A VARIATION-BASED METHODOLOGY FOR PRODUCT FAMILY DESIGN

Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference

Volumn 2, Issue , 2000, Pages 701-710

  Nayak, Raviraj U ^a   Chen, Wei ^a   Simpson, Timothy W ^b  

^a University of Illinois at Chicago   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Commonality; Product family; Product platform; Solution Set; Universal electric motor

Indexed keywords

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; TRACTION MOTORS;

COMMONALITY; DESIGN METHODOLOGY; DESIGN VARIABLES; INPUT DESIGN; PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS; PLATFORM DESIGN; PRODUCT FAMILIES; PRODUCT PLATFORMS; SOLUTIONS SETS; UNIVERSAL ELECTRIC MOTORS;

PRODUCT DESIGN;

EID: 19544393118     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1115/DETC2000/DAC-14264     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Allen, K. R. and Carlson-Skalak, S., 1998, "Defining Product Architecture During Conceptual Design," 1998 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper no. DETC98/DTM-5650, Atlanta, GA.
2. Chapman, S. J., 1991, Electric Machinery Fundamentals, McGraw-Hill, New York.
3. Chen, W., Allen, J. K., Tsui, K. L. and Mistree, F., 1996, "A Procedure for Robust Design: Minimizing Variations Caused by Noise and Control Factors," Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 118, No. 4, pp.478-485.
4. Chen, W., Allen, J. K., and Mistree, F., 1997, "The Robust Concept Exploration Method for Enhancing Concurrent Systems Design", Journal of Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, 5(3), 203-217.
5. Conner, C., De Kroon, J. P., and Mistree, F., 1999, "A Product Variety Tradeoff Evaluation Method for a Family of Cordless Drill Transmissions," 1999 ASME Design Technical Conference, paper no. DETC99/DAC-8625, Las Vegas, Nevada.
6. Du, X. and Chen, W., 1999, "Towards a Better Understanding of Modeling Feasibility Robustness in Engineering Design", 1999 ASME Design Technical Conference, Paper No. DAC-8565, Las Vegas, Nevada.
7. Gonzalez-Zugasti, J. P., Otto, K. N. and Baker, J. D., 1999,"Assessing Value for Product Family Design and Selection," 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper no. DETC99/DAC-8613, Las Vegas, Nevada.
8. Kota, S. and Sethuraman, K., 1998, "Managing Varie ty in Product Families Through Design for Commonality," 1998 ASME Design Technical Conference, paper no. DTM5651, Atlanta, GA.
9. Kotha, S., 1995, "Mass Customization: Implementing the Emerging Paradigm for Competitive Advantage," Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, 21-42 (1995)
10. Lewis, K., Smith, W. F. and Mistree, F., 1999, "Ranged Sets of Specifications for Complex Engineering Systems," Simultaneous Engineering: Methodologies and Applications (Roy, U, Usher, J. M., et al., eds.), Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 279-304.
11. Martin, M. V. and Ishii, K., 1997, "Design for Variety: Development of Complexity Indices and Design Charts," 1997 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper no. DETC97/DFM-4359, Sacramento, CA.
12. Martin, M. V. and Ishii, K., 1996, "Design for Variety: A Methodology for Understanding the Costs of Product Proliferation," 1996 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers in Engineering Conference, paper no. DETC96/DTM-1610, Irvine,CA.
13. McAdams, D. A., Stone, R. B. and Wood, K. L., 1998, "Understanding Product Similarity Using Customer Needs," 1998 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper no. DETC98/DTM-5660, Atlanta, GA.
14. Meyer, M. H. and Lehnerd, A. P., 1997, The Power of Product Platforms: Building Value and Cost Leadership, Free Press, New York.
15. Meyer, M. H. and Utterback, J. M., 1993, "The Product Family and the Dynamics of Core Capability." Sloan Management Review, Vol. 34, pp. 29-47.
16. Mistree, F., et. al., 1993, "The Compromise Decision Support Problem and the Adaptive Linear Programming Algorithm," Structural Optimization: Status and Promise (Kamat, M. P., ed.), AIAA, Washington, D.C., pp.247-289.
17. Mistree, F., et. al., 1990, "Decision- Based Design: A Contemporary Paradigm for Ship Design," Transactions, Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (Paresai, H. R. and Sullivan, IV., eds.), Jersey City, New Jersey, pp. 565-597.
18. Myers, R. H. and Montgomery, D. C., 1995, Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
19. Pine, B. J., II, 1993, Mass Customization: The New Frontier in Business Competition, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
20. Sanderson, S. and Uzumeri, M., 1995, "Managing Product Families: The Case of the Sony Walkman," Research Policy, Vol. 24, pp. 761-782.
21. Siddique, Z. and Rosen, D. W., 1998, "On the Applicability of Product Variety Design Concepts to Automotive Platform Commonality," 1998 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper no. DETC/DTM-5661, Atlanta, GA.
22. rd ed.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
23. Simpson, T. W., Maier, J. R. A. and Mistree, F., 1999, September 12-15, "A Product Platform Concept Exploration Method for Product Family Design," Design Theory and Methodology - DTM'99, Las Vegas, Nevada, ASME, Paper No. DETC99/DTM-8761.
24. Simpson, T. W., 1998, "A Concept Exploration Method for Product Family Design," Ph.D. Dissertation, G.W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
25. th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Bellevue, WA, AIAA, Vol. 2, pp.1535-1545. AIAA-96-4161.
26. Stone, R. B., Wood, K. L. and Crawford, R. H., 1998, "A Heuristic Method to Identify Modules from a Functional Description of a Product," 1998 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper no. DETC98/DTM-5642, Atlanta, GA.
27. Ulrich, K. T. and Eppinger, S. D., 2000, Product Design and Development, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.