Design Process PDF

Prioritizing plays a complex role in workprocesses, forming the vision, goals and strategies for the future. Axiomatic Design offers principles which can improve prioritizing. Therefore, Axiomatic Design was applied when creating an operational development model at one department of semiconductor manufacturing at Ericsson Microelectronics. This particular model includes all fellow-workers in the forming of vision, goals and strategies. The procedure for carrying out an operational development at Ericsson Microelectronics is presented in this paper. One of the most significant results of this procedure was a clear strategy for the future, providing convincing arguments for financial sponsors.

Since its inception, Axiomatic Design has been applied to a wide variety of both engineering and non-engineering problems in numerous disciplines. Recent theoretical developments have further expanded its ability to represent complex engineering systems. The scope of Axiomatic Design usage, however, has traditionally been limited to particular applications or projects. Axiomatic Design, however, can be most useful as a design management tool applied across an engineering organization’s Systems Engineering processes. The benefits of this approach would be both in technical areas related to the quality of the organization’s designs as well as financial benefits in the effectiveness of Axiomatic Design in decreasing the organization’s time to market and ultimately increasing customer satisfaction with more functional and more reliable products. The success of such an implementation effort requires not only integrating Axiomatic Design methodology into all aspects of engineering practice, but also measuring and tracking the organization’s capability and effectiveness in Axiomatic Design, in order to continuously refine and improve the integration efforts. To this end, an Axiomatic Design Capability Maturity Model has been developed, in order to provide a roadmap for implementation as well as coherent metrics that can be applied to determine which activities are successful and which activities may require improvement.

The following application of Axiomatic Design strives to provide a framework for the design of the organization of product development. It follows current research to expand the current theory of Axiomatic Design to complex systems, like software design [Suh (1999)] or the design of manufacturing system [Suh/Cochran/Lima (1998)], to name a few. The development of new products has always been an essential challenge as it reflects not only the evolution of the needs and wants of the customers, but also the change of the entire corporate environment and of the company itself. Implications deriving from increased competition, more fragmented and demanding markets and an acceleration of technology change have alternated the approach towards designing and managing the product development function within a corporate entity [Clark/Fujimoto (1991)]. Whereas the initial intention of Axiomatic Design is to provide a general basis for the design process, the Product Development System Decomposition (PDS) strives to model the product development organization as a whole, consisting of individual information processes and overall organizational functionality and characteristics. However, the decomposition requires to clarify the context and linkage of the PDS within the corporate system. In alignment to Axiomatic Design, the PDS is derived from top-level functional requirements (FRs) and design parameters (DPs), which reflect long-term decisions linked to corporate strategy and corporate system design. Due to the inconsistencies of current definitions it in addition appears necessary to redefine the scope and content of product development. The major FRs for the PDS are then linked to fundamental tasks within organizational theory, e.g. the provision of a sufficient level of functional expertise by differentiation and the continuing growth in productivity by aligning and adjusting the individual design activities by integration [Lawrence/Lorsch (1967), Sobek (1997)]. Beyond such high-level FRs the PDS is decomposed to a sufficient level which is necessary for a direct application and the continuous control of the product development system.

This paper describes how to use Axiomatic Design to create and plan a company-specific strategy. It couuld, for instance, be a technology strategy plan, or a business plan. It is shown that using axiomatic design during the strategic planning process achieves a tight relation between company goals (i.e. functional requirements in the design language), company strategies (i.e. design parameters), and activities (i.e. process variables). When using Axiomatic Design it is possible to do an optimization of the implementation process, i.e. action plan, by solving the mathematical system represented by the design equations. Such an optimization of the action plan minimizes iterations and speeds up the implementation process. Tasks that can be performed independently of other actions are identified and are implemented immediately without considering inputs from other process steps. The approach described is tested and verified in case studies performed within large industrial companies. The results are implemented in industrial practice.

Increased competitive pressures forced producers of goods to accelerate their product development time, minimize costs, improve organizational efficiencies, reduce product complexity, systematically design goods that are key for customer satisfaction and delights, innovative reuse of current technologies, and improve product quality. In this manuscript, we discuss the potential utilization of Axiomatic Design methods to enhance the development of Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, Parameter diagrams for robustness studies, and improve quality through robustness, testing and enhancing functional requirements specifications. A Line Pressure Regulating System example using this integrated framework will be provided.

Anyone who has been involved in the introduction of a new product knows that during the project you will pass many major crossroads, where the choice of direction will be crucial to whether or not the project will be a commercial success. It is not only about developing products – hardware, software and services – that best satisfies the market wants and needs, but also about doing the job faster and more effectively than the competition. Those who have the best competence and methods for making the right choices will take the lead, become the dominant players in the market and do the best business. The ability to understand the big picture of product development, so that in addition to making superior products companies can build efficient services around these with an optimized Life Cycle Cost (LCC), is crucial for their success. In traditional development the product is designed for a supply system or the supply system is design as a second step after the design of the product. In concurrent engineering the supply system is designed in parallel with the product. To make the right decisions a complex structure must be handle by the development team. This structure also depends on where in the product life cycle the product/supply system under development is. Axiomatic Design provides principles that can help to take these decisions based upon actual facts, facts related to many parameters. This paper focuses on the interaction between the market, product and supply system in a concurrent engineering environment. An outline of a decision model for the interaction is presented based on ongoing research within this field. By using this structured approach business managers can make the right decisions and obtain the objectives that were set up in the start of the development project within budget and time limits.

This paper presents an application of axiomatic design principles to a Noise, Vibration, and Harshness (NVH) problem in the automotive industry. An approach is illustrated for improving the robustness of an existing system design by means of the axiomatic design “decoupling” philosophy. First, identify the relationship between functional requirements (FRs) and design parameters (DPs) in terms of percentage contribution of each DP to each functional response; then put these contribution values into a design matrix and rearrange the matrix to be as triangular as possible. The obtained matrix will demonstrate the relationship between FRs and DPs and guide engineers in making design improvements.

The industrial production system is a living system that has to be managed by mean. It is our main engine of wealth where productive use of machines amplifies our effectiveness in meeting defined needs. The innovation process is the dynamic part of this system. This is the process where new products and production processes are created. Effectiveness in industrial processes requires quality and productivity. Quality is understood as meeting customers’ requirements, surprise and delight. Quality requires innovation in order to be dynamically adapted to changes in customers’ expectations. Productivity is expressing ability to meet quality with optimal use of resources. To strengthen industrial effectiveness we need a strong scientific base for innovation processes. Axiomatic criteria in the decisions belonging to innovation processes have a powerful potential to increase quality and productivity in industrial production. This paper aims at explaining why and how, furthermore addresses it a strict handling of competence.

A primary tenet of axiomatic design theory is the first axiom, stating that independence of functional requirements should be maintained throughout the design process. As the high level requirements are decomposed into greater detail, and information added to the design with the goal of creating a realizable system, the designer creates subsystems that satisfy the first axiom. While higher level decisions imply an intent that should be maintained as detail is added, this is often not done. When a system is designed that results in some unintended interactions between design elements, it is possible to achieve a non-iterative design process by rearranging the leaf level elements as a collective set. This is shown for a subset of elements from the design of a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) machine tool.

Design process starts with customer needs identification. With companies’ shifting attention from the traditional emphasis on manufacturing capabilities to customer centric, connecting customer into the design process becomes an important issue. This paper presents a systematic approach to connect customers in the product design and development process based on Axiomatic Design. It includes methodologies to capture customer needs, bring different levels of customer needs into the same level of abstraction in the form of product attributes, and prioritize those needs. Customers’ needs can then be mapped into the functional requirements (FR) domain. Based on the proposed approach, manufacturers are able to provide a platform for customers to directly participate in product design and get products that suit their personal preferences, which is termed as Design by Customer. Design by Customer provides not only an effective means to cater to individual customers’ needs but also an avenue to systematically connect customers into the design process.

Design methodologies aim to systematize the design process in order to make the practice more efficient and effective. One such methodology is Axiomatic Design. However, this design theory still has some difficulties and is not completely formalized. In this paper, the new issue for the non-linear design is suggested and the representation of system architecture by flow chart is modified accordingly.

This paper shows the method how the coupled design can be changed to uncoupled design by logical and systematic process of TRIZ. The brief concepts of Axiomatic Design and TRIZ are reviewed. The detail process of uncoupling design process is explained and also a case study is showed.

This paper proposes a formal method for usability analysis based on the axiomatic design theory. It characterizes the degree of coupling between user goals and user actions that are defined by the design of a product. Couplings between user goals and action reduce usability. As an analytical tool, this method can save time and resources by enabling an early analysis of product usability.

In the past years the word quality has been considered a synonymous of success or failure. This situation results from how firms understand quality concepts. The development of such concepts has changed the quality view as a simple way of controlling products and processes to develop a systemic vision of quality management in the whole organization. In this sense, the objective of this paper is to propose a Systemic Quality Management Model based on the precepts of Total Quality Management approach and oriented by the firm’s customer needs and attributes. This work was developed using the Axiomatic Design approach, established in function of axioms, corollaries and theorems. The objective is to improve “good practices of design” in the construction of the Systemic Quality Management Model. The proposed model was developed considering three domains in the design of a system: Customer Domain (CA), Functional Domain (FR) and Physical Domain (DP). It was also developed the hierarchy diagram of the FRs and DPs, as well as the functional requirements and design parameters decomposition, pointing out each level of the hierarchy diagram the design equations, steps and leaves that were obtained for the related elements. The model also includes the entire design matrix and module-junction diagram that shows the hierarchical structure of modules. Finally, some conclusions were drawn considering the benefits and constraints faced with the proposed development.

A primary “must” of axiomatic design theory is the first axiom, stating that independence of functional requirements should be maintained throughout the design process. Para-complete logics, such as Fuzzy logic, give us a powerful instrument to express “mathematical/functional” interaction between FRs and DPs, especially when this interaction cannot be expressed by a precise “mathematical function (i.e. the case in which we want to express several data from VOC (Voice of Customer) investigation, building an FR for a defined design performance), and so can be codified only using “Linguistic variables”.

Proceedings of the Second World Conference on Integrated Design and Process Technology (IDPT-Vol. 3), Society for Design and Process Science, Austin, TX, pp. 97-104, Dec. 1-4, 1996.
The contribution of this paper is a new tool for modeling product development processes. Currently there are two types of process models: ones that are so broad that they describe the activities of any designer but provide no assistance, and ones that are so restrictive that they cannot be an accurate description of actual design practice. The challenge is to create a general model from which the designer can structure a specific implementation of the design process. The general model must be flexible to cover all instances of the design process, yet it must contain enough specifics to be useful in guiding the designer. This apparent contradiction was solved by segmenting the design process into generic activities, with explicit relationships between them, from which the designer can structure a unique design process. Moreover, the activities are specific enough to support the designer in selecting design tools and methods for each activity, to identify clearly decision points, and to create a good information infrastructure for the process. The paper contains an overview and an analysis of existing design process models, a new proposed tool for modeling product development processes, and detailed descriptions of the activities in this model.

Software is playing an increasingly important role in manufacturing. Many manufacturing firms have problems with software development. Software engineering is still labor-intensive and prone to errors. Industrial firms are under pressure to shorten the lead-time required in introducing new software, increase the reliability of their software, and increase their market share. Software must be designed correctly from the beginning to end. With this end in mind, axiomatic design theory has been applied to software design. This paper presents how the combination of axiomatic design has been combined with the object-oriented programming method to create a large software system.

M.S. Dissertation, Texas Tech University, Dec. 2005.
In this research, different design methodologies and system/product development lifecycle models are studied. A new product development lifecycle model, the Axiomatic Product Development Lifecycle (APDL) model, with a robust structure to develop and capture the development lifecycle knowledge, is proposed and its use is discussed. The proposed approach is based on the AD method developed by Suh (1991); hence it inherits the benefits of applying the Axiomatic Design to product development. The Axiomatic Design method, in this research, is extended to cover the whole product development lifecycle including the test domain and new domain characteristic vectors are introduced such as the input constraint and system component vectors. The APDL model also provides more guidance than the AD method during the customer need mapping and during the design decomposition process.

Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry, November 2006
Using recognized methodologies to develop design control procedures can ensure compliance and lead to business excellence.

Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden, Nov 1996.
The purpose of thesis is to initiate the effort to establish the information infrastructure for axiomatic design [SUH90]. The work is primarily focused on answering the following questions: What are sources of information that the designer can use during the axiomatic design process? How can information obtained during the design process be of benefit during later stages of the design object’s life cycle? A new information framework was developed to answer the first question, and an extension of the theory presented by Suh in [SUH90] was developed to answer the second question. It was shown that this framework applies not only to engineering problems, but also to problems outside the field of engineering. Furthermore, the framework and theory that was developed can most likely be fully implemented in a computerized information system. Based on the information framework, it was demonstrated how other design methods (such as Altshuller’s theory of inventive problem solving [ALTS88]) can be used to enhance the designers performance within the framework.