Platform has been known as an effective strategy for trading off between product customization and economies of scale, and firms have paid more and more attention to designing an effective and efficient product platform. In platform designing, modularity strategy is usually adopted and new modules are introduced to maintain the variety of products and flexibility of the platform. However, production costs and failure rates of new modules are usually uncertain due to the lack of historical data. Besides, the values of some key parameters in platform design, such as cost saving from designing a modular platform and demand quantity of the products, are also often vague. In this paper, we study the problem of designing a product platform with modularity strategy under fuzzy environment. By characterizing the cost saving from designing a modular platform, the demand quantity of the products and the parameters representing economies of scale and product quality improvement as fuzzy variables, we formulate three fuzzy programming models. An efficient algorithm combining fuzzy simulation and simulated annealing is proposed to solve the models. Numerical experiments are conducted to show the performance of the algorithm.
Platform design Platform modularity Credibility theory Fuzzy programming Simulated annealing
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71471038) and Program for Huiyuan Distinguished Young Scholars, UIBE.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
Qinyu Song declares that she has no conflict of interest. Yaodong Ni declares that he has no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Alberto J, Tollenaere M (2005) Modular and platform methods for product family design: literature analysis. J Intell Manuf 16(3):371–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruno A, Bassetto S (2013) Modular design of product families for quality and cost. Int J Prod Res 51(6):1648–1667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Arieh D, Easton T, Choubey AM (2009) Solving the multiple platforms configuration problem. Int J Prod Res 47(7):1969–1988CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
Ni Y, Zhao Z (2017) Two-agent scheduling problem under fuzzy environment. J Intell Manuf 28(3):739–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivares-Benitez E, Gonzalez-Velarde JL (2008) A metaheuristic approach for selecting a common platform for modular products based on product performance and manufacturing cost. J Intell Manuf 19(5):599–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qu T et al (2011) Two-stage product platform development for mass customisation. Int J Prod Res 49(8):2197–2219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson TW (2004) Product platform design and customization: status and promise. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 18(1):3–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suryakant S (2015) Tyagi, optimization of a platform configuration with generational changes. Int J Prod Econ 169:299–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souma C, Messac A, Khire RA (2011) Comprehensive product platform planning (cp3) framework. J Mech Des 133(10):101004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarang A et al (2013) A hybrid model of component sharing and platform modularity for optimal product family design. Int J Prod Res 51(2):614–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vish K, Gupta S (2001) Appropriateness and impact of platform-based product development. Manag Sci 47(1):52–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang L, Zhou X, Gao Z (2013) Rescheduling trains with scenario-based fuzzy recovery time representation on two-way double-track railways. Soft Comput 17(4):605–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yigit AS, Ulsoy AG, Allahverdi A (2002) Optimizing modular product design for reconfigurable manufacturing. J Intell Manuf 13(4):309–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yigit AS, Ulsoy AG, Allahverdi A (2003) Optimal selection of module instances for modular products in reconfigurable manufacturing. Int J Prod Res 41:4063–4074CrossRefGoogle Scholar