DETC2008-49526 PLATFORM STRATEGIES FOR A SUPPLIER IN THE AIRCRAFT ENGINE INDUSTRY

ABSTRACT The utilization of a platform strategy has become a competitive priority in many industries, most notably in the automotive industry. Naturally, many firms in other industries are adopting this strategy with different modifications and degrees of implementation. However, little research covers the application of platform development in a supplier and/or small batch production environment. The adaptation of a platform strategy in these settings, by a supplier in the aircraft engine industry, is the focal point of this paper. Based on platform development literature and the characteristics of the aircraft engine industry and the company studied advantages and hindrances for platform strategies have been ruled out. Interviews with involved people within the company studied have further clarified different perspectives on platforms and their possible utilization. Based on the analysis of collected information it is proposed that a possible platform strategy would include: a technology platform, incorporating general knowledge on core technology assets embodied in either humans, organizations, processes, information or methods; and a product platform, incorporating product specific elements that could be re-used when developing new components for a particular product line

Assessment of Antibiofilm Potencies of Nervonic and Oleic Acid against Acinetobacter baumannii Using In Vitro and Computational Approaches

Acinetobacter baumannii is a nosocomial pathogen, and its biofilms are tolerant to desiccation, nutrient starvation, and antimicrobial treatment on biotic and abiotic surfaces, tissues, and medical devices. Biofilm formation by A. baumannii is triggered by a quorum sensing cascade, and we hypothesized that fatty acids might inhibit its biofilm formation by interfering with quorum sensing. Initially, we investigated the antibiofilm activities of 24 fatty acids against A. baumannii ATCC 17978 and two clinical isolates. Among these fatty acids, two unsaturated fatty acids, nervonic and oleic acid, at 20 μg/mL significantly inhibited A. baumannii biofilm formation without affecting its planktonic cell growth (MICs were >500 μg/mL) and markedly decreased the motility of A. baumannii but had no toxic effect on the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Interestingly, molecular dynamic simulations showed that both fatty acids bind to the quorum sensing acyl homoserine lactone synthase (AbaI), and decent conformational stabilities of interactions between the fatty acids and AbaI were exhibited. Our results demonstrate that nervonic and oleic acid inhibit biofilm formation by A. baumannii strains and may be used as lead molecules for the control of persistent A. baumannii infections

Technology change analysis for product and product platform design

In designing products and product platforms, it is essential to consider the role of technology evolution to avoid frequent redesign costs or even premature obsolescence of key components. Taking this into account in multi-generational design is referred to as planned product innovation. The existing design tools/processes fail to delineate different technologies and therefore capitalize on ways of technological change within products. This paper provides a framework for technology change analysis by identifying underlying technologies and the potential for change in their intrinsic characteristics - performance level, principle of operation, and technology architecture. Measuring the three aspects of technological change separately and comparing them to their respective forecast information yields a technology\u27s potential for planned innovation. The technology change framework can be applied to an initial design of the product that is anticipated to undergo planned innovation. A detailed function-structure diagram and a component-based design structure matrix of the initial product design serve as inputs to the framework and result in technology change potentials for each technology. Grouping components with similar technology change potentials (in all three aspects) into independent clusters will allow organizations to focus their development efforts on clusters that are most ripe for innovation with minimal disruption to the rest of the product. For product platform identification, the technology change framework is used to develop a set of four heuristics to identify technology-based platform elements. The set of four heuristics require that the platform elements have a low potential for change in performance level, principle of operation, and technology architecture or have standardized interfaces. Having a technology focus for product platforms is necessary as forecasting and diffusion models/studies are available at a technology level rather than at an individual component level. Localization of any anticipated platform or family changes due to technology evolution (through platform formation) will minimize redesign changes and the cascade of disruptions in each variant. Future work will focus on developing step-by-step methods for technology-based clustering of products and integrating the technology-based platform elements with other market-based and function-based platform methods to truly yield a flexible and robust product platform design method. Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Technology-driven product platform development

In designing product platforms it is essential to consider the role of technology and its evolution to avoid frequent redesign costs or even premature obsolescence of key components. The Technology-driven Platform Development Method (TPDM) enhances existing platform design methods by identifying underlying technologies and the potential for change in their intrinsic characteristics - performance level, principle of operation, and technology architecture. A set of four heuristics is applied to determine the technology-driven platform elements. Application of the TPDM to the iPod portable music players showed that existing platform elements would require additional platforming and interface design to form a technology-driven platform. © 2008 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd

Platform strategies for a supplier in the aircraft engine industry

The utilization of a platform strategy has become a competitive priority in many industries, most notably in the automotive industry. Naturally, many firms in other industries are adopting this strategy with different modifications and degrees of implementation. However, little research covers the application of platform development in a supplier and/or small batch production environment. The adaptation of a platform strategy in these settings, by a supplier in the aircraft engine industry, is the focal point of this paper. Based on platform development literature and the characteristics of the aircraft engine industry and the company studied advantages and hindrances for platform strategies have been ruled out. Interviews with involved people within the company studied have further clarified different perspectives on platforms and their possible utilization. Based on the analysis of collected information it is proposed that a possible platform strategy would include: a technology platform, incorporating general knowledge on core technology assets embodied in either humans, organizations, processes, information or methods; and a product platform, incorporating product specific elements that could be re-used when developing new components for a particular product line. Copyright © 2008 by ASME

An introduction to product family evaluation graphs

With increasingly aggressive competition for market share, manufacturing companies are facing the challenge of providing nearly customized products at bulk prices. To achieve this, product families - a group of related products derived from a single product platform - have been used to provide strategic variety to satisfy customer requirements and simultaneously achieve economies of scale. Many methods for product family design have been developed. However, we still lack the ability to evaluate a product family based on quantitative tradeoffs between product family commonality and product family variety. In this paper, we introduce the Product Family Evaluation Graph (PFEG), which can assist product family designers choosing the best product family design among a set of product family design options. This method is complete in its formulation, but lacking in tools for implementation. It is our purpose to show the usefulness of such a method and discuss its foundation. We show how the tool can be used to compare candidate product family designs and used in the robust design of a single product family. In addition, we highlight the strategic factors and measures that are the basis for evaluating any product family. We offer ten example strategic factors - customization, market life, technological innovation, family size, complexity, development time, service and maintenance, environmental impacts, manufacturing cost, and production volume - that determine the ideal tradeoff strategy between commonality and variety. We also highlight the need for more research into the validity of these factors, the specific relationships between these factors, and a tradeoff strategy. The measures of commonality are shown to be well established. However, we show that there is still a glaring need for the quantitative evaluation of product family variety. In summary, this paper is intended as a starting place, an opening set of questions, and as a framework for the general solution to the problem of a quantitative evaluation of product family design. Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Using product family evaluation graphs in product family design

Product family design and platform-based product development have garnered much attention. They have been used to provide nearly customised products to satisfy individual customer requirements and simultaneously achieve economies of scale during production. The inherent challenge in product family design is to balance the trade-off between product commonality (how well the components and functions can be shared across a product family) and variety (the range of different products in a product family). Quantifying this trade-off at the product family planning stage in a way that supports the engineering design process has yet to be accomplished. In this paper, we introduce a graphical evaluation method, the product family evaluation graph (PFEG), that allows designers to choose the \u27best\u27 product family design option among sets of alternatives based on their performance with respect to an ideal commonality/variety trade-off determined by a company\u27s particular competitive focus, and guides designers towards a more desirable trade-off between commonality and variety in an existing product family. Two necessary supporting pieces for developing the PFEG are also proposed. One piece is the development of commonality and variety indices to quantitatively capture the degree of commonality and variety in a product family and its functions and components. We introduce two sets of commonality and variety indices-the CDI (commonality versus diversity index) for commonality (CDIC) and variety (CDIV), and the CMC (comprehensive metric for commonality) for commonality (CMCC) and variety (CMCV)-to achieve this. The other supporting piece is the development of a quantitative representation of the ideal trade-off between commonality and variety in a product family, known as the commonality/variety trade-off angle , based on the elements that characterise a company\u27s competitive focus and their industry-wide competitors. A linear regression model is used to link the qualitative competitive focus to a quantitative engineering perspective, and then to estimate the ideal trade-off angle. The commonality/variety trade-off angle can then be applied to the PFEG to help designers evaluate a product family or compare product family design alternatives. Most importantly, the PFEG is not just the graph of the two sets of indices; it is the representation of the commonality/variety trade-off relative to the desired competitive focus. Four families of power tools are used to illustrate how the computation of such indices supports product family design evaluation in the PFEG. In this paper, we only use the CDI in the example application, but the CMC can be computed using the same approach

Frameworks for product family design and development

In today\u27s market, products must meet or exceed customers\u27 needs while being competitively priced and developed in the shortest time possible. While product platforms address many of these requirements, they can incur additional development challenges with regards to coordination, time, and cost. Companies therefore need to use a concurrent engineering process to develop product families and product platforms efficiently; however, no concurrent engineering process models exist to support product family development. Based on concurrent engineering principles, four processes are proposed for systematic product family design using two platforming approaches - top-down and bottom-up - and two development drivers: product-driven and platform-driven. The first objective of this study is to propose a consistent product family development process terminology. The second objective is to detail representative frameworks and processes for the four proposed product family design processes based on the two approaches and two drivers. Several industry examples highlight the context and illustrate the four proposed processes. © Sage Publications