A Mathematical Model for optimization of Product Development Process

Authors

Abstract

Product development process has its specific complexity. This complexity can also be due to overlapping and dependent relationships (coupling) amongst activities in a product development process. On one hand overlapping may reduce duration of a project on the other, it engenders rework risk. In addition, coupled activities are another reason for rework risk too. This iteration and rework caused by overlapping and coupling of activities results in increasing time and cost of the project. In this article, a mathematical model is presented to study the characteristics of the product development process and also to balance the duration and cost of it. According to the overlapping and the amount of dependent relationships among activities, four types of time models have been formulated. Furthermore to verify the process, the model has been implemented in MATLAB and an example has been solved. It is observed that the proposed model is easily able to calculate the time and cost of the process in all four types.

Keywords

References

1-      
[1]            Brown, S., K. Eisenhardt. )1995). Product Development: Past Research, Present Findings, and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review 20(2) 343-378.
[2]            Wind, J., V. Mahajan. (1997). Issues and Opportunities in New Product Development: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Marketing Research 34 (Feb) 1-12.
[3]            Finger, S., J. Dixon. (1989). A Review of Research in Mechanical Engineering Design: Part I: Descriptive, Prescriptive, and Computer-Based Models of Design Processes. Res. Eng. Design 1(1) 51-67.
[4]            Smith, R.P., J. Morrow. (1999). Product Development Process Modeling," Des. Studies 20 237 261.
[5]            Krishnan, V., K. Ulrich. (2001). Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature. Management Science 47(1) 1-21.
[6]            Zhang HM, Wang HW, Chen D, Zacharewicz G. (2010). A model-driven approach to multidisciplinary collaborative simulation for virtual product development. Adv Eng Inform 24(2):167–79.
[7]            Wang T, Guo S, Sarker BR, Li Y. (2012). Process planning for collaborative product development with CD-DSM in optoelectronic enterprises. Adv Eng Inform 26(2):280–91.
[8]            Yang Y, Zhang J, Wan L, Chen L. (2006). Internet-based collaborative product development chain for networked product development. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 28(7–8):845–53.
[9]            Krishnan V, Eppinger SD, Whitney DE. (1997). A model-based framework to overlap product development activities. Manage Sci 43(4):437–51.
[10]         Browning TR, Eppinger SD. (2002). Modeling impacts of process architecture on cost and schedule risk in product development. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 49(4):428–42.
[11]         Smith RP, Eppinger SD. (1997). Identifying controlling features of engineering design iteration. Manage Sci 43(3):276–93.
[12]         Wang T, Guo S, Liu Y. (2013). Pareto process optimization of product development project using bi-objective hybrid genetic algorithm. Advances in Engineering Software 65:12-22
[13]         Tripathy A, Eppinger SD. (2011). Organizing global product development for complex engineered systems. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 58(3):510–29.
[14]         KusĖ˜ar J, Duhovnik Je, Grum J, Starbek M. (2004). How to reduce new product development time. Robot Comput-Int Manuf 20(1):1–15.
[15]         Smith PG, Reinertsen DG. (1995). Developing Products in Half the Time. New York, USA: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
[16]         Moatari Kazerouni A, Achiche S, Hisarciklilar O, Thomson V. (2011). Influence of the time perspective on new product development success indicators. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on engineering design Denmark. p. 40–51.
[17]         Tatikonda MV, Rosenthal SR. (2000). Technology novelty, project complexity, and product development project execution success: a deeper look at task uncertainty in product innovation. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 47(1):74–87.
[18]         Ahmadi R, Roemer TA, Wang RH. (2001). Structuring product development processes. Eur J Oper Res 130(3):539–58.
[19]         Jun H, Park J, Suh H. (2006). Lead time estimation method for complex product development process. Concurr Eng 14(4):313–28.
[20]         Dragut A, Bertrand J. (2008). A representation model for the solving-time distribution of a set of design tasks in new product development (NPD). Eur J Oper Res 189(3):1217–33.
[21]         Yan HS, Wang B, Xu D, Wang Z. (2010). Computing completion time and optimal scheduling of design activities in concurrent product development process. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cyber A 40(1):76–89.
[22]         Tu YL, Xie SQ, Fung RYK. (2007). Product development cost estimation in mass customization. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 54(1):29–42.
[23]         Shehab EM, Abdalla HS. (2001). Manufacturing cost modelling for concurrent product development. Robot Comput-Int Manuf 17(4):341–53.
[24]         Yang Q, Zhang XF, Yao T. (2012). An overlapping-based process model for managing schedule and cost risk in product development. Concurr Eng-Res A 20(1):3–17.
[25]         Lin J, Qian YJ, Cui WT, Miao ZL. (2010). Overlapping and communication policies in product development. Eur J Oper Res 201(3):737–50.
[26]         Roemer TA, Ahmadi R, Wang RH. (2000). Time-cost trade-offs in overlapped product development. Oper Res 48(6):858–65.
[27]         Savin S, Terwiesch C. (2005). Optimal product launch times in a duopoly: balancing life-cycle revenues with product cost. Oper Res 53(1):26–47.
[28]         Wang, J, Lin, Y. (2009). An overlapping process model to assess schedule risk for new product development. Computers & Industrial Engineering 57: 460–474.
Journal of Modeling in Engineering
Volume 14, Issue 45
June 2016
Pages 111-121

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 January 2017
  • Revise Date: 16 September 2017
  • Accept Date: 28 January 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics