Skip to main content

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature

  • Akao, Y. (1992): QFD - Quality Function Deployment. Landsberg a. L.: Moderne Industrie 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C. (1964): Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, T. T. (2006): Introduction to Engineering Statistics and Six Sigma – Statistical Quality Control and Design of Experiments and Systems. London: Springer 2006.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Altschuller, G. S. (1984): Erfinden – Wege zur Lösung technischer Probleme. Berlin: Verlag Technik 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrosy, S. (1996): Methoden und Werkzeuge für die integrierte Produktentwicklung. Aachen: Shaker 1997. (Konstruktionstechnik München, Band 26), Also München: TU, Diss. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. (2006): The Long Tail: How Endless Choice is Creating Unlimited Demand. London: Random House Books 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrásfai, B. (1991): Graph Theory: Flows, Matrices. Bristol: Adam Hilger 1991.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Andreasen, M.; Kähler, S.; Lund, T. (1983): Design for Assembly. Berlin: Springer 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, R. W. (1956): An Introduction to Cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall 1956.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, C. Y.; Clark, K. B. (2000): Design Rules - The Power of Modularity. Vol. 1, Cambridge: MIT Press 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, B. S. (2004): Systems Engineering Management. 3rd Ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, J.; Sauser, B. (2006): System of Systems – the Meaning of of. In: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/SMC International Conference of Systems Engineering. Los Angeles: IEEE 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollobás, B. (1990): Graph Theory. New York: Springer 1990.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bongulielmi, L.; Henseler, P., Puls, C.; Meier, M. (2001): The K- & V-Matrix Method – An Approach in Analysis and Description of Variant Products. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 01), Glasgow. Bury St. Edmunds: IMechE 2001, pp 571-578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, T. K. (2002): Utilization of Dependency Structure Matrix Analysis to Assess Complex Project Designs. In: Proceedings of DETC’02: ASME 2002 Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Montréal. Montréal: ASME 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browning, T. (2001): Applying the Design Structure Matrix to System Decomposition and Integration Problems: A Review and New Directions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48 (2001) 3, pp 292-306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, T. R.; Eppinger, S. (2002): Modeling Impacts of Process Architecture on Cost and Schedule Risk in Product Development. IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management 49 (2002) 4, pp 428–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broy, M. (1998): Informatik – Systemstrukturen und theoretische Informatik 2. 2nd Ed., Berlin: Springer 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brualdi, R. A.; Ryser, H. J. (1991): Combinatorial Matrix Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1991.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bruegge, B.; Dutoit, A. H. (2000): Object-Oriented Software Engineering, Conquering Complex and Changing Systems. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullinger, H.-J., Kiss-Preussinger, E.; Spath, D. (Eds.) (2003): Automobilentwicklung in Deutschland – wie sicher in die Zukunft? Chancen, Potenziale und Handlungsempfehlungen für 30 Prozent mehr Effizienz. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer-IRB 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, T.; Buzan, B. (2002): Das Mind-Map-Buch: Die beste Methode zur Steigerung Ihres geistigen Potenzials. 5th Ed., Landsberg: mvg 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, G.; Oellermann, O. R. (1993): Applied and Algorithmic Graph Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K. B.; Fujimoto, T. (1991): Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Management in the World Auto Industry. Boston: Harvard Business School Press 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, P. J.; Melo, A.; Connor, A. (2000): Signposting for Design Process Improvement. In: Gero, J. S. (Ed.): Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Design (AID 2000), Worcester. Cambridge: Worcester Polytechnic Institute 2000, pp 333-353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, P. J.; Simons, C.; Eckert, C. (2001): Predicting Change Propagation in Complex Design. In: Proceedings of DETC’01: ASME 2001 Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh: ASME 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyle, R. G. (1996): System Dynamics Modelling – A Practical Approach. London: Chapman & Hall 1996.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2000): Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. 3rd Ed., New York: John Wiley & Sons 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daenzer, W. F.; Huber, F. (1999): Systems Engineering: Methodik und Praxis. 10th Ed., Zürich: Verl. Industrielle Organisation 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danilovic, M.; Börjesson, H. (2001a): Managing the Multiproject Environment. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Dependence Structure Matrix (DSM) International Workshop, Cambridge. Cambridge, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danilovic, M.; Börjesson, H. (2001b): Participatory Dependence Structure Matrix Approach. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Dependence Structure Matrix (DSM) International Workshop, Cambridge. Cambridge, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danilovic, M.; Sandkull, B. (2002): Managing Complexity and Uncertainty in a Multiproject Environment. In: Proceedings of the 2002 5th International Conference of the International Research Network on Organizing by Projects, Rotterdam. Rotterdam: Erasmus University 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danilovic, M.; Sigemyr, T. (2003): Multiplan – A New Multi-Dimensional DSM-Tool. In: Proceedings of the 5th Dependence Structure Matrix (DSM) International Workshop, Cambridge. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danilovic, M.; Browning, T. (2004): A Formal Approach for Domain Mapping Matrices (DMM) to Complement Design Structure Matrices (DSM). In: Proceedings of the 6th Design Structure Matrix (DSM) International Workshop, Cambridge. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge, Engineering Design Centre 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Battista, G.; Eades, P.; Tamassia, R.; Tollis, I. G. (1999): Graph Drawing: Algorithms for the Visualization of Graphs. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall 1999.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dong, Q.; Whitney, D. (2001): Designing a Requirement Driven Product Development Process. In: Proceedings of the DETC 2001: ASME 2001 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences. 13th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh: ASME 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dörner, D. (2000): Die Logik des Misslingens. Reinbek: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • DSM Internet Page (2007): Identifying Loops by Powers of the Adjacency Matrix. [Taken: 21.04.2008, URL: http://www.dsmweb.org/index.php?option= com_content&task=view&id= 35&Itemid=26].

  • Ehrlenspiel, K. (2007): Integrierte Produktentwicklung – Methoden für Prozessorganisation, Produkterstellung und Konstruktion. 3rd Ed. München: Hanser 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichinger, M.; Maurer, M.; Pulm, U.; Lindemann, U. (2006): Extending Design Structure Matrices and Domain Mapping Matrices by Multiple Design Structure Matrices. In: Proceedings of the 8th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis (ASME-ESDA06), Torino. Torino, Italy: ASME 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Haik, B.; Yang, K. (1999): The Components of Complexity in Engineering Design. IIE Transactions 31 (1999) 10, pp 925-934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eppinger, S. D. (1991): Model-based Approaches to Managing Concurrent Engineering. Journal of Engineering Design (1991) 2, pp 283–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eppinger, S. D.; Whitney, D. E.; Smith, R. P.; Gebala, D. A. (1994): A Model-based Method for Organizing Tasks in Product Development. Res. in Eng. Design (1994) 6, pp 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eppinger, S. D.; Salminen, V. (2001): Patterns of Product Development Interactions. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 01), Glasgow. Bury St. Edmunds: IMechE 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, A.; Erixon, G. (1999): Controlling Design Variants – Modular Product Platforms. New York: ASME Press 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Even, S. (1979): Graph Algorithms. Potomac: Computer Science Press 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fayyad, U.; Grinstein, G.; Wierse, A. (2002): Information Visualization in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. San Diego: Academic Press 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, C. I. G. (1998): Integration Analysis of Product Architecture to Support Effective Team Co-Location. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Master Thesis 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firchau, N. L. (2003): Variantenoptimierende Produktgestaltung. Göttingen: Cuvillier 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, T. L.; Eckert, C. M.; Smith, J.; Eger, T.; Clarkson, P. J. (2003): A Functional Analysis of Change Propagation. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 03), Stockholm. Stockholm: Design Society 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1961): Industrial Dynamics. Cambridge: MIT Press 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1980): System Dynamics – Future Opportunities. In: Legasto, A. A.; Forrester, J. W.; Lyneis, J. M. (Eds.): System Dynamics: Studies in the Management Sciences. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company 1980, pp 7-21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foulds, L. R. (1992): Graph Theory Applications. New York: Springer 1992.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Franke, H.-J.; Hesselbach, J.; Firchau, N. L.; Huch, B. (2002): Variantenmanagement in der Einzel- und Kleinserienfertigung. München: Hanser 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. C. (1979): Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarification. Social Networks 1 (1978/1979), pp 215-239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, H. J. (2006): Piraten, Fälscher und Kopierer – Strategien und Instrumente zum Schutz geistigen Eigentums in der Volksrepublik China. Wiesbaden: Gabler 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gausemeier, J.; Fink, A.; Schlake, O. (1995): Szenario-Management: Planen und Führen mit Szenarien. München: Hanser 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebala, D. A.; Eppinger, S. D. (1991): Methods for Analyzing Design Procedures. In: Proceedings of the ASME Third International Conference in Design Theory and Methodology, Miami. Miami, USA: ASME 1991, pp 227-233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez, P.; Probst, G. (1997): Die Praxis des ganzheitlichen Problemlösens. 2nd Ed., Bern: Paul Haupt 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grose, D. L. (1994): Reengineering the Aircraft Design Process. In: Proceedings of the Fifth AIAA/USA/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Panama City Beach. Panama City Beach, USA: NASA 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. L.; Yellen, J. (2006): Graph Theory and its Applications. 2nd Ed., Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC 2006.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hangos, K. M.; Cameron, I. T. (2001): Process Modelling and Model Analysis. San Diego: Academic Press 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harashima, F.; Tomizuka, M.; Fukuda, T. (1996): Mechatronics – What Is It, Why and How? An Editorial. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 1 (1996) 1, pp 1-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartigan, J. A. (1975): Clustering Algorithms. New York: John Wiley & Sons 1975.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, J. R.; Clausing, D. (1988): The House of Quality. Harvard Business Review 66 (1988) 3, pp 63-73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hub, H. (1994): Ganzheitliches Denken im Management: Komplexe Aufgaben PC-gestützt lösen. Wiesbaden: Gabler 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbert, J. (2003): Bis an die Grenzen gefordert. Automobilindustrie 48 (2003) 11, pp. 28-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • INCOSE (International Council on Systems Engineering) (2002): Systems Engineering Guidebook: A how to Guide for all Engineers. Version 2, 2002, [Taken 21.04.2008, URL: http://www.incose.org].

  • Jarratt, T. (2004): A Model-Based Approach to Support the Management of Engineering Change. Cambridge (UK): University of Cambridge, Diss. 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. (Ed.) (2005): 2nd Workshop on Complexity in Design and Engineering. GIST Technical Report G2005-1, Glasgow: University of Glasgow, Department of Computing Science 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karnopp, D.; Margolis, D.; Rosenberg, R. (1990): System Dynamics: A Unified Approach. 2nd Ed., New York: John Wiley & Sons 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kehat, E.; Shacham, M. (1973): Chemical Process Simulation Programs–2: Partitioning and Tearing of Systems Flowsheets. Process Technology International 18 (1973), pp 115–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keijzer, W.; Kreimeyer, M.; Schack, R.; Lindemann, U.; Zäh, R. (2006): Vernetzungsstrukturen in der Digitalen Fabrik – Status, Trends und Empfehlungen. München: Dr. Hut 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, W.: Vielfaltsmanagement: Integrative Lösungsansätze zur Optimierung und Beherrschung der Produkte und Teilevielfalt. München: TCW Transfer-Centrum 2002. (TCW-Report, Nr. 31)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kossiakoff, A.; Sweet, W. N. (2003): Systems Engineering: Principles and Practice. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Köster, O. (1998): Komplexitätsmanagement in der Industrie. Wiesbaden: DUV 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan, V.; Eppinger, S. D.; Whitney, D. E. (1997): Simplifying Iterations in Cross-Functional Design Decision Making. Journal of Mechanical Design 119 (1997) 4, pp 485-493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusiak, A. (1999): Engineering Design – Products, Processes and Systems. San Diego: Academic Press 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusiak, A. (2000): Computational Intelligence in Design and Manufacturing. New York: John Wiley & Sons 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusiak, A.; Park, K. (1990): Concurrent Engineering: Decomposition and Scheduling of Design Activities. International Journal of Production Research 28 (1990), pp 1883–1900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kusiak, A.; Larson, N.; Wang, J. (1994): Reengineering of Design and Manufacturing Processes. Computers and Industrial Engineering 26 (1994) 3, pp 521-536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusiak, A; Tang, C.-Y.; Song, Z. (2006): Identification of Modules with an Interface Structure Matrix. Working Paper ISL_04/2006. Iowa: The University of Iowa, Intelligent Systems Laboratory 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U. (Ed.) (2004): Marktnahe Produktion individualisierter Produkte. Sonderforschungsbereich 582, Arbeits- und Ergebnisbericht 2001/2 – 2004/1, München: Technische Universität 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U. (2007a): Methodische Entwicklung technischer Produkte. 2nd Ed., Berlin: Springer 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U. (2007b): A vision to overcome "chaotic" Design for X processes in early phases. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 07), Paris 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U.; Kleedörfer, R.; Gerst, M. (1998): The Development Department and Engineering Change Management. In: Frankenberger, E.; Badke-Schaub, P.; Birkhofer, H. (Eds.): Designers: The Key to Successful Product Development. London: Springer 1998, pp 169-182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U.; Maurer, M.; Kreimeyer, M. (2005): Intelligent Strategies for Structuring Products. In: Clarkson, J.; Huhtala, M. (Eds.): Engineering Design – Theory and Practice. Cambridge, UK: Engineering Design Centre 2005, pp 106-115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U.; Maurer, M. (2006): Early Evaluation of Product Properties for Individualised Products. International Journal of Mass Customization 1 (2006) 2/3, pp 299-314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann, U.; Reichwald, R.; Zäh, M. F. (2006): Individualisierte Produkte – Komplexität beherrschen in Entwicklung und Produktion. Berlin: Springer 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, A.; Kreimeyer, M.; Herfeld, U.; Deubzer, F.; Lindemann, U.; Clarkson, P. J. (2006): Reflecting Communication: A Key Factor for Successful Collaboration between Embodiment Design and Simulation. In: Marjanovic, D. (Ed.): Proceedings of the 9th International Design Conference 2006 (DESIGN06), Dubrovnik. Glasgow: Design Society 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malik, F. (2003): Strategie des Managements komplexer Systeme. Bern: Haupt 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malmqvist, J. (2002): A Classification of Matrix-Based Methods for Product Modeling. In: Marjanovic, D. (Ed.): Proceedings of the 7th International Design Conference 2002 (DESIGN02), Cavtat-Dubrovnik. Cavtat-Dubrovnik, Croatia: Design Society 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, M.; Boesch, N.-O.; Sheng, G.; Tzonev, B. (2005): A Tool for Modelling Flexible Product Structures – MOFLEPS. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 05), Melbourne. Melbourne: Institution of Engineers 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, M.; Pulm, U.; Ballestrem, F.; Clarkson, J.; Lindemann, U. (2006): The Subjective Aspects of Design Structure Matrices – Analysis of Comprehension and Application and Means to Overcome Differences. In: Proceedings of the 8th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis (ASME-ESDA06), Torino. Torino, Italy: ASME 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, M.; Lindemann, U. (2007): Facing Multi-Domain Complexity in Product Development. Cidad Working Paper Series 3 (2007) 1, pp 1-12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mccormick, J. W. T.; Schweizer, P. J.; White, T. W. (1972): Problem Decomposition and Data Reorganization by a Clustering Technique. Operations Research 20 (1972) 5, pp 993-1009.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Melnikov, O.; Tyshkevich, R.; Yemelichev, V.; Sarvanov, V. (1994): Lectures on Graph Theory. Mannheim: BI Wissenschaftsverlag 1994.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) (1995): NASA Systems Engineering Handbook. SP-6105, http://ldcm.nasa.gov/library/Systems_Engineering_ Handbook.pdf, Taken: 21.04.2008.

  • Pahl, G.; Beitz, W. (1996): Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. 2nd Ed., London: Springer 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palm, W. (2005): System Dynamics. Boston: McGraw-Hill 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piller, F. T. (2001): Mass Customization: Ein wettbewerbsstrategisches Konzept im Informationszeitalter. 2nd Ed.,Wiesbaden: Gabler 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piller, F. T.; Waringer, D. (1999): Modularisierung in der Automobilindustrie – neue Formen und Prinzipien. Modular Sourcing, Plattformkonzept und Fertigungssegmentierung als Mittel des Komplexitätsmanagements. Aachen: Shaker 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piller, F. T.; Stotko, C. M. (2003): Mass Customization und Kundenintegration – Neue Wege zum innovativen Produkt. Düsseldorf: Symposion 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimmler, T. U.; Eppinger, S. D. (1994): Integration Analysis of Product Decompositions. In: Proceedings of the 1994 ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Minneapolis. Minneapolis, USA: ASME 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pine, J. B. II (1993): Mass Customization: The New Frontier in Business Competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponn, J.; Lindemann, U. (2005): Characterization of Design Situations and Processes and a Process Module Set for Product Development. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 05), Melbourne. Melbourne: Institution of Engineers 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, G.; Gomez, P. (1991): Vernetztes Denken: Ganzheitliches Führen in der Praxis. Wiesbaden: Gabler 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puhl, H. (1999): Komplexitätsmanagement. Kaiserslautern: Univ. Kaiserslautern, Diss. 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulm, U. (2004): Eine systemtheoretische Betrachtung der Produktentwicklung. München: Dr. Hut 2004. (Produktentwicklung München, Band 56), Also München: TU, Diss. 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puls, C. (2002): Die Konfigurations- & Verträglichkeitsmatrix als Beitrag zum Management von Konfigurationswissen in KMU. Zürich: ETH, Diss. 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puls, C.; Bongulielmi, L.; Henseler, P.; Meier, M. (2002): Management of Different Types of Configuration Knowledge with the K- & V-Matrix and Wiki. In: Marjanovic, D. (Ed.): Proceedings of the 7th International Design Conference 2002 (DESIGN02), Cavtat-Dubrovnik. Cavtat-Dubrovnik, Croatia: Design Society 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, T. (1999): Produktstrukturierung. Wiesbaden: Gabler 1999. Also St. Gallen: Univ. St. Gallen, Diss. 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renner, I. (2007): Methodische Unterstützung funktionsorientierter Baukastenentwicklung am Beispiel Automobil. München: TU, Diss. 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedl, R. (2000): Strukturen der Komplexität – Eine Morphologie des Erkennens und Erklärens. Berlin: Springer 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabbaghian, N.; Eppinger, S.; Murman, E. (1998): Product Development Process Capture & Display Using Web-based Technologies. In: 1998 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, Cybernetics, San Diego. San Diego, USA: IEEE 1998, pp 2664–2669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuh, G.; Schwenk, U. (2001): Produktkomplexität managen. München: Hanser 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharman, D. M.; Yassine, A. (2004): Characterizing Complex Product Architectures. Systems Engineering 7 (2004) 1, pp 35-60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosa, M. (2005): A Network Approach to Define Component Modularity. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Dependency Structure Matrix (DSM) Conference, Seattle. Seattle, USA: Boeing 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosa, M. E.; Eppinger, S. D.; Rowles, C. M. (2003): Identifying Modular and Integrative Systems and Their Impact on Design Team Interactions. Journal of Mechanical Design 125 (2003) 2, pp 240-252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soukup, T.; Davidson, I. (2002): Visual Data Mining: Techniques and Tools for Data Visualization and Mining. New York: Wiley Computer Publishing 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmeier, E. (1999): Realisierung eines systemtechnischen Produktmodells – Einsatz in der PKW-Entwicklung. Aachen: Shaker 1999. (Konstruktionstechnik München, Band 28), Also München: TU, Diss. 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steward, D. (1962): On an Approach to the Analysis of the Structure of Large Systems of Equations. SIAM Review 5 (1962), pp 321–342.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Steward, D. (1981): The Design Structure System: A Method for Managing the Design of Complex Systems. IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management 28 (1981) 3, pp 79-83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strong, M. B. (2002): Tools and Metrics for Evaluating Modular Product Concepts Based on Strategic Objectives. Brigham: Brigham Young University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Master Thesis 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh, N. P. (1988): The Principles of Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terninko, J.; Zusman, A.; Zlotin, B. (1998): Systematic Innovation: An Introduction to TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving). Boca Raton: St. Lucie Press 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thebeau, R. E. (2001): Knowledge Management of System Interfaces and Interactions for Product Development Processes. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, System Design & Management Program, Master Thesis 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thulasiraman, K.; Swamy, M. (1992): Graphs: Theory and Algorithms. New York: John Wiley & Sons 1992.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K.; Eppinger, S. (1995): Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, H.; Probst, G. (2001): Anleitung zum ganzheitlichen Denken und Handeln – Ein Brevier für Führungskräfte. Bern: Paul Haupt 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher, J. M.; Roy, U.; Parsaei, H. R. (1998): Integrated Product and Process Development – Methods, Tools, and Technologies. New York: John-Wiley & Sons 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vester, F. (2000): Die Kunst vernetzt zu denken. Stuttgart: DVA 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vester, F.; Hesler, A. (1980): Sensitivitätsmodell. Frankfurt a. M: Regionale Planungsgemeinschaft Untermain 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ware, C. (2004): Information Visualization – Perception for Design. 2nd Ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warfield, J. N. (1973): Binary Matrices in System Modeling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics SMC-3 (1973) 5, pp 441–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasson, C. S. (2006): System Analysis, Design, and Development: Concepts, Principles, and Practices. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, C. (2005): What Is “Complexity”? In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 05), Melbourne. Melbourne: Institution of Engineers 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, G. M. (1975): An Introduction to General Systems Thinking. New York: Wiley 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitefield, R. I.; Duffy, A. H. B.; Zichao, W.; Meechan, J. (2001): Intelligent Design Guidance. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 03), Stockholm. Stockholm: Design Society 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitney, D. E.; Dong, Q.; Judson, J.; Mascoli, G. (1999): Introducing Knowledge-based Engineering into an Interconnected Product Development Process. White Paper Jan. 27, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, N. (1948): Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. New York: Technology Press 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildemann, H.; Ann, C.; Broy, M.; Günthner, W. A.; Lindemann, U. (2007): Plagiatschutz – Handlungsspielräume der produzierenden Industrie gegen Produktpiraterie. München: TCW Transfer-Centrum GmbH & Co. KG 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winston, W. L. (2004): Operations Research – Applications and Algorithms. 4th Ed. Belmont: Thomson Brooks/Cole 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yassine, A. (2004): An Introduction to Modeling and Analyzing Complex Product Development Processes Using the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) Method. Italian Management Review (2004) 9, [Taken: 01.06.2005, URL: http://www.ge.uiuc.edu/pdlab/Papers/DSM-Tutorial.pdf].

  • Yassine, A.; Falkenburg, D.; Chelst, K. (1999): Engineering Design Management: An Information Structure Approach. International Journal of Production Research 37 (1999), pp 2957–2975.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yassine, A.; Whitney, D.; Lavine, J.; Zambito, T. (2000): Do-It-Right-First-Time (DRFT) Approach to Design Structure Matrix (DSM) Restructuring. In: Proceedings of DETC 2000: ASME 2000 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Baltimore. Baltimore, USA: ASME 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yassine, A.; Whitney, D. E.; Zambito, T. (2001): Assessment of Rework Probabilities for Simulating Product Development Processes Using the Design Structure Matrix (DSM). In: Proceedings of DETC 2001: ASME 2001 Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh, USA: ASME 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yassine, A.; Whitney, D.; Daleiden, S.; Lavine, J. (2003): Connectivity Maps: Modeling and Analysing Relationships in Product Development Processes. Journal of Engineering Design 14 (2003) 3, pp 377-394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T.; Yassine, A.; Goldberg, D. E. (2003): A Genetic Algorithm for Developing Modular Product Architecture. In: Proceedings of DETC 2003: ASME 2003 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Chicago. Chicago, USA: ASME 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T.; Yassine, A.; Goldberg, D. E. (2005): An Information Theoretic Method for Developing Modular Architectures Using Genetic Algorithms. IlliGAL Report No. 2005014. Illinois: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of General Engineering 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanker, W. (1999): Situative Anpassung und Neukombination von Entwicklungsmethoden. Aachen: Shaker 1999. (Konstruktionstechnik München, Band 36), Also München: TU, Diss. 1999.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lindemann, U., Maurer, M., Braun, T. (2009). Literature. In: Structural Complexity Management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87889-6_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87889-6_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-87888-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-87889-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics