Skip to main content

Comparison Between Product and Process Oriented Zero-Defect Manufacturing (ZDM) Approaches

Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT,volume 630)

Abstract

Contemporary manufacturing companies pay a lot of attention to product quality as this aspect affects directly their competitiveness, productivity and the reputation of the company. Traditional quality improvement methods such as Six Sigma, Lean etc. seems unable to cope with the market’s quality standards. Contemporary technological advancements allowed the successful implementation of Zero Defect Manufacturing (ZDM) which is replacing traditional quality improvement methods. According to a recent review article ZDM can be implemented in two ways the product oriented and the process oriented approach, but there is no clear understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. The current research proposes a methodology for quantifying the performance of each approach. To accomplish that a set of ZDM parameters is defined to describe the problem and the proposed methodology is applied on a specific industrial use case in order to enumerate the ZDM parameters. The results from the application of the proposed methodology will assist manufacturers and researchers to select the most suitable approach to their specific case in order to achieve sustainable manufacturing. The results showed that the performance of either product or process oriented approach is heavily depending on the input parameters and use case.

Keywords

  • Zero Defect Manufacturing
  • ZDM
  • Product oriented
  • Process oriented
  • Quality management

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-85874-2_11
  • Chapter length: 8 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-85874-2
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.

References

  1. Colledani, M., Coupek, D., Verl, A., Aichele, J., Yemane, A.: Design and evaluation of in-line product repair strategies for defect reduction in the production of electric drives. Proc. CIRP 21, 159–164 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.03.186

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Jun, J., Chang, T.-W., Jun, S.: Quality prediction and yield improvement in process manufacturing based on data analytics. Processes 8(9), 1068 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8091068

  3. Psarommatis, F., Zheng, X., Kiritsis, D.: A two-layer criteria evaluation approach for re-scheduling efficiently semi-automated assembly lines with high number of rush orders. Proc. CIRP 97, 172–177 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.05.221

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Özcan, A.M., Akdoğan, A., Durakbasa, N.M.: Improvements in manufacturing processes by measurement and evaluation studies according to the quality management system standard in automotive industry. In: Durakbasa, N.M., Gençyılmaz, M.G. (eds.) ISPR 2020. LNME, pp. 483–492. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62784-3_41

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Eleftheriadis, R.J., Myklebust, O.: A guideline of quality steps towards zero defect manufacturing in industry. In: 2016 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, pp. 332–340 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Psarommatis, F., Prouvost, S., May, G., Kiritsis, D.: Product quality improvement policies in industry 4. 0: characteristics, enabling factors, barriers, and evolution toward zero defect manufacturing. Front. Comput. Sci. 2(August), 1–15 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2020.00026

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Mourtzis, D., Vlachou, E., Milas, N.: Industrial big data as a result of IoT adoption in manufacturing. Proc. CIRP 55, 290–295 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROCIR.2016.07.038

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Psarommatis, F., May, G., Dreyfus, P.-A., Kiritsis, D.: Zero defect manufacturing: state-of-the-art review, shortcomings and future directions in research. Int. J. Prod. Res. 7543, 1–17 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1605228

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Krishna, L.S.R., Srikanth, P.J.: Evaluation of environmental impact of additive and subtractive manufacturing processes for sustainable manufacturing. Mater. Today Proc. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.060

  10. Psarommatis, F., Kiritsis, D.: A scheduling tool for achieving zero defect manufacturing (ZDM): a conceptual framework. In: Moon, I., Lee, G.M., Park, J., Kiritsis, D., von Cieminski, G. (eds.) APMS 2018. IAICT, vol. 536, pp. 271–278. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99707-0_34

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Myklebust, O.: Zero defect manufacturing: a product and plant oriented lifecycle approach. Proc. CIRP 12, 246–251 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.09.043

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Eleftheriadis, R.J., Myklebust, O.: A guideline of quality steps towards zero defect manufacturing in industry. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, pp. 332–340 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eger, F., Reiff, C., Brantl, B., Colledani, M., Verl, A.: Correlation analysis methods in multi-stage production systems for reaching zero-defect manufacturing. Proc. CIRP 72, 635–640 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.163

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Sousa, J., Ferreira, J., Lopes, C., Sarraipa, J., Silva, J.: Enhancing the steel tube manufacturing process with a zero defects approach. In: ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Proceedings (IMECE), vol. 2B-2020, February 2020. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2020-24678

  15. Cheah, S.J., Amirul, A.S., Taib, F.: Tracking hidden quality costs in a manufacturing company: an action research. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 28(4), 405–425 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1108/02656711111121816

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Tannock, J., Saelem, S.: Manufacturing disruption costs due to quality loss. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 24(3), 263–278 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710710730861

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Taidi, R.: Cost of poor quality : quality management in lean manufacturing and the effectiveness of the ‘ Zero defects ’ goal ” 1,” Sci. Coop. Int. J. Financ. Business, Econ. Mark. Inf. Syst. 1(1), 61–70 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Faciane, M.: Reducing the costs of poor quality: a manufacturing case study. Walden Diss. Dr. Stud., Jan. 2018. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/5329. Accessed 01 Mar 2021

  19. “What is Cost of Quality (COQ)? | ASQ.” https://asq.org/quality-resources/cost-of-quality. Accessed 02 Mar 2021

  20. Myklebust, O.: Zero defect manufacturing: a product and plant oriented lifecycle approach. Proc. CIRP 12, 246–251 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.09.043

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoang, X.L., Hildebrandt, C., Fay, A.: Product-oriented description of manufacturing resource skills. IFAC-PapersOnLine 51(11), 90–95 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.240

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Zheng, X., Psarommatis, F., Petrali, P., Turrin, C., Lu, J., Kiritsis, D.: A quality-oriented digital twin modelling method for manufacturing processes based on a multi-agent architecture. Proc. Manuf. 51, 309–315 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.10.044

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Psarommatis, F., Kiritsis, D.: Identification of the inspection specifications for achieving zero defect manufacturing. In: Ameri, F., Stecke, K.E., von Cieminski, G., Kiritsis, D. (eds.) APMS 2019. IAICT, vol. 566, pp. 267–273. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30000-5_34

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The presented work was partially supported by the projects Eur3ka and QU4LITY, EU H2020 projects under grant agreements No 101016175 and No 825030 accordingly. The paper reflects the authors’ views and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Foivos Psarommatis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Psarommatis, F., Kiritsis, D. (2021). Comparison Between Product and Process Oriented Zero-Defect Manufacturing (ZDM) Approaches. In: Dolgui, A., Bernard, A., Lemoine, D., von Cieminski, G., Romero, D. (eds) Advances in Production Management Systems. Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable and Resilient Production Systems. APMS 2021. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 630. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85874-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85874-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-85873-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-85874-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)