Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T18:49:08.735Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PRODUCT VS. PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT II - INTEGRATED PRODUCT, PRODUCTION, MATERIAL AND JOINT DEFINITION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Pascal Stoffels ,
Jerome Kaspar  and
Michael Vielhaber
Jerome Kaspar
Affiliation:
Saarland University
Michael Vielhaber
Affiliation:
Saarland University

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

As product, production systems and material strongly influence each other, an integrated view on these domains offers huge potentials during development in order to adjust characteristics being mutually dependent. Considering manufacturing aspects within the design process certainly constitute a widespread approach to make sure that the products can be produced to predefined costs and quality.

As product characteristics are realised through material characteristics and manufacturing processes, material aspects need to be integrated into this view. Moreover, different geometries have to be assembled in order to create particular structures, why joints devote a special attention.

For this reason, a definition approach that integrates product, production systems, material plus joints and considers the ecological performance apart from the regular technical and economic aspects offers a huge potential for successful future solutions. This paper reviews relevant development approaches as well as supporting IT tools in the different domains. As a result, an extendedly integrated view is introduced and a method that supports the integrated selection of solutions regarding a technical, economic and ecological performance is introduced.

Keywords

Integrated product developmentConcurrent Engineering (CE)Design methods
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 2471 - 2480
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Ashby, M. F. (2005): Materials selection in mechanical design. 3rd edition. Amsterdam, Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
Akao, Y. (1990): Quality function deployment. Integrating customer requirements into product design. New York: Productivity Press.Google Scholar
Bellgran, M.; Säfsten, K. (2010): Production development. Design and operation of production systems. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Boothroyd, G.; Dewhurst, Peter; Knight, W. A. (2002): Product design for manufacture and assembly. 2nd edition. New York: M. Dekker.Google Scholar
Eversheim, W. (2002): Organisation in der Produktionstechnik. 4th edition. Berlin: Springer (VDI).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granta Design 2020. https://www.grantadesign.com/language-home/industry/products/ces-selector/Google Scholar
Günter, S. (1994): Handbuch der Fertigungstechnik. München, Wien: Hanser.Google Scholar
Gu, P.; Rao, H.A; Tseng, M.M (2001): Systematic design of manufacturing systems based on axiomatic design approach. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 50 (1), pp. 299-304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, J. R.; Clausing, D. (1988): The house of quality. Harvard Business Review Mai 1988, pp. 63-73.Google Scholar
Kaspar, J.; Choudry, S.A.; Vielhaber, M. Concurrent selection of material and joining technology - Holistically relevant aspects and its mutual interrelations in lightweight engineering. Procedia CIRP 72, 2018, pp. 780-785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaspar, Jerome; Revfi, Sven; Albers, Albert; Vielhaber, Michael (2019): Cross-component material and joining selection for functional lightweight design based on the extended target weighing approach - A detailed application example. Procedia CIRP 84, pp. 694-700. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.04.192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minolla, W. (1975): Rationalisierung in der Arbeitsplanung. Schwerpunkt Organisation. Dissertation. Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen.Google Scholar
REFA (1990): Methodenlehre der Betriebsorganisation. Planung und Gestaltung komplexer Produktionssysteme. 2nd edition. München: Hanser.Google Scholar
Rusitschka, Fabian (2017): Methodik zur Auswahl von lösbaren Verbindungen in der variantenreichen Serienfertigung. Dissertation. Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart. Online: http://d-nb.info/1153769859/34.Google Scholar
Stoffels, P.; Bähre, D.; Frey, G.; Vielhaber, M. (2015): Energy efficiency engineering - towards an integrated method framework for energy-oriented product and production development. In: Oral, A.Y. et al. (ed.): 2nd International Congress on Energy Efficiency and Energy Related Materials (ENEFM2014). Cham: Springer International Publishing (Springer Proceedings in Energy), pp. 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16901-9_35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoffels, P. (2017): Integrierte Definition von Produkt, Produktion und Material zur Steigerung der Ressourceneffizienz. Dissertation. Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken. http://doi.org/10.22028/D291-26985Google Scholar
Stoffels, P.; Kaspar, J.; Bähre, D.; Vielhaber, M. (2018): Integrated product and production engineering approach - A tool-based method for a holistic sustainable design, process and material selection. Procedia Manufacturing 21, pp. 790-797. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, N. P. (1990): The principles of design. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Suh, N. P. (1995): Design and operation of large systems. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 14 (3), pp. 203-213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, K. T.; Eppinger, S. D. (2008): Product design and development. 4th edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.Google Scholar
VDI Guideline VDI 2221, 1993-05: Methodik zum Entwickeln und Konstruieren technischer Systeme und Produkte. Berlin: Beuth Verlag.Google Scholar
VDI Guideline VDI 4499, 2008-02: Digital factory. Berlin: Beuth Verlag.Google Scholar
Vielhaber, M.; Stoffels, P. (2014): Product development vs. production development. Procedia CIRP 21, pp. 252-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.03.141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, C. (2005): An extended theoretical approach to modelling products and product development processes. In: Bley, H.; Janssen, H.; Shpitalni M.; Krause, F.-L. (Hg.): Proceedings of the 2nd German-Israeli Symposium on Advances in Methods and Systems for Development of Products and Processes. 2nd German-Israeli Symposium on Advances in Methods and Systems for Development of Products and Processes. Berlin, 07-08.07.2005. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer-IRB-Verlag, pp. 159–179.Google Scholar
Wu, B. (1994): Manufacturing systems design and analysis. Context and techniques. 2nd edition. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar