contributor author | Christoph Roser | |
contributor author | David Kazmer | |
contributor author | James Rinderle | |
date accessioned | 2017-05-09T00:10:59Z | |
date available | 2017-05-09T00:10:59Z | |
date copyright | June, 2003 | |
date issued | 2003 | |
identifier issn | 1050-0472 | |
identifier other | JMDEDB-27752#233_1.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/128829 | |
description abstract | New product design as well as design revision to remedy defects is complicated by an inability to precisely predict product performance. Designers often find that they are confident about the performance of some design alternatives and uncertain about others. Similarly, alternative design changes may differ substantially in uncertainty, potential impact, and cost. This paper describes a method for including the effects of uncertainty in the evaluation of economic benefits of various design change options. The results indicate that the most profitable change option sequence depends not only on relative costs but also on the relative degree of uncertainty and on the magnitude of the potential design defects. The method demonstrates how design change alternatives can be compared using the engineering design of a beam. Finally, the validity of some common engineering change heuristics are discussed relative to their associated, quantitatively determined limits. | |
publisher | The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) | |
title | An Economic Design Change Method | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 125 | |
journal issue | 2 | |
journal title | Journal of Mechanical Design | |
identifier doi | 10.1115/1.1561040 | |
journal fristpage | 233 | |
journal lastpage | 239 | |
identifier eissn | 1528-9001 | |
keywords | Design | |
tree | Journal of Mechanical Design:;2003:;volume( 125 ):;issue: 002 | |
contenttype | Fulltext | |