進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-0108201623215400
論文名稱(中文) 結合六標準差設計與設計失效模式效應分析降低設計失誤 - 以機械設計為例
論文名稱(英文) Incorporating Design for Six Sigma in Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis for Reducing Design Errors – Using Mechanical Design as an Example
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 工業與資訊管理學系碩士在職專班
系所名稱(英) Department of Industrial and Information Management (on the job class)
學年度 104
學期 2
出版年 105
研究生(中文) 鄭惠芳
研究生(英文) Hui-Fang Cheng
學號 R37031134
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 120頁
口試委員 指導教授-張裕清
口試委員-王泰裕
口試委員-蔡青志
口試委員-胡政宏
中文關鍵字 設計失效模式效應分析 (DFMEA)  六標準差設計 (DFSS)  IDDOV 
英文關鍵字 DFMEA  DFSS  IDDOV 
學科別分類
中文摘要 中文摘要
科技在進步,機械的複雜程度也隨之增加,設計人員所要考量的因素自然也跟著增加。各設計單位雖然也使用各種措施來防堵設計發生失誤,但百密還是會有一疏,所以如果能夠建立更完善的設計與審查體系,將可以再降低失誤。設計的嚴謹與否,對後續產品之製作、上市,到消費者使用之影響甚大,有些往往因設計疏失所造成的傷害,產生工安事件,不僅有財物損失,也有人員傷亡。再者,設計人員常因新產品與舊產品修改不多,而忽略設計審查的部份,導致設計失誤,或者因為趕著發包,就匆促檢查,先讓圖面發包施作,事後再補填表單應付稽核,設計審查在此時形同虛設。
本研究以機械設計部門為例,提出一個設計及審查作業流程,將設計失效模式效應分析 (DFMEA)分為五大階段 (確認產品功能、判定失效原因、評估各項風險、找出解決方案、預防再發),並將這五階段所運用到的工具、定義、步驟、參與者及注意事項,結合六標準差設計 (DFSS) 之辨識、界定、發展、最佳化、驗證 (IDDOV)的手法,進行設計階段的審查。
為此,本研究利用兩季的時間,實際運用設計失效模式效應分析與六標準差設計手法於設計階段,比較實施前後之差別,發現失誤比例有所改善,故希望藉此效果改變設計人員使用設計失效模式效應分析的作業流程,以降低機械設計失誤,提高設計的品質管理。
英文摘要 SUMMARY

As technology advances and customers demand more, product diversity and short product life cycles have become common. Many products have been manufactured before they pass the design verification stage. Therefore, errors of the new design are not found until after the production process stage. While we could modify products or change the production process, such tinkering comes with the expenses of lower product strength, higher failure rate, and higher production cost. When speed to market is imperative, maintaining quality without loss of speed is an increasing challenge that companies and designers face.

In this study, we aim to reduce design errors by combining DFMEA (Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) and DFSS (Design for Six Sigma). Both DFMEA and DFSS are often adopted in the design department. In DFMEA, our goal is to discover and then correct errors earlier. On the other hand, in DFSS, we aim to do the right thing at the beginning so that additional remedial work in the future becomes unnecessary.

In this study, we synthesize DFMEA and DFSS, applying the new process to the mechanical design stage of machine tools. DFMEA provides the foundation of our research. We then divide the process into 5 steps. In each step, we utilize the IDDOV process of DFSS, which are identification, definition, development, optimization, and verification. In the end, we compare the error rate difference before and after the implementation of the process. We find that the error rate is improved significantly, down from 60% to 30%. Our goal is to improve the DFMEA process used by designers, set up the standards of design verification, and improve the quality of product design.


Key Word:DFMEA,DFSS,IDDOV
INTRODUCTION

In order to make new products available early, product design time is often compressed. Because new products are often designed by copying old products, unmodified errors accumulate, resulting in more design errors. Significant loss of personnel or property can result from design errors. If we can detect errors at the design stage by using a systematic method, we can lower the failure rate of new products, satisfying the demands of customers and raising the quality of products at the same time.

In the following literature review, we explore mechanical design process, DFMEA, and DFSS. All three processes are discussed in depth in this study. Designers not only need to possess machinery knowledge, but they also need to have a working knowledge of the mechanical design process and chronology of the steps in the process. Because every step of the design process affects cost, quality, and production time, designers should help managers monitor it closely.

DFMEA is an evaluation method used in the development phase. It can systematically forecast the possible failure or malfunction, providing the main cause for each failure or malfunction at the same time. After evaluating each risk, some risks are prioritized. Tentative solutions are provided before things actually go wrong; implementation of the corrective measures is controlled and tracked. In a nutshell, preventive measures are taken to lower risk and uncertainty.

On the other hand, DFSS approaches the problem from a customer’s point of view at the early stage in product development. DFSS provides the framework for the overall design and development process, defining the functions of the products as well. Design and development work are carried out step by step in a systematic engineering approach. Comparing DFSS against Six-sigma, we find that the latter is passive while the former is proactive. Six-sigma solves issues found in the process. While DFSS focuses on new products and the design of the process. The benefits of Six-sigma are easily quantified. On the other hand, the benefits of DFSS are hard to quantified, but the impact can be much more profound.


In this study, we propose a new process that reduces design errors. The process is based on the incorporating DFMEA and DFSS and applying it to mechanical designs. We then divide ISO documents and DFMEA into 5 steps. Each step is implemented by utilizing core techniques of DFSS. This study shows that design errors are reduced after applying the new process. Moreover, responsibilities can be more clearly attributed, allowing for the detection the real cause of the failure.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The scope of the study is about mechanical design of new product. Research methodology is shown in Figure 1. Using DFMEA as our basis, we divide the process into 5 steps: 1) Confirm product features 2) Identify causes of failure 3) Evaluate risks 4) Propose solutions, and 5) Prevent reoccurrence. In each step, we apply the core techniques of DFSS (Identify, Define, Develop, Optimize, and Verify) in the mechanical design and verification stages of new product development.

In step 1, we confirm product features. We confirm our objectives and the scope and the consequences of the impact. In step 2, we determine the cause of failure. We focus on mechanical design errors and provide remedy for the errors. In step 3, we evaluate risks. Applying the core techniques of DFSS, we prioritize the highest risk factor and immediately provide remedy. In step 4, we develop a long-term strategy and delegate responsibilities to relevant personnel. In step 5, we verify whether the long-term strategy is effective. If so, then it is included in future training materials.

In the end, we compile tables on the definitions, steps, participants, tools, and points of notice used in the implementation phase. So that first-time readers can refer to. Every step in the process (including data gathering, objectives confirmation, milestones definition, brainstorming, and etc.) is discussed and debated to arrive a final decision. After the product specifications are set, each step is then carefully controlled and recoded, ensuring every aspect of mechanical design is considered.

In this study, we apply the core techniques of DFSS, incorporated in a systematic DFMEA framework. When designing new products, we enhance the application of information obtained from DFMEA, to allow for systematic design and lower risks.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The subject of the study is the design department of machine tools of the case company. The process is implemented for 6 months. Comparative results are shown in Figure 2. As we can see from the figure, design errors committed by mechanical design personnel dropped significantly from 60% to 30%, verifying that we can find out the root cause of failures in the mechanical design stage. Preventive measures can be taken at this stage to reduce the error rate.

As verified by case studies, the study makes the additional following contributions:
(1) Effectively reduce the design errors in mechanical design.
(2) Standardize designs process for the mechanical design department.
(3) Provide evaluation standards for damage rate, incidence rate, detection rate of products.
(4) Make design verification robust and enhance personnel training.


CONCLUSION

In this study, we propose 5 concepts based on DFSS, they are identification, definition, development, optimization, and verification. We also incorporate DFMEA into DFSS to lower design error rates. It does help to lower the error rates. However, we also have some places to improve in the process and content. We should pay particular attention to these shortcomings in the future studies.

(1) To improve efficiency.
(2) To combine development of information and knowledge management.
(3) To evaluate RPN (Risk Priority Number).
(4) To use other techniques of DFSS.
論文目次 目錄
中文摘要 i
英文延伸摘要 ii
致謝 vii
目錄 viii
表目錄 xi
圖目錄 xiii
第一章 緒論 1
1-1 研究動機 1
1-2 研究目的 3
1-3 研究範圍 4
1-4 論文架構 4
1-5 小結 5
第二章 文獻探討 6
2-1 機械設計 6
2-1-1 產品開發流程 7
2-1-2 機械設計流程 11
2-1-3 設計審查 19
2-2 失效模式效應分析 21
2-2-1 設計失效模式效應分析 21
2-2-2 設計失效模式效應分析之應用 24
2-3 六標準差設計 26
2-3-1 六標準差設計 26
2-3-2 六標準差設計之運用 29
2-4 小結 31
第三章 研究方法 32
3-1問題描述 33
3-1-1 研究方法概述 34
3-1-2 研究流程 35
3-1-3 研究對象 36
3-2 方法探討 37
3-2-1 確認產品功能、失效模式與後果 42
3-2-2 判定失效原因 46
3-2-3 評估各項風險 52
3-2-4 找出解決方案 58
3-2-5預防再發 63
3-3 機械設計流程裡的設計失效效應模式分析 68
3-4 小結 72
第四章 個案研究 73
4-1 個案公司介紹 73
4-2 現況分析 76
4-2-1 個案公司之設計出圖流程 78
4-2-2 專案人員分配 80
4-3 執行過程 81
4-3-1 第一階段 確認產品功能、失效模式與後果 82
4-3-2 第二階段 確認失效原因 87
4-3-3 第三階段 評估各項風險 90
4-3-4 第四階段 找出解決方案 93
4-3-5 第五階段 預防再發 97
4-4實驗結果 100
4-4-1 個案公司之設計失效模式效應分析表 103
4-5步驟之簡化 104
4-5-1 個案公司之簡化案例 104
4-6 小結 108
第五章 結論 111
5-1結論 111
5-2建議 113
參考文獻 114
附錄 參考工具來源 118
參考文獻 英文文獻
Baxter, M. (1995), Product Design:A Practical Guide to Systematic Methods of New Product Development, Chapman & Hall, New York.
Bluvband, Z., & Grabov, P. (2009), Failure Analysis of FMEA, Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 2009. RAMS 2009. Annual, IEEE, 344-347.
Brown, T., & Martin, R. (2015), Design for Action. Harvard Business Review, 93(9), 57-64.
Brue, G., & Launsby, R. G. (2003), Design for Six Sigma (Briefcase Books Series), McGraw-Hill, New York.
Cavanagh, R. R., Neuman, R., & Pande, P. S., (2001), Six Sigma Way Team Fieldbook, McGraw Hill, New York.
Cavanagh, R. R., Neuman, R., & Pande, P. S., (2005), What is Design for Six Sigma?, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Chao, L. P., & Ishii, K. (2007), Design process error proofing: Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of the Design Process, Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(5), 491-501.
Chava, F. N., & David, N. (2008), Research Methods in the Social Sciences (7th ed), Worth Publishers, New York.
Chowdhury, S. (2002), Design for Six Sigma:The Revolutionary Process for Achieving Extraordinary Profits, FT Prentice Hall, Chicago, IL:Dearborn Trade Publishing, Chicago.
Chowdhury, S. (2002), The power of design for six sigma, Dearborn Trade Publishing, Chicago.
Clausing, D. (1994), Total Quality Development: A Step-by-Step Guide to the World-class Concurrent Engineering, ASME Press, New York.

