0
Research Papers: Design Automation

Distributed System Development Risk Analysis

[+] Author and Article Information
Peter Leung1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4022pleung@stanfordalumni.org

Kosuke Ishii

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4022ishii@stanford.edu

Jeffrey Abell

 General Motors Corporation, Warren, MI 48090-9055jeffrey.abell@gm.com

Jan Benson

 General Motors Corporation, Warren, MI 48090-9055jan.benson@gm.com

1

Corresponding author.

J. Mech. Des 130(5), 051403 (Mar 25, 2008) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2885196 History: Received January 08, 2007; Revised October 03, 2007; Published March 25, 2008

Under the current trend of globalization, companies develop products not only to target a single market but to sell them to the entire world. Companies realize the importance of collaborative design, or workshare, to develop global regional engineering centers to balance design variations while ensuring local market success. This paradigm shift enables diverse customer values to be integrated into products but also introduces challenges in the management of work distribution. Extensive industry case studies have shown that capability and capacity of the regional centers drive the workshare decisions; however, this strategy overlooks the interdependence of the design systems causing many delays and quality problems. Seeing the opportunity, this paper presents a method to identify and to quantify the system-level workshare risk based on the couplings of system components to evaluate the overall workshare scenarios. The risk analysis consists of two key elements in terms of two relationships, the division of work for distributions (i.e., component coupling) and the work assignments of the distributed teams (i.e., workshare coupling), as well as an algorithm to combine the relationships to calculate the workshare risk. To illustrate the steps of the risk analysis, this paper applies it to a hair dryer design as a case study. The paper also discusses the usages and characteristics of the risk analysis, and concludes with the future research and the next steps of generalizing the method to other product development projects.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Matrix of component versus the common metric

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Hair dryer and its major components

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

QFD I: house of quality of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

QFD II: part development of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

QFD II: part development (binary scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Transpose of QFD II matrix

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

CCM of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

WDM of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

WCM of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

WCM′ of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

System risk results of the hair dryer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

WDM of the alternate workshare scenario

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

System risk results of the alternate workshare scenario

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Formulation of the transitive coupling

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In