首页> 外文OA文献 >Penilaian Desain Produk dengan Assembly Analysis And Line Balancing Spreadsheet dan Ullman 13 Guidelines untuk Meningkatkan Kinerja Perakitan
【2h】

Penilaian Desain Produk dengan Assembly Analysis And Line Balancing Spreadsheet dan Ullman 13 Guidelines untuk Meningkatkan Kinerja Perakitan

机译:产品设计评估,包括装配分析和生产线平衡电子表格以及提高装配性能的Ullman 13准则

摘要

In an industry that produces product with a quite many components, assembly process usually is the most cost-determining process. Realizing that almost all products are assembled from some components and that the assembly process itself takes time, then products as much as possible are made to be assembled easily.Product design that is not proper will cause a very high numbers of components that, in turn, will reduce the reliability of that product. Finally, it will increase the assembly cost. That\u27s why product design needs to be evaluated for assembly purpose.The purpose of this research is to evaluate product design by Assembly Analysis and Line Balancing Spreadsheet (AA&LBS) method. Then, the old design is improved to get a new design. The new design is compared the one resulted from Boothroyd Dewhurst (BD) method, where assembly time reduction, efficiency improvement, assembly cost reduction, and Ullman\u27s 13 Guidelines method are used as the criteria.Of the data analysis, assembly time reduction of AA&LBS method is almost 2.7 times, and assembly cost reduction is almost 2.5 times than of BD method. AA&LBS method also resulted in average efficiency improvement that is larger, i.e. 11.08%, while BD method is only 0.08%. According to Ullman\u27s 13 Guidelines method, AA&LBS method has a total score of 1062, while BD method has a score of 1060.
机译:在生产具有很多组件的产品的行业中,组装过程通常是最能决定成本的过程。意识到几乎所有产品都是由某些组件组装而成的,并且组装过程本身很费时间,然后尽可能容易地组装尽可能多的产品。不合适的产品设计将导致大量的组件,进而导致大量的组件,会降低该产品的可靠性。最后,它将增加组装成本。这就是为什么需要出于组装目的对产品设计进行评估的原因。本研究的目的是通过组装分析和线平衡电子表格(AA&LBS)方法评估产品设计。然后,对旧设计进行改进以得到新设计。将新设计与Boothroyd Dewhurst(BD)方法得到的设计进行了比较,该方法以减少装配时间,提高效率,降低装配成本和采用Ullman 13 Guidelines方法为标准。在数据分析中,减少了装配时间AA&LBS法几乎是BD法的2.7倍,装配成本降低了近2.5倍。 AA&LBS方法还导致平均效率提高幅度更大,即11.08%,而BD方法仅为0.08%。根据Ullman \ u27s 13 Guidelines方法,AA&LBS方法的总得分为1062,而BD方法的总得分为1060。

著录项

  • 作者

    Wahjudi, Didik;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 1999
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 ID
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号