Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cost Benefit Analysis of Rapid Manufacturing in Automotive Industries
Cost Benefit Analysis of Rapid Manufacturing in Automotive Industries
net/publication/319451126
CITATIONS READS
6 1,399
3 authors, including:
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Indian universities relative performance Assessment: a DEA-DE based approach View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Sunil Kumar Jauhar on 02 September 2017.
1
Sunil Jauhar, 2K. M. Asthankar & 3A.M. Kuthe
1
Research scholar, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India
2
Asst. Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, VNIT, Nagpur (MH), India
3
Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, VNIT, Nagpur (MH), India
Abstract: - This paper deals with the application of rapid manufacturing techniques to save the time as well as cost of
manufacturing of few critical components of automobiles. A case study of Inlet manifold of engine and Rotor of disk
break is taken here to demonstrate the method. While working on this objective the aim will be to reduce the lead time
required for tooling required for the conventional block-type investment casting process. There are strong incentives to
reduce costs while increasing speed and accuracy in the current market. RP is an ideal method when the components are
complex in shape because it substantially compresses the time for developing prototypes, patterns and tooling. This
method is even more promising on cost and time front. The capabilities to fabricate freeform surfaces, inbuilt cores,
projections and supports are the unbeatable strengths of RP processes. The use of benefits in terms costs have proved
that the adoption of RP technology is techno-economically justifiable for the Indian manufacturing industries. Rapid
Prototyping have proved to be a cost-effective and time efficient approach for development of pattern making, thereby
ensuring possibility for technology transfer in Indian manufacturing industries.
from CAD data and process planning is almost 2. Study of RP as a technology transfer for automotive
eliminated. industry.
4. It uses a generic fabrication machine, i.e., it does 3. Study of effect of RP techniques especially on
not require part-specific fixture or tooling. manufacturing modules in automotive industries
5. The process planning is automatic, based on the considering cost and time aspect.
CAD model. 4. To conduct a techno economical Study of effect of RP
6. It is most suitable for production of customized techniques especially on manufacturing.
or single product. 5. To check the feasibility with the help of a case study
7. There is no need of assemblage of the from automotive industry with the help of inlet
components. All the components in assembly are manifolds and rotor.
fabricated simultaneously, a layer-by-layer. A
support material is used to fill-up the cavities. The methodology for this we have used as follows:
2. Need and scope for effect of Rapid To decide objective of the research work
prototyping in manufacturing industries
1. Study of RP in context to an automotive industry 3.2.1 Cad Model of Inlet Manifold and Rotor
Sunil Jauhar, et al., AMEA, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 181-188, 2012 183
= + + +( + +
+ )………………………………………..……..1
Figure 1 Isometric view inlet manifold
Substituting the numerical values of various cost
components in equation 1 the equation 2 is formulated:
The values of various cost components are summarized Model material ( ) =178.16
as follows which is taken from literature review: [1] Support material ( ) = 45.40
Cost of base plate (Rs) = Rs.267.5 per plate, one
1. Model material cost ( ) : Rs.13.95/ base plate is require for it
2. Support material cost( ): Rs.13.95/ Build time (min) =9.45 hours
Sunil Jauhar, et al., AMEA, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 181-188, 2012 184
Substituting the values in equations 3, the total costs are 3.5.1 The total cost of inlet manifold and rotor after
Total part cost (Ct) =7601.84 Rs using mathematical model of cost benefit analysis for
determination of minimum build cost & optimal build
The Part build cost in FDM is representation in following orientation.
graph
In any RP process, deciding the orientation of
part before its actual fabrication is very important. RP
parts can be built with infinite number of orientations.
The build orientations directly affect build time, volume
of material required and surface quality. The optimal part
build orientation utilizes the optimum resources. In order
to determine the optimum part build orientation, it is
necessary to identify such orientation that incurs the
minimum build cost [1].
So with the help of cost benefit model we are
trying to get minimum build cost and optimum build
orientations. This is taking from the literature review.
After summing up the machine operating cost ( ),
material cost ( ), operator cost ( ) and pre-processing
Figure 3 The Part build cost in FDM
cost ( ) cost components, equation 4 determines the
3.5 Cost/Benefit Model total cost considering the benefit of RP technology. [1]So
total Computed cost with the help of cost benefit model
The cost incurred and costs saved in the manufacturing
processes can be easily quantified. The quantified costs =
help a lot in making crucial financial decisions. But, it is
very difficult to quantify the benefits like: time, 1. The minimum total cost of Inlet Manifold (Ct)
functionally, quality, satisfaction, manufacturability, and =3095 Rs
customization etc. in terms the cost. Rapid prototyping 2. The minimum total cost of Rotor (Ct)
yields above significant benefits over established =4151 Rs
conventional practices. The quantification of benefits in
terms costs are always desirable to evaluate the systems
performance. The cost/benefit models are justify
implementation of rapid prototyping as a technology
transfer and can be used with confidence for predicting
the values of significant costs while dealing with FDM
[1].
RP technology derives radical change by
eliminating the costs in tooling, jigs and fixtures. It
dramatically reduces the cost of process planning. As a
major change, the human cost is substantially reduced,
since RP requires minimum human skill and attention.
Finally, the significant change occurs by materially
reducing the cost of scrap, rework and assembly [1].
The total cost ( ): After summing up the machine
operating cost ( ), material cost ( ), operator cost ( ) Figure 4 Minimum part build cost in FDM
C= ………….………….4
= 0.0047 * * *
= 0.0016 * * *
= 0.539 * * *
= 33.82 * * *
Sunil Jauhar, et al., AMEA, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 181-188, 2012 185
Figure 5 Cost saving with minimum Parts build cost in FDM 5. Labor cost =560/Rs
Total cost = 6096Rs
The total cost of inlet manifold and rotor after using cost
benefit model for determination of minimum build cost 4.1.1.2 Part: Rotor
from literature review we can save the 2608 Rs of inlet
manifold and 3450Rs of rotor part build cost. To carry out cost analysis following cost element are
considered:
4. Casting Cost Estimation
1. Direct materials
Indian casting industry is booming at a rapid pace and 2. Direct labor
looking at the present scenario one concept that has 3. Direct expenses
gained its popularity in past couple of years is "Casting
Cost Estimation". These days the competition has grown After calculation following values for wax pattern
at the phenomenon rate and in order to survive and Total cost required for rotor pattern
compete at a global platform, metal casting industry has
to meet ever increasing customers' expectations in terms 1. Raw material cost =101.17
of quality standards and lower pricing [4]. 2. Freight charges =8.62
Casting process planning generally consists of 3. Design cost = 3500/Rs
proper choice of suitable casting process and various 4. Machining cost=5000/Rs
materials. Now in order to have continuous cost reduction 5. Labor cost =800/Rs
in casting process, it is essential to build up an easy-to- Total cost = 9410 Rs
use casting cost estimation methodology. It is also
important to note that any comprehensive casting cost 4.2 Investment Casting Total Cost Estimation
estimation methodology must have ability to identify the
most important parameters in casting cost. The most 4.2.1 Part: Inlet Manifold
important attributes of casting are cost estimation of
material and tooling process [3]. The casting cost With using Material: mild steel, Density of MS =7.85
estimation is carried out for getting benefit of RP in gm/cm3, Mass of the material required = 1.670 kg, Cost
casting industries. The total casting cost is given as the of the raw material per unit = 75 Rs/kg, the following
sum of costs corresponding to material, labour, energy, value for the inlet manifold
tooling and overheads costs. Total cost for casting excluding pattern cost
Total cost of material = 125 Rs
C total casting cost = C material +C melting +C molding +C core making Freight charges = 0.02*125=2.5Rs
+C finishing ………………………………………………5 Total labor cost =380 Rs
Core box design cost = 1000 Rs
Other costs related to interest rate, fixed cost, delivery, Cost of melting = 695 Rs
taxes, duties and premium can be added and calculate for Total machining cost = 200Rs
casting cost estimation[3]. Total cost = 2402 Rs
With Including Pattern Cost =6096+2402, Total cost =
4.1 Investment Casting Pattern Cost Estimation 8498 Rs
Saving
Pattern Making
4151 9410 5259
Cost Of Material
431 431 0
Freight Charges
9 9 0
Labour Charges
420 420 0
Core box Design Cost
1500 1500 0
Cost Of Melting
2393 2393 0
Machining Cost
350 350 0
Figure 6 Cost of pattern making with ABS and Wax pattern
Total Cost 9254 14513 5259
With the help of the FDM for pattern making we have
save the 3001 Rs for inlet manifold ABS pattern and
5259 Rs for rotor ABS pattern. The cost of WAX pattern
making with the use of conventional investment casting
method is costlier than the ABS pattern making in FDM.
