Selecting alternatives in the conceptual design phase: an application of Fuzzy-AHP and Pugh’s Controlled Convergence

The selection of conceptual design alternatives is crucial in product development. This is due both to the fact that an iterative process is required to solve the problem and that communication among design team members should be optimized. In addition, several design constraints need to be respected. Although the literature offers several alternative selection methods, to date, only very few are currently being used in industry. A comparison of the various approaches would improve the knowledge transfer between design research and practice, helping practitioners to approach these decision support tools more effectively. This paper proposes a structured comparison of two decision support methods, namely the Fuzzy-Analytic Hierarchy Process and Pugh’s Controlled Convergence. From the literature debate regarding selection methods, four relevant criteria are identified: computational effort, suitability for the early design stages, suitability for group decision making, and ease of application. Finally a sensitivity analysis is proposed to test the robustness of each method. An industrial case study is described regarding an innovative and low-cost solution to increase the duration of heel tips in women’s shoes. The selection of conceptual design alternatives of the heel tip presents complex challenges because of the extremely difficult geometric constraints and demanding design criteria.

[1]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  The Pugh Controlled Convergence method: model-based evaluation and implications for design theory , 2009 .

[2]  Didier Dubois,et al.  A review of fuzzy set aggregation connectives , 1985, Inf. Sci..

[3]  Rifat Gürcan Özdemir,et al.  A Fuzzy AHP Approach to Evaluating Machine Tool Alternatives , 2006, J. Intell. Manuf..

[4]  Shun Takai,et al.  Modifying Pugh’s Design Concept Evaluation Methods , 2004 .

[5]  Y. Reich.  My method is better! , 2010 .

[6]  W. Ernst Eder,et al.  Design Modeling-A Design Science Approach (and Why Does Industry Not Use It?) , 1998 .

[7]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  An Evaluation of the Pugh Controlled Convergence Method , 2007 .

[8]  Matti Perttula,et al.  Utilization of Concept Selection Methods: A Survey of Finnish Industry , 2005 .

[9]  Vikas Kapoor,et al.  Fuzzy Application to the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Robot Selection , 2005, Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak..

[10]  Thierry Gidel,et al.  An uncertainty-based approach to drive product preliminary design , 2011 .

[11]  John P. Sullivan,et al.  Preliminary Design of MALE UAV Utilizing High Fidelity CAD/CAE Tools and Design Methods , 2009 .

[12]  Mao-Jiun J. Wang,et al.  A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach for robot selection , 1993 .

[13]  Alessio Ishizaka,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis , 2013 .

[14]  Patrick Sebastian,et al.  Decision support systems in preliminary design , 2009 .

[15]  Bruno Lotter,et al.  Manufacturing Assembly Handbook , 1990 .

[16]  Marcello Pellicciari,et al.  Hybrid Reconfigurable System design and optimization through virtual prototyping and digital manufacturing tools , 2012 .

[17]  M. Franssen.  Arrow’s theorem, multi-criteria decision problems and multi-attribute preferences in engineering design , 2005 .

[18]  Anjali Awasthi,et al.  A hybrid approach based on SERVQUAL and fuzzy TOPSIS for evaluating transportation service quality , 2011, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[19]  Dr. Hans Hellendoorn,et al.  An Introduction to Fuzzy Control , 1996, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[20]  Da Ruan,et al.  A fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach for software development strategy selection , 2004, Int. J. Gen. Syst..

[21]  Zeki Ayağ,et al.  A fuzzy AHP-based simulation approach to concept evaluation in a NPD environment , 2005 .

[22]  Francesca Montagna,et al.  Decision-aiding tools in innovative product development contexts , 2011 .

[23]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  Design Methods, Tools, and Outcome Measures: A Survey of Practitioners , 2007 .

[24]  Juite Wang,et al.  Improved engineering design concept selection using fuzzy sets , 2002, Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf..

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

[26]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[27]  Erik K. Antonsson,et al.  Aggregation functions for engineering design trade-offs , 1995, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[28]  A. Thakker,et al.  3DCAD conceptual design of the next-generation impulse turbine using the Pugh decision-matrix , 2009 .

[29]  Alex H. B. Duffy,et al.  Design co-ordination for concurrent engineering , 1993 .

[30]  Erik K. Antonsson,et al.  Trade-off strategies in engineering design , 1991 .

[31]  Katri K. Sieberg,et al.  Are partwise comparisons reliable? , 2004 .

[32]  Wynne Hsu,et al.  Current research in the conceptual design of mechanical products , 1998, Comput. Aided Des..

[33]  Marcello Pellicciari,et al.  Engineering method for adaptive manufacturing systems design , 2009 .

[34]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  Granularity Enhancement of Extracted Preferential Probabilities From Design Team Discussion , 2011, DAC 2011.

[35]  Chen Liu,et al.  An optimum design selection approach for product customization development , 2012, J. Intell. Manuf..

[36]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  Design through selection: a method that works , 1985 .

[37]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .