A group multi-granularity linguistic-based methodology for prioritizing engineering characteristics under uncertainties

A framework illustrating the requirement to prioritize ECs is presented.Multiple linguistic sets are used to express decision-makers' preferences.Both positive and negative associations between CRs and ECs are considered. Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a customer driven tool for product development. Prioritizing Engineering Characteristics (ECs) is a crucial stage in QFD. However, the complex and imprecise factors in QFD present many difficulties for the analysis process of ranking ECs. Even though different techniques have been applied to determine the importance of ECs, they do not fully express all the preferences involved, which could affect the preciseness of results. To address the vague information at the early stage of product development effectively, this paper presents a group multi-granular linguistic-based approach to enable customers or developers to express their preferences using different linguistic label sets. Using different linguistic label sets although makes the process more complicated, it is more meaningful and more practical. Apparently, the proposed method may not only reflect the vague information effectively, but also avoid the risk of information loss. The proposed approach uses a two-phase framework to determine the priority of CRs and evaluate the priority of ECs. A case example is given to illustrate the feasibility and validity of the proposed method. The proposed approach is superior to the existing approach in terms of robustness.

[1]  Ming-Lang Tseng,et al.  Using QFD and ANP to analyze the environmental production requirements in linguistic preferences , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[2]  Deok-Hwan Kim,et al.  Robustness indices and robust prioritization in QFD , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[3]  Min Xie,et al.  Ranking of customer requirements in a competitive environment , 2008, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[4]  Xinggang Luo,et al.  Determining the final priority ratings of customer requirements in product planning by MDBM and BSC , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[5]  Kay Chuan Tan,et al.  INCORPORATING CONCEPTS OF BUSINESS PRIORITY INTO QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT , 2004 .

[6]  S. Bodily Note—A Delegation Process for Combining Individual Utility Functions , 1979 .

[7]  Andrzej Skowron,et al.  Rudiments of rough sets , 2007, Inf. Sci..

[8]  Ming-Lu Wu,et al.  Quality Function Deployment: A Comprehensive Review of Its Concepts and Methods , 2002 .

[9]  Qi Wu,et al.  Fuzzy measurable house of quality and quality function deployment for fuzzy regression estimation problem , 2011, Expert Syst. Appl..

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

[11]  E. Ertugrul Karsak,et al.  Fuzzy multiple objective programming framework to prioritize design requirements in quality function deployment , 2004, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[12]  William Ho,et al.  Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  R. Y. K. Fung,et al.  Fuzzy expected value modelling approach for determining target values of engineering characteristics in QFD , 2005 .

[14]  Ram D. Sriram,et al.  Evaluation and selection in product design for mass customization: A knowledge decision support approach , 2004, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[15]  Min Xie,et al.  Prioritizing quality characteristics in dynamic quality function deployment , 2006 .

[16]  S. K. Mukherjee,et al.  Integrating AHP with QFD for robot selection under requirement perspective , 2005 .

[17]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A fusion approach for managing multi-granularity linguistic term sets in decision making , 2000, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[18]  Chih-Hong Wang,et al.  An advanced quality function deployment model using fuzzy analytic network process , 2010 .

[19]  Yi Han,et al.  A rough set approach for estimating correlation measures in quality function deployment , 2012, Inf. Sci..

[20]  Ali Emrouznejad,et al.  Strategic logistics outsourcing: An integrated QFD and fuzzy AHP approach , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[21]  Zeshui Xu An Interactive Approach to Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making with Multigranular Uncertain Linguistic Information , 2009 .

[22]  Shih-Yuan Wang Constructing the complete linguistic-based and gap-oriented quality function deployment , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[23]  Fariborz Y. Partovi,et al.  An analytical model of process choice in the chemical industry , 2007 .

[24]  Isabelle Frochot,et al.  A benefit segmentation of tourists in rural areas: a Scottish perspective , 2005 .

[25]  Deok-Hwan Kim,et al.  Robust QFD: framework and a case study , 2007, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int..

[26]  Min Xie,et al.  Dealing with subjectivity in early product design phase: A systematic approach to exploit Quality Function Deployment potentials , 2008, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[27]  Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel,et al.  Review, analysis and classification of the literature on QFD—Types of research, difficulties and benefits , 2008 .

[28]  Jie Xu,et al.  A quantitative methodology for acquiring engineering characteristics in PPHOQ , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[29]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A Fuzzy Linguistic Methodology to Deal With Unbalanced Linguistic Term Sets , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[30]  C. Kahraman,et al.  Fuzzy multi-attribute selection among transportation companies using axiomatic design and analytic h , 2005 .

[31]  Min Huang,et al.  Integrating preference analysis and balanced scorecard to product planning house of quality , 2011, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[32]  Glenn H. Mazur,et al.  The leading edge in QFD: past, present and future , 2003 .

[33]  Kit Yan Chan,et al.  A methodology of generating customer satisfaction models for new product development using a neuro-fuzzy approach , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[34]  Jiafu Tang,et al.  Rating technical attributes in fuzzy QFD by integrating fuzzy weighted average method and fuzzy expected value operator , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[35]  Richard Y. K. Fung,et al.  Fuzzy regression-based mathematical programming model for quality function deployment , 2004 .

[36]  Hsin-Hung Wu,et al.  A fuzzy group decision-making approach in quality function deployment , 2008 .

[37]  Liang-Hsuan Chen,et al.  A fuzzy nonlinear model for quality function deployment considering Kano's concept , 2008, Math. Comput. Model..

[38]  King Lun Choy,et al.  A novel fuzzy group decision-making approach to prioritising engineering characteristics in QFD under uncertainties , 2011 .

[39]  C. K. Kwong,et al.  A fuzzy AHP approach to the determination of importance weights of customer requirements in quality function deployment , 2002, J. Intell. Manuf..

[40]  Jie Xu,et al.  An integrated method of rough set, Kano's model and AHP for rating customer requirements' final importance , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[41]  Mohammad Saleh Owlia,et al.  Ranking the strategic actions of Iran mobile cellular telecommunication using two models of fuzzy QFD , 2010 .

[42]  Richard Y. K. Fung,et al.  Product design resources optimization using a non-linear fuzzy quality function deployment model , 2002 .

[43]  Fariborz Y. Partovi,et al.  An analytic model for locating facilities strategically , 2006 .

[44]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  On Method for Uncertain Multiple Attribute Decision Making Problems with Uncertain Multiplicative Preference Information on Alternatives , 2005, Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak..

[45]  Amy H. I. Lee,et al.  An evaluation framework for product planning using FANP, QFD and multi-choice goal programming , 2010 .

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

[47]  Richard Y. K. Fung,et al.  Estimating the functional relationships for quality function deployment under uncertainties , 2006, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[48]  Maurizio Bevilacqua,et al.  Development and test of a new fuzzy-QFD approach for characterizing customers rating of extra virgin olive oil , 2012 .