm/foot
e. Tactile/Rubberized Grip
f. Thumb Grip (refer to sketch)





19

6.1.2 Pugh Chart used to rank various ideas created for Working Principle No.6- Switch On/Off


From the above Pugh chart we concluded that a slider with power options is definitely the best
option for switching the vacuum cleaner on/off

6.2 Created final concepts

The first chart on the large A3 sheet shows all the concepts created for working principles with
sketches. The second chart shows the 5 concepts created. This was followed by a Pugh chart
ranking the 5 concepts following which we selected our best design concept.


















6.2.1 Sketch of Various Working Principles created and highlighted in blue features working principles selected for final concept. Explanation for that is provided on the next page.



6.2.2 Generated Concepts

Based on the sketches and working principles shown on previous page we selected 5 combinations which would make our 5 concepts
for the redesigned vacuum cleaner. Some initial sketches based on these concepts are shown on the next page.










22

6.2.2.1 Generated Concept 1

23

6.2.2.2 Generated Concept 2

24

6.3 Final Concept Selection

6.3.1 Pugh Chart Comparing Various Concepts

The System Pugh chart shown on the next page helped us determine the best concept for our
final design. This chart is shown on the next page and we determined that design 5 is the best
concept we generated. All future steps such as a final sketch, architecture strategy and DFA
methods were employed based on this final design


Pugh Chart comparing all our designs based on the given design criteria


6.3.2 Final Selected Concept



25

7. ARCHITECTURE STRATEGY

We used the decision making matrix to decide what components we should platform and what
components are better made brand specific. From the matrix we decided to platform the motor, battery
and switch because the costs to offer variety in these components are high but not helping appreciably in
differentiating our product. We decided to offer brand-specific modules for handle, charger and dock,
dust container and dust filter because the cost to produce these modules are low and helps greatly in
differentiating our product.

Decision making Matrix
C
o
s
t

t
o

O
f
f
e
r

V
a
r
i
e
t
y

h
i
g
h

Platform it Analyze to Decide
Motor
Battery
switch
Does not matter Offer brand-specific
Handle
l
o
w

Charger+dock
Dust Container
Dust filter
low high
Importance to Overall Profit through Brand differentiation

After deciding which components to platform and which ones to make brand specific, we use the
modularity matrix to decide which module is included in our modules. We decided to have two brands,
basic and pro, with the premium modules in the pro brand.

Modularity Matrix
Brands: Basic Pro
Motor platform (all the same)
Dust filter Double filter
Double filter (replaceable)
Dust Container
handle dust container
(platform)
battery Li-ion (platform)
Charger + dock USB powered
Power by outlet
Switch slider with power options
Handle Tactile rubberize grip
combination of telescopic and tactile
26

8. DESIGN FOR ASSEMBLY METHODS

The methods we employed for DFA helped us understand the assembly efficiency of the product
and to help improve it by combining or redesigning a few parts which would help reduce the cost
of assembly.

8.1 Summary

Using the Boothroyd and Dewhurst (B-D) (Please see Appendix D) charts for manual handling and
manual insertion, we performed DFA analysis on the existing design of our product and estimated the
assembly efficiency.

In our initial design, the total manufacturing time is 190.5 seconds which cost 76.20 cents with a design
efficiency of 29.9%.

After our redesign, the total manufacturing time is improved to 138.05 seconds and cost 55.22 cents
(20.98 cent savings) and increased design efficiency up to 52.2%.

The major changes (listed below) made in the design were to achieve ease of assembly by minimizing the
number of parts and applying the DFA rules are summarized below.

1) Connecting shaft for rotating bristled brush at the open end using motor/battery power was
Replaced with a much simpler wheel gear purely mechanical system:
a. It would avoid excessive assembly steps by reducing the number of parts
b. The rotating shaft can be rotated by implementing a high gear ratio between wheels at the
front end and the shaft.
c. Avoids using motor/battery power thus increasing efficiency
2) Connection of Individual parts to the battery (switch,signal light,guide light and power inlet) was
replaced with a wire module which is connected to each of these parts and is connected to the
battery
a. It avoids the different wires from tangling or nesting
b. It increases speed and ease of assembly as only one connection is made to the battery
3) Rolling Bristled brush nozzle is no longer detachable but the shaft is directly snap fitted in the
dust container
a. Decreases number of parts and cost
4) Redesigned rolling bristled brush: Modified the spiral design which increases rotation via airflow
and has inbuilt bristle-like characteristics
a. Reduced number of parts
5) Combination of signal light and guide light- The guide light will be programmed to serve as a
signal light during charging thus combining two different lights into one









27

8.2 Assembly efficiency Table of initial Design

28

8.3Assembly efficiency Table after redesign

29

9. DESIGN FOR SNAP FITS

Some main areas were identified to include snap fits which would help increase the assembly efficiency
and reduce the number of parts in our redesigned product.

9.1 Methods and Equations used

After examining the assembly efficiency tables, we identified the parts that could be redesign into snap
fits either for eliminating fasters or simply for assembly time reduction.
The 2 snap fits design we chose to add into our design are:
1) Snap fit between the two halves of the interior housing for the motor which can be seen in
attached figure
2) Snap fit between dust container(subassembly1) with main housing (subassembly2) which can be
seen in the attached figure
Assumptions:
1) Based on existing product and material selection in previous homeworks we select
Polypropylene (PP) as the appropriate material for both the snap fit parts
2) The interior housing snap fit is permanent and would not have to be separated while there would
be frequent separation and joining in the dust container snap fit
3) Calculations are for each cantilever beam in the snap fit
4) It was assumed that we would need an assembly force of 25N
5) Appropriate assumptions were made for thickness, width and height for each snap fit
Equations used:
1) o = Jcgrccs n18u - to convert degrees to radians for bending angle
2) Finding Deflection force---Where: b=width, h=thickness, E= Secant Modulus, = strain, l=length
3) Finding Assembly Force---Where: P = Deflection force, = coefficient of friction, = assembly
angle
4) Finding Required Beam Deflection---- Where = permissible strain, l=length, h=thickness, y=
beam deflection












30

9.2 Calculation of Snap fits

9.2.1 Calculations for Interior Housing Snap fit

1) Interior Housing
Material Properties
Material coeff of friction () strain E (Gpa)
Polypropylene 0.450 0.056 1.22
Dimensions (m) Angles
b (width) h (thickness) length alpha 40 0.698 rad
0.008 0.002 0.030 beta 65.8 1.148 rad

Calculated Results
Engagement Force P 12.15 N
Assembly
Force F 25.16 N Deflection y 0.0168 m


Below is our final concept designing a snap fit for our vacuum motor. This snap fit helps our assembly
efficiency by eliminating fastener therefore increasing assembly efficiency and reduce cost.






31

9.2.2 Calculation for Snap fit for dust container

2) Dust Container
Material Properties
Material coeff of friction () strain E (Gpa)
Polypropylene 0.450 0.0336 1.22
Dimensions (m) Angles
b (width) h (thickness) length alpha 40 0.698 rad
0.008 0.002 0.040 beta 65.8 1.148 rad
Calculated Results
Engagement Force P 5.47 N
Assembly
Force F 11.32 N Deflection y 0.0179 m

Below is our snap fit design for our dust container and body of the vacuum. This snap fit is designed for
repeated assembly and disassembly of the user for ease in emptying dust in the container.








32

10. MATERIAL AND PROCESS SELECTION

This section covers our detailed material and process selection procedure that was used to determine the
materials and manufacturing processes for our vacuum cleaner redesign. The focus is on two primary
components that were redesigned and these are the HANDLE and the ROLLING BRISTLED BRUSH.
10.1 Handle
We have redesigned the handle with certain additional features such as tactile grip, telescopic
functionality and the switch located on the handle. However, for the sake of the homework we focus on
the main cylindrical shaft of the handle.
10.1. 1 Primary and Secondary Functions
1. Primary Function -- STRENGTH
a. Bear Axial Loads This is important because the handle should be able to withstand the
load of the system when used.
b. Bear Torsional Loads This is important as the handle should not be flimsy and twist
during operation
c. Impact Resistance This is important to ensure that the handle does not break when
dropped.
2. Secondary Functions
a. Lightweight The majority of system weight arises from the core components of the
motor and batteries. The handle shouldnt add to that excessively as the system needs to
be handheld thus the need to be lightweight.
b. Durability (Wear Resistance) This is necessary as the handle will be the most used
interface between the user and the vacuum cleaner system and this needs to be able to
withstand wear over time.
c. Insulate Heat/Electricity There will be heat generated by the rotation of the motor and
there will also be electricity in the system when charging, in order to prevent the user
from coming into contact with either of these it is necessary that the handle be an
insulator.
d. Low Cost The majority of system cost arises from the core components of the motor
and batteries and the handle needs to be low cost in order to keep the total system within
a reasonable price.

10.1.2 Function Objective Constraints-----Property Limits, Material Indices



Component Handle
Function Grip for entire system Objective Minimize Cost
Constraint m<=500 grams Minimize Weight
Conductivity <= 0.8*10
-14
S.m
-1
Free Variable Choice of material
Axial >= 1.5 kg-force Thickness
Cost<=$3 per unit
Must be an inert material
33

10.1.2.1 Justification of Property Limits

1. Mass The primary mass of the vacuum cleaner comes from the motor. It defeats the purpose of
a handheld vacuum cleaner if the handle weighs more than 500 grams.
2. Conductivity No part of the vacuum cleaner should be conductive as it should insulate and
protect the user from electric shock. Thus, the conductivity has to be approximately around that
of air. (Good insulator)
3. Axial force Assuming that the remainder of the vacuum cleaner weighs approximately 1kg, the
handle should be able to withstand the weight of the cleaner without deforming/breaking during
operation
4. Cost It has to be low cost in order to keep the price of the system low.
5. Inert material the material shouldnt react with various things in the environment in order to
remain robust.
10.1.2.2 Material Index -- Strength limited, outer radius specified -- Maximize
o

2
3
(C
p
- p)

10.1.3 Material Selection First Stage Property Limits




34

10.1.4 List of materials from first stage of material selection

Handle Suitable Justification Applications
Acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene
(ABS)
Yes Meets all requirements, tough,
weather resistant, Cost effective
and lightweight
Housings, luggage shells, toys
Natural rubber (NR) No Although it meets all the
requirements it is highly
flammable and cannot be recycled
NA
Polyethylene (PE) Yes Low density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
Milk containers
Polypropylene (PP) Yes Fire retardant, widely used,Low
density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
Pipes, pipe fittings, beer bottles, air
ducts
Polystyrene (PS) Yes Low density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
Electronic housing, household
appliances
Polyvinylchloride
(tpPVC)
Yes Low density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
boat fenders, pipe fittings, medical
tubes

10.1.5 Material Selection Second Stage Application of Material Index
Application of Material Index in CES (Red Arrows indicate direction of increasing index)



Slope=3/2
35

Final material selected is Polypropylene because:

- Good insulator, meets density & cost requirements and has high yield strength
-Lowest density and Lowest cost combination as compared to other candidate materials
-Already being used in current product
- Maximizes Material Index as seen in figure on previous page
10.2 Rolling Bristled Brush
In order to increase the suction of the vacuum cleaner we have added a rolling bristled brush. However,
for the sake of material selection and process selection for the homework we focus on the main rotating
shaft which holds the bristles but we do not focus on the bristles in the homework
10.2. 1 Primary and Secondary Functions
1. Primary Function DURABILITY
a. Resist Wear over extended and repeated use This component will constantly come in
contact with the surface that needs to be cleaned and will also be in constant rotation
during operation and it should withstand this.
b. Resistant to Water Since the vacuum cleaner will continue to have wet/dry operation,
this shaft needs to be resistant to water.
c. Resists Torsional Deformation While cleaning, the rotating brush will encounter
torsional forces that oppose the direction of rotation and it should be able to withstand
this.
d. Resists Thermal Deformation The repeated rotation at high speeds is bound to
generate heat due to friction with the surface that needs to be cleaned. The shaft material
needs to be able to withstand this heat generation without deforming.
2. Secondary Functions
a. Light Weight This is important as the motor needs to drive this rotating shaft and if it
is heavy it will cause the motor to be inefficient, less powerful and will affect the battery
life.
b. Shouldnt Absorb Odors This is important as the smell of the picked up waste
material shouldnt stay on the rotating shaft and cause an inconvenience to users
c. Low Cost The majority of system cost arises from the core components of the motor
and batteries and the shaft needs to be low cost in order to keep the total system within a
reasonable price.

10.2.2 Function Objective Constraints-----Property Limits, Material Indices



Component Handle
Function Rotate Bristles for dust pick up Objective Minimize Cost
Constraint m<=150 grams Minimize Weight
Fatigue Strength >= 10 MPa at 10^7 cycles Free Variable Choice of material
Cost<=$1 per shaft Thickness
Must be an inert material
36

10.2.2.1 Justification of Property Limits

1. Mass The primary mass of the vacuum cleaner comes from the motor. It defeats the purpose of
a handheld vacuum cleaner if the bristle brush weighs more than 150 grams.
2. Fatigue Strength This part will undergo repeated rotations over its life time and will probably
encounter the most forces over the product life time. So fatigue strength is important to have a
durable product.
3. Cost It has to be low cost in order to keep the price of the system low.
4. Inert material the material shouldnt react with various things in the environment in order to
remain robust.
10.2.2.2 Material Index -- Strength limited, outer radius specified -- Maximize
o

2
3
(C
p
- p)
10.2.3 Material Selection First Stage Property Limits






37

10.2.4 List of materials from first stage of material selection

Rolling Bristled Brush Suitable Justification Applications
Acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene
(ABS)
Yes Meets all requirements, tough,
weather resistant, Cost effective
and lightweight
Housings, luggage shells, toys
Natural rubber (NR) No Although it meets all the
requirements it is highly
flammable and cannot be recycled
NA
Polyethylene (PE) Yes Low density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
Milk containers
Polypropylene (PP) Yes Fire retardant, widely used,Low
density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
Pipes, pipe fittings, beer bottles, air
ducts
Polystyrene (PS) Yes Low density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
Electronic housing, household
appliances
Polyvinylchloride
(tpPVC)
Yes Low density, price and meets all
requirements including yield
strength and insulation
boat fenders, pipe fittings, medical
tubes

10.2.5 Material Selection Second Stage Application of Material Index
Application of Material Index in CES (Red Arrows indicate direction of increasing index)




Slope=3/2
38

Final material selected is Polypropylene because:

- Meets weight, fatigue strength, yield strength and cost requirements
-Lowest density and Lowest cost combination as compared to other candidate materials
-Already being used in current product
- Maximizes Material Index as seen in figure above

10.3 PROCESS SELECTION
Since polypropylene was the identified best material for our two redesigned parts we combined our
process selection process into one section. The batch sizes remain the same for both the parts with other
comparable aspects as well. Process selection was done by comparing the attached process matrices and
also by plugging in values into the CES program for both the handle and the rolling bristled brush shaft
Manufacturing methods are based on the following seven properties: material, shape, mass, section size,
tolerance, roughness, economic batch size. The engineering requirements we require for the redesign of
handle and shaft of brush head are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Engineering Requirements
Specification Handle Shaft
Material Thermoplastic Thermoplastic
shape Circular
prismatic/3d
Hollow
Circular
prismatic/3d Hollow
Mass (kg) 0.34 < 0.1
section thickness (mm) 3 4
tolerance (mm) 0.5 0.5
roughness (um) < 2 < 2
batch size (units) 100,000-1,000,000 100,000-1,000,000

After going through the seven category selection (Appendix G) we have identified Injection Molding,
Blow Molding and Resin Transfer Molding as the most appropriate processes that fits our engineering
requirements. These were determined by carrying forward our part characteristics through the various
process matrices. This process has been summarized in the table below.







39

Selection
Criteria
Thermo
plastic
Shape Mass Section
thickness
Tolerance Roughness Batchsize
Selected
Processes
Injection
Molding
Injection
Molding
Injection
Molding
Injection
Molding
Injection
Molding
Injection
Molding
Injection
Molding












Convention
Machining
Convention
Machining
Convention
Machining
Convention
Machining
Convention
Machining
Convention
Machining
Blow
Molding
Blowmolding polymer
casting
polymer
casting
Blow
Molding
Blow
Molding
Blow
Molding
Resin
Transfer
Molding
compression
molding
Blow
Molding
Blow
Molding
Rotational
Molding
Resin
Transfer
Molding
Resin
Transfer
Molding
rotational
molding
Rotational
Molding
Rotational
Molding
Resin
Transfer
Molding

thermo
forming
Resin
Transfer
Molding
Resin
Transfer
Molding

Resin
Tiansfei
Noluing


On comparing these results with CES we determined that injection molding is our best option. CES
results are shown in Appendix E. The alternative method based appropriate for manufacturing our part
with the seven categories of selection is conventional machining, blow molding and Resin transfer
molding. If we were to have lower batch sizes, conventional machining would be more economical for
our needs.
10.4 IT GRADES
10.4.1 HANDLE
The critical dimension selected was the Handle Diameter. We selected this dimension as it is extremely
important to have a comfortable grip during operation of the device. Our selection was based on the
optimum anthropometric hand grip diameter as obtained from the paper Optimal cylindrical handle
diameter for grip force tasks by Yong Ku-Kong and Brian D. Lowe in 2004 for the National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health. According to this paper, the most comfortable grip sizes range from 30
to 40mm and our team selected 30mm in order for the handle to be usable by the larger population. This
selection arose from the anthropometric design philosophy that determines that designing a grip for
smaller hands automatically makes it usable by larger hands but not the other way around.
The dimensional tolerance of the diameter of the telescoping handle segments are important because these
segments need to have a snug fit with each other in order to extend and retract effectively.


40

Calculation of Tolerance Grade

Iolcroncc (in microns) = 1u
n-1
5
(u.4S - X
1
3
+u.uu1 - X)
Using a Tolerance Value of 0.5 mm = 500 microns and the selected X value of 30mm we obtained
n 1S.72
RcquircJ II 0roJc = 1S (rounJcJ Jown)
Injection Molding IT Grades = 9-14 (Achieves required IT grade, (Appendix F))
10.4.2 ROTATING BRISTLE BRUSH SHAFT
The critical dimension selected is the length of the rotating bristle brush shaft. This is important because it
has to fit perfectly in the mouth of the vacuum cleaner while allowing a smooth rolling operation with
minimum friction.
The dimensional tolerance of the length of the rotating bristle brush shaft is important because it must be
able to fit inside the head of the nozzle head.
Calculation of Tolerance Grade
Iolcroncc (in microns) = 1u
n-1
5
(u.4S - X
1
3
+u.uu1 - X)
Using a Tolerance Value of 0.5 mm = 500 microns and the selected X value of 100mm we obtained
n 12.79
RcquircJ II 0roJc = 12 (rounJcJ Jown)
Injection Molding IT Grades = 9-14 (Achieves required IT grade,(Appendix F))

10.5 SUMMARY OF MATERIAL AND PROCESS SELECTION
10.5.1 Material:
Base on the CES material selection tool, we have identified Polypropylene as the ideal material for both
the handle and the bristle brush shaft. Polypropylene is ideal for the handle because it meets our weight,
fatigue strength, yield strength and cost requirements. In addition, Polypropylene is better than other
materials because it has the lowest density at lowest cost and is already proven to be effective on the
market for this purpose. We desire low density, because we would like to minimize the weight of the
system. Polypropylene is also a good insulator, which we require to insulate the user from static
electricity buildup in the vacuum system from the user. The bristle brush shaft will also be made of the
same material because of the same requirements as the handle.

41

10.5.2 Primary Manufacturing Process:

Based on CES results and answers to question 5 we have decided that Injection Molding is the most
suitable manufacturing method to produce both our Handle and the shaft for the rolling bristled brush. It
meets all our requirements based on material, shape, mass, thickness, tolerance, roughness and economic
batch size characteristics. Secondary process that can be used include conventional machining, blow
molding and resin transfer molding based on CES results and process capability matrices.
11. DRAWING AND KEY PARTS WITH DIMENSIONS
11.1 Final Concept Perspective Drawing
Sketch below shows the perspective view and the side view of the product exterior. The diagram to the bottom right shows how the
telescopic handle feature we proposed would extend and collapse during use. All the redesigned parts are labeled on the sketch.

43

11.2 Exploded View of the Product Interior

The exploded diagram shows the relationship between all the main parts. A cross section of the interior of the product main body shows
the major components such as the battery, motor, and the double filtration system.

44

12. DESIGN FOR ROBUSTNESS

12. 1 SNR Calculation
In order to fine tune some of the engineering characteristics, we have to conduct a series
of experiments to obtain the optimal configurations of the product. To demonstrate this process,
we have selected Air Watts as our example engineering characteristic. Air watts are obtained by
the measurement of suction and airflow at vacuum cleaner inlet. This is also an important
customer attribute because suction power was one of the delighting functions rated by the
customers. In this case, our optimizing target is bigger the Air Watts value, the better the
suction, which means we need to use the corresponding Signal to Noise Ratio equation to
calculate the SNR value and Loss value.

SNR = -1u - log (
1
n
- -
1

i
2
n
=1
)

Ioss = C(1y)
2


12.2 Control and Noise Factors
Before conducting the actual experiments, we need to determine the control factors and
noise factors that influence the Air Watts values. The important control factors and noise factors
along with their levels of control are listed below.
i. Control Factors
1. Motor Selection Power rating 7.2v (+1) or 3.6v (-1)
2. Power Source Voltage Level 7.2v (+1) or 3.6v (-1)
3. Design of Nozzle Difference between inlet and outlet in terms of
cross section area 16 cm
2
(+1) or 4 cm
2
(-1)
4. Design of Fan Amount of air displaced 3 ft
3
/s
2
(+1) or 1 ft
3
/s
2
(-
1)
ii. Noise factors
1. Operating Environment Temperature 115F = 46C (+1) vs. 32F =
0C (-1)
2. Relative Humidity 85% (+1) vs. 15% (-1)

45

12.3 P-Diagram
With these important factors determined, we were able to set up a P-Diagram for the engineering
characteristic we intend to optimize. The P-Diagram is shown below.












12.4 Factor interaction
The only interaction that can be found in our list of important factors is an important one.
It is the interaction between the motor selection depending on power rating and the selection of
the power source depending on the voltage level of the motor. If a motor with a higher power
rating is selected then correspondingly a higher voltage level power source needs to be
incorporated. E.g. our existing vacuum cleaner motor has a power rating of 7.2V and the power
is sourced from six 1.2V rechargeable batteries. A linear graph below shows the interaction
between all the control factors.




CONTROL
FACTORS
OperatingEnvironment
Temperature
46C(+1)vs.0C(1)
RelativeHumidity
85%(+1)vs.15%(1)
Motor
Selection7.2v
(+1)or3.6v(1)
PowerSource
7.2v(+1)or
3.6v(1)
Designof
Nozzle
16cm
2
(+1)or
4cm
2
(1)
DesignofFan
3ft
3
/s
2
(+1)or
1ft
3
/s
2
(1)
AirWatts
(Largerisbetter)
NOISE
FACTORS
2
4
3
5
1
46

12.5 Taguchi Method

Using the Taguchi method, we could conduct the least numbers of experiments to
determine how the selected control factors and noise factors affect the outcome of Air Watts.
Below is our experimentation set up with all the aforementioned factors listed, where their
definitions and levels are also noted below. The interaction between Motor Selection and Power
Source is placed in column three. No actual experiments were conducted, and therefore no data
is present in the chart.

47

13. CONCLUSIONS

Based on the preliminary and final design methods we have redesigned the Black & Decker
CHV7202 hand-held vacuum cleaner to improve its functionality. We were successful in addressing all
our customers complaints and providing an overall improved system.
We have successfully met our mission statement in the redesign of the B&D vacuum cleaner in
simultaneously increasing suction power and battery life. Through the addition of rotating suction brush
head, we are able to increase the suction power of the unit while still using the original motor. Although
the airflow would inevitably decrease due to the extra loading on the motor, we believe that the rotating
brush would more than compensate for the losses to increase suction performance overall. The addition of
lithium ion batteries allows our system to increase duration of use per charge, as it has greater energy
density than the current Ni-Cd batteries. We have redesigned the existing handle to include a telescopic
handle with a tactile rubberized grip which provides better reach and increases user comfort. We have
replaced the existing filter with a double filter to improve the filtration system and reduce the foul odor
emitted by the existing product. The air flow has been redirected away from the users face by relocating
the exhaust air vents. A guiding light has been incorporated into our system to improve visibility in dark
corners, narrow spaces or for usage during night time. An additional signal light will indicate the battery
status to the user. Finally, we have replaced the existing flimsy and unintuitive charger with a simple
plug-and-play charger.
However, if this design needs to be taken to the next step, there are some issues which need to be
addressed. The additional weight created by the new features needs to be considered as it might hamper
the portability of the product. Another parameter that requires optimization is the available space and
placement of individual components to incorporate all the new features while providing adequate empty
space for thermal dissipation of motor. An in-depth cost analysis needs to be performed to determine the
viability of the product after the addition of the new features. The cost analysis would need to concentrate
on the cost benefit ratio of using the lithium ion battery over the original Ni-Cd battery. Prototyping and
further testing would be required to test the percentage increase of suction power and battery life over the
original product. Testing would also be required to compare the new filtration system with the old one.
Minor aesthetic issues such as color scheme, surface smoothness and ergonomic design need to be
addressed.
Given a chance to start over again we would definitely follow same methodology in improving
our product design but would like to incorporate increased detail to technical issues with respect to the
engineering of the product. This would include simulation of air flow in the vacuum cleaner, detailed
engineering CAD which would allow us to build a prototype and compare it with the existing product.





48

14. REFERENCES

[1] www.amazon.com
[2] Black & Decker Website
[3] ME 452: Lecture Notes and Course Pack
[4] Optimal cylindrical handle diameter for grip force tasks by Yong Ku-Kong and Brian D. Lowe in
2004 for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health.








































49

15. APPENDICES
Appendix A: Customer Reviews on Amazon

50

AppendixB.1:DeterminationofStatic/Dynamicproduct
Appendix B.1.1: Questionnaire A


51

Appendix B.1.2: Questionnaire B





52

AppendixC:Patentsusedforlateralbenchmarking
Appendix C.1: Patent for Shop Vac: Industrial Vacuum Cleaner























53

Appendix C.2: Patent for Medical Suction Device

54

Appendix C.3: Patent for Above Ground Swimming Pool Cleaner

55

AppendixD:BDChartsusedforDFA
AppendixD.1:HandlingChart

56

AppendixD.2:InsertionChart

57

APPENDIX E -- CES Results for PROCESS SELECTION (section 10.3):

Appendix E.1:Handle

58

Appendix E.2: Rolling Bristled brush

59

APPENDIX F: IT Grade Charts

APPENDIX G: Process Capability Charts

61

APPENDIX G: Process Capability Charts Continued