assessing integration of computer simulation in ...

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management 14 (2017), pp 48-59

ASSESSING INTEGRATION OF COMPUTER SIMULATION IN DESIGN FOR MANUFACTURING AND ASSEMBLY Carlos Eduardo Sanches da Silvaa a

Federal University of Itajubá (UNIFEI) - Itajubá, MG, Brazil

ABSTRACT The process of product development strengthens as a reason for competitiveness, using sundry optimisation methods, e.g. Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA). Simulating allows engineers or managers to obtain a systemic perspective of how local changes will affect the overall performance over the entire production system, obtaining thus its optimisation. In this study, we aimed at assessing both how DFMA can be integrated with computer simulation and the benefits from the alternatives identified by such method during production and assembly. Using as object of study the electronic voting machine printer, we identified options to improve design from principles of DFMA. The benefits are: reduction in assembly time and costs. As research method we used simulation, in which data were obtained by using direct observations, document analysis, and interviews with incumbents and users. Five models were composed to represent the current assembly process and two future models before applying amendments proposed by DFMA. The results show how effective the integration is with the DFMA simulation. Keywords: DFMA; Product development; Simulation

ABEPRO DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

49 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

1. INTRODUCTION Currently, due to rapid technological changes, companies are operating in several markets that require a more frequent innovation, product life cycles shorter, and a product with high quality and reliability (NIJSSEN et FRAMBACH, 2000; ILORI, SANNE et OKE, 2000; MARCHCHORDA et al. 2002; GONZÁLEZ et PALACES, 2002; MCIVOR et HUMPHREYS, 2004; KOUFTEROS et al., 2005; XIN, YEUNG et CHENG, 2008). Thus, pressures form competition have led organisations to more quickly introduce their products to market, lower cost, and better quality (STALK et HOUT, 1990; BLACKBURN, 1991; WHEELWRIGTH et CLARK, 1992; BARNETT et CLARK, 1998; STALKER, 1998; OGLIARI, 1999; SILVA, 2001; ROMANO, 2003). Competitiveness is closely related to product development, although not exclusively determined by this process. The success of organisation often depends on the length and consistency in launching new products. In the product development literature contains many prescriptions to develop high performance products (CLARK et FUJIMOTO, 1991; GRIFFIN, 1997; LEE, LEE et SONDER, 2000; LOCH, STEIN et TERWIESCH, 1996). A study by Stalk et Hout (1990) shows that the speed to introduce new products is closely related to market position, profit, and costs. According to Barnett et Clark (1998), the products have a limited life and need to be improved, developed, and innovated by the company that want to keep competitiveness. We can define the Product Development Process (PDP) as steps, activities, tasks, stages, and decisions to develop new products or improvements for an existing product, from initial idea to product discontinuation, to streamline the process. This process identifies the customers’ desires that are translated into specifications to be developed to generate business and technical solutions (BACK, 1983; VINCENT, 1989; CLARK et FUJIMOTO, 1991; ROSENTHAL, 1992; WHEELWRIGHT et CLARK, 1992; RAMPERSAD, 1995; COOPER et EDGETT, 1999; PETERS et al., 1999; PAHL et al., 2005; ROZENFELD et al., 2006). Although sundry companies know how important is the PDP within business development for a long time, considering great effort to improve the PDP, the failure rate of new products is high. There are diverse reasons for such high failure rates (and one of the most significant is the low use of models), tools, and techniques to help the PDP (NIJSSEN et FRAMBACH, 2000; GONZÁLEZ et PALACES, 2002; RUNDQUIST et CHIBBA, 2004; YEH, FATHER et YANG, 2008; NEELANKAVIL et CHANDRA, 2008). To illustrate, in a study conducted by Chai et Xin (2006) results revealed that applying the tools of PDP are still underused in most companies in Singapore. In research in Taiwan, Yeh, Pai et Yang (2008) argue that the tools and techniques of NPD can be used by companies to improve their performance in developing new products.

However, many tools and techniques, potentially useful, are not widely used by companies. The reasons may be: (1)  companies do not understand clearly what steps the tools and techniques specific to the PDP can be used appropriately and effectively; (2)  companies do not verify how effective various tools can be and techniques of PDP; and (3) coordinators of PDP do not know certain tools and techniques. Harmsen, Grunert et Bove (2000) claimed that the PDP is day by day more important for success of organisations. Decisions made during product development are easy to realise and they may make it easier or harder to be manufactured. To choose a particular project alternative one should be attentive to the impact that such alternative has over the time, especially cost of manufacturing, operating, maintenance, and even product disposal. In addition, incorrect decisions taken at the beginning of product development can be very difficult to reverse. According to Rozenfeld et al. (2006), the Design for Manufacturing (DFM) is an approach that points up aspects of manufacturing throughout the product development process. It also aims to achieve a product with low cost without sacrificing its quality. By contrast, the Design for Assembly (DFA), as a tool, is to obtain information on the various design alternatives, considering traits as all components, difficulty for handling and insertion, and assembly time. Once can realise that the DFMA focus on using processes better, resulting in simplified manufacturing and assembly, and cost reduction. The simulation provides similar results. O’Kane (2003) says that the simulation is essentially an aid to decision–making, but its strongest point is the possibility it offers to the user to assess complex systems with many variables and possible scenarios, e.g. production lines. Such fact allows studying problems and thus preparing companies for market uncertainties. Manufacturing is complex and relevant. The computer simulation provides a visual method to design the manufacture efficiently. The popularity of simulation is due to its ability to model systems with a quick, effective, and flexible way. It can also model the system behaviour dynamically (CHAN et JIANG, 1999). Within the production process, the assembly step is responsible for a considerable percentage of the time and resources allocated. The integrative feature of this process led Choi et Guda (2000) to assert that the assembly is an important activity to manufacture products. It is expected, thus, that gains in this area for the manufacturing process is timely and quite significant for companies. This motivated the research of Saad et Byrne (1998), Gupta et al. (2001), Chan et Jiang (1999) et Rooks (2000), who seek to use tools of discrete event simulation to investigate impact factors and explore the different possible scenarios to define

50 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

schemes of assembly lines with lower lead–times and costs, and therefore more productive. In this wise, we aimed here at assessing both how DFMA can be integrated with computer simulation and the benefits from the alternatives identified by such method during production and assembly. We used the research method modelling and simulation that according to Chung (2004) is the process to create and experience a physical system using a computerised mathematical model. A system may be a set of components or processes that interact and receive inputs, in particular offering results for some purpose. 2. DESIGN FOR MANUFACTURE AND ASSEMBLY To be a source of competitiveness, the very process of product development needs to be efficient and effective. Thus, one should use techniques able to provide such attributes. Within a reverse engineering approach, DFMA is an example of a technique that can help in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of product development by reducing both time in the production & assembly and cost of manufacture  &  assembly process. The academic literature is still scarce in dealing with reverse engineering to develop products (CAPUTO et PELAGAGGE, 2008), as well as to apply it with DFMA to improve these processes. We also, by this research, seek to contribute to lessen this gap. According to Caputo et Pelagagge (2008), DFMA traditionally focuses mainly developing products with a high level of manufacturability. In fact, DFMA attempts to reduce manufacturing costs by simplifying product structure that appeals primarily to reduce the number of parts, improve the mix and selection of materials, geometry and effective methods to reduce manufacturing costs for all parts and streamline manual tasks in the set. This implies that DFMA techniques affecting directly in the direct costs of manufacturing and set. By Selvaraj, Radhakrishnan, et Adithan (2009), reducing the time and cost during product development is relevant for competitiveness. Within product development, DFMA is a key role because it seeks to lessen the number of parts. The concept behind the methodology of design for manufacture and assembly (DFMA) is not new. It dates back to 1788 when Le Blanc, a French manufacturer of muskets, applied the concept of interchangeability by establishing tolerances and developing the production process by repeatability in production, with each product before a single piece of artisan (BRALLA, 1998). It is easy to realise, by DFMA and during early stages, how features and characteristics of production interact with product development for improvements to meet customers’ needs and use processes better, streamlining manufacturing and assembly and reducing costs.

The main changes in this area have occurred in CAD software, which may be considered as a tool to practically materialise designers’ idea. Methods to simulate motion and photorealistic images have also aided in defining current products and, thus, the growth level of complexity. Including computers in the development process, that process information virtually without limits, a prototype mould or a provisional tool can be built in record time by using materials, e.g. gypsum, clay, wood, aluminium, etc. This generation of prototypes is carried in the opposite direction to obtain three-dimensional information as verified by reverse engineering (HSIAO et CHUANG, 2003). Dalgleish, Jared et Swift (2000), et Appleton et Garside (2000) mentioned a lot of evidence showing that products have been developed with an excessive number of parts and, invariably, with higher than expected costs from production process complexity. Besides reducing the number of components during the DFMA assessments, is important to consider: transport; maintenance; technical assistance for set in the field; multifunctional and standardised components; similar concepts with other products; waste from processes; details to facilitate orientation and positioning of the component by touch; lowering settings; other factors directly or indirectly linked to the production process and other operations related to products; product obtaining, handling, and disposal. According to O’Driscoll (2002), the total cost of development can be divided into the categories: design; manufacturing: and quality assurance. Manufacturing costs specifically can be divided into the three subcategories in table 1: Table 1. Total costs of production Item Labour force Materials and processes for manufacturing Extra expenses Source: O’Driscoll(2002)

Percentage 2 % ~ 15 % 50 % ~ 80 % 15 % ~ 45 %

Project costs are roughly 10  % from the budget, but typically 80  % from manufacturing costs are defined or related to the decisions on early stages of the design. Such evidence implies that early performances on product design can affect directly on manufacturing cost (O’DRISCOLL, 2002). Asiedu et Gu (1998), Kaplan et Cooper (1998), et Ragatz, Handifield et Scannell (1997) consider that 75 % ~ 85 % from total cost throughout product life cycle, is set in the early stages of its design. Boothroyd et Dewhurst (2005), et Parker (1995) found in their research cost reductions exceeding 50 % with the application of the DFMA methodology. Back (1983), Brallo (1998), et Boothroyd et Dewhurst (2005) provided in their works a database for aid to define

