Rapid design space exploration using legacy design data and technology scaling trend

Thangaraj, C.; Alkan, C.

doi:10.1016/j.vlsi.2009.11.002

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While there are great qualitative examples from Toyota the creator of SBD, Schlumberger, U.S. Navy, and others, SBD lacks a rigorous mathematical, quantitative formalization. Emergence of computational, combinatorial design generation and evaluation tools and methods continue, but there are limitations in their use and application as they mainly focus on “point solutions” even with pareto multicriteria design . Optimal point solutions early in the design are faced with unknowns that affect design fulfilment and success.…”

Section: Literature Review and Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emergence of computational, combinatorial design generation and evaluation tools and methods continue, but there are limitations in their use and application as they mainly focus on "point solutions" even with pareto multicriteria design. 6 Optimal point solutions early in the design are faced with unknowns that affect design fulfilment and success. Point designs are "brittle" as they must react to technical, time, and cost changes.…”

Section: Literature Review and Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Product development resilience through set‐based design

Rapp

Chinnam

Doerry

et al. 2018

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Often during a system Product Development program, external factors or requirements change, forcing system design change. This uncertainty adversely affects program outcome, often adding to development time and cost, production cost, and can compromise system performance. We present a development approach that minimizes the impacts, by proactively considering the possibility of changes in the external factors and the implications of mid‐course design changes. The approach considers the set of alternative designs and the burdens of a mid‐course change from one design to another in determining the relative value of a specific design through the set‐based design methodology. The approach considers and plans parallel (redundant) development of alternative designs with progressive selection of options, including time‐versus‐cost tradeoffs and the impact change‐costs. The approach includes a framework of the development process addressing design and integration lead‐times, their relationship to the time‐order of design decisions, and the time‐dependent burden of design changes. We also compare set‐based and single point design schemes.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review and Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Review and Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%