Application of Integrated Fuzzy-AHP for Design Concept Evaluation: A Case Study on Mold Design Selection

  • Faiz Mohd Turan
  • Badrul Omar
Conference paper


Design concept evaluation plays a critical role in the early phases of product development as it has significant impact on the downstream development processes as well as on the success of the product developed. In this chapter, a novel methodology using the integration of Fuzzy-AHP with House of Quality (HOQ) and Rough-Grey Analysis has been developed to obtain the weight and rank of alternatives. This method will give the designers better-informed decision before making the final decision. A real case example from industry is presented to demonstrate efficacy of the proposed methodology. The result of the example shows that the integration of Fuzzy-AHP with HOQ and Rough-Grey Analysis approach provided a novel alternative of existing methods to perform design concept evaluation.


Grey Relational Grade Mold Design Grey Relational Coefficient Secondary Criterion Short Product Life Cycle 
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. 1.
    Faiz MT, Badrul O (2013) The integration of HOQ and Fuzzy-AHP for design concept evaluation. Appl Mech Mater 315:25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hsu W, Woon IMY (1998) Current research in the conceptual design of mechanical products. Comput Aided Des 30:377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Subrahmanian E, Rachuri S, Fenves SJ, Foufou S, Sriram RD (2005) Product lifecycle management support: a challenge in supporting product design and manufacturing in a networked economy. Int J Product Lifecycle Manage 1:4–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shai O, Reich Y, Rubin D (2007) Creative conceptual design: extending the scope by infused design. Comput Aided Des 41:117–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ye X, Liu H, Chen L, Chen Z, Pan X, Zhang S (2008) Reverse innovative design—an integrated product design methodology. Comput Aided Des 40:812–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu S, Boyle IM (2009) Engineering design: perspectives, challenges, and recent advances. J Eng Des 20:7–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li W, Li Y, Wang J, Liu X (2010) The process model to Aid innovation of products conceptual design. Expert Syst Appl 37:3574–3587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Edwards T, Battisti G, McClendon WP Jr, Denyer D, Neely A (2005) Pathways to value how UK firms create more value using innovation strategically, 1st edn. Advanced Institure of Management Research (AIM), LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown S, Eisenhardt K (1995) Product development: past research, present findings, and future directions. Acad Manag Rev 20:343–378Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Griffin A, Hauser J (1996) Integrating R&D and marketing: a review and analysis of the literature. J Prod Innov Manag 13:191–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krishnan V, Ulrich K (2001) Product development decisions: a review of the literature. Manag Sci 47:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chesbrough H, Teece D (2002) Organizing for innovation: when is virtual virtuous? Harv Bus Rev 80:127–134Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ayag Z, Odzemir RG (2008) A hybrid approach to concept selection through fuzzy analytic network process. Comput Ind Eng 56:368–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee F, Santiago M (2008) Creativity in new product development: an evolutionary integration, 1st edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lotter B (1986) Manufacturing assembly handbook. Butterworth-Heinemann, BostonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ullman DG (2009) The mechanical design process, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhai LY, Khoo LP, Zhong ZW (2009) Design concept evaluation in product development using rough sets and grey relation analysis. Expert Syst Appl 36:7072–7079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Geng X, Chu X, Zhang Z (2010) A new integrated design concept evaluation approach based on vague sets. Expert Syst Appl 37:6629–6638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scott MJ (2002) Quantifying certainty in design decisions: examining AHP. In: ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences (DETC2002), 2002Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pahl G, Beitz W, Feldhuson J, Grote KH (2007) Engineering design: a systematic approach, 4th edn. Springer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nepal B, Yadav OP, Murat A (2010) A fuzzy-AHP approach to prioritization of CS attributes in target planning for automotive product development. Expert Syst Appl 37:6775–6786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bai C, Sarkis J (2010) Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies. Int J Product Econ 124:252–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bai C, Sarkis J (2011) Evaluating supplier development programs with a grey based rough set methodology. Expert Syst Appl 38:13505–13517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li GD, Yamaguchi D, Nagai M (2008) A grey-based rough decision-making approach to supplier selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 36:1032–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Manufacturing EngineeringUniversiti Malaysia PahangPekanMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing EngineeringUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn MalaysiaParit Raja, Batu PahatMalaysia

Personalised recommendations