Abstract
A typical methodology for product architecture design of complex products using Design Structure Matrix (DSM) uses a “bottom-up” approach where an algorithm suggests the ideal cluster of components. In the current research, we use a manual “top-down” approach to generate a modular product architecture for medium complexity product. We used a typical computational tool called IGTA for the “bottom-up” approach but found that the algorithm does not produce results which are practically applicable. A manual approach based on critical observation of the functional diagram of the product, product interactions, and verification of the modules using a Design Structure Matrix is more suitable. The paper compares the results of both approaches for the same product architecture considering a case study of a moving gantry based double-actuated Computer Numerical Control (CNC) milling machine. It is reported that manual “top-down” approaches are more suitable for medium complexity products than algorithmic bottom-up approaches.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Sharman, D.M., Yassine, A.A.: Characterizing complex product architectures. Syst. Eng. 7, 35–60 (2004)
Eppinger, S.D., Pimmler, T.U., Eppinger, S.D.: Integration analysis of product decompositions. ASME Des. Theory Methodol. Conf., 343–351. Minneap., no. Sept 1994 (1994)
Dahmus, J.B., Gonzalez-Zugasti, J.P., Otto, K.N.: Modular product architecture. Des. Stud. 22(5), 409–424 (2001)
Browning, T.R.: Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 48(3), 292–306 (2001)
Ulrich, K.: The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Res. Policy 24(3), 419–440 (1995)
Borjesson, F., Hölttä-Otto, K.: Improved clustering algorithm for design structure matrix. In: Volume 3: 38th Design Automation Conference, Parts A and B, p. 921 (2012)
Tuholski, S.J., Tommelein, I.D.: Design structure matrix implementation on a seismic retrofit. J. Manag. Eng. 26(3), 144–152 (2010)
Gershenson, J.K., Prasad, G.J., Zhang, Y.: Product modularity: measures and design methods. J. Eng. Des. 15(1), 33–51 (2004)
Bonvoisin, J., Halstenberg, F., Buchert, T., Stark, R.: A systematic literature review on modular product design. J. Eng. Des. 27(7), 488–514 (2016)
Thebeau, R.E.: 2001B, Matlab Program Code. Available at http://www.dsmweb.org/
Jung, S., Simpson, T.W.: New modularity indices for modularity assessment and clustering of product architecture. J. Eng. Des. 28(1), 1–22 (2017)
Jiao, J.R., Simpson, T.W., Siddique, Z.: Product family design and platform-based product development: a state-of-the-art review. J. Intell. Manuf. 18(1), 5–29 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Choudhuri, A., Upadhyay, P., Yevalkar, A. (2019). A Comparison of Practical and Computational Approaches to Design Modular Product Architecture for Products with Medium Complexity: A Case Study on Computer Numerical Control Machine. In: Chakrabarti, A. (eds) Research into Design for a Connected World. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 134. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5974-3_64
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5974-3_64
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5973-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5974-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)