Combining Fuzzy Dematel and Product Design Structure Matrix for Clustring Nozzle

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Prof., Industrial Engineering Department, Malek Ashtar University, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Assistant Prof., Department of management, Dolat Abad Branch, Islamic Azad Univesity, Isfahan, Iran.

3 MSc. Student, Industrial Engineering Department, Malek Ashtar University, Isfahan, Iran.

Abstract

This article presents an integrated approach for designing bullet fuzes. Using systems engineering in this approach, first of all the needs of the customer, Air Force, are considered and translated into functional requirements. Then, by applying the house of quality (HOQ) matrix, these functional requirements are transformed into component parts whose classification is finally carried out by the design structure matrix and through examining the presence or absence of relationship between various parts. On the other hand, regarding the different types of dependencies and relationships among these parts, the value and strength of relationships are expressed using fuzzy DEMATEL analysis that leads to the classification of components in each module. The integrated approach outlined in this article can serve as a basis for a fully localized process of designing and developing new products in design offices, resulting generally in reducing the design/redesign time and improving the quality. Furthermore, our novel approach is employed for the first time in single-function products causing changes in considering the types of relationships in the design structure matrix.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Crawley EF, Weck OL, de Eppinger SD, et al. (2004) The influence of architecture in engineering system. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineering Systems Division Monograph, Cambridge, MA, March.
  2. Yassine AA and Sreenivas RS (2008) Managing the exchange of information in product development. European Journal of Operational Research 184(1): 311–326.
  3. Ko, Y. T. (2013). Optimizing product architecture for complex design. Concurrent Engineering, 21(2), 87-102.
  4. Browning T (2002) Process integration using the design structure matrix. Systems Engineering 5(3): 180–193.
  5. Pimmler T and Eppinger SD (1994) Integration analysis of product decompositions. In: Proceedings of the ASME international conference on design theory and methodology, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 11–14 September, paper no. DE- 68L, pp. 343–351.
  6. Thebeau R (2001) Knowledge management of system interfaces and interactions for product development processes. Master Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
  7. Lindemann U, Maurer MS and Braun T (2008) Structural Complexity Management: An Approach for the Field of Product Design. Berlin: Springer.
  8. Fernandez C (1998) Integration analysis of product architecture to support effective team co-location. Master’s Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
  9. Sharman DM and Yassine AA (2007) Architectural valuation using the design structure matrix and real options theory. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 15(2):157–173.
  10. Yu TL, Yassine AA and Goldberg DE (2007) An information theoretic method for developing modular architectures using genetic algorithms. Research in Engineering Design 18: 91–109.
  11. Li S (2011) A matrix-based clustering approach for the decomposition of design problems. Research in 12.Engineering Design 22(4): 263–278.
  12. Borjesson F and Ho¨ ltta¨ -Otto K (2012) Improved clustering algorithm for design structure matrix. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2012 international design engineering, 12–15 August, Chicago, IL.
  13. Sharman DM and Yassine AA (2007) Architectural valuation using the design structure matrix and real options theory. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 15(2): 157–173.
  14. Shekar B, Venkataram R and Satish BM (2011) Managing complexity in aircraft design using design structure matrix. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 19(4): 283–294.
  15. Holtta-Otto K and Weck OD (2007) Degree of modularity in engineering systems and products with technical and business constraints. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 15(2): 113–126.
  1. Hsu-Fang Hung, Hsing-Pei Kao, Ying-Shen Juang, (2008) An integrated information system for product design planning, Expert Systems with Applications, Volume 35, Issues 1–2, Pages 338-349,
  1. Chan, L., & Wu, M. (2002). Quality function deployment: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 143, 463–497.
  2. S.D.Eppinger and T.R.Browning, (2012), Design structure matrix methods and applications, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology press.1th edition.
  3. M. Carrascosa, S. D. Eppinger, D. E. Whitney, (1998) Using the design structure matrix to estimate product development time, in: Proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences (DETC), Atlanta, Georgia, USA,1-10.
  4. Shegzhe Jin, Samuel Huang, (2010), Quality assessment planning using design structure matrix and resource constraint analysis, Thesis: Master of Science, mechanical engineering, Graduate school of the University of Cincinnati.
  5. Muhammad Adrees, (2003), Usability of the design structure matrix for automotive design engineering, Thesis: Master of Applied science, Mechanical Engineering, Ryerson University, Canada.
  6. Kushtrim Kuqi, Tim Eveleigh, Thomas Holzer, Shahryar Sarkani,(2012), Using Design Sturcture matrix for improming electronic medical record usability, IEEE.
  7. Andrew Harold Tilstra, Carolyn Conner Seepersad and Kristin L. Wood; (2012), a high-definition design structure matrix (HDDSM) for the quantitative assessment of product architecture, Journal of engineering design, Vol. 23, PP.767-789.
  8. Hsu-Fang Hung, Hsing-Pei Kao, Ying-Shen Juang, (2008), an integrated information system for product design planning, Expert systems with applications, PP.338-349.
  9. Tarek AlGeddawy, (2014), A DSM Cladistics model for product family architecture design, 24th CIRP Design Conference, Procedia CIRP 21, 87 – 92.
  10. Mendel, J. M., (2001), Uncertain Rule-Based Fuzzy Logic Systems: Introduction and New Directions, Prentice Hall PTR.
  11. Agha Ebrahimi Samani, B., Makooii, A., Sadr Lahiji, M. & Homayon, V. (2008), Assessment challenges of Iranian companies in oil and gas projects by DEMATEL Technique. Sharif Science and Research Journal. 24(45): 121-129.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics