Product Design For Engineers 1st

Edition Shetty Solutions Manual

Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankfan.com/product/product-design-for-engineers-1st-edition-shetty-soluti
ons-manual/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Design Concepts for Engineers 5th Edition Horenstein

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/design-concepts-for-
engineers-5th-edition-horenstein-solutions-manual/

Thermodynamics for Engineers 1st Edition Kroos

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/thermodynamics-for-engineers-1st-
edition-kroos-solutions-manual/

VHDL For Engineers 1st Edition Short Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/vhdl-for-engineers-1st-edition-
short-solutions-manual/

Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers 5th

Edition Peters Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/plant-design-and-economics-for-
chemical-engineers-5th-edition-peters-solutions-manual/
Fluid Mechanics for Engineers 1st Edition Chin
Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/fluid-mechanics-for-
engineers-1st-edition-chin-solutions-manual/

Thermodynamics for Engineers SI Edition 1st Edition

Kroos Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/thermodynamics-for-engineers-si-
edition-1st-edition-kroos-solutions-manual/

Calculus for Scientists and Engineers 1st Edition

Briggs Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/calculus-for-scientists-and-
engineers-1st-edition-briggs-solutions-manual/

MATLAB Programming with Applications for Engineers 1st

Edition Chapman Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/matlab-programming-with-
applications-for-engineers-1st-edition-chapman-solutions-manual/

Introduction to Renewable Energy for Engineers 1st

Edition Hagen Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/introduction-to-renewable-energy-
for-engineers-1st-edition-hagen-solutions-manual/
 Chapter 6 Exercises

6.1. Explain the importance of incorporating DFD guidelines during an original design.
List a few benefits that are achieved by doing that.

What is Design for Disassembly (DFD)?

Design for Disassembly (DFD) is a design philosophy that requires consideration to be

given for a product or a part even after it is in service. The inclusion of procedures for
design for disassembly, recyclability, and re-manufacture will save resources by
prolonging the useful life of the product. Design for Disassembly is a necessary condition
in order for products to be economically recycled. It improves components and material
reuse and remanufacturing processes, thus extending the service life of the products.
During product evaluation, the designer is required to assess component functionality,
form, manufacturing processes, and assembly characteristics using certain data
previously obtained. The designer is able to quantify the suitability of the design using
certain predetermined assessment tools.

Employing DFD

When employing the procedures of DFD, one should look at the life-cycle phases of
development, production, distribution, usage, and disposal from the conceptual product
design stage. This mandates certain procedures be established for disposal, recycling, and
occupational health. These requirements are not only for new products, but also for other
types of products, especially ones that are already in the marketplace.

DFD techniques vastly reduce waste in the manufacturing and recovery processes and
allow for greater flexibility during product development, shorter development time
scales, and reduced development costs at the end of life. These lower costs even prolong
the life of products by allowing for changes. Most of the products are not designed for
easy dismantling or disassembly. Implementing DFD into a design specification enables
the product and its components to be better suited for re-use or recycling. DFD is a good
strategy that helps reduce environmental impact in the application phase. If a product is
easy to disassemble, it will be possible to repair it more easily, resulting in an increase in
its service life.

The automobile industry has used the DFD principles for some time, as demonstrated by
the presence of automobile junkyards and the availability of a wide range of rebuilt
automotive components. Automobiles are one of the most highly recycled products. In
terms of weight, about 75% of an automobile is recovered and recycled, including most
of the metal components. Three primary operations in automobile-recycling are:
• Dismantling of the automobile
• Shredding and separating the iron components
• Separating the non-ferrous components

91
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 DFD is most effectively applied at the beginning of a design, as it can reduce the amount
of time and materials used.

Benefits of incorporating DFD in early design

As manufacturers are becoming more responsible for their products when they reach the
end of their operational lives, the dismantling of products has emerged as one of the most
serious part of this exercise. In situations involving integrated design principles, certain
assembly procedures or joining techniques can make it very difficult to disassemble a
product and separate materials into non-contaminated groups. A good strategy is to
include DFD guidelines in the current product design processes.

Benefits of DFD:
• Facilitates maintenance and repairs, thereby reducing costs.
• Facilitates part/component re-use, thereby recovering materials and reducing
costs.
• Assists material recycling, thereby avoiding the disposal and handling of waste.
• Assists product testing and failure-mode/end-of-life analysis.
• Facilitates product take-back and extended producer responsibility, thereby
reducing liability and assisting in regulatory compliance.

6.2. Write briefly about any similarities or differences that you see between DFA and
DFD guidelines. Explain the interaction between the guidelines. (Do they supplement
or contradict each other?)

Similarities between DFD and DFA include minimizing part counts and handling times.
At times, using common materials allows for multiple parts to be integrated into a single
part. It can also allow for disassembly to be simplified, even if the parts are not integrated
into a single part. This simplification occurs because the parts can remain assembled and
be recycled as one piece.

DFD and DFA differences do arise, especially when simplifying the securing of parts in
an assembly. Many of the preferred DFA methods such as snap fits and press fits can
make it more difficult to disassemble components. In these cases, alternative methods or
other compromises should be considered in attempting to optimize both the assembly and
disassembly methods.

There are places where DFA is at odds with DFD, and other places where they can
complement each other. Conflict occurs in places where parts are never intended to come
apart. For example, a multi-part plastic housing for a heater fan in the dashboard of a car
is an item that should never be accessed for the life of the car. As such, parts can be
snapped, glued, or ultrasonically welded (whichever is easiest). DFA and DFD can also
be at odds over the fastening method selected. On the opposite side are parts or

92
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 assemblies that are subject to routine maintenance. Making the system easy to access and
reassemble can greatly reduce the cost of ownership for the end user.

6.3. Practice making a design for disassembly evaluation chart using the spreadsheets.
(The rating factors method and Kroll’s disassembly evaluation chart can be developed
and compared).

6.3.1 DFD Using Rating Chart Method

Example: Escalator

Escalator systems play an important role in transporting passengers safely between

underground and station platforms. However, due to the complex working conditions
(such as uneven load, extreme weather, etc.) of escalator systems, maintenance is
constantly needed and unexpected failure frequently occurs. The escalators used in
train/subway/metro stations are exposed to extreme operating conditions such as extreme
weather/temperature, uneven loads and shock, etc., which can greatly shorten their life
span. The increase to labor and maintenance costs impedes the escalator’s ability to
efficiently serve its riders and effects its overall stability. The failure and repair of the
escalator systems result in high costs, significant amounts of labor, and customer
dissatisfaction. For evaluating the design of the escalator housing, the Rating Chart
method and Kroll methods are used. This case study presents the results of a comparison
of rating scores for original and new designs of bearing housing.

The following is a list of constraints that limit the design choices that are available or
impact the escalator housing redesign:
• Thermal Environment of a minimum 90°C ambient temperature
• Interoperability with client/manufacturer fabrication capabilities
• Limited accessibility
• Minimum modifications to existing structure and parts

Tables 1 and 2 present the results of rating scores for two different designs. The columns
numbered 1 to 7 in the tables represent task/damage, reuse, removal, recyclability,
disassembly time access, and tooling rates. The rating score was calculated by adding the
ratings from the columns numbered 1 to 7, dividing by the sum of the maximum rating of
each column (i.e., 9 + 9 + 9 + 9 + 9 + 9 + 9 = 63), and multiplying the result by the
weighting of each part (i.e., number of parts of each component in the assembly divided
by the total number of components in the assembly).

93
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Figure 1. Assembly diagram for original design of escalator housing

Table 1. DFD Analysis of Original Design using Rating Chart Method

Parts # of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rating
name Parts Score
Stub 1 9 9 9 9 3 0 6 14.29
Shaft
Bearing 1 9 9 9 6 1 0 3 11.75
Bearing 1 9 9 9 9 3 3 3 14.29
Housing
Handrail 1 9 9 9 9 4 6 6 16.51
Drive
Pulley
Double 1 9 9 9 9 4 6 6 16.51
Sprocket
Total 5 Total 73.33
parts Score

Figure 2. Assembly diagram for new design of escalator housing

94
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Table 2. DFD Analysis of New Design using Rating Chart Method

Parts # of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rating
name parts Score
Stub Shaft- 1 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 19.68
Additional
Boring
holes
bearing 1 9 9 9 6 8 9 3 16.83
bearing 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 20.00
housing
Handrail 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 19.05
drive
pulley
Double 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 19.05
Sprocket
Total 5 Total 94.60
Parts Score

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Through this practice, a special case of an evaluation of escalator housing using

the DFD method has been examined. The main changes made in the new design based on
the new rating chart method are: (1) new bearing is used which is easy to assemble and
disassemble. It can sustain larger loads; (2) new bearing housing is open at two ends so
that the bearing can be easily accessed and replaced if needed. It also has a boring hole,
which can be used to support the housing during assembly/disassembly of the bearing
without the need of additional tools; and (3) new stub-shaft with boring holes can support
the bearing housing during the assembly/disassembly of the bearing without additional
tools.
These changes affect the design for the disassembly rating score. Referring to
Tables 1 and 2, the disassembly rating score has increased from 73.33 to 94.60,
increasing the ease of disassembly. After examining different types of failure modes and
defects that occur in the major components of escalator drive systems, the
bearings/lubrication system that is in adjunct with the bearing shaft assembly has been
redesigned using the DFD method. The normal maintenance and repair of these sub
systems is time consuming as shown by the Rating Chart method. However, comparing
them with the DFD analysis of new design shows how the DFD method can greatly
improve efficiency in comparing the new design to the original design. These
improvements will save on the cost of labor during maintenance for the firm in the future.
The new parts also work with existing infrastructure and are easy to manufacture.

95
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
DFD Using Rating Chart Method and Kroll Method

6.3.2 Example - Twin Size Dorm room “Bed”

Component Description Type Dimensions (inches) Quantity

1 Bed Header Part 36 length x 18 x 1 1
2 Bed Footer Part 36 length x 12 x 1 1
3 Header Uprights Part 30 length x 3 x 2 2
4 Footer Uprights Part 24 length x 3 x 2 2
5 Header, Footer, Upright bolt Part 1/2 - 20 x 3 length 12
6 Aesthetic Caps Big Part 3 x 3 diameter 4
7 Aesthetic Caps Small Part 1 x 1 diameter 14
8 Inner leg (Height Adjustment) Part 24 length x 2.75 x 1.75 4
9 Inner leg Locking bolt and nut Part 3/8 - 16 x 2.5 length 8
10 Leg Stabilizers Part 1.5 x 3 diameter 4
11 Leg Stabilizer bolts Part 3/8 - 16 x 2 length 4
12 Mattress Frame Part 81 length x 41 x2 1
13 Mattress Support Part 39 length x 1 diameter 38
14 Mattress support bolts Part 3/8 - 16 x 1.5 length 76

96
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
An evaluation chart using the Kroll Method is shown below in Table 3. This analysis shows that the same product could have
been achieved by better design such that components are made as one part instead of multiple components.

Table 3. Kroll Evaluation Chart

Number
Minimum of
Part number Repetitive Tool Task Tool Tool Time
number of parts Tasks Type Direction Required Accessibility Position Force (minutes) Special Subtotal Total
1 1 1 P Z I 1 1 2 1 1 6 6
2 1 1 P Z I 1 1 2 1 1 6 6
3 0 2 G Y I 1 2 3 1.5 1 8.5 17
4 0 2 G Y I 1 2 3 1.5 1 8.5 17
5 0 12 U Z III 1 1 2 1.5 1 6.5 78
6 0 4 F Z I 1 1 1 0.5 1 4.5 18
7 0 14 F Y I 1 1 1 0.5 1 4.5 63
8 0 4 R Y II 1 2 3 1.5 1 8.5 34
9 0 8 U Y III 1 1 2 1.5 1 6.5 52
10 0 4 P Y I 1 2 2 1 1 7 28
11 0 4 U Y III 1 2 2 1 1 7 28
12 1 1 W X II 1 1 2 3 1 8 8
13 0 38 W Z I 1 1 2 2 1 7 266
14 0 76 U Z III 1 1 2 1 1 6 456
Total Assembly time 1077

Tool type Task direction Tools Accessibility Position Force Special

F – Flip X – Front I – Single grip 1 – readily 1 – Standing 1 – minor 1 – None

G – Grip Y – Top II – Double Grip 2 – On Knees 2 – lower moderate
P – Push/ pull Z – Side III – Allen Key 3 – upper moderate
R – Remove
U – Unscrew
W – Pry out

97
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
6.4. How can the use of self-aligning and self-locating features facilitate automatic
assembly?

For automatic assembly to be efficient, it is necessary that the parts are designed for ease
of handing during assembly operations. Designing parts for self-aligning and self-
locating assists the process of handling the part.

Designing Parts for Ease of Part Handling

The manual handling process involves the transportation and orientation of parts or
subassemblies before they are inserted into or added to the work fixture or partially built
up assembly. Some guidelines for design for ease of part handling are:
• Avoid parts that tangle or nest
• Avoid parts that interconnect
• Design parts to prevent nesting

A subassembly is considered a part if it is added during assembly. Time spent on

assembly increases if the part requires holding down. Holding down is required if the part
is unstable after placement, insertion, or during subsequent operations. A part may
require gripping, realignment, or holding down before it is finally secured. Holding down
also refers to a situation that maintains the position and orientation of a part already in
place.

Parts can present handling difficulties if they nest or tangle, stick together because of
magnetic forces or grease coatings, are slippery, require careful handling, etc. Parts that
nest or tangle are those that interlock when in bulk, but that can be separated by one
simple manipulation of a single part. Examples of this concept include paper cups, closed
end helical springs, and circlips (ring washers). Parts that are slippery are those that easily
slip from ringers or standard grasping tools because of their shape and/or surface
conditions. Parts that require careful handling are those that are fragile or delicate, have
sharp corners or edges, or present other hazards to the operator. Flexible parts are those
that substantially deform during manipulation and also require the use of two hands.
Examples of such parts are paper or felt gaskets, rubber bands, and belts.

The design for manufacturing guidelines on self-aligning and self-locating features are
useful in manual and automated assembly sequencing. The proper use of self-aligning
parts assists the assembly sequence. Self-aligning and self-locating features facilitate
automation of the assembly process, as there is less need for human intervention. Since
the features are self-locating, automation also requires a lesser degree of freedom.

98
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
6.5. In what way does the method of fastening and joining a component to a product
affect the feasibility of recycling?

Through the proper selection of fastening methods, including replacing fasteners and
screws with Snap-Ons and other similar kinds of fastening mechanisms, disassembly can
be made easier. If parts of similar material composition are substituted by one part,
segregating parts for recycling becomes easier.

6.6. What is the role of (a) alpha, (b) beta, and (c) preproduction prototypes in
evaluating new products?

(a) Alpha prototype - first comprehensive prototype.

The role of alpha prototypes is to determine whether or not the product will work as
designed and whether or not the product satisfies the key customer needs.

(b) Beta prototype - second comprehensive prototype (for “customer debugging”).

The role of beta prototypes is to answer questions about the performance and reliability in
order to identify necessary changes for the final product.

(c) Preproduction prototype - final prototype prior to launch.

Preproduction prototypes are made in small numbers on the production line to test
processes and check assembly capabilities.

6.7. With a flow chart, explain what the term design for manufacturing methodology
means.

Design for Manufacturing is the process of designing a product so that it is easy to

manufacture at the lowest possible price. DFM is primarily concerned with reducing
overall part production cost and minimizing the complexity of manufacturing operations.
It aims to reduce material, overhead, and labor costs; shorten the product development
cycle; and focus on standards to reduce cost. The key rules of DFM are part count
reduction; standardization; ease of fabrication, robustness, and orientation; minimal
flexible parts; ease of assembly; and efficient joining and fastening. The ability of
designers to apply these rules is a key factor in design for manufacturing.

A flow chart explaining the design for manufacturing methodology is shown in Figure 3.

The method consists of examining three major factors. They are (a) reduction of cost of
components, (b) reduction of cost of assembly, and (c) reduction of cost of supporting
production.

(a) Reduction of cost of components: Since the number of components influences the
cost, keeping the number at an optimum level is important. The procedure involves
identifying the criticality of each component in relation to its functionality. Factors
such as the possibility of merging one or more components into a single component
are of major concern.

99
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 (b) Reduction of cost of assembly: Focuses on reducing cost by redesigning the
components, specifically the geometry of and handling method of the component so
that the time involved in the assembly is reduced. The reduction in assembly time, in
addition to the reduction of components used, will contribute to reducing the cost of
assembly.

(c) Reduction of cost of supporting production: The redesign of the component and the
assembly process will simplify the process of handling and disassembly. This
procedure assists the designer by comparing two situations so the designer can assess
the type of supporting production equipment, tools needed, number of Jigs and
fixtures used in the production, and the cost of the production process. The designer
can also compare the cost of initial design and the cost of redesign. At this stage the
designer can review alternate designs and examine the product from the viewpoint of
cost, quality, performance, and visual appeal. Factors such as additional investment
needed to support the new design and return on revenue are also major
considerations. The designer can then calculate the cost of redesign and its impact on
sales and other institutional factors.

Proposed Design

Estimate the Manufacutring

Costs

Reduce the Costs of Reduce the Costs of Reduce the Costs of

Components Assembly Supporting Production

Consider the Impact of DFM

Decisions on Other Factors

Recompute the
Manufacturing Costs

Good
N
enough
?
Y

Acceptable Design

Figure 3. DFM process (Ref: Ulrich and Eppinger (2012))

100
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.