Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Measures of product design adaptability for changing requirements

  • Serdar Uckun (a1), Ryan Mackey (a2), Minh Do (a3), Rong Zhou (a4), Eric Huang (a4) and Jami J. Shah (a5)...

Abstract

Adaptability can have many different definitions: reliability, robustness, survivability, and changeability (adaptability to requirements change). In this research, we focused entirely on the last type. We discuss two alternative approaches to requirements change adaptability. One is the valuation approach that is based on utility and cost of design changes in response to modified requirements. The valuation approach is theoretically sound because it is based on utility and decision theory, but it may be difficult to use in the real world. The second approach is based on examining product architecture characteristics that facilitate changes that include modularity, hierarchy, interfaces, performance sensitivity, and design margins. This approach is heuristic in nature but more practical to use. If calibrated, it could serve as a surrogate for real adaptability. These measures were incorporated in a software tool for exploring alternative configurations of fractionated space satellite systems.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Reprint requests to: Jami J. Shah, Design Automation Lab, Mechanical & Aeronautical Engineering Department, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-6106, USA. E-mail: jami.shah@asu.edu

References

Hide All
Baldwin, C.Y., & Clark, K.B. (2003). Managing in an Age of Modularity. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Bischof, A., & Blessing, L. (2008). Guidelines for the development of flexible products. Int. Design Conf., Design 2008, Dubrovnik, May 19–22.
Chalupnik, M., Wynn, D., & Clarkson, J. (2009). Approaches to mitigate the impact of uncertainty in development processes. Int. Conf. Engineering Design, ICED2009, Stanford, August.
Chen, W., & Yuan, C. (1999). A probabilistic-based design model for achieving flexibility in design. Journal of Mechanical Design 121(1), 7783.
Fixson, S.K. (2003). The Multiple Faces of Modularity—A Literature Analysis of a Product Concept for Assembled Hardware Products, Technical Report 03-05. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering.
Guo, F., & Gershenson, J.K. (2003). Comparison of modular measurement methods based on consistency analysis and sensitivity analysis. Proc. 2003 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf., Chicago, September.
Guo, F., & Gershenson, J.K. (2004). A comparison of modular product design methods based on improvement and iteration. Proc. 2004 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf./Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., pp. 261–269.
Hashemian, M. (2005). Design for adaptability. PhD Thesis. University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
Hölttä, K., Suh, E.S., & de Weck, O. (2005). Trade-off between modularity and performance for engineered systems and products. Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Engineering Design, Melbourne, Australia, August 15–18.
Jiao, J., & Tseng, M.M. (2004). Customizability analysis in design for mass customization. Computer-Aided Design 36(8), 745757.
Kalligeros, K., de Weck, O., Neufille, R., & Luckins, A. (2006). Platform identification using design structure matrices. Proc. 16th Int. Symp. INCOSE, July.
Kota, S., Sethuraman, K., & Miller, R. (2000). A metric for evaluating design commonality in product families. Journal of Mechanical Design 122(4), 403410.
Lai, X., & Gershenson, J. (2008). Representation of similarity and dependency for assembly modularity. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 37(7), 803827.
Lehnerd, M.A. (1997). The Power of Product Platforms. New York: Free Press.
Lewis, K., Chen, W., & Schmidt, L. (2006). Decision Making in Engineering Design. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Li, Y., Xue, D., & Gu, P. (2008). Design for product adaptability. Concurrent Engineering 16(3), 221232.
Luce, R., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and Decisions. New York: Wiley.
Neufille, R. (n.d.). Flexibility in engineering design with examples from electric power systems. Powerpoint presentation.
Newcomb, P.J., Bras, B., & Rosen, D.W. (2001). Implications of modularity on product design for the life cycle. Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Mechanical Engineering.
Oman, P., & Hagemeister, J. (1992). Metrics for Assessing a Software System's Maintainability. New York: IEEE.
Pahl, G., & Beitz, W. (1995). Engineering Design. New York: Springer.
Rajan, P., Van Wei, M., Campbell, M., Wood, K., & Otto, K. (2005). An empirical foundation for product flexibility. Design Studies 26(4), 405438.
Ross, A.M., Rhodes, D.H., & Hastings, D.E. (2008). Defining changeability: reconciling flexibility, adaptability, scalability, modifiability, and robustness for maintaining system lifecycle value. Systems Engineering 11(3), 246262.
Shaw, G.B., Miller, D., & Hastings, D. (1999). The Generalized Information Network Analysis Methodology for Distributed Satellite Systems. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Shibata, T., Yano, M., & Kodama, F. (2004). Empirical analysis of evolution of product architecture. Research Policy 34(1), 1331.
Shibata, T., Yano, M., & Kodama, F. (2005). Empirical analysis of evolution of product architecture: Fanuc numerical controllers from 1962 to 1997. Research Policy 34(1), 1331.
Siddall, J. (1972). Analytical Decision-Making in Engineering Design. Englewood, NJ: Prentice–Hall.
Siddiqi, A., Bounova, G., de Weck, O., Keller, R., & Robinson, B. (2011). A posteriori design change analysis for complex engineering projects. Journal of Mechanical Design 133(10).
Simon, H.A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 106(6), 467482.
Simpson, T. (2004). Product platform design and customisation: status and promise. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 18(1), 320.
Simpson, T., Rosen, D., Allen, J., & Mistree, F. (1998). Metrics for assessing design freedom and information certainty in the early stages of design. ASME Transactions, Journal of Mechanical Design, 120(4), 628635.
Strong, M.B., Magleby, S., & Parkinson, A. (2003). A classification method to compare modular product concepts. Proc. ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf., pp. 657–668, Chicago, September 2–6.
Suh, E.S., de Weck, O.L., & Chang, D. (2007). Flexible product platforms: framework and case study. Research in Engineering Design 18(2), 6789.
Suh, N.P. (2000). Axiomatic Design. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ulrich, K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research Policy 24(3), 419440.
Ulrich, K.T., & Eppinger, S.D. (2011). Product Design and Development, Vol. 2. New York: McGraw–Hill.
Yassine, A., Whitney, D., & Daleiden, J. (2003). Connectivity maps: modeling and analysing relationships inproduct development processes. Journal of Engineering Design 14(3), 377394.
Zha, X., Sriram, R., & Lu, W. (2004). Evaluation and selection in product design for mass customization: a knowledge decision support approach. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 18(1), 87109.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

AI EDAM
  • ISSN: 0890-0604
  • EISSN: 1469-1760
  • URL: /core/journals/ai-edam
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed