Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Multi-objective Optimisation Using Evolutionary Algorithms: An Introduction Read chapter Read first chapter

2011 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

5. Product Portfolio Selection of Designs Through an Analysis of Lower-Dimensional Manifolds and Identification of Common Properties

Authors : Madan Mohan Dabbeeru, Kalyanmoy Deb, Amitabha Mukerjee

Published in: Multi-objective Evolutionary Optimisation for Product Design and Manufacturing

Publisher: Springer London

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Functional commonalities across product families have been considered by a large body of product family design community but this concept is not widely used in design. For a designer, a functional family refers to a set of designs evaluated based on the same set of qualities; the embodiments and the design spaces may differ, but the semantics of what is being measured (e.g., strength of a spring) remain the same. Based on this functional behaviour we introduce a product family hierarchy, where the designs can be classified into phenomenological design family, functional part family and embodiment part family. And then, we consider the set of possible performances of interest to the user at the embodiment level, and use multi-objective optimisation to identify the non-dominated solutions or the Pareto-front. The designs lying along this front are mapped to the design space, which is usually far higher in dimensionality, and then clustered in an unsupervised manner to obtain candidate product groupings which the designer may inspect to arrive at portfolio decisions. We highlight and discuss two recently suggested techniques for this purpose. First, with help of dimensionality reduction techniques, we show how these clusters in low-dimensional manifolds embedded in the high-dimensional design space. We demonstrate this process on three different designs (water faucets, compression springs and electric motors), involving both continuous and discrete design variables. Second, with the help of a data analysis of Pareto-optimal solutions, we decipher common design principles that constitute the product portfolio solutions. We demonstrate this so-called ‘innovization’ principles on a spring design problem. The use of multi-objective optimisation (evolutionary and otherwise) is the key feature of both approaches. The approaches are promising and further research should pave their ways to better design and manufacturing activities.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Many-Objective Evolutionary Optimisation and Visual Analytics for Product Family Design
next chapter Multi-objective Optimisation of a Family of Industrial Robots
Literature
1.
Jiao, J., Simpson, T. W., & Siddique, Z. (2007). Product family design and platform-based product development: A state-of-the-art review. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(1), 5–29.CrossRef
2.
Jiao, J., & Zhang,Y. (2005). Product portfolio identification based on association rule mining. Computer-Aided Design, 37(2), 149–172.MathSciNetCrossRef
3.
Simpson, T. W., Maier, J. R., & Mistree, F. (2001). Product platform design: Method and application. Research in Engineering Design, 13(1), 2–22.CrossRef
4.
Nayak, R. U., Chen, W., & Simpson, T. W. (2002). A variation-based method for product family design. Engineering Optimization, 34, 65–81.CrossRef
5.
Dabbeeru, M. M., & Mukerjee, A. (2008). Functional part families and design change for mechanical assemblies. In Proceedings of DETC’08. 2008 ASME design engineering technical conferences DETC2008-49739, New York, USA.
6.
Huang, Z., & Yip-Hoi, D. (2003). Parametric modeling of part family machining process plans from independently generated product data sets. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 3, 231.CrossRef
7.
Jiao, J., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2007). A generic genetic algorithm for product family design. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(2), 233–247.CrossRef
8.
De Weck, O. L., Suh, E. S., & Chang, D. (2003). Product family and platform portfolio optimization. In Proceedings of ASME design engineering technology conferences.
9.
Agard, B., & Kusiak, A. (2004). Standardization of components, products and processes with data mining. In International conference on production research Americas, Santiago, Chile.
10.
Stone, R., Kurtadikar, R., Villanueva, N., & Arnold, C. B. (2008). A customer needs motivated conceptual design methodology for product portfolio planning. Journal of Engineering Design, 19(6), 489–514.CrossRef
11.
Hirtz, J., Stone, R. B., McAdams, D. A., Szykman, S., & Wood, K. L. (2002). A functional basis for engineering design: Reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Research in Engineering Design, 13(2), 65–82.
12.
Meyer, M. H., & Utterback, J. M. (1993). The product family and the dynamics of core capability. Sloan Management Review, 34(3), 29–47.
13.
Simpson, T. W. (2004). Product platform design and customization: Status and promise. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 18, 3–20.CrossRef
14.
Nelson, S. A., Parkinson, M. B., & Papalambros, P. Y. (2001). Multicriteria optimization in product platform design. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 123(2), 199–204.CrossRef
15.
Simpson, T. W., & D’Souza, B. S. (2004). Assessing variable levels of platform commonality within a product family using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. Concurrent Engineering, 12(2), 119.CrossRef
16.
Messac, A., Martinez, M. P., & Simpson, T. W. (2002). Effective product family design using physical programming. Engineering Optimization, 34(3), 245–261.CrossRef
17.
Akundi, S., Simpson, T. W., & Reed, P. M. (2005). Multi-objective design optimization for product platform and product family design using genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of DETC’05, ASME design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, Long Beach, CA.
18.
Fujita, K., & Yoshida, H. (2001). Product variety optimization: Simultaneous optimization of module combination and module attributes. In Proceedings of the 2001 ASME design engineering technical conferences (pp. 9–12).
19.
Zugasti, J. P. G., Otto, K. N., & Baker, J. D. (2001). Assessing value in platformed product family design. Research in Engineering Design, 13(1), 30–41.CrossRef
20.
Dai, Z., & Scott, M. J. (2007). Product platform design through sensitivity analysis and cluster analysis. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(1), 97–113.CrossRef
21.
Khajavirad, A., & Michalek, J. (2007). An extension of the commonality index for product family optimization. In DETC2007 (pp. 4–7).
22.
Kota, S., Sethuraman, K., & Miller, R. (2000). A metric for evaluating design commonality in product families. Journal of Mechanical Design, ASME, 122, 143–150.CrossRef
23.
Wacker, J. G., & Treleven, M. (1986). Component part standardization: An analysis of commonality sources and indices. Journal of Operations Management, 6(2), 219–244.CrossRef
24.
Deb, K., & Srinivasan, A. (2006). Innovization: Innovating design principles through optimization. In Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO-2006) (pp. 1629–1636). New York: ACM
25.
Miettinen, K. (1999) Nonlinear multiobjective optimization. Boston: Kluwer.MATH
26.
Deb, K. (2001). Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Chichester, UK: Wiley.MATH
27.
Bandaru, S., & Deb, K. (2011). Towards automating the discovery of certain innovative design principles through a clustering based optimization technique. Engineering Optimization, 1–31.
28.
Ulrich, K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research Policy, 24, 419–440.CrossRef
29.
Deb, K., & Srinivasan, A. (2007). Innovization: Innovative design principles through optimization. Kangal, IIT Kanpur: Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. Kangal:2005007.
30.
Messac, A., & Mattson, C. A. (2004). Normal constraint method with guarantee of even representation of complete Pareto frontier. AIAA Journal, 42(10), 2101–2111.CrossRef
31.
Dabbeeru, M. M., & Mukerjee, A. (2008). Discovering implicit constraints in design. In Third international conference on design computing and cognition. Atlanta, GA, USA: Springer.
32.
Kannan, B. K., & Kramer, S. N. (1994). An augmented Lagrange multiplier based method for mixed integer discrete continuous optimization and its applications to mechanical design. Journal of Mechanical Design, 116(2), 405–411.CrossRef
33.
Martinetz, T. M., Berkovich, S. G., & Schulten, K. J. (1993). Neural gas network for vector quantization and its application to time-series prediction. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 4, 558–569.CrossRef
34.
Hölttä, K., Tang, V., & Seering, W. (2003). Modularizing product architectures using dendrograms. In Proceedings 14th international conference on engineering design.
35.
Simpson, T. W. (1998). A concept exploration method for product family design. Georgia Tech University, Department of Mechanical Engineering.
36.
Bishop, C. M. (2006). Pattern recognition and machine learning. Berlin: Springer.
37.
Tenenbaum, J. B., Silva, V., & Langford, J. C. (2000). A global geometric framework for nonlinear dimensionality reduction. Science, 290(5500), 2319–2323.CrossRef
38.
Saul, L. K., & Roweis, S. T. (2003). Think globally, fit locally: Unsupervised learning of low dimensional manifolds. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 4, 119–155.MathSciNet
39.
Belkin, M., & Niyogi, P. (2002). Laplacian eigenmaps and spectral techniques for embedding and clustering. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 1, 585–592.
40.
Khire, R., Wang, J., Bailey, T., Lin, Y., & Simpson, T. W. (2008). Product family commonality selection through interactive visualization. In ASME 2008 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. Proceedings of the DETC.
41.
Roweis, S. T., & Saul, L. K. (2000). Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding. Science, 290(5500), 2323–2326.CrossRef
42.
Geng, X., Zhan, D. C., Zhou, Z. H. (2005). Supervised nonlinear dimensionality reduction for visualization and classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B, 35(6), 1098–1107.CrossRef
43.
Vlachos, M., Domeniconi, C., Gunopulos, D., Kollios, G., & Koudas, N. (2002). Non-linear dimensionality reduction techniques for classification and visualization. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 645–651). New York: ACM.
Metadata
Title
Product Portfolio Selection of Designs Through an Analysis of Lower-Dimensional Manifolds and Identification of Common Properties
Authors
Madan Mohan Dabbeeru
Kalyanmoy Deb
Amitabha Mukerjee
Copyright Year
2011
Publisher
Springer London
Book
Multi-objective Evolutionary Optimisation for Product Design and Manufacturing

Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-617-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-0-85729-652-8

Copyright Year: 2011

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-652-8_5

Premium Partners

    Image Credits