galorath incorporated 2003 real time cost impact assessment of composite and metallic design...

Galorath Incorporated 2003

Real Time Cost Impact Assessment of Real Time Cost Impact Assessment of Composite and Metallic Design AlternativesComposite and Metallic Design Alternatives

Dr. Christopher Rush

Joe Falque

Karen McRitchie

2Galorath Incorporated 2003

OverviewOverview

Introduction Composite Structures – New Challenges

Background and Related Research Cost Estimating Challenges, Parametric Cost Modeling

Design for Manufacture and SEER-DFM

SEER-DFM Examples Analysis of Transmission Servo Piston

Composite and Metallic DFM analysis of SUV Fender

Summary and Conclusions


ObjectiveObjective

Introduce the SEER-DFM cost model methodology for developing composite and metallic cost trade study analyses


IntroductionIntroduction

Composite technology is evolving Engineers are less familiar with composite structures and

processes compared to traditional metallic processes

Presents new set of design and cost modeling challenges

Cost Commitment (see next slide)

Composite Affordability Initiative (CAI) sought to

address these issues SEER-DFM embodies 30 composite processes along side 70

more traditional manufacturing processes Provides a framework to perform real time cost trade studies


Cost CommitmentCost Commitment

70 - 80 % of product cost is committed during product concept phases

Most cost incurred during production phases

Scope for cost reduction reduces in product phase

Scope for Production Cost Reduction.

Production Phase

70 - 80% of Costs

Cost

Concept phases

Cost committed

Cost incurred

Time


Background and Related ResearchBackground and Related Research

Cost Estimating Challenges

Limited amount of data during development phases, high

uncertainty and expected error

Accounting for technology changes

Requirements to show how cost estimates were derived risks, assumptions,

uncertainty

Estimates need to

follow a consistent

reliable process



Parametric Cost Modeling

Dates back to the 1950’s;

introduced by the RAND Corporation for the US Air Force

widely used by Government and Industry

Uses historical samples to establish relationships

Uses the past to predict the future

Sometimes called Statistical Estimating

Linear regression most popular & simplest technique y = a + b(x)

Typically used during the product development stages

Reduces time required to produce estimates



MASS vs. COST

COST = 6.0422 + 1.1591 * MASS

Correlation: r = .97161

MASS

CO

ST

8

14

20

26

32

38

2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30

MASS vs. COST

COST = 6.0422 + 1.1591 * MASS

Correlation: r = .97161

MASS

CO

ST

8

14

20

26

32

38

2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30

Cost estimating relationship example


Design for Manufacture and SEER-DFMDesign for Manufacture and SEER-DFM

Design for manufacture (DFM) Practice of designing with manufacturing in mind Emphasis on multidisciplinary teams, supersedes sequential

product development process

Completed Design

Profitable Product?

Manufacture

$

Opportunities to Improve

Market

$

YES

NO

Completed Design

Profitable Product?Profitable Product?

Manufacture

$



Market

$

YES

NO



Integrated product teams reduce the likelihood of costly engineering changes

Product

Production Engineering

Stress Cost System Engineering Design

Aerodynamics

Product Support

Procurement

Quality Assurance

Reliability

Maintainability Systems computing

Customers

Partners

Suppliers

Phases when changed

Cost

Design $1,000Design Testing $10,000Process Planning $100,000Test Production $1.000,000Final Production $10.000,000

Phases when changed

Cost

Design $1,000Design Testing $10,000Process Planning $100,000Test Production $1.000,000Final Production $10.000,000



DFM saves companies money

13%

39%

34%

7% 7%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

<5% 5-10% 11-20% 21-30% >30% Respondents

Savin

gs

%



Process based parametric cost modeling Applies the parametric concept to manufacturing processes

MachiningConventional & High Speed; Milling; Shaping; Turning; Boring; Grinding; Screw Machining; EDMing; Drilling; Reaming; Tapping; Sawing; Broaching; Gear Hobbing; Deburring; Coring

Fabrication

Shears-Brakes; Punches; CNC Turret; Laser Cut; Gas Flame Cut; Plasma Arc Cut; Dedicated tool & Die; Progressive Die; Spin Forming; Tube Bending; Plate Roll Bending

CompositesLayup; Filament Winding; Pulltrusion; Composite Spray

PC Board Assembly

Board Fabrication; PCB Assembly/Solder

Finishing

Air Gun Spray; Thermal Spray; Electrostatic; Vacuum Metalize; Dip; Chromate/Phosphate; Electrocoat; Electroplate; Brush

Electrical Assembly

Cable; Harness

Mechanical Assembly

Fasteners; Riveting/Staking; Gas Flame Welding; Arc, MIG, TIG Welding; Electron Beam Welding; Spot Welding; Brazing; Adhesive Bonding

Mold/Cast/ForgeInjection Molding; Rotational Molding; Thermoform Molding; Sand Casting; Die Casting; Investment Casting; Forging; Powdered Metals


Composites CureHand Layup Autoclave

Filament Winding RTMTow Placement VARTM

P4A E-Beam FabricationBraiding

3D WeaveFabrication

SPF/DBAssembly Sheet MetalFasten TrimFit-upDrill

E-Beam Assembly ToolingPaste Bond

3D ReinforcementAutomated Assembly


Extended CAI Processes



Process based parametric cost modeling When integrated with the design process – cost becomes an

optimization variable Perform real time cost trade studies during design process

Design Requirements -Cost Target, Function,performance, etc.

DefineRequirements

Analyze Functionand Performance

Perform alternativeanalysis usingSEER-DFM

Do we meetrequirements

NoEstablish

implementationrequirements

Execute AgainstPlan

Yes

Design Requirements -Cost Target, Function,performance, etc.

DefineRequirements

Analyze Functionand Performance

Perform alternativeanalysis usingSEER-DFM

Do we meetrequirements

NoEstablish

implementationrequirements

Execute AgainstPlan

Yes


SEER-DFM Case StudiesSEER-DFM Case Studies

DFM Analysis of Transmission Servo Piston Study goals

Ascertain manufacturing costs

Evaluate tradeoffs using DFM principles

Study began with a rough sketch

Processes modeled using work elements e.g. machining, fabrication, and assembly

Part modeled by creating a work breakdown structure



Describe major components of transmission servo piston, and their assembly

Describe each component with respect to the people, product, and processes required to manufacture and/or assemble it

Reduce data input with knowledge bases

Pre defined templates of inputs



Output estimate results using charts and reports

Reports and charts illustrate that most cost is related to machining labor

SERVO PISTON P/N 2-10A: Cost Allocation

Labor: 70.59%

Material: 27.89%

Molding: 0.10%

Tooling: 1.42%



Alert function suggests

consider casting instead of raw stock

reduce part count – consolidate

Change parameter detail inputs for real time cost impact assessment

Option 1 -Machined

Shaft

Option 2 -Die Cast

Shaft

Option 3 -Die Cast

Shaft / RetainerMaterial Cost/Unit $2.3155 $2.3610 $2.3510Total Labor Cost/Unit $4.2944 $3.6463 $3.6316Tooling Cost/Unit $0.1161 $0.2843 $0.2925

Total Cost/Unit $6.7260 $6.2916 $6.2751

Option 1 -Machined

Shaft

Option 2 -Die Cast

Shaft

Option 3 -Die Cast

Shaft / RetainerMaterial Cost/Unit $2.3155 $2.3610 $2.3510Total Labor Cost/Unit $4.2944 $3.6463 $3.6316Tooling Cost/Unit $0.1161 $0.2843 $0.2925

Total Cost/Unit $6.7260 $6.2916 $6.2751

Option Unit CostTotal Cost

(1,650,000 Units) Savings

1 $6.7260 $11,097,900 --

2 $6.2916 $10,381,140 ($716,760)

3 $6.2751 $10,353,915 ($743,985)


(1,650,000 Units) Savings

1 $6.7260 $11,097,900 --

2 $6.2916 $10,381,140 ($716,760)

3 $6.2751 $10,353,915 ($743,985)

Including spring retainer as part of the casting = more complex cast, but reduced assembly cost



Composites and metallic DFM analysis of SUV Fender

Considers 3 options: Fabrication of steel fender

Fabrication of aluminium fender

Composite manufacture using P4

process and RTM curing

Assumptions 180,000 production run

Manufacturing labor rate US$100

Assembly labor rate US$75



P4 (Programmable Powdered Preform Process) Developed for automotive

GM use P4 to cost effectively manufacture Silverado truck cargo

Process time 4 minutes



Spray cut fibres and powdered binder on to a preformed, perforated screen tool

1

3

2

1

3

2

Vacuum and chopper

head pressure ensure

uniform layup thickness

Hot air is blown through

a consolidation tool to

melt the powdered

binder on the preform

Preform is then ready

for resin infusion - RTM



P4 parameter inputs RTM inputs



Trade off analysis P4 process reduces time

by 50% P4 process reduces labor

cost by 36% Reduced material costs

45% compared to aluminium 2% compared to steel

Reduced total cost 42% compared to aluminium 21% compared to steel Despite increased P4 tooling cost per unit

Effect on bottom line Total savings $553,264


(180,000 Units) Savings

1 $14.335 $2,580,300 --

2 $19.3703 $3,486,654 $906,354

3 $11.2612 $2,027,016 ($553,284)


(180,000 Units) Savings

1 $14.335 $2,580,300 --

2 $19.3703 $3,486,654 $906,354

3 $11.2612 $2,027,016 ($553,284)



Estimate Probability All estimates have a degree of uncertainty Model uncertainty using least, likely, most inputs Output a range of possibilities for management decisions


Summary and ConclusionsSummary and Conclusions

Introduced a process based parametric cost model

methodology

Cost model integrates cost as design variable

Perform numerous real time cost impact assessments

Achieve optimum design through informed DFM

decisions

Methodology is used to assess cost impact of

composite and metallic design options


Contact DetailsContact Details

Christopher Rush

Galorath Incorporated

100 N Sepulveda Blvd, Suite 1801

El Segundo, CA 90245

Tel: 310 414 3222

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.galorath.com

galorath incorporated 2003 real time cost impact assessment of composite and metallic design...

Documents

galorath incorporated

product cost

seerdfm dfm

cost estimates

cost reduction

seerdfm design

seerdfm process

issues seerdfm