Optimal Timing of Reviews in Concurrent Design for Manufacturability
Concurrent design can reduce the time required to develop new products and redesign old ones. In contrast to the conventional approach, in which the product design is (nearly) completed before it is "thrown over the wall" to the process design group, concurrent design for manufacturability, as conceptualized here, conducts a number of progress reviews during the product design process. Frequent reviews have two benefits: (1) (Parallel Development) process designers receive sufficient information about the design to enable them to work in parallel with the product designers, and (2) (Quality Control) flaws in the design are discovered soon after they are introduced, saving the time and resources required for redesign later. The disadvantage of frequent reviews is that each review requires setup/penalty time that otherwise would not be required. The optimal policy is derived for some special stationary cases of the model. When the parallel development benefit dominates, the review periods either increase or decrease according to the rate at which product design work empowers useful process design work to be conducted. When the quality control benefit dominates, the review periods will vary only to the extent that the quality related parameters change. Numerical examples illustrate the insights gained from the analysis.
Volume (Year): 41 (1995)
Issue (Month): 9 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:41:y:1995:i:9:p:1431-1447. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.