Executive Summary
This white paper explores why early DFM collaboration is critical for driving meaningful improvements, when and how it should be applied, and the design principles that make a tangible difference in achieving a successful production launch.
Download Velosity DFM White Paper
Overview: Lead-Up to DFM as We Know It Today
Before Design for Manufacturing (DFM) became widely adopted, early collaboration was rare and many part designers resisted changes. A 3D model and drawing would arrive with the purchase order, starting the lead-time clock. Molding engineers would provide a redline suggesting changes to improve outcomes. A week later, the customer would agree to a few changes, reflecting that most designs could not be altered.
The molder would then urge the customer to reconsider for a litany of legitimate performance reasons. The customer would review again. This back-and-forth often became an exercise in self-protection, all while consuming valuable mold build time. After more than three weeks, patience would wear thin, and the final customer sentiment was often, “Give me what I asked for.”
The molder’s last attempt at managing expectations, “We’ll do the best we can,” often felt like veering the project into oncoming traffic. This approach often resulted in late mold deliveries and sample development timelines that far exceeded expectations.
Teams accepted project inefficiencies as a normal part of the development process:
- Initial sample: parts stuck. Requested more draft; received only half of what was needed; part stuck again.
- Finally received the originally requested draft; mold now runs without sticking.
- Part warping due to thick walls; dimensions out of spec.
- Requested coring and gate relocation; customer refused.
- Adjusted process with higher pressures and longer cycle time; part improved but still did not meet spec.
- Requested additional tolerance; customer allowed just enough to pass first article inspection.
Prior to DFM collaborations, “bad tooling” often took the blame, although rarely the true cause. Most issues traced back to a decision, or indecision, on some design feature. Production parts would fall out of specification while costs continued to rise. Drawing changes were difficult to obtain, so teams returned to sampling. Rinse and repeat. While seemingly extreme, this scenario happened more often than one might think, and the customer was always considered “right.” Attitudes toward proactive problem-solving were ambivalent at best, inflexible at worst, and many teams fell into the mindset that this was simply “the way it is.”
Circumstances began to change as mold design, equipment, and machining methods improved in accuracy. Mold flow analysis provided finite element modeling of material behavior. Specialized materials reduced tolerance variation while enhancing properties. Molding machines became more precise, and metrology techniques were refined. These advances made holding tighter specifications achievable, leaving only time-to-market pressures to overcome. Better parts, faster, became the mantra. Buzzwords like “concurrent engineering” gained popularity, and part designers slowly began asking the right questions at the right time.
Customers willing to listen and collaborate discovered they could obtain usable initial samples, and in many cases, nearly print-compliant parts, on the first attempt. Mold sample and development timelines shrank from months to weeks, or even days. The most collaborative teams not only improved timelines and reduced costs but also freed technical resources from being pulled back into the project post-production launch. Lessons learned carried over to the next project. Rinse and repeat, this time, in a good way. This is how DFM was born.
Why do DFM?
To be fair, most projects undergo some form of DFM, but the assessment often fails to be comprehensive or collaborative. In many respects, the process described earlier mirrors what still happens today. Nearly everyone exposed to DFM embraces the concept, yet most teams don’t engage until the design is finalized—limiting opportunities for meaningful change. The reasons appear legitimate: marketing has already approved the ID, mating components have been released, prints have been approved by regulatory, and the list goes on. However, without early collaboration, any changes tend to have limited impact. Just like the “old days.”
The current challenge is educating customers to solicit input earlier in the product development process and reinforcing the efficiencies of designing out problems beginning with the initial CAD model. While some DFM rules can be broken and still yield acceptable molding results, there is always a cost. Usually in the form of a trade-off with another specification.
So, why pursue DFM? The answer is lower costs, reduced lead times, and smoother project execution. Tangible results from a successful first project create stronger advocates, encouraging earlier collaboration and minimizing the difficult trade-offs designers face down the line.
How to Prepare for DFM
The first step is to clearly understand your requirements and ensure they are communicated through the 3D model and preliminary drawings. Next, define the boundaries for change. But be open to adapting those boundaries if a better solution exists. Traditionally, the hardest part of DFM can be embracing an open mind and the willingness to push the design beyond what is convenient. In our experience, the payoff is well worth it.
Elements of DFM
When we discuss DFM elements, most part designers, especially those experienced with injection-molded parts, expect to make changes for draft, radii, and perhaps rib thickness. However, many do not realize that numerous other factors must also be considered together to ensure the overall design “equation” balances. Every part is unique, and each design has distinct aspects that must be evaluated. At its core, DFM variables are those that have the greatest impact on achieving a robust molding process, and they are often interdependent.
What is frequently overlooked is the ripple effect a single change can have on other variables. The key to success is knowing when and how to apply the rules. Simply providing a list of rules and saying “apply them all” is impractical. No part design is perfect, and rules inevitably conflict, requiring trade-offs. Understanding how to navigate these trade-offs based on experience is invaluable.
Here’s What Sets Velosity Apart
This white paper provides insight into how to successfully design parts for production-scalable molding. It emphasizes the importance of early involvement, collaboration, and flexibility throughout the process, and demonstrates the mission-critical role of a capable partner. To understand what sets Velosity apart, consider our points of difference:
- Our people and their deep experience. From our engineering, tooling, and process expertise—all under one roof—to our solution-based decision-making hardwired into our DNA, we know how to remove risk from programs. We are not afraid to ask the hard questions to drive the right solution, not just a solution.
- Hands-on collaboration. We invite our partners to spend time on the floor, talking to those who are making it happen, asking questions, collaborating, and learning. The more interaction there is on a project, the more successful the outcome. Our customers routinely express appreciation for the ways we encourage participation. You won’t just sit in a conference room while parts are brought to you—where’s the fun in that?
- Proven technical expertise. Our highly skilled technical resources have encountered and solved most of the challenges these programs present, making successful risk mitigation a staple of our process.
- State-of-the-art facilities. Our best-in-class molding equipment and facilities, with on-site tooling resources covering all three shifts, keep your molds in top working order. If you have not experienced one of our facilities, we encourage you to schedule a visit.
- Vertically integrated mold manufacturing. Best-in-class mold manufacturing is available to support and provide continuity for any future production tooling needs.
- Additional integrated resources. Services such as precision machining are available to reduce supply chain bottlenecks. Reach out to discuss how these services can support your project transfer.
- Certifications you can trust. We are ISO 13485, AS9100, and FDA registered, along with holding other relevant certifications. View certificates on our website: www.velosity.com.
Contact Us
We are ready to answer your questions, and we offer many resources to help with all stages of this process. Reach out to your Velosity Business Development Manager for an initial conversation.