A new interactive design approach for concept selection based on expert opinion

  • Antonio Lanzotti
  • Francesco Carbone
  • Stanislao Grazioso
  • Fabrizio RennoEmail author
  • Michele Staiano
Original Paper


Effective identification of the optimal design in the early stages of product development is critical in order to obtain the best chances of eventual customer satisfaction. Currently, the advancements in prototyping techniques offer unique chances to evaluate the features of different design candidates by means of product experts acting as assessors and/or customers enrolled as testers. In this paper, the candidate identification using virtual and physical prototypes is described and a practical fuzzy approach toward the evaluation of the optimal design is presented. The proposed methodology is tested on a full case study, namely the choice of optimal design for the traditional Neapolitan coffeemaker, inspired by the prototypes of the Italian designer Riccardo Dalisi. Several concepts are developed in a virtual environment and four alternatives among them are realized using Additive Manufacturing. By allowing experts to interact with virtual and physical prototypes, they were able to express their opinion on a custom fuzzy evaluation scale (i.e. they were freely choosing more or less coarse linguistic scales as well as the related shapes of fuzzy sets to adequately represent the level of fuzziness of their judgments). Once the opinions are collected, the set of best candidate(s) is easily identified and useful suggestion can be obtained for further developing the product.


Design method Concept design Concept selection Virtual prototyping Additive manufacturing Fuzzy set 



With regard to the case study, authors would deeply thank the Italian designer Riccardo Dalisi, who kindly allowed to use some prototypes from his laboratory for the reverse engineering of their design; prof. Donnarumma for his lessons on fuzzy logic; the prof. Alfonso Morone and prof. Massimiliano Giorgio for their active involvement into the evaluation trials.


  1. 1.
    Cecil, J., Kanchanapiboon, A.: Virtual engineering approaches in product and process design. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 31(9–10), 846–856 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Di Gironimo, G., Lanzotti, A.: Designing in vr. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 3(2), 51–53 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Di Gironimo, G., Lanzotti, A., Vanacore, A.: Concept design for quality in virtual environment. Comput. Graph. 30(6), 1011–1019 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lanzotti, A., Di Gironimo, G., Matrone, G., Patalano, S., Renno, F.: Virtual concepts and experiments to improve quality of train interiors. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 3(2), 65–79 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fiorentino, M., Radkowski, R., Stritzke, C., Uva, A.E., Monno, G.: Design review of cad assemblies using bimanual natural interface. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 7(4), 249–260 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Del Nevo, A., Martelli, E., Agostini, P., Arena, P., Bongiovì, G., Caruso, G., Di Gironimo, G., Di Maio, P.A., Eboli, M., Giammusso, R., et al.: WCLL breeding blanket design and integration for demo 2015: status and perspectives. Fusion Eng. Des. 124, 682–686 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patalano, S., Lanzotti, A., Del Giudice, D.M., Vitolo, F., Gerbino, S.: On the usability assessment of the graphical user interface related to a digital pattern software tool. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 11(3), 457–469 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ulrich, K.T.: Product Design and Development. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lanzotti, A., Martorelli, M., Staiano, G.: Understanding process parameter effects of reprap open-source three-dimensional printers through a design of experiments approach. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 137(1), 011017 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Staiano, G., Gloria, A., Ausanio, G., Lanzotti, A., Pensa, C., Martorelli, M.: Experimental study on hydrodynamic performances of naval propellers to adopt new additive manufacturing processes. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 12(1), 1–14 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, B., Campbell, R.I., Pei, E.: Real-time integration of prototypes in the product development process. Assem. Autom. 33(1), 22–28 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ingrassia, T., Mancuso, A., Nigrelli, V., Tumino, D.: A multi-technique simultaneous approach for the design of a sailing yacht. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 11(1), 19–30 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bordegoni, M., Ferrise, F.: Designing interaction with consumer products in a multisensory virtual reality environment: this paper shows how virtual reality technology can be used instead of physical artifacts or mock-ups for the new product and evaluation of its usage. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 8(1), 51–64 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferrise, F., Bordegoni, M., Graziosi, S.: A method for designing users experience with industrial products based on a multimodal environment and mixed prototypes. Comput. Aided Des. Appl. 10(3), 461–474 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Belaziz, M., Bouras, A., Brun, J.-M.: Morphological analysis for product design. Comput. Aided Des. 32(5–6), 377–388 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chou, J.-R.: A gestalt-minimalism-based decision-making model for evaluating product form design. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 41(6), 607–616 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grazioso, S., Selvaggio, M., Marzullo, D., Di Gironimo, G., Gospodarczyk, M.: Eligere: a fuzzy ahp distributed software platform for group decision making in engineering design. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Candi, M.: Design as an element of innovation: evaluating design emphasis in technology-based firms. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 10(04), 351–374 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dreyfuss, H.: Designing for People. Skyhorse Publishing Inc., New York (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Norman, D.A.: Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. Basic Civitas Books, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pahl, G., Beitz, W.: Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. Springer, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kotler, P., Rath, G.A.: Design: a powerful but neglected strategic tool. J. Bus. Strategy 5(2), 16–21 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1, 28–44 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zadeh, L.A.: A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages. Comput. Math. Appl. 9(1), 149–184 (1983)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Canfora, G., Troiano, L.: A model for opinion agreement and confidence in multi-expert multi-criteria decision making. Mathw. Soft Comput. 11(2), 67–82 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E.: Linguistic decision analysis: steps for solving decision problems under linguistic information. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 115(1), 67–82 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yager, R.R.: Owa aggregation over a continuous interval argument with applications to decision making. Trans. Syst. Man Cyber. Part B 34(5), 1952–1963 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Herrera-Viedma, E., Cabrerizo, F.J., Pérez, I.J., Cobo, M.J., Alonso, S., Herrera, F.: Applying Linguistic OWA Operators in Consensus Models Under Unbalanced Linguistic Information, pp. 167–186. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Orlovsky, S.A.: Decision making with a fuzzy preference relation. In: Dubois, D., Prade, H., Yager, R.R. (eds.) Readings in Fuzzy Sets for Intelligent Systems, pp. 717–723. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Lanzotti
    • 1
  • Francesco Carbone
    • 1
  • Stanislao Grazioso
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Renno
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michele Staiano
    • 1
  1. 1.Fraunhofer JL Ideas, Dipartimento di Ingegneria IndustrialeUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico IINaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations