Advertisement

Complexity Management in Product/Process Simultaneous Design for Implementing a Fresnel Thermodynamic Solar Plant

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Production Engineering book series (LNPE)

Abstract

Fresnel mirror in thermodynamic solar power plant technology is an efficient power resource in many potential countries. The key challenge is cost effectiveness of the product and its settling. The importance of using this technology redounded in writing this paper to propose a methodology in order to design this system considering its complexities. Because of the dependency of the product with process of production and installation of this solar plant, a simultaneous design methodology is required. Moreover, a concept of movable factory, from one solar farm site to another one, is also discussed which is identified as a proper solution for such project with reusability.

Keywords

product-process interaction design methodology mobile factory design complexity management solar power plant Fresnel 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tsao, J., Lewis, N., Crabtree, G.: Solar FAQs. US department of Energy (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jayakumar, P.: Resource Assessment Handbook, APCTT (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    US National Academy of Engineering: A Grand Challenge for the Twenty-first Century: Commercializing Solar Energy. Strategic Direction 24(7), 33–36 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Quoilin, S.: Concentrating Solar Power Plants. Université de Liège (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Babaeizadeh Malmiry, R.: Product-Process Interaction Analysis: Design of Mobile Factory for Fresnel Thermodynamic Solar Plant. Master Thesis, Arts et Metiers – ParisTech (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lloyd, S., Pagels, H.: Complexity as Thermodynamic Depth. Annals of Physics 188, 186–213 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Suh, N.P.: Axiomatic Design: advances and applications. Oxford University Press, New York (1936)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ElMaraghy, W., ElMaraghy, H., Tomiyama, T., Monostori, L.: Complexity in Engineering Design and Manufacturing, vol. 61/2 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Al-Hakima, L., Kusiak, A., Mathew, J.: A Graph-theoretic Approach to Conceptual Design with Functional Perspectives. Computer-Aided Design 32(14), 867–875 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bernard, A., Labrousse, M., Perry, N.: LC Universal Model for the Enterprise Information System Structure: Innovation in Life Cycle Engineering and Sustainable Development, pp. 429–448. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    SYNDICAT, Directory of the French Solar Thermodynamic Industry (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weinstock, D., Appelbaum, J.: Optimal solar field design of stationary collectors. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering, 898–905 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Qian, L., Gero, J.S.: Function-Behavior-Structure Paths and Their Role in Analogy-Based Design. AIEDAM, 289–312 (1996)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Umeda, Y.: Functional Reasoning in Design. IEEE Expert, 42–48 (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Labrousse, M., Bernard, A., Véron, P.: Generic FBS concept for Process/Product/Resource integration. In: Tools and Methods of Competitive Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 384–394Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    DesJardin, L.: Downsizing with VXIbus: Opportunities and Limitations in Factory, Field, and Portable environments. pp. 55–62. IEEE (1989)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.I2M - UMR 5295Arts et Métiers ParisTechTalenceFrance

Personalised recommendations