Search Results

Many of the current issues surrounding the achievement of accurate fuel level indication and fuel sensor design strategy revolve around systems issues, but are most often treated as component deficiencies. This paper takes a “systems” look at liquid fuel level indication as opposed to the traditional “component” view. The intent of the author is to present a framework of system considerations relative to the task of designing a robust fuel level indication system in the automobile.

This paper explains the “Pugh” methodology for design concept selection and cites the benefits that the author has experienced from its use. It also describes some pitfalls one may encounter, ways to minimize them, and ways to maximize the benefits. The author neither endorses nor advises for or against the use of this methodology as compared to other available methodologies. It is assumed that the reader has some basic familiarity with the Pugh process as described by Professor S. Pugh in his book, Total Design-Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering.

QFD, FMEA, Process Improvement, Taguchi, Simultaneous Engineering, PDP, Project Management, DVP, DOE, …and the list goes on. Today's automotive product design engineers face a myriad of “tools” (methodologies, techniques, procedures) that are expected to be mastered and used in the course of performing their job. The list continually grows with new tools being added to the existing ones. And each new tool has an associated acronym to add to the confusion. New and inexperienced engineers are often confused by these tools being tossed at them …school did not cover all this ! The experienced engineer is often skeptical. After all, “if I have been a successful engineer for 20 years, why do I need to start doing these things now?” Nevertheless, most of these tools are truly needed by engineers today in order to be competitive in the increasingly complex and sophisticated world of automotive product design.