Manufacturing system design with optimal diagnosability

Liu, J. P.; Luo, Zhijun; Chu, LK; Chen, Y. L.

doi:10.1080/00207540310001645147

Cited by 16 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bounded to the scope of the first research stream, currently the authors intend to make a study to develop a holistic performance measurement system of reconfigurability as a capability. Yu et al (2003) X X 12 Abdi and Labib (2004a) X X X 13 Liu et al (2004) X 14 Pérez et al (2004) X X X X X 15 Setchi and Lagos (2004) X X X X X 16 Tang and Qiu (2004) X…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework to manage reconfigurability in manufacturing

Napoleone

Pozzetti

Macchi

2018

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, manufacturing firms are dealing with the unpredictability of market requirements and the frequent changes induced by technological innovation. For this reason, firms are more and more addressing the need to be responsive at an affordable cost. To do so, they are required to develop a capability called reconfigurability. This paper is a review of the existing literature because the current need makes interesting to reflect on the state of the art of reconfigurability as a concept. This reflection has led to focus on reconfigurability characteristics for both their relevance and their relationships with managerial decisions in manufacturing. To this end, a framework has been proposed. It is based on system lifecycle and production levels. These two elements have been deduced from literature and identified as relevant dimensions for decision making.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework to manage reconfigurability in manufacturing

Napoleone

Pozzetti

Macchi

2018

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…the period for decisions to maintain a stable production state -, diagnosability is utilized. It allows (i) quick identification of the sources of quality and reliability problems (Mehrabi, Ulsoy, and Koren 2000;Liu et al 2004) and (ii) quick correction of operational problems (Koren and Shpitalni 2010;Gumasta et al 2011;Singh, Khilwani, and Tiwari 2007) within the manufacturing system;…”

Section: Reconfigurability: a Strategic Capabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

How the technologies underlying cyber-physical systems support the reconfigurability capability in manufacturing: a literature review

Napoleone

Negri

Macchi

et al. 2022

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How the Technologies underlying Cyber-Physical Systems support the Reconfigurability Capability in Manufacturing. A Literature Review Nowadays, manufacturing firms need the reconfigurability capability to be responsive in the current context characterized by unpredictable and frequent market changes and the reduction of product life cycle. Despite the relevance of the subject, a challenge for practitioners is the development of a strategy aimed to increase the level of reconfigurability with long-term goals of customization and responsiveness. Moreover, traditional manufacturing paradigms are disrupted by the transformation of manufacturing systems in Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), thus introducing innovative means also to increase the level of reconfigurability in manufacturing systems. This study investigates what technologies underlying CPS support the reconfigurability capability and how these support the reconfigurability along system life cycle. Thus, the technologies underlying CPS are classified in seven categories and it is shown how they enable the sequence of utilization of the reconfigurability characteristics (modularity, integrability, diagnosability, scalability, convertibility and customization) along system life cycle. The results of the study can guide practitioners in developing reconfigurability as strategic capability. Moreover, different directions for future research can be considered, as discussed in the conclusions.

show abstract

“…RMS diagnosability (D) is defined as the ability to make a diagnosis rapidly in order to reduce the ramp-up time after reconfiguration [28], i.e., the ability of an RMS to detect the ultimate cause of product quality defects and make adjustments to achieve the objective of reducing rampup time. The length of the ramp-up time depends on the RMS diagnosability, and an excessively long ramp-up time would lower the RMS responsiveness, influencing the implementation of reconfiguration schemes.…”

Section: Quantitative Model For Rms Diagnosabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconfiguration schemes evaluation based on preference ranking of key characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing systems

Wang

Huang

Yan

et al. 2016

Int J Adv Manuf Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To address the problem of how to build quantitative evaluation index models that reflect the essential characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) and rank alternative reconfiguration schemes, which possess both advantages and disadvantages, an evaluation method based on the preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) is proposed. Based on a consideration of the reconfiguration of the reconfigurable machine components and manufacturing cells, quantitative models of the key characteristics of an RMS (scalability, convertibility, diagnosability, modularity, integrability, and customization) are established, after which the quantitative models are used as the basis for constructing an RMS evaluation index system. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to assign the weights for these indices. During the evaluation process, PROMETHEE I is first applied to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative scheme. Then, PROMETHEE II is adopted to analyze the net advantages of the schemes. Finally, all of the alternative configurations are ranked according to the analysis results above. The workshop of an institute that has both research and production capabilities was used as an example to validate the effectiveness and practicability of the proposed method. The example contains 10 alternative reconfiguration schemes, and each scheme consists of six evaluation indices. The computation result shows that quantitative models of six key RMS characteristics are equipped with the ability of quantitative description of the RMS reconfiguration scheme, which gives intuitive decision-making information combined with PROMETHEE, including advantage and disadvantage between alternative schemes, for a decision-maker to select the satisfactory configuration. In addition, only a 7.2 % data loss during the evaluation data processing means the rationality of the selected evaluation index and evaluation algorithm.

show abstract

Manufacturing system design with optimal diagnosability

Cited by 16 publications

References 15 publications

A framework to manage reconfigurability in manufacturing

A framework to manage reconfigurability in manufacturing

How the technologies underlying cyber-physical systems support the reconfigurability capability in manufacturing: a literature review

Reconfiguration schemes evaluation based on preference ranking of key characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About