Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Algorithmic strategy for optimizing product design considering the production costs

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes a new interactive design approach integrating the constraints associated with production include manufacturing and assembling. The proposed method, in the form of an algorithm, allows optimisation of product design by minimizing production costs at each iteration, without compromising its functionality. The novelty of this algorithm in terms of modeling and optimisation of production costs in the design phase is its ability to dynamically evaluate the cumulative costs of production as a function of design and procedural choices. The availability of this information first allows the identification of design points and/or procedural points that generate significant production costs, and second, suggests improvements and recommendations that aim to optimize production costs. These experiments were conducted at a smart factory installed in our organisation. The proposed algorithm involves four steps. To optimise production costs, the designer must input all of the required data into the simulation and thereby identify the most significant cost elements to optimise. Then, the designer uses the suggested recommendation list to modify the relevant design and/or manufacturing parameters, thus obtaining the new, optimised production costs. If the first result is unsatisfactory, other iterations can be performed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Karre, H., Hammer, M., Kleindienst, M., Ramsauer, C.: Transition towards an Industry 4.0 State of the LeanLab at Graz University of Technology. Procedia Manuf. 9, 206–213 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Synnes, E.L., Welo, T.: Enhancing integrative capabilities through lean product and process development. Procedia CIRP 54, 221–226 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yann-Guirec, M., Khaled, B., Améziane, A.: Life cycle cost through reliability. In: Zamojski, W., Mazurkiewicz, J., Sugier, J., Walkowiak, T., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.) New results in dependability and computer systems, pp. 523–530. Springer, Switzerland (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Etienne, A., et al.: Cost engineering for variation management during the product and process development. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. IJIDeM 11(2), 289–300 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Audoux, K., Segonds, F., Kerbrat, O., Aoussat, A.: Toward a customized multicriterion tool for product evaluation in the early design phases: the CMDET methodology. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00549-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Alsyouf, I., Al-Alami, A., Saidam, A.: Implementing product design development methodology for assessing and improving the performance of products. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. IJIDeM 9(3), 225–234 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nadeau, J.-P., Fischer, X.: Research in Interactive Design. Virtual, Interactive and Integrated Product Design and Manufacturing for Industrial Innovation, vol. 3. Springer, Berlin (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kumar, U., Markeset, T.: Product support strategy: conventional versus functional products. J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 11(1), 53–67 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Markeset, T., Kumar U.: R&M and risk-analysis tools in product design, to reduce life-cycle cost and improve attractiveness. In: 2001 Proceedings on Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium. International Symposium on Product Quality and Integrity (Cat. No. 01CH37179), pp. 116–122. Philadelphia, PA, USA, (2001)

  10. Boothroyd, G., Radovanovic, P.: Estimating the cost of machined components during the conceptual design of a product. CIRP Ann. 38(1), 157–160 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., Knight, W.A., Dewhurst, P., Knight, W.A.: Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly, Revised and Expanded. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Evbuomwan, N.F.O., Sivaloganathan, S., Jebb, A.: Concurrent Materials and Manufacturing Process Selection in Design Function Deployment. Concurr. Eng. 3(2), 135–144 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Feng, S.C., Song, E.Y.: Information modeling of conceptual process planning integrated with conceptual design. In: The 5th design for manufacturing conference, The 2000 ASME design engineering technical conferences, Baltimore, Maryland, Paper Number DETC00/DFM-14009, 10–13 September 2000

  14. Segonds, F., Cohen, G., Véron, P., Peyceré, J.: PLM and early stages collaboration in interactive design, a case study in the glass industry. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. IJIDeM 10(2), 95–104 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu, J., Ma, Y.: A survey of manufacturing oriented topology optimization methods. Adv. Eng. Softw. 100, 161–175 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jung, J.-Y.: Manufacturing cost estimation for machined parts based on manufacturing features. J. Intell. Manuf. 13(4), 227–238 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Elgh, F., Cederfeldt, M.: Concurrent cost estimation as a tool for enhanced producibility—system development and applicability for producibility studies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 109(1), 12–26 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Niazi, A., Dai, J.S., Balabani, S., Seneviratne, L.: Product cost estimation: technique classification and methodology review. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 128(2), 563–575 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lukic, D., Milosevic, M., Antic, A., Borojevic, S., Ficko, M.: Multi-criteria selection of manufacturing processes in the conceptual process planning. Adv. Prod. Eng. Manag. 12(2), 151–162 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Molcho, G., Cristal, A., Shpitalni, M.: Part cost estimation at early design phase. CIRP Ann. 63(1), 153–156 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Luki, D., Miloševi, M., Borojevi, S.: Manufacturing cost estimation in the conceptual process planning. Mach. Des. 8(3), 83–90 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chang, K.-H.: Product Manufacturing and Cost Estimating using CAD/CAE: The Computer Aided Engineering Design Series. Academic Press, London (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Griese, D., Namouz, E., Shankar, P., Summers, J. D., Mocko, G.: Application of a lightweight engineering tool: lazy parts analysis and redesign of a remote controlled car, pp. 839–847 (2011)

  24. Li, R.-K., Hwang, C.-L.: A framework for automatic DFA system development. Comput. Ind. Eng. 22(4), 403–413 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shehab, E.: An intelligent knowledge based cost modelling system for innovative product development (2001)

  26. Creese, R.: Introduction to Manufacturing Processes and Materials. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2017)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Giachetti, R.E.: A decision support system for material and manufacturing process selection. J. Intell. Manuf. 9(3), 265–276 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Yu, J.-C., Krizan, S., Ishii, K.: Computer-aided design for manufacturing process selection. J. Intell. Manuf. 4(3), 199–208 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Xu, X., Wang, L., Newman, S.T.: Computer-aided process planning—a critical review of recent developments and future trends. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 24(1), 1–31 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Orji, I.J., Wei, S.: Reducing total costs of machined parts through green manufacturing. Int. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 30(5), 289–305 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Samant, A.: Laser machining of structural ceramics: computational and experimental (2019). (Online) https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/99/. Accessed 17 Jan 2019

  32. Duverlie, P., Castelain, J.M.: Cost estimation during design step: parametric method versus case based reasoning method. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 15(12), 895–906 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Gao, Q., Lizarazo-Adarme, J., Paul, B.K., Haapala, K.R.: An economic and environmental assessment model for microchannel device manufacturing: part 2—Application. J. Clean. Prod. 120, 146–156 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Duflou, J.R., Kellens, K., Renaldi, Y., Guo, W.Dewulf: Critical comparison of methods to determine the energy input for discrete manufacturing processes. CIRP Ann. 61(1), 63–66 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lwin, T., Lin, T., Lee, J.: Integrated approach for rotor blade manufacturing cost estimate. Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 83(4), 235–244 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire de Conception de Produits et Innovation, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 boulevard de l’Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France

    Oussama Adjoul, Khaled Benfriha & Améziane Aoussat

Authors
  1. Oussama Adjoul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Khaled Benfriha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Améziane Aoussat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oussama Adjoul.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Adjoul, O., Benfriha, K. & Aoussat, A. Algorithmic strategy for optimizing product design considering the production costs. Int J Interact Des Manuf 13, 1313–1329 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00571-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00571-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation