Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.15480/882.1841
This item is licensed with a CreativeCommons licence by-nc-nd/4.0
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWindheim, Marc-
dc.contributor.authorGebhardt, Nicolas-
dc.contributor.authorKrause, Dieter-
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-12T08:59:53Z-
dc.date.available2018-11-12T08:59:53Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationProcedia CIRP (70): 380-385 (2018)de_DE
dc.identifier.issn2212-8271de_DE
dc.identifier.urihttp://tubdok.tub.tuhh.de/handle/11420/1844-
dc.description.abstractModular product family design is a strong strategy to offer a wide range of product variants economically. Many methods for designing and assessing modular product concepts are provided in literature - deciding between modular product structure alternatives, however, is still a challenging task, because of the many and unforeseeable effects on all product life-phases in combination with the high number of involved stakeholders. In addition, modularity alternatives cause multi-dimensional trade-offs that make the decision process a complex challenge. Current approaches to decide the product modularization tend to focus on the prediction of either internal or external consequences. Furthermore, they rarely consider the prevalent situation of a company’s internal tier structure with different organizational sections, responsible for different module design and supply. In this paper, we investigate modularity decision problems and introduce an innovative framework and modularity decision dashboard, considering internal and external variety evaluation, conflicting objectives of stakeholders as well as company-internal tier structures of component, module and product suppliers. The approach builds on the integrated PKT-approach for developing modular product families, recent findings in complexity cost evaluation, effects of modularization and modularity decision problems. An industrial application at a modularization strategy project in an international powertool company is presented and proves basic validity of the framework and the process model. The results of the study demonstrate how an applicable modularity decision dashboard can facilitate cooperative decision-making and leads to a balanced variety for the electromotor module portfolio in an industrial environment.en
dc.language.isoende_DE
dc.publisherElsevierde_DE
dc.relation.ispartofProcedia CIRPde_DE
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess-
dc.subject.ddc600: Technikde_DE
dc.titleTowards a decision-making framework for multi-criteria product modularization in cooperative environmentsde_DE
dc.typeArticlede_DE
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:gbv:830-882.023232-
dc.identifier.doi10.15480/882.1841-
dc.type.diniarticle-
dc.subject.ddccode600-
dcterms.DCMITypeText-
tuhh.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:gbv:830-882.023232de_DE
tuhh.oai.showtrue-
dc.identifier.hdl11420/1844-
tuhh.abstract.englishModular product family design is a strong strategy to offer a wide range of product variants economically. Many methods for designing and assessing modular product concepts are provided in literature - deciding between modular product structure alternatives, however, is still a challenging task, because of the many and unforeseeable effects on all product life-phases in combination with the high number of involved stakeholders. In addition, modularity alternatives cause multi-dimensional trade-offs that make the decision process a complex challenge. Current approaches to decide the product modularization tend to focus on the prediction of either internal or external consequences. Furthermore, they rarely consider the prevalent situation of a company’s internal tier structure with different organizational sections, responsible for different module design and supply. In this paper, we investigate modularity decision problems and introduce an innovative framework and modularity decision dashboard, considering internal and external variety evaluation, conflicting objectives of stakeholders as well as company-internal tier structures of component, module and product suppliers. The approach builds on the integrated PKT-approach for developing modular product families, recent findings in complexity cost evaluation, effects of modularization and modularity decision problems. An industrial application at a modularization strategy project in an international powertool company is presented and proves basic validity of the framework and the process model. The results of the study demonstrate how an applicable modularity decision dashboard can facilitate cooperative decision-making and leads to a balanced variety for the electromotor module portfolio in an industrial environment.de_DE
tuhh.publisher.doi10.1016/j.procir.2018.02.027-
tuhh.publication.instituteProduktentwicklung und Konstruktionstechnik M-17de_DE
tuhh.identifier.doi10.15480/882.1841-
tuhh.type.opus(wissenschaftlicher) Artikelde
tuhh.institute.germanProduktentwicklung und Konstruktionstechnik M-17de
tuhh.institute.englishProduktentwicklung und Konstruktionstechnik M-17de_DE
tuhh.gvk.hasppnfalse-
openaire.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessde_DE
dc.type.driverarticle-
dc.rights.ccby-nc-ndde_DE
dc.rights.ccversion4.0de_DE
dc.type.casraiJournal Articleen
tuhh.container.volume70de_DE
tuhh.container.startpage380de_DE
tuhh.container.endpage385de_DE
dc.relation.conference28th CIRP Design Conference, May 2018, Nantes, Francede_DE
dc.rights.nationallicensefalsede_DE
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.creatorOrcidWindheim, Marc-
item.creatorOrcidGebhardt, Nicolas-
item.creatorOrcidKrause, Dieter-
item.creatorGNDWindheim, Marc-
item.creatorGNDGebhardt, Nicolas-
item.creatorGNDKrause, Dieter-
item.grantfulltextopen-
crisitem.author.deptProduktentwicklung und Konstruktionstechnik M-17-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-3977-7488-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-1253-1699-
Appears in Collections:Publications (tub.dok)
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
1-s2.0-S2212827118300921-main.pdfVerlags-PDF997,95 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

23
Last Week
0
Last month
15
checked on Apr 19, 2019

Download(s)

26
checked on Apr 19, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Export

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons