Desain Berbasis Komputer

SIL 312/3(2-3)
Yuli Suharnoto
Cakupan Kuliah
• Introduction
• The e-Design paradigm
• Virtual prototyping
• Geometric Modeling
• Solid Modeling
• Assembly Modeling
• Design Parameterization
• Product Data Management
• Project Works
Introduction
• Conventional product development employs a design-build-test
philosophy.
• The sequentially executed development process often results in prolonged
lead times and elevated product costs.
• The proposed e-Design paradigm employs IT-enabled technology for
product design, including virtual prototyping (VP) to support a cross-
functional team in analyzing product performance, reliability, and
manufacturing costs early in product development, and in making
quantitative trade-offs for design decision making.
• Physical prototypes of the product design are then produced using the
rapid prototyping (RP) technique and computer numerical control (CNC) to
support design verification and functional prototyping, respectively.
Introduction (continued)
• e-Design holds potential for shortening the overall product
development cycle, improving product quality, and reducing product
costs. It offers three concepts and methods for product development:
• Bringing product performance, quality, and manufacturing costs together
early in design for consideration.
• Supporting design decision making based on quantitative product
performance data.
• Incorporating physical prototyping techniques to support design verification
and functional prototyping.
Design paradox (Ullman 1992)
• The dichotomy or mismatch between the design engineer’s
knowledge about the product and the number of decisions to be
made (flexibility) throughout the product development cycle (see
Figure 1.1).
• Major design decisions are usually made in the early design stage
when the product is not very well understood.
• Consequently, engineering changes are frequently requested in later
product development stages, when product design evolves and is
better understood, to correct decisions made earlier.
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
• Conventional product development is a design-build-test process.
• Product performance and reliability assessments depend heavily on
physical tests, which involve fabricating functional prototypes of the
product and usually lengthy and expensive physical tests.
• Fabricating prototypes usually involves manufacturing process
planning and fixtures and tooling for a very small amount of
production.
• The process can be expensive and lengthy, especially when a design
change is requested to correct problems found in physical tests.
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
• In conventional product development, design and manufacturing
tend to be disjointed. Often, manufacturability of a product is not
considered in design.
• Manufacturing issues usually appear when the design is finalized and
tests are completed.
• Design defects related to manufacturing in process planning or
production are usually found too late to be corrected.
• Consequently, more manufacturing procedures are necessary for
production, resulting in elevated product cost.
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
• With this highly structured and sequential process, the product
development cycle tends to be extended, cost is elevated, and
product quality is often compromised to avoid further delay.
• Costs and the number of engineering change requests (ECRs)
throughout the product development cycle are often proportional
according to the pattern shown in Figure 1.2.
• It is reported that only 8% of the total product budget is spent for
design; however, in the early stage, design determines 80% of the
lifetime cost of the product (Anderson 1990).
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
• Realistically, today’s industries will not survive worldwide competition
unless they introduce new products of better quality, at lower cost,
and with shorter lead times.
• Many approaches and concepts have been proposed over the years,
all with a common goal to shorten the product development cycle,
improve product quality, and reduce product cost.
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
• A number of proposed approaches are along the lines of virtual prototyping (Lee
1999), which is a simulation-based method that helps engineers understand
product behavior and make design decisions in a virtual environment.
• The virtual environment is a computational framework in which the geometric
and physical properties of products are accurately simulated and represented.
• A number of successful virtual prototypes have been reported, such as Boeing’s
777 jetliner, General Motors’ locomotive engine, Chrysler’s automotive interior
design, and the Stockholm Metro’s Car 2000 (Lee 1999).
• In addition to virtual prototyping, the concurrent engineering (CE) concept and
methodology have been studied and developed with emphasis on subjects such
as product life cycle design, design for X-abilities (DFX), integrated product and
process development (IPPD), and Six Sigma (Prasad 1996).
Design paradox (Ullman 1992) (continued)
• Although significant research has been conducted in improving the product
development process and successful stories have been reported, industry
at large is not taking advantage of new product development paradigms.
• The main reason is that small and mid-size companies cannot afford to
develop an in-house computer tool environment like those of Boeing and
the Big-Three automakers.
• On the other hand, commercial software tools are not tailored to meet the
specific needs of individual companies; they often lack proper engineering
capabilities to support specific product development needs, and most of
them are not properly integrated.
• Therefore, companies are using commercial tools to support segments of
their product development without employing the new design paradigms
to their full advantage.
e-Design paradigm
• The e-Design paradigm does not supersede any of the approaches
discussed. Rather, it is simply a realization of concurrent engineering
through virtual and physical prototyping with a systematic and
quantitative method for design decision making.
• Moreover, e-Design specializes in performance and reliability
assessment and improvement of complex, large-scale, compute-
intensive mechanical systems.
• The paradigm also uses design for manufacturability (DFM), design for
manufacturing and assembly (DFMA), and manufacturing cost
estimates through virtual manufacturing process planning and
simulation for design considerations.
e-Design paradigm(continued)
• The objective of this chapter is to present an overview of the e-Design paradigm
and the sample tool environment that supports a cross-functional team in
simulating and designing mechanical products concurrently in the early design
stage. In turn, better-quality products can be designed and manufactured at
lower cost.
• With intensive knowledge of the product gained from simulations, better design
decisions can be made, breaking the aforementioned design paradox.
• With the advancement of computer simulations, more hardware tests can be
replaced by computer simulations, thus reducing cost and shortening product
development time.
• The desirable cost and ECR distributions throughout the product development
cycle shown in Figure 1.3 can be achieved through the e-Design paradigm.
e-Design paradigm(continued)
• A typical e-Design software environment can be built using a
combination of existing computer aided design (CAD), computer-
aided engineering (CAE), and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM)
as the base, and integrating discipline-specific software tools that are
commercially available for specific simulation tasks.
• The main technique in building the e-Design environment is tool
integration. This integrated e-Design tool environment allows small
and mid-size companies to conduct efficient product development
using the e-Design paradigm.
• The tool environment is flexible so that additional engineering tools
can be incorporated with a lesser effort.
e-Design paradigm(continued)
• In addition, the basis for tool integration, such as product data
management (PDM), is well established in commercial CAD tools and
so no wheel needs to be reinvented.
• The e-Design paradigm employs three main concepts and methods
for product development:
• Bringing product performance, quality, and manufacturing cost for design
considerations in the early design stage through virtual prototyping.
• Supporting design decision making through a quantitative approach for both
concept and detail designs.
• Incorporating product physical prototypes for design verification and
functional tests via rapid prototyping and CNC machining, respectively.
To be continued to week 2