Design For
Manufacturing
Design for
Design
for Manufacturing (DFM) is a methodology aimed at
Manufacturing
improving the manufacturability or productibility of a single
product by reducing manufacturing costs
Ulrich and Eppinger (2000) advocate a 5 step approach
Proposed
Design
Estimate
Manufacturing
Costs
Reduce
the Costs of
Components
Reduce
the Costs of
Assembly
Reduce
the Costs of
Supporting
Production
No
Consider Impact
of DFM Decisions
on Other Factors
Re-Compute
Manufacturing
Costs
Good
Enough?
Yes
Acceptable
Design
Step 1: Estimate the Manufacturing
Costs
Manufacturing Cost
Components
Standard
Custom
Raw
Material
Processing
Assembly
Labor
Tooling
Equipment
and Tooling
Overhead
Support
Indirect
Step 1: Estimate
Manufacturing Costs
Estimate the costs of standard and custom components
Estimating the Cost of Standard Components:
compare each part to a substantially similar part the firm is already
producing or purchasing in volumes or
solicit price quotes from suppliers or vendors (must estimate
production quantities as this will greatly affect price)
Estimating the Cost of Custom Components:
Raw materials mass of part and scrap allowance times cost per
unit mass of material
Processing cost of operator(s) for equipment plus cost to use
equipment itself (typically $25/hr for stamping to $75/hr for CNC
milling)
Tooling costs incurred for design and fabrication of cutters,
molds, dies, and/or fixtures used to fabricate the component
Step 1: Estimate Manufacturing
Costs (cont.)
Estimate the assembly costs
This includes labor costs to assemble a product as well as tooling cost
and equipment cost
Production quantities of less than several hundred thousand per year
are usually performed manually
Manual assembly costs can be estimated by summing the estimated
time of each assembly operation and multiplying by the labor rate
Estimate the overhead costs
Support costs (e.g., material handling, quality assurance, purchasing,
shipping, receiving, facilities, maintenance of equipment and tooling)
Indirect allocations which cannot be linked to any particular product
but which must be paid for by the manufacturer to be in business (e.g.,
building and grounds maintenance, janitorial supplies, electricity)
Step 2: Reduce Component
Costs
The cost of purchased components will often be the most significant
factor driving manufacturing costs
General rules of thumb are used to reduce component costs:
Reduce tolerances on non-critical dimensions
Reduce the number of parts
Choose materials wisely
Choose processes wisely
Eliminate extra processing steps:
employ net shape fabrication techniques such as molding,
casting, forging, and extrusion whenever possible to produce
parts with the final geometry in a single manufacturing step
Step 2: Reduce
Component Costs
Chose
the appropriate scale for the part process
(cont.)
realize economies of scale by amortizing fixed costs over
more units and lowering variable costs through use of
larger and more efficient processes and equipment
Use standardized parts and processes whenever
possible
Adhere to black box component procurement
designate what the component must do and its interfaces,
not how it should be achieved
gives suppliers freedom to design or select minimum cost
components, and reduces your design effort
Step 3: Reduce Assembly
Costs
For most products, assembly contributes a relatively small fraction to
the total manufacturing cost of the product
However, by emphasizing Design for Assembly (DFA), many indirect
benefits are often realized since the overall part count, manufacturing
complexity, and support costs are usually reduced in addition to the
assembly costs
Boothroyd & Dewhurst have developed a systematic approach to
facilitate DFA analysis:
Boothroyd, G. and Dewhurst, P. (1989) Product Design for
Assembly, Boothroyd Dewhurst, Inc., Wakefield, RI.
Boothroyd & Dewhursts DFA
Analysis
B&D offer eight rules or guidelines which are important during design for
manual assembly (listed in decreasing order of importance):
1. Reduce part count and part types
2. Strive to eliminate adjustments
3. Design parts to be self-aligning and self-locating
4. Ensure adequate access and unrestricted vision
5. Ensure the ease of handling parts from bulk
6. Minimize the need for re-orientations during assembly
7. Design parts that cannot be installed incorrectly
8. Maximize part symmetry if possible or make parts obviously
asymmetrical
Boothroyd & Dewhursts DFA
Analysis (cont.)
