PLM system support for modular product development

Bruun, Hans Peter Lomholt; Mortensen, Niels Henrik; Harlou, Ulf; Wörösch, Michael; Proschowsky, Mikkel

doi:10.1016/j.compind.2014.10.010

Cited by 53 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bonev et al (2013) established product requirement development model for reflecting customer needs to multi-layered architecture by combining PFMP with matrix-based methods. Other tools such as interface diagram (Bruun et al, 2015) and architecture ICED19 mapping and evaluation (AME; Mortensen et al, 2016) were continuously advanced to support the overall framework for product family architecture design.…”

Section: Product Family Architecture (Cross-domain Viewpoint)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Development Architecture for Modular Products: Cross-Domain Variety Management Perspective

Oh¹,

Lim²,

Cho³

et al. 2019

Proc. Int. Conf. Eng. Des.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variety management is a cross-domain issue in product family design. In the real field, the relationships across the domains are so complex for most of the existing product families that they cannot be easily identified without proper reference architecture. This reference architecture should provide the cross- domain mapping mechanisms in an explicit manner and be able to identify the proper units for management. From this perspective of cross-domain framework, this paper introduces development architecture (DA) to describe the relationships between elements in market, design, and production domains and to give insights for the cross-domain variety management in the product development stage. DA has three parts: (1) the arrangement of elements in each domain, (2) the mapping between elements, and (3) the identification of management sets and key interfaces which are the proper units for variety management. The proposed development architecture framework is applied to the case of front chassis family of modules of an automobile.

show abstract

Section: Product Family Architecture (Cross-domain Viewpoint)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Development Architecture for Modular Products: Cross-Domain Variety Management Perspective

Oh¹,

Lim²,

Cho³

et al. 2019

Proc. Int. Conf. Eng. Des.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Integrating independent systems into an interoperable SoS is challenging . SoS integration “involves interfacing and enabling the interactions of component systems to create the needed SoS capability to accomplish a mission or business goals.” Interoperability in SoS is defined as “the ability of distinct systems to share semantically compatible information and then process and manage the information in semantically compatible ways, enabling users to perform desired tasks.” According to the literature in interface management, “ensuring interface compatibility is the process of identifying all functional and physical characteristics of interacting entities from different organizations, and ensuring that proposed changes to these characteristics are assessed and approved before implementation.” A “multidisciplinary interface represents the logical or physical relationship integrating the components” of the system …”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The interface compatibility would be ensured by “identifying all functional and physical characteristics of interacting entities from different organizations.” Creating innovative types of interactions and identifying all possible interfaces and ensuring their compatibility are crucial tasks in PSS‐SoS engineering . On account of the PSS modularity and stimulus interaction between its heterogeneous components from different systems, it becomes evident that defining interfaces is more challenging in PSS‐SoS design .…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…36 According to the literature in interface management, "ensuring interface compatibility is the process of identifying all functional and physical characteristics of interacting entities from different organizations, and ensuring that proposed changes to these characteristics are assessed and approved before implementation." 47 A "multidisciplinary interface represents the logical or physical relationship integrating the components" of the system. 16 The interface compatibility would be ensured by "identifying all functional and physical characteristics of interacting entities from different organizations."…”

Section: Interfaces Management Within Pss and Sos Paradigmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interface modeling for product‐service system integration

Maleki

Belkadi

Bonjour

et al. 2019

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Product‐service system (PSS) is proposed as a response to the increasing need for sustainable solutions. To provide PSS, companies develop a customized system interconnecting heterogeneous systems. Consequently, distinguishing and modeling the interfaces in PSS is challenging because of the heterogeneity of its tangible and intangible components and their continuous interactions. To tackle this issue, this paper presents a contribution to interface definition in PSS architecture. It aims at proposing a conceptual model supporting the definition and classification of the interfaces in PSS architecture as a system of systems. Based on systems engineering recommendations, the model defines the interfaces between subsystems and components. The application of the model is illustrated by a pragmatic use case concerning a station‐less bicycle‐sharing system.

show abstract

“…[1,2]. The complexity of handling information for a product increases the more complex and highly engineered the product is [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Product configuration system and its impact on product's life cycle complexity

Myrodia

Kristjánsdóttir

Shafiee

et al. 2016

2016 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The purpose of this paper is to identify areas throughout a product's lifecycle processes where complexity can be reduced by implementing a product configuration system (PCS). As discussed in the literature, several benefits are realized by using a PCS in terms of product and process standardization. This also leads to control and reduce of complexity both in products and processes. To this end, this research attempts to quantify and assess these benefits and is supported by empirical evidence. A case study of an engineering company is used and the results indicate significant improvements for the company in several life cycle processes.

show abstract

PLM system support for modular product development

Cited by 53 publications

References 23 publications

A Framework for Development Architecture for Modular Products: Cross-Domain Variety Management Perspective

A Framework for Development Architecture for Modular Products: Cross-Domain Variety Management Perspective

Interface modeling for product‐service system integration

Product configuration system and its impact on product's life cycle complexity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About