Relationship between dfma and concurrent engineering

relationship between dfma and concurrent engineering

DFA (Design for Assembly) is important in that it potentially can reduce the estimated % of manufacturing cost that is attributable to assembly. Besides th. Design for Manufacturing and Assembly and Concurrent Engineering in systems based on the integration of many CE tools in support of DFMA methodology. Concurrent Engineering is "A systematic approach to the integrated development of a product and its related processes-from conception to disposal-that.

Following the changes that have being occurring in Brazil, the plants of car makers and suppliers, also have to adapt to The main proposal of concurrent engineering is to shorten a product development time through a simultaneous time a implementation of the several stages of the engineering activity in parallel and under a concurrent mode offering all information required by all elements of the product life cycle. Studies show that the design approaches affects the final cost of a new product more than any other factor.

So design have enormous b influence in terms of power to compete on quality and cost. Information flow in engineering design and manufacture; a conventional flow; b concurrent engineering approach [10] Fig.

Engineers can use those DFM variants for high or low volume, simple or complex and bigger or smaller products. Relative importance of development steps on the final x Less production problems; product cost [7] x Reduced program budget. The following criteria are considered in a DFA study: Costs influence lever and the design [7] x Ensure adequate access and unrestricted vision. See an example of DFA approaches on the Figure 5.

Automotive door component sets: DFM DFM Design for Manufacturability is a set of methods and tools that support concurrent engineering and that can be understood as an analytical process structure of concurrent engineering tools that provide conditions to design a product regarding its manufacturability.

Through the use of the DFM concepts, designers and engineers can attain main target: Each DFM tool focuses on a manufacture specialty or on a manufacture processes family.

Batalha Manufacturing and processing 3. The Design for X is a generic term for all types of concurrent engineering tools which are oriented to consider environment, recycling, disassembly, life cycle, among other requirements [11, 12, 13, 14].

What is the relation between concurrent engineering and DFMA

It is x Pressure reduction from governmental laws ; focused on reducing as much as possible the environmental x Trademark image improvement; impact of this product during its life cycle, since from its x Environmental performance improvement.

According to Hockerts et al. The design integration varies according to each company and x Provide meaningful results based on simplified LCI life data it is basically applied in four main items: Concurrent engineering and DFMA approaches on the development of automotive panels and doors Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering Volume 31 Issue 2 December x Activities whose main attributions are: DFR focuses on the recyclability, maximum disassembly rate and product end-of-life treatment.

Then, the design for disassembly is Brazil for decades. Until late s, any size and type of metallic parts necessary condition for products to be economically recycled, by was fabricated at the press shop of this company. One of the strategies improving components and material reuse and remanufacture processes, adopted in the early s was to be focused only on the main stamped extending the service life of the products and components.

The parts, like doors, side panel, hood, fender, etc. The main mean less raw material and energy waste and better performance in results were reduction of structural press shop cost due to the disposal of terms of life cycle of evaluation. Benefits from using DFD are: The stamped sheet metal part manufacturability criteria must be established before starting its design, because it will be quality; the standard and give support to design areas see the following x Dismountable non-metallic parts can be re-processed.

An analogy of an assembly line plant can be made, however dedicated to disassembly. Typical vehicle dismantling line [20] Fig. Besides the manufacturability criteria standards, other tools the Panel draw depth is the greatest depth of the panel in an are essential for the DFM promotion in these phases of the elevation view in die position.

relationship between dfma and concurrent engineering

It does not analyze flanges because project, as mentioned below: By using it, the following outputs can be achieved [4]. The finite-element method FEM is effective in analyzing general structural problems.

In sheet metal forming practice, two main finite element approaches have been used: One-step is more useful if not so accurate Fig. Panel draw depth output requirements are needed just right after and before the frozen car style phase, see [4]. In a typical one-step solver, the The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the blank final part geometry and boundary conditions are known and dimension and check if neither sheet metal part are over estimated are used to predict blank geometry and size, thickness, strain nor under estimated for the presses line [5].

For door and closure and stress distribution and springback prediction [3]. Engineered scrap has been used to provide a relation between blank size dimension and the stamped part.

DFMA Q&A - Design for Assembly

Then the typical project encounters serious DFM shortcomings only as production ramps approach. If DFM was not designed early in the product, it will probably be very difficult to make the product manufacturable through changes at this late a date. Faced with the formidable scope of implementing DFM by change order under intense time pressures, only the easy changes are pursued and production soon begins on a product with questionable manufacturability.

As the product goes into production, manufacturability shortcomings manifest as painfully slow ramps shown in the center graph in Figuresometimes taking months to reach the target production volume. Manufacturability problems also show up as poor quality and disappointing productivity which may take even longer to attain acceptable levels.

Not only do these delays and shortcomings disappoint customers, but they also consume a great deal of resources — resources that should have been utilized more wisely at the proactive beginning, not the inefficient reactive end of the project. This, of course, emphasizes the importance of measuring time-to-market to the time of full stabilized production. If each team member has a versatile background and can represent multiple specializations, then the team would be smaller and easier to manage.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

The complete team is formed at the very beginning to simplify concepts and optimize product architecture and the thorough up-front work that is discussed below.

