Skip to main content
Log in

A quality-engineering-based approach for conceptual product design

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although many conceptual design methods have been proposed, there is still ample room for improvement. First, most conceptual design methods do not relate concepts generation by a combination of basic features to the feasibility of the concepts. Second, those methods may have ignored customer preferences in modeling concept selection. To overcome these shortcomings, a quality-engineering-based conceptual design approach is proposed in this paper by integrating the use of quality function deployment (QFD), morphological matrix analysis (MMA), multi-attribute decision-making techniques (MADM), and possibilistic optimization models (POMs). A possibility distribution function (PDF) is applied to account for the uncertainties of technology development cost in the early design stages, and a mathematical framework is established by incorporating the customer-perceived relative importance into a possibilistic optimization model for design concept selection, which plays a central role in the proposed methodology. Contrary to deterministic optimization models (DOMs), the proposed possibilistic optimization can produce results that are more informative and more reliable to the designers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Qiu SL, Fok SC, Chen CH, Xu S (2002) Conceptual design using evolution strategy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 20(9):683–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Seo K-K, Park J-H, Jang D-S, Wallace D (2002) Approximate estimation of the product life cycle cost using artificial neural networks in conceptual design. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 19(6):461–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Pugh S (1991) Total design: integrated methods for successful product engineering, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ulrich KT, Eppinger SD (2000) Product design and development, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen Y, Tang J, Fung RYK, Ren Z (2004) Fuzzy regression-based mathematical programming model for quality function deployment. Int J Prod Res 42(5):1009–1027

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Armacost RL, Componation PJ, Mullens MA, Swart WW (1994) An AHP framework for prioritizing customer requirements in QFD: an industrialized housing application. IIE Trans 26(4):72–79

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fung RYK, Law DST, Ip WH (1999) Design targets determination for inter-dependent product attributes in QFD using fuzzy inference. Integr Manuf Syst 10(6):376–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sopadang A, Cho B-R, Leonard MS (2003) Development of the hybrid weight assessment system for multiple quality attributes. Qual Eng 15(1):75–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Akao Y (1990) Quality function deployment: integrating customer requirements into product design (translated by Glenn Mazur). Productivity Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hauser JR, Clausing D (1988) The house of quality. Harvard Bus Rev 66(3):63–73

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chen CH, Khoo LP, Yan W (2002) Web-enabled customer-oriented product concept formation via laddering technique and Kohonen association. Concurr Eng Res Appl 10(4):299–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wasserman G (1993) On how to prioritize design requirements during the QFD planning process. IIE Trans 25(3):59–65

    Google Scholar 

  13. Norris KW (1963) The morphological approach to engineering design. In: Jones JC, Thornley D (eds) Conference on design methods. Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  14. Huang GQ, Mak KL (1999) Web-based morphological charts for concept design in collaborative product development. J Intell Manuf 10(3–4):267–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making—methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Reeve JM, Sullivan WG (1990) A synthesis of methods for evaluating interrelated investment projects. In: Liberatore MJ (ed) Selection and evaluation of advanced manufacturing technologies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fung RYK, Tang J, Tu Y, Wang D (2002) Product design resources optimization using a non-linear fuzzy quality function deployment model. Int J Prod Res 40(3):585–599

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Tang J, Fung RYK, Xu B, Wang D (2002) A new approach to quality function deployment planning with financial consideration. Comput Oper Res 29(11):1447–1463

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yizeng Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fung, R.Y.K., Chen, Y. & Tang, J. A quality-engineering-based approach for conceptual product design. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 32, 1064–1073 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0434-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0434-5

Keywords

Navigation