Design for assembly

Author(s):  
A. H. Redford
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 731-740
Author(s):  
Giovanni Formentini ◽  
Claudio Favi ◽  
Claude Cuiller ◽  
Pierre-Eric Dereux ◽  
Francois Bouissiere ◽  
...  

AbstractOne of the most challenging activity in the engineering design process is the definition of a framework (model and parameters) for the characterization of specific processes such as installation and assembly. Aircraft system architectures are complex structures used to understand relation among elements (modules) inside an aircraft and its evaluation is one of the first activity since the conceptual design. The assessment of aircraft architectures, from the assembly perspective, requires parameter identification as well as the definition of the overall analysis framework (i.e., mathematical models, equations).The paper aims at the analysis of a mathematical framework (structure, equations and parameters) developed to assess the fit for assembly performances of aircraft system architectures by the mean of sensitivity analysis (One-Factor-At-Time method). The sensitivity analysis was performed on a complex engineering framework, i.e. the Conceptual Design for Assembly (CDfA) methodology, which is characterized by level, domains and attributes (parameters). A commercial aircraft cabin system was used as a case study to understand the use of different mathematical operators as well as the way to cluster attributes.


CIRP Annals ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 625-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Boothroyd ◽  
L. Alting
Keyword(s):  

Procedia CIRP ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 342-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Betancur-Muñoz ◽  
G. Osorio-Gómez ◽  
J.F. Martínez-Cadavid ◽  
J.F. Duque-Lombana

Author(s):  
Douglas D. Lefever ◽  
Kristin L. Wood

Abstract Design for Assembly (DFA) is the process by which a product is designed to be easily assembled. Such design simplifications are accomplished through reducing the number of operations required to assemble the product, improving the handling of each component, and/or modifying the required operations (insertion, joining, etc.). There exist several techniques for assessing the assemblability of a design through an analysis of these three aspects. However, there also exists a clearly defined need for evolving such techniques to indicate how a product should be redesigned with respect to customer needs and associated functionality. This paper presents three such evolutions, aimed at reducing the number of components in an assembly during redesign. The first technique is a component elimination procedure, the second technique is a component combination analysis, and the third technique establishes a logical approach for revealing more abstract component elimination or combination opportunities. These three DFA techniques are integrated within a reverse engineering and redesign methodology. They are then applied to a industrial design application, i.e., redesign of an auxiliary automobile visor. Results demonstrate definitive part count reduction, while maintaining and improving design functionality.


Author(s):  
Robert H. Sturges ◽  
Jui-Te Yang

Abstract In support of the effort to bring downstream issues to the attention of the designer as parts take shape, an analysis system is being built to extract certain features relevant to the assembly process, such as the dimension, shape, and symmetry of an object. These features can be applied to a model during the downstream process to evaluate handling and assemblability. In this paper, we will focus on the acquisition phase of the assembly process and employ a Design for Assembly (DFA) evaluation to quantify factors in this process. The capabilities of a non-homogeneous, non-manifold boundary representation geometric modeling system are used with an Index of Difficulty (ID) that represents the dexterity and time required to assemble a product. A series of algorithms based on the high-level abstractions of loop and link are developed to extract features that are difficult to orient, which is one of the DFA criteria. Examples for testing the robustness of the algorithms are given. Problems related to nearly symmetric outlines are also discussed.


Author(s):  
John W. Wong ◽  
Robert H. Sturges

Abstract Traditional Design for Assembly methods are limited to part sizes between a few millimeters to a few tens of centimeters in overall size and to part weights under a few kilograms. Parts in the range of a meter in overall size and weighing a few tens of kilograms are examined in this paper. An experimental plan separates weight, mass and inertia and correlates these properties with assembly difficulty and time. When windage, part flexibility and operator fatigue are absent, a set of three parameters serve to model these effects on human assembly performance. Adaptation of this result is made to extend a Design for Assembly methodology.


Author(s):  
David H. Myszka

Abstract Several manufacturer’s are witnessing soaring profits as a result of cost reductions derived from Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA) analyses. These successes are prompting others to turn to more refined computer models of product assemblies. However, much can be gained from a very routine analysis, using nothing more than the basic Design for Assembly (DFA) guidelines. These gains can be realized at a mere fraction of the resources needed for the computer models. This method of analysis is especially appealing to engineers whose time constraints require careful selection of design activities. This paper argues that DFMA analysis does not need to be an elaborate modeling process to produce significant cost improvements. This point is illustrated with an example of a redesign of a cooking range door. A manual review of the DFA guidelines turned a design innovation from a loser into a winner. Success stories from such informal analyses should promote greater implementation across industries that are hesitant in adopting DFMA practices.


2000 ◽  
pp. 97-122
Author(s):  
Ali K. Kamrani ◽  
Sa’ed M. Salhieh
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Claudio Favi ◽  
Giovanni Formentini ◽  
Francois Bouissiere ◽  
Claude Cuiller ◽  
Pierre-Eric Dereux ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document