11/02/2015

ADVANCED MANUFACTURING
SYSTEMS DESIGN

Concurrent Engineering
Introduction to Simultaneous and
Asynchronous Engineering Activities

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Computer Integrated Manufacturing

Systems
• Definition Revisited
• Systems which enable the integrated,
rationalized design, development,
implementation, operation and improvement
of production facilities and their output over
the life cycle of the product. These systems
identify and use appropriate technology to
achieve their goals at minimum cost and effort.

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

1
 11/02/2015

Concurrent Engineering - Definition

• Concurrent Engineering is a systematic
approach to the integrated, concurrent design
of products and their related processes,
including manufacturing and support. This
approach is intended to cause the developers,
from the outset, to consider all elements of
the product life cycle from conception to
disposal, including quality, cost, schedule, and
user requirements. (Pennell and Winner, 1989)
1989)

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Concurrent Engineering –
Definition Problems
• Name Implies only Engineering Involved
• Activity is Really Concurrent (DESIGN)
CONCEPTUALIZATION and
EVALUATION (ENGINEERING)
– Require Broad View of Design
– Must Assure that Correct Concepts Are
Incorporated into the Design
– Must Assure that Principles of
Engineering/Nature are Followed

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

2
 11/02/2015

Goals of Concurrent Engineering in CIM (1)

• Primary Goal is to Assure Rationalization in

Early Stages to Avoid Cost/Improve Product
– Operational Concept
– Physical Concept
– Manufacturing Concept
– Maintenance Concept
– Disposal Concept

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Goals of Concurrent Engineering in CIM (2)

• Secondary Goal is Lead Time Reduction

– Administrative Lead Time
• Design and Rationalization of Product
• Approval and Acquisition of Facilities
– Manufacturing Lead Time
• Scheduling and Execution
• Storage and Distribution
• Measure of Exposure to Risk/Changes
Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

3
 11/02/2015

Traditional Process of Serial Engineering

• Functions Separated
• Functions Serially Executed
• No Interaction
• Maintenance Usually an Afterthought
• Time Consuming
• Costly
• Product a Series of Suboptimal
Reconsiderations
Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Serial Engineering

SUPPORT??

DESIGN MANUFACTURING MANUFACTURING CUSTOMER

PLANNING
Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

4
 11/02/2015

Concurrent vs. Serial Engineering

• All Viewpoints Solicited
• Interdisciplinary Teams
• Life Cycle Cost Considered
• Attempt to Embody Concept Early - Before
Committing to Detail Design
• Data/Information/Knowledge Exchange
Planned and Encouraged
• Cycle Time and Cost Reduced
Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

A Concurrent Engineering Model

PRODUCT DISCIPLINE INPUTS

FUNCTIONAL
CONCEPT • ENGINEERING

• MARKETING
PRODUCT CONCURRENT
MANUFACTURING DESIGN • PRODUCTION
CONCEPT
• CUSTOMERS

PRODUCT • WORKERS
MAINTENENCE
CONCEPT

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

5
 11/02/2015

Keys to Concurrent Engineering

• Supportive Culture
• Clear Understanding and Documentation of
Requirements
• Technical Competence/Experiences
• Technical Tool Availability (CAx Tools)
• Communication Competence
• Communication and Information Tool
Availability
Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Quantitative Analysis in
Concurrent Engineering
–Singh’s Mathematical Model
–Uses Manufacturing Method/Process
Capabilities, Tolerance Limits, Input
and Processing Costs, and Time
Estimates to Compare Alternatives
– Source: Singh, Nanua, Systems Approach to Computer Integrated
Design and Manufacturing, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York,
New York, c1995

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

6
 11/02/2015

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.1, 4.2)

u
• Tolerance Alternatives t j
and Process
k
 Z ujk
j
Capabilities
– Standard Normal l
Variate of upper t j
Tolerance
k
 Z ljk
j
– Standard Normal
Variate of lower
Tolerance t = tolerance limit
k= tolerance system (design alt.)
j= machining system

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.3)

