Technical Brief

Evaluation of Design Feedback Modality in Design for Manufacturability

[+] Author and Article Information
Prashant Barnawal

Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering,
Iowa State University,
3004 Black Engineering,
Ames, IA 50011
e-mail: imprsnt@gmail.com

Michael C. Dorneich

Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering,
Iowa State University,
3004 Black Engineering,
Ames, IA 50011
e-mail: dorneich@iastate.edu

Matthew C. Frank

Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering,
Iowa State University,
3004 Black Engineering,
Ames, IA 50011
e-mail: mfrank@iastate.edu

Frank Peters

Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering,
Iowa State University,
3004 Black Engineering,
Ames, IA 50011
e-mail: fpeters@iastate.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design for Manufacturing Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received July 23, 2016; final manuscript received June 9, 2017; published online July 27, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Irem Tumer.

J. Mech. Des 139(9), 094503 (Jul 27, 2017) (5 pages) Paper No: MD-16-1528; doi: 10.1115/1.4037109 History: Received July 23, 2016; Revised June 09, 2017

The early conceptual design phase often focuses on functional requirements, with limited consideration of the manufacturing processes needed to turn design engineers' conceptual models into physical products. Increasingly, design and manufacturing engineers no longer work in physical proximity, which has slowed the feedback cycle and increased product lead-time. Design for manufacturability (DFM) techniques have been adopted to overcome this problem and are critical for faster convergence to a manufacturable design. DFM tools give feedback in textual and graphical modalities. However, since information modality may affect interpretability, empirical evidence is needed to understand how manufacturability feedback modalities affect design engineers' work. A user study evaluated how novice design engineers' design performance, workload, confidence, and feedback usability were affected by textual, two-dimensional (2D), and three-dimensional (3D) feedback modalities. Results showed that graphical feedback significantly improved performance and reduced mental workload compared to textual and no feedback. Differences between 3D and 2D feedback were mixed. Three-dimensional was generally better on average, but not significantly so. However, the usability of 3D was significantly higher than 2D. Conversely, providing feedback in textual modality was often no better than not providing feedback. The study will benefit manufacturing industries by demonstrating that early 3D manufacturability feedback improves novice design engineers' performance with less mental workload and streamlines the design process resulting in cost-saving and reduction of product lead-time.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Linsey, J. S. , Wood, K. L. , and Markman, A. B. , 2008, “ Modality and Representation in Analogy,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf., 22(2), pp. 85–100. [CrossRef]
Linsey, J. S. , Clauss, E. F. , Kurtoglu, T. , Murphy, J. T. , Wood, K. L. , and Markman, A. B. , 2011, “ An Experimental Study of Group Idea Generation Techniques: Understanding the Roles of Idea Representation and Viewing Methods,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 133(3), p. 031008. [CrossRef]
Easterday, M. , Aleven, V. , and Scheines, R. , 2007, “ Tis Better to Construct Than to Receive? The Effects of Diagram Tools on Causal Reasoning,” Artificial Intelligence in Education: Building Technology Rich Learning Contexts That Work (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications), R. Luckin, K. R. Koedinger, and J. Green, eds., IOE Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 93–100.
Belay, A. M. , 2009, “ Design for Manufacturability and Concurrent Engineering for Product Development,” World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(1), pp. 1–7. https://waset.org/publications/15800/design-for-manufacturability-and-concurrent-engineering-for-product-development
Zhu, Y. , Alard, R. , You, J. , and Schoünsleben, P. , 2011, “ Collaboration in the Design-Manufacturing Chain: A Key to Improve Product Quality,” Supply Chain Management—New Perspectives, S. Renkom , ed., InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, Chap. 9. [CrossRef]
Boschma, R. , 2005, “ Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment,” Reg. Stud., 39(1), pp. 61–74. [CrossRef]
Gupta, S. K. , Regli, W. C. , Das, D. , and Nau, D. S. , 1997, “ Automated Manufacturability Analysis: A Survey,” Res. Eng. Des., 9(3), pp. 168–190. [CrossRef]
DFMPro, 2015, “ About DFMPro: Best-in-Class DFM Software,” HCL Technologies Ltd., Troy, MI, accessed Nov. 19, 2016, http://dfmpro.geometricglobal.com/about-dfmpro/
Autodesk, 2015, “ Simulation DFM—Design for Manufacturability—Autodesk,” Autodesk, Inc., San Rafael, CA, accessed Nov. 19, 2016, http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=19335884&siteID=123112
Madan, J. , Rao, P. V. M. , and Kundra, T. K. , 2007, “ Computer Aided Manufacturability Analysis of Die-Cast Parts,” Comput. Aided Des. Appl., 4(1–4), pp. 147–158. [CrossRef]
Bramall, D. , Mckay, K. , Rogers, B. , Chapman, P. , Cheung, W. , and Maropoulos, P. , 2003, “ Manufacturability Analysis of Early Product Designs,” Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf., 16(7–8), pp. 501–508. [CrossRef]
Boothroyd Dewhurst, 2015, “ DFMA,” Boothroyd Dewhurst, Inc., Wakefield, RI, accessed Nov. 19, 2016, http://www.dfma.com/
Bidkar, R. A. , and McAdams, D. A. , 2010, “ Methods for Automated Manufacturability Analysis of Injection-Molded and Die-Cast Parts,” Res. Eng. Des., 21(1), pp. 1–24. [CrossRef]
Singh, R. , Madan, J. , and Kumar, R. , 2014, “ Automated Identification of Complex Undercut Features for Side-Core Design for Die-Casting Parts,” Eng. Manuf., 228(9), pp. 1138–1152. [CrossRef]
Tversky, B. , Morrison, J. B. , and Betrancourt, M. , 2002, “ Animation: Can It Facilitate?,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., 57(4), pp. 247–262. [CrossRef]
Atkins, P. W. , Wood, R. E. , and Rutgers, P. J. , 2002, “ The Effects of Feedback Format on Dynamic Decision Making,” Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Processes, 88(2), pp. 587–604. [CrossRef]
Wickens, C. D. , and Carswell, M. , 1995, “ The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Design,” Hum. Factors, 37(3), pp. 473–494. [CrossRef]
Yagmur-Kilimci, E. S. , 2010, “ 3D Mental Visualization in Architectural Design,” Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA. https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/37132
Suwa, M. , and Barbara, T. , 1997, “ What Do Architects and Students Perceive in Their Design Sketches? A Protocol Analysis,” Des. Stud., 18(4), pp. 385–403. [CrossRef]
Fish, J. , and Scrivener, S. , 1990, “ Amplifying the Mind's Eye: Sketching and Visual Cognition,” Leonardo, 23(1), pp. 117–126. [CrossRef]
Kashihara, K. , 2009, “ Evaluation of the Cognitive Process During Mental Imaging of Two- or Three-Dimensional Figures,” Second International Conferences on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (ACHI), Cancun, Mexico, Feb. 1–7, pp. 126–129.
Gîrbacia, F. , 2012, “ Evaluation of Cognitive Effort in the Perception of Engineering Drawings as 3D Models,” The Fifth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (ACHI), Valencia, Spain, Jan. 30–Feb. 4, pp. 247–250. https://www.thinkmind.org/download.php?articleid=achi_2012_10_10_20221
Kühl, T. , Scheiter, K. , Gerjets, P. , and Edelmann, J. , 2011, “ The Influence of Text Modality on Learning With Static and Dynamic Visualizations,” Comput. Hum. Behav., 27(1), pp. 29–35. [CrossRef]
Vessey, I. , 1991, “ Cognitive Fit: A Theory-Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature,” Decis. Sci., 22(2), pp. 219–240. [CrossRef]
Epstein, S. , 1994, “ An Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious,” Am. Psychol., 49(8), pp. 709–724. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Amer, T. , 1991, “ An Experimental Investigation of Multi-Cue Financial Information Display and Decision Making,” J. Inf. Syst., 5(2), pp. 18–34.
Kelton, A. S. , Pennington, R. R. , and Tuttle, B. M. , 2010, “ The Effects of Information Presentation Format on Judgment and Decision Making: A Review of the Information Systems Research,” J. Inf. Syst., 24(2), pp. 79–105.
Coury, B. G. , and Pietras, C. M. , 1989, “ Alphanumeric and Graphic Displays for Dynamic Process Monitoring and Control,” Ergonomics, 32(11), pp. 1373–1389. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Tractinsky, N. , and Meyer, J. , 1999, “ Chartjunk or Goldgraph? Effects of Presentation Objectives and Content Desirability on Information Presentation,” Manage. Inf. Syst. Q., 23(3), pp. 397–420. [CrossRef]
Dull, R. B. , and Tegarden, D. P. , 1999, “ A Comparison of Three Visual Representations of Complex Multidimensional Accounting Information,” J. Inf. Syst., 13(2), pp. 117–131.
Montazemi, A. R. , and Wang, S. , 1988, “ The Effects of Modes of Information Presentation on Decision-Making: A Review and Meta-Analysis,” J. Manage. Inf. Syst., 5(3), pp. 101–127. [CrossRef]
Ahmed, S. , Wallace, K. M. , and Blessing, L. T. M. , 2003, “ Understanding the Differences Between How Novice and Experienced Designers Approach Design Tasks,” Res. Eng. Des., 14(1), pp. 1–11. [CrossRef]
Traband, M. , 2013, “ Using the iFAB Architecture to Execute Rapid Response Manufacturing,” Model Based Enterprise Summit, Gaithersburg, MD, accessed July 7, 2015, http://www.nist.gov/el/msid/upload/2Traband_iFAB.pdf
Barnawal, P. , Dorneich, M. C. , Peters, F. , and Frank, M. , 2015, “ Design and Evaluation of Designer Feedback System in Design for Manufacturability,” Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (HFES), Los Angeles, CA, Oct. 26–30, pp. 1142–1146.
Wright, P. , 1977, “ Presenting Technical Information: A Survey of Research Findings,” Instr. Sci., 6(2), pp. 93–134. [CrossRef]
Wright, P. , and Reid, F. , 1973, “ Written Information: Some Alternatives to Prose for Expressing the Outcomes of Complex Contingencies,” J. Appl. Psychol., 57(2), pp. 160–166. [CrossRef]
Hart, S. G. , and Staveland, L. E. , 1988, “ Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research,” Adv. Psychol., 52, pp. 139–183. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

3D integrated feedback displaying graphical feedback from cast-ana

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Part models used in the study



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In