slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
PENN S TATE PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
PENN S TATE

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 20

PENN S TATE - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 149 Views
  • Uploaded on

Differentiation and Platform Architecting. ME 546 - Designing Product Families - IE 546. Timothy W. Simpson Professor of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering and Engineering Design The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802 phone: (814) 863-7136 email: tws8@psu.edu

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'PENN S TATE' - chipo


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Differentiation andPlatform Architecting

ME 546 - Designing Product Families - IE 546

Timothy W. Simpson

Professor of Mechanical & Industrial

Engineering and Engineering Design

The Pennsylvania State University

University Park, PA 16802

phone: (814) 863-7136

email: tws8@psu.edu

http://www.mne.psu.edu/simpson/courses/me546

PENNSTATE

© T. W. SIMPSON

planning product platforms
Planning Product Platforms
  • Robertson and Ulrich (1998) advocate a three-step approach:

1) Product plan – which products to offer when

2) Differentiation plan – how products will be differentiated

3) Commonality plan – which components/modules will be shared

Source: D. Robertson and K. Ulrich, 1998, "Planning Product Platforms," Sloan Management Review, 39(4), pp. 19-31.

commonality plan and differentiation plan
Commonality Plan and Differentiation Plan

Commonality Plan

for automotive example

Differentiation Plan

for automotive example

Source: D. Robertson and K. Ulrich, 1998, "Planning Product Platforms," Sloan Management Review, 39(4), pp. 19-31.

product family architecting
Product Family Architecting
  • Based on the commonality plan and differentiation plan, an architecture must be developed for the platform and family of products
    • If everything is the same,then nothing is differentdespite cost savings
    • If everything is different,then costs skyrocket
  • Trick: how to find the best architecture to balance the two

Source: D. Robertson and K. Ulrich, 1998, "Planning Product Platforms," Sloan Management Review, 39(4), pp. 19-31.

platform architecting
Platform Architecting
  • The platform architecture will lead to a product family with a given level of commonality and distinctiveness
    • Option A has low commonality but each product is very distinctive
    • Option B has high commonality but products lackdistinctiveness
    • Option C has a good balance ofcommonality and distinctiveness

C

A

B

commonality variety tradeoff angle
Commonality/Variety Tradeoff Angle
  • Within a given industry do companies tend to apply the same strategy: do they have the same trade-off angle, a, between commonalityand variety?
  • X. Ye & J. Gershenson(Michigan Tech) arguethat they do and havecreated the Product Family EvaluationGraph (PFEG) based on this idea to provide guidance for companiesin product family design

C

A

a

a

B

a

product family evaluation graph ye 2008
Product Family Evaluation Graph (Ye, 2008)
  • Compares alternative product families to determine which family best meets a company’s strategic goals
    • Also good for product family benchmarking
  • The tradeoff angle, a, is dictated by strategic impact factors and a company’s competitive focus

 ideal

target

 actual

 realistic

goal for

company

 target

tradeoff

strategic impact factors others
Strategic Impact Factors: Others
  • Each factor is scored and weighted:

and a is computed:

power tool case study
Power Tool Case Study

  • Imagine you are designing Delta’s new power toolset
  • The competition is existingtoolsetsmade by:

determining a for delta ideal vs actual
Determining a for Delta – Ideal vs. Actual
  • Use linear regression to correlate S and a based on competition

39.61

74.3

pfeg discussion
PFEG Discussion
  • Why the differences between estimated and actual?
  • How else could we use PFEG?
  • What do you think about the underlying assumption, i.e., companies within a given industry tend to use a similar commonality/variety strategy?
factors affecting platform architecture
Factors Affecting Platform Architecture
  • Customer requirements
  • Changing performance needs (including size, style, weight, etc.)
  • New environmental constraints (temperature, humidity, vibration, etc.)
  • New functions (due to new markets or new enabling technologies)
  • Reliability improvements
  • Reduce prices (cost reductions required)
  • Reduce amount of material
  • Change material type
  • Remove redundant components
  • Reduce assembly time
  • Use lower cost technology
  • Reduce serviceability requirements
  • Reduce serviceability time
  • Improve component manufacturing process
  • Regulations, standards, and so on
  • Changing government/industry regulations or standards
  • Competitor introduction of improved product (higher quality or lower price)
  • Obsolescence of parts

Source: Martin, M. V. and Ishii, K., 2002, "Design for Variety: Developing Standardized and Modularized Product Platform Architectures," Research in Engineering Design, 13(4), pp. 213-235.

generational variety index
Generational Variety Index
  • GVI is an indicator of the amount of redesign required for a component to meet future market requirements
  • Process for calculating GVI:

Step 1:

Determine

market &

desired life for platform

Step 3:

List expected

changes in

customer

requirements

Step 2:

Create QFD

matrix

Step 4:

Estimate

engineering

metric target

values

Step 5:

Calculate

normalized

target values

matrix

Step 6:

Create GVI

matrix

Step 7:

Calculate GVI

Source: Martin, M. V. and Ishii, K., 2002, "Design for Variety: Developing Standardized and Modularized Product Platform Architectures," Research in Engineering Design, 13(4), pp. 213-235.

what is quality function deployment qfd
What is Quality Function Deployment (QFD)?
  • Developed by Japanese in 1970’s to provide a way to propagate customer needs through product, part, and process quality requirements using a series of maps
    • House of Quality helps translate “Voice of the Customer” into specific engineering requirements

Source: J. R. Hauser and D. Clausing, 1998, "The House of Quality," Harvard Business Review, 66(3), pp. 63-73.

customer attributes engineering characteristics
Customer Attributes  Engineering Characteristics

Source: J. R. Hauser and D. Clausing, 1998, "The House of Quality," Harvard Business Review, 66(3), pp. 63-73.

house of quality hoq
House of Quality (HOQ)

Source: J. R. Hauser and D. Clausing, 1998, "The House of Quality," Harvard Business Review, 66(3), pp. 63-73.

The “roof” identifies any relationships between the Engineering Requirements

The “basement” identifies specific targets for each Engineering Requirement

generational variety index1
Generational Variety Index
  • GVI is an indicator of the amount of redesign required for a component to meet future market requirements
  • Process for calculating GVI:

Step 1:

Determine

market &

desired life for platform

Step 3:

List expected

changes in

customer

requirements

Step 2:

Create QFD

matrix

Step 4:

Estimate

engineering

metric target

values

Step 5:

Calculate

normalized

target values

matrix

Step 6:

Create GVI

matrix

Step 7:

Calculate GVI

Source: Martin, M. V. and Ishii, K., 2002, "Design for Variety: Developing Standardized and Modularized Product Platform Architectures," Research in Engineering Design, 13(4), pp. 213-235.

example of gvi computation
Example of GVI Computation
  • Consider the design of a water coolerfor current and three future markets:

Water

bottle

T

E

C

Heat

sink

Reservoir

Fan

Insulation

Power supply

Water Cooler Chassis

(side view)

Source: Martin, M. V. and Ishii, K., 2002, "Design for Variety: Developing Standardized and Modularized Product Platform Architectures," Research in Engineering Design, 13(4), pp. 213-235.

gvi matrices
GVI Matrices

Engineering Requirements

Components

QFD Matrix I

QFD Matrix II

Engineering

Requirements

Customer

Requirements

GVI Matrix

GVI Ratings

Note: Elements with higher GVI values will require most redesign for future markets; so, platform low GVI elements and embed flexibility into/for high GVI elements