Product platform two-stage quality optimization design based on multiobjective genetic algorithm

Product platform design (PFD) has been recognized as an effective means to satisfy diverse market niches while maintaining the economies of scale and scope. Numerous optimization-based approaches have been proposed to help resolve the tradeoff between platform commonality and the ability to achieve distinct performance targets for each variant. In this study, we propose a two-stage multiobjective optimization-based platform design methodology (TMOPDM) for solving the product family problem using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. In the first stage, the common product platform is identified using a nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II); In the second stage, each individual product is designed around the common platform such that the functional requirements of the product are best satisfied. The design of a family of traction machine is used as an example to benchmark the effectiveness of the proposed approach against previous approachs.

[1]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  A Variation-Based Method for Product Family Design , 2002 .

[2]  Marc H. Meyer,et al.  The power of product platforms : building value and cost leadership , 1997 .

[3]  DebK.,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm , 2002 .

[4]  Ben Paechter,et al.  Multi-objective optimisation of the pump scheduling problem using SPEA2 , 2005, 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Michael J. Scott,et al.  Product platform design through sensitivity analysis and cluster analysis , 2007, J. Intell. Manuf..

[6]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Robust Design of Families of Products With Production Modeling and Evaluation , 2001 .

[7]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  A PRODUCT VARIETY TRADEOFF EVALUATION METHOD FOR A FAMILY OF CORDLESS DRILL TRANSMISSIONS , 1999 .

[8]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Muiltiobjective Optimization Using Nondominated Sorting in Genetic Algorithms , 1994, Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Product platform design and customization: Status and promise , 2004, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[10]  Rajiv Tiwari,et al.  Rolling element bearing design through genetic algorithms , 2003 .

[11]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  An evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization: the strength Pareto approach , 1998 .

[12]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[13]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization , 1994, Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence.

[14]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems , 2002, Genetic Algorithms and Evolutionary Computation.

[15]  Kishalay Mitra,et al.  Multiobjective optimization of an industrial grinding operation using elitist nondominated sorting genetic algorithm , 2004 .

[16]  Michael J. Scott,et al.  Effective Product Family Design Using Preference Aggregation , 2006 .

[17]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  Product platform design: method and application , 2001 .

[18]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  A genetic algorithm based method for product family design optimization , 2003 .

[19]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Product Platform Design and Optimization: Status and Promise , 2003, DAC 2003.

[20]  Michael P. Martinez,et al.  Effective Product Family Design Using Physical Programming , 2002 .

[21]  Tomoyuki Hiroyasu,et al.  SPEA2+: Improving the Performance of the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 2 , 2004, PPSN.

[22]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems (Genetic and Evolutionary Computation) , 2006 .

[23]  M. H. Wang,et al.  A systematic approach for the robust design of scalable product platforms , 2006 .