Comprehensive Product Platform Planning (CP3) Using Mixed-Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization and a New Commonality Index

A product family with a common platform paradigm can increase the flexibility and responsiveness of the product-manufacturing process and help take away market share from competitors that develop one product at a time. The recently developed Comprehensive Product Platform Planning (CP3) method allows (i) the formation of sub-families of products, and (ii) the simultaneous identification and quantification of platform/scaling design variables. The CP3 model is founded on a generalized commonality matrix representation of the product-platform-plan. In this paper, a new commonality index is developed and introduced in CP3 to simultaneously account for the degree of inter-product commonalities and for the overlap between groups of products sharing different platform variables. To maximize both the performance of the product family and the new commonality measure, we develop and apply an advanced mixed-discrete Particle Swarm Optimization (MDPSO) algorithm. In the MDPSO algorithm, the discrete variables are updated using a deterministic nearest-feasible-vertex criterion after each iteration of the conventional PSO. Such an approach is expected to avoid the undesirable discrepancy in the rate of evolution of discrete and continuous variables. To prevent a premature stagnation of solutions (likely in conventional PSO), while solving the high dimensional MINLP problem presented by CP3, we introduce a new adaptive diversity-preservation technique. This technique first characterizes the population diversity and then applies a stochastic update of the discrete variables based on the estimated diversity measure. The potential of the new CP3 optimization methodology is illustrated through its application to design a family of universal electric motors. The optimized platform plans provide helpful insights into the importance of accounting for the overlap between different product platforms, when quantifying the effective commonality in the product family.Copyright © 2012 by ASME

[1]  Achille Messac,et al.  Avoiding premature convergence in a mixed-discrete particle swarm optimization (MDPSO) algorithm , 2012 .

[2]  John K. Gershenson,et al.  Comparison of Modular Measurement Methods Based on Consistency Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis , 2003 .

[3]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  An information theoretic method for developing modular architectures using genetic algorithms , 2007 .

[4]  Achille Messac,et al.  Comprehensive Product Platform Planning (CP3) Framework , 2011 .

[5]  Zahed Siddique,et al.  Product platform and product family design : methods and applications , 2010 .

[6]  Achille Messac,et al.  Selection-Integrated Optimization (SIO) Methodology for Optimal Design of Adaptive Systems , 2008, DAC 2006.

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

[8]  Wenjun Zhang,et al.  Dissipative particle swarm optimization , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[9]  Javier P. Gonzalez-Zugasti,et al.  Modular product architecture , 2001 .

[10]  Achille Messac,et al.  Comprehensive Product Platform Planning (CP 3 ) Framework: Presenting a Generalized Product Family Model , 2010 .

[11]  T. Krink,et al.  Particle swarm optimisation with spatial particle extension , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[12]  Kikuo Fujita,et al.  Product Variety Optimization Simultaneously Designing Module Combination and Module Attributes , 2004, Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl..

[13]  Stephen J. Chapman,et al.  Electric Machinery and Power System Fundamentals , 2001 .

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

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

[16]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  Particle swarm optimization , 1995, Swarm Intelligence.

[17]  Jeremy J. Michalek,et al.  A Decomposed Gradient-Based Approach for Generalized Platform Selection and Variant Design in Product Family , 2008 .

[18]  Achille Messac,et al.  Physical programming - Effective optimization for computational design , 1996 .

[19]  Jeremy J. Michalek,et al.  An efficient decomposed multiobjective genetic algorithm for solving the joint product platform selection and product family design problem with generalized commonality , 2009 .

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

[21]  Achille Messac,et al.  Developing a Non-gradient Based Mixed-Discrete Optimization Approach for Comprehensive Product Platform Planning (CP 3 ) , 2010 .

[22]  T. Simpson,et al.  Conceptual design of a family of products through the use of the robust concept exploration method , 1996 .

[23]  Jie Zhang,et al.  A mixed-discrete Particle Swarm Optimization algorithm with explicit diversity-preservation , 2013 .

[24]  S. Sanderson,et al.  A framework for model and product family competition , 1995 .

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

[26]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Don't push me! Collision-avoiding swarms , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[27]  Karl Sabbagh,et al.  21st century jet : the making and marketing of the Boeing 777 , 1996 .

[28]  Michel Tollenaere,et al.  Modular and platform methods for product family design: literature analysis , 2005, J. Intell. Manuf..

[29]  Mustafa Uzumeri,et al.  Managing Product Families , 1996 .

[30]  Souma Chowdhury,et al.  Improvements to single-objective constrained predator–prey evolutionary optimization algorithm , 2010 .

[31]  Olivier L. de Weck,et al.  4.3.2 Platform identification using Design Structure Matrices , 2006 .