Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A new configuration approach to support the technical bid solutions for complex ETO products under uncertainties

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

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel two-stage and multi-objective optimization design method for the configuration design of complex engineering-to-order (ETO) product under imprecise matching and other uncertainties. The goal is to support selection of the optimal technical bid solutions while meeting requirements. A new two-stage configuration design framework for complex ETO products is proposed. Stage one is product architecture configuration design, supported by an engineering characteristics design method based on constraint satisfaction problems and Bayesian networks, and stage two is physical module configuration design, where a multi-objective optimal configuration model of physical modules is developed with the goals of minimum production cost, shortest delivery time, and maximum degree of matching technical requirements under imprecise matching of technical requirements and uncertainties in such as production cost and delivery time. As for the new selection method for obtaining an optimal technical bid solution scheme, it integrates a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) and an approximate ideal solution ranking method (TOPSIS). Our approach has been applied to the design of a technical bid solution of subway’s bogie. The results show that this approach enables bidders to quickly select the most interesting solution during a bidding process. The proposed approach aids the bidders to quickly create ETO product scheme designs, and then advise a new selection method for the bidders to quickly obtain a technical bid solution from the above product scheme designs, which has a minimum cost while meeting order requirements.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sonmez R, Sozgen B (2017) A support vector machine method for Bid/No bid decision making. J Civ Eng Manag 23:641–649. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2017.1281836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A. Sylla, E. Vareilles, T. Coudert, M. Aldanondo, L. Geneste, Y. Beauregard (2017) ETO bid solutions definition and selection using configuration models and a multi-criteria approach. In C Ind Eng Eng Man:1833–1837.

  3. Du XH, Jiao JX, Tseng MM (2003) Modelling platform-based product configuration using programmed attributed graph grammars. J Eng Design 14:145–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954482031000091482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Willner O, Powell D, Duchi A, Schonsleben P (2014) Globally distributed engineering processes: making the distinction between engineer-to-order and make-to-order. Variety Manag Manuf: Proceedings of the 47th Cirp Conference on Manufacturing Systems 17:663–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.02.054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Olhager J (2003) Strategic positioning of the order penetration point. Int J Prod Econ 85:319–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00119-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vanwelkenhuysen J (1998) The tender support system. Knowl-Based Syst 11:363–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-7051(98)00065-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Aldanondo M, Vareilles E (2008) Configuration for mass customization: how to extend product configuration towards requirements and process configuration. J Intell Manuf 19:521–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-008-0135-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li B, Chen LP, Huang ZD, Zhong YF (2006) Product configuration optimization using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 30:20–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-005-0035-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Liu Z, Wong YS, Lee KS (2010) Modularity analysis and commonality design: a framework for the top-down platform and product family design. Int J Prod Res 48:3657–3680. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540902902598

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang LL (2014) Product configuration: a review of the state-of-the-art and future research. Int J Prod Res 52:6381–6398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.942012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Willner O, Gosling J, Schonsleben P (2016) Establishing a maturity model for design automation in sales-delivery processes of ETO products. Comput Ind 82:57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2016.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fang J, Wei X (2020) A knowledge support approach for the preliminary design of platform-based products in engineering-to-order manufacturing. Adv Eng Inform 46 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2020.101196

  13. Pitiot P, Aldanondo M, Vareilles E, Gaborit P, Djefel M, Carbonnel S (2013) Concurrent product configuration and process planning, towards an approach combining interactivity and optimality. Int J Prod Res 51:524–541. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2011.653449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Baud-Lavigne B, Agard B, Penz B (2016) Simultaneous product family and supply chain design: an optimization approach. Int J Prod Econ 174:111–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.01.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Song QY, Ni YD, Ralescu DA (2021) The impact of lead-time uncertainty in product configuration. Int J Prod Res 59:959–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yao XF, Askin R (2019) Review of supply chain configuration and design decision-making for new product. Int J Prod Res 57:2226–2246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1567954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Felfernig A, Friedrich G, Jannach D (2001) Conceptual modeling for configuration of mass-customizable products. Artif Intell Eng 15:165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0954-1810(01)00016-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kristianto Y, Helo P, Jiao RJ (2013) Mass customization design of engineer-to-order products using Benders’ decomposition and bi-level stochastic programming. J Intell Manuf 24:961–975. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-012-0692-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Levandowski CE, Jiao JR, Johannesson H (2015) A two-stage model of adaptable product platform for engineering-to-order configuration design. J Eng Design 26:220–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2015.1021305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sylla A, Guillon D, Vareilles E, Aldanondo M, Coudert T, Geneste L (2018) Configuration knowledge modeling: how to extend configuration from assemble/make to order towards engineer to order for the bidding process. Comput Ind 99:29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.03.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Guillon D, Villeneuve E, Merlo C, Vareilles E, Aldanondo M (2021) ISIEM: a methodology to deploy a knowledge-based system to support bidding process. Comput Ind Eng 161 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107638

  22. Sylla A, Coudert T, Vareilles E, Geneste L, Aldanondo M (2021) Possibilistic Pareto-dominance approach to support technical bid selection under imprecision and uncertainty in engineer-to-order bidding process. Int J Prod Res 59:6361–6381. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1812754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cicconi P, Castorani V, Germani M, Mandolini M, Vita A (2020) A multi-objective sequential method for manufacturing cost and structural optimization of modular steel towers. Eng Comput-Germany 36:475–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00709-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hong G, Xue DY, Tu Y (2010) Rapid identification of the optimal product configuration and its parameters based on customer-centric product modeling for one-of-a-kind production. Comput Ind 61:270–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2009.09.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Song Z, Kusiak A (2009) Optimising product configurations with a data-mining approach. Int J Prod Res 47:1733–1751. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540701644235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Zhang JS, Wang QF, Wan L, Zhong YF (2005) Configuration-oriented product modelling and knowledge management for made-to-order manufacturing enterprises. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 25:41–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-003-1871-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jannach D, Zanker M (2013) Modeling and solving distributed configuration problems: a CSP-based approach. Ieee T Knowl Data En 25:603–618. https://doi.org/10.1109/Tkde.2011.236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Yang D, Dong M, Chang XK (2012) A dynamic constraint satisfaction approach for configuring structural products under mass customization. Eng Appl Artif Intel 25:1723–1737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2012.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Guillon D, Ayachi R, Vareilles E, Aldanondo M, Villeneuve E, Merlo C (2021) Product v service system configuration: a generic knowledge-based model for commercial offers. Int J Prod Res 59:1021–1040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. T.C. Wang, H. Li, X.W. Wang (2022) Extension design model of rapid configuration design for complex mechanical products scheme design. Appl Sci-Basel 12 https://doi.org/10.3390/app12157921

  31. Jiao JX, Tseng MM (1999) A methodology of developing product family architecture for mass customization. J Intell Manuf 10:3–20. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008926428533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lee HJ, Lee JK (2005) An effective customization procedure with configurable standard models. Decis Support Syst 41:262–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2004.06.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang CH (2013) Incorporating customer satisfaction into the decision-making process of product configuration: a fuzzy Kano perspective. Int J Prod Res 51:6651–6662. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.825742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang D, Miao R, Wu HW, Zhou YT (2009) Product configuration knowledge modeling using ontology web language. Expert Syst Appl 36:4399–4411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.05.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhu GN, Hu J, Qi J, Ma J, Peng YH (2015) An integrated feature selection and cluster analysis techniques for case-based reasoning. Eng Appl Artif Intel 39:14–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2014.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wang PJ, Gong YD, Xie HL, Liu YX, Nee A (2017) Applying CBR to machine tool product configuration design oriented to customer requirements. Chin J Mech Eng-En 30:60–76. https://doi.org/10.3901/Cjme.2016.0113.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yeh JY, Wu TH (2005) Solutions for product configuration management: an empirical study. Ai Edam 19:39–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060405050043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Long HJ, Wang LY, Shen J, Wu MX, Jiang ZB (2013) Product service system configuration based on support vector machine considering customer perception. Int J Prod Res 51:5450–5468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.778432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wei W, Fan WH, Li ZK (2014) Multi-objective optimization and evaluation method of modular product configuration design scheme. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 75:1527–1536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-6240-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zheng H, Yang S, Lou SH, Gao YC, Feng YX (2021) Knowledge-based integrated product design framework towards sustainable low-carbon manufacturing. Adv Eng Inform 48 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101258

  41. Sigurdarson NS, Eifler T, Ebro M, Papalambros PY (2022) Multiobjective monotonicity analysis: Pareto set dependency and trade-offs causality in configuration design. J Mech Design 144 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4052444

  42. Zheng P, Xu X, Yu SQ, Liu C (2017) Personalized product configuration framework in an adaptable open architecture product platform. J Manuf Syst 43:422–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2017.03.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Du G, Jiao RJ, Chen M (2014) Joint optimization of product family configuration and scaling design by Stackelberg game. Eur J Oper Res 232:330–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.07.021

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Tang DB, Wang Q, Ullah I (2017) Optimisation of product configuration in consideration of customer satisfaction and low carbon. Int J Prod Res 55:3349–3373. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.1231430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Song QY, Ni YD, Ralescu DA (2021) Product configuration using redundancy and standardisation in an uncertain environment. Int J Prod Res 59:6451–6470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang J, Li R, Ding GF, Qin SF, Cai ZY (2022) Product-service system engineering characteristics design for life cycle cost based on constraint satisfaction problem and Bayesian network. Adv Eng Inform 52 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101573

  47. Zhang HZ, Han X, Li R, Qin SF, Ding GF, Yan KY (2016) A new conceptual design method to support rapid and effective mapping from product design specification to concept design. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 87:2375–2389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-8576-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Li L, Liu F, Li CB (2014) Customer satisfaction evaluation method for customized product development using Entropy weight and Analytic Hierarchy Process. Comput Ind Eng 77:80–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2014.09.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. OuYang J, Yang F, Yang SW, Nie ZP (2008) The improved NSGA-II approach. J Electromagnet Wave 22:163–172. https://doi.org/10.1163/156939308784160703

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by National Key Research of China (grant number 2020YFB1711402); National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 52105277); and Sichuan Provincial Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 2022NSFSC0038).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Advanced Design and Manufacturing, School of Mechanical Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, 610031, People’s Republic of China

    Haizhu Zhang, Rong Li, Jian Wang & Lifei Zhu

  2. School of Design, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK

    Shengfeng Qin

Authors
  1. Haizhu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rong Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shengfeng Qin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jian Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lifei Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

H. Z. contributed in the initial research idea and paper writing; R. L. and G. D. contributed to the conception of the study; S. Q. contributed in the paper writing and proofreading; J. W. and L. Z. performed the experiment and performed the data analyses.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rong Li.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All the authors have given their consent for the publication of this manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, H., Li, R., Qin, S. et al. A new configuration approach to support the technical bid solutions for complex ETO products under uncertainties. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 129, 3413–3434 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12472-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12472-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation