See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272051727

Study and Scope of DFMA and GD&T in

manufacturing process: A case study on Dual
Plate Check Valve

Conference Paper · November 2013

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2294.8642

CITATIONS READS

5 923

3 authors, including:

Saurin Mukundbhai Sheth

G H Patel College of Engineering and Technology (GCET)
83 PUBLICATIONS 305 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A crucial review on sources of error to attain the geometrical tolerances View project

Engineering View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Saurin Mukundbhai Sheth on 10 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Study and Scope of DFMA and GD&T in
manufacturing process: A case study on Dual Plate
Check Valve
Bhavesh Mistry, Dr. P. M. George
Mechanical Engineering Department
B.V.M. Engineering College
Vallabh Vidyanagar, Anand Dist., Gujarat,
388120, INDIA
mistry.bhavesh756@gmail.com
Abstract—Proper assembly of a product plays a vital role in
the performance, quality and cost of the product. If the
assembly of the product is not proper than it will lead to loss of
time in revising the design and increase the cost of
manufacturing through re-work. By revising the design,
proper assembly can be achieved. To reduce the problems in
assembly, one can use the DFMA (Design for manufacturing
and assembly) or GD&T (Geometric Dimensioning and
Tolerancing) at the design stage. This review paper mainly
concentrates on how to apply DFMA in development of a
product or to improve the already existed design of the
products. This paper also demonstrates how GD&T can
improve the quality of product and reduce the cost of
manufacturing by reducing the rework. Here an attempt is
made to use the concepts of DFMA and GD&T on dual plate
check valve.
IndexTerms—DFMA, DFA, GD&T.
I. INTRODUCTION
A. DFMA(Design for manufacturing and assembly)
DFMA stands for Design for Manufacture and Assembly.
DFMA is the combination of two methodologies; Design for
Manufacture, which means the design for ease of
manufacture of the parts that will form a product, and Design
for Assembly, which means the design of the product for
ease of assembly. DFMA is used as the basis for concurrent
engineering studies to provide guidance to the design team in
simplifying the product structure, to reduce manufacturing
and assembly costs, and to quantify improvements. The
practice of applying DFMA is to identify, quantify and
eliminate waste or inefficiency in a product design. DFMA is
therefore a component of Lean Manufacturing. DFMA is
also used as a benchmarking tool to study competitors’
products, and it can be used as a cost tool to assist in supplier
negotiations [1]. DFA is a systematic analysis process
primarily intended to reduce the assembly costs of a product
by simplifying the product design. It does so by first
reducing the number of parts in the product design, and then
by ensuring that remaining parts are easily assembled [2].
B. GD&T(Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing)
Drawing has been the language of engineers. For the
design, manufacturing and inspection departments to
understand, interpret the drawing in the same way,
Saurin Sheth
Mechatronics Engineering Department
G. H. Patel college of Engineering and Technology
Vallabh Vidyanagar, Anand Dist., Gujarat 388120,
INDIA
unambiguous interpretation of the drawing is mandatory.
This avoids re-work, misunderstanding, misinterpretation,
loss of time and cost over-runs. Geometric Dimensioning
and tolerancing (GD&T) practice has evolved into a
standard and has come to be accepted as the factor of
standard for manufacturing organizations worldwide
[3].Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) is a
language for communicating engineering design
specifications. GD&T includes all the symbols, definitions,
mathematical formulae, and application rules necessary to
embody a viable engineering language. As its name implies,
it conveys both the nominal dimensions (ideal geometry),
and the tolerances for a part [4].
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
Jeffrey W. Herrmann et al [5] gives an overview of
research that is expanding the domain of design for
manufacturing (DFM) into new and important areas. This
paper covers DFM and concurrent engineering, DFM for
conceptual design, DFM for embodiment design, DFM for
detailed design, design for production, platform design for
reducing time-to-market, design for system quality, design
for life cycle costs, and design for environment. The scope of
DFM tools has expanded in many ways: to applications for
different phases of design, to manufacturing system
performance, to platform design and system quality, and to