Cooper, R. G. (1999), Product Leadership:Creating and Launching Superior New Products, Perseus Books, New York.
Cross, N. (1990), The Nature and Nurture of Design Ability. Design Studies, 11(3), 127-140.
Cutuli, G., Imperiale, F., Lissoni, R., & Marchese, M. (2006), U.S. Patent No. 7,035,769. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Domb, E. (2001), Using TRIZ in a Six Sigma Environment, TRIZCON2001, Woodland Hills, CA.
Down, M. H. (2011), DFMEA and FTA Applied to Complex Hybrid and Fuel Cell Systems (No. 2011-01-0512), SAE Technical Paper.
Franza, R. M., & Chakravorty, S. S. (2007, August), Design for Six Sigma (DFSS): A Case Study. Management of Engineering and Technology, Portland International Center for IEEE, 1982-1989.
Foster, S. T. (2004), Managing Quality: An Integrative Approach, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Hassan, A., Siadat, A., Dantan, J. Y., & Martin, P. (2010), Conceptual Process Planning–an Improvement Approach Using QFD FMEA and ABC Methods, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 26(4), 392-401.
Kang, M. S., Cho, J., Ahmed, R., Heo, G., Kim, H. J., & Lee, Y. S. (2012). Design Failure Mode and Effect Analysis for Korean Fusion DEMO Plant. Fusion Engineering and Design, 87(5), 412-417.
Kim, H. J., Kim, H. C., Kwon, M., Heo, G., Hwang, I. J., Chang, S. H., ... & Kim, Y. S. (2014), Fusion Licensing and Safety Studies in Korea. Plasma Science, IEEE Transactions on, 42(3), 664-670.
Mikulak, R. J., McDermott, R., & Beauregard, M. (2009), The basics of FMEA (2nd ed), CRC Press/Productivity Press, New York.
Mirza-Jahanzaib, S. A. M., Jamil, U., & Akhtar, K. (2013), Product Design Variables Optimization using Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) Approach, Life Science Journal, 10(1).
Ullman, D. G. (1992), The Mechanical Design Process (Vol. 2), McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ulrich, Karl T. & Steven D. Eppinger (2008), Product Design and Development (4th ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York.
Yan, H. S. (1998), Creative Design of Mechanical Devices, Springer Science & Business Media Publishing, Singapore.

日文文獻
久米均 (1999), 設計開発の品質マネジメント, 日科技連R&DMセミナー・テキスト, Tokyo.
市田嵩, 牧野鉄治 (1981), デザインレビュー―開発・設計における製品保証のカギ, 日科技連出版社, Tokyo.
米山猛 (1993), 機械設計の基礎知識: はじめて設計をする人へ. 日刊工業新聞社, Tokyo.
伊藤美光 (1998-2001), 事例から学ぶトラブルを起こさない機械の設計, 機械設計,日刊工業新聞社, Tokyo.
真木和俊 (2012), リーンシックスシグマ (Lean Six Sigma), ダイヤモンド社, Tokyo.

中文文獻
王丕承. (2003), 實踐六標準差的技術. 中國生產力中心, 台北市.
余信超 (2005), 六標準差設計應用於 ODM 電子產品設計品質提升之研究—以無線通訊產品為例, 交通大學工業工程研究所, 碩士論文
李傳政 (1998), 問題分析與解決:如何運用品質手法解決問題 中國生產力中心, 臺北縣
柯煇耀 (2005), 可靠度保證:工程與管理技術之應用, 中華民國品質學會, 台北市.
徐業良 (2001), 機械設計, 全華科技圖書股份有限公司, 台北市.
樊耀宗 (2002), 工業設計公司提案與決策效率探討, 台灣科技大學設計研究所, 碩士論文

中文網頁
五楊高架設計疏失 國工局承認, 中央社 (2010, Dec. 08), Retrieved Sep. 15, 2015, from http://news.cts.com.tw/cna/life/201012/201012080626967.html
那霸華航火燒機 設計維修都出錯, 自由時報 (2009, Aug. 29), Retrieved Sep. 15, 2015, from http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/paper/330850/print
英特爾問題晶片集完成修正 預計損失10億美元, 新浪網 (2011, Feb. 11), Retrieved Sep. 15, 2015, from http://dailynews.sina.com/bg/news/int/chinanews/20110211/15462219274.html
班機那霸出事 華航損失慘重, 華視新聞網 (2007, Aug. 21), Retrieved Sep. 15, 2015, from http://news.cts.com.tw/cts/general/200708/200708210229142.html
細數歷史上那些本來可避免的大災難, 中時電子報 (2015, Oct. 17), Retrieved Oct. 17, 2015, from http://www.chinatimes.com/photo-app/20151015004417-260812
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2016-08-24起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2016-08-24起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw