Purpose StatementTo provide an overview of Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA) techniques, which are used to minimize product cost through design and process improvements.

ObjectivesParticipants will understand:Differences and Similarities between Design for Manufacturing and Design for AssemblyDescribe how product design has a primary influenceBasic criteria for Part MinimizationQuantitative analysis of a designs efficiencyCritique product designs for ease of assemblyThe importance of involving production engineers in DFMA analysis

Design for AssemblyDefinition: DFA is the method of design of the product for ease of assembly. Optimization of the part/system assemblyDFA is a tool used to assist the design teams in the design of products that will transition to productions at a minimum cost, focusing on the number of parts, handling and ease of assembly.

Design for ManufacturingDefinition: DFM is the method of design for ease of manufacturing of the collection of parts that will form the product after assembly. Optimization of the manufacturing processDFA is a tool used to select the most cost effective material and process to be used in the production in the early stages of product design.

Differences

Design for Assembly (DFA)concerned only with reducing product assembly costminimizes number of assembly operationsindividual parts tend to be more complex in design

Design for Manufacturing (DFM)concerned with reducing overall part production costminimizes complexity of manufacturing operationsuses common datum features and primary axes

SimilaritiesBoth DFM and DFA seek to reduce material, overhead, and labor cost.They both shorten the product development cycle time. Both DFM and DFA seek to utilize standards to reduce cost

TerminologyDesign for Manufacturing (DFM) and Design for Assembly (DFA) are now commonly referred to as a single methodology, Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA) .

What Internal Organization has the most Influence over Price, Quality, & Cycle Time?

Time Into the Design ProcessPercentage100908070605040302010100908070605040302010High

LowKnowledge and Learning

Concept DesignDesign for AssemblyDesign for ManufacturingDetailed DesignOptimize Design for Part Count and AssemblyOptimize Design for Production ReadinessSequence of Analysis

Copyright 2003 Cummins, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Design for AssemblyDFA is a process that REQUIRES involvement of Assembly Engineers

Design for Assembly PrinciplesMinimize part countDesign parts with self-locating featuresDesign parts with self-fastening featuresMinimize reorientation of parts during assemblyDesign parts for retrieval, handling, & insertionEmphasize Top-Down assembliesStandardize partsminimum use of fasteners.Encourage modular designDesign for a base part to locate other componentsDesign for component symmetry for insertion

DFA ProcessProduct Information: functional requirementsFunctional analysisIdentify parts that can be standardizedDetermine part count efficienciesStep 2Step 1Analyze data for new designStep 3Identify handling (grasp & orientation) opportunitiesStep 4Identify insertion (locate & secure) opportunitiesStep 5Step 6Identify opportunities to reduce secondary operationsIdentify quality (mistake proofing) opportunitiesBenchmark when possibleDetermine your practical part countStep 7

DFA Analysis Worksheet

Product Information: functional requirements Functional analysis Identify parts that can be standardized Determine part count efficiencies

Considerations/AssumptionsThe first part is essential (base part)

Non-essential parts:FastenersSpacers, washers, O-ringsConnectors, leads

Do not include liquids as parts (e.g.. glue, gasket sealant, lube)

Part IdentificationList parts in the order of assemblyAssign/record part number

So take it apart!

Count Parts & InterfacesList number of parts (Np)List number of interfaces (Ni)

Your TurnList parts in the order of assembly.Assign part number to keep up with the part.List number of parts (Np)List number of interfaces (Ni)

Current DesignConsider SpecificationOther OptionsDoes the part move relative to all other parts already assembled?Is the part of a different material, or isolated from, all other parts already assembled?Is the part separate to allow for its in-service adjustment or replacement?Is the movement essential for the product to function?Is a different material or isolation essential for the product to function?Is the adjustment or replacement essential?Must the part be separate to provide the required movement?Must the part be separate to satisfy the different material or isolation requirement?Must the part be separate to enable the adjustment or replacement?Essential PartYYYNon Essential PartDetermine Theoretical Min. No. of PartsMovementIsolationAdjustment or Replacement

Functional AnalysisMovementIsolationAdjustment or Replacement

Determine if Parts Can be StandardizedCan the current parts be standardized?:Within the assembly stationWithin the full assemblyWithin the assembly plantWithin the corporationWithin the industryShould they be?(Only put a Y if both answers are yes)

Theoretical Part Count EfficiencyTheoretical Part Count EfficiencyTheoretical Min. No. Parts Total Number of Parts

Theoretical Part 1 Count Efficiency 10

Theoretical Part Count Efficiency

==* 100= 10%* 100GoalRule of Thumb Part Count Efficiency Goal > 60%

DFA Complexity Factor DefinitionCummins Inc. metric for assessing complexity of a product designTwo FactorsNp Number of partsNi Number of part-to-part interfaces

Multiply the two and take the square root of the total

This is known as the DFA Complexity FactorS Np x S Ni

DFA Complexity Factor TargetSmaller is better (Minimize Np and Ni)Let Npt = Theoretical Minimum Number of partsfrom the Functional AnalysisNpt = 5Let Nit = Theoretical minimum number of part to part interfacesNit = 2(Npt-1)Nit = 2(5-1) = 8Part 2Part 3Part 4Part 5Part 1DCFt = S Npt x S NitDCFt = 5 x 8 = 6.32

Determine Relative Part Cost LevelsSubjective estimate only Low/Medium/High relative to other parts in the assembly and/or product line

Cost BreakdownMedia paper 21.4%Centertube 3.6%Endplates (2) 3.0%Plastisol 2.6%Inner Seal 4.0%Spring 0.9%Shell 31.4%Nutplate 21.0%Retainer 4.8%Loctite 0.3%End Seal 7.0%

Determine Practical Minimum Part Count

Determine Practical Minimum Part CountTeam assessment of practical changes Tradeoffs between part cost and assembly cost

InnovationNo. PartsCreativity & Innovation

Part Count ReductionAssembly Saving(DFA)Part Manufacture Saving (DFM)SavingOptimumTotal SavingCost of Assembly Vs Cost of Part Manufacture

ImplementationRiskHighMediumLowShort TermMedium TermLong TermIdea Classification

Dont constrain yourself to incremental improvement unless you have to!This style doesnt tear paper like the claw style and is much cheaper to produce!

Steps One & TwoProduct Information: functional requirementsFunctional analysisIdentify parts that can be standardizedDetermine part count efficienciesDetermine your practical part countInstructions

Your Turn...

FastenersA study by Ford Motor Co. revealed that threaded fasteners were the most common cause of warranty repairs

This finding is echoed in more recent survey of automotive mechanics, in which 80% reported finding loose or incorrect fasteners in cars they serviced

Component EliminationExample: Rollbar Redesign 24 Parts 8 different parts multiple mfg. & assembly processes necessary 2 Parts 2 Manufacturing processes one assembly step..If more than 1/3 of the components in a product are fasteners, the assembly logic should be questioned.

Fasteners: Cummins EnginesData from Munroe & Associates October 2002

Engine Type

Number of Components

Number of Fasteners

Percent Fasteners

B Series, 6 Cyl 5.9L

1086

436

40%

B Series, 4 Cyl 3.9L

718

331

46%

C Series, 8.3L

1111

486

44%

Standard Bolt SizesMinimize extra sizes to both reduce inventory and eliminate confusion during assembly

Sheet: Sheet1

Sheet: Sheet2

Sheet: Sheet3

Sheet: Sheet4

Sheet: Sheet5

Sheet: Sheet6

Sheet: Sheet7

Sheet: Sheet8

Sheet: Sheet9

Sheet: Sheet10

Sheet: Sheet11

Sheet: Sheet12

Sheet: Sheet13

Sheet: Sheet14

Sheet: Sheet15

Sheet: Sheet16

Candidates for elimination

Fastener CostSelect the most inexpensive fastening method requiredplastic bendingrivetingscrewingsnap fit

General Design PrinciplesSelf-fastening features

General Design PrinciplesAsymmetric PartSymmetry of a partmakes assembly easierSymmetry eliminates reorientation

General Design PrinciplesTop-Down Assembly

General Design PrinciplesModular AssembliesImagingDrivesDevelopmentTransfer/StrippingCleaningFusingCharge/EraseCopy HandlingElectrical DistributionPhotoreceptorInput/Output DevicesXerox photocopier

DesignedDetailedPrototypedProducedScrappedTestedRe-engineeredPurchasedProgressedReceivedInspectedRejectedStockedOutdatedWritten-offUnreliableRecycledlate from the supplier!Eliminated Parts are NEVER

Identify quality (mistake proofing) opportunities

Mistake Proofing IssuesCannot assemble wrong partCannot omit partCannot assemble part wrong way around.

Mistake Proofing Issues72 Wiring Harness Part NumbersCDC - Rocky Mount, NC

Identify handling (grasp & orientation) opportunities

Quantitative criteriaHandling Time: based on assembly process and complexity of partsHow many hands are required?Is any grasping assistance needed?What is the effect of part symmetry on assembly?Is the part easy to align/position?

Handling DifficultySizeThicknessWeightFragilityFlexibilitySlipperinessStickinessNecessity for using 1) two hands, 2) optical magnification, or 3) mechanical assistance

Handling Difficultysizeslipperinesssharpnessflexibility

Eliminate Tangling/Nesting

Identify insertion (locate & secure) opportunities

Quantitative criteriaInsertion time: based on difficulty required for each component insertionIs the part secured immediately upon insertion?Is it necessary to hold down part to maintain location?What type of fastening process is used? (mechanical, thermal, other?)Is the part easy to align/position?

Insertion IssuesProvide self-aligning & self locating parts

Insertion IssuesEnsure parts do not need to be held in position

Insertion IssuesParts are easy to insert. Provide adequate access & visibility

Insertion IssuesProvide adequate access and visibility

Identify opportunities to reduce secondary operations

Eliminate Secondary OperationsRe-orientation (assemble in Z axis)Screwing, drilling, twisting, riveting, bending, crimping.Rivet

Eliminate Secondary Operations

Welding, soldering, gluing.Painting, lubricating, applying liquid or gas.Testing, measuring, adjusting.

Error = Sum all Ys in Error Columns Proofing Theoretical Min. No. Parts Handling = Sum all Ys in Handling Columns Index Theoretical Min. No. PartsInsertion = Sum all Ys in Insertion Columns Index Theoretical Min. No. Parts 2nd Op. = Sum all Ys in 2nd Op. Columns Index Theoretical Min. No. PartsAssembly Metrics

Analyze All MetricsFirst consider:Reduce part count & type Part Count Efficiency & DFA Complexity FactorThen think about:Error ProofingError IndexThen think about:Ease of handlingHandling IndexEase of insertionInsertion IndexEliminate secondary ops.2nd Op. IndexSet Target Values for These Measures

Complete the remaining columns & calculate your products Assemblability IndicesInstructions

Your Turn...

Analyze data for new design

DFA ProcessProduct Information: functional requirementsFunctional analysisIdentify parts that can be standardizedDetermine part count efficienciesStep 2Step 1Analyze data for new designStep 3Identify handling (grasp & orientation) opportunitiesStep 4Identify insertion (locate & secure) opportunitiesStep 5Step 6Identify opportunities to reduce secondary operationsIdentify quality (mistake proofing) opportunitiesBenchmark when possibleDetermine your practical part countStep 7

In order of importance:DFA GuidelinesReduce part count & typesEnsure parts cannot be installed incorrectlyStrive to eliminate adjustmentsEnsure parts self-align & self-locateEnsure adequate access & unrestricted visionEnsure parts are easily handled from bulkMinimize reorientation (assemble in Z axis) & secondary operations during assembly Make parts symmetrical or obviously asymmetrical

Consideration of True Production costs and the Bill of Material Costs,Typical CostingTotal Cost Pareto by Part Cost1. Castings $$2. Forging $$3.--------------------------------n. Fasteners cPareto by Total Cost1. Fasteners $$$$$2. ----- 3. --------------------------------------n. Castings $$Understanding Product Costs

Have we selected the Best Technology or Process to fabricate the parts?Is hard tooling Required...Selection of Manufacturing MethodHave we selected the best Material needed for function and cost?Have we looked at all the new Technology that is available

Has the Design Addressed Automation Possibilities?Is the Product configured with access for and the parts shaped for the implementation of automation? Selection of Manufacturing Method

Part Features that are Critical To the Products Functional QualityEvery Drawing Call Out is not Critical to Function and QualityUnderstanding Component Features

Key DFMA PrinciplesMinimize Part CountStandardize Parts and MaterialsCreate Modular AssembliesDesign for Efficient JoiningMinimize Reorientation of parts during Assembly and/or MachiningSimplify and Reduce the number of Manufacturing OperationsSpecify Acceptable surface Finishes for functionality

1. Assembly Automation and Product Design G. Boothroyd, Marcell Dekker, Inc. 19922. Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly G. Boothroyd and P. Dewhurst, Boothroyd Dewhurst, Inc. 1989 Marcell Dekker, Inc. 19943. Design and Analysis of Manufacturing Systems Prof. Rajan Suri University of Wisconsin 19954. Product Design for Assembly: The Methodology Applied G. Lewis and H. Connelly 5. Simultaneous Engineering Study of Phase II Injector Assembly line Giddings & Lewis 19976. Design for Manufacturing Society of Manufacturing Engineers, (VIDEO)

References

Note: The title slide name is intentionally manipulated to emphasize a couple of key points.The words Cost Effective have been highlighted in red and put in parentheses. This is there to emphasize that we only do this activity to make the overall cost of the assembly and part manufacturing lower. This includes costs associated with difficult assembly (thus taking more time/labor), quality defect costs (due to omitted, wrong or assembled wrong errors, etc.) and other costs associated with poor designs.The order of Assembly and Manufacturing was switched from the traditional order (the one that the standard DFMA acronym came from) in order to highlight that we actually want the belts to do DFA first and then do DFM.

Material checklist:- copies of 1) PowerPoint handout and/or 2) Exercise handouts for all participants- DFA spreadsheet wall-chart (one for each team) for exercise- Instructors Notes (this packet)- Transparency set (backup to computer presentation) - Overhead Projector- Dry erase pens, several blank transparencies (if using overheads)- Gear Pumps: enough to provide 1 to each three-member group (or other hardware brought by students, can be different for each group)3/16 hex wrench, shop towels, hammer & punch to assist with pump disassembly (or other appropriate hand tools)- PC with PowerPoint and color LCD projector

6One of the concerns that people sometimes have about DFMA is their perception that changing the design is going to drive up costs. This slide is here to simply provide a second opportunity to emphasize that the process is intended to drive costs DOWN, and that the process should not make recommendations that increase the overall cost of the product (inclusive of assembly cost, quality cost, etc., not just referring to piece-part cost).7

These are the basic skills that all of you should be able to walk out with today.9The goal here is to enable the assembler to perform their job in the most productive manner possible, and reduce the amount of work they must do to the simplest level.8The goal is to make the manufacturing process as simple and efficient as the products functionality will allow.

Design for Manufacturing is sometimes referred to as Design for Manufacturability within industry

10

These two methodologies should work in conjunction to simplify the work of machinists, assemblers, electricians, and engineers, or others at each stage in the life cycle of a product. They shouldnt be viewed as competing, but rather compromises need to be made to balance all requirements.

Some examples of DFM vs. DFA conflicts:1. A one-piece plastic injection molding design reduces assembly by eliminating 6 parts. The molding, however, has so many intricate features that the tooling would be extremely expensive.

2. A one-piece stamping is designed for an electronic circuit board housing. The sides of the housing, which were previously separate, now impede the assemblers access to fastening locations. 11Effective designs incorporate both philosophies, beginning with initial product development

Organizations which bring the design teams together with the manufacturing teams will save much time and effort12Talk about the design team that designed the classroom PC projector.whoever was on the team locked in at the design phase 60-80% of the cost.

Cost of materials Number of parts used to achieve a particular function Types of parts Modularity Design Complexity..these are all things we will talk about.What happens to our understanding of the behavior of our design over time? (increases).What happens to our ability to make changes over time? (decreases). If we do make changes, what effect does that have on the cost of the part? (increases) .There is a BIG P.Production date that has to be met. Our objective is to increase the slope of the knowledge line so that we have more time to work out changes.better yet, we want to move this line over into the PPT area.There is a chunk of manufacturing knowledge and information that can be shared once we go into production. Our objective then is to move this Manufacturing knowledge and information into the design phase along with Marketing informationQuestion: What do we do first..Design for Manufacturing or Design for Assembly?

Answer: We do DFA first, then DFM. That way youre not wasting your time optimizing the manufacturing processes on component parts that you might end up eliminating from the assembly.29Here are Key Principles which simplify and minimize assembly operationsThis is the Cummins DFA analysis worksheet. It is available to the students as an Excel file (and should have been distributed to them electronically for the class).

They will use this tool during the exercises for this module.If a process map of the assembly sequence is available, it should be used to define the order of assembly. If not, then start disassembling the parts and invert the order that you take things off!If Cummins part numbers are available, use them. If not, then simply use the outline form shown in the example to show parts and subassemblies.Instruct the class to consider interfaces as the entire interaction of one part with another. If a part has several bosses or sections that all make contact with the same part (even if physically located separately from each other), this is one part-to-part interface.Order of Questions going across column by column:Current Design - Consider the design only as isConsider Specs. - Consider as is and ask if it has to beOther Options - Should provoke ideas of how the design could be

Order of Questions going down row by rows:Movement - Does it move and does it have to?Isolation - Is the part of a different material or isolated and is that necessary?Adjustment or Replacment - Does the servicing or replacement of the part require it to be separate?

This should be a cross-functional activity!!! This helps make the invisible, visible.This mostly applies to fasters, connectors, seals/gaskets, etc. though it can also apply to major subassemblies (like EGR valves).The Goal arrow points to 10%, because that number of parts (10% of the current total) is the entitlement or stretch goal that this assembly could theoretically reach.

The practical target is to redesign and achieve a system that has an efficiency score of 60% or higher. It is not typically worthwhile to push for 100% efficiency.This part of the exercise is simply done to help highlight parts that would be beneficial to eliminate. This will be used in the next step when deciding on Practical Minimum Part Count.This stage is dependent on the specific timing, resource and design control constraints that a given team is under.

The team should make these decisions based on what they are recommending should be done within the scope of the work that they (or collaborating teams) can control.

This is really about answering the question: OK, so what are we actually going to try to do?

Reality is somewhere in the middle!There is always a tradeoff between DFA and DFM.

Taken to its extreme, DFA would recommend that you make one very complex part that requires no assembly. This can make that one part very difficult to manufacture.

Taken to its extreme, DFM would recommend that you make parts that can be manufactured by knocking the big chunks off with sledgehammers and saying close enough. But this would make it really hard to put the parts together into an assembly that functions.

The optimum is somewhere in between. Where the cost savings achieved by simplifying assembly are just balanced by the increased manufacturing costs of the more complex components.Low Risk:These ideas can be implemented almost immediatelyThe technology is not new to the product marketDemonstrate that, with minimal testing and validation, the ideas can be incorporated

Medium Risk:These ideas take a greater amount of research than low risk ideasIdeas may involve technology utilised by another industryMay use a combination of unfamiliar materials and processes

High Risk:These are stretch or blue-sky ideasIdeas require experimentation, research, testing and validationIdeas are on the edge of a new paradigmIdeas can thrust companies to the forefront of their fieldIdeas are almost always patentable

Short/Medium/Long Term refers to the relative duration of time needed to complete the idea relative to the expected duration of the project. Short or medium term ideas can typically be implemented within the project duration and still allow time for adequate testing and integration within the overall design. Long term ideas are typically those that can only be completed toward the end of the project (or beyond) and may not allow adequate test/integration time.

Great to have non-technical persons spread out onto each of the teams. There is no such thing as a bad idea!

Sometimes the worst person on the team is a design engineer they will often defend parts to the last!

(Other times, of course, the designers are the most creative participants!)

During this part of the exercise, go around and stress that they use the matrix questions to assess parts and actually restrict themselves to answering the questions to determine whether parts are essential or not. Remind them that the practical part comes at the end. Theyre setting a stretch goal, so they need to be aggressive with it.30This rollbar assembly was greatly improved by combining parts and adding self-fastening features.

Point out the quote at the top of the slide and then ask the class what percentage of components in a Cummins Engine are typically fasteners?Recall: Rule of thumb - ..If more than 1/3 of the components in a product are fasteners, the assembly logic should be questioned.

There is definitely room for improvement, but there will also be some fasteners that can not be eliminated. (Its the nature of an engine that will be disassembled and repaired multiple times during its duty life that some joints/fasteners are required.)

38The example shows all the fasteners used in a new engine design. The graph illustrates the length and diameter of the sizes. The goal is to minimize the number of sizes used and the stick to standard sizes.

Illustration of one visual method of eliminating non-standard fasteners from a product.

Replace infrequently used fasteners with common ones, especially for those which are very similar in size.

Also point out that one of the pairs of both M10 and M11 capscrews only differ in length by .5 mm. Believe it or not, in at least one case, both of those capscrews were used in fastening the same component onto the engine and had to be done in the same station at the plant. This drove HUGE amounts of failsafing to ensure that the wrong capscrew did not get placed in the wrong hole on the part. ($200K +) There was no visual way that the operator could tell the difference (nor the material supply technician). Consequently, the potentials for quality issues were/are huge! How robust a design do we really have if a 0.5 mm variance in capscrew length and/or engagement means the success or failure of a joint?39The time and tooling required progresses as the fasteners become more complex.34Here, 4 screws are eliminated, and the cover is now immediately secured to the base using snap-fit fasteners

We havent perfected the snap-fit cylinder head yet, but we should be considering this possibility for covers, shields, etc.

31The square part at left is not fully symmetric, since it is not identical in all four orientations (Exhibits 180 degree symmetry only). 35All assembly operations are done from above, which allows for maximum visibility and provides no obstructions to the operator.

36What is the definition of modularity? (standardization of sub-systems.)All components can be removed as single pieces, which assists with servicing and troubleshooting.

Can make the modules themselves expensive (and certainly more expensive than the one component that actually broke) but this is the trend in industry. Makes for faster repairs, less trouble-shooting time and quicker service events in general.Emphasize the impact on part count in a system.

Dont just flash this slide and move on. Its worth reading every bullet point. Youre trying to stress the number of things that go wrong with a part. I typically speed up as I get into the second column and then take a big breath and state the last one regarding late from the supplier

This slide shows what the staging area for wiring harnesses at CDC looks like. They are like wrestling with an octopus, wires and connectors going every different direction. Having 72 different ones makes the chances of picking up the wrong one pretty high. (and you typically dont discover it until further down the line where you have a wire that wont reach).

Main point: Reduce proliferation where possible and if you cant, at least provide an easy way to identify the specific part (barcodes, highly visible part numbers, color-coding, etc.)47The Handling time for each part in the assembly must be determined.

All of the above listed criteria affect the handling characteristics of a given operation. 48 examples of parts which cause difficulty: Size: a small ball, such as a checkballThickness: A very thin gasket Weight: A large steel block which requires two hands or a lifting mechanismFragility: thin wooden sticks which break easily, require greater timeFlexibility: Rubber bandSlipperiness: an oiled or otherwise lubricated part Stickiness: heavily-greased part 49

Each of these factors adds degrees of difficulty to the handling of parts.

40By tying the ends of the spring together, they are prevented from becoming interlaced with on another.50The Insertion time for each part in the assembly must be determined.

All of the above listed criteria affect the insertion characteristics of a given operation.

Both handling and insertion issues and their impact on assembly times can be quantified using the software EASE which is the Cummins Corporate Standard software used for Pre-determined Time Study analysis.

Tight clearances may lead to jams and hang-ups requiring the occasional use of a toolTight clearances may lead to jams and hang-ups requiring the occasional use of a toolEliminate painting of engines: Not feasible for all markets, but Daimler-Chrysler has been requesting it at CMEP as a cost reduction (they currently clear-coat the Ram engines at CMEP).

Setting of target values is pretty subjective and really are just goals for the team. Ideally you would improve the design to where there were no more issues or opportunities for improvement. If you did that, then your assembly measures would have a zero in the numerator, so that would be your target!Review the steps (quickly) just to show that we covered them all.This is the last slide for DFA - Next topic DFMBe aware of low cost parts that over the life cycle (or unit production cost) actually cost us more!

Example shown is that castings (say oil cooler housings), while expensive, do not typically require a lot of additional tooling to handle, manage or further process.

Capscrews, on the other hand, require extensive tooling (DC torque wrenches, calibration equipment, Calibration Laboratory personnel, etc.) to maintain our ability to use them.

Bottom line: its not just the cost of the part, its the other costs that the part drives into the manufacturing/assembly process that matters. Are we taking advantage of the technology in the process. Some features or processes may be free.

An example is that a spot-face can often be added to a drilled hole on a casting with no additional cost, because by simply using a step drill, that feature can be added without requiring an extra movement of the machine tool. It requires a different cutter/bit to be placed in the spindle, but this is typically not a significant tooling cost increase.HPI Injector line at the Fuel Systems plant in Columbus.

Main point: If youre going to ask a machine to pick a part up and/or position it, you have to give the machine a good consistently available and accessible place to hold onto. Robot grippers (and machine manipulators) are not as flexible and adaptive as human fingers! (at least yet)

Recommend that the students examine the Classification of Characteristics standard for more details.68Just a review/summary. This slide incorporates the main themes of both of the previous DFA and DFM summary slides.69Just a few of the many references available on DFMA.