0
Research Papers

Improving Process Performance of Distributed Set-Based Design Systems by Controlling Wellbeing Indicators of Design Actors

[+] Author and Article Information
Baris Canbaz

e-mail: baris.canbaz@ecp.fr

Bernard Yannou

e-mail: bernard.yannou@ecp.fr
Ecole Centrale Paris,
Laboratoire Genie Industriel,
Grande Voie des Vignes,
Chatenay-Malabry 92 295, France

Pierre-Alain Yvars

Institut Supérieur de Mécanique de Paris
(SupMeca)—LISMMA,
3 rue Fernand Hainaut,
Saint Ouen Cedex 93407, France
e-mail: payvars@supmeca.fr

Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received January 7, 2013; final manuscript received November 10, 2013; published online December 11, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Matthew B Parkinson.

J. Mech. Des 136(2), 021005 (Dec 11, 2013) (10 pages) Paper No: MD-13-1007; doi: 10.1115/1.4026034 History: Received January 07, 2013; Revised November 10, 2013

In new complex product development processes, the design problem is usually distributed to multiple actors from different disciplines. Each design actor has a limited responsibility in the design system. Therefore, each design actor has limited control over design variables and performance variables. However, design actors are not isolated since their design activities are coupled. This can generate design conflicts through inconsistencies among design objectives and working procedures. When the design convergence is not controlled, inconsistencies can distort the satisfaction equilibrium between design actors. This means that if a design actor aims at satisfying only his/her local design objective, other actors having conflicting objectives will be dissatisfied. Thus, individual satisfactions diverge. The intensity of conflicts is measured with the satisfaction divergence. In this paper, we define wellbeing indicators in order to control the convergence of distributed set-based design (SBD) processes. Wellbeing indicators reflect design actors' satisfaction degree of their process desires. We performed a constraint programming Monte Carlo simulation of our SBD framework with a complex design problem. We compared the results of wellbeing indicators with the results of the processes where design actors do not use wellbeing indicators. It is shown that when design actors have some means to control their convergence, the solution space converges to a solution in satisfaction equilibrium while epistemic uncertainty of the design model is reduced. Some conflicts are therefore prevented and the satisfaction divergence is reduced, leading thus to an improved design process performance.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Topics: Design , Simulation
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Papalambros, P. Y., Michelena, N. F., and Kikuchi, N., 1997, “Distributed Cooperative Systems Design,” Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Engineering Design, Tampere, Finland, pp. 265–270.
Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., Barthelemy, J. F. M., and Giles, G. L., 1984, “Aerospace Engineering Design by Systematic Decomposition and Multilevel Optimization,” 14th Congr. of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), Toulouse, France.
Cramer, E., Dennis, J., Frank, P., Lewis, R., and Shubin, G., 1994, “Problem Formulation for Multidisciplinary Optimization,” SIAM J. Control Optim., 4(4), pp. 754–776. [CrossRef]
Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., and Haftka, R. T., 1997, “Multidisciplinary Aerospace Design Optimization: Survey of Recent Developments,” Struct. Optim., 14(1), pp. 1–23. [CrossRef]
Balling, R. J., and Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., 1996, “Optimization of Coupled Systems—A Critical Overview of Approaches,” AIAA J., 34(1), pp. 6–17. [CrossRef]
Lewis, K., and Mistree, F., 1998, “Collaborative, Sequential, and Isolated Decisions in Design,” J. Mech. Des., 120(4), pp. 643–652. [CrossRef]
Zhao, L., and Jin, Y., 2003, “Work Structure Based Collaborative Engineering Design,” Proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, pp. 865–874.
Chanron, V., and Lewis, K., 2005, “A Study of Convergence in Decentralized Design Processes,” Res. Eng. Des., 16(3), pp. 133–145. [CrossRef]
Kim, H. M., Michelena, N. F., Papalambros, P. Y., and Jiang, T., 2003, “Target Cascading in Optimal System Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 125(9), pp. 474–480. [CrossRef]
Park, H., Michelena, N., Kulkarni, D., and Papalambros, P. Y., 2001, “Convergence Criteria for Hierarchical Overlapping Coordination of Linearly Constrained Convex Design Problems,” Comput. Optim. Appl., 18(3), pp. 273–293. [CrossRef]
Malak, R. J., Aughenbaugh, J. M., and Paredis, C. J. J., 2009, “Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis in Set-Based Conceptual Design,” Comput.-Aided Des., 41(3), pp. 214–227. [CrossRef]
Fathianathan, M., and Panchal, J. H., 2009, “Modelling an Ongoing Design Process Utilizing Top-Down and Bottom-Up Design Strategies,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part B, 223(5), pp. 547–560. [CrossRef]
Antonsson, E. K., and Otto, K. N., 1995, “Imprecision in Engineering Design,” J. Mech. Des., 117(B), pp. 25–32. [CrossRef]
Parsons, M. G., Singer, D. J., and Sauter, J. A., 1999, “A Hybrid Agent Approach for Set-Based Conceptual Ship Design,” Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Computer Applications in Shipbuilding, Cambridge, MA.
Ward, A. C., Liker, J., Sobek, D. K., and Cristiano, J. J., 1994, “Set-Based Concurrent Engineering and Toyota,” Proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, pp. 79–90.
Sobek, D. K., Ward, A. C., and Liker, J., 1999, “Toyota's Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering,” Sloan Manage. Rev., 40(2), pp. 67–83.
McKenney, T. A., Kemink, L. F., and Singer, D. J., 2011, “Adapting to Changes in Design Requirements Using Set-Based Design,” Nav. Eng. J., 123(3), pp. 66–77. [CrossRef]
Wang, J., and Terpenny, J., 2003, “Interactive Evolutionary Solution Synthesis in Fuzzy Set-Based Preliminary Engineering Design,” J. Intell. Manuf., 14(2), pp. 153–167. [CrossRef]
Lottaz, C., Smith, I. F., Robert-Nicoud, Y., and Faltings, B., 2000, “Constraint-Based Support for Negotiation in Collaborative Design,” Artif. Intell. Eng., 14(3), pp. 261–280. [CrossRef]
Panchal, J. H., Fernández, M. G., Paredis, C. J. J., Allen, J. K., and Mistree, F., 2007, “An Interval-Based Constraint Satisfaction (IBCS) Method for Decentralized, Collaborative Multifunctional Design,” Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl., 15(3), pp. 309–323. [CrossRef]
Yvars, P.-A., 2009, “A CSP Approach for the Network of Product Lifecycle Constraints Consistency in a Collaborative Design Context,” Eng. Applic. Artif. Intell., 22(6), pp. 961–970. [CrossRef]
Yannou, B., Yvars, P.-A., Hoyle, C., and Chen, W., 2013, “Set-Based Design by Simulation of Usage Scenario Coverage,” J. Eng. Design, 24(8), pp. 575–603. [CrossRef]
Brailsford, S. C., Potts, C. N., and Smith, B. M., 1999, “Constraint Satisfaction Problems: Algorithms and Applications,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 119(3), pp. 557–581. [CrossRef]
Montanari, U., 1974, “Networks of Constraints: Fundamental Properties and Applications to Picture Processing,” Inf. Sci., 7, pp. 95–132. [CrossRef]
Mackworth, A. K., 1977, “Consistency in Networks of Relations,” Artif. Intell., 8(1), pp. 99–118. [CrossRef]
Faltings, B., 1994, “Arc-Consistency for Continuous Variables,” Artif. Intell., 65(2), pp. 363–376. [CrossRef]
Dechter, R., and Dechter, A., 1988, “Belief Maintenance in Dynamic Constraint Networks,” Proceedings of the 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, American Association for Artificial Intelligence, St. Paul, MN, pp. 37–42.
Yannou, B., and Harmel, G., 2004, “A Comparative Study of Constraint Programming Techniques Over Intervals in Preliminary Design,” Proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, pp. 189–198.
Lottaz, C., Stouffs, R., and Smith, I., 2000, “Increasing Understanding During Collaboration Through Advanced Representations,” ITcon, 5, pp. 1–24. Available at: http://www.itcon.org/2000/1
Sam-Haroud, D., and Faltings, B., 1996, “Consistency Techniques for Continuous Constraints,” Constraints, 1(1–2), pp. 85–118. [CrossRef]
Wood, W., 2001, “A View of Design Theory and Methodology From the Standpoint of Design Freedom,” Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, ASME, pp. 345–355.
Canbaz, B., Yannou, B., and Yvars, P.-A., 2011, “A New Framework for Collaborative Set-Based Design: Application to the Design Problem of a Hollow Cylindrical Cantilever Beam,” Proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, Washington, D.C., pp. 197–206.
Canbaz, B., Yannou, B., and Yvars, P.-A., 2012, “Constraint Programming Simulation of a Distributed Set-Based Design Framework With Control Indicators,” Proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, Chicago, IL.
Messac, A., 1996, “Physical Programming—Effective Optimization for Computational Design,” AIAA J., 34(1), pp. 149–158. [CrossRef]
Granvilliers, L., 2012, “Adaptive Bisection of Numerical CSPs,” Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, M.Milano, ed., Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 290–298.
Yannou, B., Mazur, C., and Yvars, P.-A., 2010, “Parameterization and Dimensioning of the Multi-Disc Clutch in the CO4 Environment,” Ecole Centrale Paris, Technical Report No. 2010–21. Available at: http://www.lgi.ecp.fr/Biblio/PDF/CR-LGI-2010-21.pdf
IBM, 2012, “IBM ILOG CPLEX CP Optimizer for Constraint Programs—Features and Benefits,” http://www-01.ibm.com/software/integration/optimization/cplex-cp-optimizer/about/

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Coupled design pattern

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Progressive convergence in SBD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Dynamic sub-problem

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Dynamic SBD process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Satisfaction functions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Intervals on the satisfaction function

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Bilateral convergence of satisfaction interval

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Derivation of wellbeing indicator

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Simulation algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Multiplate clutch system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Average results of multiplate clutch simulations

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