Product design concept evaluation using rough sets and VIKOR method

This work proposes a rough number enabled VIKOR method for concept evaluation.The perceptions of designers and customers are captured through rough numbers.The proposed method selects the best concept for both the designers and customers.The proposed method provides novel and more effective concepts ranking framework. Design concept evaluation is one of the most important phases in the early stages of the design process as it not only significantly affects the later stages of the design process but also influences the success of the final design solutions. The main objective of this work is to reduce the imprecise content of customer evaluation process and thus, improve the effectiveness and objectivity of the product design. This paper proposes a novel way of performing design concept evaluations where instead of considering cost and benefit characteristics of design criteria, the work identifies best concept which satisfy constraints imposed by the team of designers on design criteria's as well as fulfilling maximum customers' preferences. In this work, the rough number enabled modified Vlsekriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) method for design concept evaluation is developed by modifying the extended VIKOR method with interval numbers. The proposed technique is labeled as modified rough VIKOR (MR-VIKOR) analysis. The work primarily involves two phases of concept evaluation. In the first phase, relative importance ranking and initial weights of design criteria are computed through the importance assigned to each design criteria by the designers or the decision makers (DM); and in the second phase, customers' preferences to the generated user needs are captured in the form of rough numbers. The relative importance ranking computed in first phase along with customers' preferences is incorporated in the second phase to select the best concept.

[1]  Zaifang Zhang,et al.  A new integrated design concept evaluation approach based on vague sets , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[2]  Gloria Pérez,et al.  On the product selection and plant dimensioning problem under uncertainty , 2005 .

[3]  M. Sayadi,et al.  Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem with interval numbers , 2009 .

[4]  Z. Ayağ,et al.  An analytic network process-based approach to concept evaluation in a new product development environment , 2007 .

[5]  Li Pheng Khoo,et al.  Design concept evaluation in product development using rough sets and grey relation analysis , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[6]  Zeki Ayağ,et al.  An integrated approach to evaluating conceptual design alternatives in a new product development environment , 2005 .

[7]  Ming-Lu Wu,et al.  A systematic approach to quality function deployment with a full illustrative example , 2005 .

[8]  S. H. Zanakis,et al.  A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP , 1997 .

[9]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  Modelling design processes: a conceptual, decision-based perspective , 1995 .

[10]  Li Pheng Khoo,et al.  A rough set enhanced fuzzy approach to quality function deployment , 2008 .

[11]  Pratyush Sen,et al.  Multiple Attribute Design Evaluation of Complex Engineering Products Using the Evidential Reasoning Approach , 1997 .

[12]  Wolfgang Beitz,et al.  Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach , 1984 .

[13]  Reza Zanjirani Farahani,et al.  Fuzzy AHP to determine the relative weights of evaluation criteria and Fuzzy TOPSIS to rank the alternatives , 2010, Appl. Soft Comput..

[14]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[15]  Yaochu Jin,et al.  Advanced fuzzy systems design and applications , 2003, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing.

[16]  Michael J. Scott Quantifying Certainty in Design Decisions: Examining AHP , 2002 .

[17]  Liang-Hsuan Chen,et al.  A fuzzy model for exploiting quality function deployment , 2003 .

[18]  Daniel E. Whitney,et al.  Concurrent Design of Products and Processes: A Strategy for the Next Generation in Manufacturing , 1989 .

[19]  Wei Chen,et al.  An integrated computational intelligence approach to product concept generation and evaluation , 2006 .

[20]  Bimal Nepal,et al.  Integrated fuzzy logic-based model for product modularization during concept development phase , 2005 .

[21]  Jerzy W. Grzymala-Busse,et al.  Rough Sets , 1995, Commun. ACM.

[22]  Mitchell M. Tseng,et al.  Fuzzy Ranking for Concept Evaluation in Configuration Design for Mass Customization , 1998 .

[23]  P. Yu A Class of Solutions for Group Decision Problems , 1973 .

[24]  Jian S. Dai,et al.  Product Cost Estimation: Technique Classification and Methodology Review , 2006 .

[25]  Li Pheng Khoo,et al.  Framework of a fuzzy quality function deployment system , 1996 .

[26]  S. Tor,et al.  A Rough-Set-Based Approach for Classification and Rule Induction , 1999 .

[27]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[28]  Deborah L Thurston,et al.  Fuzzy Ratings and Utility Analysis in Preliminary Design Evaluation of Multiple Attributes , 1992 .

[29]  Deborah L Thurston,et al.  A formal method for subjective design evaluation with multiple attributes , 1991 .

[30]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[31]  S. Q. Xie,et al.  Product Development Cost Estimation in Mass Customization , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[32]  Wenyan Song,et al.  An integrated rough number-based approach to design concept evaluation under subjective environments , 2013 .

[33]  A. M. King,et al.  Development of a Methodology for Concept Selection in Flexible Design Strategies , 1999 .