Advertisement

Identification of Optimised Open Platform Architecture Products for Design for Mass Individualisation

  • Ravi K. SikhwalEmail author
  • Peter R. N. Childs
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 135)

Abstract

Mass Individualisation is a new product design paradigm that comprises an open-hardware platform and multiple independent modules for end-user’s selection that are integrated with the platform. Open platform architecture products (OPAP) are the key enablers for this paradigm. Based on explorative literature analysis, with practical insights from an industrial questionnaire survey, an Innovation toolkit for the end-user has been developed. This provides a means for selecting an optimal OPAP. The design of the Innovation toolkit has been approached in four different steps: modelling of OPAP Products; modelling of evaluation measures and evaluation indices with end-user preferences; identification of the optimal module options for every configuration and Configuration optimisation. Two case studies have been presented to demonstrate the effectiveness and to illustrate that the Innovation toolkit can readily be applied to these types of product development to obtain highly individualised and optimised OPAP.

Keyword

Design optimisation Innovation toolkit Mass individualisation Open platform architecture products 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The case studies used in this paper are based on the information available in the public domain about Google ARA and Axia smart chair by Nomique.

References

  1. 1.
    Project ARA by Google.: [cited 2016 20-05-2016]; Available from: https://twitter.com/projectara?lang=en (2016)
  2. 2.
    Axia Smart Chair by Nomique. [cited 2018 10-02-2018]; Available from: http://nomique.com/products/task-ergonomics/axia-smart-chair-2/ (2018)
  3. 3.
    Tseng, M.M., Jiao, J.: Mass customization, in handbook of industrial engineering: technology and operations managementIn: Salvendy, G. (ed.) Wiley, Canada. pp. 684–709Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ulrich, K.T., Design: creation of artifacts in society. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dodgson, M., Gann. D., Salter, A.: Think, Play, Do: Innovation, Technology, and Organization. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anderson, C.: Makers: the new industrial revolution. Crown Business. 272 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ninan, J.A., Siddique, Z.: Internet-based framework to support integration of customer in the design of customizable products. Concurrent Eng. Res. Appl. 14(3), 245–256 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holle, M., Lindemann, U.: Design for Open Innovation (DfOI)—Product structure planning for open innovation toolkits. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. 2015: Bandar Sunway, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Porter, M.E., Heppelmann, J.E.: How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harvard Business Review 92(11) (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sikhwal, R.K., Childs, P.R.N.: Design for mass individualisation: introducing networked innovation approach. In: World Mass Customization & Personalization Conference (MCPC 2017). 2017: RWTH Aachen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Koren, Y., et al.: Product design for mass-individualization. Des. Conf. Innovative Prod. Creation 36, 64–71 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xie, H., Henderson, P., Kernahan, M.: Modelling and solving engineering product configuration problems by constraint satisfaction. Int. J. Prod. Res. 43(20), 4455–4469 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hong, G., et al.: Identification of the optimal product configuration and parameters based on individual customer requirements on performance and costs in one-of-a-kind production. Int. J. Prod. Res. 46(12), 3297–3326 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Russell, S., Norvig, P.: Artificial Intelligence: a modern approach. Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall, NJ (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang, H., Xue, D., Tu, Y.L.: Modeling of non-linear relations among different design evaluation measures for multi-objective design optimization. In: ASME 2005 IDETC/CIE. CA, USA: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Arora, J.S.: Introduction to optimum design, 4th edn. Elsevier Academic Press, Cambridge (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Koza, J.R.: Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection, p. 680. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dyson School of Design EngineeringImperial College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations