IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i8p4584-d539841.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Exploratory Study on Optimal Iterative Design Schedules with the Consideration of Design Quality and Resource Constraints

Author

Listed:
  • Sou-Sen Leu

    (Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 10607, Taiwan)

  • Theresia Daisy Nattali Suparman

    (Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 10607, Taiwan)

  • Cathy Chang-Wei Hung

    (Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 10607, Taiwan)

Abstract

The classical dependency structure matrix (DSM) can effectively deal with iterative schedules that are highly coupled and interdependent, such as the design process and the concurrent process. Classical DSM generally follows the assumption that the least iteration occurs to achieve the shortest completion time. Nevertheless, the assumption may not hold because tasks ought to be re-visited several times if the design qualities do not meet the requirements. This research proposed a novel iterative scheduling model that combines the classical DSM concept with quality equations. The quality equations were used to determine the number of tasks that ought to be re-visited for fulfilling quality requirements during the iterative design process. Moreover, resources for concurrent activities are generally limited in the real world. Resource allocation should be incorporated in scheduling to avoid the waste and shortage of resources on a design project. This research proposed a new iterative scheduling model based on the classical DSM to optimize the iterative activities’ structure in terms of minimizing completion time with the consideration of design quality under resource constraints. A practical design schedule was introduced to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed DSM algorithm.

Suggested Citation

  • Sou-Sen Leu & Theresia Daisy Nattali Suparman & Cathy Chang-Wei Hung, 2021. "An Exploratory Study on Optimal Iterative Design Schedules with the Consideration of Design Quality and Resource Constraints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4584-:d:539841
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4584/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4584/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Austin & Andrew Baldwin & Baizhan Li & Paul Waskett, 2000. "Analytical design planning technique (ADePT): a dependency structure matrix tool to schedule the building design process," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 173-182.
    2. Robert P. Smith & Steven D. Eppinger, 1997. "A Predictive Model of Sequential Iteration in Engineering Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(8), pages 1104-1120, August.
    3. Sou-Sen Leu & Chung-Huei Yang, 1999. "A genetic-algorithm-based resource-constrained construction scheduling system," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 767-776.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hosang Hyun & Hyunsoo Kim & Hyun-Soo Lee & Moonseo Park & Jeonghoon Lee, 2020. "Integrated Design Process for Modular Construction Projects to Reduce Rework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Luo, Jianxi & Triulzi, Giorgio, 2018. "Cyclic dependence, vertical integration, and innovation: The case of Japanese electronics sector in the 1990s," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 46-55.
    3. Lin, Jun & Qian, Yanjun & Cui, Wentian & Goh, Thong Ngee, 2015. "An effective approach for scheduling coupled activities in development projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 97-108.
    4. Jeeeun Kim & Sungjoo Lee, 2017. "Forecasting and identifying multi-technology convergence based on patent data: the case of IT and BT industries in 2020," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 47-65, April.
    5. Atif Açıkgöz & Irem Demirkan & Gary P. Latham & Cemil Kuzey, 2021. "The Relationship Between Unlearning and Innovation Ambidexterity with the Performance of New Product Development Teams," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 945-982, August.
    6. Thomke, Stefan H., 1998. "Simulation, learning and R&D performance: Evidence from automotive development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 55-74, May.
    7. Inayat Ullah & Dunbing Tang & Qi Wang & Leilei Yin, 2017. "Least Risky Change Propagation Path Analysis in Product Design Process," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 379-391, July.
    8. Nitindra R. Joglekar & Ali A. Yassine & Steven D. Eppinger & Daniel E. Whitney, 2001. "Performance of Coupled Product Development Activities with a Deadline," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(12), pages 1605-1620, December.
    9. H. Zhang & C. M. Tam, 2003. "Fuzzy decision-making for dynamic resource allocation," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 31-41.
    10. Baldwin, Andrew & Poon, Chi-Sun & Shen, Li-Yin & Austin, Simon & Wong, Irene, 2009. "Designing out waste in high-rise residential buildings: Analysis of precasting methods and traditional construction," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 2067-2073.
    11. Munehiko Itoh, 2004. "Modularization for Product Competitiveness - Analysis of Modularization in the Digital Camera Industry -," Discussion Paper Series 164, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    12. José Adalberto França, 2019. "The Coordination Of Complex Product Systems Projects: A Case Study Of An R&D Multi-Party Alliance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(03), pages 1-25, April.
    13. Luo, Jianxi, 2018. "Architecture and evolvability of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 132-144.
    14. Ergo Pikas & Bárbara Pedó & Algan Tezel & Lauri Koskela & Markus Veersoo, 2022. "Digital Last Planner System Whiteboard for Enabling Remote Collaborative Design Process Planning and Control," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    15. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    16. Foad Iravani & Sriram Dasu & Reza Ahmadi, 2012. "A Hierarchical Framework for Organizing a Software Development Process," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1310-1322, December.
    17. Anderson, Shannon W. & Glenn, David & Sedatole, Karen L., 2000. "Sourcing parts of complex products: evidence on transactions costs, high-powered incentives and ex-post opportunism," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 723-749, November.
    18. C. M. Tam & Thomas Tong & S. O. Cheung & Albert Chan, 2001. "Genetic algorithm model in optimizing the use of labour," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 207-215.
    19. Xinying Cao & Xiaodong Li & Yangzhi Yan & Xiang Yuan, 2018. "Skeleton and Infill Housing Construction Delivery Process Optimization Based on the Design Structure Matrix," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    20. Hong Zhang & Heng Li & C. M. Tam, 2006. "Heuristic scheduling of resource-constrained, multiple-mode and repetitive projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 159-169.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4584-:d:539841. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.