Advertisement

Bio-inspired Knowledge Representation Framework for Decision Making in Product Design

  • Varun Tiwari
  • Prashant Kumar Jain
  • Puneet TandonEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary Industrial Engineering book series (LNMUINEN)

Abstract

A lot of information, mostly disorganized, is available to the designer during early stages of design in the form of raw data. To extract useful information from raw data, its storage and analysis is important, for which knowledge representation plays prominent role. While new product variants are generated, a few previous designs are generally accessible to the designers to take inspiration. If efficient knowledge representation of relationships among previous designs exists, it would help the designers in new product development. In this work, analogy is sought from biological phenomenon in nature, i.e., phylogenetic, to store, depict, and retrieve knowledge from previous design concepts in the form of phylogenetic tree. The tree is developed using two Phenetic approaches, i.e., unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA) and neighbor joining algorithm. The tree of UPGMA represents similarity of product features for different design concepts, and the tree of neighbor joining depicts number of modifications a designer performs to develop a new variant from the previous variants. An example of power drill is taken to illustrate the application of both the algorithms in product design.

Keywords

Knowledge representation New product development Phylogenetic Phylogenetic tree 

References

  1. 1.
    Saitou, N., Nei, M.: The neighbour-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4, 406–425 (1987).  https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ammar-Khodja, S., Bernard, A.: An overview on knowledge management. In: Methods and tools for effective knowledge life-cycle-management, pp. 3–21. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chandrasegaran, S., Ramani, K., Sriram, R., Horváth, I., Bernard, A., Harik, R., Gao, W.: The evolution, challenges, and future of knowledge representation in product design systems. Comput. Aided Des. 45(2), 204–228 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2012.08.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Owen, R., Horváth, I.: Towards product-related knowledge asset warehousing in enterprises. In: Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on tools and methods of competitive engineering, TMCE, pp. 155–170. China (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bryan, A., Wang, H., Abell, J.: Concurrent design of product families and reconfigurable assembly systems. J. Mech. Des. 135(5), 051001 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4023920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hölttä-Otto, K., Tang, V., Otto, K.: Analyzing module commonality for platform design using dendrograms. Res. Eng. Des. 19(2–3), 127–141 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0044-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    AlGeddawy, T., ElMaraghy, H.: A co-evolution model for prediction and synthesis of new products and manufacturing systems. J. Mech. Des. 134(5), 051008 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4006439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kashkoush, M., ElMaraghy, H.: Product design retrieval by matching bills of materials. J. Mech. Des. 136(1), 011002 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4025489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ElMaraghy, H., AlGeddawy, T., Azab, A.: Modelling evolution in manufacturing: a biological analogy. CIRP Ann. 57(1), 467–472 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2008.03.136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    AlGeddawy, T., ElMaraghy, H.: Co-evolution hypotheses and model for manufacturing planning. CIRP Ann. 59(1), 445–448 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2010.03.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Azab, A., ElMaraghy, H.: Mathematical modeling for reconfigurable process planning. CIRP Ann. 56(1), 467–472 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2007.05.112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buneman, P.: A note on the metric properties of trees. J. Comb. Theory (B) 17, 48–50 (1974).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-8956(74)90047-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EngineeringAvantika UniversityUjjainIndia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringIndian Institute of Information Technology Design and ManufacturingJabalpurIndia

Personalised recommendations