Abstract
Product family design (PFD) has been well recognized as an effective means to satisfy diverse market niches while maintaining the economies of scale and scope. PFD essentially entails a configuration problem by “combination," where combinatorial explosion always occurs and is known to be mathematically intractable or NP-hard. Although genetic algorithms (GAs) have been proven to excel in solving combinatorial optimization problems, it is difficult to adopt the traditional GA to deal with the complex data and interrelationships inherent in the PFD problem. This paper proposes a generic genetic algorithm (GGA) for PFD. A generic encoding scheme is developed to adapt to diverse PFD scenarios. A hybrid constraint-handling strategy is proposed to handle complex and distinguishing constraints at different stages along the evolutionary process. The design and implementation procedures of the GGA are discussed in detail. An application of the proposed GGA to motor family design is reported. The GGA efficiency is also tested through efficiency analysis in terms of the probability of generating feasible solutions, as well as through analysis of the GGA complexity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Balakrishnan P.V.S., & Jacob V.S. (1996). Genetic algorithms for product design. Management Science, 42(1): 1105–1117
Baldwin C.Y., & Clark K.B. (2000). Design rules: The Power of Modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Bohm M.R., & Stone R.B. (2004). Representing functionality to support reuse: Conceptual and supporting functions, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC2004-57693, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Chen L., & Lin L. (2002). Optimization of product configuration design using functional requirements and constraints. Research in Engineering Design, 13(3): 167–182
Corbett B., & Rosen D.W. (2004). A configuration design based method for platform commonization for product families. AIEDAM, 18(1): 21–39
De Weck, O. L., Suh, E. S., & Chang, D. (2003). Product family and platform portfolio optimization, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC03/DAC-48721, Chicago, IL.
Dobson, G., & Yano, C. A. (1994). Product line and technology selection with shared manufacturing and engineering design resources, Paper provided by Rochester, Business—Center for Manufacturing and Operations Management in its paper series with number (RePEc:fth:robuma:95-01), http://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/robuma/95-01.html.
Du X., Jiao J., & Tseng M.M. (2001). Architecture of product family: fundamentals and methodology, Concurrent Engineering: Research and Application, 9(4): 309–325
Erlandsson, A., Erixon, G., & Ostgren, B. (1992). Product modules—the link between QFD and DFA? Newport, RI: The International Forum on Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly.
Gen M., & Cheng R.W. (1997). Genetic algorithms & engineering design. New York: John Wiley and Sons
Gen M., & Cheng R.W. (2000). Genetic algorithm and engineering optimization. New York, John Wiley and Sons
Green P.E., & Krieger A.M. (1996). Individualized hybrid models for conjoint analysis. Management Science, 42(6): 850–867
Holland J.H. (1992). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Jiao J., & Tseng M.M. (1999). A pragmatic approach to product costing based on standard time estimation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(7): 738–755
Jiao J., Tseng M.M., Duffy V.G., & Lin F. (1998). Product family modeling for mass customization. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 35(3–4): 495–498
Jiao J., Tseng M.M., Ma Q., & Zou Y. (2000). Generic bill of materials and operations for high-variety production management. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Application, 8(4): 297–322
Jiao J., & Zhang Y. (2005). Product portfolio planning with customer-engineering interaction. IIE Transactions, 37(9): 801–814
Kamrani A.K., & Gonzalez R. (2003). A genetic algorithm-based solution methodology for modular design. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 14(6): 599–616
Kota S., Sethuraman K., & Miller R. (2000). A metric for evaluating design commonality in product families. Journal of Mechanical Design, 122(4): 403–410
Männistö, T. (2000). A Conceptual Modeling Approach to Product Families and their Evolution, Ph.D thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica, Mathematics and Computing Series, No. 106, Espoo.
McKay A., Erens F., & Bloor M.S. (1996). Relating product definition and product variety. Research in Engineering Design, 8(2):63–80
Meyer, M., & Utterback, J. (1993). The product family and the dynamics of core capability. Sloan Management Review (pp. 29–47), Spring.
Michalek J.J., Feinberg F.M., & Papalambros P.Y. (2005). Linking marketing and engineering product design decisions via analytical target cascading. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1): 42–62
Morgan L.O., Daniels R.L., & Kouvelis P. (2001). Marketing/Manufacturing tradeoffs in product line management. IIE Transactions, 33(11): 949–962
Otto, K., Gonzalez-Zugasti, J., & Dahmus, J. (2000). Modular product architecture, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC2000/DTM-4565, Baltimore, MD.
Qiu S.L., Fok S.C., Chen C.H., & Xu S. (2002). Conceptual design using evolutionary strategy. Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 20, 683–691
Ramdas K., & Sawhney M.S. (2001). A cross-functional approach to evaluating multiple line extensions for assembled products. Management Science, 47(1): 22–36
Salhieh S.M., & Kamrani A.K. (1999). Macro level product development using design for modularity. Robotics and Computer Integrated-Manufacturing, 15(11): 319–329
Sawhney M.S. (1998). Leveraged high-variety strategies: from portfolio thinking to platform thinking. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(1): 54–61
Shocker A.D., & Srinivasan V. (1979). Multiattribute approaches for product concept evaluation and generation: A critical review. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(2): 159–180
Simpson T.W., & D’Souza B. (2004). Assessing variable levels of platform commonality within a product family using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, 12(2): 119–130
Simpson T.W., Siddique Z., & Jiao J. (2005). Product platform and product family design: Methods and applications. New York, Springer
Steiner, W. J., & Hruschka, H. (2002). A probabilistic one-step approach to the optimal product line design problem using conjoint and cost data, Review of Marketing Science Working Papers, 1(4): Working Paper 4, http://www.bepress.com/roms/vol1/iss4/paper4.
Sudharshan D., May J.H., & Shocker A.D. (1987). A simulation comparison of methods for new product location. Marketing Science, 6(2): 182–201
Sundgren N. (1999). Introducing interface management in product family development. Journal of Production Innovation Management, 16(1): 40–51
Tarasewich P., & Nair S.K. (2001). Designer-moderated product design. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48(2): 175–188
Tiihonen J., Lehtonen T., Soininen T., Pulkkinen A., Sulonen R., & Riitahuhta A. (1998). Modeling configurable product families The 4th WDK Workshop on Product Structuring. Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology
Ulrich K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research Policy, 24(3): 419–440
Wortmann J.C., Muntslag D.R., & Timmermans P.J.M. (1997). Customer driven manufacturing. London, Chapman & Hall
Yu J.S., Gonzalez-Zugasti J.P., & Otto K.N. (1999). Product architecture definition based upon customer demands. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 121(3): 329–335
Zhang J., Wang Q., Wan L., & Zhong Y. (2005). Configuration-oriented product modeling and knowledge for made-to-order manufacturing enterprises. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 25(1–2): 41–52
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
(Roger) Jiao, J., Zhang, Y. & Wang, Y. A generic genetic algorithm for product family design. J Intell Manuf 18, 233–247 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-007-0019-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-007-0019-7