The activities start with a methodical product definition. The result is that the volume ramp is completed quickly. Similarly, normal quality and productivity targets are reached rapidly. One important result is the ability to cut in half the real time-to-market as measured to stable production. The other equally important result is that the cost of resource-hours the areas under either curve is half compared to the traditional model.

Companies on the upper time line need shift from a back-loaded model to front loaded one. The most immediate way to make resources available for a new project is to avoid wasting resources trying to reduce cost after design.

relationship between dfma and concurrent engineering

The consequences of inadequate resources at the beginning are significant delays and wasted resources, which in turn will delay other projects and deplete their resources, while expending more development cost for all projects 2 Project Timeline has higher proportion of up-front work The second step is to assure the project time-line has a high enough proportion of up-front time to assure that the project has enough time do Concurrent Engineering.

Thorough up-front work greatly shortens the real time-to-market and avoids wasting time and resources on firefighting, change orders, and ramp problems, as shown in the top bar of Figure 3. The author first saw that graph in a Sematech presentation to the semiconductor equipment industry, which indicates its value for the development of challenging products. Do not offer or accept management or customer-specified intermediate deadlines that would compromise thorough up-front work.

Thorough up-front work is the most important principle to reduce the real time-to-market. Which is the time to stable production in the center graph in Figure 2. In fact, a commercial airplane manufacturer spent one hour discussing this graphic at all four seminars. The key elements of an optimal architecture phase are the following: Understand, scrutinize, evaluate, challenge, and vet assumptions, especially those that will commit the project to a certain path.

Categorize changes that would force a requalification, especially customer-induced changes and changes needed for manufacturability. Based on that, formulate plans to minimize customer changes in the first bullet above and use Concurrent Engineering to design the product for manufacturability, using the steps below. Concepts should be generated with clever, practical innovations for the product, processing, and optimal modularity to handle anticipated variety.

With the multifunctional team in place, the next step is to understand the lessons learned from previous or similar product development efforts. This will show the team what worked and all the things that cause problems and delays, as shown in the upper bars in both of the above charts.

relationship between dfma and concurrent engineering

Lessons learned should be thoroughly investigated and understood to learn what worked well and what caused problems in previous projects see Section 3. The architecture may need to be optimized for product families, variety, extensions, next generations, contingencies, and growth.

The Design Phase Considerations and Methodologies With the thorough up-front work done right, the actual design phase can proceed quickly and smoothly, in half the usual time, as shown in Figure 3. According to the authors of the book that started the Lean Production movement in the U.

relationship between dfma and concurrent engineering

They effective expand the size of the ign team without hiring any more employees or reassigning them from other projects. This also avoids losing your scarce resources to deal with problems cause by low-bid vendors or vendors who just build-to-print whatever your sent them in a request-for-quotation.

Basing production designs on hard-to-get parts, which may have been selected for a proof-of-principle, may compromise order fulfillment and ultimately limit growth. Selecting parts for available needs to be done all along because availability problems are hard to remedy after qualification.

Never exceed the capability of production-line workers in your plant or contract manufacturers. Avoid building proofs-of-concept that can only be built by highly skilled scientists, engineers, or prototype technicians because once approved, qualified, and put into production, high skill production-line workers will be needed, who may be hard to find, train, and retain, and may limit growth.


Further, if not managed really well, dependence on skilled labor may cause quality vulnerabilities. Design teams should focus their valuable resources on the crown jewels, which are what customers will buy your products for — and get the rest off-the-shelf, whenever possible.

Customers buy electronic products for the unique, innovative features and functions they accomplish, not routine computations, controls, communications, and power supplies that are just expected to work reliably.

Customers buy mechanical products for the unique, innovative structures or motions they do, not routine motions, controls, enclosures, and structures that support the crown jewels and work reliability. What is needed from these routine support parts is adequate functionality, assured availability at any volumes, no risk, and high quality and reliability.

But, despite these opportunities, most design teams do not even consider off-the-shelf parts because of the following inhibitions that can be set straight by these principles: In fact, the product will be better if everyone focuses on what is really leading-edge. The paradox of off-the-shelf parts is that designers may have to first choose the best off-the-shelf parts and then literally design the product around them.

But it may be worth it to focus finite resources and time on your crown jewels. Until a company or division effort establishes standard parts lists Chapter 5the project should standardize on key parts for the product, at least for the following categories before detailed design starts: To curtail this proliferation before it starts, project management should select a baseline list of standard fasteners for the needed sizes, loads, and environments, for instance: For instance, all bolts should be standardized on the strongest grade.

This provides automatic mistake-proofing Poka-Yoke benefit by preventing a weaker bolt accidently being used where a stronger bolt should have been used For small parts, like fasteners and integrated circuits, there would be minimal, if any, weight penalty for such standardization.

Standardizing on expensive parts is one of the solutions to eliminating long-lead-time part problems, which can enable steady flows of parts that will be used one way or another, borrowing from others users in emergencies, and even stocking the standard versions, none of which would be possible for a plethora of just-the-right-size versions.

More advanced or higher capacity parts may weight more or take up more space, but that may be cancelled out if the more advanced part combines parts that would otherwise be many discreet parts.

The bottom line is that standardization will: Designing Products for Manufacturability Everything discussed above is essential to design for manufacturability. But many courses and books only present design guidelines which is the next section or just analyze the product after it is designed to look for opportunity to combine parts originally Design for Assembly now this is called DFMA.