DEVELOPMENT OF INDUSTRIAL VISUALIZATION TOOLS FOR VALIDATION OF VEHICLE CONFIGURATION RULES

This paper addresses the industrial visualization tools used when validating vehicle configuration rules. The configuration rules are logic expressions allowing vehicle configurations to be built, as well as which components these configurations should consist of. Valid configuration rules are permitting vehicle configurations according to the specialists’ expectations. Those vehicles also have to have the correct components assigned. Currently, the validation of configuration rules partially relies on time-consuming manual inspection and calculations. Our aim is to find a demonstrator facilitating the validation of configuration rules. Our approach is to visualize the calculation results together with the original configuration rules. In doing so, it should also be possible to use one single user interface instead of the multiple used today. The work presented in this paper is rooted in user studies at three automotive companies including both interviews and observations. The identified typical rule queries when using the industrial visualization tools and the identified difficulties informed the development of a demonstrator. This paper describes the conducted usability tests of the demonstrator, showing how the users found the validation of configuration rules less error-prone, more time-efficient and easier to learn.

[1]  L. Blessing,et al.  EFFECT-ORIENTED DESCRIPTION OF VARIANT RICH PRODUCTS , 2005 .

[2]  MASTER’S THESIS,et al.  Methods for Interactive Constraint Satisfaction , 2003 .

[3]  Martin J. Eppler,et al.  Towards a periodic table of visualization methods of management , 2007 .

[4]  Johan Malmqvist,et al.  Information Modelling for Automotive Configuration , 2010 .

[5]  Alun D. Preece,et al.  Verification and validation of knowledge-based systems with formal specifications , 1995, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[6]  Johan Malmqvist,et al.  A Classification of Matrix-Based Methods for Product Modeling , 2002 .

[7]  Knut Åkesson,et al.  Enumeration of Valid Partial Configurations , 2011, Configuration Workshop.

[8]  M. Braga,et al.  Exploratory Data Analysis , 2018, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining. 2nd Ed..

[9]  H. Rex Hartson,et al.  Formative evaluation: ensuring usability in user interfaces , 1993 .

[10]  D. V. Steward,et al.  The design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[11]  Markus Meier,et al.  The K- A V-Matrix METHOD - AN APPROACH IN ANALYSIS AND DESCRIPTION OF VARIANT PRODUCTS , 2001 .

[12]  Daniel E. O'Leary,et al.  Expert system verification and validation: a survey and tutorial , 1993, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[13]  Christophe Viel,et al.  Management of product's diversity: industrial validation of AP214 reference model , 2003, Int. J. Comput. Appl. Technol..

[14]  Sara Fripp.  A learning curve. , 2014, Midwives.

[15]  Wolfgang Küchlin,et al.  Formal methods for the validation of automotive product configuration data , 2003, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[16]  Udo Lindemann,et al.  Structural Complexity Management: An Approach for the Field of Product Design , 2008 .

[17]  Maik Maurer,et al.  Structural Awareness in Complex Product Design , 2007 .

[18]  Christofer Pak.  Hantering av dataflöde i produktutveckling , 2010 .

[19]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[20]  Weimin Xiao,et al.  A visual data mining framework for convenient identification of useful knowledge , 2005, Fifth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'05).

[21]  Rakesh Agarwal,et al.  Fast Algorithms for Mining Association Rules , 1994, VLDB 1994.

[22]  Albert Haag,et al.  Sales Configuration in Business Processes , 1998, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[23]  Martin J. Eppler,et al.  Towards a periodic table of visualization methods , 2007 .