0
Research Papers

An Approach Toward Integrating Top-Down and Bottom-Up Product Concept and Design Selection

[+] Author and Article Information
Shun Takai1

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,  Missouri University of Science and Technology, 290C Toomey Hall, 400 West 13th Street, Rolla, MO 65409-0500takais@mst.edu

Vivek K. Jikar

Kenneth M. Ragsdell

Department of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering,  Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409-0370ragsdell@mst.edu

1

Corresponding author.

J. Mech. Des 133(7), 071007 (Jul 08, 2011) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004233 History: Received January 27, 2010; Accepted May 02, 2011; Published July 07, 2011; Online July 08, 2011

This paper proposes an approach to integrate top-down and bottom-up procedures for product concept and design selection. The top-down procedure identifies relationships between product requirements and design parameters and specifies an acceptable range of design parameters (called a design range) from product specifications and tolerances. Then, within the design range, the bottom-up procedure optimizes design specifications and tolerances in order to minimize a product cost. A product cost is defined as a sum of component costs, each of which is a function of design specifications and tolerances. A concept, with design specifications and tolerances, that minimizes product cost is an optimum concept. The proposed approach is demonstrated using an illustrative example. Sensitivity analysis with respect to the parameters of the product cost illustrates that the shape of design range defines how responsive a product is to uncertainty in cost function parameters relevant to design tolerances.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Topics: Design
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Top-down procedure

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Product decomposition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Mapping from product requirements to design parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Mapping from design parameters to product requirements

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Mapping from product to design ranges: (a) product range and (b) design range

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Controllable design range

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Passive filter concepts: (a) concept A and (b) concept B

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Mapping from product requirements to design parameters: (a) product requirements and (b) design parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Design ranges (a) concept A and (b) concept B

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Sensitivity of costs of concepts (a) with respect to A1 and (b) with respect to A2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Sensitivity of costs of concepts (a) with respect to B1 and (b) with respect to B2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Sensitivity of tolerances and costs with respect to B1 : (a) tolerances of concept A, (b) tolerances of concept B, (c) cost due to tolerances of concept A, and (d) cost due to tolerances of concept B

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Sensitivity of cost of concepts with respect to B2 : (a) tolerances of concept A, (b) tolerances of concept B, (c) cost due to tolerances of concept A, and (d) cost due to tolerances of concept B

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