RP Pattern
Wax Pattern
References
1. D.S. Ingole., A.M. Kuthe., S.B. Thakare, A.S.
Talankar, Rapid prototyping – a technology transfer approach
for development of rapid tooling, Journal: rapid prototyping
journal, Volume: 15, (2009) pp: 280 – 290.
2. D.S. Ingole, A.M. Kuthe. T.R. Deshmukh, Rapid
prototyping for pattern making, Foundry: A journal of
progressive metal casters, Vol: 5, (2009) pp: 53 – 55.
Figure 10 Percentage reductions in lead time of wax pattern as 3. P. Duverlie, J. M. Castelain, Cost estimation during
compare with ABS pattern design step: parametric method versus case based reasoning
method, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 15(12), (1999) 895–906.
4. R.C., Creese, A. Rao, Scrap vs. Profitability. Modern
Casting, August (1995), 38–41.
5. N.Hopkinson, P.Dickens, Rapid prototyping for direct
manufacture”, Rapid prototyping journal, Vol: 7, No. 4, (2001)
pp: 197– 202.
6. Y. Song, Y. Yan, R. Zhang, D. Xu, F. Wang,
Manufacture of the die of an automobile deck part based on
rapid prototyping and rapid tooling technology, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 120 (2002) 237±242
7. R. G. Chougule, B. Ravi, Casting cost estimation in
an integrated product and process design environment, revised
paper submitted for publication in IJCIM, Dec 2006
8. B. Ravi., D. Joshi., K. Singh, Part, Tooling and
Method Optimization Driven by Cast ability Analysis and Cost
Figure 11 Percentage saving in lead time Model, Technical paper 68th World Foundry Congress and 56th
Indian Foundry Congress, Chennai, 7-10 February 2008
So the value of lead time for RP is lesser than the wax 9. Inlet Manifold an Alibre Design Tutorial by CDS
pattern, here percentage saving in lead time as compare Written by Steve Carr All Rights Reserved @by CDS 06-04-05
with Wax pattern are 42% for inlet manifold and 45.87% 10. S. Feng, Y.Zhang, Conceptual process planning – a
definition and functional decomposition. Proceedings of the
for rotor.
1999 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and
Exposition, 10, (1999) pp. 97–106.
6. Conclusions 11. Y. Zhang, L. Wu, Rigid Image Registration by
PSOSQP Algorithm, Advances in Digital Multimedia,
The patterns produced with FDM process shows 58% of 1:1(2012) 4-8.
Inlet manifold and 54.13% of Rotor reduction in lead 12. M. Rezaei Rad, M. Rezaei Rad, S. Akbari, S. Abbas
times as compared to Wax patterns. So the lead time for Taher, Using ANFIS, PSO, FCN in Cooperation with Fuzzy
Sunil Jauhar, et al., AMEA, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 181-188, 2012 188
Vitae