Article Review

On

A systematic review of design for X techniques from 1980 to 2018:

concepts, applications, and perspectives

Submitted to:

Dr. Ranjit Shrestha

Submitted by:

Bigya Krishna Shrestha

31112

ME-Design

Date: July 25, 2021

A. C. Benabdellah, I. Bouhaddou, A. Benghabrit and O. Benghabrit, "A systematic review of design for X
techniques from 1980 to 2018:," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 102, no. 9-
12, pp. 3473-3502, 2019. [CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] Reviewed by Bigya Krishna Shrestha.

Introduction

In this article, Benabdellah & Bouhaddou[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] states that in a new product development, as
abbreviated into NPD, contains a lot of variables that affect each other. When a variable at one point is changed it
causes a number of simultaneous changes in the whole process, creating an unpredictable pattern to know what
sort of design should be made. To address this, it has been stated that concurrent engineers (engineers who
develop methods for simultaneous processes) and researchers has implored upon design of X (DFX) or design for
Excellence for this matter. The reason DFX is used, has been indicated to the improvements in competitiveness,
rational design decisions for products and processes and overall Quality improvements in the product. It has been
demonstrated that this can be implemented fir a specific stage in product life cycle or for a specific target. For
example, design for environment. Over all 75 different DFX techniques had was found to be taken into account
and being similar led to the whole concept to turn into a complex mess.

Hence, Benbdellah & Bouhaddou[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] has tried to illustrate a comprehensive overview of
the most prominent DFX techniques to promote sustainability, cost, product impact on the market and optimize
product life cycle. In order to do this, Benbdellah & Bouhaddou [ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ]has gathered
information from researchers about DFX techniques from 1980 to 2018 and its impacts on the three dimensions of
sustainability i.e., economy, ecology and equity. Similarly, the impacts on the total cost of the product known as
cost ownership as well as to differentiate the product from other products in the market. Thus, by doing this the
authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] claim to contribute to develop: “

1. An overview of the most used DFX techniques from 1980 to 2018,

2. A classification of different DFX with respect to the strategy considered by companies.,
3. An analysis and categorization of the selected DFX techniques.
4. A presentation of the existing integrated DFX that optimize the product life cycle.
5. An investigation of the major challenges and future prospects.”

In short, the authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] aim to build classify, analyze and categorize different DFX
strategies with respect to existing part of a product life cycle and determine any problems that can be addressed in
the future by the help of an overview of the DFX design techniques used from 1980 to 2018.
The author to achieve this aim, has brought together a plethora of information from number of research articles. By
going through the articles, regarding the application of DFX through automotive sector, the authors came to the
realization that, in the 50-year time period of the articles about DFX, there were no paper that dealt with just the
connection of DFX techniques and the strategies that had been implied in the automotive sector. Similarly, the
customer didn’t have a clear understanding of how to implement different DFX techniques to the automotive
sector. By an impact of this the customers ended up using just the Design for Quality (DFQ) for the Life cycle
assessment.

Thus, the authors went through a systematic process for their methods:

1. Selection of the DFX techniques

2. Classification of most prominent DFX techniques
3. Analysis of the selected DFX techniques with respect to the literature review of document from 1980-
2018.

This process was carried out through an iterative process as provided as follows:

1. Literature Search
2. Literature Selection
3. Analysis
4. Discussion and future works

Step 1 and 2 purpose was to know which DFX technique could be used for which strategy: This process included
gathering papers from two databases: “Science direct” and “Taylor & Francis” which provided a total of 457
papers. From these paper through keyword analysis, 75 DFX was found. Then, the 457 papers were condensed
into just 220 with respect to relative application and significance the papers showed. Then again 220 papers were
condensed to 142 papers with respect to number of citation and real-world application. This resulted in the
classification of the 6 prominent DFX technique in the automotive sector. This process is known as Newbert
methodology[ CITATION New06 \l 1033 ].

The 6 DFX techniques derived from the 142 papers were then studied deeply gathering the information about
methodology, coordination and trade-offs between the techniques were gathered and discussed about. Through
this the major challenges and future prospects of DFX theory was discussed.
Study Review

Through the literature search of the authors, it has been found that DFX first appeared in 1983 with relevance to
design engineering, manufacturing engineering and concurrent engineering. DFX was first build upon the
foundation of making production efficient, which then expanded into the whole product lifecycle impacting several
other factors such as economy, ecology, and the overall health of the company. With the growth of the concept of
DFX, the techniques have been categorized into different sectors by bunch of researchers. Chiu et al.[CITATION
MCC10 \l 1033 ] brought upon product scope, system scope and ecosystem scope. Arnette et al.[ CITATION
ANA14 \l 1033 ] turned it to dimensions of sustainability i.e., economy, ecology, and equity. Radzwill et al.
[ CITATION Rad17 \l 1033 ] classified them according to their application in product, system or ecosystem and
their focus on requirements of stakeholders.

To provide a concise way of viewing the 75 different DFX techniques in the literature search of the methodology,
the Authors have provided us with a table categorizing the 75 techniques into the above-mentioned
conditions[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] of:

1. Sustainable dimensions
2. Scope
3. Abbreviations
4. Design consideration

From the table-1[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ], it has been inferred that, it is difficult to classify every technique into a
category, the equity dimension only contains DFSR (Social responsibility) due to lack of a separate social
dimension, some of the DFX had same design consideration even though they were recognized as different
techniques and many traditional engineering-based techniques have lot in common and can be placed inside a
same technique.

Thus, with this considered, the authors classified a categorization strategy with respect to the concept of cost
leadership which categorizes them into techniques impacting:

1. Reduction of production cost (factory)

2. Reduction of supply chain cost (transfer and market)
3. Reduction of cost ownership (end user)

Along with this, another categorization strategy was respect to the product differentiation strategy categorizing
them into:

1. Reducing environmental impact

 2. Reducing variation and defects

With this the papers of the corresponding categories were distributed and by using analytical hierarchy process
(AHP), the most prominent DFX was determined with their respective impact. These six DFX was called design for
relevance. When linked the following was inferred by the Authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ]:

1. Reduction of production cost, needs DFMA

2. Reduction of supply chain cost, needs DFSC
3. Reduction of cost ownership, needs DFSv
4. Reducing environmental impact, needs DFE
5. Reducing variation and defects, needs DEQ and DFS

All the other DFX were integrated into sub categories of the six prominent DFX.

To understand the amount of research done in each field of DFX, the authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] have
provided with an appendix[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] containing all the 142 main sources categorized into the
above 6 DFX of design for relevance, with their analysis.

Discussion

The DFX of design for relevance has ben presented to us in the following manner:

1. Design for manufacture and assembly

The authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] state that every organization must adopt the DFMA philosophy and apply
the cost quantification tools early on in their product design process, in order to able to exist in the market of
globalization, rapid technological development, and increasing product complexity, by maximizing the use of
component and manufacturing processes, an integral part of DFA and DFM respectively.

DFMA is the combination of both DFA and DFM and has been used since its concept started in 1990 for automatic
assembly. As the authors have presented in their example: “Ford Motor Company Saving over $1000M annually
by using DFMA on Their Taurus line of cars, DFMA has been proved to have a tremendous impact when properly
applied in a concurrent engineering environment.”[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ]

DFMA guides to minimize parts and increase modularity using standardized parts and top-down assemblies. It
suggests to make the systems simpler during the assembly process and using a team provided with clear and
specific responsibilities. Due to this, idea of DFMA focuses on design for easier assembly and manufacture, which
consists of reduced components, reduced operation, standard parts, efficient joining, easier fabrication, packaging,
and modular design to replace adjustment requirements.
2. Design for Service

By the literature of DFS, the authors conclude that disrupting the traditional channel using DFS can increase
innovation, customer satisfaction and offer a product differentiation that will lead to a competitive product.

It has been described that in traditional channel, there is no effort to promote product sales, don’t really care about
what happens to the product at end of life destroying the environment in process. To overcome these serviceable
goods that doesn’t need to be thrown away immediately is considered. This part of the product is involved into the
design process. Which has been dealt in two different ways:

1. Product Service system (PSS)

2. Design for Service (DFSv)

PSS is a strategy focusing on shifting from just selling a product to selling both products and services. DFSv is a
guideline for planning and organizing of different parts of a service to improve quality of interaction between
customers and company, by improving maintainability and reliability of a product from the design phase. This
involves the design consideration of:

1. User-centered design
2. Involving stakeholders
3. Sequencing service into several processes
4. Making service experience tangible
5. Considering interaction of users

As in the example of PCB[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ], use of DFSv have reported to increase efficiency and lower
the time and cost. More future research has been done to incorporate social, legal and political considerations and
matching service to sustainability.

3. Design for Supply Chain

The DFSC is the process of optimization of the fit between supply chain and product design. The Authors have
urged for the use of DFSC for sustaining competition in the market, by addressing infrastructure limitations and
use series of supply chain optimization techniques to ensure customer satisfaction, and decrease total costs and
be flexible in timing of unfortunate events.

This is carried out by the use of Froward logistics (DFL) and Reverse logistics (DFRL); referring to process of
turning raw materials to finished products and bring back the used products through product returns, repairs,
maintenance, recycling and dismantling to raw materials respectively. These process that has been recognized
since 1990s for its benefits and impacts on cost of manufacture, lead time and customer satisfaction. Furthermore,
Due to the closed loop system from DFL and DFRL, environmental impacts can be lowered.

4. Design for Quality

Quality can mean “compliance with requirements,”” Degree of excellence,” “fitness for use”, “freedom from
defects”, “imperfections”, and “delighting customers”. Which has been condensed into a “process to maximize
production efficiency and safety while enhancing product manufacturability and control”. Thus, quality is both a
products and system term, where quality in system is production of products that fulfill customer needs and
expectation and is something that needs to be designed into the product. In order to reduce cost, “doing things
right the first time is better than not doing right things the right first time” is urged by the authors [ CITATION
Abl19 \l 1033 ] through DFQ.

DFQ provides a process to design a robust product by knowing the products environment to minimize potential
variation during manufacture to improve reliability, performance and technology to exceed customer expectation.
DFQ described by the design for six-sigma (DFSS), introduced by Taguchi method [ CITATION Tag93 \l 1033 ].

5. Design for Safety

Safety is a very important part of any domain with injuries and deaths in question. The main point is the work
situations that may have malfunctions. Thus, DFS focuses not only on product design but also consider human
behavior during the work situations.

Millions of products are recalled for safety risk and financial risks, like Toyota facing $2 billion loses due to safety
concern on a specific product, Product safety addresses the quality and reliability of a system. The main thing is
the human behavior must be considered to know when a possible safety risk might occur. Thus, several questions
are asked: what are the risks? Where its is defined that it is categorized into accidental risks, ergonomical risks
and residual risks which is addressed in the design three design phases of: conceptual phase, embodiment phase
and detailed phase. This was suggested by Pahl et al.[ CITATION Pah94 \l 1033 ]

The included factor of DFS is DFHS where by consideration of safety performance indicator include the human
safety factors in the design which has 6 main groups:

1. Utilization of TRIZ (theory of inventive problem solving)- finding solution based on analysis of design
problem
2. Axiomatic design theory – design on a foundation/ axis based on rational process and tools
3. Failure mode and Effect analysis
4. Function behavior structure
 5. Functional Analysis
6. QFD method to introduce quality in design

6. Design for Environment

Design for Environment considers the impact of all human-induced environmental impacts due to products and
introduces us to concept that is more environmentally responsible. The Design of Environment starts form the
consideration during the development of the design ideas about the impacts on the environmental safety and
health during the whole product life-cycle. DFE aims to produce products that has the lowest environmental impact
still making the product cost effective and high quality.

DFE consist of a number of guidelines such as: quality function deployment (QFD), life cycle analysis (LCA),
analytical hierarchical process (AHP), and TRIZ based methodologies for sustainability.

DFE can be a common feature in the future product considering the environmental considerations and impacts
that the past products have made in the world. The best thing about this as described by the author is the
systematic consideration of design performance in accordance to the environment, health and safety objectives of
the process life cycle of the products.

Integration of DFX

Through the study’s different models for integration of DFX has been created first and foremost is a computer-
based support tool that can be used alongside CAD software these include DFA, DFM, and DFD which aims to
contain execution, results and coordination of the design activities. Similarly, for planning, three parts has been
made: design for profit, resources, and staff. Another work is to simplify the application of DFX techniques using
structure matrices and domain mapping matrices. Others include linkage of human factors and ergonomics and to
design products to serve and the physical and cognitive requirements of users. Similarly new components include,
remanufacture, reuse, recycling for sustainability. Furthermore, application of analytic network process based on
AHP has been proposed. The use of DFX has expanded from just the automotive sector to Information technology
to support actionable strategies for quality and customer satisfaction.

Applications
With the emergence of DFX, more sectors have applied DFX in the areas of assembly, manufacturing,
quality, safety, serviceability, and environment aspects. But the ideas even if known are not practiced enough and
omitted. The authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] have presented examples of application of each prominent DFX
and one of them are as follows:
The authors have provided examples of use of DFMA in a redesign process of a motor drive to reduce the number
of items used from 19 parts to just 4 parts, this reduced the time of assembly from 121s to 64 s and saving $15.59 [
CITATION GBo88 \l 1033 ]. Similarly in a car seat design by DFMA the total time taken for manufacturing reduced
from 24 to 1.5 min[ CITATION JCo91 \l 1033 ].

Next is the use of Design for Service a PCB replacement was done in pressure recorder with accordance to DFS,
the time bases efficiency increased from 3.8 % while using only DFMA to 54.5% while using DFS and the parts
were reduced by 56 %.[ CITATION GQH98 \l 1033 ]

Next Design for supply chain, the first use was to define the type of order picking for delivery of a product. Here
the authors used STORE software to deduce the appropriate order picking type needed to store and distribute
product[ CITATION GQH98 \l 1033 ].

Next for Design for quality, a case study showed application of DFQ to deal with concept design of a new
Neapolitan coffee, Giromino et al. produced a prototype following DFQ to meet customer requirement [ CITATION
DiG06 \l 1033 ].

Next for design for safety, Sandberget al.[ CITATION San14 \l 1033 ] have applied DFS and have presented a list
of essential criteria to consider in mechanical equipment, pipes and valves, plumbing, refrigerants, rooftop air
conditioners, fan drivers and motors, air distribution, ventilation control, batteries, electrical equipment locations,
electric utility commissioning, contractor qualifications, miscellaneous, fire precautions, etc.

Next for Design for Environment, Huang[ CITATION GQH98 \l 1033 ] presented a selection of materials for the
manufacturing of bottles, where glass is considered 100% recycled and plastic is considered bad.

With this the authors found that majority of applications relate to mechanical, then automotive, software, others,
alimentary and electronics in descending order. Concluding that DFX was started in the mechanical software
because of its initial usage.

Future Works

The Author[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ] urges that the implementation of the DFX should be mandatory not
voluntary as how it has benefits on sustainability dimensions, cost ownership, and product differentiation. It’s been
claimed as a key concept driver of “Industry 4.0 revolution”. With benefits to companies to produce individualized
products with low lead time, higher quality and sustainability, the author has summarized the future considerations
to following points:

1. Systematic identification of requirements

 2. Incorporation of DFX in life cycle and estimation of cost and time
3. Multiple studies on impacts of DFX on design process
4. Involvement of sensors to create autonomous system
5. Integration of DFX to enable communication with products
6. Gathering of data to enable growth in quality of product
7. Achieve a flexible, smart, reconfigurable development process.
8. Integration of upcoming artificial intelligence

Conclusion

In this research, the authors[ CITATION Abl19 \l 1033 ], used a series of journals, books and conference papers of
over 38 years to gather the meaning of DFX till date. Then used Newbert methodology to select 142 papers out of
457 papers, then select, categorize the DFX methods derived from the papers into 6 prominent DFX. The resulting
DFX was analyzed with relevant literature review to analyze the past, current and future of each DFX as well as
the integrated ones.

From the categorized DFX techniques the authors developed a new design tool to provide which DFX is to be
used in what phase of the product life cycle and which of the phases does the DFX technique impact to the most.
Then providing with relevant examples to enable more companies, sectors to explore into DFX and its application
in their respective fields.

With the new research done in the DFX field, more future possibilities have been explored by the author. This
includes integration of Artificial intelligence to optimize and create more tools to support the development of DFX
theory as well as a holistic approach to the beginning of Industry 4.0 revolution and thus redesign different sectors
involving assembly, safety, service, supply chain, quality and environment.

Personal Comment

The author has brought a vast amount of scattered knowledge of DFX theory into one central guideline to
incorporate all of the 75 DFX technique the author has mentioned about. I believe this is an honorable feat that will
surely be implemented in the upcoming days of product design process. DFX is, as pushed by the authors, should
be implemented as a mandatory process in companies as, just because why not. It may be a bit difficult to start
considering the amount of knowledge it requires but once it is implemented, the world can be pushed to a new
level of innovation with better products.

I believe the development of technology is an exponential process and what the author has suggested here is the
next step of development of the civilization. Better products with service, environmental sustainability, safety
means, people can worry less about their products killing them and the world, and have a secure life. For example;
fossil fuel cars kill people in accidents and cause a lot of environmental damage. But considering using DFX to
improve technology into a sustainable car run by machines are far safer to people and environment than if a
person was behind the wheel.

Thus, in brief, I have an optimistic view about how we can use this technology to have a better life and create a
better world for the generations to come.
References

[1] A. C. Benabdellah, I. Bouhaddou, A. Benghabrit and O. Benghabrit, "A systematic review of design for X
techniques from 1980 to 2018:," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 102,
no. 9-12, pp. 3473-3502, 2019.

[2] N. SL, "Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: An assessment and suggestions for future
research," Strategic Management Journal, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 121-146, 2006.

[3] C. MC and O. GE, "Evolution of design for X tools applicable to design stages: a literature review," in
International design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering
conference, Montreal ASME, 2010.

[4] A. AN, B. BL and C. T, "Design for sustainability (DFS): the intersection of supply chain and environment.,"
Journal of cleaner production, vol. 83, pp. 374-390, 2014.

[5] R. NM and B. MC, "Design for X (DfX) in the Internet of Things (IoT)," Journal of Quality Management
Systems, Applied Engineering, & Technology Management, vol. 1, 2017.

[6] T. G, Taguchi on robust technology development: Bringing quality engineering upstream, New York: ASME
Press, 1993.

[7] P. G and B. W, Engineering Design, Springer, 1994.

[8] B. G and D. P, "Manufacturing Engineering," in Product design for manufacture and assembly , Estados
Unidos, CRC Press, 1988, pp. 42-46.

[9] C. J, Design for manufacture: strategies, principles, and techniques, Addison Wesley publishing company,
1991.

[10] H. GQ and M. KL, "The DFX shell: a generic framework for developing design for X tools," International
Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 475-484, 1998.

[11] D. G. G, L. A and V. A, "Concept design for quality in virtual environment," Computers & Graphics, vol. 30,
no. 6, pp. 1011-1019, 2006.

[12] S. SF, E. C, O. R, V. KD, S. ST and L. M, "Hennepin health: A Safety-net Accountable care organization for
the EXPANDED Medicaid Population," Health Affairs, vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 1975-1984, 2014.