A Formal Two-Phase Method for Decomposition of Complex Design Problems

This paper presents a formal two-phase decomposition method for complex design problems that are represented in an attribute-component incidence matrix. Unlike the conventional approaches, this method decouples the overall decomposition process into two separate, autonomous function components: dependency analysis and matrix partitioning, which are algorithmically achieved by an extended Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) and a Partition Point Analysis (PPA), respectively. The extended HCA (Phase I) is applied to convert the (input) incidence matrix, which is originally unorganized, into a banded diagonal matrix. The PPA (Phase 2) is applied to further transform this matrix into a block-angular matrix according to a given set of decomposition criteria. This method provides both flexibility in the choice of the different settings on the decomposition criteria, and diversity in the generation of the decomposition solutions, both taking place in Phase 2 without resort to Phase I. These features essentially make this decomposition method effective, especially in its application to re-decomposition. A powertrain design example is employed for illustration and discussion.

[1]  J. King,et al.  Machine-component group formation in group technology , 1980 .

[2]  D. V. Steward.  Systems Analysis and Management: Structure, Strategy and Design , 1981 .

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

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

[5]  Andrew Kusiak,et al.  A branch-and-bound algorithm for solving the group technology problem , 1991 .

[6]  Richard A. Wysk,et al.  Computer-aided manufacturing , 1991 .

[7]  Andrew Kusiak,et al.  Decomposition of the Design Process , 1993 .

[8]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Fundamentals of Product Modularity , 1994 .

[9]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  A Network Reliability Approach to Optimal Decomposition of Design Problems , 1995 .

[10]  Andrew Kusiak,et al.  Decomposition and Representation Methods in Mechanical Design , 1995 .

[11]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  Optimal model-based decomposition of powertrain system design , 1995 .

[12]  Ramprasad Srinivasan Krishnamachari.  A decomposition synthesis methodology for optimal systems design. , 1996 .

[13]  Ilan Kroo,et al.  A Genetic Algorithm for Scheduling and Decomposition of Multidisciplinary Design Problems , 1996 .

[14]  Christina Bloebaum,et al.  Integrating a Genetic Algorithm Into a Knowledge-Based System for Ordering Complex Design Processes , 1996 .

[15]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  A Hypergraph Framework for Optimal Model-Based Decomposition of Design Problems , 1997, Comput. Optim. Appl..

[16]  P. Papalambros,et al.  Optimal hierarchical decomposition synthesis using integer programming , 1997 .

[17]  Devadatta M. Kulkarni,et al.  Hierarchical overlapping coordination for large-scale optimization by decomposition , 1999 .

[18]  John K. Gershenson,et al.  Modular Product Design: A Life-Cycle View , 1999, Trans. SDPS.

[19]  Timothy K. Brady.  Utilization of Dependency Structure Matrix Analysis to Assess Complex Project Designs , 2002 .

[20]  Li Lin,et al.  Decomposition of interdependent task group for concurrent engineering , 2003 .

[21]  Kazuhiro Saitou,et al.  Decomposition-Based Assembly Synthesis for Structural Stiffness , 2003 .

[22]  G. G. Wang,et al.  Adaptive Response Surface Method Using Inherited Latin Hypercube Design Points , 2003 .