life cycle cost and environmental considerations. A product
development team should consider the product’s entire life
cycle. Different techniques consider different phases of the
life cycle and may make contradictory design improvement
suggestions. Therefore, successfully employing techniques
such as DFM requires using them in a coordinated way to
design a more profitable product.
Tajul Ariffin Bin Abdullah et al [6] has discussed design
improvement of product steam iron by using Design for
Assembly (DFA) method. DFA is an approach that addresses
product structure simplification without losing functional and
quality of product. DFA offers numerous advantages
including easier of product assembly, part minimization and
product efficiency. The current product efficiency is
identified by using Boothroyd – Dewhurst (BD), DFMA
guidelines. Components that have major influence on
product assembly time are identified for elimination or
combination and redesign purpose. Both data from current
design and proposed design was compared. The result show
that the total part count are being reduced and ease
installation can be done on the new product design. The
design concept is carried out between the current and the new
product development of steam iron. The higher design
efficiency for the new development of steam iron proves that
the Boothroyd Dewhurst DFA method gives more benefits to
manufacturing especially in assembly process.
Nayra Mendoza et al [7] summarize the experiences
obtained during the application of Quality Function
Deployment, Value Engineering, and Design for
Manufacture and Assembly to the redesign of five
components. The research work showed that the tools can be
used to maintain the team’s focus during the design process.
The exercise was motivated by the need to establish a
methodology that results in functional products designs that
are compatible with assembly and manufacture. The study
shows that the methodology is better suited to products that
are still in early stages of their life cycle. The life cycle value
of the product was implicit in the procedure. A benefit of the
integrated methodology is the fact that after each step, the
information is summarized, classified and displayed clearly.
This allows the teams to have evidence of the project’s
evolution.
Osiris Canciglieri Junior et al [8] demonstrates the
applicability of the concepts of Concurrent engineering and
DFM/DFA (Design for Manufacturing and Assembly) in the
development of products and parts for the White Goods
industry in Brazil (major appliances as refrigerators, cookers
and washing machines), showing one case concerning to the
development and releasing of a component. The task was to
substitute a complex assembly of different parts made of
press worked metal and plastics by an aggregated function
single solution with cost reduction, short-time tooling
payback, quality improvement and most important: ease to
assemble in line. The case study explored in this was guided
by the cost-reduction and problems caused by the die-pressed
main part of the subassembly concern the real importance of
some alternative (the tool was in the lifetime end and any
maintenance could lead to necessity of a new equipment). A
solution with high cost-effectiveness, low design-tooling-
implementation time and high reliability was required, for
these parameters a DFA/DFM/CE concept-driven component
was welcomed. The component was developed aiming cost
reduction purposes. When comparing values of materials
used before and after the DFM/DFA, the direct cost of
materials (considered here only BOM component individual
price) was reduced in 69.79%, with no quality or featuring
restrictions. This change leads also to a manpower reduction
– from three operators to only one. The assembly economy
was 67%. The investment on a specific new tool (injection
mould) for a 2-sided complete plastics part, only for the main
component, was 10% lower than the necessity of a new die-
pressing tool. Also, the new plastic part avoided the demand
for a new high temperature stove (about US$ 150,000.00)
that used to be used for a further process of glass-metal
joining which required a special adhesive.
Mohan V. Tatikonda [2] explains that DFA serves a
critical role in reengineering existing products and in
supporting effective design and development of new
products. The increased competitive significance of rapid and
highly effective new product development efforts continues
to increase, highlighting the need for managers and engineers
from both manufacturing and design engineering areas to
gain a better understanding of DFA and related tools. The
primary results of DFA usage are reduced unit costs,
shortened manufacturing lead times, and increased reliability.
In addition, DFA aids reduction of product development time
and cost, helping speed products to market. DFA is
applicable in many contexts, but requires appropriate
organizational support and linkage with other tools to
achieve DESIGN FOR ASSEMBLY the greatest benefits.
David E. Lee et al [9] approaches to establish an
environment for coordinated product and assembly process
development. Using DFA methods as a motivation, an
approach to assembly process development (APD) is
derived. Given the acceptance of DFA methods in product
development, a coordinated approach toward product and
assembly process development has been presented. The
methodology for defining a systematic view for assembly
process development is the use of generic assembly
operations to model assembly processes. By coupling
systematic APD with DFA methods, a common approach
toward coordinated product and process development. By
providing explicit mechanisms for coordinating and tracking
product and process information flow, a new approach
toward concurrent engineering as it applies to the
development and assembly of unmanned composite low-cost
aircraft is being tried.
Markku Mikkola et al [10] suggests that the following
aspects be emphasized when planning a collaborative
product development project: 1) define clear methodologies
and modeling principles for the subject under development;
2) define and agree upon rules of collaboration; 3) ensure the
key personnel in every company are aware of the
development project and that the project team has access to
their expertise, if necessary; 4) review the product strategy
and product development principles and prepare to revise
them. The DFMA approach concentrates on reducing the
number of parts in a product structure. This means designing
more integrated structures in order to reduce the number of
connections and thereby assembly operations.
A. Whiteside et al [11] describes the development of a
framework to facilitate optimal design for manufacture based
on current manufacturing capabilities within the aerospace
industry. This framework takes the form of a progressive
definition release process route-map to guide integrated
product teams through the efficient release of a product
master model from design to the manufacturing and
assembly functions. Manufacturing and process capabilities
are typically manifested through assigning tolerances to all
manufacturable design parameters. The developed
progressive definition and release framework promotes the
incorporation of process capability knowledge during the
design and definition of a product. Adherence to the process
route-map ensures that no engineering model is released that
cannot be realized by manufacturing and assembly functions.
DFMA principles and process capability knowledge united
into the creation of a tangible process to facilitate the release
of an engineering model for production.
F.Z. Krumenauer et al [12] tried to develop DFMA tools
for an industrial real case. There several tools that could be
included in the Design for Excellence (DFX) methodologies.
Initially, two of those can be outstand here: Design for
Manufacturing (DFM) and Design for Assembly (DFA). The
main proposal of concurrent engineering is to shorten a
product development time through a simultaneous time
implementation of the several stages of the engineering
activity in parallel and under a concurrent mode offering all
information required by all elements of the product life cycle.
Figure summarizes the benefits of the DFMA at the
developments of automotive side panels and doors at a
Brazilian plant.
Tamas Kulcsar et al [13] aims to present a summary about
the activity of the Institute of Mechanical Engineering in the
University of Pannonia on the research of the product and
process design methods – supported by CAXX (Computer
Aided Techniques) and DFMA (Design For Manufacture and
Assembly) technologies. It was demonstrated on several
applications that the combined adaptation of the CAXX
technologies and the DFA/DFM/DFMA modules is
applicable to develop an effective product and production
process design method, which can fulfill the constraints
simultaneously: all the product specifications (dimension,
tolerance, operation parameters), the optimum criteria,
complex optimum criteria. The production costs of the
product can significantly decrease, and competitive market
position can be reached using the methods of DFA/DFM.
M. N. Islam et al [14] feels that the dimensioning and
tolerancing (D&T) is a multi-disciplinary problem which
requires the fulfillment of a large number of dimensional
requirements. However, almost all of the currently available
D&T tools are only intended for use by the designer.
Methodology for determining the dimensional specifications
of the component parts and sub-assemblies of a product by
satisfying all of its requirements is presented. The
comprehensive solution strategy presented includes: a
strategy for separating D&T problems into groups, the
determination of an optimum solution order for coupled
functional equations, a generic tolerance allocation strategy,
and strategies for solving different types of D&T problems.
A number of commonly used cost minimization strategies,
such as the use of standard parts, preferred sizes, preferred
fits, and preferred tolerances, have also been incorporated
into the proposed methodology. The methodology is
interactive and intended for use in a concurrent engineering
environment by members of a product development team.
B. K. A. Ngoi et al[15] investigate that the dimensioning
and tolerancing are important engineering processes in
the different phases of a product development cycle. The
two main phases in a product cycle where dimensioning
and tolerancing techniques are extensively employed are
in the areas of product design and process planning.
Tolerance and dimension assignment in both product
design and process planning has an equally important
role in keeping the production cost down and, hence,
requires equal attention as far as research into these
areas are concerned. Another important motivating factor
for research is that manual dimension and tolerance
assignment is often tedious, time-consuming and requires
a considerable amount of skill and experience on the
part of the engineer, resulting in inconsistencies and
errors. Extensive research, in the area of dimensioning
and tolerancing in both product design and process
planning, has been carried out with the advancement in
computers since the 1970s. More important limitations of
dimensioning and tolerancing techniques developed for
product design is its focus on the minimizing of
manufacturing cost, which does not give due
consideration to assemblies which have special
requirements such as a minimum clearance or interference
requirement.
Merwan Mehta et al [16] investigate that the lean design is
a product design philosophy that aims to drive down resource
waste on the factory floor using efficient design. Lean design
has the greatest impact on the efficient workings of a
manufacturing operation. Lean design influences floor-space,
labor, raw material, quality, and ultimately profits for a
manufacturing company. In this paper, how companies can
pursue Lean design utilizing geometric dimensioning and
tolerancing (GD&T) through target manufacturing and zero
tolerancing at the maximum material virtual condition
(MMVC) are shown. Although these concepts are available
in different places within GD&T and quality texts, the
connection eludes some educators and most students.
Further, how these concepts can be utilized by manufacturing
companies as strategic tools to better communicate between
product-design and manufacturing personnel is presented.
GD&T hence is an important tool for a company that would
like to pursue Lean design. Also, GD&T through the use of
the concept of zero tolerance at MMVC for an assembled
product further ensures that no good products that will
function well in an assembly are rejected because of bad
tolerancing practices. Through the use of the concept of zero
tolerance at MMVC, GD&T is capable of preventing the best
fitting parts to not be rejected. GD&T has the potential of
bringing down costs through the use of attribute gaging
which takes substantially less time to implement than
variable gaging. However, the use of GD&T promotes the
use of the total tolerance spread, compromising product
quality. Further, manufacturing personnel should be taught
the importance .of zero tolerancing at the MMVC, to allow
them to get the maximum allowable tolerance, and at the
same time reduce the need to seek special variation
acceptance when the part has not been made to the specified
tolerance.
III. CASE STUDY
The non-return valves especially dual plate check valves
are used in many applications such as in petrochemical
industries, refineries, oil and gas petroleum and cooling
water applications [17]. As shown in Fig. 1., During
assembly of the valves, if the axes of the retainer pin hole,
door hinge drills and the shaft don’t get coincide then the
door doesn’t seat properly on the body which will lead to
rework the assembly. Fig. 2, 3, 4, 5 shows the conceptual
creo model of Valve body, Valve door, retainer pin and shaft
respectively. The rework in assembly leads to the loss of
time and increase in the cost of the product. So by revising
the conventional drawing into GD&T drawing, the rework
can be eliminated in the assembly of the valve.
Following methodology can be used to convert the
conventional drawing into a GD&T drawing:
A. Study the conventional drawing.
B. Study the machine capability.
C. Convert the linear tolerances in to the Geometrical
tolerances
D. Manufacturing and assembly of the valve according
to new revised GD&T drawing.
Fig. 1. Exploded view of Dual plate check valve
Fig. 2. Creo Model of Valve body
Fig. 3. Creo Model of Valve Door
Fig. 4. Creo Model of Retainer Pin
Fig. 5. Creo Model of Shaft
IV. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE
This research explored the application of DFMA and
GD&T to improve the assembly. Applying proper tolerance
to the mating parts plays a vital role in assembly of the
product. So by using GD&T standards, one can apply zero
tolerancing and maximum material virtual conditions which
will lead to proper assembly of the part. The conventional
drawing should be revised to GD&T drawing, so that the
rework in assembly of the valve can be eliminated or
minimized.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge the Flovel valves
pvt.Ltd. (1201, GIDC, vitthal udhyognagar-388120, Anand,
Gujarat, India) for providing information and the
infrastructure.
REFERENCES
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFMA
[2] Mohan V. Tatikonda, ―Design for assembly: a critical
methodology for product reengineering and new product
development,‖ production and inventory Management Journal
35, pp. 31-37.
[3] GD&T Training brochure, Engineering Global solution,
http://www.egsindia.com/G-D-and-T-Training-Brochure.pdf
[4] Paul J Drake Jr.,“Dimensioning and tolerancinghandbook,‖
McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07-018131-4
[5]Jeffrey W. Herrmann, Joyce cooper, Satyandra K.
Gupta,Caroline C. Hayes, Kosuke Ishii, David Kazmer, Peter
A. Sandborn, William H. Wood, ―New directions in design
for manufacturing,‖ Proceedings of DETC’04, ASME 2004
Design Engineering Technical conferences and Computers
and Information in Engineering Conference,September 28-
October 2, 2004, Salt Lake City, Utah USA, pp. 1-9.
[6] TajulAriffin Bin Abdullah , M. KhairulAizat , Kamarul A. M.,
M. FaizalHalim, ―Product design improvement by design for
assembly (DFA) method: a case study on steam iron,‖
iDECON 2010 – International Conference on Design and
Concurrent Engineering.
[7] Nayra Mendoza, HoracioAhuett, Arturo Molina, ―Case studies
in the integration of QFD, VE and DFMA during the product
design stage,‖ The Proceedings of the 9th International
Conference of Concurrent Enterprising, Espoo, Finland, 16-18
June 2003.
[8] Osiris Canciglieri Junior, Joao Pedro BuiarskeyKovalchuk,
Antonio Batocchio, ―The white goods part designed based on
dfm/dfa concepts in a concurrent engineering environment‖.
[9] David E. Lee and H. Thomas Hahn, ‖A coordinated product
and process development environment for design for
assembly,‖ Proceedings of The 1996 ASME Design
Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers in
Engineering Conference, pp. 1-13.
[10] Mikkola M., Uoti M., Kettunen J., ―Challenges in
collaborative product development a case of DFMA approach
in a machine manufacturing supply network,‖ 12th
International EurOMA Conference on Operational and Global
Competitiveness. Budapest, 19 22 June 2005, pp. 81-86.
[11] A. Whiteside, E. Shehab, C. Beadle, M. Percival, ―Developing
a current capability design for manufacture framework in the
aerospace industry,‖ proceedings of the 19th CIRP
conference- competitive design, cranfield University,30-31
March 2009, pp223.
[12] F.Z. Krumenauer, C.T. Matayoshi, I.B. da Silva, M.S. Filho ,
G.F. Batalha, ―Concurrent engineering and DFMA
approaches on the development of automotive panels and
doors,‖ Journal of achievements in materials manufacturing
engineering, vol. 31, issue 2, Dec. 2008, pp. 690-698.
[13] Tamas Kulcsar, ImreTimar, ―Combined application of caxx
and dfma techniques in the design process,‖ Annals of Faculty
of engineering hunedoara-international journal of engineering,
pp. 367-372.
[14] M. N. Islam, ―A dimensioning and tolerancing methodology
for concurrent engineering applications II: comprehensive
solution strategy,‖ The International Journal of Advance
Manufacturing Technology (2009), 29 August 2008, pp. 922-
939.
[15]B. K. A. Ngoi, C. T. Ong, ―Product and Process
Dimensioning and Tolerancing Techniques. A State of the Art
Review,‖ The International Journal of Advance
Manufacturing Technology (1998), pp. 910-917.
[16] Merwan Mehta, ―Promoting awareness in manufacturing
students of key concepts of lean design to improve
manufacturing quality,‖ American Society for Engineering
Education, 2012 annual conference, pp. 1-8.
[17] http://www.flovelvalves.com/

View publication stats