Robust Tolerance Design at

Volvo Aero Corporation

Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s program Product Development
ANDREAS STENLUND

Department of Product and Production Development

Division of Product Development
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Göteborg, Sweden 2010
 MASTER OF SCIENCE THESIS

Robust Tolerance Design at

Volvo Aero Corporation
Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s program Product Development
ANDREAS STENLUND

Department of Product and Production Development

Division of Product Development
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Göteborg, Sweden 2010
Robust Tolerance Design at Volvo Aero Corporation
Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s program Product Development
ANDREAS STENLUND

© ANDREAS STENLUND, 2010

Examensarbete / Institutionen för Produkt och Produktionsutveckling,

Chalmers tekniska högskola

Department of Product and Production Development

Division of Product Development
Chalmers University of Technology
SE-412 96 Göteborg
Sweden
Telephone: + 46 (0)31-772 1000

Reproservice / Department of Product and Production Development

Göteborg, Sweden 2010
Robust Tolerance Design at Volvo Aero Corporation
Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s program Product Development
ANDREAS STENLUND
Department of Product and Production Development
Division of Product Development
Chalmers University of Technology

ABSTRACT
Volvo Aero Corporation develops and produces advanced components for aircraft
engines. To fulfil the demands for lighter engines, their new product development is
based on Volvo Aero’s capability for light weight design, through fabrication.
Fabrication, as opposed to traditional production methods of a one-piece casting,
consists of smaller cast, forged and sheet metal worked parts, which are welded
together. Simultaneously with this new design follows problems that need to be
solved in order to stay competitive and to be able to produce their products. By
working with robust tolerance design and geometry assurance, variation related
problems can be avoided and thereby improve the quality of produced products.
Robust tolerance design is also required in order to, avoid manual adjustments in
production and thereby make it possible to increase the level of automation.
In the thesis work, several case studies have been conducted in order to investigate
Volvo Aero’s potential to adapt to robust tolerance design methods. These studies
show improvement potential for the parts tested and have been used in order to
describe important work procedures and tasks. A “geometry system developer” role
has been tested in a project in concept phase, were the robust tolerance design tasks
and questions have been handled.
Key words: Robust tolerance design, Fabrication, Variation, Geometry assurance.

I
Robust Tolerans Konstruktion på Volvo Aero Corporation
Examensarbete inom Product Development
ANDREAS STENLUND
Institutionen för Produkt och Produktionsutveckling
Avdelningen för Produktutveckling
Chalmers tekniska högskola

SAMMANFATTNING
Volvo Aero Corporation utvecklar och tillverkar avancerade komponenter till
flygmotorer. För att uppfylla kraven för lättare motorer, är deras utveckling av nya
produkter baserade på Volvo Aeros lättvikts konstruktion, genom fabrikation.
Fabrikation, i jämförelse med traditionella framställningsmetoder genom ett gjutet
stycke, består av mindre gjutna eller smidda delar samt plåtar, som svetsas samman.
Tillsammans med denna nya design följer problem som måste lösas för att förbli
konkurrenskraftiga och för att kunna producera sina produkter. Genom att arbeta med
geometrisk robust konstruktion och geometrisäkring kan variationsrelaterade problem
undvikas och därigenom förbättra kvaliteten på producerade produkter. Geometrisk
robust konstruktion är också nödvändigt för att undvika manuella justeringar i
produktionen och därmed göra det möjligt att öka graden av automatisering.
I examensarbetet har flera fallstudier genomförts för att undersöka Volvo Aeros
potential att anpassa sina metoder till geometrisk robust konstruktion. Dessa studier
visar förbättringspotential för de testade komponenterna och har använts för att
beskriva viktiga arbetssätt och arbetsuppgifter. En "Geometri System Utvecklar" roll
har testats i konceptfasen av ett projekt, genom att ta hand om arbetsuppgifter och
frågor relaterade till geometrisk robust konstruktion.
Nyckelord: Robust konstruktion, Fabrikation, Variation, Geometrisäkring.

II
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT I 
SAMMANFATTNING II 
CONTENTS III 
PREFACE V 

1  INTRODUCTION 1 
1.1  Background 1 
1.2  Purpose 1 
1.3  Objective 1 
1.4  Research questions 2 
1.5  Scope 2 

2  FRAME OF REFERENCE 3 
2.1  Tolerances 3 
2.1.1  Worst case tolerancing 3 
2.1.2  Statistical tolerancing 4 
2.1.3  Process capability indices 4 
2.2  Locating scheme 5 
2.3  Geometrical robust design 5 
2.3.1  Wingquist Laboratory and RD&T 7 
2.4  Measurements 8 
2.5  Geometry System Developer role 8 

3  RESEARCH APPROACH 9 
3.1  Case study research 9 
3.2  Research process 10 

4  RESEARCH FINDINGS 11 

4.1  Case studies 11 
4.1.1  Product X 12 
4.1.2  Product Y 14 
4.1.3  Product Z 16 
4.2  GSU role 17 

5  DISCUSSION 19 
5.1  Discussion about research questions 19 
5.2  Discussion about research approach 21 
5.3  Discussion about case studies 22 

III
6  CONCLUSION 23 
6.1  Recommendations 23 

7  REFERENCES 25 

8  APPENDIX A. CASE STUDY OF PRODUCT X 27 

9  APPENDIX B. CASE STUDY OF PRODUCT Y 29 

10  APPENDIX C. CASE STUDY OF PRODUCT Z 31 

11  APPENDIX D. INTERVIEW 33 

IV
Preface
This Master of Science, thesis report, describes a study about how Volvo Aero
Corporation can implement robust tolerance design into their Global Development
Process (GDP). The research has been carried out between March 2010 and
November 2010, at Volvo Aero Trollhättan, Sweden. The thesis work is the final part
of the master’s program Product Development at Chalmers University of Technology.
It comprises 30 units of credits.
The work has been carried out by Andreas Stenlund and the progress has been
supervised by Prof. Rikard Söderberg at Product development, Chalmers University
of Technology. At Volvo Aero Corporation, mentoring and supervising have been
performed by PhD Johan Lööf.
I would like to thank Rikard for being my mentor and Volvo Aero Corporation for
being able to perform this thesis. Special thanks to Johan who has been the company
supervisor. I want to thank him for all his mentoring and support during the whole
process. I am also thankful to Alejandro Vega Galvez, Tor Wendel, Jesper Larsson,
and all other persons who have helped me at Volvo Aero Trollhättan.

Because of company secrecy policy, all important figures, manufacturing methods

and delicate information have been moved to classified appendixes and can be viewed
in Volvo Aero Corporation’s internal system. With these appendixes available the
reader is advised to ignore Section 4.1 and instead read the appendixes.

Göteborg, Mars 2011

Andreas Stenlund

V
VI
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Volvo Aero Corporation (VAC) a part of Volvo Group (2010), develops and produces
advanced components for aircraft engines. A part of their vision is to develop
lightweight products to lower the fuel consumption of aerospace industry and thereby
reducing costs and emissions (Volvo Aero Corporation, 2007).
To fulfil their vision new product development is based on VAC’s capability for light
weight design through fabrication. Fabrication, as opposed to traditional production
methods of a one-piece casting consists of smaller cast, forged and sheet metal
worked parts, which are welded together (Volvo Aero Corporation, 2007).
One of the major challenges in VAC’s projects is to without any manual adjustments,
assure optimal geometrical conditions before welding. Assuring optimal conditions
will have a great impact on the quality outcome of their production process which
constantly is adapted towards automation. Therefore there is a need to develop
geometry assurance and robust tolerance design techniques applied to aircraft engine
manufacturing.

1.2 Purpose
The purpose is to improve Volvo Aero Corporation’s work with robust tolerance
design and geometry assurance, in line with their Global Development Process
(GDP).

1.3 Objective
The thesis work consists of three main objectives.
• To perform case studies on projects from different stages in the GDP to gain
knowledge about what work can and needs to be done in each stage.
• To perform a method study about how VAC is working with geometric robust
design and geometry assurance today, and produce a guide for how that work
can be improved.
• Conduct studies about what skills are needed for a person with a geometry
system developer role (GSU, Geometri System Utvecklare in Swedish) and
how this role should function in the company.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

1
1.4 Research questions
To guide the work and verify the results afterwards a set of research questions have
been stated. The importance and use of these questions is further described in Section
3.1.
How well adapted are VAC’s products and processes for
implementation of a robust tolerance design process? RQ 1
This question is stated with the aim to investigate how well implemented the work
with robust tolerance design can become at VAC. It is interesting to test how well the
analyse process work with the products geometry and manufacturing processes.
How should the everyday work with robust tolerance design,
function within VAC? RQ 2
This question relates to the GSU role which is explained in Section 2.5, if VAC
should implement a similar role there is a need to conduct research about how the role
should function.
Is there any problems related to robust tolerance design with
VAC’s products today? RQ 3
This question is stated to find out if VAC could gain anything, if the company starts to
work with robust tolerance design.

1.5 Scope
The case study analyses in this thesis are performed using the software Robust Design
& Tolerancing (RD&T) and the recommendations about how to perform similar
studies is based on the software. No other software has in this thesis been evaluated or
tested but the limitation is based on the results from Mia Westins thesis work (Westin,
2010), performed at VAC, where she gathered information about different analysis
software, for robust design.
A limitation for the analyses conducted is that only rigid parts have been analysed.
However a section about the use of non rigid parts can be found in Section 5.1.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

2
2 Frame of Reference
This chapter shortly explains the basic theory used throughout the thesis, regarding
robust tolerance design, geometric robust design and geometry assurance.

2.1 Tolerances
A tolerance is an engineering tool to handle manufacture variation, to make sure that
the functional, assembly and aesthetic demands on the product are met. Tolerances are
often defined in intervals which give the upper and lower limits for how much a
certain measure can vary (Volvo Group, 2006).
To anticipate the final size of a product, when manufactured, tolerances for each part
need to be taken into consideration as well as the locating scheme for each part, see
Section 2.2. With information about both these things the anticipated maximum and
minimum size of the product can be calculated according to different theories. Worst
case and statistical tolerancing are two common used calculation methods which will
be explained in the following sections, Section 2.1.1 and Section 2.1.2.

2.1.1 Worst case tolerancing

When tolerances are calculated according to worst case scenario, it is implied that all
measures included in the analysis is at it maximum or minimum value. The total
measurement for the whole product is then calculated as the sum of all part
measurements. Figure 1 illustrates the relation. The chance for that the worst case will
occur is very small and therefore is statistical calculations more realistic and useful.

D1 D2 D3 D1+ D2+ D3

Nominal size

D1+t1 D2+t2 D3+t3 D1+ D2+ D3+t1+t2+t3

Worst case tolerancing

D1+t1 D2+t2 D3+t3 D1+ D2+ D3+T

Statistical tolerancing

Figure 1 Illustrates two different tolerance calculation methods

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

3
2.1.2 Statistical tolerancing
If statistical tolerancing is used when calculating a measurement of the total product,
tolerances for parts can in some cases provide the advantage of cancellation because
one part is smaller and one is bigger than nominal size (Srinivasan, 1999). A
calculation method in statistical tolerancing is Rot Sum Square (RSS). In this method
the total tolerance (T) for a set of parts is a function of all part’s tolerances and their
amplification factor (Chase & Parkinson, 1991).
∑   1 
Where , is the sensitivity coefficient (amplification factor), n is is the
amount of parts and the mean value is the expected value. The difference of worst
case tolerancing and statistical tolerancing is illustrated in Figure 1.

2.1.3 Process capability indices

The interval specified by tolerances does not describe how the measurement within
the interval is distributed, to specify the behaviour of the measurement standard
deviation and process capability indices are used.
If the variation in a process is measured and documented it can be illustrated in a
histogram where the distribution curve will have a spread around a mean value. This
spread is defined as the standard deviation which is calculated as (Montgomery &
Runger, 2007):
  (2)
   
The variance is a measure of the dispersion in the distribution. The standard deviation
implies how well a measurement can be realised, a low value shows that the
measurement size often is close to nominal. The actual spread of a measure (process
performance) can be related to the allowed tolerance interval with a capability index,
Cp, when the data follows a normal distribution. This capability index relates with
which confidence a measure will fit in between an upper and lower distribution limit
(UDL, LDL) (Forrest, 2003). It is calculated as:
  3 
One limitation when calculating with Cp is that the mean value is assumed to be
correct according to the desired value. In normal processes this is hardly ever the case;
therefore several alternative indices to Cp have been developed. Cpk is one of them
which are taking variation into account as well as a mean shift from the target value.
The Cpk value is calculated as:
 
,   4 
 
A normal minimal Cpk value in industry is 1.33 which refers to four standard
deviations and a confidence level of 99.99%. This is 66 parts per million outside the
specified distribution limits (Pearn & Kotz, 2006).

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

4
2.22 Locatiing schem
me
A loocating scheeme for a paart is the coollection of defined
d poinnts that lockks the part in
i all
six degrees of freedom. A locating scheme s ually consisst of three ppoints (A1, A2,
usu
A3)) that form a plane andd lock the paart in one trranslation annd two rotattions, two point
p
(B1, B2) that locks one translation annd one rotattion and onne point (C11) that lockss the
last translation.. For a betteer understannding see Fiigure 2 beloow.

Figuure 2 Illustrattion that shhows the siix

poinnts necessary to lock alll degrees of o
freeddom in a locaating scheme.(Söderberg et
e
al., 2006,
2 p.76)

Thee name that describes the

t collectioon of pointss that locks a parts possition can differ
d
betwween differrent users. The collecction and th he points themselves
t may be caalled
locaating schem
me and locattors, datum planes and datum poinnts or refereence system m and
refeerence poinnts. Howeveer, in this thesis the collection is referred to as locaating
scheeme and thee points as locators.
l

2.33 Geomeetrical roobust deesign

Twoo produced products arre never ideentical; theree will alwayys be geomeetrical variaation
due to variatioon during manufacturin
m ng. This vaariation mayy lead to pooor quality and
highh manufactuuring costs. A geomettrical robusst design is less sensitiive to variaation
whiich means thatt the prooduct will be
b satisfying
g regardlesss of ingoingg variation,, see
Figuure 3 (Söderberg & Linndkvist, 19999). The wo ork with inccreasing the robustness of a
partt is closely linked withh improvingg the parts locating
l schheme whichh was descrribed
earllier in Sectioon 2.2.

Figuure 3 Illustrattes the relation between input and output when the
robuustness is varyying (Söderberrg & Lindkvist, 2002, p.175
5).

CHA
ALMERS, Prroduct Developpment, Masterr of Science Thesis
T
5
Robust design was developed in Japan during the 1950’s by Genichi Taguchi (The
American Supplier Institute, 2000). By using the method early in the development
process, the locating schemes can be improved and coupled tolerances be avoided. In
a coupled tolerance chain, the geometrical variation is not only affected by the part
itself but also by other parts. A coupled design is therefore more sensitive to variation
because it is amplified further out in the chain which results in a higher risk of causing
problems. One way to solve problems caused by a coupled design is to assign more
narrow tolerances to the parts. This solution is however expensive. Small tolerances
can instead be avoided by implementing robust design early in the product
development process which consequently leads to cost savings. (Söderberg &
Lindkvist, 1999).
Improving the locating schemes to archive a more robust design is enabled by
allocating the locators to more suitable positions. The main idea is to spread out the
locators in a way that minimizes the effect of variation in the points. Figure 4 shows
two separate sets of locators with different robustness. The three locators that form a
plane have in the right figure been moved away from each other. A variation in one
point would not affect the part as much as it would in the left figure. The right figure
therefore shows a more robust behaviour and is less sensitive to variation. A locating
scheme’s sensitivity to variation can therefore be analysed by affecting one locator at
a time and measuring the resulting movement of the part. This procedure has to be
made for each locator and the movement tracked for each surface of the part, which is
time-consuming and hard. However there are computer software tools too quickly and
effortless do this analysis virtually. One such software is RD&T (Robust Design &
Tolerancing) developed by Wingquist Laboratory at Chalmers University of
Technology (RD&T Technology AB, 2010).

Figure 4 Illustrates the difference in robustness between two locating schemes. The right is more
robust as indicated by the legend.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

6
2.3.1 Wingq
quist Lab
boratory and
a RD&T
Winngquist labboratory is an internnationally competitivee competennce centre for
mulltidisciplinaary researchh in the fieldd of producct and prodduction deveelopment. Their
T
fourr main reseearch areas is System Engineerin ng and PLMM, Geometrry Assurancce &
Robbust Designn, Geometrry and Mottion Planniing lastly Flexible F Auutomation. The
reseearch area that
t is relatted to this thesis
t is Geeometry Asssurance & Robust Deesign
whiich focuses on how to handle geoometrical vaariation throoughout thee whole pro oduct
reallization proccess. With distinct
d actiivities durin
ng each phase of the Viirtual Geom
metry
Assurance loopp, the variaation can be b controlleed throughoout the whoole processs see
Figuure 5. Thee research group workking in thiis area is lead by Prrofessor Riikard
Södderberg and includes teen additionaal senior ressearchers annd 9 PhD sstudents (Siilow,
2010).

Figuure 5 Geomettry assurancee activities illuustated by the “Virtual Geoometry Assuraance

Proccess” loop (Sööderberg et all., 2006)

In 1998 Rikarrd Söderbeerg and Laars Lindqvist introducced the Coomputer Aided A
Toleerancing (CCAT) softwaare RD&T (RD&T ( Tecchnology AB,
A 2010) too assist the work
w
in thhe Virtual Geometry
G A
Assurance P
Process. CA
AT softwaree such as R RD&T could be
usedd to simulaate variatioon and calcculate stand dard deviatiion. At firsst, the softw ware
requuires Compputer Aided Design (CA AD) modells of all parrts, to repreesent the deesign
and shape of thhe product. The next important
i sttep in the process
p is too evaluate what
w
geom metries thatt actually loock the partts together and in whaat directionss they act. Then
T
locaators and loocating scheeme can be assigned an nd positionning the partts to each other
o
(Södderberg & Lindkvist,
L 2
2007).

CHA
ALMERS, Prroduct Developpment, Masterr of Science Thesis
T
7
In the software RD&T it is possible to perform analyses like stability analysis,
variation analysis and contribution analysis. In a stability analysis every locator is
allowed a unit sized distortion. Then the amount of units that this variation affects the
entire structure is visualised by colour coding. The variation analysis uses the so
called, Monte-Carlo method to generate random variables for variation of each point
in line with their assigned tolerance. The variation of all assigned measures is then
documented for each assembled product, which is repeated for a chosen number of
iterations. Contribution analysis uses the documented values from the variation
analysis and calculates in which amount (percentage) the different points contribute to
the variation in the different measures (Söderberg et al., 2006).

2.4 Measurements
For a better understanding some measurements that are used in the thesis are here
described and Figure 6 illustrates them further.
Gap is the perpendicular distance between two opposing surfaces or edges
Mismatch, also called flush is the height difference between two neighbouring
surfaces.
Parallelism between two parts is also measured by calculating the variation in two
gap or mismatch measures.

Gap

Mismatch

Figure 6 Illustrates how mismatch and gap measurements are

defined

2.5 Geometry System Developer role

Geometry System Developer (GSU, Geometri System Utvecklare, in Swedish) is a
common name for the people at Volvo Cars Corporation and Volvo 3P (Volvo Group,
2010) that work with geometric robust design. Information about his (hers) work
tasks, processes and role are more described in research findings, Section 4.2.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

8
3 Research Approach
The research mainly consists of testing if the Virtual Geometry Assurance Process
developed by Wingquist Laboratories is possible to apply into VAC’s development
process. Geometry assurance and geometric robust design are new work methods at
VAC. The analysis, about how the work should be implemented and which work
methods are suitable are therefore hard to structure beforehand. According to Yin
(2003), highly unstructured analyses and problems can benefit from using a case study
research design, which also have been chosen for this thesis. Yin (2003) also explains
that the aim for a case study is to verify the feasibility of the chosen research
procedure which mainly is the case at VAC. A more fixed and pre-decided research
method would become hard to manage due to the nature of the project. Other research
approaches lack the flexibility that exploratory case study possesses.
To get more deep knowledge in the area qualitative semi structured interviews was
planned. However due to lack of response from interviewees, only one interview
could be performed. The interview where held at VAC face to face with prepared
subject matters to discuss but otherwise unstructured.

3.1 Case study research

With the use of a case study, it is possible to look into an organisation and keep the
holistic and real characteristics of important events, such as relations and processes
(Yin, 2003). Case studies are in other words used to catch the dynamics present and to
increase the understanding of an area in interest (Eisenhardt, 1989). The studies often
use data collection from many sources, combined together to give a true holistic
representation of the real life case (Tellis, 1997).
Yin (2003) has divided the case study research into three different types, explanatory,
descriptive or exploratory. An explanatory case study should be performed when a
situation is known and there is a need to explain why the situation is present or
occurred. A descriptive case study mostly aims at describing social and personal
issues such as performance, group structure and social relations of neighbourhoods.
An exploratory study is used when not much about the structure and process is
known. The study aims at answering questions of the type “How?” and “Why?”,
which fits well with the stated research questions. Stuart et al. (2002) states similar
questions of type “What is there?”, “What are the key issues?” and “What is
happening?” when the case study is meant to explore a territory, which is the case in
this thesis.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

9
3.2 Research process
Three case studies are conducted to capture the different stages of Volvo Aero’s GDP.
The individual case studies have been tailored to fit into Wingquist Laboratory’s
“Virtual Geometry Assurance Process” that was mentioned in Section 2.3.1. By
implementing this process the case studies aim at describing how well the process can
be adapted and connected to VAC’s development process. According to Yin (2003)
there is a need for a plan or design how to get from the initial research questions to
their answers when conducting a case study. In this thesis the plan or design is simply
as mentioned, to apply Wingquist Laboratory’s process and for each case follow
enough of that path to be able to answer the stated research questions

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

10
4 Research Findings
This chapter describes the different findings gained during the case studies and
interviews.

4.1 Case studies

The case studies were conducted in order to provide information about what type of
work that is possible and viable to perform during a product development process.
The three projects that were chosen for the case studies are in different development
phases according to VAC’s GDP and could therefore provide information from a
wider spectrum. The GDP which is based on the Volvo Corporate’s, is a development
logic, formed to compose a generic and common ground for product development
with the flexibility to adapt to different assignments.
The three case studies performed are described, regarding analyse and result in the
following Sections. Figure 7 explains where in the GDP the projects currently are.

Figure 7 Describes the case studies and in which phase of the development the product are.

Common for all the case studies is that they provided interesting information and
understanding about how to gather useful data and how to perform the analysis
effective.
It was found that for products in late developments stages a study of the drawings
where necessary in order to get a complete view of the product. After this initial
analyse of the geometry and drawings the already defined locating scheme could be
analysed with respect to geometric stability. The overall stability (RMS-value) can be
insightful and guiding but more interesting is the stability in a certain direction.
Which direction that is most important, have to be figured out by experience and is
not always clear. This shows that theoretical knowledge is not enough, practical
experience from working with robust design and analyses like this case are truly
important.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

11
The next analyse step with these matured products is to identify problem areas that
could be related to variation, either from the initial study or from persons familiar
with the product. However it is more likely to come from the latter. It is necessary that
for each problem area identify some critical dimensions and define these in RD&T.
With the critical dimensions at hand it is possible to define tolerances according to
drawings or process capability and perform a focused analyse. The results from the
analysis are documented with the help of standardised report supplied by RD&T. The
documentation and acceptance/approval of results and are according to Peter Edholm
(2010) a key to be able to make changes in a developments process. He states that
clear deliverables in form of reports that can be signed, are important in order to keep
leverage in upcoming discussions and decisions.

4.1.1 Product X
Because of company confidentiality some of the information regarding the analysis
can not be included into this report. The complete version of this analysis is therefore
explained in Appendix A. Case Study of Product X, available internally at VAC.
The work needed to be performed in the Product X project was about building up a
good ground for the continuing development and to increase the interference between
different organisational functions. The work was conducted together with the design
team at VAC. At first the work was focused on aiding the project team regarding
robust tolerance design and tolerance chains, during concept selection for the product.
The two concepts were called ”Forged” and “Sector” and as the names imply one is
made mostly by forging and the other assembled from smaller sectors, by welding
them together.
Stability analyses were performed and assembly sequences were discussed for each
concept. During that work, questions were raised regarding level of control that would
be needed for the different concepts to assure that variation could be kept within
limits. To answer these questions more investigations needed to be performed
regarding manufacturing methods and fixture design. The two concepts Sector and
Forged were very different, but when regarding robustness, quite similar. Hence, for
the upcoming stage gate, a comparison between them, was delivered, see Table 1Fel!
Hittar inte referenskälla.. The main difference between the two, are the lack of
process control, that concept Sector suffers from. Since the structure is composed of
several parts welded together it is hard to ensure good position for each of them.
Because of anticipated weld distortions there would be necessary to weld prepare
several connection surfaces between the parts. This extra operation is expensive but
good from a robust design, point of view, because it in this case, avoids an unwanted
tolerance chain.
During the manufacturing it is favourable to weld all or some parts together in an even
distribution and in the same fixture (Aronsson, 2010). Hence, the fixture that is to
hold the parts during welding for the concept Sector would become extremely
complex. The fixture complexity would not only come from the number of parts but
because of the parts locating schemes, if they were to be geometrically robust.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

12
Table 1 Important aspects to consider during concept selection, regarding
robust design.

Forged Sector

Two fixtures (one

Fixtures One fixture
complex)
Level of certainty Hard to predict weld
Good control
and control distortions
Defined by milling Hard to control due
Tolerances
operations to weld distortions

Tolerance chain Good Good

The locating schemes for the other concept, Forged, was instead optimised to use easy
accessed surfaces and consist of three locators. The process control for Forged would
also be improved because the tolerances for the parts would be well defined by
process capability. Because of more integration of parts as opposed to concept Sector,
there is no need for extra weld preparations. However the forging of the part is time-
consuming and difficult, but that is not considered in this analysis.
The development of the locating scheme for the two concepts involved so much more
than optimising regarding geometric robustness which was the initial objective.
Several aspects proved to affect the choice of design for the locating scheme and
sometimes these were hard to discover and understand, some of them are gathered in
Table 2.
Table 2 Important aspects regarding the choice of locating scheme

It should be strived for, to use only one locating scheme for a part
Areas near weld seam could be deformed and the position of locators/fixture may
hinder the weld tool
Areas that is to be machined, should not be used, othervise the locating scheme for
that part need to be varied during production

Locators should be positioned so that there is possible to clamp the part directly
towards the locator
It is favourable if the locating scheme provide an easy fixturing of the part, partly
because of fixture design but also because of assembly time during production

Flexible areas could increase input variation and should be avoided

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

13
The resulting proposed locating schemes for both concepts are developed with these
guidelines in mind, trough several iterations to become optimal in every aspect.
Parallel as the concepts were to be reviewed for further development a design work
was presented that resulted in a change of the concept Forged. This altered the
geometry but not the locating schemes for the parts. With input regarding robustness,
concept Forged were later selected for further development which for the case study
work, resulted in that robust locating schemes were developed for each part. These
locating schemes are described in Appendix A.
An analysis was performed to gain knowledge about what tolerances and processes
that would be needed to control variation. To perform this variation analysis,
information about the manufacturing method was required and then mainly what
tolerances that method results in. The capability for those methods was acquired thru
discussion with production engineers, which enabled the analysis to be performed.
During this more extended analysis required size of tolerances was calculated. The
result was elicited with variation analysis in RD&T, which is explained in Section
2.3.1. The variation analysis calculated anticipated process capabilities and found
areas more sensitive to variation than others. It was also found that the initial stated
value for tolerances, given by the project team could be increased and the assembly
would still work. A more complete description about the analysis can be found in
Appendix A.

4.1.2 Product Y
Because of company confidentiality some of the information regarding the analysis
can not be included into this report. The complete version of this analysis is therefore
explained in Appendix B. Case Study of Product Y, available internally at VAC.
The Product Y design is developed according to VAC’s concept lightweight through
fabrication. Since the development of Product Y is in phase G5-G6 according to
Volvo Aero’s GDP, all interfaces and locating schemes have already been set. The
analysis in this phase need to be more verification than an input to design, and are
therefore limited to one small but critical part of the production. The part selected in
this case study is a specific welding sequence. This operation will affect all the
following operations because of the tolerance chain built into the design and it is
therefore extra important that it is performed correctly. The main question is if the
fixture that holds the parts during welding and the parts themselves are adequate
geometrically robust for this operation.
The first step in the analysis was to, from drawings, locate the defined locating
schemes for all parts and apply these in RD&T. To fully understand what actually
happens during the welding sequence, in order to not leave any important aspects out,
a more comprehensive study was required for some parts. In the analysis of the
drawings and models of the fixture and the parts it was found that VAC had applied
some geometrically robust design in this project. For the included parts there were
well defined locating schemes realised mostly with the use of discrete bosses.
However, theses locating schemes proved not to be especially geometrically stable.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

14
The idea from the start was to use the locating schemes to fixture the parts together
and perform weld preparations on several surfaces at the same time before welding.
This proved, during prototyping, impossible to perform due to weld distortions and
the weld preparations for all other surfaces than the first one were removed. Hence,
the locating scheme is as a result, located far from the actual weld seam to avoid
interference with operations that is not performed anymore. Therefore it is not
optimised regarding geometrical robustness, in relation to the weld seam which results
in unnecessary big amplification of the variations.
The next step was then to define critical measurements on the assembly and add these
to the analysis in RD&T. The critical area in this analysis was defined to be the weld
seam and the measurements selected were therefore gap and mismatch measurements
between the interfering parts. With the gap measurement analysed on four locations
the distance between the two parts can be checked together with the angle between the
parts. Mismatch measurements gave information about the size of the misalignment
between the two parts. When the measurements had been defined in RD&T the
tolerances for all surfaces, pins and holes that are used by the locating schemes or the
measurements needed to be inserted from drawings. However for the fixture no
tolerances were specified since this part was defined as rigid without any possibility to
move. As mentioned, variation analysis provided results about gap, mismatch and
parallelism for the relations in the seam. The size of these variations was however
hard to relate to, since there were few products produced and no requirements stated,
for the condition of the seam. The only demand on the weld seam was standardised
values about largest allowed mismatch between two parts. In this process a major lack
in communication and coupling between functions was identified. All weld
simulations done by engineers at VAC are performed on nominal geometries.
However in design and production tolerances and variation are defined and conditions
that are not nominal are frequently identified. There is therefore no control and
simulation performed for what impact geometric variation has on e.g. weld
distortions.
From discussions with weld engineers and operators, it emerged that if a gap between
parts is present before attachment welding this gap will shrink during the more
extensive welding that will follow. If the parts, in the weld seam, are not parallel in
relation to each other, they would therefore tend to become more parallel. Mismatch
between parts would however still be present after all welding is performed. What this
really denotes and what complications this might result in are discussed in
Appendix B.
To easier understand and to display the results from the different analyses a RD&T
analyse document was created during the case study and is available internally at
VAC.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

15
4.1.3 Product Z
Because of company confidentiality some of the information regarding the analysis
can not be included into this report. The complete version of the analysis is therefore
explained in Appendix C. Case Study of Product Z, available internally at VAC.
The phases of the process that are analysed are the manufacturing, measurement and
assembly of a part of the product. The analysis is conducted because VAC wishes to
improve the control and reduce the variation of this manufacturing process. The case
study of Product Z was supposed to be a study of the possibility to verify results from
analyses against measured values. It was known that the product had some problems
possibly related to geometric robust design but the source was not known. Soon into
the analyse it was clear that the product had big problems related to repeatability and
robustness.
At first the drawings and the model were achieved to be able to understand the
geometry and locating scheme of the product. The part analysed have all locators
positioned against non machined surfaces and the positions for the locators is not well
defined. Therefore it is hard to position the part in the exact same way repeatedly.
Furthermore, the geometric stability of the locating scheme is far from robust which
amplifies this variation even further. The total variation in an area or point is a
combination between input variation in the locators, variation in the measured area
and the geometric robustness of the locating scheme. Hence, the total variation of
Product Z is in some areas to big. Exact values of the analysed variations are
described in Appendix C. However these results were hard to verify due to much
bigger problems. One problem is that the geometry seems to be deformed when it
comes from the supplier. This deformation makes the hardware measurements
performed on the part somewhat unusable since they do not reflect the same geometry
as in the analysis. Another problem is that the bad repeatability affects the conducted
measurements and there is no way to determine in what extent. The hardware
measurements are conducted on more than 50 parts with respect to the same locating
scheme. However, no measurements are conducted to determine with which precision
one particular part could be fixtured over and over again, i.e. the fixture’s
repeatability.
Even if the improvements would be hard to verify, a set of new locating schemes was
designed, see Appendix C. The three new locating schemes are designed so that their
implementation would need different amount of change to the process. Table 3 shows
a comparison between the different locating schemes. Even if all of the new locating
schemes suggested would be an improvement in relation to the current one, it is not
clear that they all will provide adequate improvement, for a change to be
implemented.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

16
Table 3 Comparison between the different alternative locating schemes suggested. Robustness
with Rot Mean Square (RMS)-value implies how well the locating scheme can handle variation. The
changes to geometry and fixtures rows, implies how much change that need to be performed in
order to use the suggested locating scheme. Repeatability shows with which precision the part can
be inserted into the fixture repeatedly.

Robustness Original Alternative 1 Alternative 4 Alternative 5

RMS‐value 3.30 2.28 2.27 1.64

Changes to geometry None None Significant Significant

Changes to fixtures None Significant Significant Significant

Repeatability Bad Bad Improved Good

A more complete description about the analysis can be seen in Appendix C.

4.2 GSU role

The GSU should be a central role inside the corporation that actively works to
increase knowledge about robust design and improve the geometrical robustness
products by e.g. optimising locating schemes. To optimise a new product regarding
robust design it is important to include the GSU from pre study until production starts.
The most important should be to set the locating schemes for each part in a really
early stage to give each other function in the company a common ground for each
part. The locating schemes provide a ground for e.g. quality measurement,
requirement specification that will help to guide and control the process. On the
further development these locating schemes will also be developed to fit with the
changing product. When questions about tolerances, fixturing and packing studies
arise, the GSU is present and well-grounded to answer these questions with proper
analyses and writes a report. Much of this knowledge has been acquired during an
interview with Peter Edholm (2010) which can be read about in Appendix D.
It is important that the GSU is a part of the development team and that (s)he have
clear stated deliveries for each stage. If the GSU provide a result and get it accepted
by project leader or design leader it is easy to go back to that decision later, if pressure
of time affects the priority of robust design.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

17
 CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis
18
5 Discussion
5.1 Discussion about research questions
The stated research questions in the introducing chapter (1.4) are here discussed and
answered based on result in this thesis.
How well adapted are VAC’s products and processes for
implementation of a geometry assurance process? RQ 1
VAC’s products are often hard to model in an analysis due to the rotational symmetry.
When there are no well defined geometries like bosses or such that specify where the
locators should be placed but instead only a flat surface, it is hard to position e.g. only
three points. What could happen if the surface is deformed is that the three points on
the surface is located on one side and thereby tilt the whole part. To adapt VAC’s
process to a more robust design, well defined locating schemes are required. The
locators in this scheme could be realised by geometries on the parts themselves, or by
geometries on their fixtures.
VAC’s parts are mostly welded together into products, these welds are somewhat hard
to analyse. Welding in e.g. automotive industry could partly be seen as a glue process,
were the geometry mostly stays in the position that it is fixtured. However, in VAC’s
case the welding often require more extensive use of heat which makes the geometries
deform and then shrink during cooling. This process deforms the geometries in such
extent that several assemblies cannot be analysed in one simulation model. Often in
VAC’s case there are demands that the variations should be really small, weld
operations are therefore often followed by machining due to the deformations. Hence,
it is mostly interesting to analyse the state before welding because after the operation
the structure will be machined to desired geometry anyway. To correctly analyse the
weld operation a more advanced non-rigid analyse would need to be performed,
incorporated with weld simulation, to anticipate deformations. A non-rigid analyse
allows for more than 6 locators to hold a part, it permits extra support points that can
define the weld seam. A non-rigid module for e.g. sheet metal analyses is available in
RD&T but for VAC’s complex geometries, there is a need to analyse solid models.
How should the everyday work with geometry assurance function
within VAC? RQ 2
Like explained in Section 4.2 the work with geometry assurance should be handled by
a person with a GSU role since the area is too complex to be handled at every single
department separately. The important connections made between department will also
be lost if there is no central role. If a single person in one project gets the
responsibility for geometric robust design instead of a central GSU, this person will
not have time to fully learn and utilise the techniques. The person responsible should
therefore do this work consistently to become better but also have a central function
within projects and be inserted into the projects from start.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

19
As described earlier the work should consist of defining geometric robust locating
schemes for all parts and during the development process continue to optimise and
develop them further. The work will consist of joining different functions in the
organisation together and in unity decide where it is possible to place locators.
Functions or persons that the GSU need to have contact with are e.g.:
• Leaders; Design and Project
• Mechanical engineers
• Weld engineers
• Aero engineers
• Fixture developers
• Production
• Suppliers
During many of the steps in the case studies it was clear that knowledge and
experience about geometrically robust design, tolerances and locating schemes are
truly important. If the person who performs the analyses and interpreted the result
from them should be able to do this in a efficient and correct way (s)he needs
experience.
The GSU also need to inform and slowly train affected employees about robust design
and what they together with VAC can gain from working with it. Only if the benefits
with robust design are widely known they can properly be utilised.
Is there any problems related to geometric robust design with
VAC’s products today? RQ 3
VAC need to design products with locating schemes that are better defined in order to
gain control of the process variation throughout the entire product lifecycle. One
example is the lack of ability to control and review the variation in the Product Z
project. A better defined locating scheme would solve the repeatability problem as
well as the control problems.
Throughout all the case studies it has been found that VAC could gain a lot from
increasing the geometric robustness of all their products. Some problems might have
been avoided and some narrow tolerances could be increased to lower expenses.
Although it seems like many things can be improved, it is hard to beforehand give a
indication about how much.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

20
5.2 Discussion about research approach
The use of case studies as research approach during the thesis work has encouraged
testing and exploration of new way to solve problems. Since the research method is
less controlled during its implementation than other methods, it allows changes to be
performed that are needed to reach conclusions. During the case study of Product Z
changes was performed from the initial plan since the verification of the product was
found to be harder than expected. This change provided a chance to investigate the
product for improvements instead of ending the research with only the results about
the verification problems.
The common work method for dealing with geometric robust design, during product
development, proved to work for most cases. However, the different steps were
sometimes hard to apply due to the fact that necessary information about the product
or process sometimes was missing. This was the case for e.g. the Product Y case study
where necessary information about the requirements for a weld seam was missing. In
the future, these problems have to be identified and work methods may have to be
changed to manage them.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

21
5.3 Discussion about case studies
The case studies resulted in several new ideas and work methods of how to implement
geometric robust design into VAC’s GDP. However, there are a big difference in
providing ideas and getting them implemented. The projects are as explained, in
different developments stages and are naturally therefore more or less easy to guide in
the right direction. Early changes like those in Product X project, does not affect that
many other areas, however, the effect from them are huge. In a later stage like with
Product Z necessary changes are easy to find but hard to realize. It is often hard to put
a figure on the improvement potential and therefore even harder to get the change
approved. Since the main reason for implementing geometrically robust design, is to
avoid problems in manufacturing instead of having to solve them, it is more
interesting to look into new products and projects. However, as already stated, a lot
can be learned from analysing already developed products to identify company
specific problem areas and avoid these problems in the future.
Welding at VAC creates another problem since it deforms the part in such extent that
assemblies cannot be analysed in sequence. The welding deforms of the parts between
two following assemblies which makes today’s software unable to simulate them.
Today there are no analyse method to simulate the connection between variation and
deformation from welding at VAC but it would be needed.
One problem that needs a change in behaviour and definitions are the fact that VAC
uses the engine’s centreline when making drawings. The centerline is in theory, a
good point to define tolerances, in relation to, but not in practice. The centerline
cannot be found anywhere and this affects for example the measurement of the part.
Since this position is not a physical location but a point in the middle of the part, it
needs to be measured every time it should be found. This measurement increases the
tolerance chain for the part or process with another tolerance which is unwanted.
Furthermore, many of VAC’s products are rotational symmetric and therefore quite
hard to analyse. The analysis tool demands that all degrees of freedom are locked and
need discrete locator positions. A solution about how to solve these problems needs to
be discussed further, internally at VAC.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

22
6 Conclusion
If VAC should be competitive on the market and produce product according their
vision, “Best Partner”, they need to implement new work methods to control
variation. The difficulties and problems related to variation, which will come from
working with fabrication instead of single cast parts, needs to be taken care of. With
an implementation of robust tolerance design and a GSU role, several benefits will be
obtained. New products developed will become more geometrical robust and from a
early start in the projects there will be a common ground defining the product,
spreading from design to fixture manufacturing, drawings and production.
The implementation of a new work method, a new role within the company and a new
way of thinking might take time. It will probably take several years until the process
is well adapted to the project work at VAC. Even if there is an interest and somewhat
understanding in the company it will become a hard process. However, as seen in the
cases studies every little step makes a huge difference.
This new work method needs to get proper support from the top management
otherwise it will be hard to gain full advantage of robust tolerance design and
geometry assurance. The benefits from working with robust tolerance design are hard
to translate into numbers and sometimes even hard to see, since the main factor is to
avoid problems instead of solving them. Therefore is support for the area even more
important.

6.1 Recommendations
The recommendations to VAC are to implement robust tolerance design into the
company and later when more knowledge is gathered, customize the process to fit
their own processes. Some areas can be looked into further, like how to avoid a
tolerance chain when working with the engines centerline and how to analyse the
connection between variations and weld deformations. A study regarding
deformations could be initiated as a master’s thesis work to gain some knowledge
before a complete study is conducted. VAC will gain a lot if they can predict weld
distortions originated from geometric variations and thereby be able to define more
accurate demands on weld seam conditions before welding.
Even if VAC introduces new work methods with robust tolerance design and
implements a GSU role, some kind of 3D simulation software need to be acquired.
The simulations and calculations that need to be performed are impossible to perform
by head. Therefore is there a need for some kind of software that can calculate
geometrical variation outcomes, related to robust tolerance design.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

23
 CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis
24
7 References
Aronsson, E., 2010. Interview about welding techniques at Volvo Aero. Trollhättan,
Sweden.
Chase, K.W. & Parkinson, A.R., 1991. A Survey of Research in the Application of
Tolerance Analysis to the Design of Mechanical Assemblies. Research in Engineering
Design, 3, pp.23-37.
Edholm, P., 2010. Interview about Robust Design and GSU Role. Translated by A.
Stenlund. Trollhättan, Sweden.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Building Theories From Case Study Research. The Academy
of Management Review, 14(4), pp.532-50.
Forrest, W.B., 2003. Implementing Six Sigma: Smarter Solutions Using Statistical
Methods, Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons.
Montgomery, D.C. & Runger, G.C., 2007. Applied Statistics and Probability for
Engineers, fourth edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
Pearn, W.L. & Kotz, S., 2006. Encyclopedia and Handbook of Process Capability
Indices: A Comprehensive Exposition of Quality Control Measures. World Scientific
Publishing Co.
RD&T Technology AB, 2010. RD&T Technology - The Tool RD&T. [Online]
Available at: http://www.rdttech.se/tool.html [Accessed 26 October 2010].
Silow, N., 2010. Produkt- och produktionsutveckling. Research Areas. [Online]
Available at: http://www.chalmers.se/ppd/wingquist-en/research/research-areas7743
[Accessed 12 October 2010].
Srinivasan, V., 1999. Statistical Tolerancing. In Drake, P.J. Dimensioning and
Tolerancing Handbook. McGraw-Hill. p.Ch. 8.
Stuart, I. et al., 2002. Effective case research in operations management: A process
perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 20(5), pp.419-33.
Söderberg, R. & Lindkvist, L., 1999. Computer aided assembly robustness evaluation.
Journal of Engineering Design, 10(2)..
Söderberg, R. & Lindkvist, L., 2002. Stability and seam variation analysis for
automotive body design. Journal of Engineering Design 13(2).
Söderberg, R. & Lindkvist, L., 2007. Robustness evaluation and tolerance analysis,
Software manual Robust Design & Tolerancing.
Söderberg, R., Lindkvist, L. & Carlson, J., 2006. Virtual Geometry Assurance For
Effective Product Realization. In 1st Nordic Conference on Product Lifecycle
Management - NordPLM’06. Göteborg, 2006.
Tellis, W., 1997. Application of a Case Study Methodology. The Qualitative Reports,
3(3).
The American Supplier Institute, 2000. Dr. Genishi Tagushi. [Online] Available at:
http://www.amsup.com/taguchi_methods/dr_taguchi.htm [Accessed 26 October
2010].

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

25
Westin, M., 2010. Tolerance Design and Processes for Fabricated Jet Engine
Components. Master's Thesis. Luleå, Sweden: Luleå University of Technology
Industrial Design Engineering.
Volvo Aero Corporation, 2007. Technology - Make It Light. [Online] Available at:
http://www.volvoaero.com/volvoaero/global/en-
gb/aboutus/Technology/Pages/Technology.aspx [Accessed 23 Augustus 2010].
Volvo Aero Corporation, 2010. Weld modelling & automation. [Online] Available at:
http://www.volvoaero.com/volvoaero/global/en-
gb/aboutus/Technology/weld_modeling_automation/Pages/weld_modeling_tech.aspx
[Accessed 23 Augustus 2010].
Volvo Group, 2006. STD 112-00, Geometrical tolerances. Standars. Volvo Group.
Volvo Group, 2010. Volvo 3P. [Online] Available at:
http://www.volvogroup.com/group/global/en-
gb/volvo%20group/our%20companies/volvo3p/Pages/Volvo3P.aspx
[Accessed 15 November 2010].
Volvo Group, 2010. Volvo Group: Home. [Online] Available at:
http://www.volvo.com/group/volvosplash-global/en-gb/volvo_splash.htm
[Accessed 23 Augustus 2010].
Yin, R.K., 2003. Case study research - Design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks:
Sage.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

26
8 Appendix A. Case Study of Product X
This part of the report is removed due to confidentiality. Refer to Volvo Aero
Corporation’s intern servers for a full version of the report.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

27
 CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis
28
9 Appendix B. Case Study of Product Y
This part of the report is removed due to confidentiality. Refer to Volvo Aero
Corporation’s intern servers for a full version of the report.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

29
 CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis
30
10 Appendix C. Case Study of Product Z
This part of the report is removed due to confidentiality. Refer to Volvo Aero
Corporation’s intern servers for a full version of the report.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

31
 CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis
32
11 Appendix D. Interview
This is a summary of an unstructured interview with Peter Edholm about robust
design and GSU role. Summarised and translated by Andreas Stenlund.
Peter Edholm works with a consultant firm, PE Geometry Development AB, to
implement robust design into businesses in the area. He has been involved with
implementing robust design into Volvo Trucks and Volvo Cars Corporation among
others.
Team design
Usually geometry assurance activities is performed by consulting businesses but in
larger companies as with the automotive industry it is usually performed internal by
about 10 people. In a single project, it may be up to 6 people (GAE, Geometry
Assurance Engineer), each divided into a structural component in the project. These
GEA can either sit together or be placed in design teams. They converse with each
other about the entire design solution in the project and put up a common strategy, but
deliver and discuss individually against design department.
GSU role
A GSU should be involved in a project from pre-study, to the production start of the
part. Most important in a project is to establish and optimize the locating schemes
early, this can be implemented at low cost and it will have positive repercussions in
design as well as production. Locating schemes thereby creates a basis for setting
standards, monitoring measurements etc. on the product, that makes it possible to
guide and control the process. Is work done on a new detail, the process is simple and
rather theoretical because the GSU can decide what (s)he wants but if it is an existing
product or production system, a lot of cooperation with production is needed.
It is important to include design and be active as GSU to get as much cooperation as
possible. It is also important with fixed deliverables lashed to the project plan and get
them approved in order to highlight the decisions taken later in the project phase. It is
hard to put requirements on design as GSU but with active discussions the GSU can
get ideas through and thereby get the solution implemented in the design.
Later when the part takes shape the GSU can set up a specification of requirements on
the product, such as critical functional requirements, split lines, packing studies etc.
However, these requirements are often found because someone seeing a potential
problem and wonder if that is the case. The GSU then does an analysis of
requirements and delivers a report of the results, possibly with an alternative solution
to the problem.
Robust design within a company
It is difficult to both in forehand and afterwards, point out in figures what robust
design can give a company. What you do if you in an efficient way work with robust
design is to avoid problems and therefore produce a better product instead of solving
the problems once they arise. Often it can be difficult to be understood within the
company and many do not realize how important it is to work effectively with robust
design. To ensure this does not occur, which might reduce the positive effects of the
process, active support from the management of the company is required.

CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis

33
 CHALMERS, Product Development, Master of Science Thesis
34