Transcript No Slide Title

MPD 575 Design for X
Design for Retool
Brian Armstrong and Kim Calloway
Edits by Dwayne Mattison, Keith Wanrer, Mac Lunn
Edits by Rolf Glaser
Design for Retool
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction to DFR
Heuristics
Key Principles of DFR
Procedures for DFR
Examples
Conclusion
2
Introduction to DFR
What is Design for Retool?
• To reequip with tools ~ Webster
• To revise and reorganize, especially for the
purpose of updating or improving~ The Free
Dictionary
• Utilize existing capital facilities / equipment to
produce (manufacture / assemble) new and
improved products ~ Kim and Brian
3
Introduction to DFR (cont)
Why Design for Retool?
• Easier to make running changes / incremental improvements
• Use Make Like Production (MLP) prototype requirements as
process is well defined
• It’s often the only option if late changes are required or if late
decisions drive component changes which in turn affect process
• Saves money; return on capital investment, less manufacturing
engineering resource investment
• Reduces engineering risk as process failure modes are well
understood
• Shorten development time; faster time to market
4
Introduction to DFR (cont)
What are the drawbacks of Design for Retool?
• Can limit design flexibility on all new designs for numerous
reasons
• Undesirable component characteristics are sometimes carried
forward because they are too costly in terms of process change
to correct
• Can create apathy in the product development process where
components and processes that are understood to be carry-over
will not be assessed and lead to new issues
• Business risk that competition is using newer / better process
methods obtaining edge in performance, quality and cost
• Old equipment and all the associated concerns with its use
5
Design for Retool
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction to DFR
Heuristics
Key Principles of DFR
Procedures for DFR
Examples
Conclusion
6
DFR Heuristics
• If it’s not broke then don’t fix it (but do maintain it or
it will break!)
• The more knowledgeable the component engineer is
with the current process the better the potential for
incremental product improvements given the
constraints of the current process
• Late design changes are more difficult to deal with
than up front engineering assumption related
changes
7
Design for Retool
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction to DFR
Heuristics
Key Principles of DFR
Procedures for DFR
Examples
Conclusion
8
DFR Principles
• What are the processes used to manufacture a
component?
• How is the assembly process ordered?
• How are assemblies transferred from one station to
another?
• How are components located and oriented?
• What tools and processes are used to manufacture the
part?
9
Component:
DFR Principles
• Carry forward the Best in Class design features
• Eliminate unnecessary part features that can negatively impact
tooling designs
• Minimize machining stock
• Standardize handling and assembly features
• Manage tolerances to insure they are not over applied
Process:
•Eliminate unneeded processes
•Minimize repositioning and multiple fixture where possible
•Utilize capability data from existing process to ‘keep’ what works well
and improve processes where capability is a concern.
10
DFR Principles
• Plan to reuse process and tooling where possible
• Verify manufacturing requirement during the design
phase to avoid unique manufacturing constraints
• Note: sometimes the offsets are to be found on a subsystem or system level. Balance of ‘real estate’, cost,
weight or consumption
11
Design for Retool
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction to DFR
Heuristics
Key Principles of DFR
Procedures for DFR
Examples
Conclusion
12
DFR Procedures
• Verify Tooling requirements at the design phase
– Insure the In-plant tooling CAD data is up to date
– Conduct feasibility reviews with manufacturing to verify
reuse with the new product design
– Use CAD Environment to understand the manufacturing
tooling requirements
• Packaging / clearance studies
13
DFR Procedures
•
Insure manufacturing requirements for assembly are aligned with the retool
strategy
– Review existing In-Plant equipment and verify with new designs
– Develop standards for equipment that allow for reuse
• Define by type the tooling and capital equipment that is common and
consider new machine designs that can be standardized
• Use historical budgets to set priorities of key equipment to standardize
• Refurbish existing tooling and capital (make vs. buy decisions) along
with aggressive maintenance plans to achieve cost savings
– Higher return on capital investments
– Less engineering resources
– shorten development time / faster launches
– Use capability data for manufacturing processes to drive design updates
– Revise and update existing manufacturing processes
14
DFR Procedures
• Verify current In-Plant processes are capable to meet
new design requirements
– Verify the existing process can be applied to new
concepts
– Apply best in class designs and processes to new
designs
– Apply assembly process lessons learned to new
product designs
15
DFR Procedures
• Use semi-production tooling (a.k.a. Production pull-a-head or
Make like Production) in a production environment to develop
the assembly process and support late programming timing
– Use production tooling with limited capabilities to support production timing
or develop manufacturing process
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Limited capabilities include Aluminum vs. Steel
Manual clamps vs. hydraulic or pneumatic cylinders
Operator instruction vs. electronic Poka yoke systems
Use CMM holding fixtures in place of Attribute gauges
Use milling processes that are more expensive to support limited runs
Use of simi-completed equipment to can reduce build timing by 40%
Process capabilities can be updated and corrected in the design
• Use Prototype tooling in a production environment to develop
the assembly process and support late programming timing
– Prototype tooling used for process prove-out can be used to mature the
design and support launch timing but the tools will have a limited
manufacturing life and may not meet all manufacturing requirements
16
Design for Retool
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction to DFR
Heuristics
Key Principles of DFR
Procedures for DFR
Examples
Conclusion
17
DFR Procedures Make Like
Production
Once improvements are made to a component the new
design must be verified. There are many prototype phases
in product development process where components must
be MLP.
18
CAD of Coyote Engine in Shipping Rack
P415
10.9mm CLEARANCE - OIL FILTER TO
SHIPPING RACK
AA5E-6714-AA
2C3E-6A642-BB OIL COOLER
19
MLP (Engine Engineering)
• Early prototypes (pre-VP), rapid prototyping, early
concepts, and MLP can be supported in-house at Ford.
• Engine Manufacturing Development Operations (EMDO)
– EMDO uses process that simulate production process to produce
engine components
– Process Sequence
– Material Removal Rates (wet/dry)
– Same locating Datums
– Fixtures
• Beech Daly Technical Center (BDTC)
– Inspection/Gauging methods and programs
– Assembly methods
20
Examples
• Connecting Rod
• Engine Oil Cooler
21
Connecting Rod
The Right Way
22
Connecting Rod
The Right Way
Increased engine speeds and increased
engine specific output (HP/L) drives
needed design changes to connecting
rod.
• Need increase strength while
simultaneously reducing rod weight
• Need to use the existing rod machining
line
23
Connecting Rod
The Right Way
Rod Improvements:
• Material change from Powdered Metal to Forged Steel
– Allows use of less material for weight reduction and is stronger than
PM
• Maintain critical features for current process
– Rod shoulders for part transfer
– Clamping pads, pin-end radius for locating and rod cap gnorf
• Other functional improvements:
– Rolled threads to allow blind holes for weight reduction
• Lower stress concentrations
• Eliminate potential for chips in bolt hole
– Elimination of Piston Pin Bushing
• Reduces weight further
• Reduces part count and cost
– Tapered Pin End for weight reduction (Piston, Crank as well)
24
Connecting Rod
The Right Way
The changes to the connecting rod necessitated
some changes to the process as follows:
• The harder material required changes to
boring, drilling, and grinding operations
• Speed and feeds had to be adjusted
• Fracture splitting of rod required laser notch
in lieu of the traditional machining broach
– The laser equipment was installed where the old
broach equipment was removed
– Some UAW push-back due to Health and Safety
concerns
25
Connecting Rod
The Right Way
Summary:
All of the changes to the connecting rod were
containable via retooling the existing
manufacturing line. The improvements to the
connecting rod help the overall engine
system. The result is a lighter, stronger rod
that in turn allows for weight reduction of the
piston and crank shaft. Reducing the rotating
and reciprocating mass in the engine which
improves the overall engine efficiency.
26
Engine Oil Cooler
The Wrong Way
Background:
In the spring of 2008 at FMC Engine
Engineering. Coyote V8 engine
program is in the M1D phase of
GPDS with S197 as lead customer
and P415 as the secondary but
higher volume customer.
– Preliminary testing indicates engine
oil temps are marginal
– Lubrication CPMT and Systems
Engineer are concerned and request
to package protect for an engine oil
cooler
– Coyote program manager denies the
request to package protect for the oil
cooler stating “this engine doesn’t
need an oil cooler”
27
Engine Oil Cooler
11.5MM CLEARANCE COOLER TO
BELT (NOT INCLUDING SLAP)
OIL COOLER INTERFERES
WITH ALTERNATOR
16.26mm OIL COOLER
CLEARANCE TO FRAME RAIL
OIL COOLER INTERFERES
WITH DRIP SHIELD
Engine Oil Cooler (Cont)
• The failure to package
protect for an oil cooler has
led to sub-standard design
clearances and required
process changes.
– Nut runners for oil pan to front
cover are mounted on fixed
slide driving a process
sequencing change
– Alternator install clearance is
sub-standard requiring an
operator assist as well as a
protective shield on cooler
during assembly
– Oil filter protrusion results in
specifying two different filters (a
stubby for assembly and
regular FL400 for service)
– EPSA cable rerouted
– Redesigned OFA to support
additional weight of cooler
Unique cooler shape results
in cooler tooling cost of ½
million USD
29
Process Verification
We are measuring
15mm clearance to the
stanchion. CAD said we
had 17mm.
The hoisting of the engine
process must be level to
insure the installation
clearance are maintained.
This this case, its is not.
30
Engine Oil Cooler (Cont)
Valley Mounted Cooler
If an engine oil cooler was part of the original
engineering assumptions, then more time and
resources would have been available to
design a product that utilizes the current
process without all of the sub-standard
clearances and process tear-ups.
A valley mounted cooler would package nicely,
but would require more time to sort through
the block casting and block retooling
changes.
31
CONCEPT PACKAGE MODEL –80mm WIDTH, 39mm HEIGHT, 340mm LENGTH
32
WATER IN TO COOLER FROM WATERJACKETS
10 dia
WATER FROM COOLER TO
BLOCK – 15 dia
COOLED OIL TO
BLOCK – 15 dia
CLEAN OIL IN TO
COOLER - 15 dia
Engine Oil Cooler (Cont)
Valley Mounted Cooler
• This package holds more promise than the external
OFA mounted cooler previously shown.
• Larger cooler capacity with better heat rejection
• Less coolant and oil pressure loss
• Package constraints limited to intake, knock sensors
and wire harness
• Fewer water / oil terminations reducing risk of leaks
• Requires more Retooling effort and higher cost for
the larger cooler
34
Design for Retool
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction to DFR
Heuristics
Key Principles of DFR
Procedures for DFR
Examples
Conclusion
35
Conclusion
Engineers who are responsible for the design and
release of components should understand the whole
manufacturing process related to their component
and their system. Similarly, engineers should know
the manufacturing process to understand what is
currently possible, what is good about the current
process and what they would change if they could.
36