First Part Correct Perspectives

Pre-work for First Part Correct Workshop

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Gaithersburg, Maryland

April 4-6, 2000

First Part Correct (FPC) Implications

Mike Lackner

Honeywell

Federal Manufacturing and Technologies

Kansas City Plant

Kansas City, MO

The FPC groundwork for manufacturing is to baseline manufacturing equipment for machine-based features (and feature characteristics) such as holes, slots, etc. in order to gather

process variation associated with normal production. The gathered variation must include situations that may vary process parameters other than the normal feed, speed, and depth of cut. These derivatives include such factors as multiple machine setup, feature orientation relative to manufacture, and variation in spindle horsepower. Once these types of process parameters are included and natural process variation is gathered, then predictions for “what if” scenarios may be proposed based on design requirements (associated tolerances). One methodology to accomplish these tasks which has been utilized with high success is Six Sigma and associated tools such as factor relationship diagrams, SPC and variance components analysis.

Briefly addressing the design portion of FPC, designers need to fully understand the consequences, in terms of manufacturability and cost, of reducing tolerance width for a given feature dimension. Additionally, an understanding has to be reached for the belief that tighter tolerances make better parts and assemblies.

The major points for Honeywell’s understanding of what FPC are:

· Look at the process capabilities of manufacturing equipment (at the feature and feature characteristic level) and compare against the given incoming design requirements, calculating predicted defects for the features using various machines.

· Decide on what machine to manufacture the desired features based on criteria to include: minimization of defects, machine availability, resources, etc.

· Include a measurement system evaluation (MSE) to assure process variation information is valid. Remember measurement is a process and must be tested for process variation (multiple part setup).

First part Correct Perspective – South Carolina Research Authority

John Bradham

First Part Correct is defined as the ability to transition from design concept to finished product with absolute certainty of a correctly produced part or product.

The question is: "What does this means to my company?" The answer is in the understanding of what would be required in the "concept to reality" process for the first part produced to be a correct part. The high level process steps include:

· Concept: Idea/need for discrete part conceived

· Design: Design of part is accomplished in a concurrent engineering environment and is captured in a CAD system with understanding of required manufacturing capabilities

· Product data transfer: Product data for part to be manufactured is transferred in complete and accurate (automation enabling) format to manufacturer from designer/customer

· Macro Process Plan: A macro process plan is created using a feature based manufacturing knowledge system

· Modeling/Simulation: Detailed modeling and simulation of part manufacture is completed in accordance with known and verified processes

· Micro-process Plan: Detailed manufacturing process plan including NC code preparation and verification is completed and checked prior to releasing the part to manufacturing

· Factory Equipment: CNC machine with manufacturing tolerance capabilities equal to or greater than the required tolerances is available

· Material/tooling/fixtures: Required raw material, fixtures and tooling are available as identified in the technical data package and the detailed manufacturing process plan

· Artisan: Machine tool operator follows detailed operator instructions (includes inspection after each specific process) that have proven successful in the manufacture of similar parts

· Reality: First Part Correct created

The magnitude of the effort required to transition from concept to reality for a discrete part is a function of many factors in each of the steps highlighted above. In each step, the potential for challenges increase with part complexity. Early in the RAMP program we had visions of a completely automatic generative process planner for any machined part. We quickly learned the overwhelming magnitude of the effort and cost that would be required to achieve that vision. In contrast, we designed and built an "intelligent assistant" generative process planning system that could accomplish much of the desired functionality very cost effectively in an automated but not automatic manner. That lesson learned has applicability here. We must strive to minimize variability in each required process step to increase the probability of an accurate transition from concept to reality. However, the effort should be conducted in a manner that includes realistic financial tradeoffs. Research concentration should be on the process steps with the greatest potential payback for a defined range of part complexities rather than attempting to build a single structure to deliver First Part Correct for highly complex discrete parts.

