Data processing: generic control systems or specific application – Specific application – apparatus or process – Product assembly or manufacturing
Reexamination Certificate
2000-12-20
2004-03-30
Picard, Leo (Department: 2125)
Data processing: generic control systems or specific application
Specific application, apparatus or process
Product assembly or manufacturing
C700S095000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06714827
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Technical Field
The present invention relates generally to article development and tooling projects and more particularly to a method for scheduling the development and tooling of an article which reduces the cost and lead time of the project through the elimination or a substantial reduction in the iterative efforts associated with multiple prototype builds.
2. Discussion
In
FIG. 1
, a prior art system for designing and manufacturing a multi-component assembly is generally indicated by reference numeral
10
. Such systems are commonly employed in the design and manufacture of automotive vehicles where the resources of many individuals with diverse backgrounds are employed to produce a desired product from a product concept in a desired time period.
System
10
is illustrated as including four distinct stages: an invention stage
12
, a planning stage
14
, an execution stage
16
and a launch stage
18
. The invention stage
12
typically refers to the development or incorporation of a new technology or new component configuration into a product. Depending upon the new technology or complexity of the component, the invention stage may conclude fairly quickly, or may linger on until the latter stages of the project.
The planning stage
14
refers to the development of a product theme that outlines the goals and objectives of the project. This stage usually has a duration which is relatively short and tends to focus on the product at a level rarely more detailed than that of the major systems that make up the product. As such, the outcome of this stage is generally a set of systems guidelines that define the overall performance and functionality of the product.
The execution stage
16
consists of the simultaneous development of the components of the multi-component assembly. Responsibility for each component is usually delegated to a team which then sets forth designing and perhaps building and testing their component. While these teams are not truly independent, the lack of available data on the other components which make up the product significantly impairs their ability to develop their component in a timely and efficient manner.
One example is where a team is cognizant of the problems facing a team responsible for another component and commits to certain design criteria to assist the other team in mitigating those problems. Often times, these decisions are made so early in the execution stage
16
that the teams lack a complete understanding of the true magnitude of the problem. As such, attempts to mitigate a problem may simply force unnecessary engineering and development efforts, or may force a team to accept a design which meets the design criteria but does not provide a solution which completely optimizes all of the design criteria (i.e., a non-optimal solution).
Another example is where the problems of one team affect the component of another team. Such occurrences are common and not necessarily the fault of any one team, as it is often necessary to test the limits of technology to maintain a competitive edge in today's global market. Whatever the cause of these problems, the end result is the same and includes one or more teams scrambling to revise their designs and tooling to incorporate the newly discovered constraints. These efforts, while necessary under the circumstances, also negatively impact the project as they require duplicative engineering and development efforts.
Validation of the design of the entire multi-component assembly is required prior to the release of a production-ready design which is typically obtained through a pilot build. During the prototype build prototype parts for each of the components are fabricated from the preliminary designs and the components are assembled to verify their performance and function, as well as the performance and function of the multi-component assembly as a whole. As most or substantially all of the teams had developed their components without a complete understanding of the efforts of the other teams, significant redesign of numerous components is often necessary. It should be noted that the typical case is not that the component fails to perform, but rather that interaction between the various components does not produce the desired functionality, appearance or performance.
The detection of one or more problems with a component often necessitates modifications to its design. Such modifications frequently diminish the value of the validation data obtained from the initial pilot build for that component and well as the other components with which that component interacted. Even if problems had not been detected with a component, teams would frequently refine their designs to eliminate concerns as to the manufacturability, the ease of assembly or the cost of the component. The value of the validation data for these components, as well as the other components with which they interacted, is frequently diminished by such refinements. Consequently, the process of refining designs after the initial pilot build to reduce cost and optimize performance, functionality, the ease of assembly and manufacturability most often necessitated an additional pilot build so as to obtain validation data on the refined designs which was more represenative of the final design of the product and hence, more meaningful and valuable.
Depending upon the extent to which information is shared between the various teams, three or more pilot builds may be necessary before the design of all of the components can be released for production. The iterative design and development process is costly and frequently fails to optimize cost, performance, functionality, ease of assembly and manufacturability. Accordingly, the execution stage
16
frequently carries into the launch stage
18
where the transition to production manufacturing of the multi-component assembly is being made.
As the management and staff of the groups responsible for the design and development of the multi-component assembly are generally different from the management and staff of the groups responsible for the production manufacturing of the multi-component assembly, it is desired that all issues with the execution stage
16
of the project be resolved prior to or at an early stage of the launch stage
18
. Also, it is desired that any issues from the invention stage
12
be resolved prior to the launch stage
18
. Unfortunately, as new projects are frequently tied to new inventions, problems from the invention and execution stages
12
and
16
frequently linger into the latter stages of the launch stage
18
. Scheduling of a project in this manner may impact engineering decisions relating to the design and manufacture of the product in a manner which risks the cost, timing and ability to optimize the product to the design criteria.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
It is a general object of the present invention to provide a method for scheduling a multi-phase project to design and manufacture a multi-component assembly which forestalls design and tooling activity on components which are not part of the critical path of the project so as to improve the first pass yield of the project.
In one form, the present invention provides a method of scheduling a project to design and manufacture a multi-component assembly. The method includes the general steps of:
a. identifying a project completion date;
b. determining a tooling lead time for each of the plurality of components;
c. determining a common design completion date for each of the plurality of sub-assemblies, the common design completion date being a function of the project completion date and the tooling lead times for each of the plurality of components;
d. determining a design lead time for each of the plurality of components; and
e. determining a design start date for each of the plurality of components.
In another form, the present invention provides a method of scheduling the design of a motor vehicle having a plurality of sub-assemblies. The method includes:
a. identifying a project completio
Achram Lawrence J
Brown Timothy K
Dupuis Robert J
Hedding N. Ray
Lundberg Roger P
DaimlerChrysler Corporation
Ortiz Carlos R.
Picard Leo
Smith Ralph E.
LandOfFree
Method for scheduling a project to design and manufacture a... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method for scheduling a project to design and manufacture a..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method for scheduling a project to design and manufacture a... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3193036