Designing a family of product variants that share some components usually requires a compromise in performance relative to the individually optimized variants due to the commonality constraints. Choosing components for sharing may depend on what performance losses can be tolerated. In this article an optimal design problem is formulated to choose product components to be shared without exceeding user-specified bounds on performance. This enables the designer to control tradeoffs and obtain optimal product family designs for maximizing commonality at different levels of acceptable performance. A family of automotive body side frames is used to demonstrate the approach.

1.
Nelson
,
S. A.
,
Parkinson
,
M. B.
, and
Papalambros
,
P. Y.
, 2001, “
Multicriteria Optimization in Product Platform Design
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
1050-0472,
123
, pp.
199
204
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Las Vegas
, Nevada, 1999, Paper No. DAC-8676.
2.
Gonzalez-Zugasti
,
J. P.
,
Otto
,
K. N.
, and
Baker
,
J. D.
, 2000, “
A Method for Architecting Product Platforms With an Application to Interplanetary Mission Design
,”
Res. Eng. Des.
0934-9839,
12
, pp.
48
60
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 1998 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Atlanta
, Georgia, 1998, Paper No. DAC-5608.
3.
Simpson
,
T. W.
,
Maier
,
J. R. A.
, and
Mistree
,
F.
, 2001, “
A Product Platform Concept Exploration Method for Product Family Design
,”
Res. Eng. Des.
0934-9839,
13
, pp.
2
22
;
also appeared as “
Product Platform Design: Method and Application
,” in
Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Las Vegas
, Nevada, 1999, Paper No. DTM-8761.
4.
Messac
,
A.
,
Martinez
,
M. P.
, and
Simpson
,
T. W.
, 2002, “
Effective Product Family Design Using Physical Programming and the Product Platform Concept Exploration Method
,”
Eng. Optimiz.
0305-215X,
34
, pp.
245
261
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Baltimore
, Maryland, 2000, Paper No. DAC-14252.
5.
Conner
,
C. G.
,
De Kroon
,
J. P.
, and
Mistree
,
F.
, 1999, “
A Product Variety Tradeoff Evaluation Method for a Family of Cordless Drill Transmissions
,” in
Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
, Paper No. DAC-8625.
6.
Fellini
,
R.
,
Papalambros
,
P.
, and
Weber
,
T.
, 2000, “
Application of a Product Platform Design Process to Automotive Powertrains
,” in
Proceedings of the 8th AIAA∕NASA∕USAF∕ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization
, Paper No. AIAA-2000-4849.
7.
Kokkolaras
,
M.
,
Fellini
,
R.
,
Kim
,
H. M.
,
Michelena
,
N.
, and
Papalambros
,
P.
, 2002, “
Extension of the Target Cascading Formulation to the Design of Product Families
,”
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization
,
24
, pp.
293
301
;
also appeared as “
Target Cascading for Design of Product Families
,” in the addendum of the
Proceedings of the 4th Congress on Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization
,
Dalian
, China, 2001.
8.
Conner Seepersad
,
C.
,
Hernandez
,
G.
, and
Allen
,
J. K.
, 2000, “
A Quantitative Approach to Determining Product Platform Extent
,” in
Proceedings of the 2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
, Paper No. DAC-14288.
9.
Gonzalez-Zugasti
,
J. P.
, and
Otto
,
K. N.
, 2000, “
Modular Platform-Based Product Family Design
,” in
Proceedings of the 2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
, Paper No. DAC-14238.
10.
Fujita
,
K.
, and
Yoshida
,
H.
, 2004, “
Product Variety Optimization: Simultaneous Optimization of Module Combination and Module Attributes
,”
Concurrent Engineering: Research Applications
,
12
, pp.
105
118
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 2001 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Pittsburgh
, Pennsylvania, 2001, Paper No. DAC-21058.
11.
D’Souza
,
B. S.
, and
Simpson
,
T. W.
, 2004, “
A Genetic Algorithm Based Method for Product Family Design Optimization
,”
Eng. Optimiz.
0305-215X,
35
, pp.
1
18
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 28th ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Montreal
, Canada, 2002, Paper No. DAC-34106.
12.
Simpson
,
T. W.
, and
D’Souza
,
B.
, 2004, “
Assessing Variable Levels of Platform Commonality Within a Product Family Using a Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm
,”
Concurrent Engineering: Research Applications
,
12
, pp.
119
130
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 9th AIAA∕ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization
,
Atlanta
, Georgia, 2002, Paper No. AIAA-2002-5427.
13.
Nayak
,
R. U.
,
Chen
,
W.
, and
Simpson
,
T. W.
, 2002, “
A Variation-Based Methodology for Product Family Design
,”
Eng. Optimiz.
0305-215X,
34
, pp.
69
81
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences
,
Baltimore
, Maryland, 2000, Paper No. DAC-14264.
14.
Fellini
,
R.
,
Kokkolaras
,
M.
,
Michelena
,
N.
,
Papalambros
,
P.
,
Saitou
,
K.
,
Perez-Duarte
,
A.
, and
Fenyes
,
P. A.
, 2004, “
A Sensitivity-Based Commonality Strategy for Family Products of Mild Variation, With Application to Automotive Body Structures
,”
Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimiz.
,
27
, pp.
89
96
;
also appeared in
Proceedings of the 9th AIAA∕ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization
,
Atlanta
, Georgia, 2002, Paper No. AIAA-2002-5610.
You do not currently have access to this content.