Advertisement

On the Influence of Material Selection Decisions on Second Order Cost Factors

  • Marco Leite
  • Arlindo SilvaEmail author
  • Elsa Henriques
Chapter
  • 2k Downloads
Part of the Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing book series (SSAM)

Abstract

Life cycle cost of manufactured parts and the selection of the manufacturing equipment to produce the parts are of the utmost importance in today’s highly competitive automotive industry. In the context of materials substitution for high volume production, a problem is often encountered on how to accurately predict the cost of manufactured parts. First order cost factors, like the cost of the raw material itself, are normally easily available, but second order factors, like tools and dies cost, amount of scrap, rework and others, are quite difficult to predict to support the substitution decision. Nevertheless, they play a major role in defining the overall life cycle cost. It becomes even harder when the new proposed material is similar to the incumbent material. In these cases, a predictive cost model will have to be sensitive to changes in the material properties to be able to correctly estimate these second order costs. The problem is that material properties are seldom directly related to manufacturing cost parameters in sufficient detail. Very often, relying on empirical models calibrated with historical data represents the only available alternative. This chapter presents discussion around these issues and follows four industrial examples where a methodology is proposed for predicting cost in the presence of alternative materials with the same manufacturing process, using empirical engineering models together with process-based cost models. The relevant manufacturing cost factors are identified and discussed, and conclusions are drawn. A generalization of the methodology is also discussed, enabling further work in different industrial situations.

Keywords

Magnesium Alloy Injection Molding High Strength Steel Life Cycle Cost Cost Driver 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank the MIT Portugal Program for funding of this research.

References

  1. ASM Handbook Committee, Semiatin SL (1988) Forming and forging, 9th edn. ASM International, Metals Park, OhioGoogle Scholar
  2. Banu M, Takamura M, Hama T, Naidim O, Teodosiu C, Makinouchi A (2006) Simulation of springback and wrinkling in stamping of a dual phase steel rail-shaped part. J Mater Process Technol 173(2):178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker J, Fischer G (2004) Manufacturing and potential of extruded and forged magnesium products. In: Prof. Dr Kainer KU (ed) Magnesium—alloys and technology, Wiley, Weinheim Germany, p 90–105Google Scholar
  4. Cora ÖN, Namiki K, Koç M (2009) Wear performance assessment of alternative stamping die materials utilizing a novel test system. Wear 267(5–8):1123–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cunha A, Roth R, Cirincione R, Camanho PP, Neves PC, Esteves S, Correia N, Silva A, Henriques E, Reis L, Sousa L, Pec¸as P, Baptista R, Dias GR, Viana JC, Simões R (2007) Pilot-project EDAM—MIT, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  6. Field F, Kirchain R, Roth R (2007) Process cost modeling: strategic engineering and economic evaluation of materials technologies. JOM 59(10):21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ghomashchi MR, Vikhrov A (2000) Squeeze casting: an overview. J Mater Process Technol 101(1–3):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Holmberg S, Thilderkvist P (2002) Influence of material properties and stamping conditions on the stiffness and static dent resistance of automotive panels. Mater Des 23(8):681–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kalpakjian S, Schmid SR (2008) Manufacturing processes for engineering materials, 5th edn. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  10. Kumar S, Singh R (2007) A short note on an intelligent system for selection of materials for progressive die components. J Mater Process Technol 182(1–3):456–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Leite M (2012) Techno economic evaluation in materials selection for multiple parts under OEM-Tier relations. Instituto Superior Técnico, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  12. Liang JZ, Ness JN (1996) The calculation of cooling time in injection moulding. J Mater Process Technol 57(1–2):62–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Prasad YVRK, Sasidhara S (1997) Hot working guide: a compendium of processing maps, ASM International, Materials Park, OHGoogle Scholar
  14. Prasad YKDV, Somasundaram S (1992) CADDS: an automated die design system for sheet-metal blanking. Comput Contr Eng J 3(4):185–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Semiatin SL (2005) ASM handbook, vol 14A—metalworking: bulk forming. ASM International, NoveltyGoogle Scholar
  16. Shang R, Altenhof W, Hu H, Li N (2008a) Rotary fatigue analysis of forged magnesium road wheels. In: International S (ed) SAE international world congress, reprinted from: magnesium technologies, 2008 (SP-2205), Detroit, Michigan, 14–17 April 2008Google Scholar
  17. Shang R, Altenhof W, Hu H, Li N (2008b) Rotary fatigue analysis of forged magnesium road wheels. SAE Technical paper series 2008-01-0211Google Scholar
  18. Slooff FA, Dzwonczyk JS, Zhou J, Duszczyk J, Katgerman L (2010) Hot workability analysis of extruded AZ magnesium alloys with processing maps. Mater Sci Eng A 527(3):735–744Google Scholar
  19. Uddeholm tooling AB. (2011) Tooling solutions for advanced high strength steels, SSABGoogle Scholar
  20. Wang CY, Wang XJ, Chang H, Wu K, Zheng MY (2007) Processing maps for hot working of ZK60 magnesium alloy. Mater Sci Eng A 464(1–2):52–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mold cost estimator. UFE IncorporatedGoogle Scholar
  22. Yarlagadda PKDV, Teck Khong CA (2001) Development of a hybrid neural network system for prediction of process parameters in injection moulding. J Mater Process Technol 118(1–3):109–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ICEMS, Instituto Superior TécnicoUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.IDMEC, Instituto Superior TécnicoUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations