Changes in requirements may result in the increasing of product development project cost and lead time, therefore, it is important to understand how requirement changes propagate in the design of complex product systems and be able to select best options to guide design. Currently, a most approach for design change is lack of take the multi-disciplinary coupling relationships and the number of parameters into account integrally. A new design change model is presented to systematically analyze and search change propagation paths. Firstly, a PDS-Behavior-Structure-based design change model is established to describe requirement changes causing the design change propagation in behavior and structure domains. Secondly, a multi-disciplinary oriented behavior matrix is utilized to support change propagation analysis of complex product systems, and the interaction relationships of the matrix elements are used to obtain an initial set of change paths. Finally, a rough set-based propagation space reducing tool is developed to assist in narrowing change propagation paths by computing the importance of the design change parameters. The proposed new design change model and its associated tools have been demonstrated by the scheduling change propagation paths of high speed train's bogie to show its feasibility and effectiveness. This model is not only supportive to response quickly to diversified market requirements, but also helpful to satisfy customer requirements and reduce product development lead time. The proposed new design change model can be applied in a wide range of engineering systems design with improved efficiency.
1. M Giffin, O De Weck, G Bounova, et al. Change propagation analysis in complex technical systems. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2009, 131(8):1-14.
2. C M Eckert, R Keller, C Earl, et al. Supporting change processes in design:Complexity, prediction and reliability. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2006, 91(12):1521-1534.
3. C Eckert, P J Clarkson, W Zanker. Change and customization in complex engineering domains. Research in Engineering Design, 2004, 15(1):1-21.
4. P J Clarkson, C Simons, C Eckert. Predicting change propagation in complex design. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2004, 126(5):788-797.
5. T A W Jarratt, C M Eckert, N H M Caldwell, et al. Engineering change:an overview and perspective on the literature. Research in Engineering Design, 2011, 22(2):103-124.
6. N Cross, R Roy. Engineering design methods. New York:Wiley, 1989.
7. M Hobday. Product complexity, innovation and industrial organization. Research Policy, 1998, 26(6):689-710.
8. Y S Zou, G F Ding, W H Zhang, et al. Collaborative simulation method with spatiotemporal synchronization process control. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2016, 29(6):1074-1082.
9. N Ahmad, D C Wynn, P J Clarkson. Change impact on a product and its redesign process:a tool for knowledge capture and reuse. Research in Engineering Design, 2013, 24(3):219-244.
10. S Ahmed, Y Kanike. Engineering change during a product's lifecycle. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Engineering Design, Paris, France, August 28-31, 2007:633-634.
11. P Shankar, B Morkos, J D Summers. Reasons for change propagation:a case study in an automotive OEM. Research in Engineering Design, 2012, 23(4):291-303.
12. S Nonsiri, E Coatanea, M Bakhouya, et al. Model-based approach for change propagation analysis in requirements. Systems Conference, IEEE International, Orlando FL, USA, April 15-18, 2013:497-503.
13. K Rouibah, K R Caskey. Change management in concurrent engineering from a parameter perspective. Computers in Industry, 2003, 50(1):15-34.
14. T Cohen, S B Navathe, R E Fulton. C-FAR, change favorable representation. Computer-Aided Design, 2000, 32(5):321-338.
15. F Yang, G Duan. Developing a parameter linkage-based method for searching change propagation paths. Research in Engineering Design, 2012, 23(4):353-372.
16. K Kernschmidt, B Vogel-heuser. An interdisciplinary SysML based modeling approach for analyzing change influences in production plants to support the engineering. IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), Madison, WI, USA, August 17-20, 2013:1113-1118.
17. M Ghoniem, J D Fekete, P Castagliola. A comparison of the readability of graphs using node-link and matrix-based representations. Information Visualization, IEEE Symposium on, Austin, Texas, October 10-12, 2004:17-24.
18. T Jarratt, R Keller, S Nair, et al. Visualization techniques for product change and product modelling in complex design. International Conference on Theory and Application of Diagrams, Heidelberg, Berlin, March 22-24, 2004:388-391.
19. G Di Battista, P Eades, R Tamassia, et al. Algorithms for drawing graphs:an annotated bibliography. Computational Geometry, 1994, 4(5):235-282.
20. J Lamping, R Rao. Laying out and visualizing large trees using a hyperbolic space. Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Marina del Rey, California, United States, November 02-04, 1994:13-14.
21. R Keller, T Eger, C M Eckert, et al. Visualising change propagation. Proceedings ICED 05, the 15th International Conference on Engineering Design, Melbourne, Australia, August 15-18, 2005:15-18.
22. H Z Zhang, X Han, R Li, et al. A new conceptual design method to support rapid and effective mapping from product design specification to concept design. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2016, 87(5-8):2375-2389.
23. P Hehenberger. Perspectives on hierarchical modeling in mechatronic design. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2014, 28(3):188-197.
24. Z Pawlak. Rough set theory and its applications to data analysis. Cybernetics & Systems, 1998, 29(7):661-688.
25. H Fang, J R Tan, G F Yin, et al. Process auxiliary decisionmaking based on rough sets and regulation distance computing. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2009, 22(4):528-534.
26. D Liu, P Hu, T R Li, et al. An approach for attribute weights acquisition based on rough sets theory and information gain. International Conference on Intelligent Systems and Knowledge Engineering, Paris, France, August 28-31, 2007:1296-1302.
27. M Stein. Large sample properties of simulations using Latin hypercube sampling. Technometrics, 1987, 29(2):143-151.
