SUSTAINABILITY OF MODULAR PRODUCT FAMILIES

A global customer base demanding highly individual products often forces companies to offer a wide range of products. Commonality within modular product families allows great product variety through lower internal variety of components and processes. Companies then struggle with sustainability of modular product families, that is, managing commonality across the product family lifecycle when modular product families are changed to react to new customer demands. Based on a literature review, the current support from academia for handling the sustainability of modular product families is presented. The findings are consolidated into a conceptual schema. The subsequent successful use of the conceptual schema in the process planning of a medium-sized enterprise, developing and producing elevators, identified further factors that influence the sustainability of modular product families. These factors will be addressed in the future, with support from academia.

[1]  Udo Lindemann,et al.  System architecture change decisions in multi-variant product portfolios , 2013 .

[2]  Claudia Eckert,et al.  Engineering change: an overview and perspective on the literature , 2011 .

[3]  Edward F. Crawley,et al.  Divergence and lifecycle offsets in product families with commonality , 2013, Syst. Eng..

[4]  D. Krause,et al.  Methodische Entwicklung eines Modulbaukastens für kundenindividuelle Aufzüge , 2015 .

[5]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Decision analysis: practice and promise , 1988 .

[6]  D. Krause,et al.  Pflege modularer Produktfamilien nach dem Markteintritt durch die Produktentwicklung , 2013 .

[7]  Ernst Fricke,et al.  Systems Engineering - Grundlagen und Anwendung , 2015 .

[8]  Ralf Reichwald,et al.  Perspektiven für ein Integriertes Änderungsmanagement , 1998 .

[9]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Designing systems for adaptability by means of architecture options , 2008 .

[10]  Armin P. Schulz,et al.  Design for changeability (DfC): Principles to enable changes in systems throughout their entire lifecycle , 2005, Syst. Eng..

[11]  Dieter Krause,et al.  TRANSFER OF METHODS FOR DEVELOPING MODULAR PRODUCT FAMILIES INTO PRACTICE – AN INTERVIEW STUDY , 2014 .

[12]  Margherita Pero,et al.  NPD-SCM Alignment in Mass Customization , 2011 .

[13]  Dieter Krause,et al.  An assessment of methodical approaches to support the development of modular product families , 2013 .

[14]  Wolfgang Bauer,et al.  An Approach for Cycle-Robust Platform Design , 2013 .

[15]  Dieter Krause,et al.  Integrated Development of Modular Product Families: A Methods Toolkit , 2014 .

[16]  Kosuke Ishii,et al.  Design for variety: developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures , 2002 .

[17]  K. Ulrich,et al.  Planning for Product Platforms , 1998 .

[18]  Dieter Krause,et al.  Process visualisation of product family development methods , 2013 .

[19]  Fabrizio Salvador,et al.  Toward a Product System Modularity Construct: Literature Review and Reconceptualization , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[20]  Maximilian Kissel,et al.  Design for adaptability in multi-variant product families , 2013 .

[21]  K. Wallace,et al.  Transferring Design Methods into Practice , 2011 .

[22]  P. John Clarkson,et al.  Change and customisation in complex engineering domains , 2004 .

[23]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  A Review of Recent Literature in Product Family Design and Platform-Based Product Development , 2014 .

[24]  Dieter Krause,et al.  An example of visually supported design of modular product families , 2014 .

[25]  Kevin Otto,et al.  Modularization to Support Multiple Brand Platforms , 2001 .

[26]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Defining changeability: Reconciling flexibility, adaptability, scalability, modifiability, and robustness for maintaining system lifecycle value , 2008 .