Extending Design Structure Matrices and Domain Mapping Matrices by Multiple Design Structure Matrices

Eichinger, Markus; Maurer, Maik; Pulm, Udo; Lindemann, Udo

doi:10.1115/esda2006-95266

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The matrix in the latter category represents relationships between elements within the same domain. Recently, Eichinger et al (2006) propose to extend DMM and DSM by introducing Multiple Design Structure Matrices.…”

Section: Matrix-based Methods For Product Architecture Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Propagating product architecture decisions onto the project organisation: a comparison between two methods

Bonjour

Dulmet

Deniaud

et al. 2009

IJDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concepts like product architecture and modularity have been introduced in order to limit the effects of technological change on complex product design. Researchers have highlighted that product architectures and design organizations (projects, teams…) are strongly interrelated. However, little research has analyzed this relationship. System architects and design managers need a method that helps them to simulate the mapping of the product architecture onto the project organization by propagating choices and then assessing alternatives. In this paper, two propagation methods are presented and compared. The first one is based on a fuzzy process, which is proposed by the authors. The second one is based on a matrix approach. Both are applied to define new robotized gearbox architectures. A sensitivity analysis is conducted. It is concluded that in new product development situations or in re-engineering projects, system architects could use these methods in the early design stages to forecast the more appropriate design project organization.

show abstract

Section: Matrix-based Methods For Product Architecture Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Propagating product architecture decisions onto the project organisation: a comparison between two methods

Bonjour

Dulmet

Deniaud

et al. 2009

IJDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…DMMs represent relationships between two domains (Danilovic and Browning 2004;Eichinger et al 2006;Lindemann 2007;Bartolomei et al 2012). Other authors call these matrices as'incidence matrices' (Chen, Ding, and Li 2005).…”

Section: Systems Architecture Modelling Researchmentioning

confidence: 98%

A method for jointly drawing up the functional and design architectures of complex systems during the preliminary system-definition phase

Bonjour

Deniaud

Micaëlli

2013

Journal of Engineering Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In systems engineering, determining a system's architecture is a crucial part of the preliminary systemdefinition phase because this architecture greatly impacts the quality of the system, the way the subsequent phases of the design process are organised and the overall performance of this process. Consequently, systems architects need methods for defining the couplings of modules (or sub-systems) and for estimating the impact of allocation decisions on candidate system architectures. This paper presents a method that helps simultaneously define the functional and design architectures of complex systems. Starting from an allocation matrix, or domain mapping matrix, which represents the couplings between the elements of two domains (functions vs. components), the method generates a sesign structure matrix (DSM) for each domain. A clustering algorithm is then applied to each DSM in order to generate a rearranged architecture. This method can be used in the synthesis process to provide architectural output that then forms the input data for the systems analysis process, where these data will help systems architects assess candidate architectures. We illustrate the method via an industrial case study focusing on a new automobile engine development project.

show abstract

“…Il faut donc proposer une représentation supportant ces différents types d 'allocations (Danilovic, 2007). Au final, les relations à matérialiser sont des interactions Fonction/Fonction, Bloc Strnctw·el/Bloc Structw·el mais aussi les relations entre Fonction/Bloc Structw·el qui matérialisent l'allocation des fonctions aux supports appropriés (Eichinger, 2006) . Dans (Malmqvist, 2002), l'autew-présente différents types de méthodes de modélisation à base de matrices.…”

Section: Représentation Matricielleunclassified

Intégration de la sûreté de fonctionnement en phase de réponse à appel d’offres

Benaben¹,

Noyes²,

Pérès³

et al. 2016

Journal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nous proposons dans ce travail une approche d'évaluation, en amont du cycle de développement d'un produit, de l'impact des exigences de sûreté de fonctionnement (SdF) sur la réalisation du projet associé. La nécessité d'allier les connaissances SdF et les connaissances « métiers » sur les dimensions fonctionnelles et structurelles du produit conduit à utiliser un formalisme de représentation matricielle. Nous présentons ce type de modèle et illustrons la démarche d'exploitation pour évaluer, tôt dans le projet, les effets de la dimension SdF du produit. ABSTRACT. In this work, we propose an approach, applied to the early product development cycle for assessment of the impact of the dependability requirements (SdF) on the project realization. The need to combine RAMS knowledge and trade expertise on the functional and structural product dimensions led to a matrix representation formalism. We introduce this kind of modelling and illustrate the way to assess, early in the project, the effects of the RAMS constraints on the product specification and definition. MOTS-CLÉS : évaluation prévisionnelle de sûreté, satisfaction des exigences, modèle matriciel.

show abstract

Extending Design Structure Matrices and Domain Mapping Matrices by Multiple Design Structure Matrices

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Propagating product architecture decisions onto the project organisation: a comparison between two methods

Propagating product architecture decisions onto the project organisation: a comparison between two methods

A method for jointly drawing up the functional and design architectures of complex systems during the preliminary system-definition phase

Intégration de la sûreté de fonctionnement en phase de réponse à appel d’offres

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About