51 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

and guide product design, aiming at optimising development. Back (1983) also mentions that such database should not be considered as a guide to run only once, but should be used as a permanent reference for consultations. The basic idea is to rescue the question ‘Has that already been tried? Why?’ or ‘Why do we do it this way?’. As a means of strengthening new conceptions, Parker (1995), reporting on the use of DFMA, mentions that in the company studied on producing tools for artificial respiration were performed special sections to assess new projects, including meetings for three days outside the factory. 3. COMPUTER SIMULATION Simulating, modelling, and assessing manufacturing system to improve performance have become increasingly important in recent decades. Simulation and modelling help visualise, assess, implement, change, and improve complex production processes by using computer animations within a reasonable time and investment. Thus, with the fierce competition among businesses, implementing new strategies to improve company performance is necessary (SANDANAYAKE et al., 2008; SANDANAYAKE et ODUOZA, 2009). Simulation models have become a very popular technique employed to assess complex industrial systems, according to O’Kane et al. (2000). According to Greasley (2003), business process simulation (BPS) is a tool developed to assess manufacturing systems. Today, however, it is used to aid change management in sundry processes and services. There are several reasons to use simulation, e.g. tool to model processes. It includes cases in which many areas and resources of organisation are involved. Further, costs a lot performing experiments with real changes to verify impacts. In cases the variables and resources of processes are not set or known; simulation can offer insights that help managers to know the relevant points (IRANI et al., 2000). Law et al. (1991) argue that the simulation benefit allows the engineer or manager to obtain a systemic perspective of how local changes will affect the overall performance over the entire production system. Some other benefits quoted by the author are: increased use of necessary resources; in-process stock reduction; increased speed and reliability for delivery; lower operating costs; better understanding for system; and better consideration of certain aspects of production system by model construction. Using Simulation can still be justified, according to Harrell, Ghosh et Bowden (1996), et Strack (1984), by some features found in problems such as: (a)  there is no complete mathematical formula; (b) the system has random variables; (c) there is not an analytical method to solve the mathematical model; (d)  obtaining results with the model is easier to be performed by simulation than by analytical method; (e) there is no skill to solve the mathematical model

by numerical or analytical technique; (f)  it is necessary to observe the process from beginning to final results; (g)  specific details are necessary; (h)  or observing the system behaviour for a period is required; (i) is not possible or is very difficult trial of the real system; (j) studying long periods is desirable, or alternatives that physical models hardly provide are necessary; (k) in case of complexity in the process dynamics; and (l) when the animation is important to visualise the process. The literature provides some use cases to simulate studies related to product development. Wang, Lee et Chu (2009) assessed different scenarios to learn how the allocation strategy for resources affects the R&D performance. Chan (2003) used virtual environments to assess sundry activities, including product development. To use the simulation some steps are required. These steps according to Banks et al. (2005) are: (a) formulating the problem; (b)  planing study and setting goals; (c)  collecting data and defining models; (d)  translating models into computer language and putting data into a software; (e)  verifying computational models; (f)  validating models; (g) modelling experiments (determining alternatives to be simulated); (h)  performing simulations; and (i)  recording documents. According to Robinson (2004), computational models should be developed incrementally, documenting it and testing it at every step so that errors can be identified in advance; otherwise, the tests to verify the reliability or validity, or both, of the model would left after all model were ready. Most software available to simulate this approach allows incremental construction for models. To validate models, Sargent (2004) describes sundry techniques in the literature that can be used subjectively and objectively. For ‘objectively’, we mean the use of statistical techniques or mathematical procedures, hypothesis testing, and confidence intervals. Some techniques are: (a)  animation; (b)  comparison with other models; (c)  degeneration tests; (d)  validity of event; (e)  extreme condition; (f) validity by historical data; (g) internal validity; (h)  multi-stage validation; (i)  flow charts; (j)  life tests; and so on. According to Balci, Nance, et Arthur (2002), although a sundry validation methods available, only some of such methods are used to simulate projects, due to time and resource constraints. According to Seila (1995), validation is the process ensuring that the computational model adequately approximates the desired behaviour to the real system. Validation usually involves collecting data from real system and simulated system, comparing them and making sure that the results do not differ substantially. Sundry software are available on the market for simulation use, and its main features are: (a)  graphical interface for communication with users; (b) object-oriented model design; (c) animation capability; (d) ability to provide

52 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

reports; and (e)  use of statistical tools. The simulation software packages, e.g. Arena, AutoMode, Empower, ProModel, and Quest, contains tools to insert the input parameters that provide the desired output parameters. A typical example would be to find the optimal number of bank tellers, because there is a cost in waiting time for customers and, secondly, a cost in downtime of bank tellers (APPELQVIST et LEHTONEN, 2003). A study by Redman et Law (2002) concluded that identical models made in different software may produce different results. Each tool is affected in one way by neglect in the assumption regarding the values, processes, and activities that the appliance takes over its work. The study suggests that due to these special features of each software, is very important that users be aware of and understand this type of implication. The computer simulation is thus a tool that has proliferated in recent years. To use it correctly, procedures and choosing the best software for the study are necessary. So, effectively, it means to obtain valid responses that truly represent the system studied and also quick answers to rise the market competitiveness. To achieve this, this study supports the hypothesis of limiting the problem by using artifices of Process Mapping. Emphatically, the simulation requires additional data to undertake a dynamic analysis system (GREASLEY, 2003), which can be obtained by process mapping, researchers’ observations, record reviews, interviews, and questionnaires. 4  APPLYING DFMA AND SIMULATING ASSEMBLY – ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINE PRINTER The criteria to choose the object of study to be assessed were accessing information and the relevance of the product under study. Based on such criteria, we selected for the case study the Sisvôo (a small company of the electronics assembly sector, located in the city of Itajubá, State of Minas Gerais, Brazil). The information was readily provided by the owner and director. The product chosen was an electronic voting machine (EVM) printer; despite the product was already developed, we chose it to redesign it because of the lack of a product under development that would enable to apply DFMA and computer simulation.

Figure 1. EVM Evolution

According to Millward et Lewis (2005), Koufteros et al. (2005), Millward et al. (2006), et Mu, Peng et Tan (2007), small and medium sized companies represent a key element within national economies worldwide. Most of the literature for PDP focuses on the activities of large companies known or within the context of well-developed economies. However, the literature for design and development by small and medium sized companies is more limited. According to Siu et al. (2006) suncry research on PDP were conducted in large companies and the results do not necessarily apply in the context of small sized companies. Sisvôo provides assembly services, testing, and integration for electronic cards, in particular performs projects, development, and manufacturing of electronic systems. Sisvôo signed a contract for the assembly of 25 700 EVM printers to be delivered withing 44 days (from 8 June to 10 August). In Brazil, EVMs automated 100 % of the elections and was developed by a Brazilian company, named OMNITECH Serviços em Tecnologia e Marketing (services in technology and marketing) from 1995 to 1996, and improved (in 1997) for the model that became the standard Brazilian today. The Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE) [Superior Electoral Court] have already bought more than 506  000 EVMs by means of six public bids from 1996 to 2006 from two American companies working with system integration, i.e. the Unisys Brazil (1996, 2002), and the Diebold Procomp (1998, 2000, 2004, 2006). All EVMs were made to order by the manufacturing companies TDA Indústria de Produtos Eletrônicos, Samurai, Flextronics Brasil, and FIC Brasil (all of them working with electronic products). From left to right: (a) first model for EVMs was a common personal computer, covered by a cabinet, with weight of roughly 25 kg, four times heavier than today EVMs; (b) second models are today EVMs (Figure 1). Printer for the bulletin printing, containing the results of their polling station, is part of the EVM, which is below EVM, being the object of study (Figure 2). We elaborated the table  2 by using (a)  data collection to process the EVM assembling and (b) principles of DFMA recommended by Horta et Rozenfeld (2006). The results are presented in table 3.

Figure 2. EVM bottom view (printer highlighted)

53 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

Table 2. Applying the principles of DFMA in the EVM assembly process of VMP printer.

1E

Assemble: snap ring; engine box; washer, mobile blade follow-up; mobile blade; and marking the connector

2E

Assemble: gear and spacer sleeve; guide bushing; spring, support gear, mouthpiece

3E

Functional testing and softening of the cutter; assembling sensor; fixing cables on lid with clamp; assembling lid

1D

Fixing the thermal head in the support; connecting thermal head cables

2D

3D

4D

5ED

6E

7E

8D

9ED

Snap ring; engine; bolt M2X3; impeller; 10X5 steel washer; mobile blade; pin Gear; spacer sleeve; guide bushing; spring; support gear; mouthpiece

X

X

Mechanical fasteners (quick connect, rivet, bolt) X

X

X

X

X

X

Thermal head; thermal head support; bolt M3X2; black & white cabter cables

X

X

Assembling stepper motor at the printer base; assembling paper roll

Bolt M2X3; printing basis; stepper motor; draft roll

X

Assemble deliverer in roll, gear 16M, and 13M and deliverer, gears 13M and 48M and locking gear Assembling head support in the printer basis; springs in the printer head; cutter in the printer; testing current and cutter printer

EVM deliverer; snap ring; gear 16M; EVM deliverer; gear 13M; gear 48M; snap ring

Shredder lid; clamp; lid; bolt M2X3

Facilitate so the part can be positioned before being released into the hand of the assembler

Nipples – preventing resistance to facilitate insertion or chamfer to guide the insertion

Avoid parts that cling to each other, and parts that are slippery, delicate, flexible, too small or too big, or dangerous to handlers

Provides tangle of parts

Prevent binding of parts

rotational and axial or pronounced symmetry

Remove adjustments

Remove bolts, springs, pulleys, wiring harnesses

Facilitating alignment and insertion

Unidirectional assembly (from top to bottom)

Modular approach

Standardising

Components

Multifunction

Description of assembly

Minimum number of components

Workstation

Principles

X

X

X

X

X

X

MP1 spring head; cutter

Testing printer and cutter Fixing PCI and printer on the module basis; labelling printer, basis, and PCI and FR (tracking sheet); connecting five cables Arranging cables, fitting guard and RF; fixing PCI guard; putting clamps; and checking connectors Moving and cutting the paper roll tip; positioning paper roll on roll; grease the gears; assembling lid and closing; assembling bolt M3X12 and nut at the basis

Module base; PCI; bolt M3X10; sticker PCI guard; bolt M3X10; clamp

Lid; handling; bolt M3X12; hex nut M3

Final test and packaging Source: The author(s) own

54 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

Workstation

Table 3. Results with the DFMA for assembly process of VMP printer Current Average Time (s)

Proposed

Standard Deviation (s)

Average Time (s)

Standard Deviation (s)

Improvement

1E

52.8

5.5

43

5.5

Bolt with integrated washer; Removing bolts; Standardising M 2x3 to M 2.5x5; Folding one of the engine tabs and tear on the box cutter; Printer connector with different colours*

2E

51.7

3.6

47

3.6

Filler with quick connect.

3E

53.5

10.0

42

10.0

Flat cable for clamp removal; Standardising M 2x3 to M 2.5x5; Standardising bolt M3x8 to M3x10.

1D

24.2

1.0

24.2

1.0

Standardising M 3x4 to M 2.5x5; Changing colours of connectors to prevent reversed assembly*

2D

50.2

4.1

50.2

4.1

Standardising M 2x3 to M 2.5x5.

3D

81

2.0

66

2.0

Inserting quick gear 48M; Removing snap ring.

4D

48.4

6.0

48.4

6.0

Not applicable

5ED

48

14.1

48

14.1

Not applicable

6E

57.2

5.2

57.2

5.2

Not applicable

7E

42.1

4.7

26

4.7

Inserting quick connect in the PCI guard and removing 2 bolts M3x10.

8D

42.9

2.6

42.9

2.6

Not applicable

9ED

61.6

1.0

61.6

1.0

Not applicable Source: The author(s) own

Assessing the alternatives allow to identify as results reduction of variation from five to two types of bolts, reduction of assembly time by 57 secs (9 %), reduction in the number of bolts (from 10 to 7), washer, and snap ring. The data necessary to create the model were obtained from production records, interviews with the incumbent and entrants, timings, photos, and observations, summarising as follows: •

First shift – from 6:00 to 14:20 (with lunch and 1 h and 6 min of warm-up exercise) = 26 040 secs (on Saturday works only the first shift)

•

Second shift – from 14:40 to 21:40 (1 h and and 6 min for warm-up exercise) = 21 240 secs

•

Contract of 25 700 printers (from 8  Jun to 10  Aug) within 44 days with 2 shifts and 9 Saturdays. Total of 2 314 680 (assuming that the missed days from 8 to 22 parts were missed – we have a period of seconds) – 72 secs per printer.

•

Fifteen people (from 20 to 30 parts – first operation, later it will assist other offices with bottlenecks) – with an average production of 800 parts per day (two shifts).

To build the computational representation of the assembly process printer the software ProModel 4.22 was

Risk

*Note

Dropping engine due to vibration

It may reduce time in rework

Reduce rework time Two operators

The step to connect cables will be put on 7E

Two operators

used, and five models were developed. We validated the models by using the methods proposed by Sargent (2004): a model for professional involved in the company; model for specialist, comparing the results of the simulated volume of production and actual production. The models have evolved in complexity to better represent the assembly line (Table 4). The fifth model in the simulation presented a production of 815 assembled printers, on average 835 per day with a standard deviation of 28.4. By incorporating the alternatives proposed by DFMA, we elaborated a new six model with times for assembling, resulting in the assembly of 810 printers a day. Such result surprised the researchers and the sector head. They imagined that the volume of production would be higher. Afterwards, we identified that the ‘bottleneck’, i.e. the workstation 6E, had not changed. However, the changes proposed by DFMA reduced the workstation operating time 7E, from 42.1 secs to 26 secs, providing the integration of the assembly of five wire connections made in the workstation 6E. Therefore, we obtained a workstation time reduction 6E of 15 secs, and a rise in the workstation 7E of 15 secs. We elaborated the seventh model, which resulted in a production volume of 918 printers.

55 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

Models

Table 4. Models of the evolutionary assembly process for VMP printer Iconic representation

First model: flow definition; locations; entities; processing; arrivals.

Second model: including set time.

Third model: including rework.

Fourth model: changing from time to stock variables.

Fifth model: including expedition

Source: The author(s) own

56 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

It is worth noting that the potential of simulation was used in part, since the stress was to assess the design changes from the application of the DFMA principles concerning the assembly line. There are opportunities to develop models to optimise the number of stations, harmonise the production flow, and lessen rework. 5. CONCLUSION The principles of DFMA are designed to process product development, in this case being applied in existing products (EVM printer). In it, we could identify opportunities to improve the project. The results show how effective is to integrate the simulation with DFMA, since for each alternative redesign could be simulated in the assembly, allowing to assess investments with the results achieved. In this study, we verified that the DFMA provides improvements that can directly or indirectly lessen the bottleneck operating time. Products that have been developed with the principles of DFMA allow to use simulation for assessment, forecasting, and optimisation of manufacturing processes become more effective.

Back, N. (1983). Metodologia de projeto de produtos industriais. Guanabara Dois: Rio de Janeiro/RJ. Banks, J.; Carson II, J. S.; Nelson, B. L.; Nicol, D. M. (2005). Discrete- event system simulation. 4 ed. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Barnett, B. D.; Clark, K. B. (1998). Problem solving in product development: a model for the advanced materials industries. International Journal of Technology Management. Vol. 15, No. 8, p. 805-820. Blackburn, J. D. (1991). Time-based competition: the next battleground in American manufacturing. Homewood, IL: Ed. Business One Irwin. Blau, G. E.; Bose, S.; Mehta, B.; Pekny, J.; Sinclair, G.; Keunker, K.; Bunch, P. (2000). Risk management in the development of new products in highly regulated industries. Computers and Chemical Engineering, v.24, n.1, p. 659-664. Boothroyd G.; Dewhurst P. (2005). Boothroyd and Dewhurst Website. Source: www.dfma.com. Accessed on: 18 Dec 2005.

As a proposal to continue this study, we suggest applying simulation in a product that is being developed with the principles of DFMA.

Braglia, M.; Fantoni, G.; Frosolini, M. (2007). The house of reliability. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. Vol. 24, No. 4, p. 420-440.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Bralla, J. J. (1988). Design for manufacturability Handbook, International Edition, McGraw-Hill.

CAPES (Pro-Engineering - PE024/2008 process; PRODOC 102 059), the FAPEMIG and CNPq. Special thanks to SISVOO (especially those involved in this study) and interviewed. REFERENCES Almeida, L. F.; Miguel, P. A. C. (2007). The first stage of a proposal of a theoretical model for managing a new product development process. Product: Management & Development. Vol. 5, No.1. Appelqvist, P.; Lehtonen, J.-M. (2005). Combining optimisation and simulation for steel production scheduling. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management. Vol. 16, No. 2, p. 197-210. Appleton, E.; Garside, J. A. (2000). A team-based design for assembly methodology. Assembly Automation, Vol. 20, n.2, p.162-169. Asiedu, Y.; Gu, P. (1998). Product life cycle cost analysis: state of the art review. International Journal of Production Research, v.36, n.4, p.883-908. Balci, O.; Nance, R. E.; Arthur, J. D. (2002). Expanding our horizons in verification, validation, and accreditation research and practice. In Proceedings of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference, ed. E. Yücesan, C.-H.; Chen, J. L.; Snowdon; J. M. Charnes.

Caputo, A.C.; Pelagagge, P.M. (2008). Effects of product design on assembly lines performances: A concurrent engineering approach. Industrial Management & Data Systems. Vol. 108, No. 6, p. 726-749. Chai, K.-H.; Xin, Y. (2006). The Application of New Product Development Tools in Industry: The Case of Singapore. IEEE transactions on engineering management, Vol. 53, No. 4. Chan D. S.K. (2003). Simulation modelling in virtual manufacturing analysis for integrated product and process design. Assembly Automation, Vol. 23, N. 1, pp. 69–74. Chan, F.T.S.; Jiang, B. (1999). Simulation-aided design of production and assembly cells in an automotive company. Integrated Manufacturing Systems. Vol. 10, No.5, p.276-283. Chandra, M.; Neelankavil, J. (2008). Product development and innovation for developing countries: Potential and challenges. Journal of Management Development. Vol. 27 No. 10, pp. 1017-1025. Choi, A. C. K., Guda, P. (2000). Product design enhancement by integration of virtual design and assembly analysis tools. Assembly Automation, Vol. 20, No 4, pp. 283-290. Chung, C. A. (2004). Simulation modeling handbook: a practical approach. CRC Press, Florida, 2004, 574p.

57 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

Clark, K.B.; Fujimoto, T. (1991). Product development performance: strategy, organization and management in the word auto industry. Boston-Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

Irani, Z. ; Hlupic, V. ; Lynne, P. B. ; Peter, E. D. L. (2000). Reengineering manufacturing processes through simulation modelling. Logistics Information Management, Vol. 13, N. 1, pp. 7-13.

Cooper, R. G.; Edgett, S. J. (1999). Product development for de service sector – lessons from market leaders. New York: Basic Books.

Kaplan, R. S.; Cooper, R. (1998). Custo e desempenho: administre seus custos para ser mais competitivo. Trad. por O.P. traduções. São Paulo, Futura.

Cooper, R.G.; Edgett, S.J.; Kleinschmidt, E.J. (1999). New product portfolio management: Practices and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management. Vol. 16, p. 333– 351.

Killen, C.P.; Hunt, R.A.; Kleinschmidt, E.J. (2008). Project portfolio management for product innovation. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 24-38.

Cooper, R.G.; Kleinschmidt, E.J. (1995). Benchmarking the firm’s critical sucess factors in New Product Development. Journal of Product Innovation Management. Vol. 12, p. 374 – 391.

Koufteros, X.; Vonderembse, M.; Jayaram, J. (2005). Internal and external integration for product development: the contingency effects of uncertainty, equivocality, and platform strategy. Decision Sciences. Volume 36, No 1.

Dalgleish, G. F.; Jared, G. E. M.; Swift, K. G. (2000). Design for assembly: influencing the design process, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 11, n.1, p.17–29.

Law, A. M.; Kelton, W. D. (1991). Simulation modeling and analysis. 2nd. ed. New York: McGraw Hill.

Formoso, C.T.; Tzortzopoulos, P.; Liedtke, R. (2002). A model for managing the product development process in house building. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. Vol. 9, No. 5/6, p. 419–432. González, F.J.M.; Palacios T.M.B. (2002). The effect of new product development techniques on new product success in Spanish firms. Industrial Marketing Management. Vol. 31, p. 261-271. Greasley, A. (2003). Using business-process simulation within a business-process reengineering approach. Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4. Griffin, A. (1997). PDMA research on new product development practices: Updating trends and benchmarking best practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14, p. 429–458. Gupta, S. K., Paredis, C. F.F., Sinha, R., Brown, P. F. (2001). Intelligent assembly modeling and simulation. Assembly Automation, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 215-235. Harrel, C. R.; Ghosh, B. K.; Bowden, R. (1996). Simulation using promodel. McGraw-Hill. Horta, L. C.; Rozenfeld, H. (2006). DMFA – Design for manufature and assembly. Núcleo de Manufatura Avançada (NUMA). Source: http://www.numa.org.br/conhecimentos/ conhecimentos_port/pag_conhec/dfma_v2.html. Accessed on: 22 Aug 2006.

