A Comparison of DFA Methods for Manual Assembly

Mašín, Ivan

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05203-8_38

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This methodology, which starts from the existing DfM and DfA (Design for Manufacture and Design for Assembly), aims to reduce manufacturing and assembly costs in engineering projects. For the development of the DfMA for Ll-Ls, the appropriately modified Boothroyd-Dewhurst (Boothroyd, 1980;Boothroyd, 1987;Boothroyd, 1996) and Lucas-Hull (Lucas Engineering Systems Ltd., 1993;Masín, 2014) methods were used for application in large products. This DfA / DfMA methodology has been developed and applied in some Ll-Ls product use case (Cabello et al, 2018;Remirez et al, 2019).…”

Section: Figure 3 Application Of the Dfma For Ll-ls Methodology Based On Bandd And L/hull Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a New Design Methodology for Large Size Products Based on DSM and Dfma

Mora

Retolaza

Campos

et al. 2020

Proc. Des. Soc.: Des. Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new design methodology for long life and large size (Ll-Ls) products called Design for Installation (DfI) is proposed. Ll-Ls products are usually made up of large parts that need to be assembled on field. The proposed methodology, based on adapted Design Structure Matrix (DSM) and Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) methods, enables to optimize the design of a Ll-Ls product in order to reduce time and cost of the installation process. The new methodology works with a conceptual design of the product and the weight and size restrictions given by logistic factors as inputs.

show abstract

Section: Figure 3 Application Of the Dfma For Ll-ls Methodology Based On Bandd And L/hull Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a New Design Methodology for Large Size Products Based on DSM and Dfma

Mora

Retolaza

Campos

et al. 2020

Proc. Des. Soc.: Des. Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also devised a method for calculating assembly time by considering factors such as handling, feeding, and inserting time. By the 1990s, a multitude of DFA methods had been developed, such as IPA Stuttgart Method, Hitachi AEM, Lucas Method, Modified Westinghouse Method, Hinchley Assembly Complexity Factor, Sony Standard Time Assembly Method, and Bralla Method [8][9][10]. These DFA methods continue to serve as design tools and quantitative evaluation tools, playing a critical role in improving assembly efficiency.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design for Assembly (DFA) Evaluation Method for Prefabricated Buildings

Zhai,

Sun,

et al. 2023

Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Design for Assembly (DFA) method, incorporating lean and prefabricated construction concepts, is emerging as a novel approach to industrialize the construction industry. In recent years, several countries have developed guidance documents to enhance building assembly efficiency and quality through the implementation of DFA methods. However, there remains significant room for improvement in the assembly efficiency of prefabricated buildings, along with a lack of effective evaluation measures. Therefore, this paper aims to develop a DFA evaluation method specifically applicable to prefabricated buildings, utilizing the formula design, Delphi method, and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. The DFA evaluation method presented in this study comprises two main components: the assembly efficiency index (AEI) and the assembly design index (ADI). The assembly efficiency evaluation serves to gauge the efficiency level of a construction system and identify the space for improvement. On the other hand, the assembly design evaluation identifies factors influencing assembly, enabling process enhancement and upgrading. Subsequently, the paper employs the developed evaluation method to analyze a case, the New Lawuga School in Yushu, China. The AEI of the New Lawuga School is 2.44 m3/pc., and the ADI value of the building is 0.54. The assembly evaluation of the New Lawuga School reveals that efficient assembly was achieved through integrated design and parts reduction. However, non-standardized design emerged as a hindrance to the assembly process. The primary contribution of this study lies in the proposed DFA evaluation method tailored specifically for prefabricated buildings.

show abstract