Manufacturability Assessment in the Conceptual Design of Aircraft Engines – Building Knowledge and Balancing Trade-Offs

  • Roland StoltEmail author
  • Samuel André
  • Fredrik Elgh
  • Petter Andersson
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 467)


This paper addresses the automated assessment of manufacturability of air-craft engine components in the early stages of design, focused on the welding process. It is a novel part of a multi-objective decision support tool for design evaluation, currently running at a manufacturer of jet engine components. The paper briefly describes the tool and how it impacts the product development process. Further, the paper presents an integrated method for manufacturability assessment by finding welding processes that complies with all geometrical and other constraints found in the CAD-models of the conceptual engine. Here, preferences made by manufacturing engineers serves as a base for a manufacturability index so that different parameter settings in the CAD-models can be compared to find the best parameter settings, considering the trade-off with other performance criteria’s of the engine.


Manufacturability CAD Robotic welding Set-Based concurrent engineering Multi-objective optimization 



The authors would like to thank GKN aerospace Sweden AB for providing a great environment and participating in the research. Also the authors express gratitude towards the Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA) for partly financing this research.


  1. 1.
    Vallhagen, J., et al.: A framework for producibility and design for manufacturing requirements in a system engineering context. Cranfield (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vallhagen, J., et al.: An approach for producibility and DFM-methodology in aerospace engine component development. Procedia CIRP 11, 151–156 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boothroyd, G.: Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly. In: Dewhurst, P., Knight, W.A. (eds.) 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bralla, J.G. (ed.): Design for manufacturability handbook, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blessing, L.T.M., Chakrabarti, A. (eds.): DRM, A Design Research Methodology. Springer, London (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Simpson, T.W., Jiao, J(.R)., Siddique, Z., Hölttä-Otto, K. (eds.): Advances in Product Family and Product Platform Design. Springer, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johannesson, H.: Emphasizing reuse of generic assets through integrated product and production system development platforms. In: Simpson, T.W., Jiao, J(.R)., Siddique, Z., Hölttä-Otto, K. (eds.) Advances in product family and product platform design: Methods & application, pp. 119–146. (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Högman, U., Johannesson, H.: Technology development practices in industry. In: ICED 11 – 18th International Conference on Engineering Design - Impacting Society Through Engineering Design (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Levandowski, C., Raudberget, D., Johannesson, H.: Set-based concurrent engineering for early phases in platform development. In: The 21st ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering-CE2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sobek II, D.K., Ward, A.: Toyota´s principles of set-based concurrent engineering. Sloan Manage. Rev. 40(2), 67–83 (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Raudberget, D.: Industrial Experiences of Set-Based Engineering - Effects, Results and Applications. Chalmers Reproservice, Göteborg (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kennedy, M., Harmon, K., Minnock, E.: Ready, Set, Dominate: Implement Toyota’s Set-Based Learning for Developing Products and Nobody Can Catch You!. Oaklea Press, Richmond (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    André, S., et al.: Managing Fluctuating Requirements by Platforms Defined in the Interface Between Technology and Product Development, in Advances in Transdisciplinary Engineering: Moving Integrated Product Development to Service Clouds in the Global Economy, pp. 424–433. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shah, J.J., Mäntylä, M.: Parametric and Feature-Based CAD/CAM: Concepts, Techniques, and Applications. Wiley, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shukor, S.A., Axinte, D.A.: Manufacturability analysis system: issues and future trends. Int. J. Prod. Res. 47(5), 1369–1390 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maropoulos, P.G., et al.: An integrated design and planning environment for welding: part 1: product modelling. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 107(1–3), 3–8 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chayoukhi, S., Bouaziz, Z., Zghal, A.: Cost estimation of joints preparation for GMAW welding process using feature model. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 199(1–3), 402–411 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Elgh, F., Cederfeldt, M.: Cost-based producibility assessment: analysis and synthesis approaches through design automation. J. Eng. Des. 19(2), 113–130 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland Stolt
    • 1
    Email author
  • Samuel André
    • 1
  • Fredrik Elgh
    • 1
  • Petter Andersson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Product DevelopmentJonkoping UniversityJonkopingSweden
  2. 2.GKN Aerospace Sweden ABTrollhättanSweden

Personalised recommendations