Implementation Example

  • Arie Karniel
  • Yoram Reich


The main applications presented in the following example are the monitoring of a dynamically changing process scheme; the implication of the simulation of dynamic planning capabilities; and the potential use of the simulation results for process-related decision-making.The example represents an NPD environment, where process activities are derived from the product structure and the relations between product components, which are subject to changes during the design as new knowledge becomes available.


Conceptual Design Product Knowledge Process Scheme Parallel Implementation Design Activity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Browning TR, Eppinger SD (2002) Modeling impacts of process architecture on cost and schedule risk in product development. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 49(4):428–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cho SH, Eppinger SD (2005) A simulation-based process model for managing complex design projects. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 52(3):316–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Huberman BA, Wilkinson DM (2005) Performance variability and project dynamics. Comput Math Organiz Theory 11:307–332MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Karniel A, Reich Y (2007a) Simulating design processes with self-iteration activities based on DSM planning. IEEE Proceedings international Conference Systems Engineering Model—ICSEM’07, March, 33–41, HaifaGoogle Scholar
  5. Karniel A, Reich Y (2007b) Managing dynamic new product development processes. In: Proceedings of the 17th annual international symposium of the international council systems engineering INCOSE’07, June, San Diego, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  6. Karniel A, Reich Y (2009) From DSM based planning to design process simulation: A review of process scheme logic verification issues. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 56(4):636–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Karniel A, Reich Y (2011) Formalizing the implementation of DSM-based process planning for NPD. IEEE Tran Sys Man Cybern Part A 41(3):476–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sadiq W, Orlowska ME (2000) Analyzing process models using graph reduction techniques. Inf Sys 25(2):117–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sered Y, Reich Y (2006) Standardization and modularization driven by minimizing overall process effort. Comput Aided Des 38(5):405–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Smith RP, Eppinger SD (1997a) Identifying controlling features of engineering design iteration. Manag Sci 43(3):276–293MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Smith RP, Eppinger SD (1997b) A predictive model of sequential iteration in engineering design. Manag Sci 43(8):1104–1120MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Smith RP, Morrow JA (1999) Product development process modeling. Des Stud 20(3):237–261Google Scholar
  13. van der Aalst WMP (2000) Finding control-flow errors using Petri net based techniques. In: Aalst Wvd , Desel J, Oberweis A (eds) Bus Process Management, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1806. Springer, Berlin, pp 161–183Google Scholar
  14. Whitley D, (1994) A genetic algorithm tutorial. Stat Comput 4(2):65–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Williams T (2003) The contribution of mathematical modelling to the practice of project management. IMA J Manag Math 14:3–30MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yassine A (2007) Investigating product development process reliability and robustness using simulation. J Eng Des 18(6):545–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Yassine A, Joglekar N, Braha D, Eppinger SD, Whitney D (2003) Information hiding in product development: The design churn effect. Res Eng Des 14(3):131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations