Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Intelligent Knowledge-Based Systems pp 3–35Cite as

Platform-Based Product Design and Development: Knowledge Support Strategy and Implementation

  • Chapter

  • 2476 Accesses

Abstract

Product family is a group of related products that share common features, components, and subsystems, and satisfy a variety of market niches. Product platform is a set of parts, subsystems, interfaces, and manufacturing processes that are shared among a set of products (Meyer and Lehnerd 1997). A product family comprises a set of variables, features or components that remain constant in a product platform and from product to product. Platform-based product family design has been recognized as an efficient and effective means to realize sufficient product variety to satisfy a range of customer demands in support for mass customization (Tseng and Jiao 1998). The platform product development approach usually includes two main phases: 1) the establishment of the appropriate product platform; and 2) the customization of the platform into individual product variants to meet the specific market, business and engineering needs. The establishment, maintenance and application of the right product platform are very complex.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Agarwal, M. and Cagan, J., 1998, A Blend of Different Tastes: the Language of Coffeemakers,” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25(2): 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. C., 1998, “Defining Configuring,” http://www.cs.wpi.edu/~dcb/Config/EdamConfig. html, AI EDAM special issue on Configuration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang T-S. and Ward A. C., 1995, “Design-In-Modularity with Conceptual Robustness,” Design Technical Conference ASME 1995, DE-Vol. 82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, I. M., Yeo, S. H., Chen, G., and Yang, G. L., Kernel for Modular Robot Applications: Automatic Modeling Techniques, Int. J. Robotics Research, pp. 225–242, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W, Allen, J. K., Mavris D., and Mistree, F., 1996, “A Concept Exploration Method for Determining Robust Top-Level Specifications,” Engineering Optimization, Vol. 26: pp. 137–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W, Rosen D., Allen J., and Mistree, F., 1994, “Modularity and the Independence of Functional Requirements in Designing Complex Systems,” Concurrent Product Design, Vol. 74: pp. 31–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D. A., 1981, “The Measurement and Operating Benefits of Component Part Commonality,” Decision Sciences, Vol. 12(1): pp. 85–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D. A., 1982, “Aggregate Safety Stock Levels and Component Part Commonality,” Management Science, Vol. 28(22): pp. 1296–1303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, J. R., 2000, Product Structuring for Customer, Assembly and Maintenance, Assembly Automation Lab., Industrial Engineering, Pusan National University, Korea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, D. and McGregor, D. R., 1994, “A More Biologically Motivated Genetic Algorithm: The Model and Some Results,” Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, Vol. 25: pp. 447–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, X. H., Jiao, J. X., and Tseng, M. M., 2001, Product Platform Planning for Mass Customization, Department of Industrial Engineering & Engineering Management, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erens, E and Verhulst, K., 1997, “Architectures for Product Families,” Computers in Industry, Vol. 33 (2–3): pp.165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernest J. Friedman-Hill, The Java Expert System Shell, http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess, Sandia National Laboratories, USA, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenves, S.J., 2001, “A Core Product Model for Representing Design Information,” NISTIR 6736, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finch, W. W., 1977, Predicate Logic Representations for Design Constraints on Uncertainty Supporting the Set-Based Design Paradigm, Ph.D Thesis, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, K., 2000, “Product Variety Optimization under Modular Architecture,” Proceedings of Third International Symposium on Tools and Methods of Competitive Engineering (TMCE2000), pp. 451–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, K., Sakaguchi, H., and Akagi, S., 1999, “Product Variety Deployment and its Optimization under Modular Architecture and Module Commonalization,” Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Paper No. DETC99/DFM-8923, ASME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, K., Akagi. S., Yoneda, T., and Ishikawa, M., 1998, “Simultaneous Optimization of Product Family Sharing System Structure and Configuration,” Proceedings of the 1998 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Paper No. DETC98/DFM-5722, ASME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, K. and Ishii, K., 1997, “Task Structuring Toward Computational Approaches to Product Variety Design,” Proceedings of the 1997 ASME Design Engineering Technical Coriferences, Paper No. 97DETC/DAC-3766, ASME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaithen, N., 1980, Production and Operations Management: A Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Approach, The Dryden Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gero, J. S., 1990, “Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design,” AI Magazine 11(4): 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D. E., 1989, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., New York.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzale-Zugasti, J. P., 2000, Models for Platform-Based Product Family Design, Ph.D Thesis, MIT, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorti, S. R., Gupta, A., Kim, G.J., Sriram, R. D., and Wong, A., 1998, “An Object-Oriented Representation for Product and Design Process,” Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 489–501.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, P. and Sosale, S., 1999, “Product Modularization for Life Cycle Engineering,” Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing; Vol. 15(5): pp. 387–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishii, K., Juengel, C., and Eubanks, F., 1995, “Design for Product Variety: Key to Product Line Structuring,” ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Boston, MA, DE-Vol. 83: pp. 499–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • IONA, Orbix2 Programming Guide: IONA Technologies Ltd., 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey B. D., Gonzalez-Zugasti, J. P., and Otto, K. N. 2001, “Modular Product Architecture,” Design Studies, Vol. 22(5): pp. 409–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiao, J. X., Tseng, M. M., Ma, Q., and Zou, Y., 2000, “Generic Bill of Materials and Operations for High-Variety Production Management,” Concurrent Engineering: Research and Application, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 297–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan, V. and Gupta, S., 2001, “Appropriateness and Impact of Platform-based Product Development,” Management Science, 47(1): pp. 52–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., 1989, “From Mass Marketing to Mass Customization,” Planning Review, Vol. 17(5): pp. 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusiak, A. and Huang, C. C., 1996, “Development of Modular Products,” IEEE Trans. on Components, Packaging, and Manufacturing Technology, Part-A, Vol. 19(4): pp. 523–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. L. and Tang, C. S., 1997, “Modeling the Costs and Benefits of Delayed Product Differentiation,” Management Science, Vol. 43(1): pp. 40–53.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Leger, Chris, Automated Synthesis and Optimization of Robot Configurations: An Evolutionary Approach, Ph.D Thesis, The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. and Ishii, K., 1996, “Design for Variety: A Methodology for Understanding the Costs of Product Proliferation,” 1996 Design Theory and Methodology Conference (Wood, K., ed.), Irvine, CA, ASME, Paper No. 96-DETC/DTM-1610.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, C. M. and Stock, G. N., 1994, “The Use of Common Parts and Designs in High-Tech Industries: A Strategic Approach,” Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 35 (3): pp. 65–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKay, A., Erens, E, and Bloor, M. S., 1996, “Relating Product Definition and Product Variety,” Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 8 (2): pp. 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. H., 1997, “Revitalize Your Product Lines through Continuous Platform Renewal,” Research Technology Management, Vol. 40(2): pp. 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. H. and Utterback, J. M., 1993, “The Product Family and the Dynamics of Core Capability,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 34 (Spring): pp. 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. H., Tertzakian, P, and Utterback, J. M., 1997, “Metrics for Managing Research and Development in the Context of the Product Family,” Management Science, Vol. 43(1): pp. 88–111.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. H. and Lehnerd, A. P., 1997, The Power of Product Platforms, New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRCC (Nationa Research Council of Canada), Fuzzy Logic in Integrated Reasoning, webpage: http://www.iit.nrc.ca/IR_public/fuzzy/, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, G. J., 1992, Open Systems, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl, G. and Beitz, W., 1996, Engineering Design—A Systematic Approach, New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfaltz, J. L. and A. Rosenfeld, 1969, “Web Grammars,” Proceedings of First International joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Washington, D.C. pp. 609–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pine, B. J., 1993, Mass Customization—The New Frontier in Business Competition, Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paredis, C. J. J., An Agent-Based Approach to the Design of Rapidly Deployable Fault Tolerant Manipulators, Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, D. W., 1996, “Design of Modular Product Architectures in Discrete Design Spaces Subject to Life Cycle Issues,” 1996 ASME Design Automation Conference, Irvine, CA. 96-DETC/DAC-1485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, G. and Cagan, J., 1995, “An Improved Shape Annealing Algorithm for Truss Topology Generation,” ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 117: pp. 315–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R. and Gardiner, P., 1990, “Robustness and Product Design Families,” Design Management: A Handbook of Issues and Methods (Oakley, M., ed.), Basil Blackwell Inc., Cambridge, MA, pp. 279–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, G. Z., 2000, Development of Modular Vehicle Systems, Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering, University of Michigan, Dearborn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, S. and Uzumeri, M., 1995, “Managing Product Families: The Case of the Sony Walkman,” Research Policy, Vol. 24: pp. 761–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, A. K. and Bellam, S., 2000, http://www.glue.umd.edu/~sbellam/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, S. W., 1991, “Cost Models for Evaluating Virtual Design Strategies in Multi-cycle Product Families,” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 8: pp. 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirley, G. V., 1990, “Models for Managing the Redesign and Manufacture of Product Sets,” Journal of Manufacturing and Operations Management, Vol. 3 (2): pp. 85–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siddique, Z. and Rosen, D. W., 2001, “On Discrete Design Spaces for the Configuration Design of Product Families,” Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, Design, Automation, and Manufacturing, Vol. 15, pp. 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siddique, Z. and Rosen, D. W., 1999, “Product Platform Design: A Graph Grammar Approach,” Proceedings of DETC’99, 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Sept. 12–16, 1999, LasVegas, Nevada, DETC99/DTM-8762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, J., CORBA: Fundamentals and Programming: OMG, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, T. W, 1998, A Concept Exploration Method for Product Family Design’, Ph.D Dissertation, System Realization Laboratory, Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, T. W., Maier, J. R. A., and Mistree, F., 2001, “Product Platform Design: Method and Application,” Research In Engineering Design, Vol. 13, pp. 2–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivaloganathan, S., Andrews, P. T. J., and Shahin, T. M. M., 2001, Design Function Deployment: A Tutorial Introduction, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivard, G., 2000, A Generic Information Platform for Product Families, Doctoral Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriram, R. D., 1997, Intelligent Systems for Engineering: A Knowledge-based Approach, London: Springer-Verlag, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriram, R. D., 2002, Distributed and Integrated Collaborative Engineering Design, Sarven Publishers, Glenwood, MD 21738, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadzisz, P. C. and Henrioud, J. M., 1995, “Integrated Design of Product Families and Assembly Systems,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan, Vol. 2 of 3: pp. 1290–1295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone R. B., Kristin L. W., and Crawford, R. H., 2000, “A Heuristic Method for Identifying Modules for Product Architectures,” Design Studies, Vol. 21(1): pp 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stodes, M., 2000, Managing Engineering Knowledge: MOKA Methodology for Knowledge Based Engineering Applications, MOKA Consortium, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh, N. P., 1990, The Principles of Design, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szykman, S., Sriram, R. D., and Regli, W. C., “The Role of Knowledge in Next-generation Product Development Systems,” Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, Transactions of ASME, Vol. 1, pp. 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szykman, S., Racz, J. W., Bochenek, C., and Sriram, R. D., 2000, “A Web-based System for Design Artifact Modeling,” Design Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tichem, M. et al., 1997, “Designer Support for Product Structuring—Development ofa DFX Tool within the Design Coordination Framework,” Computers in Industry, Vol. 33(2–3): pp. 155–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, C. and Sriram, D. (Eds.), 1991a, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design: Volume I—Representation: Structure, Function and Constraints; Routine Design, Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tong, C. and Sriram, D. (Eds.), 1991b, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design: Volume III—Knowledge Acquisition, Commercial Systems; Integrated Environments, Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, M. M. and Jiao, J. X., 1996, “Design for Mass Customization,” CIRP Annals, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 153–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, M. M. and Jiao, J. X., 1998, “Product Family Modeling for Mass Customization,” Computers in Industry, Vol. 35(3–4): pp. 495–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K. and Tung, K., 1991, “Fundamentals of Product Modularity,” Proceedings of ASME Winter Annual Meeting Conference, Atlanta, GA. DE Vol. 39: pp. 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K., 1995, “The Role of Product Architecture in the Manufacturing Firm,” Research Policy, Vol. 24(3): pp. 419–440.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K. T. and Eppinger, S. D., 1995, Product Design and Development, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uzumeri, M. and S. Sanderson, 1995, “A Framework for Model and Product Family Competition,” Research Policy, Vol. 24: pp. 583–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuuren, W. V. and Halman, J. I. M., 2001, “Platform-Driven Development of Product Families: Linking Theory with Practice,” Proceedings of Conference on “The Future of Innovation Studies”, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, F., Fenves, S. J., Sudarsan, R., and Sriram, R. D., Towards Modeling the Evolution of Product Families, Proceedings of 2003 ASME DETC, Paper No. CIE-48216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C. and Sasser, W. E., 1989, “The New Product Development Map,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 67 (May–June), pp. 112–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C. and Clark, K. B., 1992, “Creating Project Plans to Focus Product Development,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 70 (March–April): pp. 70–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, J. S., Gonzalez-Zugasti, J. P., and Otto, K. N., 1999, “Product Architecture Definition Based Upon Customer Demands,” Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 121(3): pp. 329–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zha, X. F. and Du, H., 2001, “Mechanical Systems and Assemblies Modeling Using Knowledge Intensive Petri Net Formalisms,” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 15 (2), pp. 145–171.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zha, X. F. and Lu, W. F., 2002a, “Knowledge Support for Customer-Based Design for Mass Customization,” AID’02, Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 407–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zha, X. F. and Lu, W. F., 2002b, “Knowledge Intensive Support for Product Family Design,” Proceedings of 2002 ASME DETC, Paper No. DETC02-DAC 34098.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zha, X. F., Web-based Knowledge Intensive Intelligent Support for Robot Family Design, Proceedings of 2002 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and System, Vol. 2, 2002, Page(s): 1814–1819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zha, X. F., Sriram, R. D., Lu, W. F., and Wang F., 2003, “Evaluation and Selection in Product Design for Mass Customization,” Intelligent Knowledge-based Systems: Business and Technology in New Millennium, Cornelius T. Leondes (ed), Kluwer Academic Publishers, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Design and Process Group Manufacturing Systems Integration Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA

    Xuan F. Zha & Ram D. Sriram

Authors
  1. Xuan F. Zha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ram D. Sriram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Los Angeles, USA

    Cornelius T. Leondes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zha, X.F., Sriram, R.D. (2005). Platform-Based Product Design and Development: Knowledge Support Strategy and Implementation. In: Leondes, C.T. (eds) Intelligent Knowledge-Based Systems. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-7829-3_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-7829-3_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-7746-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-7829-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation