Abstract
This study explores the issue of optimizing the size of a product family as well as designing the product variants of the family in the context of designing a stand for a unique electric violin known as the “Viper.” The study uses collected customer data in order to identify the optimal number of design variants in the product family, generate design alternatives, assign each design to the appropriate customer type, and verify the outcome. The methodology begins with data collection through a survey of Viper players which is analyzed using K-means clustering analysis and segmentation in order to determine the optimal number of variants in the product family. This analysis also defines each customer group and each group’s specific customer requirements. Quality function deployment (QFD) is used to fit design concepts (generated by the requirements and specifications) to synthesized design variants and assign to a customer group. Then, analytic network process (ANP) is used to substantiate the outcome of the study by further verifying each Product Family Member-Customer Group mapping as well as the number of variants. This is achieved by simultaneously fitting the generated design concepts to customer requirements and customer groups through ANP. The ultimate goal of this work is to provide a simple, easy to understand, easy to reproduce, and customizable method for making product family size and design decisions in any industry.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bhandare S, Allada V (2009) Scalable product family design: case study of axial piston pumps. Int J Prod Res 47:585–620
Bicknell BA, Bicknell KD (1995) The road map to repeatable success—using QFD to implement change. CRC, Boca Raton, FL
Chan L-K, Wu M-L (2002) Quality function deployment: a comprehensive review of its concepts and methods. Qual Eng 15(1):23–35
Chiu M, Gupta S,Okudan GE (2008) A multi-stakeholder quality function deployment approach to support design decision-making. In: Industrial engineering research conference, Vancouver, CA
Dahmus JB, Gonzalez-Zugasti JP, Otto KN (2000) Modular product architecture. Des Stud 22(5):409–424
Fujita K (2002) Product variety optimization under modular architecture. Comput Aid Des 34:953–965
Fujita KF, Sakaguchi H, Akagi S (1999) Product variety deployment and its optimization under modular architecture and modules communalization. In: ASME design engineering technical conferences, Las Vegas, Nevada, 12–15 Sept 1999.
Huang JJ, Tzeng GH, Ong CS (2005) Multidimensional data in multidimensional scaling using the analytic network process. Pattern Recognit Lett 26:755–67
Huang GQ, Li L, Schulze L (2008) Genetic algorithm-based optimisation method for product family design with multi-level commonality. J Eng Des 19(5):401–416
Jiao J, Zhang Y (2005) Product portfolio identification based on association rule mining. Comput Aid Des 37:149–172
Jiao J, Tseng MM, Dufty VG, Lin F (1998) Product family modeling for mass customization. Comput Ind Eng 35(3–4):495–498
Kumar D, Chen W, Simpson TW (2009) A market-driven approach to product family design. Int J Prod Res 47(1):71–104
Li Z, Feng Y, Tan J, Wei Z (2008) A methodology to support product platform optimization using multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. Trans Inst Measur Contr 30:295–312
MacQueen JB (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of the 5th symposium on math, statistics, and probability, Berkeley, CA, pp 291–297
Meade L, Sarkis J (1998) Strategic analysis of logistics and supply chain management systems using the analytical network process. Logist Transport Rev 34(3):201–215
Meyer MH, Lehnerd AP (1997) The power of product platforms. The Free Press, New York
Ray S, Turi RH (1999) Determination of the number of clusters in K-means clustering and application in color image segmentation. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on advances in pattern recognition and digital techniques, India, 2–3 (Sect. 3.2).
Saaty TL (2001) Decision making with the ANP and the national missile defense example. In: Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on the AHP, ISAHP 2001, Bern, Switzerland, pp 365–382
Salhieh SM (2007) A methodology to redesign heterogeneous product portfolios as homogeneous product families. Comput Aid Des 39:1065–1074
Super Decisions Software, http://www.superdecisions.com. Viewed on 20 Jul 2012
Tseng MM, Jiao J (1996) Design for mass customization. Ann CIRP 45(1):153–156
Tucker CS, Kim HM (2009) Data-driven decision tree classification for product portfolio design optimization. J Comput Inform Sci Eng 9:1–14
Wagstaff K, Rogers S, Schroedl S (2001) Constrained K-means clustering with background knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on machine learning, pp 577–584
Zha XF, Sriram RD (2006) Platform-based product design and development: A knowledge-intensive support approach. Knowl Based Syst 19:524–543
Acknowledgments
This product family design project was introduced during the 2010 offering of the Design Decision Making (IE/EDSGN 549) course at Penn State University. Some of the designs included within this chapter are inspired by the designs generated by students enrolled in IE/EDGSN 549. We acknowledge their contributions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sotos, C., Kremer, G.E.O., Akman, G. (2014). Customer Needs Based Product Family Sizing Design: The Viper Case Study. In: Simpson, T., Jiao, J., Siddique, Z., Hölttä-Otto, K. (eds) Advances in Product Family and Product Platform Design. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7937-6_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7937-6_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7936-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7937-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)