Characterizing complex product architectures

Abstract

Due to the large-scale nature of complex product architectures, it is necessary to develop some form of abstraction in order to be able to describe and grasp the structure of the product, facilitating product modularization. In this paper we develop three methods for describing product architectures: (a) the Dependency Structure Matrix (DSM), (b) Molecular Diagrams (MD), and (c) Visibility-Dependency (VD) signature diagrams. Each method has its own language (and abstraction), which can be used to qualitatively or quantitatively characterize any given architecture spanning the modular-integrated continuum. A consequence of abstraction is the loss of some detail. So, it is important to choose the correct method (and resolution) to characterize the architecture in order to retain the salient details. The proposed methods are suited for describing architectures of varying levels of complexity and detail. The three methods are demonstrated using a sequence of illustrative simple examples and a case-study analysis of a complex product architecture for an industrial gas turbine.

Structure‐Based System Dynamics Analysis of Engineering Design Processes

“…This interrelatedness can, for example, be seen as structurally complex systems are usually also behaviorally (dynamically) complex (De Weck et al, 2011). Various researchers such as Baldwin & Clark (2000), Lindemann et al (2005), , Sharman & Yassine (2004) claim that system behavior can be estimated based on the structure of the system.…”

A PLM-based data analytics approach for improving product development lead time in an engineer-to-order manufacturing firm

“…The DSM (Design Structure Matrix) method is capable of representing both static and temporal information as directed graphs. A variety of analytical techniques (sequencing, clustering, banding, and tearing) are available to analyze information presented in DSMs [13], [14]. Accordingly, DMM (Domain Mapping Matrix) is to connect DSMs representing different domains in order to model and visualize interactions across domains [15].…”

“…decompose the resources in the engineering department into engineering managers, project managers, quality engineers, drafters, document and manual specialists, etc. ); 2) understanding and documenting the interactions between the elements (i.e., the collaboration of the engineers); and 3) analyzing potential reintegration of the elements via clustering (integration analysis) [13], [16]. Qualitative and quantitative measures can be employed when filling the matrices.…”

Using Network Science to Support Design Research: From Counting to Connecting

“…Gokpinar et al 2010;Sosa et al 2011), the characterisation of modularity, and other complex product architectures (e.g. Sharman and Yassine 2004).…”