Connecting product design, process, and technology decisions to strengthen the solid hardwood business with a multi-step quality function deployment approach

Abstract

Hardwood is currently underestimated with respect to its utilisation and its value creation potential. Due to changes in forest management in various countries, hardwood resources will become more important. However, solid hardwood (SH) production capacities, mainly structured as small to medium-sized enterprises (SME), are dropping or have dropped already because of changes in the wood products market. Enhancing the SH sector, the foundation of products, processes, and technology must be better understood. To support the SME SH business, the approach used here focuses on manufacturing processes of the first and secondary downstream industry. A multi-step Quality Function Deployment has been developed to match the manufacturing process with the product architecture, and a Process-Technology Matrix has been added to visualize the influence of technology on the manufacturing process. Both have been applied on three chosen hardwood products which are solid wood panel, parquet, and glued-laminated timber. The main contribution of the paper is a conceptual consideration with a conceptual framework rather than providing comprehensive solutions. Optimization potential exists within the SH manufacturing chain based on alternative the combinations of manufacturing processes and applied technologies.

Platform-based product development in the process industry: a systematic literature review

“…Besides usage of the term module, the term 'building block' was adopted as a synonym in several studies (see e.g. Zhou et al 2018;Faveere et al 2020;Kühle, Teischinger, and Gronalt 2019). The second perspective identified is related to the similarities of the entities comprising a module, such as grouping based on food nutritional groups (Ortuño and 13 Padilla 2017), enzyme turnovers (Yadav et al 2012) or active sites (McDaniel et al 1997;Bedford et al 1996).…”

“…Examples include modules for 'filling purposes' which comprising a physical dose of a pharmaceutical product (Siiskonen, Folestad, and Malmqvist 2018) or modules being individual components of wood products (Kühle, Teischinger, and Gronalt 2019). In relation to interfaces in the context of process industry products, no explicit definitions have been identified.…”

“…In relation to interfaces in the context of process industry products, no explicit definitions have been identified. Of the studies that mention interfaces, some repeated the descriptions from discrete industry (Meyer and Dalal 2002;Kühle, Teischinger, and Gronalt 2019) yet did not elaborate on the application in the process industry or in the case of Siiskonen, Folestad, and Malmqvist (2018) illustrated the use only for physically assembled products. Others even argue that the concept is invalid in the process industry (Lager 2017).…”

“…Utilising a multi-step QFD-based approach, Kühle, Teischinger, and Gronalt (2019) addresses the issue of manufacturability through a conceptual framework based on propagating requirements inherited from the finished product through product modules onto the manufacturing processes and technology. Acquiring a holistic perspective on manufacturability is argued as imperative for the competitiveness of the SMEs that comprises the wood products sector studied.…”

“…Studies focusing on more productive product innovation likewise ap-17 proach the subject in different ways. Some consider platforms a means of reducing complexity in product development to reduce efforts required in development of new products(Kittleson, Wu, and Anderson 2012;Papin, Reed, and Palsson 2004;Kühle, Teischinger, and Gronalt 2019).5.3. Development lead time reductionThe least represented driver is reduced product development lead time, which includes 47 percent of the studies.…”