Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:56:38.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Supporting the Modelling and Managing of Relations in the Design Platform

Part of: Product Architecture and Modularization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Samuel André  and
Fredrik Elgh

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A common strategy which has in many cases become a necessity in product developing companies is to apply platform thinking to some extent. Engineer-to-order (ETO) companies are firms that need to invest in a significant amount engineering time in each product ordered by customers. These companies have in the past been known to not be fully able to apply platform strategies. An area of concern to product development is the design and manufacture of machine tools aimed for part manufacturing which is a large investment and a critical bottle neck. As a response to these challenges the design platform (DP) concept was developed which is founded on the re-use of company assets. This paper aims to investigate the application of the DP in a company designing and producing unique high-pressure die casting tools for different applications and customers. To enable companies of this character to utilize platform thinking to a higher degree and thus increase the efficiency in product development, a focus is set on modelling and managing relations within the DP. In addition, a PDM system setup is proposed together with an integrated support application for the realisation in industry.

Keywords

Platform strategiesHigh Pressure Die CastingProduct Lifecycle Management (PLM)Product modelling/modelsEngineer-to-Order
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 3001 - 3010
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

André, S. and Elgh, F. (2018), “Modeling of transdisciplinary engineering assets using the design platform approach for improved customization ability”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 38, pp. 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2018.07.006Google Scholar
André, S., Elgh, F., Johansson, J. and Stolt, R. (2017), “The design platform–a coherent platform description of heterogeneous design assets for suppliers of highly customised systems”, Journal of Engineering Design, pp. 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2017.1376244Google Scholar
Blessing, L. T. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009), DRM, a design research methodology: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1_2Google Scholar
Bührig-Polaczek, A., Behr, M., Hopmann, C., Schuh, G., Aryobsei, A., Elgeti, S. and Schmidt, , F. (2017), “Mold-Based Production Systems”, In Integrative Production Technology. Springer. (pp. 113–174) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47452-6_3Google Scholar
Duffy, A. and Andreasen, M. (1995), “Enhancing the evolution of design science”, Proceedings of ICED 95: International Conference on Engineering Design, Praha, Czechoslovakia August 22-24, 1995.Google Scholar
Guerrero, H. H. (1985), “The effect of various production strategies on product structures with commonality”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-6963(85)90021-xGoogle Scholar
Halman, J. I. M., Hofer, A. P. and Vuuren, W. V. (2003), “Platform-driven development of product families - Linking theory with practice”, Journal of product innovation management, pp. 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.2002007Google Scholar
McGrath, M. E. (1995), “Product strategy for high-technology companies”, Irwin professional publishing, New York. https://doi.org/10.1108/ws.2001.07950dae.002Google Scholar
Meyer, M. H. and Lehnerd, A. P. (1997), “The power of product platforms - Building value and cost leadership”, The Free Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0737-6782(97)80157-9Google Scholar
Queudeville, Y., Ivanov, T., Vroomen, U., Bührig-Polaczek, A., Elgeti, S., Probst, M. and Nussbaum, , C. (2011), “Design methodology for modular tools”, Production Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 351–358.Google Scholar
Queudeville, Y., Vroomen, U. and Bührig-Polaczek, A. (2014), “Modularization methodology for high pressure die casting dies”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 71 No. 9-12, pp. 1677–1686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5582-9Google Scholar
Robertson, D. and Ulrich, K. (1998), “Planning product platforms”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
Sawhney, M. S. (1998), “Leveraged high-variety strategies: from portfolio thinking to platform thinking”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 26 No. 1, p. 54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070398261006Google Scholar
Stolt, R., André, S. and Elgh, F. (2018), “Introducing Inserts for Die Casting Manufactured by Selective Laser Sintering”, Procedia Manufacturing, Vol. 17, pp. 309–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.051Google Scholar
Vollmar, J. and Gepp, M. (2015), “Framework for standardization programs in the Engineer-To-Order industry”, Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Portland, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1109/picmet.2015.7273186Google Scholar