Fig 1- uploaded by José Ríos
Content may be subject to copyright.
Integrating manufacturing into the design process. 

Integrating manufacturing into the design process. 

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Design for manufacturing (DFM) practices lead to more competitive products from the point of view of cost, development time and quality. However, the success of considering manufacturing issues during design process would be higher if manufacturing information was more readily available and designers needed less experience to select information rel...

Contexts in source publication

Context 1
... products are developed in concurrent engineering environments where integrating manufacturing into design is fundamental. For this reason the manufacturing process has to be considered in the design as soon as possible. Fig. 1 shows the relationship between the research fields for integrating manufacturing into design and the design phases [10]. DFM techniques include manufacturing process selection, DFM guidelines and manufacturability ...
Context 2
... the design is quite detailed, integrating it with manufactur- ing is more focused on process and production planning than on DFM techniques, Fig. 1. Systems that integrate process planning and production planning are presented in ...
Context 3
... the DFM information for manufacturing the connecting rod with the hot closed die forging process (H/F) and with the powder metal forging process (P/F) was determined. Fig. 10 shows some of the process properties (PPs) of the two different manufacturing processes that should be considered to decide on the DPs formalized in Phase 1, such as "DP121-fatigue strength" and ''DP122-section thickness". For instance, the relationship between "DP121-fatigue strength" and ''PP-anisotropy'' means that the H/F process ...
Context 4
... way, the designer will also have to remember that this process has a limitation on the''PP-material type'' that will also limit its value. The value range that each process property can take has also been formalized, as has the information that describes the relationship between the DP and PP, including a description and the relationship type (Fig. 10). Fig. 11 shows two manufacturing defects that have to be considered when using the H/F and P/F processes to successfully obtain the ''DP121-fatigue strength" of the connecting rod. These defects are ''Df-cracks'' and ''Df-decarburization'' [26]. The cracks can be avoided by controlling the execution variables of work temperature and ...
Context 5
... designer will also have to remember that this process has a limitation on the''PP-material type'' that will also limit its value. The value range that each process property can take has also been formalized, as has the information that describes the relationship between the DP and PP, including a description and the relationship type (Fig. 10). Fig. 11 shows two manufacturing defects that have to be considered when using the H/F and P/F processes to successfully obtain the ''DP121-fatigue strength" of the connecting rod. These defects are ''Df-cracks'' and ''Df-decarburization'' [26]. The cracks can be avoided by controlling the execution variables of work temperature and deformation ...
Context 6
... for manufacturing (DFM) considers design goals and manufacturing constraints simultaneously to identify and alleviate manufacturing problems while the product is being designed. As a consequence the lead time for product development is reduced the and product quality and cost are improved [2]. Several DFM techniques have been developed to assist the designer, such as manufacturing process selection methods [3,4], DFMA guidelines [5,6] and manufacturability analysis tools [2]. Consequently product competitiveness has been improved by applying these DFM techniques. Nevertheless, the decision- making process and the expertise of the designer continue to be the key aspects to ensure the success of DFM, due in part to the availability of DFM information. There are a variety of data and information associated with each manufacturing process, but little explicitly represented knowledge about how to use them in DFM. In addition, the different sources and formats make it difficult to access such information and knowledge when needed. This leads companies to develop their own particular DFM guidelines suited to their own needs [4]. Another reason that makes difficult DFM is the lack of systematic procedures for capturing, organizing and representing DFM knowledge and its associated rationale [4,7]. The relation- ship between DFM knowledge and design, and that it depends on collecting empirical data derived from years of experience, is obvious. Nevertheless, it is quite difficult to solve this problem from a theoretical point of view. On the other hand the lack of procedures to document and formalize the decisions taken during the design process, and more specifically in the initial design phases [8], does not help either. Although design models, such as the Pahl and Beitz model [9], indicate the steps needed to develop a design, there are a few formalized procedures to guide the designer and document the decisions taken during this process. These issues have led to the main questions that motivated this work: which manufacturing information should be available to designers for DFM? How could expert designers be guided to capture and document the DFM information that they use in each design phase? How could this DFM information be reused in other designs? This paper presents a methodology for identifying and formalizing the relevant manufacturing information that should be available in DFM, that is, the manufacturing information designers should take into account. This is achieved by developing a systematic procedure that guides designers in three ways: (1) to define and formalize the information generated during the design process; (2) to make explicit the relationship between this design information and essential DFM information; and (3) to define and formalize this DFM information. This methodology is based on the Axiomatic Design theory [1] and DFM techniques. It demonstrates how the Axiomatic Design theory can be used to support DFM. As a result, applying the methodology provides explicit manufacturing knowledge related to design, as well as the relationship between this manufacturing knowledge and its corresponding design phase. This knowledge is based on the expertise and is essential for the future development of a software system that effectively provides necessary DFM information to designers. This means providing information for each of the design phases without saturating designers with unnecessary information. Next, the research fields related to this work are discussed; including DFM techniques and the relationship between design methods and the manufacturing process that research has established and developed the theoretical fundaments of the proposed methodology. Finally, the methodology is validated with a case study: the connecting rod of an alternative internal combustion engine. Nowadays products are developed in concurrent engineering environments where integrating manufacturing into design is fundamental. For this reason the manufacturing process has to be considered in the design as soon as possible. Fig. 1 shows the relationship between the research fields for integrating manufacturing into design and the design phases [10]. DFM techniques include manufacturing process selection, DFM guidelines and manufacturability analysis. In early design, the manufacturing process selection helps designers choose the manufacturing processes that are technically and economically suitable for a given design [3,4,11]. The choice is made by comparing the design specifications with the attributes of the manufacturing process. The process attributes are parameters that describe a process and its capabilities and allow direct, objective comparisons to be made [12]. In the preliminary selection the attributes are common to all processes, for example, the tolerance or roughness each process is able to obtain in a part. In a more detailed selection, the attributes are usually more specific and their values can be related to design requirements and other attributes or processing conditions [12]. Some selection tools, such as a CES Selector [13], PRIMA [4] and MAS [11], select from among all manufacturing processes. Other selection tools, such as the forging process selector [14], select from among specific processes. When the set of processes has been limited, DFM guidelines become essential to evaluate the design according to manufacturing aspects [10]. Design guidelines suggest how to better design parts for a particular manufacturing process, and how this process may affect the shape, dimensions, material and internal structure of the part [6]. Most of the data and information related to these guidelines are available in handbooks, standards, and in-house guidelines. Nevertheless, the lack of systematic procedures for developing these guidelines may lead to incomplete knowledge, which makes it difficult to use them without prior experience [4,7]. Integrating DFM guidelines into a CAD system would help analyze the manufacturability automatically [2], identify the potential manufacturability problems and assess the manufacturing cost. This automatic analysis should make it unnecessary to study and memorize manufacturability checklists, and therefore allow designers to focus on the creative aspects of the design process [2]. Most of the literature reviewed focuses this manufacturability analysis on geometric issues. The main geometrical design features are recognized and their manufacturability is checked for a given process [2]. Geometric redesigns can also be proposed [15]. However, there is much more important manufacturing information for DFM that is not integrated enough, for example the roughness or the draft in the forging process. Manufacturability evaluation is also important in this research field. This evaluation reflects the ease or difficulty of carrying out the design technically [5] or economically [2,5]. When the design is quite detailed, integrating it with manufacturing is more focused on process and production planning than on DFM techniques, Fig. 1. Systems that integrate process planning and production planning are presented in [16,17]. Design methods also emphasize the relevance of manufacturing integration. Design models which structure the design process in phases establish that the manufacturing issues should start to be considered in the embodiment design phase, when the overall layout design (general arrangement and spatial compatibility) and the preliminary form designs (component shapes and materials) are being defined [9]. However, the Axiomatic Design theory [1] states that the manufacturing process should be considered during early design stages because the design evolves within the functional, physical and process domains at the same time. In spite of these differences, most design methods consider that the design has to satisfy product functionality [1,9]; therefore, the manufacturing process should produce a product that achieves such functionality. This relationship between functionality and the manufacturing process is stated explicitly in the Axiomatic Design theory [1]. The Axiomatic Design theory organizes the design process into four domains: customer [customer needs (CNs)], functional [functional requirements (FRs) and constraints], physical [design parameters (DPs)] and process [process variable (PVs)]. The information in each domain evolves in parallel by means of a mapping process between CNs and FRs, FRs and DPs, and DPs and PVs. For example, in the physical domain the design solution is defined by the set of DPs that satisfies the set of FRs specified in the functional domain. In the process domain the set of PVs used to produce the specified product (DPs) is identified. The mapping relationships between domains are expressed by a matrix composed of 1s and 0s that shows, which DP affects each FR and which PV affects each DP. The relationships between the design information in each design level are stated explicitly in Eqs. (1) and ...
