posted on 2011-01-14, 11:45authored byMichael J. Burton
Numerous works have been produced on the topic of Design for Manufacturing (DFM)
to better educate the designers of products as to various methods of manufacturing and
their specific requirements. It is the common aim of these works to eliminate so called
"over the wall" product development in which procedurally ignorant designers pass
largely un-producible design concepts to manufacturers, who are then required to make
necessary refinements and changes. When applied correctly, DFM results in the
efficient and economical production of well-designed products, whose forms have been
attuned to the particular requirements of their final method of production at an early
stage of development. However, one aspect of using such approaches is that design
intent is frequently compromised for the sake of manufacturability and innovative
design concepts are often dismissed as being unfeasible. Recent advances in additive manufacturing technologies and their use in the direct
manufacture of end-use products from digital data sources has brought about a new
method of production that is known as Rapid Manufacturing (RM). Unlike conventional
subtractive machining processes, such as milling and turning which generate forms by
removing material from a stock billet, RM parts are grown from an empty part bed
using the controlled addition of specialised build materials. Additive manufacturing
requires no forming tools, is unrestricted by many conventional process considerations
and is capable of producing practically any geometry. The freedoms that are associated
with this technology facilitate the design and realisation of product concepts that would
be unachievable with any other method of production. This promotes an almost
boundless design philosophy in which innovative product solutions can be designed to
best meet the needs of specification criteria, rather than the production process with
which they are to be made. However, unlike other forms of manufacturing, the newness
of this technology means that there is no proven aid or tool to assist industrial designers
in exploiting the freedoms that it offers. Using information that was collated in the literature review and case study projects, a
systematic design approach was proposed and then tested in a series of user trials with
groups of industrial design students and practicing industrial design professionals. The
results of these trials are discussed, showing a common acknowledgement from both
groups that the proposed DFRM tool was of assistance and that it had an influence upon
their design work. However, whilst the student group were generally receptive toward
tool uptake, the experienced designers showed more of a reluctance to abandon their
own "tried and tested" methods in favour of the unknown and unproven approach. It is
concluded that this attitude would be fairly representative of wider opinion and that the
future uptake of any such tool would be reliant upon sufficient evidence of its successful
application. Hence, suggestions are made for future work to continue tool development
and for more validation trials to be conducted with its intended user group.
History
School
Mechanical, Electrical and Manufacturing Engineering