Jump to content
Product Design Forums

Treasurebox

prashantshelke

Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by prashantshelke

  1. Plastic Parts Design Guidelines – Download the free eBookWinning in today’s dynamic marketplace requires more than just creating innovative product designs. To succeed, companies must also focus on efficient manufacturing within budget and schedule targets. The discipline of Design for Manufacturing (DFM) intends to aid designers in doing just that. Designing plastic parts is very complex process and it requires involvement of many factors like functional requirements, process constraints, material selection and assembly or structural issues. Wall thickness, Draft and Textures, Ribs & Bosses, Holes/Depressions, etc. are some of the important elements to be considered in design of plastic parts. When designing your parts for injection molding, the more attention you pay to wall thickness, the more likely you’ll be able to create a successful design. Parts having uniform wall thickness also simplify the manufacturing process and reduce overall cost. Adhering to these basic design guidelines for injection molded parts can improve the moldability of the designs and the life of the mold, increase the operational life of the part and reduce manufacturing cost. Download this free ebook and you can learn about many plastic part design best practices and DFM guidelines .
  2. Early consideration of manufacturability (DFM/DFA) challenges during the design stage itself shortens product development time, minimizes development cost, and ensures a smooth transition into production for quick time to market. DFMPro is a powerful Design for Manufacturing & Assembly solution, fully integrated inside Siemens NX which facilitates upstream manufacturability validation and identification of areas of a design that are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture. DFMPro aims to build a knowledge environment which helps designers achieve excellence in design process and improve productivity by eliminating rework. This is ably done by complementing and leveraging the powers of NX Checkmate framework to marry design and manufacturing side of product development. The benefits that can be achieved are manifold whose effects reverberate across the product lifecycle. Automation and formalization of the design review process for manufacturability using best-practice knowledge and guidelines provided by DFMPro will make DFM validation process highly simple and cost effective. At the same time, design review teams will find the reporting functionality as a great assistant in ensuring design collaboration between departments, suppliers and vendors thus enabling faster turnaround times while providing inputs within product lifecycle. When:Date: Feb 22, 2017 Time: 11:00 AM EST Register Now In this webinar you will learn: Key aspects of DFMPro that aim to make life easier for designers and reviewers Explore relevant case studies that highlight how DFMPro facilitates continuous process improvement through knowledge capture and reuse How to tackle today’s challenges of faster time to market with optimal cost and high quality product
  3. Dimensional variation is a defect characterized by the molded or fabricated part dimension varying from batch to batch or shot to shot with no apparent variation in the machine settings. Most of the variation in any given dimension on a manufactured part can be broken down into the following areas: • Intimal departure from the nominal in the construction of the tool • Variation as the tool ages and wears or undergoes maintenance • Part to part variation due to the change in stroke length or mold closing • Variation caused by the moving parts within the tool • Variation in the raw material • Variation in the process variables – velocity, pressure and temperature • Measurement repeatability and reproducibility Even if all of the above are minimized, there will still be part to part variation. As product complexity continues to grow, assessing the effects of part tolerances and their impact on assembly becomes increasingly important to ensure product quality and performance. Tolerance stackup analysis (TSA) is essential to make sure assembly problems related to these variations are reduced or completely eliminated before the parts go into production. Checking and calculating the right tolerance is a painstaking task. More than 60% designers use spreadsheet for performing TSA. However, this method lacks flexibility, visual representation of CAD assembly and it is very tedious and error-prone process. Geometric Stackup provides a simple solution for tolerance Stackup analysis on complex assemblies with unprecedented ease, speed and accuracy – reducing tolerance stack up calculation time from hours to minutes. Attend the webinar to learn: • Sources of variation for common manufacturing processes • Compare the dimensional variation sources and its impacts for common mass production processes such as die-casting, forging and machining with plastic injection molding • A simplified approach to Tolerance Stackup Analysis • How to reduce stackup calculation time from hours to minute Register here
  4. You can have brilliant ideas, but if you can’t get them across, your ideas won’t get you anywhere- Lee Iacocca In a world strewn with air-conditioners, kitchen appliances, medical equipment mobile phones, cameras, hybrid cars and other paraphernalia, mechanical parts with Printed circuit boards (PCBs) form a major part of the consumer market. Given this, traditional methods of designing electromechanical parts would often fail to ascend the aggressive demand curve. Electromechanical parts are always considered to be pesky components which are often approached with much trepidation. For the longest time sequential methodology was an industrial standard of designing an electromechanical part. In this, the mechanical engineer would first conceive the mechanical design which then gets passed on to the electrical engineer then to be administered by the software engineer. With plethora of data, information and communication being bandied about, the electromechanical component would usually undergo numerous prolonged design cycles before hitting the homerun. Realizing this very fact, this relay race of designing mechanical components with PCBs was introspected by industrial competitors in the recent past. Much-needed attention With its many flaws, essentially addressing the following would have resulted in a plot twist- Bridging the communication gap between MCAD and ECAD engineers. Nipping faulty software codes in the bud. Configuration management. Filing and organizing configuration for each design stream. Having addressed these issues, an electromechanical part would have experienced speedy-time-to-market, shorter design cycles, efficient processes across streams involved in designing an electromechanical component, effective cost and the like. Modern day Concurrence The prospects of such benefits with the promises of customized solutions then drove firms to adopt concurrent methodology of designing and producing electromechanical component. Simultaneous engineering has a clear view of customer requirements, financial estimates, practical challenges and real life operational domain. With cross-functional activities carried out by a team, information exchange is meteoric, thereby reducing time and cost of manufacturing an electromechanical part. Concurrent enough? While the benefits of this process are many, the benefits of this quadruples in the right software environment. Altering design of a virtual prototype immediately (or, simultaneously) on being informed of a major mechanical part design change. Likewise, being able to alter a mechanical part right at the phase of design on being warned of thermal concerns (the part would face in the end) is another one of many benefits a manufacturability software would help one reap. A software which takes both mechanical and electrical requirements of a part is a major plus. Such a software would make interpretation of data easy at all levels, eliminating prolonged hours, re-work at each level and unstructured data which makes optimization difficult. Conquering all odds Most software draw a hazy line between PCB input and mechanical input, thereby dallying the production cycle. If not this, then the design software purveyor throws the analyzing software into a tizzy. Industrial leaders have benefited by implementing systems which are not biased to interface in which mechanical (or, electrical) part is designed. Be it PTC, Dassault, Siemens or the like the ability to alter design right within the designing environment and then being able to switch to the manufacturability software is a must feature for designing that electro-mechanical part right. Setting up such an ideal product life-cycle management (PLM) software is all it would take to expel the gap between mechanical and electrical designs. Often referred to as “throwing designs over the wall”, the right software would bash these walls. Knowing each component right In this pursuit, one would encounter complex questions such as- what’s the best, what spells economical, which one has an eye for detail, which one perceives it all……as smart design calls for smart software. DFMPro suite of products prides itself in comprehending the design intent of both the parties, thereby, identifying issues much in advance, right at the stage of design! Understanding the eminence of assembly in an electromechanical part, it checks ones unique design for clearance, interference, alignment, preferred components, et al. Being able to envision the manufacturability of a part and proposing a design alternate often results in optimization…at all stages! Are you exchanging and implementing your brilliant ideas right in your electromechanical part?
  5. prashantshelke

    Take The Dfmpro Challenge – See How Fit Your Design Is!

    A design for manufacturing solution like DFMPro can help reduce or eliminate these engineering changes in an intuitive and easy-to-use way. DFMPro establishes a framework that provides numerous built-in checks to validate and identify areas of designs which are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture, assemble and service. Free DFM evaluation web service allows you to analyze your designs for manufacturability in 3 easy steps. Simply submit CAD files to our website and receive back an in-depth DFM report on your designs.
  6. We all know that unexpected rework due to downstream manufacturability and assembly problems is one of the biggest concern for any design engineers as it adds to unnecessary time and cost. And you feel this impact most, when these changes originate in later stages of lifecycle having exponentially higher impact on time-to-market and cost. Whether it’s incorrect tolerance, non-uniform wall thickness, or choice of exotic material, a lot of these design decisions can go wrong , impacting all aspects of downstream product development. If you’re thinking of eliminating these risks, then you’ll need to make sure you meet your designs meet all DFM requirements before releasing it to manufacturing. Regardless of your situation, shouldn’t you know how fit you design is for downstream requirements? Just use the simple form below to submit your CAD files to our DFMPro server. We will conduct a FREE assessment on your design in DFMPro and email you a full and comprehensive DFM report on your design. Feeling up to the challenge? You can submit you designs right here.
  7. Sink mark is like history – what’s done cannot be undone! Any designer who has ever dealt with plastic would know the trepidation with which a plastic part design is often dealt with. Each sink speaks greatly of the type of plastic design. Often times a result of- Part design Low injection and packing pressure Cooling time Melt or mold temperature Location and size of gate These localized depressions can be remedied well before they happen, by nipping the design error in the bud! An apt part design combined with befitting tools and techniques can save both the designer and molder from unnecessary woes. The right design Part design plays a major role in sink mark, it is influenced by variegated factors such as- Uniform wall thickness, Wall thickness variation, ribs, bosses, Mold wall thickness, gusset, et cetera Uniform wall thickness:Wall thickness should be uniform throughout the component-primary rule in plastic design. The principle of this rule is deeply embedded in manufacturing. With the current trend of light weighing products and reduction of material consumption, designers are often found making decisions regarding nominal wall based on functional and performance requirements. Overlooking the integral role of the nominal wall in the manufacturing process (in the initial stage of design) can result in a constrained process with the prospects of non-manufacturability of the part looming overhead. These issues often arise at tooling (mold making) phase, when the chances of resolving issues have depleted. With an intention of making the design work, the designer often lets the responsibility fall of the mold maker’s shoulder. With limited choices and wasted time on mind, these parts, once manufactured, often present one with performance related issues. Knowing the importance of manufacturing, one needs to consider functional and performance requirements in the course of deciding the nominal wall thickness. If a part is manufacturable but fails to meet the functional/performance requirements, then the design would eventually fail. Consideration of life time and acceptable stresses would help the designer make robust designs. In general, liquids tend to flow through conduits with least resistance. Given this, molten polymer would inadvertently flow through thicker region in case of variation in wall thickness. Some of the downsides of this heat and temperature induced process are imbalanced filling of cavities, trapped air in tool, development of weld lines and the like, each of which highlight the significance of uniform wall thickness. It further ensures uniform cooling of plastic parts which otherwise are poor carriers of heat. The resultant uniform shrinkage of the part with minimum sink marks and residual stresses are some of the many benefits of planning a design with uniform wall thickness. For instance, if a 2-mm wall approximately takes 2 seconds to cool, a 4-mm would take 5 seconds longer. If these two are adjacently placed, the 4-mm wall would shrink more than its nether counterpart. This disparity in shrinkage leads to a rise in stress which is relieved by the part upon ejection, as a result of which the part suffers from “potato-chipping” (excessive warpage). If the designer intends to stiffen a certain area, then an alternate can be adopted as opposed to increasing the thickness. An area can otherwise be stiffened by addition of ribs, or profiling the part wall which would make it stiffer and would also maintain the uniform wall thickness. Wall thickness variation: As a rule of thumb, the wall thickness must always be somewhere between 0.75mm to 3mm. This established theory is easier said than done. It is often times affected by factors such as the type of plastic, tooling and the like. Though a plastic designer may make an attempt of maintaining a nominal wall thickness throughout a part, the consistency of the thickness would falter where functional and manufacturing requirements differ, resulting in resistance in optimum mold construction. In situations such as these, locally adding a variation to the wall thickness would help one achieve a desired part with an intended function. While one is at it, certain points need to be always taken into consideration- Smooth transition in thickness: A sudden thickness transition may lead to shrinkage and high residual stresses in the part. This can also lead to warpage and reduced strength. Wall thickness variation: A maximum of 25 percent wall thickness variation is typically allowed for a better design. In addition to these, sink marks can also be avoided by other design/manufacturing considerations – Planning a rib which is 50- 80 percent of the wall thickness it’s connected with. Tweaking the geometry of the feature responsible for sink marks so as to lower the probability of sink marks on the part design. Relocating the gate in a manner which would ensure the flow of the molten plastic towards an obstruction, for instance, a core pin. Once a direct relation between design and sink marks is deeply ingrained in the mind of a plastic part designer, sink marks would then be a history! Read the blog post here Read the blog post here
  8. To design and manufacture today's complex plastic components, product designers are under tremendous pressure to produce robust designs at a minimum cost and in the fastest possible time. Leading author David Wright wrote in his book titled “Failure of Plastics and Rubber Products” that design issues account for almost 20% of product failures. The fact is that many errors that manifest themselves as material, tooling or processing can also be accounted to due to design issues. Conventional plastic flow simulation does not necessarily help diagnose and avoid common design issues. Decisions made at the design stage impacts manufacturing quality, product cost, and delivery lead times. Taking a proactive approach by including Six Sigma philosophy upfront into the early design stage can help develop high quality, profitable products eventually bringing sustained value to customers and markets. During the webinar, presenters will discuss the Design for Six Sigma philosophy and best practices and tools for its incorporation into new plastic product development. Why Should You Attend? • Understand DFSS concept and popular methodologies such as DMAIC and DMADV • Learn how to use DFSS Methodology in early part of plastic product design lifecycle • Applying DFSS techniques and tools such as DFMPro for successful DFSS implementation Who Should Attend? • Design Engineers/Managers/VPs • Manufacturing Engineers/Managers/VPs • Production and Process Engineers • Quality Engineers/Managers/VPs Note: This webinar is being hosted by Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE) and sponsored by Geometric Americas Inc. Participation is free of charge, however pre-registration is required. Please reserve your space by registering below Register here Register Here
  9. A design engineer’s role in designing a product has undergone a lot of change in this decade or so. Earlier, a designer’s responsibility was limited to only the functional requirements of the product but now they have a greater role to play in success of the product delivered by the organization. Designers have to design products which not only satisfy functional requirements but also manufacturability requirements by way of keeping product cost within the budgetary constraints and delivering innovative solutions to customers. Lack of knowledge about manufacturing processes especially with new designers with no earlier exposure to manufacturing often results into lot of rework and faulty designs. More often than not, most of the experienced design engineers too are not familiar with manufacturing process requirements and downstream related parameters and constraints. This is also observed when the designs are outsourced for manufacturing to different vendors. On a global average, almost 30% – 35% of engineering rework happens because of downstream manufacturability issues occurring late in the cycle. Some of the typical issues observed in case of plastic parts are missing drafts, non-uniform wall thickness, sudden variation in wall thickness, inappropriate bosses and rib designs, no consideration for thin steel condition, etc. Impact of such issues leads to defective parts with sink marks, warpage, frequent field failures, etc. Ultimately it leads to part rejection, rework and delay in delivery and increase in overall product cost. Some of the design conditions also lead to increased tooling cost. Fig 1.0 Sink Mark Issue Fig. 2.0 Non uniform wall thickness for boss Fig 3.0 Sink Mark on part Various studies have shown that errors rectified during design stage can cost hundred times less than errors detected during the manufacturing stage. This can be avoided when Design for Manufacturing (DFM) methodology is followed as an integral part of the product development process. Design for Manufacturing Knowledge plays a vital role in controlling product costs and maximizing engineering productivity by addressing potential problems in design phase itself. More and more companies are incorporating DFM practices in their organization which is reducing their rework and unwanted design errors and changes. Following are some of the typical methods of DFM implementation followed by organisations: DFM Checklists and Handbooks Classroom trainings on DFM best practices Expert discussions and reviews Dedicated validation teams Hiring consultants for design review It is essential to incorporate various DFM guidelines early in the product development phase to reduce defects, cut down rework, eliminate waste, shorten time to market and save costs. But the truth is that manual DFM methods are difficult, to say the least as referring to handbooks, checklist, rules manually can be frustrating and designers can miss them altogether. With limited time and resources, manually reviewing designs for hundreds of design guidelines is difficult, time-consuming and error-prone, and there is a risk of missing important design guidelines altogether. Fig 4.0 DFM implementation and integration Due to all these factors, organizations look for expert system with an automated solution to identify the design errors right at the design stage and provide suggestions on manufacturability and other aspects. Listed below are some of the benefits that can be achieved through an automated DFM solution: Improved Time-to-Market Quick and faster decision on manufacturability issues Direct and indirect cost savings associated with design iteration Cost savings associated with rework and scrap Capturing and re-use of best practices & tribal knowledge for continuous improvement Improved collaboration between designer and suppliers DFM tools like DFMPro can easily automate the design for manufacturing guidelines right within your CAD software and automatically review designs for downstream manufacturability, supplier capability, assembly, cost, quality etc. Designers can quickly ensure that if their designs can be easily manufactured, who is the best supplier to manufacture it and whether if any design feature is increasing the cost significantly. DFMPro can help in better understanding of downstream requirements at the right time – that is, when the design is being created. It further promotes collaboration of design with manufacturing, and captures the right understanding of supplier capability to design parts the very first time. This drastically reduces the review time and avoids rework in design. Using DFMPro, you can improve engineering productivity by over 15%. What are you waiting for? Contact us now for beginning your journey to reduced product costs and improved time to market.
  10. As product are becoming complex, assessing the interchange ability of part across variants has becomes increasingly important to ensure product quality and performance. Tolerance Stack-up Analysis helps ensure that assembly problems related to dimensional issues are reduced or completely eliminated before parts go into production. It is used as a predictive and a problem-solving technique during design for assembly stage and is vital technique to address mechanical fit and mechanical performance requirements in the design process. It is no longer a luxury but a necessity to perform tolerance stackup analysis during early design stage. However, Inspite of its importance, designers struggle to checking calculate the right tolerances. Geometric Stackup addresses this problem by providing an easy and efficient way to perform tolerance on complex parts and assemblies without having the know-how of dimensional engineering and tolerance analysis Automatically assesses minimum and maximum tolerances on critical assemblies using Worst Case Scenario & RSS (Statistical Variation) methods Works directly with CAD geometry, eliminating the process of tedious and error-prone manual entries of nominal values from CAD models to excel sheet Captures key dimensions in interactive 3D manner Auto-correction dimension capture guides user to locate the correct assembly sequence Rubber-band effect helps user in the process of dimension selection without loosing focus of the bigger picture Easy to use and shorter learning curve, confidently run stackup analysis without having the “know-how” of dimensional engineering and tolerance analysis Download Free Trial Request Demo To know more, please visit https://www.tolerancestackup.com/ or write to gs.mktg@geometricglobal.com
  11. prashantshelke

    Design For Standardization

    Ever-increasing demand for new products from customers is forcing OEMs to launch innovative products at record speeds. Launching a new product could mean either starting from scratch and designing something revolutionary or putting existing pieces together and creating something evolutionary. Revolutionary products form part of a company’s long term vision while evolutionary products comprise of the immediate road-map. Naturally, it is far easier to bring something out faster in the market by adopting the approach of evolution rather than revolution. The success of design for standardization approach depends heavily on how successful designers are at implementing and using the current available set of parts and reusing them for creating new products by minimizing total number of parts used. This is important for new products to be launched in the market on time, reduction in redesigning cost, eliminating redundant components both at supplier and OEM levels and optimization of overall product life-cycle by bringing in standardization. Almost every major OEM (irrespective of the sector) is focusing on part standardization to reduce lead times, improve part quality and reduce costs. Standardization helps in sharing more standard parts, standard platforms for different categories of products and enhanced modularity in manufacturing processes. Apart from operational gains, standardization initiatives enhance global sourcing of components and supplier modularization. Some of the benefits of standardization are as follows: Standard components, assemblies Common platforms Shop floor integration for efficient manufacturing Standard machine tools for cost effective manufacturing Standard design rules for better quality designs Definitive operating parameters Effective standardization strategies help organizations reduce time to market and garner profits from shorter product life-cycle. Standardization of components enables to put in place a common platform for product or manufacturing processes thus enabling common system layouts and module integration. To enable such a scale of activity, it is important for PLM to play a vital role in communicating downstream (or upstream) and capture design information and knowledge. PLM or in some cases PDM systems will be required to narrow down standardization to minute level. PLM will not only consist of technical or model based information, but it will also cover other types of attribute related information such as material or process specific that could lead to better choices during design as well as manufacturing stage. Designers working day in day out can get access on demand to such information thus reducing design cycle time and improving productivity. Take an example where a design initiative allowing standardization of parts based on sizes or with respect to materials will help manufacturing engineers use a smaller set of production resources. This is called upstream standardization of parts. Conversely, downstream teams can give excellent feedback on which type of parts are best suited for use of standard jigs and fixtures. All parts with too tight tolerances on large parts lead to use of non-standard tools which the downstream teams need to procure leading to high cost and cycle time. This can act as an excellent guideline for design activity right at design stage. How to do it?Such scenarios call for a common location where such information can be easily stored and referred to by everyone involved in the product life-cycle. Different groups at the upstream as well as downstream stages must find it convenient to define, communicate and use rules, guidelines or standards for parts to be used in the product development. This translates to defining a common framework or location which contains such information and gives stakeholders the confidence that all data in such secure location will be up to date and relevant for regular usage. Geometrics’ DFX solution caters to this exact need where parts standardization and reduction can be possible with an extensible framework in place. DFX provides a possibility to pick up information from custom PLM implementations (or via spreadsheet links) to define standard parts list and categorize them as preferred, allowed or disallowed. Such flexibility provides options to the downstream and upstream teams to precisely communicate what needs to be used and avoided during designing from the plethora of parts in part database. Example of Database consisting of thousands of Parts. To achieve this, designers need the knowledge of which parts are allowed to be used for future use and which parts are classified as redundant. This will help effective and clear collaboration between designers and manufacturing engineers. Geometrics’ DFX solution allows for clear distinction of what’s allowed and disallowed in terms of reuse or up-gradation of parts. It’s “Check Preferred Components” functionality also provides an opportunity right at the design stage to assist in correct selection of parts during designing. Geometric DFX: “Check Preferred Components“ Multiple set of components can be categorized for standardization by creating multiple rule sets in DFX. DFX also has option facility to aid part count reduction in assemblies based on material etc. This helps designers to understand whether components with similar material in contact with each other can be combined to reduce part count, which in turn helps to reduce overall manufacturing cost of assembly. Some benefits of using DFX in reducing part count in assembly: Part handling cost, inventory cost, purchasing and packaging cost. Possibility of defects per part is reduced and cost of Non-Value Added (NVA) activities decreases. Automation of assembly process becomes easy and less expensive To summarize, Geometric DFX can be used for part modularization across programs and product lines so as to improve cost inventory management, commonization, use of standard parts and improving the productivity of designers by managing rework. This is just one of the ways in which Geometric’s DFX solution can help improve standardization. For more use cases on “Check Preferred Components” and Geometric DFX, keep reading our blogs and visit www.dfmpro.com
  12. In the last couple of decades, use of lightweight alternatives such as plastics and composites has dramatically increased, with its applications well entrenched in automotive, aerospace, consumer electronics industry. Today’s car for example, has more than 150 kilograms of plastics on board in the form of seats, dashboards, bumpers, and engine components. Boeing 787 on the other hand has 50% carbon fibre-reinforced plastic and other composites in its airframe. The company says it has used more carbon composites and plastics than ever before in the 787 model. Plastics offer good mechanical properties and are relatively lighter than metal, making products more efficient, while providing enough toughness to withstand the test of time. However, it is important that designers be sensitive to certain physical and mechanical properties of plastics as it is not as strong as metal, has relatively lower density than metal and is poor conductor of heat and electricity Injection molding is the most commonly used manufacturing process but due to its intricacies product designers need to make adequate design considerations to ensure that part designs focus on maximizing molding performance and reducing tooling costs , an area that often plague the injection molding industry. Plastics tend to have higher rates of thermal expansion than metals and thicker sections shrink more than a thinner section, resulting in warpage or sink mark during the molding process. Stress concentration is another area that is of particular concern for plastic part manufacturing. These stresses can be the result of a continuous load, warpage, or any other issue related to design, material, processing, or tooling factors. Additionally there can be many latent defects in plastic parts that can not be detected with routine quality control. Plastic part performance and cost can be significantly enhanced by proper part design features. Through the use of simple designs and by following general moldability guidelines for plastic parts, design engineers can avoid problems occurring during manufacturing and also reduce the cost of parts. These factors require designers to introduce adequate design features that can lessen the stress level within a part and help develop low-shrinkage, warp-free parts. Consider the following injection molding design considerations for designing better plastic parts 1. Radius A design with corners always needs to accommodate large radii. Sharp corners spell stress thereby affecting the manufacturability of parts. Corners such as the attachment between bosses and surfaces which are often overlooked require scrutiny. The radius should always be with regards to the part thickness thereby eliminating the prospects of high-stress concentration and resulting in the breakage of the plastic part. General guideline suggest that the thickness at the corner should be in the range of 0.9 times the nominal thickness to 1.2 times the nominal thickness of the part. 2. Wall Thickness Given the different nature of the composition of plastics, plastic parts should always have walls with uniform thickness. Swerving away from the recommended would give rise to unfavorable results such as shrinkage and warpage. Apart from this, uniform wall thickness gives the assurance of minimum manufacturing cost. This further ensures quick cooling which in turn lets one produce more parts in a short span of time and optimum utilization of resources which is much sought after. And lighter parts have never been considered inconvenient. General guidelines suggest that wall thicknesses for reinforced plastic materials should be between the range of 0.75 mm to 3 mm and those for unfilled materials should be 0.5 mm to 5 mm. 3. Determine an apt location for gate While it is recommended to have a plastic design with a uniform wall thickness, we understand the need to have variations in few designs. In such unavoidable situations, having a proper gate location would decide the success of the part. Experts recommend designs with the gate at a location at which the melt enter the thickest section of the cavity only to flow out of a narrower region. 4. Draft Plastic heavily relies on mold draft in the course of its removal from the mold. Due to which plastic parts are to be designed with a taper (or, draft) in the direction in which the mold moves. In such case, the lack of an appropriate draft would make the removal of plastic parts almost impossible. A design with sufficient draft is always considered to be a good practice. 1.5 degrees for a depth of 0.25mm is usually recommended by design experts. General guidelines suggests that a draft angle of 0.5 degrees is recommended for core and 1.0 degrees for cavity 5. Ribs A known aspect of plastic is its stiff nature. Given this, the inclusion of ribs in a design is often recommended which adds to the bending stiffness. Ribs are pocket-friendly and a convenient option, the end result of which is often well received by both the designer and the manufacturer. But a plastic designer should always take the wall thickness into consideration at the time of including a rib in a plastic design. Thick and deep ribs can cause sink marks and filling problems respectively. Rib thickness of a part should never exceed the wall thickness. General guidelines suggests that rib thickness at its base should be around 0.6 times nominal wall thickness of the part. Failing to include a proper rib would eventually lead to the distortion of the plastic part. Learn more about what makes a great plastic part design. Download the complete DFM eBook here
  13. Prototyping and Tooling Recommendations This is part two of a two-part series. Thefirst partdescribed the stages for a planned approach and a well thought-through set of deliverables at each stage that can ensure a focused, efficient and fast design review process. This results in a true Poka Yoke tool which prevents design deficiencies from being carried to the next phase of design. The second part will address the tooling and prototyping requirements from preliminary models such as wax and stereolithography to hard tools capable of producing over a million parts. This discussion will be restricted to molded plastic parts – which in most instances are the most complex for a typical product. Preliminary Form and Fit for Concept Review and Refinement To help visualize basic product and marketing requirements To set preliminary form, size, weight and cost targets Review form factors with key customers Before the advent of 3D wax modeling, stereolithography and selective laser sintering, this used to be done by carefully machining and sculpting foamed plastic pieces to create a crude “touchy, feely” part. The following are the current choices (approximately in terms of cost – lowest to highest): 3 D Wax Printing CAD Data Required – Has a waxy feel, does not feel quite like a plastic part and has the least finished surface. It has very poor mechanical strength and is therefore formed as a solid. For this reason, it does not provide an accurate feel for the weight. Very suitable for the outside form factor refinement and preliminary discussions with internal and external customers. Stereolithography This has come a long way from its introduction in eighties and nineties and has a much wider choice of resins than the acrylic based ones in when first introduced. Can be used for limited thermal studies of internal electronic components. Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) Available in a variety or resins. Can be used for limited thermal and other environmental studies. CNC Machining By far the most expensive. Can be machined from solid blocks of most commercial resins and can have very accurate details and tolerances. Especially suitable for tolerance studies in addition to limited thermal and environmental studies. The last three can be finished and painted to look and feel like real injection molded parts. Detailed Design Review To finalize a design that is ready for an engineering verification (EV) build and comprises of the following: Issues highlighted in Concept Review Part geometry ready for tooling Specific areas of concern identified Materials finalized Design fallbacks for identified risky areas Full design validation performed using software such asDFMPro1along with reasons for exceptions Stereolithography and Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) Can be used for form, fit and thermal studies of internal electronic components. CNC Machining Especially suitable for tolerance studies in addition to limited thermal and environmental studies. Can be used for drop tests to get an idea on how well the enclosure is supporting the internal parts.Cannotbe used to predict the drop or chemical resistance of the final injection molded part. Please see discussion below. Let us take a minute to understand stress in plastics. Plastic basically is a very poor conductor of heat. An injection molded part may come out of a mold at upwards of 200 deg C. As soon as it comes out, the outer layers are exposed to the ambient air and start to cool and shrink. The inside layers are insulated by the outside layer and stay hot for a much longer time. See below: The net result is that the outside layers are continuously pulled in by the inside layers and the inside layers are pulled out by the layer when the part has finally cooled down. This results in the following stress pattern for the part: Illustration Credit:http://www.dc.engr.scu.edu/ The outside layers in compression add to the stress carrying properties. Additionally, the chemical resistance of the plastics is considerably improved. When a piece of plastic is machined the compressive layers may be removed resulting in lower stress carrying capacity and chemical resistance. The figure below shows a polycarbonate dog bone. The top layer on one side has been removed by very carefully machining it without letting the part distort due to the heat generated by machining. Due to the removal of the top compressive layer, the part bows in the direction of the machined surface. Also whereas the un-machined bar can be bent back and forth hundreds of times without developing a crack, just one bend in this case results in a crack in the middle. Thus the results obtained from a drop or chemical resistance from a machined enclosure may be very misleading. Cast Polyurethane Parts Can be used for form, fit and limited thermal and environmental studies. They provide a cheaper way to make limited number of parts (preferably under 100) for marketing purposes. Prototype Tooling Single cavity tooling that can produce close to the final design parts in the final material and provide data for fine tuning the final molds in terms of cosmetics and yield. Where possible, automation (slides and lifters, etc.) avoided. Material: CR Steel or P 20 CAD Data Requirements: Final data including required draft and inside radii, except: Identified areas that need to be finalized based on the proto-tooling Flow Analysis: Full flow analysis Other Requirements: Gating, runner system, cooling replicate final tooling Processing and resins replicate the final tooled parts Limitations: Parts cost will be higher due to lack of automation and possible secondary operations Cosmetics may be not be as good as the production tools due to witness lines, etc. Soft Tooling In addition to or in place of prototype tooling – lower cost tooling for life time volume of around 100,000. Use discouraged in favor of P20 type tooling. Material: Aircraft Grade Aluminum (6061 T6), P 20, CR Steel Aluminum was the material of choice before the advent of high speed machining since it was easier and faster to machine. The main disadvantage is its high thermal conductivity (6-8 times tool steels – a desirable property for molding) and a relatively soft surface (Rockwell 60 B compared to 32-36 C for P20 and 46-52 C for H13) that needs very careful handling during molding. The higher conductivity may result in better overall mechanical and chemical properties of the molded part, however this may not represent the properties obtained from the steel molds resulting in unexpected failures in production parts. All other requirements same as prototype tooling. Final Design Review and Release for Production Tooling Objective Review of action items generated and modifications needed based on verification testing Structural integrity confirmed by simulation Areas of weakness redesigned Material performance confirmed Comprehensive transition of design to tooling including inspection and quality control documents Depending on the Production Needs: Soft Tooling– As Discussed Above Low Volume Tooling(Volumes of 250,000 -500,000) Material P 20 or equivalent. May have multiple cavities. High Volume Tooling– Guaranteed life 1,000,000 cycles Material Hardened H 13 or other special materials such as stainless steel May have multiple cavities. Final data including required draft and inside radii and areas that needed to be finalized based on the prototype tooling. Full Flow Analysis Gating, runner system, cooling optimized Processing optimized DFMProis a design for manufacturing solution for design engineers tightly integrated with popular CAD systems. It helps design engineers quickly review their designs for ease of manufacturing and assembly prior to taking the designs forward for design reviews or manufacturing. Thus, it helps the organization avoid rework, improve product quality and reduce the time to market. In the design review process, DFMPro optimizes the overall inherent design to prevent short and long term visual, functional, processing or tooling issues. To know more, visit dfmpro.com Prototyping and Tooling Recommendations This is part two of a two-part series. The first part described the stages for a planned approach and a well thought-through set of deliverables at each stage that can ensure a focused, efficient and fast design review process. This results in a true Poka Yoke tool which prevents design deficiencies from being carried to the next phase of design. The second part will address the tooling and prototyping requirements from preliminary models such as wax and stereolithography to hard tools capable of producing over a million parts. This discussion will be restricted to molded plastic parts – which in most instances are the most complex for a typical product. Preliminary Form and Fit for Concept Review and Refinement To help visualize basic product and marketing requirements To set preliminary form, size, weight and cost targets Review form factors with key customers Before the advent of 3D wax modeling, stereolithography and selective laser sintering, this used to be done by carefully machining and sculpting foamed plastic pieces to create a crude “touchy, feely” part. The following are the current choices (approximately in terms of cost – lowest to highest): 3 D Wax Printing CAD Data Required – Has a waxy feel, does not feel quite like a plastic part and has the least finished surface. It has very poor mechanical strength and is therefore formed as a solid. For this reason, it does not provide an accurate feel for the weight. Very suitable for the outside form factor refinement and preliminary discussions with internal and external customers. Stereolithography This has come a long way from its introduction in eighties and nineties and has a much wider choice of resins than the acrylic based ones in when first introduced. Can be used for limited thermal studies of internal electronic components. Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) Available in a variety or resins. Can be used for limited thermal and other environmental studies. CNC Machining By far the most expensive. Can be machined from solid blocks of most commercial resins and can have very accurate details and tolerances. Especially suitable for tolerance studies in addition to limited thermal and environmental studies. The last three can be finished and painted to look and feel like real injection molded parts. Detailed Design Review To finalize a design that is ready for an engineering verification (EV) build and comprises of the following: Issues highlighted in Concept Review Part geometry ready for tooling Specific areas of concern identified Materials finalized Design fallbacks for identified risky areas Full design validation performed using software such as DFMPro1 along with reasons for exceptions Stereolithography and Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) Can be used for form, fit and thermal studies of internal electronic components. CNC Machining Especially suitable for tolerance studies in addition to limited thermal and environmental studies. Can be used for drop tests to get an idea on how well the enclosure is supporting the internal parts.Cannot be used to predict the drop or chemical resistance of the final injection molded part. Please see discussion below. Let us take a minute to understand stress in plastics. Plastic basically is a very poor conductor of heat. An injection molded part may come out of a mold at upwards of 200 deg C. As soon as it comes out, the outer layers are exposed to the ambient air and start to cool and shrink. The inside layers are insulated by the outside layer and stay hot for a much longer time. See below: The net result is that the outside layers are continuously pulled in by the inside layers and the inside layers are pulled out by the layer when the part has finally cooled down. This results in the following stress pattern for the part: Illustration Credit: http://www.dc.engr.scu.edu/ The outside layers in compression add to the stress carrying properties. Additionally, the chemical resistance of the plastics is considerably improved. When a piece of plastic is machined the compressive layers may be removed resulting in lower stress carrying capacity and chemical resistance. The figure below shows a polycarbonate dog bone. The top layer on one side has been removed by very carefully machining it without letting the part distort due to the heat generated by machining. Due to the removal of the top compressive layer, the part bows in the direction of the machined surface. Also whereas the un-machined bar can be bent back and forth hundreds of times without developing a crack, just one bend in this case results in a crack in the middle. Thus the results obtained from a drop or chemical resistance from a machined enclosure may be very misleading. Cast Polyurethane Parts Can be used for form, fit and limited thermal and environmental studies. They provide a cheaper way to make limited number of parts (preferably under 100) for marketing purposes. Prototype Tooling Single cavity tooling that can produce close to the final design parts in the final material and provide data for fine tuning the final molds in terms of cosmetics and yield. Where possible, automation (slides and lifters, etc.) avoided. Material: CR Steel or P 20 CAD Data Requirements: Final data including required draft and inside radii, except: Identified areas that need to be finalized based on the proto-tooling Flow Analysis: Full flow analysis Other Requirements: Gating, runner system, cooling replicate final tooling Processing and resins replicate the final tooled parts Limitations: Parts cost will be higher due to lack of automation and possible secondary operations Cosmetics may be not be as good as the production tools due to witness lines, etc. Soft Tooling In addition to or in place of prototype tooling – lower cost tooling for life time volume of around 100,000. Use discouraged in favor of P20 type tooling. Material: Aircraft Grade Aluminum (6061 T6), P 20, CR Steel Aluminum was the material of choice before the advent of high speed machining since it was easier and faster to machine. The main disadvantage is its high thermal conductivity (6-8 times tool steels – a desirable property for molding) and a relatively soft surface (Rockwell 60 B compared to 32-36 C for P20 and 46-52 C for H13) that needs very careful handling during molding. The higher conductivity may result in better overall mechanical and chemical properties of the molded part, however this may not represent the properties obtained from the steel molds resulting in unexpected failures in production parts. All other requirements same as prototype tooling. Final Design Review and Release for Production Tooling Objective Review of action items generated and modifications needed based on verification testing Structural integrity confirmed by simulation Areas of weakness redesigned Material performance confirmed Comprehensive transition of design to tooling including inspection and quality control documents Depending on the Production Needs: Soft Tooling – As Discussed Above Low Volume Tooling (Volumes of 250,000 -500,000) Material P 20 or equivalent. May have multiple cavities. High Volume Tooling – Guaranteed life 1,000,000 cycles Material Hardened H 13 or other special materials such as stainless steel May have multiple cavities. Final data including required draft and inside radii and areas that needed to be finalized based on the prototype tooling. Full Flow Analysis Gating, runner system, cooling optimized Processing optimized DFMPro is a design for manufacturing solution for design engineers tightly integrated with popular CAD systems. It helps design engineers quickly review their designs for ease of manufacturing and assembly prior to taking the designs forward for design reviews or manufacturing. Thus, it helps the organization avoid rework, improve product quality and reduce the time to market. In the design review process, DFMPro optimizes the overall inherent design to prevent short and long term visual, functional, processing or tooling issues. To know more, visit dfmpro.com
  14. With increasing adoption of PMI, design for manufacturability validation becomes even more critical to achieve First Time Right and avoid changes late in the development cycle leading to extra cost and time delay. Join us at Booth #317 to connect with our teams and explore how you can reduce your design review time significantly with the automated design for manufacturability solution, DFMPro, integrated inside NX. Don't miss our knowledge sharing session: Title: PMI best practices and validation within NX with DFMPro Abstract: There is growing need for accelerating the design cycle there is an increasing trend towards communicating downstream manufacturing requirements in digital form i.e. adding Product and manufacturing information (PMI) such as geometric dimensioning and tolerancing, 3D annotation etc. directly within the 3D model. This presentation will explain global best practices for implementing PMI and how DFMPro empowers designers to quickly validate their 3D models to ensure that they comply with industry standards and PMI best practices within NX. Session Number: 16255 Location: Knowledge Theater 2 Time: Wed, May 18, 3:00 PM - 3:20 PM
  15. Design reviews are integral to any process of designing and developing new products, with an emphasis to reduce risks, avoid unnecessary iterations and increase program success. One of the most obvious benefits of effective design reviews is improvement in engineering productivity. Engineers spend a significant amount of time to address and correct errors identified in late stages of product development. A comprehensive design review process helps towards error-proofing the design process. While reviews provide clear value, most companies have an informal, ad-hoc and an inconsistent review process - from the initial kick-off and preliminary design stage to tooling and production. Without a formal set of specific requirements and guidelines especially for non-functional requirements, the reviews are often time-consuming, resulting in relatively less actionable feedback for the design team. And given today's increasingly complex supply chain and manufacturing landscape, if a particular supplier makes design changes and applies control to a particular design, the ramifications for organizations are clear: Lack of design standardization leads to supplier lock-in issues and significant cost overruns. These problems typically stem from inadequate and informal review process between the design teams and SMEs in manufacturing departments or with suppliers. With this in mind, we will demystify a robust design review process during the webinar. About the Presenter: Vikram Bhargava Vikram is a fellow of the Society of Plastics Engineers and past chairman of its product design and development division. He recently retired as the director of mechanical engineering services at Motorola Solutions in Holtsville, NY. He has over 40 years of experience in product design, development, manufacturing and management, especially in plastics. He is currently authoring a book on Holistic Product Design to be published by Hanser in 2015. He holds or has pending over 21 US and International patents. Register for the Webinar Register for the Webinar Register for the Webinar
  16. On a global average, 30 percent of engineering effort and time is spent on rework due to late design changes occurring because of downstream manufacturing and design for assembly issues. Watch this short animated video to learn how you can address manufacturability, assembly, quality, serviceability and cost issues with upfront DFM validation with DFMPro. To know more write to us dfmpro.marketing@geometricglobal.com or call us at +1 (248) 882-7533
  17. Given that 30% of engineering effort is spent on rework due to downstream issues in manufacturing and assembly, it is becoming increasingly important to adopt Design for Manufacturing principles during early design stage. With most traditional DFM approaches its not easy to analyze designs for all downstream requirements and fix them during early design stage. This results in engineering rework, errors during manufacturing and quality issues. DFMPro, a design for manufacturing solution automates the design review process through a series of guidelines and best-practices, configured as rule-based checks. It on the other hand is integrated within leading CAD platforms and facilitates upstream manufacturability validation of CAD models right during the design stage. DFMPro Detects and highlights areas of a design that are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture Offers useful suggestions Reduces rework, improves design quality Register for the webinar to learn the capabilities of latest version, DFMPro 4.1 for Creo Parametric. Who should attend? Design engineering Manufacturing engineering Quality engineering Register Here Given that 30% of engineering effort is spent on rework due to downstream issues in manufacturing and assembly, it is becoming increasingly important to adopt Design for Manufacturing principles during early design stage. With most traditional DFM approaches its not easy to analyze designs for all downstream requirements and fix them during early design stage. This results in engineering rework, errors during manufacturing and quality issues. DFMPro, a design for manufacturing solution automates the design review process through a series of guidelines and best-practices, configured as rule-based checks. It on the other hand is integrated within leading CAD platforms and facilitates upstream manufacturability validation of CAD models right during the design stage. DFMPro Detects and highlights areas of a design that are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture Offers useful suggestions Reduces rework, improves design quality Register for the webinar to learn the capabilities of latest version, DFMPro 4.1 for Creo Parametric. Who should attend? Design engineering Manufacturing engineering Quality engineering Register HereVSv Given that 30% of engineering effort is spent on rework due to downstream issues in manufacturing and assembly, it is becoming increasingly important to adopt Design for Manufacturing principles during early design stage. With most traditional DFM approaches its not easy to analyze designs for all downstream requirements and fix them during early design stage. This results in engineering rework, errors during manufacturing and quality issues. DFMPro, a design for manufacturing solution automates the design review process through a series of guidelines and best-practices, configured as rule-based checks. It on the other hand is integrated within leading CAD platforms and facilitates upstream manufacturability validation of CAD models right during the design stage. DFMPro Detects and highlights areas of a design that are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture Offers useful suggestions Reduces rework, improves design quality Register for the webinar to learn the capabilities of latest version, DFMPro 4.1 for Creo Parametric. Who should attend? Design engineering Manufacturing engineering Quality engineering March 02, 2016. 11:00 AM EST Register here
  18. Geometric invites you to visit us at PTC / User Benelux conference where we will be showcasing our design for manufacturing solution, integrated right inside PTC CREO Parametric. Global competition, increasing product complexities and pressures to optimize costs has led to iterative product development process which significantly impacts time to market and product costs. Design engineers spend around 30% or higher on engineering rework due to downstream manufacturability and assembly issues. Hence it is imperative to identify and address such issues during the early product design stage. Visit our booth to see live demonstrations of DFMPro, a design for manufacturing solution that facilitates upstream manufacturability validation and identification of areas of a design that are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture. Join us for our KT session on “Adopting a Holistic Approach to Design for Manufacturability”. This 40 minutes presentation is must-attend for product designers as well as manufacturing engineers who face issues related to engineering rework, defects and delays. Add to Calendar. Session Details: Session Title: Moving from Reactive to Proactive Design: Adopting a Holistic Approach to Design for Manufacturability Time: 15:40 – 16:20 Location: Eindhoven 3, Hotel Eindhoven Aalsterweg 322, 5644 RL Eindhoven Session Abstract: The traditional approach of Design for Manufacturability (DFM) with design guidelines and checklist addresses these issues but is difficult, time-consuming and error-prone. A proactive approach to Design for Manufacturing, by implementing it upstream can help reduce engineering changes and improve time to market .This presentation demonstrates innovative technological developments in 3D design to automate the process of design validation for manufacturability. It covers some of the traditional manufacturing process such as machining, sheet metal, injection molding, casting, tubing and next generation processes like additive manufacturing.
  19. prashantshelke

    Design For Performance

    Design engineers are faced with many challenges related to product performance, costs and time to market. Optimal product performance starts from the design stage and continues throughout the lifecycle of the product. To improve product performance and cost, equal emphasis should be given to all four attributes - material selection, part design, tooling, and processing. If any one of these attributes is deficient, then it will nullify the other three, even if they are highly optimized. More often than not , design issues account for almost 20% of product failures. Download the whitepaper to learn how to identify and correct Design for Performance related issues early in the design cycle and achieve superior results and products. Download Whitepaper
  20. Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) who design and market high-tech goods such as computer products, networking and telecommunication equipment, medical devices, and consumer electronics are continually working towards becoming more cost-efficient to remain profitable as global competition and new innovations are driving prices down. Thin margins and shorter product lifespans mean there is little room for inefficiencies and rework within the product development lifecycle. As contract manufacturing increases, it is imperative to reduce rework and ensure maximum efficiency across the supply chain to control costs. Best-in-Class companies focus on improving engineering efficiencies through rework reduction and by adopting the right tools and processes to make “early choices” during design. So how do you quickly and cost efficiently bring affordable products to market? Attend the webinar to learn how DFMPro can foster more cost-effective innovation by capturing your supplier knowledge and using it to enable designers to take intelligent decisions during early design stages. Webinar Details: Date: 13th Oct 2015 Time: 02:00 PM - 03:00 PM EST Register for the Webinar Here Read the full blog post Here
  21. Thu, Sep 24, 2015. 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM EDT In the new competitive world, product designers are under tremendous pressure to produce robust designs at a minimum cost and in the fastest possible time. For a robust plastic part or assembly equal emphasis has to be given to all four attributes – material selection, part design, tooling, and processing. If any one of these attribute is deficient then it will nullify the other three, even if they are highly optimized. Leading author David Wright wrote in his book titled “Failure of Plastics and Rubber Products” that design issues account for almost 20% of product failures. The fact is that many errors that manifest themselves as material, tooling or processing can also be accounted to due to design issues. Conventional plastic flow simulation does not necessarily help diagnose and avoid common design issues such as sharp internal corners. In most cases it can only optimize the tooling and processing of plastic part designs. Mechanical simulation tools on the other hand are strongly aligned to metals and will not even detect the esoteric issues related to plastics, such as non-uniformity of wall thicknesses. During the webinar key speaker Vikram Bhargava, will explain a holistic approach for plastic part design and review all the four attributes mentioned above, illustrating through actual deficiencies in plastic parts. The webinar will also be interspersed with his insights to the role of Six Sigma in improving the entire process. A brief demonstration of automated design validation tool DFMPro will be demonstrated that can help avoid basic design errors from proceeding to the simulation or manufacturing stage. Keynote Speakers Vikram Bhargava Vikram is a fellow of the Society of Plastics Engineers and past chairman of its product design and development division. He recently retired as the director of mechanical engineering services at Motorola Solutions in Holtsville, NY where he set up and headed an international group of professionals, state of the art simulation capabilities and training programs that were key contributors to improving products’ robustness. He has over 40 years of experience in product design, development, manufacturing and management, especially in plastics. He is a sought after trainer and has trained thousands of engineers and suppliers in the proper design and manufacturing of plastic parts and assemblies in the US, China, Taiwan, Canada and India. He is a certified Six Sigma Black Belt and has led or mentored numerous projects resulting millions of dollars in savings. He is currently authoring a book on Holistic Product Design to be published by Hanser in 2015. He holds or has pending over 21 US and International patents. For more information visitwww.linkedin.com/in/bhargavavik/ Nikhil Dalvi Nikhil Dalvi is a senior subject matter expert at Geometric. With a diverse experience in manufacturing, development, project management, Nikhil now provides consultative solutions for customers in the US around our suite of technologies and products addressing the design and manufacturing space. This webinar is being hosted by Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE) and sponsored by Geometric Americas Inc. Participation is free of charge, however pre-registration is required. Please reserve your space by registering from link below.
  22. A design engineer’s praxis in designing a product has undergone a great change in this decade. Earlier, designers were only responsible for functional requirements of the product but now they have a greater role to play in an organization – to design products which not only satisfy functional requirements but also manufacturability requirements by way of keeping product cost within the budgetary constraints and delivering innovative solutions to customers. Functional requirements, especially for machining, translate into product design features like slots, pockets, holes, islands, grooves, profiles, etc. Design engineers have to select such features based on their prior experiences or guidelines / standards. However, when it comes to understanding downstream manufacturing capability, the knowledge is often in ‘tacit’ form. Designers have an uphill struggle in accessing this knowledge. Thus, at times the feature they add in their design is either not manufacturable or is difficult, and expensive or takes longer time to manufacture. In this case, designers may end up spending hours in design reviews with the manufacturing department or suppliers and would also have to spend considerable time in rework leading to poor design throughput. Hence, it is important that design engineers should have access to all the required downstream capability knowledge base. Geometric’s DFMPro takes all this into consideration and capacitates design engineers to access this knowledge base, so that ‘informed decisions’ based on standards and downstream requirements can be taken. This saves a lot of effort and also ensures that design release timelines will be met and ECO/ECN instances will be reduced. Machining guidelines for milling cutter radius: For designing a milled component, it is important for a design engineer to understand what cutter sizes are available with internal manufacturing or with suppliers. This is important because if the required radius is not available with the machine shop, it would lead to additional investment in buying a new cutter or at times selecting a smaller cutter which would increase the production time drastically. This becomes more important for smaller pocket radius. In the image depicted above, the design engineer created a pocket with side radius of 10 mm. General guideline for cutter selection is as below: “Side Radius to Cutter Radius should be between 1.1 to 1.25.” It means that a milling cutter with radius between 8.0 to 9.0 mm should be used for milling the side radius. DFMPro can check for appropriateness of side radii based on available cutters. By configuring cutter database within DFMPro, it will check whether such a cutter is available as per the mentioned range. If the milling cutter is available as per the range, then the analysis will pass and the radius would be acceptable. If not, the analysis will fail and DFMPro will suggest the next nearest milling cutter radius tool that needs to be considered based on this, the design engineer is suggested to modify the side radius value. For example, if a cutter is not available with radius between 8.0 to 9.0 mm, then DFMPro will automatically find out the next nearest cutter radius e.g. 9.5 mm radius tool available in database. Using this nearest cutter radius, it will find the actual side radius value which needs to be provided on the pocket/slot feature. E.g. 10.45 mm to 11.875 mm side radius needs to be provided in this case. It is normally convenient for a design engineer to modify the side radius rather than using a non-standard milling cutter with additional cost. This way DFMPro can help design engineers by way of providing better understanding of manufacturing requirements at the right time – that is, when the design is being created. It further promotes better collaboration of design with manufacturing and captures the right understanding of supplier capability to design parts the very first time. This drastically reduces the review time and avoids rework in design. For the downstream departments, it helps reduce manufacturing time and avoid issues like tool breakage due to wrong cutter selection. Read some important machining guidelines here
  23. prashantshelke

    Meet Us At Ptc Live Global 2015

    Planning on attending PTC Live Global 2015, one of the largest networking event for product development professionals? Geometric invites you to visit us at booth # 203 as we unveil the latest version of DFMPro, a powerful Design for manufacturability and assembly solution integrated right inside CREO Parametric Global competition, increasing product complexities and pressures to optimize costs has led to iterative product development process which significantly impacts time to market and product costs. Design engineers spend around 30% or higher on engineering rework due to downstream manufacturability and assembly issues. Identifying and correcting potential downstream issues right at the design stage can save a lot of time and effort and maximize productivity. Please visit us at Booth # 203 to learn more about our design for manufacturability solutions and view live demos. Hear from the leading Aerospace Engine Manufacturer, Honeywell on how they successfully embarked on a DFM journey with an aim to reduce manufacturing cost and improve time-to-market. Session Topic : DFM Considerations during Design: Perspective Change from Reactive to Proactive Session Abstract: Honeywell decided to embark on a journey with a clear mandate from senior management to reduce manufacturing cost and improve time to market. Honeywell was looking for a solution which would help their engineers identify design changes that would reduce manufacturing time and cost, and/or improve product quality. Secondly, the solution had to be simple and easy to use. Needing too many user inputs would consume too much design time. The presentation will explain the key elements of successfully deploying DFM solution and actual case study and benefits. Presenters will explain how to reduce time for design checks for manufacturability, while offering the experience of a Manufacturing Subject Matter Expert to novice designers. It is a must-attend for design as well as manufacturing engineers who face issues related to rework, defects and delays. Dont Miss the Presentation. Block your calendar now! About PTC Live Global PTC’s largest education and networking event for product development and service professionals. Product development professionals will discover new techniques and best practices, while building technical skills and peer networks, that help them develop more innovative products, more effectively. Service leaders will access the latest industry research and technology, innovative concepts and best practices for achieving a sustainable competitive advantage Speaking Session > Date : Wednesday, June 10 > Time : 11:30 AM – 11:50 AM > Topic : DFM Considerations during design: Perspective Change from Reactive to Proactive Presenters Omar Santiago del Valle Mechanical Engineer,EHCOE Honeywell Aerospace Nikhil Dalvi SME- Design for Manufacturing geometric Americas Inc. Know more >>
  24. Thursday, 04 June 2015, 11:00 AM – 11:45 AM CDT We invite you to check out the latest version 4.0 of DFMPro on PTC Creo Parametric platform with enhanced functionality and new modules integrated into the already highly rated version 3.6. New DFMPro 4.0 comes with added support Creo Parametric 3.0 along with support for modules like tubing, sand casting and investment casting. Wall thickness is the critical element in achieving defect-free parts in sand casting and investment casting. The new release of DFMPro helps to define the wall thickness requirements as rules which can be easily specified for individual as well as a set of components. DFMPro is a powerful CAD integrated Design for Manufacturing & Assembly solution, which facilitates upstream manufacturability validation and identification of areas of a design that are difficult, expensive or impossible to manufacture. With the new version of DFMPro 4.0, Creo Parametric users can have much greater flexibility to design products for multiple processes, including additive manufacturing, tubing and sand casting and significantly reduce engineering change orders (ECOs) by getting their designs right the first time. Register for the 45 minutes webinar to Discover how DFMPro 4.0 for Creo Parametric can help design BETTER products in Less TIME and COST!
  25. Design BETTER Products in LESS Time and Cost To Know How, Ask the Experts at our DfX Seminar at NPE 2015 To design and manufacture today’s complex plastic components, designers must carefully consider all aspects of plastic properties and systematically follow design guidelines to assure the best cost, quality, manufacturability and robustness of plastic parts. At NPE 2015, Geometric is hosting a roster of mini seminar sessions where panel of experts from Geometric and recognized trainer from Plastics Industry will provide their insights on Design for Excellence (DfX) Techniques and Guidelines and discuss real world design problems and case studies on complex parts. Participants are encouraged to bring in their CAD models, No matter how big or small, simple or complex they might be, and let our experts run a DfX analysis on your part and offer their thoughts and advice to solve your design problems. You can also submit your part online at our website here. This is a unique opportunity for the product designers, engineers, program manager, manufacturing engineers and alike to explore and discuss on variety of topics including How to Design for Cost and Quality, Tolerance Stackup Analysis techniques, technologies for efficient design collaboration and future of Design for Manufacturing. Register today to reserve your seat. There is no charge to attend the Seminar, but because space is limited, we do ask that you pre-register yourself. For detailed schedule click here
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.