Context 7
... for manufacturing (DFM) considers design goals and manufacturing constraints simultaneously to identify and alleviate manufacturing problems while the product is being designed. As a consequence the lead time for product development is reduced the and product quality and cost are improved [2]. Several DFM techniques have been developed to assist the designer, such as manufacturing process selection methods [3,4], DFMA guidelines [5,6] and manufacturability analysis tools [2]. Consequently product competitiveness has been improved by applying these DFM techniques. Nevertheless, the decision- making process and the expertise of the designer continue to be the key aspects to ensure the success of DFM, due in part to the availability of DFM information. There are a variety of data and information associated with each manufacturing process, but little explicitly represented knowledge about how to use them in DFM. In addition, the different sources and formats make it difficult to access such information and knowledge when needed. This leads companies to develop their own particular DFM guidelines suited to their own needs [4]. Another reason that makes difficult DFM is the lack of systematic procedures for capturing, organizing and representing DFM knowledge and its associated rationale [4,7]. The relation- ship between DFM knowledge and design, and that it depends on collecting empirical data derived from years of experience, is obvious. Nevertheless, it is quite difficult to solve this problem from a theoretical point of view. On the other hand the lack of procedures to document and formalize the decisions taken during the design process, and more specifically in the initial design phases [8], does not help either. Although design models, such as the Pahl and Beitz model [9], indicate the steps needed to develop a design, there are a few formalized procedures to guide the designer and document the decisions taken during this process. These issues have led to the main questions that motivated this work: which manufacturing information should be available to designers for DFM? How could expert designers be guided to capture and document the DFM information that they use in each design phase? How could this DFM information be reused in other designs? This paper presents a methodology for identifying and formalizing the relevant manufacturing information that should be available in DFM, that is, the manufacturing information designers should take into account. This is achieved by developing a systematic procedure that guides designers in three ways: (1) to define and formalize the information generated during the design process; (2) to make explicit the relationship between this design information and essential DFM information; and (3) to define and formalize this DFM information. This methodology is based on the Axiomatic Design theory [1] and DFM techniques. It demonstrates how the Axiomatic Design theory can be used to support DFM. As a result, applying the methodology provides explicit manufacturing knowledge related to design, as well as the relationship between this manufacturing knowledge and its corresponding design phase. This knowledge is based on the expertise and is essential for the future development of a software system that effectively provides necessary DFM information to designers. This means providing information for each of the design phases without saturating designers with unnecessary information. Next, the research fields related to this work are discussed; including DFM techniques and the relationship between design methods and the manufacturing process that research has established and developed the theoretical fundaments of the proposed methodology. Finally, the methodology is validated with a case study: the connecting rod of an alternative internal combustion engine. Nowadays products are developed in concurrent engineering environments where integrating manufacturing into design is fundamental. For this reason the manufacturing process has to be considered in the design as soon as possible. Fig. 1 shows the relationship between the research fields for integrating manufacturing into design and the design phases [10]. DFM techniques include manufacturing process selection, DFM guidelines and manufacturability analysis. In early design, the manufacturing process selection helps designers choose the manufacturing processes that are technically and economically suitable for a given design [3,4,11]. The choice is made by comparing the design specifications with the attributes of the manufacturing process. The process attributes are parameters that describe a process and its capabilities and allow direct, objective comparisons to be made [12]. In the preliminary selection the attributes are common to all processes, for example, the tolerance or roughness each process is able to obtain in a part. In a more detailed selection, the attributes are usually more specific and their values can be related to design requirements and other attributes or processing conditions [12]. Some selection tools, such as a CES Selector [13], PRIMA [4] and MAS [11], select from among all manufacturing processes. Other selection tools, such as the forging process selector [14], select from among specific processes. When the set of processes has been limited, DFM guidelines become essential to evaluate the design according to manufacturing aspects [10]. Design guidelines suggest how to better design parts for a particular manufacturing process, and how this process may affect the shape, dimensions, material and internal structure of the part [6]. Most of the data and information related to these guidelines are available in handbooks, standards, and in-house guidelines. Nevertheless, the lack of systematic procedures for developing these guidelines may lead to incomplete knowledge, which makes it difficult to use them without prior experience [4,7]. Integrating DFM guidelines into a CAD system would help analyze the manufacturability automatically [2], identify the potential manufacturability problems and assess the manufacturing cost. This automatic analysis should make it unnecessary to study and memorize manufacturability checklists, and therefore allow designers to focus on the creative aspects of the design process [2]. Most of the literature reviewed focuses this manufacturability analysis on geometric issues. The main geometrical design features are recognized and their manufacturability is checked for a given process [2]. Geometric redesigns can also be proposed [15]. However, there is much more important manufacturing information for DFM that is not integrated enough, for example the roughness or the draft in the forging process. Manufacturability evaluation is also important in this research field. This evaluation reflects the ease or difficulty of carrying out the design technically [5] or economically [2,5]. When the design is quite detailed, integrating it with manufacturing is more focused on process and production planning than on DFM techniques, Fig. 1. Systems that integrate process planning and production planning are presented in [16,17]. Design methods also emphasize the relevance of manufacturing integration. Design models which structure the design process in phases establish that the manufacturing issues should start to be considered in the embodiment design phase, when the overall layout design (general arrangement and spatial compatibility) and the preliminary form designs (component shapes and materials) are being defined [9]. However, the Axiomatic Design theory [1] states that the manufacturing process should be considered during early design stages because the design evolves within the functional, physical and process domains at the same time. In spite of these differences, most design methods consider that the design has to satisfy product functionality [1,9]; therefore, the manufacturing process should produce a product that achieves such functionality. This relationship between functionality and the manufacturing process is stated explicitly in the Axiomatic Design theory [1]. The Axiomatic Design theory organizes the design process into four domains: customer [customer needs (CNs)], functional [functional requirements (FRs) and constraints], physical [design parameters (DPs)] and process [process variable (PVs)]. The information in each domain evolves in parallel by means of a mapping process between CNs and FRs, FRs and DPs, and DPs and PVs. For example, in the physical domain the design solution is defined by the set of DPs that satisfies the set of FRs specified in the functional domain. In the process domain the set of PVs used to produce the specified product (DPs) is identified. The mapping relationships between domains are expressed by a matrix composed of 1s and 0s that shows, which DP affects each FR and which PV affects each DP. The relationships between the design information in each design level are stated explicitly in Eqs. (1) and ...

Citations

... From the DFM perspective, the focus will be to make the manufacturing process selection such that the parts are manufacturable in an efficient way, and such that the materials and tolerances are compatible. The business case for considering a DFM technique is easy to make, as it prevents re-design and resulting delays, as well as ensuring the the possible design space is as large as possible [5,[68][69][70]. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Design-for-manufacturing (DFM) concepts have traditionally focused on design simplification; this is highly effective for relatively simple, mass-produced products, but tends to be too restrictive for more complex designs. Effort in recent decades has focused on creating methods for generating and imposing specific , process-derived technical manufacturability constraints for some common problems. This paper presents an overview of the problem and its design implications, a discussion of the nature of the manufacturability constraints, and a survey of the existing approaches and methods for generating/enforcing the minimally-restrictive manufacturability constraints within several design domains. Four major design perspectives were included in the study, including the system design (top-down), the product design (bottom-up), the manufacturing process-dominant approach (specific process required), and the part-redesign approach. Manufacturability constraints within four design levels were explored as well, ranging from macro-scale to sub-micro-scale design. Very little previous work was found in many areas, but it is clear from the existing literature that the problem and a general solution to it are very important to explore further in future DFM and design automation work.
... The independence axiom maintains the independency of FRs, to show that the FRs are defined as the minimum set of independent requirements that characterizes the design goals through functional domain. And the Information Axiom minimizes the information content of the design, and shows that the best design among those design that satisfy the Independence Axiom is that one which has the smallest information content [70][71][72]. If we assume FRs as a vector with m component and DPs as a vector with n component, there is a m×n matrix to connect these two, in matrix representation: ...
... Design for Manufacturing (DfM) in general considers design goals and manufacturing constraints simultaneously to identify and alleviate manufacturing problems while the product is being designed [13]. Since AM technologies provide unique capabilities and free the designers from many constraints in conventional manufacturing processes, the focus of DfAM is not only to avoid printability issues but to maximize the capability of AM [14]. ...
... Cluster 5 [73], [74], [75], [76], [77], [78], [79], [80], [81], [82], [83], [84], [85], [86], [87] Customer 5 4 6 15 ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The term Integrated Product Development (IPD) has been introduced as a focus for cross-disciplinary research and can have several forms, or manifestations, with regard to the existing disciplines such as concurrent engineering and design for manufacturing. Of central importance to IPD is the interpretation of the term “integration”, particularly with regard to internal and external elements. However, there is not yet an explicit understanding of an appropriate degree of integration, or involvement, with respect to its different forms, that can assure successful implementation of IPD frameworks in practice. Through a review and clustering of the literature, this paper aims to address this challenge.
... This part allows capitalizing and formalizing the useful data for the selection of material and manufacturing processes. By defining the essential information to DFMM [4], we have a database composed of three no exhaustive tables: materials, manufacturing processes and compatibility material-processes. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Design for X called DFX is a form of integrated design that allows designing for a specific area X. Among these areas, the DFM (Design for Manufacturing) takes into account manufacturing constraints at the design stage. In this context, the DFMM (Design for Material and Manufacturing) approach ensures the transition between the design and the manufacture of the product and allows the selection of the most appropriate material and manufacturing processes. In this paper, we will see the different stages of the DFMM approach and we will interest particularly to the modelling phase which is the first step of the approach. Modelling allows converting the useful properties of the part into exploitable data used by the selection stages. This phase consists of function modelling and modelling of the shape. The modelling of the functions collects and formalizes the essential information for material selection and the modelling of the shape identifies the necessary information for the selection of the processes.
... Final design success is achieved when the CNs are completely satisfied. 36,37 Furthermore, gathering information from patients and expert physicians was required in this case study. Likewise, product functional analysis was essential to discern, in detail, the range of functions that the product had to satisfy. ...
Article
Full-text available
The scapholunate interosseous ligament is located between the scaphoid and lunate bones and if it torns causes instability, leading to weakness in the hand, chronic pain, and lack of motion. While many treatment options are available, based on the type of instability, all of them present side effects including stiffness in the wrist, long recovery times, and widespread scarring. As such, wrist prostheses have been introduced as an alternative treatment. As suitable scapholunate prostheses implanted using arthroscopy are a promising option in reducing complications associated with conservative treatments, this work proposes a new implant designed to replace the scapholunate ligament. The implant is a completely new design, which was manufactured to determine its workability. Medical experts and engineers approved and validated the new design process, and the prototype obtained will be used to evaluate performance and to propose possible future improvements.
... Ferrer et al. [33] presented a general methodology to identify the information required to support a DfM approach. Their method helps a designer to identify a relationship between design and manufacturing information, but it is necessary for them to have a level of manufacturing expertise. ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper presents a methodology for the transformation of a product concept into a detailed design and manufacturing process chain for hybrid manufacturing platforms. Hybrid platforms offer new capabilities and opportunities for product design. However, they require high levels of process expertise for effective design and effective process selection. Design for hybrid manufacture is challenging as there is a requirement to understand a number of technologies, which may be highly varied. To address this challenge, a knowledge-based decision support system developed in this paper enables manufacturing expertise to be integrated into procedures for product design and process chain selection. This formalised numerical methodology is able to consider a wider range of varied manufacturing processes than any previous study. A feature-based design method is developed, which guides the designer towards an optimised product design during the embodiment design phase, and a process chain selection program is utilised to enable the effective analysis of a product design based on product evaluation criteria. The methodology has been successfully applied to the design of an LED product with internal geometries and electronics.
... This part allows to capitalize and formalize the useful data for the selection of material and the processes. By defining the essential informations to DFMM (Ferrer and al., 2010), we have a database composed of three nonexhaustive tables: materials, manufacturing processes and compatibility material-processes. ...
Conference Paper
Simultaneous engineering and integrated design allow to better design the product by considering all phases of its life cycle.For the manufacturing phase, DFMM approach (Design For Material and Manufacturing) integrates the constraints of manufacturing and ensures the selection of material and manufacturing processes. The used method for the material selection is made up of the translation of requirements, the screening of alternatives, the ranking of alternatives and additional documentation. For the ranking of alternatives, the method of subjective and objective integration was used. With these tools, we have a reliable selection method which allows to the designer to choose with effectiveness the best possible material.
... The design process should be carried out following methods or methodologies, which assure good product results by addressing all the requirements and needs of the user or customer. The systematic procedures for capturing, organising and representing functional requirements are applied in different works and explained in the literature (Ferrer et al. 2010). The relationship between manufacturing knowledge and design can sometimes depend on collecting empirical data derived from years of experience in product manufacturing. ...
Article
Full-text available
Nowadays medical devices are a fast-growing industry. Advances in design, materials and technologies have increased the potential to find better solutions for those medical problems whose remedies were, up until now, unimaginable. A broad spectrum of new solutions is available ranging from new materials to new products, tools and procedures. Medical doctors have discovered how the latest advances in engineering support their work by making surgery or treatment processes easier than ever before. For this reason, medical devices are now a hot topic of industrial and academic interest in fields such as design, prototypes or manufacturing. This paper introduces a special issue with several medical device case studies, illustrating new developments in product design, material selection and prototype methods. In addition, the paper also reviews medical device development research and depicts some case studies to better explain the relationship between technology/engineering and medical devices. The paper contributes with some data on this combination of research fields.
... Customer needs satisfaction is essential to assure the success of the final design [25,26]. Therefore, gathering information from expert doctors and patients was required in this case. ...
Article
Full-text available
Scapholunate instability, caused mainly due to tears in the scapholunate interosseous ligament (SLIL), may result in chronic pain, hand weakness, and lack of motion. Several open surgery procedures are used to repair it however long recovery time, widespread scarring and movement limitations are associated. Focusing on arthroscopy surgery, the combination of arthroscopy techniques and a prosthesis could be a good solution to manage it. A new prosthesis to substitute the SLIL was designed and manufactured. The design process was assessed by expert surgeons in wrist arthroscopy and the prototype manufactured allowed to analyze advantages and drawbacks of the adopted solution.