Y jki , Y jko , Y jks = output, input, scrap units

• Scrap Fraction

Y jks
SC jk
 i
 ( Z ljk )  [1  ( Z ujk )]
Y jk

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

7
 11/02/2015

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.4)

Y jki , Y jko , Y jks = output, input, scrap units

• Mass Balance

Y jki  Y jko  Y jks

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.5, 4.6)

Y jki , Y jko , Y jks = output, input, scrap units

• Technological Coefficients (input per unit of

output, scrap per unit of output)

Y jki s
Y jks
k ijk  k 
jk
Y o
jk
Y jko

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

8
 11/02/2015

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.7)

• Combining (Percent Acceptable in Output
Stream)

s
Y jks SC jk  ( Z ljk )  [1   ( Z ujk )]
k jk  o
 
Y jk 1  SC jk  ( Z ujk )   ( Z ljk )

Y jki , Y jko , Y jks = output, input, scrap units

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.8)

• Combining (Ratio of Input to Output
Obtained – Will be >1)

i
Y jki 1
k jk   1  k sjk 
Y jko  ( Z ujk )   ( Z ljk )

Y jki , Y jko , Y jks = output, input, scrap units

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

9
 11/02/2015

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.4, 4.9, 4.10)

• Combining to Reform Material Balance
Equations

Y jks  k sjk Y jko

Y jki  Y jko  Y jks
Y jki  k ijk Y jko
Yjki ,Yjko ,Yjks = output, input, scrap units

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.11)

• Cost Equation (Cost of Output and Scrap =
Cost of Input and Processing

X ojk Y jko  X sjk Y jks  X ijk Y jki  Y jki f (Y jki )

X ijk , X ojk , X sjk  Unit Cost of input, output, scrap

f (Yjki )  Processing Cost per Unit

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

10
 11/02/2015

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.11)

• Dividing by Y o to get output cost/unit
jk

X ojk Y jko  X sjk Y jks X ijk Y jki  Y jki f (Y jki )


Y jko Y jko

Y jki Y jks Y jki

X o
jk  X i
jk  s
X 
jk fY jki
Y jko Y jko Y jko

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.12)

• Or, by substituting technological factors, unit
cost of output (good units)

X ojk  k ijk X ijk  k sjk X sjk  k ijk f (Y jki )

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

11
 11/02/2015

Singh’s Quantitative Analysis (Eq. 4.13)

• Developing an expression for
Manufacturing Lead Time:

T j  S j  t j k ijk Y jko

tj  Processing time, j th method

Sj  Set-up Time

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Using Singh’s Quantitative Analysis

• Given a Set of Production Methods
– With Process Capabilities,
– Unit Production Cost Estimates,
– Unit Production Time Estimates, and
– Set up Times
• and a Set of Precision Alternatives,
– Assuming Precision is Relevant to Customer
Definition of Quality
• Then, Quantitative Assessment Possible.

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

12
 11/02/2015

Problems with Singh Quantification (1)

• Product Manufacturing Centric Viewpoint
– No Design Cost Data
– No Service/Maintenance Cost Data
– No Value to Increase/Decrease in Lead Time
• No Administrative Lead Time Factor
• No Material/Capacity Lead Time

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Problems with Singh Quantification (2)

• Product Manufacturing Centric Viewpoint
– Scrap Defined by Designer, not Customer, no
Customer Definition of Quality
– No Differential Cost Savings/Cost (Serial vs.
Concurrent)
– NOT AN ANALYSIS OF CONCURRENT
ENGINEERING !!! -- IT IS A
DESIGN/PROCESS COMPARISION METHOD

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

13
 11/02/2015

Benefits of Quantification
• Forces Focus upon Measurable Factors
– To Extent These are the “Right” Factors, Drives
Organization’s Direction

• Shows Changes/Provides Basis for Comparison

of Alternatives

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

Concurrent Re-Engineering of Products

• No Real Difference in Organization and
Process Execution

• Only Change is Inclusion of Existing Plant and

Facilities

• Cost (Current) Known, Not Estimated

Computer Integrated
Manufacturing Systems

14