In today's highly competitive and volatile market, companies are trying to bring their products to the market faster in order to maintain a competitive advantage. One of the strategies is to develop common product platforms for rapid new product development. The objective of this research is to develop a scalable product platform robust design (SPPRD) framework that can assist companies in creating product platforms quickly and efficiently. The essential of this framework is to infuse the robust design concept into the product platform design process. Two objectives of robust design - achieving performance targets and minimizing performance variation are evaluated in the Compromise Decision Support Problem (Compromise-DSP) model. This SPPRD framework is demonstrated with the design of a tube-fin evaporator platform.
MessacA.MartinezM.SimpsonT.Introduction of a product family penalty function using physical programming. J. Mechanical Design, 2002, 124(2), 164–172.
2.
SimpsonT.SeepersadC.MistreeF.Balancing commonality and performance within the concurrent design of multiple products in a product family. Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications, 2001, 9(3), 177–190.
3.
PineB. J.VictorB.BoyntonA. C.Making mass customization work. Harvard Business Review, Sep-Oct 1993, 71(5), p. 108.
4.
SimpsonT.Product platform design and optimization: Status and promise, 2003. ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Chicago, USA.
5.
ParkJ.SimpsonT. W.Development of a production cost estimation framework for product family design. In Proceedings of 2004 IIE Annual Conference and Exhibition, 2004, pp. 2353–2358.
6.
MeyerM. H.TertzakianP.UtterbackJ. M.Metrics for managing research and development in the context of the product family. Management Science, 1997, 43(1), 88–111.
7.
WheelwrightS. C.SasserW. E.Jr.The new product development map. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 1989, 67(3), 112–123.
8.
FarrellR. S.Product platform design to improve commonality in custom products. J. Intelligent Manufacturing, 2003, 14(6), 541–556.
9.
MarstonM.AllenJ. K.MistreeF.Decision support problem technique: Integrating descriptive and normative approaches in decision based design. J. Engineering Valuation Cost Analysis, 2000, 3(2), 107–129.
10.
MistreeF.HughesO.BrasB.The Compromise Decision Support Problem and the adaptive linear programming algorithm. In Proceedings of Structural optimization: Status and promise, AIAA, Washington, DC, 1993, pp 247–286.
11.
SimpsonT.Product platform design and customization: Status and promise. AI-EDAM Special Issue: Platform product development for mass customization, 2004, 18(1), 3–20.
12.
FujitaK.YoshidaH.Product variety optimization simultaneously designing module combination and module attributes. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, 2004, 12(2), 105–118.
13.
Gonzalez-ZugastiJ. P.OttoK. N.BakerJ. D.Method for architecting product platforms. Research in Engineering Design - Theory, Applications, and Concurrent Engineering, 2002, 12(2), 61–72.
SopadangA.ChoRae ByungLeonardM.Development of a scaling factor identification method using design of experiments for product family based product and process design. Quality Engineering, 2002, 14(2), 319–329.
16.
SopadangA.ChoRae ByungLeonardM.Development of the hybrid weight assessment system for multiple quality attributes. Quality Engineering, 2003, 15(1), 75–89.
17.
HernandezG.AllenJ. K.MistreeF.Platform design for customizable products as a problem of access in a geometric space. Engineering Optimization, 2003, 35(3), 229–254.
18.
SeepersadC.MistreeF.AllenJ.Designing evolving families of products using the utility-based compromise Decision Support Problem. Int. J. Mass Customization, 2005, 1(1), 37–64.
19.
KulkarniR. S.AllenJ. K.MistreeF.Designing product families for a changing market space. In Proceedings of the ASME DETC 2005 Conference, 2005, pp. 1029–1051.
20.
KreiderJ. F.Handbook of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning, 2001 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL) ISBN: 0849395844.
