Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-956mj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-16T22:55:50.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EXTRAPOLATION OF DESIGN GUIDELINES DURING THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHASE: A METHOD TO SUPPORT PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE DESIGN

Part of: Design Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

G. Formentini ,
C. Favi ,
F. Bouissiere ,
C. Cuiller ,
P.-E. Dereux ,
R. Guillaume  and
C. Malchair
G. Formentini*
Affiliation:
University of Parma, Italy
C. Favi
Affiliation:
University of Parma, Italy
F. Bouissiere
Affiliation:
Airbus S.A.S., France
C. Cuiller
Affiliation:
Airbus S.A.S., France
P.-E. Dereux
Affiliation:
Airbus S.A.S., France
R. Guillaume
Affiliation:
Airbus S.A.S., France
C. Malchair
Affiliation:
Airbus S.A.S., France
*
*[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The work aims at the definition of a design methodology able to drive designers in the definition of product architectures, starting from rough information available at the conceptual design. The methodology identifies design guidelines useful for the development of product architectures optimized for a given target (i.e. assembly, cost). The methodology is based on domains which combine attributes related to a specific aspect of the target. The exploratory application of the methodology was performed to address the equipment installation of a civil aircraft for assembly/installation target.

Keywords

conceptual designdesign guidelinesproduct architectureoptimisationdesign methodology
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 857 - 866
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P. and Knight, W.A. (2010), Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly. s.l.:Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420089288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouissiere, F. et al. (2019), “Conceputal Design for Assembly in aerospace industry: A method to assess manufacturing and assembly aspects of product architectures”, Delft, s.n. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahmus, B.J., Gonzalez-Zugasti, J.P. and Otto, K.N. (2001), “Modular product architecture”, Design Studies, Vol. 22 No 5, pp. 409–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0142-694x(01)00004-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demoly, F. et al. (2011), “An assembly oriented design framework for product structure engineering and assembly sequence planning”, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, pp. 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2010.05.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favi, C. et al. (2019), Design for Assembly in the Conceptual Develipment of Aircraft Systems, Modena, Springer, pp. 268–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31154-4_23Google Scholar
Favi, C. and Germani, M. (2012), “A method to optimize assemblability of industrial product in early design phase: from product architecture to assembly sequence”, International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing, Vol. VI No. 3, pp. 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-012-0147-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorineschi, L. et al. (2015), Product architecture definition: evaluating the potentiality of TRIZ tools, s.l., Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.415Google Scholar
Golob, B., Jezernik, A. and Hren, G. (2002), A feature based approach for conceptual design. Dubrovnik, s.n.Google Scholar
Namouz, E., Summers, J.D. and Mocko, G.M. (2012), “Reasoning: Source of variability in the Boothroyd and Dewhurst assembly time estimation method”, s.l., s.n. https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2012-71075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto, K.N. and Wood, K.L. (2001), Product Design: Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development. s.l.:Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Pahl, G. et al. (2007), Engineering Design. s.l.:Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-319-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, R.B., McAdams, D.A. and Kayyalethekkel, V.J. (2004), “A product architecture-based conceptual DFA technique”, Design Studies. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, K. and Eppinger, S. (2011), Product design and development. V ed. s.l.: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar