Assembly manufacturability check

How an ear­ly check of the assem­bla­bi­li­ty of pro­ducts succeeds

“Once the BOM has been drawn up, we have not­hing but pro­blems to sol­ve later on in pro­duc­tion”. The­se and simi­lar state­ments are regu­lar­ly heard in exch­an­ges with long-suf­­fe­ring indus­tri­al engi­neers in engi­nee­ring. They com­plain about pro­ducts and vari­ants that can­not be built. The source of error: In order to com­ple­te an order quick­ly, pro­ces­ses are acce­le­ra­ted and essen­ti­al inter­me­dia­te steps are skipped.

Bet­ween the receipt of an order and the finis­hed parts list, the­re are work steps that are urgen­tly requi­red in theo­ry, but in prac­ti­ce are often put on the back bur­ner in order to save time. In many cases, the­r­e­fo­re, pro­duct design and deve­lo­p­ment are alre­a­dy lar­ge­ly com­ple­te by the time the first pro­to­ty­pes reach the hands of workers. In order to avo­id errors in builda­b­ili­ty, this should ide­al­ly alre­a­dy be che­cked bet­ween the infeed and the deter­mi­na­ti­on of parts requi­re­ments. Builda­b­ili­ty veri­fi­ca­ti­on in assem­bly, howe­ver, reli­es on phy­si­cal models.

The use of 3D prin­ters has moved the point in time at which state­ments about builda­b­ili­ty con­di­ti­ons can be made for­ward. Nevert­hel­ess, adjus­t­ments to indi­vi­du­al com­pon­ents that only turn out to be unas­sem­bla­ble on the basis of the prin­ted parts are alre­a­dy very time-con­­sum­ing and expensive.

If inac­ces­si­bi­li­ty of screw points or com­pli­ca­ted moun­ta­bi­li­ty of assem­blies then occurs during the first assem­bly, in many cases the­se can no lon­ger be cor­rec­ted. The pro­duct or vari­ant is the­r­e­fo­re not buildable and the result is com­plex and expen­si­ve pro­duc­tion pro­ces­ses that often can­not meet the time and cycle specifications.

Checking products early in the process — with virtual reality

So the for­mu­la for hap­pi­ness would actual­ly be: Iden­ti­fy pro­blems of builda­b­ili­ty well befo­re the first pro­to­ty­pes, so that pro­ducts can alre­a­dy be veri­fied in their struc­tu­re and con­s­truc­tion during the plan­ning pro­cess. How can this be achie­ved on the basis of CAD data? By means of a vir­tu­al rea­li­ty edi­tor solu­ti­on: By using Halo­cli­ne Assem­bly, veri­fi­ca­ti­ons of the­se essen­ti­al suc­cess fac­tors can alre­a­dy be car­ri­ed out on the basis of 3D deve­lo­p­ment data.

All com­mon CAD data for­mats can be easi­ly and quick­ly impor­ted and expe­ri­en­ced in VR in a very short time. Ana­log­ous to the struc­tu­re of the model, assem­blies can be dis­as­sem­bled, making even the smal­lest details visi­ble and the rela­ti­onship bet­ween indi­vi­du­al com­pon­ents easier to under­stand. It is also pos­si­ble to iden­ti­fy pro­blems at this ear­ly stage of the pro­duct deve­lo­p­ment pro­cess (PEP), which can usual­ly only be detec­ted very late with today’s tools.

By means of a detail­ed phy­sics simu­la­ti­on, com­pon­ents can be gras­ped and moved with the hands in the vir­tu­al fac­to­ry. This form of intui­ti­ve work with digi­tal data means that even peo­p­le inex­pe­ri­en­ced with com­pu­ters can work with CAD data and incor­po­ra­te their many years of know­ledge from pro­duc­tion into the design and con­s­truc­tion of new pro­ducts. In this way, the know­ledge of the top per­for­mers from pro­duc­tion can also be used in the crea­ti­on of the pro­duc­tion bill of materials.

Dif­fi­cult assem­bly situa­tions and unfa­vorable posi­tio­ning are noti­ced very ear­ly in the pro­cess and can be chan­ged and opti­mi­zed while a pro­duct is still in the deve­lo­p­ment pha­se. Based on this builda­b­ili­ty con­trol, Design for Assem­bly gets a real chance!

With Halo­cli­ne, no sur­pri­ses ari­se at the start of pro­duc­tion (SOP) due to the incor­rect struc­tu­re of the pro­duc­tion bill of materials.

Halocline & item
Virtual Cardboard Engineering

Take your planning process to the next level!

This might also be of interest to you