Axiomatic Design of a Reconfigurable Assembly System for Primary Wing Structures

Jefferson, Thomas G.; Ratchev, Svetan; Crossley, Richard

doi:10.4271/2014-01-2249

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on cases with low-volume manufacturing of a high variety of customized products suggests that reconfigurability implementation on equipment level, e.g. in the fixtures, is suitable for reducing ramp-up time and changeovers between variants of the same product (Bejlegaard et al , 2016; Brunoe et al , 2017; Jefferson et al , 2014). Thus, short-term convertibility, mobility, and integrability are essential enablers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical enablers of changeable and reconfigurable manufacturing and their industrial implementation

Andersen

Larsen

Brunoe

et al. 2018

JMTM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose During design of reconfigurable manufacturing systems, manufacturing companies need to select and implement the right enablers of reconfigurability in accordance with the specific requirements being present in the manufacturing setting. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate enablers of reconfigurability in terms of their importance in industry, current level of implementation in industry, and significant differences in their implementation and criticality across different manufacturing settings. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire survey is conducted, in order to provide generalizable empirical evidence across various industries and manufacturing types. Findings The findings indicate that the level of implementation of the reconfigurability enablers is rudimentary, while their criticality is perceived higher than the current level of implementation. Moreover, significant differences regarding implementation and criticality of mobility, scalability, and convertibility were found for companies with varying degrees of manual work, make-to-stock production, and varying production volume, industry type and organization size. Research limitations/implications Main limitations of the research cover the relatively small sample size and non-random sampling method applied, primarily limited to one country, which could be increased to further extent the findings reported in this paper. Practical implications The findings indicate that the importance and implementation of reconfigurability enablers is contingent on the manufacturing setting. Thus, the research presented in this paper provides valuable knowledge in regard to aiding a paradigm shift in industry and help companies design manufacturing systems with the right reconfigurability enablers. Originality/value This paper expands research on manufacturing system design for changeability and reconfigurability, by explicitly considering these as capabilities that can be enabled in various ways for various purposes in different manufacturing contexts.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical enablers of changeable and reconfigurable manufacturing and their industrial implementation

Andersen

Larsen

Brunoe

et al. 2018

JMTM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In support of Mohsen and Cekecek's [19] suggestion and extension to Arcidiacono and Campatelli's [23] proposal, this study has developed and validated the proposed framework that co-adopted AD, DSM and FMEA methodologies with the overall aim for synchronising Functional, Design and Process FMEAs. Both the works of Jefferson, Ratchev and Crossley [26] and Guenov and Barker [27] share several key features of this proposed framework. However, the additional feature in this framework is the involvement of FMEA method.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…However, this issue was acknowledged in the proposed framework, whereby DSM method was included in the framework to consider the coupling issues within the design elements. DSM is a wellknown approach for processing connected design elements [26,27,29,30]. However, the validation of the framework developed for integrating Functional, Design and Process FMEAs presents some limitations that may shape the agenda for future investigations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More so, zigzagging is the iterative process for vertically and horizontally decomposing these domains: where zig stands for determining the CNs/FRs/DPs/PVs and zag stands for locating the next level of FRs/DPs/PVs. At an increasing level of detail, these methodologies' elements provide an iterative structure of product functions that can be cascaded to their solutions [19,20,24,25,26,27]. Finally, axioms are the set of rules defined to provide the boundaries and references for managing the design workflow and resulted in, potentially creating such robust design [20].…”

Section: Fig 3 Ad Domains Adapted From Suhmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Guenov and Barker [27] proposed using the integration of AD and DSM methods for developing a new design, because AD application is more useful for defining the design elements and presenting the link between domains [20], while DSM is a great strength for modelling the interactive design elements [29,30]. Jefferson, Ratchev and Crossley [26] have augmented the work of Guenov and Barker [27] to model a reconfigurable assembly process for aerospace applications.…”

Section: Design Structure Matrix (Dsm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Structured Approach for Synchronising the Applications of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

Alruqi

Baumers

Branson

et al. 2021

Management Systems in Production Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a systematic approach for evaluating the potential failure modes in a system, and is mainly employed in three distinct tasks labelled: (1) Functional FMEA – evaluating those failures associated with product functional definition, (2) Design FMEA – analysing those failures associated with design definition and (3) Process FMEA – assessing potential failures in manufacturing and assembly processes. The literature review has shown limited works on the field of synchronising these different tasks into a working model. To address this gap, this research developed a framework for integrating these tasks of FMEAs, and then qualitatively validating the proposed framework. This research adopted a semi-structured questionnaire to collect experts’ feedback and validate the proposed framework. The t-test was then employed to evaluate the collected feedback. The findings highlight that the proposed framework is applicable and could facilitate the synchronisation of the different tasks of FMEA. This research presents a methodological approach for executing and synchronising FMEAs. Therefore, the proposed framework is practically relevant as an aid for the practitioners in catching the cascading failures and reducing the relevant impact.

show abstract

Tailored Reconfigurability: A Comparative Study of Eight Industrial Cases with Reconfigurability as a Key to Manufacturing Competitiveness

Andersen

Brunoe

Christensen

et al. 2019

Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Axiomatic Design of a Reconfigurable Assembly System for Primary Wing Structures

Cited by 15 publications

References 25 publications

Critical enablers of changeable and reconfigurable manufacturing and their industrial implementation

Critical enablers of changeable and reconfigurable manufacturing and their industrial implementation

A Structured Approach for Synchronising the Applications of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

Tailored Reconfigurability: A Comparative Study of Eight Industrial Cases with Reconfigurability as a Key to Manufacturing Competitiveness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About