Design for Manufacturing

and Assembly
Case Study
Many well-known disasters can be traced back to design changes.
Although the root cause for the source of the fire has never been determined, there
are some lessons that still apply today.
Recap: After crossing the Atlantic, the Hindenburg attempted to land in Lakehurst,
New Jersey. During the landing procedure, a fire started on the aircraft. The
aircraft was destroyed in 30 seconds. Trivia: This flight was actually a partnership
with American Airlines.
 Lesson 1: The Hindenburg design contained
performance and safety improvements over the
previous best-in-class airships from both
Germany and the UK. Even “better” can fail
catastrophically.
 Lesson 2: Initial assumption was that the fire
was hydrogen-burning, but the flames were
yellow – indicating the side and internal
containment bags were burning. The obvious
root cause might not be correct.
 Lesson 3: The designers originally specified
Rolls-Royce gasoline engines, but the
manufacturer refused to buy from a UK
supplier. Instead, they installed Benz diesels
with a lower power-to-weight ratio. As a
result, the designers had to quickly lighten the
airship. They chose to skip the flame-retardant
coating on the skin. Last minute changes are
risky.
Source: Pat Baird, Baxter Healthcare, 2015
Design for Assembly

 Definition: DFA is a method of design of products for ease of assembly

 DFA focuses on the optimization of the part/system assembly
 DFA is a tool used to assist the design teams in the design of products
that will transition to production at a minimum cost, focusing on the
number of parts, handling and ease of assembly.
 Concerned only with reducing product assembly cost
 Minimizes number of assembly operations
 Individual parts tend to be more complex in design

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Design for Manufacturing

 Definition: DFM is a method of design for ease of manufacturing of

the collection of parts that will form the product after assembly.
 DFM focuses on optimization of the manufacturing process.
 DFM is a tool used to select the most cost effective material and
process to be used in production in the early stages of product design.
 Concerned with reducing overall part production cost
 Minimizes complexity of manufacturing operations
 Uses common datum features and primary axes

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Design for Manufacturing and Assembly

Source: Boothroyd and Dewhurst, 1989

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Design for Manufacturing and Assembly

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Sequence of Analysis for DFMA

1. Concept Design
2. Design for Assembly
 Optimize Design for Part Count
 Optimize Design for Assembly
3. Design for Manufacturing
 Optimize Design for Production Readiness
4. Detailed Design

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

10 Steps of the Design for Assembly Process
1. Gather functional requirements
2. Perform a functional analysis
3. Identify parts that can be standardized
4. Determine part count efficiencies
5. Determine the practical part count
6. Identify poka-yoke opportunities
7. Identify handling opportunities
8. Identify insertion opportunities
9. Look for ways to reduce secondary operations
10.Analyze metrics against cost and risk

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Example: The CLAW

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

1 of 10: Gather Functional Requirements

 Understand how the product works

 Review the preliminary specifications and DOE
 DOE for design optimization
 DOE for process optimization

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

2 of 10: Functional Analysis

There are 3 rules for functional analysis:

1. Assume the first part (the base) is always an essential part

2. Assume fasteners, spacers, washers, o-rings, connectors and

leads are always non-essential parts

3. Liquids such as glue, sealant, lube do not count as parts

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

 DFA Analysis Worksheet (courtesy of Cummins Tools)
Functional Analysis

Begin by identifying each

Part

part of The CLAW:

1. List the parts in the order of

Part Number
assembly

2. Assign a part number to each Part Name

part 1 Lower Jaw Subassembly
1.1 Lower Jaw
1.2 Lower Cover
1.3 Rivet
2 Upper Jaw Subassembly
2.1 Upper Jaw
2.2 Upper Cover
2.3 Rivet
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015 3 Spring
4 Pivot
 Functional Analysis
Rivet The best way to
Upper
Cover
identify all the parts
Rivet is to take the device
apart…

Upper jaw
Spring
Pivot

Lower jaw
Lower
Cover Rivet

Rivet
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015
 DFA Analysis Worksheet (courtesy of Cummins Tools)
Functional Analysis
Assembly Name: ____________________________

Next, count the number of each Part DFA Complexity

kind of part

Number of Interfaces (Ni)

- this value is known as Np

Number of Parts (Np)

(part a to part b = 1)
Then, count the number of

Part Number
Interfaces between each part
- this value is known as Ni Part Name
1 Lower Jaw Subassembly
1.1 Lower Jaw 1 6
1.2 Lower Cover 1 3
1.3 Rivet 2 4
2 Upper Jaw Subassembly
2.1 Upper Jaw 1 6
2.2 Upper Cover 1 3
2.3 Rivet 2 4
3 Spring 1 3
4 Pivot 1 3
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015
Totals 10 32
Functional Analysis
Now we’ll determine if each part is essential or non-essential, so we
can determine the theoretical minimum number of parts.

