Albert Einstein once said, \u201cThe best design is the simplest one that works.\u201d However, a simple design can be difficult and time-consuming to create.<\/p>\n
However, putting too little work into engineering a new product can easily backfire in the latter stages of a project. It is more efficient in terms of overall time and money spent to take the time to consider the different aspects of a project before it leaves the drawing room.<\/p>\n
This is where design for excellence (aka design for X and DFX) comes in. The term “design for X” first made an appearance at the Keys Conference in 1990 and in the AT&T Technological journal<\/a>. The papers even suggest that the two authors were not aware of each other, showing that the movement towards the same goal had started independently.<\/p>\n The DFX ideology helps build amazing products without the need for modifications in later stages, as its different areas take many of the most crucial aspects into consideration already in the design phase.<\/p>\n Design for excellence is an ever-evolving philosophy of a set of principles in design and manufacturing. It adopts a holistic and systematic approach to design, focusing on all aspects of a product – from concept generation<\/a> to final delivery.<\/p>\n It provides good practices and design guidelines to ensure we get the design and manufacturing methods right the first time. All this is done before the product even reaches the shop floor.<\/p>\n Think of design for X (DFX) as a whole new way to look at engineering design. There are many similarities between design for X and the traditional way of doing things. But the differences are so stark as well.<\/p>\n Having a good idea about how design for X can do so much more than good old engineering design practices will help us understand why more and more companies are taking the leap to design for X.<\/p>\n Traditional engineering design follows a sequence from research to testing\/improvement of design. A general sequence of engineering design is as follows:<\/p>\n This kind of linear approach can be problematic and costly in many cases, preventing us from achieving the full potential of engineering design.<\/p>\n The design for X process comes with certain characteristics that make it a better alternative to its traditional counterparts.<\/p>\n Issues in the traditional engineering design process are usually identified and rectified after the design phase. Correcting these problems can prove extremely costly in many cases.<\/p>\n DFX shifts the addressing of these issues to an early design stage, which saves money as well as time.<\/p>\n It is rare to see a designed product work perfectly the first time. Multiple iterations are needed to perfect a design. But creating these iterations is expensive, especially for plastic products that need custom moulds for injection moulding.<\/p>\n DFX strives to reduce the number of product iterations and try to get the design right the first time. This can be done by creating various virtual designs and carrying simulations instead of physical tests.<\/p>\n In cases where a physical iteration is needed, technologies such as rapid prototyping<\/a> and generative design<\/a> may be preferred. For example, instead of using injection moulding, additive manufacturing techniques such as 3D printing can be used to create iterations within a few hours at a low cost.<\/p>\n Traditional engineering design requires the use of many tools. DFX reduces the number of tools needed for design by limiting it to a standard set for increased efficiency. This is one of the areas DFM (design for manufacturing) touches upon.<\/p>\n As stated before, the scope of DFX is broader and more inclusive than regular engineering design. By utilising the design principles within the various areas (for example, DFM and DFA), the DFX methodology increases the value while reducing the costs of products.<\/p>\n As DFX considers many aspects of product development, the design team’s role is much bigger than one in traditional engineering design. DFX encourages greater collaboration between designers, suppliers, and manufacturers.<\/p>\n By increasing communication and reducing rework costs, DFX considerably reduces the time to market for any product.<\/p>\n Some other salient characteristics of DFX that are quite self-explanatory are as follows:<\/p>\n Design for excellence is an all-encompassing philosophy that provides design guidelines for all aspects of a design and production process.<\/p>\n The “X” that stands for excellence can be substituted with a few letters to address a certain sub-section of DFX. These categories include manufacturing (DFM), assembly (DFA), quality (DFQ), supply chain (DFSC), etc.<\/p>\n Designers improve a product\u2019s design in all these areas by implementing certain design principles in the process. The aim is to create a product that excels in these areas by making changes in the proposed design.<\/p>\n Design for X (DFX) has many such focus areas for design improvement. Some of them such as DFM, DFA, and DFMA are more popular than others.<\/p>\n Next, we shall cover some of these focus areas to get a better overall understanding of the design for X concept in different aspects of product development.<\/p>\n Design for manufacturing refers to a design that brings convenience in the manufacturing aspect of product development. At every stage of the design, the ease of manufacturing the product is evaluated.<\/p>\n It is one of the most common and useful designs for X categories as it provides techniques that help us create a better product at a lesser cost. Designers use them to enhance the design of parts, assemblies, and complete products.<\/p>\n For example, a metal product can be made using various fabrication processes<\/a>. DFM enables designers to choose the right manufacturing and surface treatment methods for the best quality at the lowest prices. Part design then follows the chosen method to secure manufacturability.<\/p>\n Following the initial choice comes cost analysis. If the cost is still high, the above steps are repeated until reaching an optimal solution.<\/p>\n In design for assembly, designers implement qualities in a product that make it easy to assemble. Fewer, simpler components that can be easily assembled by simple operations are encouraged to eliminate the possibility of mistakes.\u00a0<\/p>\n It also provides other advantages such as low maintainability due to fewer parts requiring testing and maintenance. The one question that is repeatedly asked of a design in DFA is “Does a part\/component need to be separate from the entire product?”<\/p>\n Possible reasons for needing a part to be separate from the product body are:<\/p>\n In the absence of the above reasons, the part must be combined with another part or with the product body to reduce the part count in the final assembly.<\/p>\nWhat is Design for X?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Traditional Engineering Design vs Design for X<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Conventional Product Development Process<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
DFX Process characteristics<\/h3>\n
Early correction of defects<\/h4>\n
A smaller number of product iterations<\/h4>\n
Requires fewer tools<\/h4>\n
Broader scope of design<\/h4>\n
Inclusive design team<\/h4>\n
Shorter time to market<\/h4>\n
\n
Types of DFX<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Design for Manufacturing (DFM)<\/strong><\/a><\/h3>\n
Design for Assembly (DFA)<\/a><\/h3>\n
\n
Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA)<\/a><\/h3>\n