The problems that kill a production run are visible in the design
if you know where to look.
Most DFM Reviews Miss the Expensive Problems.
A basic DFM check tells you if your wall is too thin and if your draft angle exists. That catches maybe 30% of what actually goes wrong in production.
The problems that cause real damage — a weld line forming on the A-surface, a sink mark collapsing an O-ring groove, a texture callout that requires 3 degrees of draft but the drawing only shows 1 — those require a different level of review.
We review every design before a tool is cut.
Not as a formality. Because we’ve seen what happens when these problems make it to the mold.
What Advanced DFM Actually Looks At
- Wall Thickness & Warpage Control
- Cosmetics vs. Structure — Weld Lines & Air Traps
- Texture & Draft — The Connection Most Shops Miss
- Undercut Resolution & Tooling Cost Reduction
Case Studies
What DFM Catches Before It Becomes Your Problem
- Medical Enclosure: IP67 Seal Failure Prevented
The design had an O-ring groove with excessive wall thickness directly beneath it. Standard shops would have cut the tool and moved on.
Our DFM identified that the thick section would sink during cooling — collapsing the groove geometry and preventing the O-ring from seating flat. On a medical device rated IP67, that means leakage on every unit.
We recommended coring out the section beneath the groove and adding support ribs to maintain structural integrity. The result: consistent seal geometry across the production run, reduced material cost per part, and shorter cycle time.
- Automotive Display Bezel: Weld Line Eliminated from A-Surface
The client was molding a high-gloss PC bezel for an in-vehicle display. Button apertures in the design created a flow split — and confirmed the weld line would reform directly on the upper front face of the part.
On a high-gloss surface, a weld line reads as a crack under directional light. Paint doesn’t cover it.
We redesigned the gating strategy, moving to a valve gate approach. We also deployed AI-driven mold flow algorithms to mathematically predict and pinpoint the exact optimal venting coordinates — driving the weld line completely to the non-cosmetic rear face.
First trial hit A-surface standard. Yield went from a projected 68% to 97.6%.