Abstract
This work applies modular design concepts to designating beverage-container injection molds. This study aims to develop a method of controlling costs and time in relation to mold development, and also to improve product design. This investigation comprises two parts: functionality coding, and establishing a standard operation procedure, specifically designed for beverage-container injection mold design and manufacturing. First, the injection mold is divided into several modules, each with a specific function. Each module is further divided into several structural units possessing sub-function or sub-sub-function. Next, dimensions and specifications of each unit are standardized and a compatible interface is constructed linking relevant units. This work employs a cup-shaped beverage container to experimentally assess the performance of the modular design approach. The experimental results indicate that the modular design approach to manufacturing injection molds shortens development time by 36% and reduces costs by 19∼23% compared with the conventional approach. Meanwhile, the information on modularity helps designers in diverse products design. Additionally, the functionality code helps effectively manage and maintain products and molds.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Mota JQ, Castro LM (2004) Industrial agglomerations as localized networks: the case of the Portuguese injection industry. Environ Plan 36(2):263–278
Pine B, Pietrocini T (1993) Standard modules allow mass customization at bally engineered structures. Plann Rev 21:20
Shirley GV (1992) Technical change and manufacturing for competitive manufacturing. Integrating design and manufacturing for competitive advantage 82–103
Feitzinger E, Lee HL (1997) Mass customization at Hewlett-Packard: the power of postponement. Harvard Bus Rev 75(1):116–121
Lau KW, Yam CM, Tang E (2009) The complementarity of internal integration and product modularity: an empirical study of their interaction effect on competitive capabilities. J Eng Tech Manage 26:305–326
Stone R, Wood K (2002) A heuristic method for identifying modules for product architectures. Design Stud 21:5–31
Salhieh SM, Kamrani AK (2008) Modular design. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 207–226. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-47321-5_10
Pandremenos J, Paralikas J, Salonitis K, Chryssolouris G (2009) Modularity concepts for the automotive industry: a critical review. CIRP J Manuf Sci Tech 1:148–152
Baldwin CY, Clark KB (1997) Managing in an age of modularity. Harv Bus Rev 75:84–93
Ulrich K (1995) The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Res Policy 24:419–440
Meyer MH, Utterback JM (1993) The product family and the dynamics of core capability. Sloan Manage Rev 25:29–47
Hsiao SW, Liu E (2005) A structural component-based approach for designing product family. Comput Ind 56:13–28
Lau KW, Yam CM, Tang E (2007) The impact of product modularity on competitive capabilities and performance: an empirical study. Int J Prod Econ 105:1–20
Gershenson JK, Prasad GJ, Zhang Y (2003) Product modularity: definitions and benefits. J Eng Design 14:295–313
Jong WR, Wu CH, Liu HH, Li MY (2009) A collaborative navigation system for concurrent mold design. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 40:215–224
Chin LS, Mok CK, Zu X (2007) Modeling and performance simulation of mould-design process. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 34:236–251
Cho Y, Leem C, Kitae S (2006) An assessment of the level of informatization in the Korea mold industry as a prerequisite for e-collaboration: an exploratory empirical investigation. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 29:897–911
Nagahanumaiah RR, Mukherjee NP (2005) An integrated framework for die and mold cost estimation using design features and tooling parameters. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 26:1138–1149
Rosato DV, Rosato DV (1995) Injection molding handbook, 2nd edn. International Thomson Publishing, USA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huang, MS., Hsu, MK. Modular design applied to beverage-container injection molds. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 53, 1–10 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-010-2796-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-010-2796-y