Modelling production system architectures in the early phases of product development

Abstract

This article suggests a framework for modeling a Production System Architecture (PSA) in the early phases of product development. The challenge in these phases is that the products to be produced are not completely defined and yet decisions need to be made early in the process on what investments are needed and appropriate to enable determination of obtainable product quality.In order to meet this challenge, it is suggested that a visual modeling framework be adopted that clarifies which product and production features are known at a specific time of the project and which features will be worked on-leading to an improved basis for prioritizing activities in the project.Requirements for the contents of the framework are presented and literature on production and system models is reviewed. The PSA modeling framework is founded on methods and approaches in literature and adjusted to fit the modeling requirements of a PSA at an early phase of development. The PSA models capture and describe the structure, capabilities and expansions of the PSA under development.The PSA modeling framework is tested in a case study and the results indicate that the modeling process facilitates identification of critical factors of the PSA, that the PSA models capture and describe the structure, capabilities, and expansions of a PSA under development, and that the PSA models can facilitate dialogue on the PSA between heterogeneous stakeholder groups. Draft page 2Keywords: Production modeling, system modeling, production architecture, production system architecture, production modeling, product architecture, concurrent engineering. IntroductionWhen developing a Production System Architecture (PSA), methods exist for describing the product architecture [1][2][3]; however, when developing a product architecture in parallel with developing new products during technology development, the definition of the products and the production system that existing approaches in literature rely on, are not complete.To support the development of the production system despite the incomplete definition of both the products and the production system, two approaches may be valuable: (i) Graphically modelling the incompletely defined PSA [4]. (ii) Developing the PSA concurrently with the development of the product architecture that will define the products to be produced by the PSA [5][6][7][8]. To accomplish this, however, we need a modelling approach which clearly shows which parts of the product and production system architecture have been defined and stabilized, and which parts are still under development.Concurrent development of product architecture and a PSA during technology development is illustrated in Figure 1. The production task definition [9] in the early phases includes external factors leading to crucial functional requirements to the production system. In technology developmentcovering Technology Readiness Levels 1-5 [10]-the product design, product performance, required and obtainable product quality, production processes, and produ...

SLAE–CPS: Smart Lean Automation Engine Enabled by Cyber-Physical Systems Technologies

“…Architecture is described variously as an inherent aspect of systems or a description of the key characteristics of system composition, functionality, and behavior, and the rules and guidelines governing the design [ 21 ]. A system’s architecture differs from its architecture description.…”

Using business critical design rules to frame new architecture introduction in multi-architecture portfolios

“…Like the product domain, a manufacturing system can be seen as a structural combination of subsystems, together performing a complex function (Mesa et al 2014;Jepsen 2014;Gudlaugsson et al 2016). Both systems exhibit characteristics as a result of design choices, and the value-adding processes performed by the manufacturing system can be seen as corresponding to the functions of a product (Claesson 2006).…”

Categorizing modularization strategies to achieve various objectives of building investments

“…Similarly, a modularization strategy should consist of these dimensions, specifying the use of modular product architecture. Decisions about the production strategy should be made in parallel with those about modular product architecture (Guðlaugsson et al 2016 and industrialized building (Jonsson and Rudberg 2014). Therefore, for the purpose of this research, the classification provides a fruitful but still rather narrow approach to modularization strategies as they focus mostly on process issues, such as implications for project operations (Gosling et al 2016), while neglecting the organization of production and the roles of different stakeholders in the building investment.…”