Advertisement

Analysing Design Decisions from a Product and Process Perspective

  • Raymond Holt
  • Catherine Barnes
Conference paper

Abstract

Most approaches to integrated product and process design focus on decision support — providing designers with information about the implications of their choices for different stages of the product life cycle. When the needs of different life cycle stages conflict, however, these techniques provide no basis for determining which should take precedence. This paper proposes a methodology for helping designers assess trade-offs between the competing needs to minimize cost and maximize quality, by drawing on principles from decision analysis. Research on decision analysis in design tends to focus on the mathematics of decision-making, but this methodology takes the view that the value of decision analysis is in the insights, not the numbers, it generates. It is argued that decision analysis should not be a normative tool for making optimal choices, but a framework for systematic discussion of important life cycle issues. This paper discusses the implications of manufacturing for design decisions, and proposes four conditions that a systematic approach to design decision-making should address to take these implications into account. The methodology is described, and illustrated with a case study. The paper ends by discussing the future work needed to validate and refine the methodology.

Key words

Design decision-making Design for manufacture Decision analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    G. Pahl and W. Beitz, Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, 2nd Ed., Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3540199179, 1996Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Pugh, Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering, Addison Wesley, ISBN 0201416395, 1990Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D.L. Thurston, J.V. Carnahan and T. Liu, Optimisation of Design Utility, Journal of Mechanical Design, No 116, 1994, pp801–808Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G.A. Hazelrigg, A Framework for Decision-Based Design, Journal of Mechanical Design, No120, 1998, pp653–658Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Wang, Ranking Engineering Design Concepts Using a Fuzzy Outranking Preference Model, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, No119, 2001, pp161–170Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S-W. Hsiao, Concurrent Design Method for Developing a New Product, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, No29, 2002, pp41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    K.J. Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd Ed., Yale University Press, ISBN 0300013639 m, 1973Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T.L. Vincent, Game Theory as a Design Tool, Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design, No105, 1983, pp165–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. Chen and S. Li, A Computerized Team Approach for Concurrent Product and Process Design Optimisation, Computer-Aided Design, No34, 2002, pp 57–69Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L.L. Bucciarelli, Designing Engineers, MIT Press, ISBN 0262023776 m, 1994Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Phillips, A Theory of Requisite Decision Models, Acta Psychologica, No56, 1984, pp29–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. Edwards and D. von Winterfeldt, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521273048, 1986Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. Edwards, How to Use Multi-Attribute Utility Measurement for Social Decision-Making, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, No7, 1977, pp326–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    K.G. Swift and J.D. Booker, Process Selection: From Design to Manufacture, 2nd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, ISBN 0750654376, 2003Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raymond Holt
    • 1
  • Catherine Barnes
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of LeedsLeeds

Personalised recommendations