Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multiobjective optimization of modular design concepts for a collection of interacting systems

  • RESEARCH PAPER
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A collection of interacting systems, such as a fleet of military vehicles, can have a life-cycle benefit from sharing interoperable modules. Defining the modules that maximize such benefits must be addressed at the early stages of system design. We present a multi-objective optimization framework for conceptual modular design. We use a functional representation of the supersystem, i.e., the interacting systems collection, to make module design decisions informed by supersystem requirements and life-cycle objectives. The resultant modules are configured into a variety of architectures and form a set of systems with distinct capabilities that meet supersystem requirements. We apply this approach on a fleet of military vehicles. Computational results quantify the intuition that designing a large number of smaller modules reduces overall fleet weight and increases required personnel resources because of larger demand for vehicle reconfiguration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baldwin C, Clark KB (2000) design rules: the power of modularity, vol 1. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayrak AE, Collopy AX, Epureanu BI, Papalambros PY (2016a) A computational concept generation method for a modular vehicle fleet design. In: Proceedings IEEE systems conference. IEEE, Orlando, pp 1–8

  • Bayrak AE, Collopy AX, Epureanu BI, Papalambros PY (2017) Modular design concept generation for a collection of interacting systems with application to modular vehicle fleet design. In: Presented at the world congress on structural and multidisciplinary optimization, Braunschweig

  • Bayrak AE, Egilmez MM, Kaung H, Xingyu L, Park JM, Umpfenbach E, Anderson E, Gorsich D, Hu J, Papalambros P, Epureanu B (2016b) A system of systems approach to the strategic feasibility of modular vehicle fleets. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics. to be published

  • Borjesson F, Hölttä-Otto K (2013) A module generation algorithm for product architecture based on component interactions and strategic drivers. Res Eng Des 25(1):31–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown O, Eremenko P (2006) The value proposition for fractionated space architectures. In: Space 2006. AIAA, San Jose

  • Browning TR (2016) Design structure matrix extensions and innovations: a survey and new opportunities. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 63(1):27–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarti A, Bligh TP (1996) An approach to functional synthesis of mechanical design concepts: theory, applications, and emerging research issues. Art Intell Eng Design Anal Manuf 10(04):313–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer EJ, Dennis Jr JE, Frank PD, Lewis RM, Shubin GR (1994) Problem formulation for multidisciplinary optimization. SIAM J Optim 4(4):754–776

  • Dahmus JB, Gonzalez-Zugasti JP, Otto KN (2001) Modular product architecture. Des Stud 22(5):409–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasch J, Gorsich DJ (2016) Survey of modular military vehicles: Benefits and burdens. Defense Acquisition Research Journal 23(1):2–27

    Google Scholar 

  • de Weck OL, Suh ES, Chang D (2003) Product family and platform portfolio optimization. In: Proceedings international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. ASME, Chicago, pp 175–185

  • Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Souza K, Bayrak AE, Kang N, Wang H, Altin B, Barton K, Hu J, Papalambros P, Epureanu B, Gerth R (2016) An integrated design approach for evaluating the effectiveness and cost of a conventional and modular fleet. Defense Journal on Modeling and Simulation 13(4):381–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eppinger SD, Whitney DE, Smith RP, Gebala DA (1994) A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development. Res Eng Des 6(1):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erixon G (1998) Modular function deployment - a method for product modularisation. PhD thesis, The Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Fellini R, Kokkolaras M, Papalambros PY (2006) Quantitative platform selection in optimal design of product families, with application to automotive engine design. J Eng Des 17(5):429–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson S, Kasprzak E, Lewis K (2009) Designing a family of reconfigurable vehicles using multilevel multidisciplinary design optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 39(2):171–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujita K (2002) Product variety optimization under modular architecture. Comput Aided Des 34(12):953–965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujita K, Yoshida H (2004) Product variety optimization simultaneously designing module combination and module attributes. Concurr Eng 12(2):105–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gershenson J, Prasad G, Zhang Y (2004) Product modularity: measures and methods. J Eng Des 15 (1):33–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Zugasti JP, Otto KN, Baker JD (2000) A method for architecting product platforms. Res Eng Des 12(2):61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu P, Sosale S (1999) Product modularization for life cycle engineering. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 15 (5):387–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heydari B, Dalili K (2015) Emergence of modularity in system of systems: complex networks in heterogeneous environments. IEEE Syst J 9(1):223–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopcroft J, Tarjan R (1973) Algorithm 447: efficient algorithms for graph manipulation. Commun ACM 16(6):372–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang C-C, Kusiak A (1998) Modularity in design of products and systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 28(1):66–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Incremona GP, De Felici G, Ferrara A, Bassi E (2015) A supervisory sliding mode control approach for cooperative robotic system of systems. IEEE Syst J 9(1):263–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain R, Chandrasekaran A, Elias G, Cloutier R (2008) Exploring the impact of systems architecture and systems requirements on systems integration complexity. IEEE Syst J 2(2):209–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiao JR, Simpson TW, Siddique Z (2007) Product family design and platform-based product development: a state-of-the-art review. J Intell Manuf 18(1):5–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapser CJ (2009) Toward an understanding of software code cloning as a development practice. PhD thesis, University of Waterloo

    Google Scholar 

  • Khajavirad A, Michalek JJ, Simpson TW (2008) An efficient decomposed multiobjective genetic algorithm for solving the joint product platform selection and product family design problem with generalized commonality. Struct Multidiscip Optim 39(2):187–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamachari RS, Papalambros PY (1997) Hierarchical decomposition synthesis in optimal systems design. J Mech Des 119(4):448–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafleur J, Saleh J (2009) Exploring the F6 fractionated spacecraft trade space with GT-FAST. In: Space 2009. AIAA, Pasadena

  • Maier MW (1998) Architecting principles for systems-of-systems. Syst Eng 1(4):267–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marler RT, Arora JS (2004) Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidiscip Optim 26(6):369–395

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Martins JR, Lambe AB (2013) Multidisciplinary design optimization: a survey of architectures. AIAA J 51(9):2049–2075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathworks (2016a) conncomp (biograph). Retrieved from https://www.mathworks.com/help/bioinfo/ref/conncompbiograph.html

  • Mathworks (2016b) Mixed-integer linear programming algorithms. Retrieved from https://www.mathworks.com/help/optim/ug/mixed-integer-linear-programming-algorithms.html

  • Mathworks (2016) Multiobjective genetic algorithm options.Retrieved from https://www.mathworks.com/help/gads/examples/multiobjective-genetic-algorithm-options.html

  • Mosleh M, Dalili K, Heydari B (2016) Distributed or monolithic? A computational architecture decision framework. IEEE Systems Journal 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2016.2594290

  • Newman MEJ (2006) Modularity and community structure in networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103(23):8577–8582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otto K, Wood KL (2001) Product design: techniques in reverse engineering, systematic design, and new product development. Prentice-Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnas DL (1972) On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Commun ACM 15 (12):1053–1058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pate DJ, Patterson MD, German BJ (2012) Optimizing families of reconfigurable aircraft for multiple missions. J Aircr 49(6):1988–2000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reghbati E, Corneil DG (1978) Parallel computations in graph theory. SIAM J Comput 7(2):230–237

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rota G-C (1964) The number of partitions of a set. Am Math Mon 71(5):498–504

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Salvador F, Forza C, Rungtusanatham M (2002) Modularity, product variety, production volume, and component sourcing: theorizing beyond generic prescriptions. J Oper Manag 20(5):549–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW (2004) Product platform design and customization: status and promise. Art Intell Eng Design Anal Manuf 18(1):3– 20

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Jiao JR, Siddique Z, Hölttä-Otto K (2014) Advances in product family and product platform design. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sosa ME, Eppinger SD, Rowles CM (2003) Identifying modular and integrative systems and their impact on design team interactions. J Mech Des 125(2):240–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steward DV (1981) The design structure system: a method for managing the design of complex systems. IEEE Trans Eng Manag EM-28(3):71–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich KT, Eppinger SD (2004) Product design and development, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner TC, Papalambros PY (1993) A general framework for decomposition analysis in optimal design. In: Gilmore BJ (ed) Advances in design automation, vol 2. ASME, New York, pp 327– 335

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, 500 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Alparslan Emrah Bayrak, Panos Y. Papalambros & Bogdan I. Epureanu

  2. Integrative Systems + Design, University of Michigan, 500 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Arianne X. Collopy

Authors
  1. Alparslan Emrah Bayrak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arianne X. Collopy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Panos Y. Papalambros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bogdan I. Epureanu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alparslan Emrah Bayrak.

Additional information

This work was supported in part by the US TARDEC Automotive Research Center at the University of Michigan thanks to the Vehicle Agnostic Modularity program at the Office of Naval Research. An earlier version of this article was presented at WCSMO-12 held in Braunschweig, Germany 2017. See Bayrak et al. 2017.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bayrak, A.E., Collopy, A.X., Papalambros, P.Y. et al. Multiobjective optimization of modular design concepts for a collection of interacting systems. Struct Multidisc Optim 57, 83–94 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-017-1872-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-017-1872-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation