協同產品開發之最佳設計方案評估與選擇

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：72

、訪客IP：3.143.17.75

姓名

洪勖芳(Hsu-Fang Hung) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

工業管理研究所

論文名稱

協同產品開發之最佳設計方案評估與選擇
(Evaluating and selecting an optimum design alternative for collaborative product development)

相關論文

★ 應用MFM 與PPM 監控協同設計之執行流程	★ 應用DSM與DRFT於汽車電子之協同開發流程
★ 一協同設計專案團隊組成方法- 以安全監視器產品為例	★ 應用認知工程開發全球化光纖通訊系統
★ 羽絨產業策略規劃-應用品質機能展開分析法	★ 重電業協同專案管理績效之研究-以變電所統包工程為例
★ 以屬性導向新產品開發之流程塑模與分析– 以醫療器材產業為案例	★ 以品質機能展開法應用於主管管理職能之建構
★ 應用參考模型以及流程建模改善供應鏈績效-以投影機產業為例	★ 協同產品開發之流程管理 - 以汽車零件為例
★ 配電系統之高壓電纜接頭供應商評選	★ 應用品質機能展開於產品開發之流程分析-以刀鋒式伺服器為例
★ 實施精實六標準差改進製程良率－以機頂盒表面黏著技術為例	★ 太陽能模組產業之決策營運研究
★ 新產品開發階段導入替代料之流程建模及潛在風險分析	★ 應用實驗設計研發PET複合膜及改善厚膜翹曲問題

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

在全球化競爭的企業環境中，協同產品開發已經成為企業用以降低風險與提升競爭力的重要策略。在運用外部資源以獲得產品解決方案來滿足客戶需求與達成企業目標時，產品規劃階段變得更加重要且複雜。而設計方案評估的決策過程取決於產品品質、開發與製造時間及成本間的最佳化考量。本研究中，作者提出了一個協同產品開發的架構－它專注於連結客戶的需求，結合品質機能展開與設計架構矩陣方法論以產生完整的產品設計方案，並發展出一多屬性決策分析模型以評估及選取出適合的產品解決方案。這些程序不僅僅從產品設計觀點考量，它同時考慮在產品生產製造時的各項需求。而產品策略是在評估過程中最重要的考量因數之一，它能影響產品設計的取向與評估的結果。本研究進而提出輔助之產品開發資料庫的結構以幫助本研究目的之達成。最後並以一產業應用的實例－系統單晶片產品開發規劃的流程，用以說明本建議架構的完整度與其效益。

摘要(英)

In the globally competitive business environment, collaborative product development has become an important strategy for enterprises to reduce risks and enhance their competitiveness. The planning phase becomes more significant and complicated when utilizing external resources to determine a product solution to achieve customer satisfaction and business goals. The decision process for assessing design alternatives depends on the tradeoffs between quality, time, and cost. In this research, author proposed a framework for collaborative product development. It aims at linking customer requirements, integrating quality function deployment and Design structure matrix to generate design alternatives, and then setting a multi-attribute decision analysis model to evaluate and select them to determine a proper solution. They are considered not only design aspects but also manufacturing concerns. Product strategy is discussed as the most important factor in the evaluation process. A database structure was constructed to realize the proposed framework. Further, a practical application of a System-on-a-Chip product planning process was carried out to demonstrate the completeness and benefit of the proposed framework.

關鍵字(中)

★ 協同產品開發
★ 設計方案評估
★ 品質機能展開
★ 設計架構矩陣
★ 多屬性決策分析

關鍵字(英)

★ Design alternatives evaluation
★ Collaborative product development
★ Quality function deployment
★ Multi-attribute decision analysis
★ Design structure matrix

論文目次

論文電子檔授權書………………………………………………………i
論文指導教授推薦書……………………………………………………ii
論文口試委員審定書…………………………………………………iii
中文摘要………………………………………………………………iv
Abstract…………………………………………………………………v
誌謝辭…………………………………………………………………vi
Table of Contents……………………………………………………vii
List of Figures………………………………………………………ix
List of Tables…………………………………………………………xi
Chapter 1 Introduction………………………………………………1
1.1 Motivation…………………………………………………2
1.2 Objectives…………………………………………………4
Chapter 2 Background and Literature Review……………………7
2.1 Project and product planning…………………………7
2.2 Product design alternatives…………………………8
2.3 Quality function deployment…………………………9
2.4 Design structure matrix………………………………13
2.5 Multi-attribute decision analysis…………………18
Chapter 3 Model Construction……………………………………23
3.1 Customer-driven product design……………………25
3.2 Feasible solutions generation………………………26
3.3 Costing and scheduling estimation…………………29
3.4 Design alternatives evaluation and selection…35
Chapter 4 Product Development Database………………………44
4.1 Database structure……………………………………45
4.2 Database interaction…………………………………49
4.3 Integrated data process………………………………53
Chapter 5 Industrial Application………………………………55
5.1 IC industry and System-on-a-chip design…………55
5.2 SoC product planning…………………………………57
5.3 Analysis and discussion………………………………76
Chapter 6 Conclusions and Future Works………………………80
6.1 Conclusions………………………………………………80
6.2 Limitations and future works………………………81
References………………………………………………………………84

參考文獻

1. Akgunduz, A.; Zetu, D.; Banerjee, P.; Liang, D. (2002). Evaluation of sub-component alternatives in product design processes. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 18, pp. 69-81
2. Alegre-Vidal, J.; Lapiedra-Alcami, R.; Chiva-Gómez, R. (2004). Linking operations strategy and product innovation: an empirical study of Spanish ceramic tile producers. Research Policy 33, pp. 829-839
3. Bernroider, E.W.N. & Stix, V. (2006). Profile distance method—a multi-attribute decision making approach for information system investments. Decision Support Systems 42, pp. 988– 998
4. Browning, T.R. (2001). Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions. IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management 40(3), pp. 292-306.
5. Browning, T.R. & Eppinger, S.D. (2002). Modeling impacts of process architecture on cost and schedule risk in product development. IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management 49(4), pp.428-442.
6. Chan, L. & Wu, M. (2002). Quality function deployment: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 143, pp. 463-497
7. Chen, Y.-J.; Chen, Y.-M.; Wang, C.-B.; Chu, H.-C.; Tsai, T.-N. (2005a). Developing a multi-layer reference design retrieval technology for knowledge management in engineering design. Expert Systems with Applications 29, pp. 839-866.
8. Chen, C.-H.; Khoo, L.P.; Yan, W. (2005b). PDCS－a product definition and customisation system for product concept development. Expert Systems with Applications 28, pp. 591-602.
9. Chen, C.-H.; Khoo, L.P.; Jiao L. M. (2004). Information deduction approach through quality function deployment for the quantification of the dependency between design tasks. International Journal of Production Research 42(21), pp.4623-4637
10. Chen, P.P. (1981). Entity-relationship approach to information modeling and analysis. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Entity-Relationship Approach, Amsterdam.
11. Chen, S.-J. & Lin, L. (2003). Decomposition of interdependent task group for concurrent engineering. Computers and Industrial Engineering 44, pp. 435-459.
12. Chen, C.-H.; Ling, S.F.; Chen, W. (2003). Project scheduling for collaborative product development using DSM. International Journal of Project Management 21, pp. 291-299.
13. Clemen, R.T. (1996). Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis. 2nd Ed., Duxbury Press, New York.
14. Cristiano, J.J.; Liker, J.K.; White, III, C.C. (2001). Key factors in the successful application of quality function deployment (QFD). IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48(1), pp.81-95
15. Czuchry, A.J. & Yasin, M.M. (2003). Managing the project management process. Industrial Management and Data Systems 103(1), pp. 39-46.
16. Darringer, J.A.; Bergamaschi, R.A.; Bhattacharya, S.; Brand, D.; Herkersdorf, A.; Morrell, J.K.; Nair, I.I.; Sagmeister, P.; Shin, Y. (2002). Early analysis tools for system-on-a-chip design. IBM Journal of Research and Development 46(6), pp. 691-707
17. Dvir, D.; Raz, T.; Shenhar, A.J. (2003). An empirical analysis of the relationship between project planning and project success. International Journal of Project Management 21, pp. 89-95
18. Eppinger, S.D. & Salminen, V. (2001). Patterns of product development interactions. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 01 Glasgow, August 21-23.
19. FIPS (Federal Information Processing Standards Publication) 184 (1993a) Announcing the Standard for Integration Definition for Function Modeling (IDEF0) http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/idef02.doc
20. FIPS (Federal Information Processing Standards Publication) 184 (1993b) Announcing the standard for integration definition for information modeling (IDEF1X). http://www.idef.com/pdf/Idef1x.pdf
21. Hicks, B.J.; Cully, S.J.; Allen, R.D.; Mullineux, G.. (2002). A framework for the requirements of capturing, storing and reusing information and knowledge in engineering design. International Journal of Information Management 22, pp. 263-280
22. Hung, H.-F.; Kao, H.-P.; Ku, K.-C. (2007a). Evaluation of design alternatives in collaborative development and production of modular products. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 33, pp. 1065-1076, Available online first at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0548-9.
23. Hung, H.-F.; Kao, H.-P.; Chu, Y.-Y. (2007b). An empirical study on knowledge integration, technology innovation and experimental practice. Expert Systems with Applications 36(4), Available online first at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.06.017.
24. Hung, H.-F.; Kao, H.-P.; Juang, Y.-S. (2007c). An integrated information system for product design planning. Expert Systems with Applications 37(1), Available online first at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.07.030.
25. Hwang, C.L. & Lin, M.J. (1987). Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria- Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.
26. Hwang, C.L.; Yoon, K.P. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications, Springer, New York.
27. Kao, H.-P.; Su, E.; Wang, B. (2002). I2QFD: a blackboard-based multiagent system for supporting concurrent engineering projects. International Journal of Production Research 40(5), pp. 1235-1262
28. Karsak, E.E.; Sozer, S.; Alptekin, S.E. (2002). Product planning in quality function deployment using a combined analytic network process and goal programming approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering 44, pp. 171-190
29. Kim. Y.-M.; Kim, J.-H.; Kim, S.-H. (2000). Use of multi-attribute decision analysis for designing operations system framework in telecommunications management network. Computers & Operations Research 27, pp. 1375-1388
30. Kumar R, Midha PS (2001) A QFD based methodology for evaluating a company’s PDM requirements for collaborative product development. Industrial Management and Data Systems 101(3):126-131
31. Lahtinen, V.; Kuusilinna, K.; Kangas, T.; Hamalainen, T. (2002). Interconnection scheme for continuous-media systems-on-a-chip. Microprocessors and Microsystems 26, pp. 123-38.
32. Lee, E.; Woo, S.; Sasada, T. (2001). The evaluation system for design alternatives in collaborative design. Automation in Construction 10, pp. 295-301
33. Li, D. (2003). Fuzzy Multiobjective Many-Person Decision Makings and Games, National Defense Industry Press, Beijing.
34. Li, D.-F. (2007) Compromise ratio method for fuzzy multi-attribute group decision making. Applied Soft Computing 7, pp. 807–817
35. Loch, C. (2000). Tailoring product development to strategy: case of a European technology manufacturer. European Management Journal 18(3), pp. 246-258
36. Mohamed, A. & Celik, T. (2002). Knowledge based-system for alternative design, cost estimating and scheduling. Knowledge-Based Systems 15, pp.177-188
37. Myint, S. & Tabucanon, M.T. (1998). The framework for an expert system to generate alternative products in concurrent engineering design. Computers in Industry 37, pp. 125-134
38. Nellore, R. & Balachandra, R. (2001). Factors influencing success in integrated product development (IPD) projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48(2), pp. 164-174
39. Park, K.S. & Kim, S.H. (1997). Tools for interactive multiattribute decision-making with incompletely identified information. European Journal of Operational Research 98, pp. 111-123.
40. Parker, H. (2000). Interfirm collaboration and the new product development process. Industrial Management and Data Systems 100(6), pp. 255-260
41. PMI (1996). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Project Management Institute.
42. Porter, M.E. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press, New York
43. Porter, M.E. (1998). What is strategy. In Porter ME (ed). On Competition. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, pp 39-74
44. Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review 68(3), pp. 79-91
45. Rao, A.; Carr, L.P.; Dambolena, I.; Kopp, R.J.; Martin, J.; Rafii, F.; Schlesinger, P.F. (1996). Total Quality Management: A Cross Functional Perspective. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
46. Rajsuman, R. (2000). System-on-a-Chip: Design and Test. Artech House, Boston.
47. Shtub, A.; Bard, J.F.; Globerson, S. (2004). Project Management: Processes, Methodologies, and Economics, 2nd Ed. Prentice-Hall International (UK) Limited, London.
48. Stalk, G.; Evans, P.; Shulman, L.E. (1992). Competing on capabilities: the new rules of corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review 70(2), pp. 57-69
49. Steward, D.V. (1981). The design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 28(3), pp. 71-74.
50. Triantaphyllou, E. (2000). Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell.
51. Ulrich, K.T. & Eppinger, S.D. (2000). Product Design and Development. Second Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
52. Voros, J. (2002). Product balancing under conditions of quality inflation, cost pressures and growth strategies. European Journal of Operational Research 141, pp. 153-166
53. Westerveld, E. (2003). The project excellence model: linking success criteria and critical success factors. The Journal of Product Innovation Management 21, pp. 411-418
54. Xu, X.W. & Liu T. (2003). A web-enabled PDM system in a collaborative design environment. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 19, pp. 315-328
55. Zanakis, S.H.; Solomon, A.; Wishart, N.; Dublish, S. (1998). Multiattribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods, European Journal of Operational Research 107 (3), pp. 507-529.
56. Zhang, Q.; Lim. J.-S.; Cao, M. (2004). Innovation-driven learning in new product development: a conceptual model. Industrial Management and Data Systems 104(3), pp. 252-261

指導教授

高信培(Hsing-Pei Kao)

審核日期

2007-12-22

推文