In this paper, we present the importance of using a single criterion approach to Decision-Based Design (DBD) by examining the limitations of multicriteria approaches. We propose in this paper an approach to DBD as an enhancement to Hazelrigg’s DBD framework that utilizes the economic benefit to the producer as the single criterion in alternative selection. The technique of Discrete Choice Analysis (DCA) is introduced for constructing a product demand model, which is crucial for the evaluation of both profit and production cost. An academic universal motor design problem illustrates the proposed DBD approach. It appears that DBD, when applied correctly, is capable of unambiguously selecting the preferred alternative in a rigorous manner. Open research issues related to implementing the DBD approach are raised. The focus of our study is on demonstrating the approach rather than the design results per se.
Issue Section:
Technical Papers
1.
Chen
, W.
, Lewis
, K. E.
, and Schmidt
, L.
, 2000
, “Decision-Based Design: An Emerging Design Perspective
,” Engineering Valuation & Cost Analysis
, special edition on “Decision-Based Design: Status & Promise,” 3
(2/3
), pp. 57
–66
.2.
Hazelrigg
, G. A.
, 1998
, “A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 120
, pp. 653
–658
.3.
Thurston, D. L., 1999, “Real and Perceived Limitations to Decision Based Design,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC99/DTM-8750, Las Vegas NV, September.
4.
Gu, X., Renaud, J. E., Ashe, L. M., Batill, S. M., Budhiraja, A. S., and Krajewski, L. J., 2000, “Decision-Based Collaborative Optimization under Uncertainty,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DAC-14297, Baltimore MD, September.
5.
Li, H., and Azarm, S., 2000, “Product Design Selection under Uncertainty and with Competitive Advantage,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DAC-14234, Baltimore MD.
6.
Tang
, X.
, and Krishnamurty
, S.
, 2000
, “On Decision Model Development in Engineering Design
,” Engineering Valuation & Cost Analysis
, special edition on “Decision-Based Design: Status & Promise,” 3
(2/3
), pp. 131
–150
.7.
Callaghan, A. R., and Lewis, K. E., 2000, “A 2-Phase Aspiration-Level and Utility Theory Approach to Large Scale Design,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DTM-14569, Baltimore MD, September.
8.
Scott
, M. J.
, and Antonsson
, E. K.
, 1999
, “Arrow’s Theorem and Engineering Design Decision-making
,” Res. Eng. Des.
, 11
(4
), pp. 218
–228
, Springer.9.
Messac
, A.
, 1996
, “Physical Programming: Effective Optimization for Computational Design
,” IAA J.
, 34
(1
), pp. 149
–158
.10.
Wang, K-L., and Jin, Y., 2000, “Managing Dependencies for Collaborative Design,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DTM-14552, Baltimore MD, September.
11.
Kim, H. M., Michelena, N. F. Jiang, T., and Papalambros, P. Y., 2000, “Target Cascading in Optimal System Design,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DAC-14265, Baltimore MD, September.
12.
Roser, C., and Kazmer, D., 2000, “Flexible Design Methodology,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DFM-14016, Baltimore MD, September.
13.
Marston
, M.
, Allen
, J.
, and Mistree
, F.
, 2000
, “The Decision Support Problem Technique: Integrating Descriptive and Normative Approaches in Decision Based Design
,” Engineering Valuation & Cost Analysis
, special edition on “Decision-Based Design: Status & Promise,” 3
(2/3
), pp. 107
–130
.14.
Allen
, B.
, 2000
, “A Toolkit for Decision-Based Design Theory
,” Engineering Valuation & Cost Analysis
, special edition on “Decision-Based Design: Status & Promise,” 3
(2/3
), pp. 85
–106
.15.
Shah, J. J., and Wright, P. K., 2000, “Developing Theoretical Foundations of DfM,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DFM-14015, Baltimore MD, September.
16.
Wood, W., 2000, “Quantifying Design Freedom in Decision-Based Conceptual Design,” ASME Design Technical Conference, DETC2000/DTM-14577, Baltimore MD, September.
17.
Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S. R., 1985, Discrete Choice Analysis, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
18.
Clausing, D., 1994, Total Quality Development, ASME Press, New York.
19.
Otto, K. N., and Wood, K., 2000, Product Design: Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
20.
Phadke, M. S., 1989, Quality Engineering using Robust Design, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
21.
Suh, N. P., 1990, The Principles of Design, Oxford University Press, New York.
22.
Saari
, D. G.
, 2000
, “Mathematical Structure of Voting Paradoxes. I; Pairwise Vote. II; Positional Voting
,” Economic Theory
, 15
, pp. 1
–103
.23.
Arrow, K. J., and Raynaud, H., 1986, Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
24.
Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H., 1976, Decisions with Multiple Objectives, Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
25.
Chen
, W.
, Wiecek
, M.
, and Zhang
, J.
, 1999
, “Quality Utility: A Compromise Programming Approach to Robust Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 121
(2
), pp. 179
–187
.26.
Green, P. E., and Wind, Y., 1975, “New Ways to Measure Consumer Judgments,” Harvard Business Review.
27.
Green, P. E., and Srinivasan, V., 1990, “Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice,” Journal of Marketing.
28.
Thurston
, D. L.
, and Liu
, T.
, 1991
, “Design Evaluation of Multiple Attributes under Uncertainty
,” Int. J. Syst. Autom.: Res. Appl.
, 1
, pp. 143
–159
.29.
Daganzo, C., 1979, Multinomial Probit, The Theory and Its Application to Demand Forecasting, Academic Press Inc., New York.
30.
Hensher, D. A., and Johnson, L. W., 1981, Applied Discrete Choice Modeling, Halsted Press, New York.
31.
Arrow, K. J., 1963, Social Choice and Individual Values, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
32.
Simpson, T. W., 1998, A Concept Exploration Method for Product Family Design, Georgia Institute of Technology.
33.
Nayak, R., Chen, W., and Simpson, T., 2000, “A Variation-Based Methodology for Product Family Design,” ASME Design Technical Conference, Paper No. DAC14264 Baltimore, MD, September 10–13.
34.
Hazelrigg, G. A., 2000, “Favorable Properties of a Design Method,” 9th Face-to-face DBD Open Workshop at 2000 NSF Design and Manufacturing Grantees Conference, Vancouver, Canada, 2000. http://dbd.eng.buffalo.edu/9th_meet/hazelrigg.pdf
35.
Hazelrigg
, G. A.
, 1999
, “An Axiomatic Framework for Engineering Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 121
, pp. 342
–347
.Copyright © 2003
by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.
