Linking design and manufacturing domains via web-based and enterprise integration technologies

The manufacturing industry faces many challenges such as reducing time-to-market and cutting costs. In order to meet these increasing demands, effective methods are need to support the early product development stages by bridging the gap of communicating early design ideas and the evaluation of manufacturing performance. This paper introduces methods of linking design and manufacturing domains using disparate technologies. The combined technologies include knowledge management supporting for product lifecycle management (PLM) systems, enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, aggregate process planning systems, workflow management and data exchange formats. A case study has been used to demonstrate the use of these technologies, illustrated by adding manufacturing knowledge to generate alternative early process plan which are in turn used by an ERP system to obtain and optimise a rough-cut capacity plan

FUNCTION DRIVEN ASSESSMENT OF MANUFACTURING RISKS IN CONCEPT GENERATION STAGES

Decisions made in the concept generation phase have a significant effect on the product. While product- related risks typically can be considered in the early stages of design, risks such as supply chain and manufacturing methods are rarely easy to account for in early phases. This is because the currently available methods require mature data, which may not be available during concept generation. In this paper, we propose an approach to address this. First, the product and the non-product (manufacturing and/or supply chain) attributes are modelled using the enhanced function means (EF-M) modelling method. The EF-M method provides the opportunity to model alternative solutions-set for functions. Dependencies are then mapped within the product and the manufacturing models, and also in between them. An automatic combinatorial method of concept generation is employed where each generated instance is a design concept-manufacturing method pair. A risk propagation algorithm is then used to assess the risks of all the generated alternatives

Project for the analysis of technology transfer

The special task of preparing technology transfer profiles during the first six months of 1971 produced two major results: refining a new method for identifying and describing technology transfer activities, and generating practical insights into a number of issues associated with transfer programs

Automatically Leveraging MapReduce Frameworks for Data-Intensive Applications

MapReduce is a popular programming paradigm for developing large-scale, data-intensive computation. Many frameworks that implement this paradigm have recently been developed. To leverage these frameworks, however, developers must become familiar with their APIs and rewrite existing code. Casper is a new tool that automatically translates sequential Java programs into the MapReduce paradigm. Casper identifies potential code fragments to rewrite and translates them in two steps: (1) Casper uses program synthesis to search for a program summary (i.e., a functional specification) of each code fragment. The summary is expressed using a high-level intermediate language resembling the MapReduce paradigm and verified to be semantically equivalent to the original using a theorem prover. (2) Casper generates executable code from the summary, using either the Hadoop, Spark, or Flink API. We evaluated Casper by automatically converting real-world, sequential Java benchmarks to MapReduce. The resulting benchmarks perform up to 48.2x faster compared to the original.Comment: 12 pages, additional 4 pages of references and appendi

Using a product's sustainability space as a design exploration tool

Sustainable design is often practiced and assessed through the consideration of three essential areas: economic sustainability, environmental sustainability, and social sustainability. For even the simplest of products, the complexities of these three areas and their tradeoffs cause decision-making transparency to be lost in most practical situations. The existing field of multiobjective optimization offers a natural framework to define and explore a given design space. In this paper, a method for defining a product’s sustainability space (defined by economic, environmental, and social sustainability objectives) is outlined and used to explore the tradeoffs within the space, thus offering both the design team and the decision makers a means of better understanding the sustainability tradeoffs. This paper concludes that sustainable product development can indeed benefit from tradeoff characterization using multiobjective optimization techniques – even when using only basic models of sustainability. Interestingly, the unique characteristics of the three essential sustainable development areas lead to an alternative view of some traditional multiobjective optimization concepts, such as weak-Pareto optimality. The sustainable redesign of a machine to drill boreholes for water wells is presented as a practical example for method demonstration and discussion

Demanufacturing metrics for industrial fasteners and disassembly process

As the society progresses towards ecological maturity, the issue of reducing the environmental burden imposed by used products becomes increasingly important Environmental issues are becoming increasingly relevant for product designers and manufacturers. Public awareness of the value and fragility of an intact ecology is constantly growing, and the traditional assumption that the cost of ecological burdens to be shared by a society, as a whole is no longer accepted. Environmental protection legislation requiring manufacturers to take back and recycle used products will be a commonplace throughout Europe and the U.S. in the near future. Demanufacturing involves separating and disassembling a \u27product\u27 into its smaller \u27subassemblies\u27 and \u27components\u27. Unfastening carries out the physical separation itself and other separation techniques are also used to separate the unfastened component. There are two types of Disassembly methods they are destructive disassembly and non-destructive. The term \u27product\u27 means a complete entity, such as an automobile, a washing machine, etc. \u27Sub-assembly\u27 refers to a product .A \u27component\u27 is a subassembly that cannot be disassembled any further. The principle aims and objectives of this research are to analyze the mechanical aspects of demanufacturing a component with respect to fasteners and disassembly Processes. This research involved developing Disassembly Effort Index Metrics (DEIM) for a wide variety of industrial fasteners, destructive and non destructive disassembly processes. The industrial Fasteners were separated into four categories i.e. One Piece Fasteners, Two Piece Fasteners, Integral Fasteners and Miscellaneous Fasteners. They were analyzed with respect to the accessibility of a fastener with respect to the part, tools necessary to disassemble them, time needed to unfasten them, part hold and fixturing issues ,forces needed to unfasten them and instructions to the dissemblers to dissemble the fastener. A scoring pattern was developed. The Disassembly Processes were categorized into Non-Destructive Disassembly and Destructive Disassembly. The Non-Destructive Disassembly methods like Magnetic Separation, Suction and Drainage, Self Removal, Separation of both Fastened and Unfastened Components, and only two of the Destructive Disassembly methods i.e. Weld Breakage and Impact breakage were analyzed using Disassembly Effort Index Metrics (DEIM) parameters. The DEIM parameters, for the Disassembly Processes are, time needed to disassemble the component, tools needed to separate them, Forces (both human and Machine), Part hold , Process Instructions and Hazard Tools. The scoring pattern was developed