Product platform design through sensitivity analysis and cluster analysis

Scale-based product platform design consists of platform configuration to decide which variables are shared among which product variants, and selection of the optimal values for platform (shared) and non-platform variables for all product variants. The configuration step plays a vital role in determining two important aspects of a product family: efficiency (cost savings due to commonality) and effectiveness (capability to satisfy performance requirements). Many existing product platform design methods ignore it, assuming a given platform configuration. Most approaches, whether or not they consider the configuration step, are single-platform methods, in which design variables are either shared across all product variants or not shared at all. In multiple-platform design, design variables may be shared among variants in any possible combination of subsets, offering opportunities for superior overall design but presenting a more difficult computational problem. In this work, sensitivity analysis and cluster analysis are used to improve both efficiency and effectiveness of a scale-based product family through multiple-platform product family design.Sensitivity analysis is performed on each design variable to help select candidate platform design variables and to provide guidance for cluster analysis. Cluster analysis, using performance loss due to commonization as the clustering criterion, is employed to determine platform configuration. An illustrative example is used to demonstrate the merits of the proposed method, and the results are compared with existing results from the literature.

[1]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  Platform Selection Under Performance Loss Constraints in Optimal Design of Product Families , 2002, DAC 2002.

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

[3]  Srinivas Nidamarthi,et al.  A Systematic Method for Designing Profitable Product Families , 2003 .

[4]  Kikuo Fujita,et al.  Optimal Design Methodology of Common Components for a Class of Products: Its Foundations and Promise , 2003, DAC 2003.

[5]  T. Simpson.  A concept exploration method for product family design , 1998 .

[6]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Introduction of a product family penalty function using physical programming , 2000 .

[7]  Sridhar Kota,et al.  A Metric for Evaluating Design Commonality in Product Families , 2000 .

[8]  Mark V. Martin,et al.  DESIGN FOR VARIETY: DEVELOPMENT OF COMPLEXITY INDICES AND DESIGN CHARTS , 1998 .

[9]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Production Cost Modeling to Support Product Family Design Optimization , 2003, DAC 2003.

[10]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  A Sensitivity-Based Commonality Strategy for Family Products of Mild Variation, with Application to Automotive Body Structures , 2002 .

[11]  H. Charles Romesburg,et al.  Cluster analysis for researchers , 1984 .

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

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

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

[15]  Michael J. Scott,et al.  Meaningful tradeoffs in product family design considering monetary and technical aspects of commonality , 2005 .

[16]  Warren P. Seering,et al.  MODULARIZING PRODUCT ARCHITECTURES USING DENDROGRAMS , 2003 .

[17]  Peter J. Rousseeuw,et al.  Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis , 1990 .

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

[19]  Erik K. Antonsson,et al.  Aggregation functions for engineering design trade-offs , 1995, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[20]  Michael Joseph Scott,et al.  Formalizing Negotiation in Engineering Design , 1999 .

[21]  Wei Chen,et al.  A Variation-Based Methodology for Product Family Design , 2000, Volume 2: 26th Design Automation Conference.

[22]  B. L. Karihaloo.  Minimum-Weight Design of Multipurpose Tie-Beam of Solid Cross-Section , 1978 .

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

[24]  E. Antonsson,et al.  USING INDIFFERENCE POINTS IN ENGINEERING DECISIONS , 2000 .

[25]  Boris Mirkin,et al.  Mathematical Classification and Clustering , 1996 .