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

 DFA Analysis Worksheet (courtesy of Cummins Tools)
Assembly Name: ____________________________
Team Name: _______________________

Functional Analysis /
Part DFA Complexity Redesign Opportunity

(Functional Analysis Chart)

Theoretical Minimum Part
Number of Interfaces (Ni)

Cost (Low/Medium/High)
Part Can be Standardized
(if not already standard)

Practical Minimum Part

Number of Parts (Np)

(part a to part b = 1)
Part Number

Part Name
1 Lower Jaw Subassembly
1.1 Lower Jaw 1 6 Y N L Y
1.2 Lower Cover 1 3 N N L N
1.3 Rivet 2 4 N N L N
2 Upper Jaw Subassembly
2.1 Upper Jaw 1 6 N N L Y
2.2 Upper Cover 1 3 N N L N
2.3 Rivet 2 4 N N L N
3 Spring 1 3 N N L Y
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015
4 Pivot 1 3 N N L Y
Totals 10 32 1 0 0 4
3 of 10: Can Parts be Standardized?

• Consider if each part can be

standardized
• within the assembly station
• Within the full assembly
• Within the assembly plant
• Within the corporation
• Within the industry

• Consider if each part should be

standardized

• If you answer yes to both questions,

place “Y” in the spreadsheet cell;
otherwise, place “N”
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015
4 of 10: Part Count Efficiency
In step 4, we’ll determine part count efficiencies, beginning with the
theoretical part count efficiency.

Theoretical Part Theoretical Min. No. Parts

Count Efficiency = Total Number of Parts x 100

• In our example:

Theoretical Part 1
Count Efficiency = 10 x 100 = 10%

• Rule of thumb: part count efficiency goal is >60%

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Continuing with Step 4, we’ll calculate the DFA Complexity Factor
 Cummins metric for assessing complexity of a product design
 Two Factors
 Np – Number of Parts
 Ni – Number of part-to-part interfaces
 Smaller is better (goal is 0.0)

= 17.9

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Part Cost
As we prepare for the next Step in the sequence, we must consider the part
cost.

This is a subjective estimate

Part costs are categorized as low,

medium or high relative to other
parts in the assembly or in the
factory.

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

5 of 10: Practical Minimum Part Count
Step 5 is to determine the practical minimum part count

This is also subjective, and requires a team assessment of practical changes and
consideration of the trade offs between part cost and assembly cost.

Consider the “Part Cost” from the previous slide.

This step answers the question, “What are we prepared to do with the design
realistically and practically?”

From our example, there are 4 practical minimum parts:

spring, pivot, upper jaw, lower jaw

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Practical Part Count Efficiency

Now we have enough information to calculate the Practical Part Count Efficiency:

Practical Part Practical Min. No. Parts

Count Efficiency = Total Number of Parts x 100

• In our example:

Practical Part 4
Count Efficiency = 10 x 100 = 40%

• Rule of thumb: part count efficiency goal is >60%

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Re-designed CLAW

This simple design is the result of the

theoretical part count of 1, the
consideration of cost, and the practical
minimum part count.

Don’t constrain your design to

incremental improvement unless you
have to!

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

DFA Analysis Worksheet (courtesy of Cummins Tools)
Assembly Name: ____________________________
Team Name: _______________________________

Functional Analysis /
Part DFA Complexity Redesign Opportunity

(Functional Analysis Chart)

Theoretical Minimum Part
Number of Interfaces (Ni)

Cost (Low/Medium/High)
Part Can be Standardized
(if not already standard)

Practical Minimum Part

Number of Parts (Np)

(part a to part b = 1)
Part Number

Part Name
1 Lower Jaw Subassembly
1.1 Lower Jaw 1 6 Y N L Y
1.2 Lower Cover 1 3 N N L N
1.3 Rivet 2 4 N N L N
2 Upper Jaw Subassembly
2.1 Upper Jaw 1 6 N N L Y
2.2 Upper Cover 1 3 N N L N
2.3 Rivet 2 4 N N L N
3 Spring 1 3 N N L Y
4 Pivot 1 3 N N L Y
Totals
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015
10 32 1 0 0 4
DFA Metrics 17.9 10% - 40%
Goals 0.0 60% - 60%
General Design and Cost Considerations

Select the least expensive fastening method that allows you to meet the
specification

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

General Design and Cost Considerations
Where appropriate, choose self-fastening features

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

General Design and Cost Considerations
Symmetrical parts are easier to assemble because they don’t require
reorientation

Asymmetric Symmetric

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

General Design and Cost Considerations
Top-Down Assembly is preferred

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

General Design and Cost Considerations
Modular Assemblies are preferred

Image courtesy hitechcontrols.com

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

General Design and Cost Considerations
Eliminate parts that aren’t required. Eliminated parts are NEVER…

 Received  Designed
 Inspected  Detailed
 Rejected  Prototyped
 Stocked  Produced
 Outdated  Scrapped
 Returned to Vendor  Tested
 Unreliable  Re-engineered
 Recycled  Purchased
 Late from Supplier  Progressed
 Involved in a Customer Complaint  Audited by FDA
Copyright GCI, LLC 2015
Examples

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

7 of 10: Handling (Grasp and
Orientation)

Handling time is based on:

• Assembly process
• Complexity of parts

Consider:
• How 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?

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Handling Difficulty
Is a function of…

Part size
Part thickness
Part weight
Part fragility
Part flexibility
Part slipperiness
Part stickiness
How many hands it takes
Is optical magnification required
Is mechanical assistance required

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Picture How Difficult It Is to Handle
These Parts…

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Another Handling Challenge Is
Tangling or Nesting

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

 8 of 10: Insertion (Locate and Secure)
Insertion time is based on the difficulty required
for each component’s insertion

Consider:
• Is the part secured immediately upon insertion?
• Is it necessary to hold down the part to maintain
its location?
• What type of fastening process is used
(mechanical, thermal, other)?
• Is the part easy to align?

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Design Self-aligning and Self-locating Parts

…and ensure the parts do not need to be held in

position in order to secure them in place

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Other Insertion Challenges…
• Provide adequate access and visibility
• Avoid small clearances
• Avoid large insertion forces
• Avoid mating locations that cannot be seen easily

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

 9 of 10: Secondary Operations
Eliminate Secondary Operations as much as possible

Instead of this….. Do this

Soldering
Gluing
Welding
Measuring
Reorienting
Screwing
Crimping
Drilling
Painting
Testing
Adjusting

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

DFA Analysis Worksheet (courtesy of Cummins Tools)
Assembly Name: ____________________________
Team Name: _______________________________

Functional Analysis /
Part DFA Complexity Redesign Opportunity Poka-yoke Handling Insertion Secondary Operations

Assemble wrong way around

(Functional Analysis Chart)

Obstructed access/visibility
Tangle/Nest/Stick together
Theoretical Minimum Part
Number of Interfaces (Ni)

Cost (Low/Medium/High)
Part Can be Standardized
(if not already standard)

Screw/Drill/Twist/Rivet/
Practical Minimum Part

Re-oriented work piece

Difficult to align/Locate

Holding down required

Assemble wrong part /

Resistance to insertion

Test/Measure/Adjust
Number of Parts (Np)

(part a to part b = 1)

Apply liquid or gas

Weld/Solder/Glue

Paint/Lube/Heat/
Pliers/Tweezers/
Magnifying glass
Flexible/Fragile/
Sharp/Slippery
Part Number

Bend/Crimp
Omit part
Part Name
1 Lower Jaw Subassembly
1.1 Lower Jaw 1 6 Y N L Y Y N N Y N N N N N N Y N N N
1.2 Lower Cover 1 3 N N L N N N N N N N Y N N N Y N N N
1.3 Rivet 2 4 N N L N N N N Y N N Y N N N N N N N
2 Upper Jaw Subassembly
2.1 Upper Jaw 1 6 N N L Y Y N N Y N N N N N N Y N N N
2.2 Upper Cover 1 3 N N L N Y N N N N N Y N N N Y N N N
2.3 Rivet 2 4 N N L N N N N Y N N Y N N N N N N N
3 Spring 1 3 N N L Y N N Y Y N N Y Y N N Y N N N
4 Pivot 1 3 N N L Y N N N Y N N Y N N N N N N N
Totals GCI, LLC 2015
Copyright 10 32 1 2 0 4 3 0 1 6 0 0 6 1 0 0 5 0 0 0
DFA Metrics 17.9 10% - 40% 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0
Goals 0.0 60% - 60% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Now Let’s Focus on
Design for Manufacturing
6 questions to ask when selecting the manufacturing method:

Q1: Is hard tooling required?

Q2: Have we selected the best technology or process to fabricate parts?
Q3: Have we selected the best material needed for function and cost?
Q4: Have we looked at all the new technology that is available?
Q5: Are the parts shaped for the implementation of automation?
Q6: Is the supplier capable of meeting the specifications?

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

Image courtesy dmtcnc.com

Selection of Manufacturing Method

 Material
 Function
 Cost
 Fabrication Process
 Hard Tooling
 New Technology
 Configure product with access for automation
 Simplify and reduce the number of manufacturing operations

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

 …and Finally
Understand which part features are critical to the product’s functional quality

(not every drawing call out is critical to function and quality)

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

 Contact Roberta Goode
Information RGoode@GoodeCompliance.com

www.GoodeCompliance.com
(954) 399-7510

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015

DFMA References

7. Introduction to Design for (Cost Effective) Assembly and

Manufacturing David Steinstra, Rose-Hulman, 2015

Copyright GCI, LLC 2015