Lee, J., Lee, J., Sonder, W. E. (2000). Differences of organizational characteristics in new product development: Crosscultural comparison of Korea and the US. Technovation, 20(9), p. 497–508. Lobão, E. C. (2000). Discussão, sistematização e modelagem do processo de realização de estudo de simulação. Tese de Doutorado Escola de Engenharia de São Carlos, Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos. Loch, C.; Stein, L.;Terwiesch, C. (1996). Measuring product development performance in the electronics industry. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13, p. 3–20. Mahadevan, S.; Smith, N.; Zang, T. A. (2003). System Risk Assessment and Allocation in Conceptual Design. NASA/CR2003-212162, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA. March-Chorda, I.; Gunasekaran, A.; Lloria-Aramburo, B. (2002). Product development process in Spanish SMEs: An empirical research. Technovation. Vol. 22, p. 301–312. Marion, T. J.; Simpson, T. W. (2009). New product development practice application to an early-stage firm: the case of the PaperPro-StackMaster, Design Studies. Vol 30 No. 5. Mcivor, R.; Humphreys, P. (2004). Early supplier involvement in the design process: lessons from the electronics industry. Omega. Vol. 32, p. 179 – 199.

Hsiao, S.-W.; Chuang, J.-C. (2003). A reverse engineering based approach for product form design. Design Studies. Vol. 24, n.2, p.155–171.

Mcnally, R. C.; Durmusoglu, S. S.; Calantone, R. J.; Harmancioglu, N. (2009). Exploring new product portfolio management decisions: The role of managers’ dispositional traits. Industrial Marketing Management. Vol. 38, p. 127143.

Ilori, M.O.; Oke, J.S.; Sanni, S.A. (2000). Management of new product development in selected food companies in Nigeria. Technovation. Volume 20, p. 333–342.

Miguel, P. A. C. (2007). Innovative new product development: a study of selected QFD case studies. The TQM Magazine. Vol. 19, No. 6, p. 617-625.

58 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

Miguel, P. A. C. (2008). Portfolio management and new product development implementation: A case study in a manufacturing firm. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 10-23.

Page, A. L. (1993). Assessing New Product Development Practices and Performance: Establishing Crucial Norms. Journal of product innovation management. Vol. 10, p.273290.

Millward, H.; Byrne, C.; Walters, A.; Lewis, A. (2006). New product development within small and medium-sized enterprises: analysis through technology management maps. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 283–302.

Pahl, G.; Beitz,W.; Feldhusen, J.; Grote, K. (2005). Projeto na engenharia – Fundamentos do desenvolvimento eficaz de produtos – Métodos e aplicações. São Paulo: Editora Edgard Blücher.

Millward, H.; Lewis, A. (2005). Barriers to successful new product development within small manufacturing companies. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. Vol. 12, No. 3, p. 379-394. Mu, J.; Peng, G.; Tan, Y. (2007). New product development in Chinese SMEs: Key success factors from a managerial perspective. International Journal of Emerging Markets Vol. 2 No. 2, p. 123-143. Nijssen, E. J.; Frambach, R. T. (2000). Determinants of the adoption of new product development tools by industrial firms. Industrial Marketing. Management. Volume29, No 2, p. 121–131. O’Driscoll, M. (2002). Design for manufacture. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. Vol. 122, p.318–321. O’Kane, J. F. (2003). Simulation as an enabler for organizational excellence. Measuring business excellence. Vol 7, No. 4, pp. 12-19. O’Kane, J. F.; Spenceley, J. R.; Taylor, R. (2000). Simulation as an essential tool for advanced manufacturing technology problems. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, n. 107, p. 412 -424. Ogliari, A. (1999). Sistematização da concepção de produtos auxiliada por computador com aplicações no domínio de componentes de plástico injetado. Tese (Doutorado em Engenharia Mecânica) – Programa de PósGraduação em Engenharia Mecânica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis. Ottenbacher, M.; Harrington, R. J. (2007). The innovation development process of Michelin-starred chefs. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 444-460. Owens, J. D. (2007). Why do some UK SMEs still find the implementation of a new product development process problematical? An exploratory investigation. Management Decision, Vol. 45 No. 2, p. 235-251. Selvaraj, P.; Radhakrishnan, P.; Adithan, M. (2009). An integrated approach to design for manufacturing and assembly based on reduction of product development time and cost. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. Vol. 42, No 1-2, p. 13-29.

Parker, M. (1995). Breathing easier with dfma. World Class Design to Manufacture. Vol. 2, n.6, p.17-20. Pereira, I. C. (2000). Proposta de sistematização da simulação para fabricação em lotes. Dissertação (Mestrado em Engenharia de Produção) Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção, Universidade Federal de Itajubá, Itajubá/MG. Peters, A. J.; Rooney, E. M.; Rogerson, J. H.; Mcquater, R. E.; Spring, M.; Dale, B. G. (1999). New product design and development: a generic model. The TQM Magazine. Vol. 11, No 3, p. 172–179. Phaal, R.; Farrukh, C. J. P.; Probert, D. R. (2004). Technology roadmapping—A planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Vol. 71, p. 5-26. Pitt, M.; Macvaugh, J. (2008). Knowledge management for new product development. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 12, No. 4, p. 101-116. PMI - Project Management Institute (2004). Um guia do conjunto de conhecimentos em gerenciamento de projetos (Guia PMBOK®), EUA, 3ª edição. Prasnikar, J.; Skerlj, T. (2006). New product development process and time-to-market in the generic pharmaceutical industry. Industrial Marketing Management. Vol. 35, p. 690 – 702. Ragatz, G. L.; Handifield, R. B.; Scannell, T.V. (1997). Success factors for integrating suppliers into new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, v.14, n.3, p.190-202. Rampersad, H.K. (1995). Concurrent design of product, process and robotic assembly system. Assembly Automation. Vol. 15, No. 1, p. 21-28. Redman, S.; Law, S. (2002). An examination of implementation in extend, arena, and silk. Proceedings of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference. Ed. E. Yücesan, C-H. Chen, J. L. Snowdon, and J. M. Charnes. Robinson, E. (2004). Simulation: the practice of model development and use. John Wiley and Sons Ltd., England, 339p.

59 Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management Volume 14, Número 1, 2017, pp. 48-59 DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n1.a6

Rogers, H.; Ghauri, P.; Pawar, K. S. (2005). Measuring international NPD projects: an evaluation process. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. Vol. 20, No 2, p. 79-87. Romano, L. N. (2003). Modelo de referência para o processo de desenvolvimento de máquinas agrícolas. Tese de doutorado. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia Mecânica, Florianópolis/SC, 266p.

Site da empresa Samurai - Urna eletrônica. Available in: Siu, W. S.; Lin, T.; Fang, W.; Liu, Z. C. (2006). An institutional analysis of the new product development process of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Industrial Marketing Management. Vol. 35, p. 323335.

Rooks , B. (2000). Software planning of assembly lines. Assembly Automation, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 300-304.

Stalk, G. (1998). Time: the next source of competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review, Harvard Business School, Vol. 66, No. 4, p. 41-51.

Rosenthal, S. R. (1992). Effective Product Design and Development – How to cut lead time and increase customer satisfaction. New York, N.Y. Irwin Professional Publishing.

Stalk, G.; Hout, T. M. (1990). Competing against time: how time-based competition is reshaping global markets. New York: Ed. The Free Press.

Rozenfeld, H.; Forcellini, F. A.; Amaral, D. C.; Toledo, J. C.; Silva, S. L.; Alliprandini, D. H.; Scalice, R. K. (2006). Gestão de desenvolvimento de produtos. Uma referência para a melhoria do processo. São Paulo: Editora Saraiva.

Strack, J. (1984). GPSS: modelagem e simulação de sistemas. Rio de Janeiro: LTC.

Rundquist, J.; Chibba, A. (2004). The use of processes and methods in npd: a survey of swedish industry. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management. Vol. 1, No. 1, p.37-54. Saad, S. M.; Byrne, M. D. (1998). Comprehensive simulation analysis of a flexible hybrid assembly system. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 9, No.3, pp.156– 167. Sandanayake, Y.G.; Oduoza, C.F.; Proverbs, D.G. (2008). A systematic modelling and simulation approach for JIT performance optimization. Robotics and ComputerIntegrated Manufacturing. Vol. 24, p. 735– 743. Sandanayake, Y. G.; Oduoza, C. F. (2009). Dynamic simulation for performance optimization in just-in-timeenabled manufacturing processes. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. Vol. 42, No. 3-4, p. 372–380. Sargent, R. G. (2004). Validation and verification of simulation models. Proceedings of the 2004 Winter Simulation Conference. Segismundo, A.; Miguel, P. A. C. (2008). Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) in the context of risk management in new product development. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. Vol. 25, No. 9, p. 899-912. Seila, A. F. (1995). Introduction to simulation. Proceedings of the 1995 Winter Simulation Conference. Ed. C. Alexopoulos, K. Kang, W. R. Lilegdon, and D. Goldsman. Silva, C. E. S. (2001). Método de avaliação do desempenho do processo de desenvolvimento de produtos. Tese (Doutorado em Engenharia de Produção) – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis.

Vincent, G. (1989). Managing new product development. New York:Van Nostrand Reinold. Voetsch, R. J. (2004). The current state of project risk management practices among risk sensitive project management professionals. Tese de Doutorado. The George Washington University. Wang, K.-J.; Lee, Y.-H.; Wang, S. Chu, C.-P. (2009). Performance evaluation of resource allocation strategies for new product development under different workload scenarios. Journal of Modelling in Management. Vol. 4, No. 2, p. 91-113. Wheelwright, S. C.; Clark, K. B. (1992). Revolutionizing product development – quantum leaps in speed, efficiency, and quality. New York: Free Press. Xin, J.Y.; Yeng, A.C.L.E.; Cheng, T.C.E. (2008). Radical innovations in new product development and their financial performance implications: An event study of US manufacturing firms. Operations Management Research. Vol. 1, No 2, p. 119-128. Yeh, T. M.; Pai, F. Y.; Yang, C. C. (2008). Performance improvement in new product development with effective tools and techniques adoption for high-tech industries. Quality and Quantity.