Skip to main content
Log in

Modularization methodology for high pressure die casting dies

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Focusing on a low price segment is usually not an option for production companies in high-wage countries. In order to stay competitive, companies have to match individual products with prices close to those of mass products. A proven instrument in reducing costs in manufacturing processes is modularization. In the die casting industry, many manufacturers already have company specific methods of modularization in their construction departments. The dies are strongly influenced by the style of the design engineers. A holistic design methodology is not yet established. To improve this current situation, a methodology for the layout of modular dies has been developed. The methodology consists of three main phases where the focus is narrowed down from company via die to component perspective. This methodology will assist the design engineers throughout the development of new dies, helping to choose an appropriate set of modules based on technical as well as economic criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schuh G (2005) Produktionskomplexität managen, 2nd edn. Carl Hanser, Munich

    Google Scholar 

  2. Queudeville Y, Ivanov T, Nußbaum C, Vroomen U, Bührig-Polaczek A (2009) Decision and design methodologies for the lay-out of modular dies for high-pressure-die-cast-processes. Mater Sci Forum 618–619:345–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Queudeville Y et al (2011) Design methodology for modular tools. Prod Eng. doi:10.1007/s11740-011-0318-x

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fixon SK (2007) Modularity and commonality research: past developments and future opportunities, concurrent engineering SAGE

  5. Eitelwein O, Weber J (2008) Unternehmenserfolg durch Modularisierung von Produkten, Prozessen und Supply Chains. Book on Demand GmbH, Norderstedt

    Google Scholar 

  6. Koppenhagen F (2011) Verzahnte Produktentwicklung. Ind Manag 27(5):13–16

    Google Scholar 

  7. Göpfert J (1998) Modulare Produktentwicklung. Zur gemeinsamen Gestaltung von Technik und Organisation Dissertation. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pahl G, Beitz W, Feldhusen J, Grote K (2007) Pahl/Beitz Konstruktionslehre: Grundlagen erfolgreicher Produktentwicklung. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ulrich K (1995) The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Res Policy 24:419–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gershenson JK, Prasad GJ, Zhang Y (2003) Product modularity: definitions and benefits. J Eng Des 15:33–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. N N (2007) Statistik Ne-Metallguss 2007, Bundesverband der Deutschen Gießerei-Industrie (BDG), p 10, Düsseldorf, Germany

  12. Hummler-Schaufler B, Schlumpberger C (2004) Produktentwicklung auf hohem Niveau, Druckguss Praxis, pp 39-42

  13. Lee KS, Luo C (2002) Application of case-based reasoning in die-casting die design, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Springer Verlag, London, vol. 20, pp 284-295

  14. Lin JC (2003) The optimal design of a cooling system for a die-casting die with a free form surface, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Springer Verlag, London , vol. 21, pp 612-619

  15. Wu SH, Lee KS, Fuh JYH (2002) Feature-based parametric design of a gating system for a dies-casting die, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Springer Verlag, London, vol. 19, pp 821-829

  16. Desai P, Kekre S, Radhakrishnan S, Srinivasan K (2001) Product differentiation and commonality in design: balancing revenue and cost drivers. Manag Sci INFORMS 47:37–51

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kota S, Sethuraman K, Miller R (2000) A metric for evaluating design commonality in product families. J Mech Des 122:403–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tang D, Eversheim W, Schuh G (2004) A new generation of cooperative development paradigm in the tool and die making branch: strategy and technology. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 20:301–311, Aachen, Germany

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mikkola JH, Gassmann O (2003) Managing modularity of product architectures: toward an integrated theory. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 50:204–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Boos W (2008) Methodik zur Gestaltung und Bewertung von modularen Werkzeugen. Apprimus Wissenschaftsverlag, Aachen

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lindemann U, Maurer M, Braun T (2009) Structural complexity management: an approach for the field of product design. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Y. Queudeville.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Queudeville, Y., Vroomen, U. & Bührig-Polaczek, A. Modularization methodology for high pressure die casting dies. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 71, 1677–1686 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5582-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5582-9

Keywords

Navigation