SCRA/bradham@scra.org/843-760-3322/03/29/2000

First part Correct Perspective

Bryan Dodge - Aeroquip

Aeroquips' process for design will often include the need for a prototype
for fit checks. This prototype will be required long before the final
product is qualified for flight. This one off part will often require that the design department completes the details before all of the analysis for structural integrity
and flow optimization is complete. The results of the various analyses will
require changes to the details. It would be highly desirable to be able to
manufacture the prototype from solid model prior to the final detail
drawings being completed. In this light, Aeroquip has adopted a methodology
to create a solid model from which a tool path can be created such that the
components are manufacturable without the need for detail prints. Aeroquip
is able to attach enough information on the solid model to assist in the
inspection of the part via a numerically controlled coordinate measurement
system.
Once the final design is complete there is also the need to produce hardware
for qualification testing and low production runs to satisfy the
requirements of the initial build of aircraft for their type certification.
The same methodology will be used as described above to produce the parts
and assemble to hardware for these critical test pieces. Our participation
in the first part correct program will be to determine if there are any new
or alternative processes that can be adopted to streamline the process
and/or improve the accuracy and speed for low rate production.

First Part Correct and Industry Canada

Val Traversy

Industry Canada

March 29, 2000

Background

By international standards, Canada has both fairly high productivity and a fairly high standard of living. However, over the past 25 years, Canada has had the lowest rate of growth of productivity of any G-7 country, and by 1998 productivity in Canada’s manufacturing industries was on average more than 25% below the levels achieved by American manufacturing industries.

Productivity is, of course, strongly linked to innovation, and a robust innovation culture must be encouraged across Canadian industry if we are to improve our manufacturing productivity and competitiveness. A particular focus must be on SME’s with fewer than 200 employees, which are markedly slower than their US counterparts at adopting leading-edge technologies and methods to enhance their productivity and profitability.

The Value of First Part Correct

The diagnosis set out above is well known to most Canadian manufacturing entrepreneurs, but few take the kind of actions one would expect in response. Why?

The answer of many SME managers is that major overhaul initiatives, such as Next Generation Manufacturing (NGM) or even Lean/High Performance Manufacturing (HPM) are too daunting (time and resource consuming) to undertake.

As we understand it, First Part Correct holds out the prospect of bringing Lean/HPM/NGM concepts within reach of the hard-pressed manufacturing strategist/manager, in terms and for purposes to which he/she can relate.

Software Developer Perspective

Mike Cronin - Cognition

Cognition is a developer of software for the First Part Correct community with the following suggestions for the workshop:

1. First Part should be changed to First Prototype because:

- parts are the simplest element in a product and are 95% described in a geometry domain only.

- Prototypes must also account for tolerances, function, performance and conformity with requirements.

2. Parts made correctly must still undergo many changes as a result of prototype testing.

3. A product development process has two distinct cost accumulations. The first is the cost in time and dollars to release a functionally correct prototype to manufacturing. These costs include:

- Multiple prototypes

- Changes to early released tooling

- Testing

The second is the manufacturing costs which include:

- Design costs to revise product to achieve manufacturability

- ECOs to correct pilot problems

- Costs to change design to achieve cost targets

- Scrap and rework costs

- Product failure liability claims

- Recalls

- Customer dissatisfaction/warranty and service claims

In summary, IMTI’s goal should be to build one product prototype to verify the correctness of the primary simulation and analysis models. The prototype is more important that the parts since parts alone are only predictors of a small fraction of a prototype function.

Another primary goal of the IMTI should be the quantification of the cost and time accruing from today’s development process. These costs should be used for the shock value inherent in their magnitude and as a baseline against which to measure improvements.

First Part Correct Perspective

Jack C. H. Chung - SDRC Fellow
SDRC

The significance of First Part Correct to SDRC means:

Providing an integrated set of computer software tools to
ensure that software models will behave similarly with
real-life physical models

Utilizing web technologies in enabling collaboration during
the design processes to reduce design errors

Identifying and developing new enabling technologies to
address the deficiencies of current tools in meeting FPC objectives.

The Vision for "First Part Correct" or "First Part Good Part"

John Kohls – Institute for Advanced Manufacturing Sciences (IAMS)

   A Robust Process has been developed that ensures the part or component will
   be produced, manufactured or machined without the necessity of proveout,
   validation or inspection.

   Final Design to completed component without human decision requirements (A
   fully automated process).

   The sequence from final design to completed component is one step on the
   process sheet.

John B. Kohls
Institute of Advanced Manufacturing Sciences
Cincinnati Ohio
513-948-2111
kohls@iams.org

31 March 2000

FIRST PART CORRECT - TORRINGTON COMPANY

By: Karl Radune

The Torrington Company is America’s largest broad line bearing manufacturer and a leading producer of precision components and assemblies. Products range from every basic type of rolling element bearing to automotive steering columns and innovative composite camshafts. Products vary in size from miniature to 14 feet in outside diameter.

Manufacturing philosophies range from dedicated, hard-linked manufacturing cells for high volume components and assemblies to one $50,000 twist bridge bearing made every 10 years. Many of our products are made in batches that may only require several hours for processing through a particular manufacturing operation. Lean manufacturing principles drive manufacturing toward smaller batch sizes, flow of the product through a series of machines with low inventory, flexibility of machinery, and minimal changeover times, and no scrap.

For a metal removal process, First Part Correct to Torrington requires:

1. quick tooling changes on a series of machines in a cell for a new batch of components, with presetting, or no adjustments.

2. knowledge in the machine control of the location of (1) the surface of the tool, (2) surface of any dress device, and (3) an absolute location on the workpiece, either with respect to machine datum surfaces or with respect to each other.

3. trajectories for machine motions pre-generated as a function of the workpiece and tooling dimensions.

4. feed and speed information pre-generated as a function of the workpiece, tooling, and machine dimensions and characteristics, and algorithms based on process knowledge to achieve acceptable part surface quality.

5. where necessary, in-process or post-process gauging accurately set with minimal use of artifacts.

6. where necessary or appropriate, adaptive logic using information from in-process sensors to optimize quality and make the first part correct.

Barriers to First Part Correct are:

1. Difficulty establishing the location of surfaces with respect to reference datums.

2. Inadequate characterization of the process.

3. Difficulty in incorporating process knowledge into the machine control.

4. Lack of integrated sensor and adaptive control systems.

Aerospace Manufacturing Perspective - First Part Correct

Ray M. Walker

The concept of First Part Correct (FPC) must respond to several contrasting imperatives to support the business objectives associated with manufacturing a competitive product. The primary considerations are:

1. To bring a new discrete part into production with a minimal recurring cost that achieves (or surpasses) a target cost goal.

2. To bring a new part into production rapidly, with minimal non-recurring cost.

3. To enable product and process creativity necessary for an aggressively competitive market.

4. To bring a new part into production that is responsive to the values of the end-user or customer (100% delivery performance, low cost, rapid response, product features,…).

In most aerospace product, a discrete part is an element of a highly engineered and complex sub-system or system. There is critical interaction between the function and fit of the parts in a system, therefore the design and validation of an engine or airframe relies heavily on the fabrication of functional prototype systems to validate strenuous performance and cost requirements. Due to the uncertainties and imprecision of design models, final product design evolves from physical testing and operation of the system or sub-system. The uncertainty of long-term failure modes requires endurance or accelerated-life testing from which final design iterations are made. In the case of gas-turbine engines, often 10 to 15 engines are produced prior to a “configuration lock” being declared by engineering prior to the ramp up into rate production.

At any point in this production of demonstration and validation systems, individual parts can be delivered in a First Part Correct mode. Today, in the development of a complex system, the definition of “correct” will change as the system moves from prototype to demonstration to validation, with each phase responding to progressively outward customers. Initially, “correct” is defined by engineering for design intent, followed by manufacturing’s definition of “correct” embodying producibility, capacity investments, supply chain issues, and cycle time. Ultimately, the customer definition of “correct” dominates in terms of value (cost, delivery, and feature innovation) during implementation, however this perspective must be effectively driven upstream during early system development.

The process of FPC must not be an automation of today’s empirically oriented methods. FPC must avoid over use of standard work methods to prevent the suppression of creativity. FPC must attain optimization of key end-user values such as cost, response time, and on-time delivery. Optimization is balanced against the speed and depth of the non-recurring development effort. The use and management of knowledge by “intelligent” organizations (including the entire value stream) will be the underpinning of the future state of FPC.

American Metalcasting Consortium – John Tirpak

In his presentation, Mr. Tirpak presented an Overview of AMC - Who we are, what we do, how

we do it.

CAST-IT - Design and Acquisition process of castings

Casting Readiness Matrix - Tabular inference of leadtimes associated with 4
parameters of raw casting technical data, finished casting technical data,
source data, and tooling data.

As these charts are presented, Mr. Tirpak highlighted where the concepts of First
Part Correct impact casting design and acquisition.

First Part Correct as I see it's importance to the SMEs

Manufacturing Assistance Center, Inc. – Frank Julian

.

In order to compete Small and Medium Manufacturers (SMEs) are being forced to a level of efficiencies thatthey never dreamed of. One of the biggest problems SMEs face is the
inability to attract high-level personnel and the time and money to implement lean. SMEs have the most to gain out of the chute by striving towards a First Part Correct Program. First Part Correct means to me, the first time a job/product is run it is run in a manner conducive to 100% quality utilizing the most effective process and quality controls while
insuring the correct productivity level is met. This is greatly lacking in the SME world and causes a series of problems that effect capacity and profit margins, ultimately impacting competitiveness. the right programs for the SME world could increase productivity significantly while protecting margins. I'm looking forward to hearing how the large OEMs deal with this problem at the tier 2 and 3 supplier level.

First Part Correct Perspective

Northrop Grumman ISA – Don Pope

The "First Part Correct" idea embodies much of the lean concept that we in
aerospace are attempting to achieve. Tremendous amounts of the waste in
time, cost, resources, etc. have historically occurred in the transition from design to successful production of the first detail parts and assemblies. Because of affordability and cycle time pressures, we can no longer afford to pass immature, ambiguous designs downstream to tool design, tool fabrication, and production and hope to eventually achieve efficiencies through high volume production and long learning curves. We must learn to design parts in a manner that, when fabricated and assembled, will meet the
customer's requirements the first time. Assembly key characteristics must be directly linked to dimensional requirements on detail parts. 3-D solid model-based designs must be unambiguous, capable of being "understood" by all subsequent processes so that digital design data can directly drive tool design/fab (to the degree that part-specific tooling is required at all) and production NC processes without the involvement and interpretation of people.

Don Pope
Northrop Grumman ISA

National Center for Advanced Manufacturing

“A partnership between government, industry, and academia

to advance manufacturing research and technology development”

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has established the National Center for Advanced Manufacturing (NCAM) to be performed under direction of the Office of the Chief Technologist and through the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). The NCAM has been created to address the research and technology development needs for manufacturing the next generation of reusable space transportation systems while also building a future manufacturing technology base for NASA and industry. The mission of the NCAM is to establish partnerships involving NASA, government agencies, states, universities and industry, that will develop manufacturing technologies enabling new launch vehicle and propulsion systems with orders of magnitude improvements in safety, cost and reliability.

Conceptual designs for reusable space transportation systems, including the Lockheed Martin VentureStarÒ (figure 1) require unprecedented very large composite structures to achieve the necessary mass fraction for a single stage to orbit vehicle. The ability to effectively reduce system costs and development cycle times will rely on breakthroughs in the engineering environment. Furthermore, new education and training in the operations of technologically advanced manufacturing systems (figure 2) is critical to revolutionary product development. Current research has identified that the advanced manufacturing processes, and the level of performance of engineering tools are not available today for production of these very complex structures.

Figure 1. Vehicle 160’l x 150’w x 50’h Figure 2. Virtual Manufacturing Tools

Intense global competition in the launch vehicle and aircraft businesses are requiring changes in the way U. S. aerospace industry operates to become globally competitive. In less than ten years, the U. S. has gone from dominating the launch vehicle market to owning less than 40%. NASA’s interest and sponsorship of the NCAM is in direct support of helping the U. S. compete internationally.

Involving education is critical to the success of this endeavor. Development of revolutionary engineering tools will require expanding the scope of current educational achievement. The NCAM will support universities in exploratory development and participatory efforts in emerging educational technologies to provide knowledge and skills for the next generation technological workforce.

National Center for Advanced Manufacturing

Program Objectives

· Enable manufacturing to meet NASA requirements for future space transportation

· Strengthen the competitiveness of the U.S. in aerospace and other commercial markets through advanced manufacturing

· Effect a cultural change in the manufacturing industry to an intelligent-collaborative environment

· Involve the educational community to enhance educational development and increase the number of high value jobs in the U.S.

Approach

· Provide a world-class manufacturing center for the U.S. Aerospace Industry

· Expand NASA/MSFC’s unique experience and relationships within the aerospace community to include state governments and universities

· Maintain government role in technology development for the support of industry

· Direct critical investments in cross-cutting, fundamental technologies

· Institutionalize the intelligent synthesis environment and virtual partnership concepts within manufacturing community

· Leverage resources of involved parties

· Facilitate hands-on and virtual training at MSFC facilities and remote sites, and participate in university curricula and course development

First Part Correct Perspective: Kingsbury Corporation

James E. O'Neil (Jim), VP Technology

What Does FPC Mean To A Machining Systems Designer and Builder?
______________________________________________________
The precise definition of product and process is critical to establishing.......
   - equipment specifications (positioning accuracy, repeatability, vibration dampening,
     thermal expansion control, structural stiffness)
   - fixturing (casting/weldment variation tolerance, clamping control, deflection
     control, location control to nest, cast location features)
   - tooling specifications (material, geometry, preset capabilities, micron finish

     capability)
   - gaging/inspection process validation (calibration, repeatability, climate control)
      (e.g. Who has final determination if first part IS correct? –the machine?)
   - Incoming part consistency (casting,weldment, bar, blank, forging) Brinell, porosity,
     granular structure, scale
   - Process environmental characteristics (maintenance support, operator competency,
     ambient temperature variations/contamination sources, power feed quality, coolant

     temperature control, chip flush/disposal system)
    -Machine controls specifications (offset/compensation capabilities, fault detection,
     feed/speed spec, spindle speed, part program proofing/validation)

    Why Is FPC Important to Kingsbury Corporation?: The Business Case:
________________________________________________________
     -Shortened machine delivery time; "first time qualification"
     -Eliminate engineering/manufacturing rework
     -Higher utilization of company resources; reduced "opportunity costs"
     -Eliminate labor/rework costs results in more competitive machine pricing
     -Exceed customer expectations for quality/delivery; future business opportunities

     Present Actions to Improve FPC and Quantified Results:
     __________________________________________
     - No formal FPC program at Kingsbury; no metrics; FPC prevalent in academia
     - Conventional efforts to achieve FPC include .......
              - Procedures to proof (IO/card simulate) parts program (PICS -
                Programmable Industrial Control System)
              - Simultaneous engineering customer contracts (Design for Manufacture)
              -Increased emphasis on project management (communication/coordination)
              - Implementation of ISO quality procedures; pre-runoff checklists
              - CAD solid modeling (Solid Edge) to support process simulation

       The Dream: (See Business Case above)
       ______________________________
              - Self compensating tooling, thermal expansion, self-gaging technologies
               made more robust-more cost effective- more user friendly

               - AI integration?

       What's Missing?
       ____________
              - Must address organizational coordination/communication issues
                 as well as technical issues (customer-supplier, user-user,
                 customer-OEM-vendor)
              - Payback for FPC costs must be analyzed (eg simulation costs may be
                more than trial and error??!!)
              - Raw material inconsistencies; tooling applications (both still "more art than
                 science")

What does “First Part Correct” mean?

Submitted by William H. VerDuin, Ohio Aerospace Institute

March 21, 2000

The phrase First Part Correct may be interpreted as a manufacturing or design opportunity. A First Part Correct manufacturing goal might be to avoid scrap production during process startup. Process modeling, process improvement, and advanced control strategies might be employed to overcome, for example, temporal and spatial temperature distributions that degrade the quality of thermal process First Parts.

Alternatively, First Part Correct may be seen as a design opportunity in which streamlined yet more rigorous product design and analysis enable First Part Correct, avoiding the cost and timing imposed by testing and redesign cycles common in the design of highly engineered products.

General Electric, Parker Hannifin, BFGoodrich Aerospace, Engineous Software, Ohio University and Ohio Aerospace Institute are working together to address this opportunity. This team, with the support of the National Institute of Standards and Technology under their Advanced Technology Program, has begun development of advanced design support technologies comprising the Federated Integrated Product EnviRonment (FIPER).

Significant reductions in Time To Market and improvements in product functionality and quality are anticipated upon successful development and commercialization (outside of this project) of the following:

· Preliminary 3D solid geometry will be automatically generated and analysis codes invoked from product requirements.

· Knowledge-based systems will automatically revise component geometry in response to analysis outputs. Geometry changes or analytical results for a component will be reflected in geometries of associated components through “intelligent” nonlinear scaling.

· The FIPER environment will support electronic experimentation for robust designs and Multidisciplinary Optimization.

· A “zooming” capability will provide increasing fidelity of analysis, automatically selecting methods of analysis appropriate to increasing detail of geometry and assembly information.

· Cost and producibility will be integrated into the knowledge base.

· Design processes distributed across platforms and locations will be enabled by an open web-based environment in which existing proprietary CAD and analytical packages are integrated through JAVA-based wrappers

About the Project

Page One