Considering Design for Disassembly…

Anything automotive, whether it be cars or tractors. Not only do I DFM, but I DFS [Design for Service].

I mentioned in a previous blog that I once had a Pontiac 6000LE. Changing out the starter and alternator belt were a nightmare. COMPLETELY hidden fasteners made the job absolutely miserable. On the other hand, changing out the starter on my old Mustang was a dream [straight 6 motor in a HUGE engine bay].

I look at my '09 Cobalt and stare in wonder and amazement. The only thing I can do to it is an oil change.

DIY'ers unite!

Steve, some of the places I've worked at I was involved in the redesign for service and the ease of manufacture (give a lazy man a task, he will find the easiest method to do it). The biggest road block I ran into was "why change, this is how we've always done it!". Because have you ever thought about someone trying to work on it in the field? AFTER its put together!

In the past and now I've wanted to find the "idiot engineer" that designed the product Im trying to repair/service and ask them what the hell they were thinking!

Rant off, I could go on for way too long.

Charles

Charles,

I really believe that designers/engineers/architects should spend time out in the shop or in the field before they put on their Hat. I've mentored a few young bucks in my time and the look in their eyes when they have that "aha" moment is priceless.

Resistance to change is death for any Company. Training an old dog to do new tricks can sometimes be difficult. Buy-in from everyone is critical because just one abstainer can wreck everything. We've got to show these guys how their jobs just became easier, but we've also got to listen to them and be willing to muck around in the shop or field ourselves. I've converted many oldtimers by doing just that. Maintaining that relationship after the change is important too.

Agreed, One example, I was hired in(transferred from another department) my boss team me with the old guy to show me how they "did it". Ok no problem, like most things I picked it up quickly. After a period I went to the boss and suggested a method of building the wiring harness from the prints on the bench instead of "laying the wires one at a time" in the equipment racks. Basically the wiring went from tie in terminals on one side up and over then down the other side with enough slack to rack the equipment.

The old method took about one to two days after installing the equipment. My method using the terminal strip (it was built on din rail) and using measurements (plans) of the racks (most were similar builds). I could layout the harness, label both ends with just a little excess (so if a mistake was made it could be fixed). I could build the harness in a couple of hours and install it in about the same time or less.

This allowed one team to build the racks as the harness was built, with the harness ready it save the one-two days build in the shop.

This took the shop from one or two man teams building start to finish each rack(or rack and half a week) to being able to build three or more per week. And there were things that help with production.

But that old geezer and I clashed on a lot of other areas. But he and I finally had a meeting of the minds and started working better together after several months after the harness issue. (he finally realize I was Not after his job but was there as a coworker. The bosses right hand man was another story. I did NOT want his headaches!

Reusing electronic parts would be very limited in view of the high rate of evolution in today's electronics.

Who's the industry expert anyway?