Step 1: Obtain information about the product or assembly from drawings,
prototypes, or an existing product
Step 2: Take the product or assembly apart and assign an identification
number to each item as it is removed
Step 3: Begin to reassemble the product beginning with the highest
identification number and add the remaining parts one-by-one
Complete one row of the DFA worksheet for each part
Never assume that parts are grasped one in each hand and then
assembled together before placing them in a partially-completed
assembly
Step 4: Complete DFA worksheet, computing total manual assembly
time, cost, and design efficiency
N a m e o f P a rt
P a rt ID #
3
4
m a n u a l in s e rtio n tim e
p e r p a rt
tw o -d ig it m a n u a l
in s e rtio n c o d e
m a n u a l h a n d lin g tim e
p e r p a rt
tw o -d ig it m a n u a l
h a n d lin g c o d e
# o f tim e s th e
o p e ra tio n is c a rrie d o u t
c o n s e c u tive ly
DFA Worksheet
o p e ra tio n tim e , s e c ,
(2 ) x [(4 ) + (6 )]
TM
o p e ra tio n c o s t, c e n ts ,
0 .4 x (7 )
CM
e s tim a tio n o f
th e o re tic a l m in im u m #
o f p a rts ,
0 or 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
NM
Obtained
from B&D
Manual
Handling
Worksheet
Obtained
from B&D
Manual
Insertion
Worksheet
Design Efficiency
EM = (3 x NM)/TM
Design for Assembly Index
(Theoretical minimum number of parts) x (3 seconds)
DFA index =
Estimated total assembly time
Estimating Theoretical Minimum
Number of Parts
First Part;
Add a part
Theoretical #
of parts = 1
Yes
Is there a need for significant
movement between parts?
No
Is there a need for interfacing
parts to be isolated?
Yes
No
Would assembly or disassembly of the
product be prevented by combining two parts?
Yes
No
Combine the two parts
Keep the two
parts separate
Add zero to the
minimum theoretical
number of parts
Add one to the
minimum theoretical
number of parts
Add next part
Step 4: Reduce Overhead
Costs
Reduced
overhead costs is often an indirect benefit
Reducing part count reduces inventory and material handling
costs...
also reduces assembly content which reduces the number of
workers required, reducing the costs of management and
supervisors
Minimize the complexity of the manufacturing process as much as
possible since everything must be tracked, monitored, managed,
inspected, handled, inventoried, and maintained
Simplest process would be to take raw material and transform it
into a single part via one manufacturing process.
Step 4: Reduce Overhead Costs
(cont.)
Monitor such things as:
Number of new parts introduced
Number of new vendors introduced
Number of custom parts introduced
Number of new major tools introduced
Number of new production processes introduced
as a result of a new design or modification
Also, try to error proof the product as best as possible
anticipate failure modes of the product and production system,
taking appropriate corrective actions early in the development
process
E.g., eliminate confusing parts (e.g., screws of the same diameter
but with different threads, or screws with right-hand
hand threading).
vs. left-
DFM Example
Step 5: Evaluate DFM Impact on
Other Factors
Finally, evaluate the impact of DFM decisions on:
Product and process development time and costs
Product quality
Other external factors, e.g., component re-use in future designs, life-cycle
costs
E.g., Volvo
E.g., Delco Modular Door
Once Steps 1-5 have been completed:
Re-compute Manufacturing Costs
Are results of DFM good enough?
If YES: you have acceptable design
If NO: back to the drawing board
Impact of DFM on Delco Modular
Door
Total Number of Doors per Year:
No.
Material Cost
Direct Labor in Vehicle Plant
Indirect Labor at Vehicle Plant
Material Handlers
Maintenance for assembly equipment
Supervisors for line workers
Structural Cost
Supplier Quality Engineers
Purchasing Agents
Engineers
Designers
Change Management
Plant Benefits
Floor Space
Line Length
Off-Line Storage of Parts
Ergonomics (medical claims costs)
Increased Build Rate (through put)
Reduced in Plant Inventory
Reduced Work-In-Process
Cost for Part Numbers in System
Value of Mass Reduction
Value of Warranty Reduction (10 IPTV)
Value of reduced in plant repair
Value of reduced returned parts (RPPM)
Value of serviceability improvement
Unit
1 operator
0.5 operator
1 operator
400,000
Rate per unit Cost/Savings
$6.00
-$3.00
$60,000
$60,000
$60,000
-$0.15
-$0.08
-$0.15
eng.
agent
eng.
designers
staff
$100,000
$100,000
$100,000
$80,000
$100,000
-$0.25
-$0.50
-$0.75
-$0.80
-$0.25
1600
1600
40
1000
Sq. Feet
Sq. Feet
Claims
Cars
50
0.5
1000
1
1
2000
Numbers
Kg
Claims
repairman
inspector
Claims
$200
$200
$500
$500
$50,000
$200,000
$5,000
$1
$100
$60,000
$60,000
$20
-$0.16
-$0.16
-$0.05
-$1.25
-$0.13
-$0.50
-$0.63
-$0.50
-$0.25
-$0.15
-$0.15
-$0.10
Total Value of Building with a Door Module
-$3.95
1
2
3
4
1
Note
loss
Note
savings
per door
