Abstract
Traditional component manufacturing systems have been optimized for either small scale craft production or for mass production of a small variety of high volume parts. Trends towards intermediate volumes and larger variety of parts have exposed the need for intelligently embedding flexibility in manufacturing systems and processes. The literature offers only few attempts to value component fabrication flexibility in a systematic way. In this article a 5-step framework for valuing flexibility and ranking of manufacturing processes under uncertainty is developed. A discrete time simulation is used to predict profit, remaining tool value and machine utilization as a function of three probabilistic demand and specification scenarios. A case study demonstrates the simulation and contrasts both a high volume (automotive) and a low volume (aerospace) market situation across six different processes ranging from punching to laser cutting. It is found that for intermediate, uncertain production volumes alternative manufacturing processes that embed flexibility carefully in one or more dimensions can outperform traditional processes that are either completely non-flexible (e.g., stamping) or completely flexible (e.g., laser cutting). It is also shown that flexibility in parts manufacturing is a complex topic because flexibility can be embedded in the parts themselves, in tooling or in the process parameters.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Fricke, E., Schulz, A. P., Wenzel, S., & Negele, H. (2000). Design for changeability of integrated systems within a hyper-competitive environment, Colorado 2000 Conference “Systems Approach to Product Innovation and Development in Hyper-Competitive Environments", INCOSE
Gupta Y.P., Somers T.M. (1992). The measurement of manufacturing flexibility. European Journal of Operational Research 60, 166–182
Hauser, D. P. S. (2004). Flexibility in aerospace and automotive Component manufacturing Systems: Practice, strategy and optimization, Diplomarbeit, S.M. thesis. Institute for Virtual Production, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
Mills D.E. (1984). Demand fluctuations and endogenous firm flexibility. The Journal of Industrial Economics 33(1): 55–71
Mehrabi M.G., Ulsoy A.G., Koren Y. (2000). Reconfigurable manufacturing systems: Key to future manufacturing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 11(4): 403-419
Pine II B.J. (1993). Mass customization: The new frontier in business competition. Boston, Harvard Business School Press
Schips, B. (2000). Einführung in die Volkswirtschaftslehre, Vorlesungsunterlagen. ETH Zürich: Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.
Schulz, A. P., & Fricke E. (1999). Incorporating flexibility, agility, robustness, and adaptability within the design of integrated systems—key to success? 18th DASC, Gateway to the New Millenium. IEEE.
Sethi A.K., Sethi S.P. (1990). Flexibility in manufacturing: A survey. The International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 2, 289–328
Simpson T.W., Siddique Z., Jiao (Roger) J. (2006). Product platform and product family design: Methods and applications. New York, Springer Verlag
Suh, E. S., Kim, I. Y., & de Weck, O. L., (2004). Design for Flexibility: Performance and Economic Optimization of Product Platform Components, AIAA-2004-4310, 10th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, Albany, New York.
Upton D.M. (1994). The management of manufacturing flexibility. California Management Review 36(2): 72–89
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hauser, D.P., de Weck, O.L. Flexibility in component manufacturing systems: evaluation framework and case study. J Intell Manuf 18, 421–432 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-007-0033-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-007-0033-9