Why Product Platforms and Product Families?

Transcription

Product
Product Family
Family Design
Design and
and
Platform-Based
Platform-Based Product
Product Development
Development
Timothy W. Simpson
Associate Professor
Engineering Design & Optimization Group
Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering and
Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802 USA
http://edog.mne.psu.edu/
phone: (814) 863-7136
email: tws8@psu.edu
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Overview
Overview of
of Lecture
Lecture
• Product Platforms and Product Families
Motivation
Definition of key terms
Some examples

• Approaches for Architecting Families of Products
Platform leveraging strategies
Module-based product families
Scale-based product families

• Challenges and Opportunities
• Closing Remarks
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Why
Why Product
Product Platforms
Platforms and
and Product
Product Families?
Families?
“Since many companies design new products one at a
time, the focus on individual customers and products
often results in a failure to embrace commonality,
compatibility, standardization, or modularization among
different products or product lines.” - Meyer and Lehnerd, 1997
• The end result:

a “mushrooming” or diversification of products and
components with proliferating variety and costs Æ lower profits
• To remain competitive, companies are utilizing product
platforms and product families to:
increase product variety
shorten product lead-times
maintain economies of scale (and scope) to reduce costs

PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Definition
Definition of
of Key
Key Terms
Terms
• What is a product family and a product platform?
• Product family:

a group of related products that share common features,
components, and subsystems; and satisfy a variety of markets
• Product platform:

the set of features, components or subsystems that remain
constant from product to product, within a given product family
• Derivative:

products derived from the product platform through:
– addition, removal, or substitution of one or more modules
( module-based product family)
– scaling or “stretching” the platform in one or more
dimensions ( scale-based product family)
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
®® Platform Strategy
Sony
Walkman
Sony Walkman Platform Strategy
• In 1980s, Sony dominated
portable stereo market
with three basic platforms:
WM2, WMDD and WM20
Incremental changes
accounted for only 20-30
of the 250+ models
introduced in the U.S.
Remaining 85% of Sony's models
produced from minor rearrangements
of existing features and cosmetic
redesigns of the external case
Ref: (Sanderson and Uzumeri, 1997)
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Product
Product Platform
Platform Definitions
Definitions
• Product Platform:

“set of common components, modules, or parts from which a
stream of derivative products can be efficiently developed and
launched” (Meyer and Lehnerd, 1997)
“collection of the common elements, especially the underlying
core technology, implemented across a range of products”
(McGrath, 1995)

“collection of assets [i.e., components, processes, knowledge,
people and relationships] that are shared by a set of products”
(Robertson and Ulrich, 1998)
• In the automotive industry (Muffato, 1999):
Platforms increase plant usage and enhance flexibility between
plants, reducing product lead times by as much as 30%
Firms using a platform-based product development approach
gained a 5.1 percent market share per year while firms that did
not lost 2.2 percent in 1998

PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Source:
Platforms
Platforms in
in Auto
Auto Industry
Industry
Development Car Division
• The number of platforms with over 1 million units in volume will
increase from 6 to 16 by 2004
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Common
Common Components
Components in
in Volkswagen
Volkswagen Platform
Platform
Source:
• Shimokawa, K., Jurgens, U., and Fujimoto, T. (Eds.), 1997, Transforming Automobile Assembly, Springer, New York.
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Under
Under the
the Hood
Hood of
of the
the VW
VW Family
Family
VW Golf
Audi TT
Source:
Audi A3
• Common hard points (interfaces)
• Similar packaging philosophy and relative arrangements
• Different engines
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Automobile
Automobile Platforms
Platforms at
at Ford
Ford
Source:
(C. Moccio, K. Ewing,
G. Pumpuni, 2000)
• At Ford, an automobile platform includes:
A common architecture (e.g., assembly sequence, joint
configuration, system interfaces, etc.)
Definition of subsystem and module interfaces
A set of common hardpoints used by the range of products that
share the platform and the manufacturing processes

• Ford defines a platform as a set of subsystems and
interfaces that form a common structure from which a
stream of derivative products can be efficiently produced
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Reference:
(Pessina and
Renner, 1998)
• Lutron makes customizable lighting control systems for
commercial and residential applications including hotel
lobbies, ballrooms, conference rooms, and exec offices.
• Lutron has rarely shipped the
same lighting system twice.

Work with individual customers
to extend the product line until
they have 100+ models from
which to choose.
Engineering and production
redesign the product line with
15-20 standardized components
that can be configured into the
same 100+ models.
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
General
General Approaches
Approaches to
to Product
Product Family
Family Design
Design
Top-down Approach:
A company strategically manages and
develops a family of products based on Black &
Decker
a product platform and its moduleand/or scale-based derivatives
E.g., Sony, Volkswagen

Bottom-up Approach:
A company redesigns/consolidates
a group of distinct products by
standardizing components to
improve economies of scale
and reduce inventory
E.g., Lutron, Black & Decker

Sony
Lutron
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Identify
Identify Platform
Platform Leveraging
Leveraging Strategy
Strategy
• Market segmentation grid can be used to identify and
map platform leveraging strategies (Meyer, 1997)
High Cost
High Performance
Mid-Range
What Market Niches
Will Your Product Serve?
Low Cost
Low Performance
Segment A
Segment B
Segment C
Derivative Products
Product Platform
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Platform
Platform Strategies:
Strategies: No
No Leveraging
Leveraging
• Niche-specific platforms (products) with very little
sharing of subsystems and/or manufacturing processes
High-end
Product 1 Product 3 Product 4
Mid-range Product 2
Low-end
Segment A Segment B Segment C
• Disadvantages:
R&D can be easily duplicated by different product teams
Manufacturing and capital investments much higher
Manufacturing improvements not adopted by others
Potential for synergy in marketing development is lost

• Result: myriad of products, higher costs, lower margins
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Platform
Strategies: Horizontal
Horizontal Leveraging
Leveraging
• Horizontally leverage platform subsystems and/or
manufacturing processes across different segments
High-end
High-end platform
Mid-range
Low-end
Low-end platform
• Benefits:
Introduce series of related products for different customer
groups without having to “reinvent the wheel”
R&D can develop products more rapidly and with less risk
(since technology has been proven in other market segments)
Manufacturing procurement and retooling costs can be
minimized

PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Platform
Strategies: Vertical
Vertical Leveraging
Leveraging
Mid-range
Low-end
Platform 1
Scale down
High-end
Scale up
• Vertically scale key platform subsystems and/or
manufacturing processes within a market segment
Platform 2
• Benefits:
Leverage knowledge of customer wants and needs within a given
market segment
Product development is less costly (R&D and manufacturing
enjoy same benefits as horizontal leveraging)

• Risk:
Weak platform may undermine competitiveness of product family

PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Platform
Strategies: Beachhead
Beachhead Approach
Approach
• Beachhead approach combines horizontal leveraging
with upward vertical scaling
High-end
Mid-range
Low-end
Platform
• Key Aspects:
Develop low-cost, effective platform and efficient processes
Scale up performance characteristics of low-cost platform to
appeal to needs of mid- and high-end users
Extend platform for customers in different market segments
Combine extensions and scaling to provide step-up functions
required by mid- and high-end users in other segments

PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Example
Example Leveraging
Leveraging Strategies:
Strategies: B&D
B&D Cordless
Cordless
Industry
(Heavy)
Use
Home
(Med)
Use
Home
(Light)
Use
Saws
PENNSTATE
Drills & Drivers
Lighting
© T. W. SIMPSON
Source:
Volkswagen
Volkswagen A-Platform
A-Platform
Audi A3
(3+ 5-door)
Audi TT coupe
Audi TT roadster
VW Golf IV
(3+5
door, station
wagon, convertible,
and Minivan)
VW Bora
VW Beetle
Skoda Octavia
(Bora sedan, coupe,
convertible, and
station wagon)
(New Beetle,
New Beetle
convertible)
(Octavia sedan,
and station wagon)
• VW plans for 19 vehicles based on A-platform
• VW estimates development and investment
cost savings of $1.5 billion/yr using platforms
PENNSTATE
Seat Toledo
Successor
(Toledo, coupe, station
wagon, and convertible)
© T. W. SIMPSON
Modularity
Modularity in
in Automobiles
Automobiles
Different Modules in
an Automobile
Dashboard
Module
PENNSTATE
Source:
• Shimokawa, K.,
Jurgens, U., and
Fujimoto, T. (Eds),
1997, Transforming
Automobile Assembly,
Springer, New York.
© T. W. SIMPSON
Module-Based
Module-Based Product
Product Families
Families
• Modular design is best known approach for effective
product family design

Design a product platform that can be up easily modified by
adding, subtracting, and/or upgrading of modules
• Designing a module-based product family involves
defining its product architecture (Ulrich, 1995):

the arrangement of functional elements
the mapping of functional elements to physical components
the specification of the interfaces among physical components
• Common modules in family form the product platform
• Standardized interfaces facilitate addition, substitution,
and removal of modules
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Creating
Creating aa Module-Based
Module-Based Product
Product Family
Family
1. Decompose products into their representative functions
2. Develop modules with one-to-one (or many-to-one)
correspondence with functions
3. Group common functional modules into a common
product platform
Product
Common
4. Standardize interfaces to
Functions
Platform
facilitate addition, removal,
and substitution of
modules
}
Product
Family
PENNSTATE
{
Specific
Function 1
Specific
Function 2
Specific
Function k
Derivative
Product 1
Derivative
Product 2
Derivative
Product k
© T. W. SIMPSON
Example:
Example: Braun
Braun Family
Family of
of Coffee
Coffee Makers
Makers
Electricity
Water
Ground
Coffee
Store
Water
Heat
Water
Heat
Coffee
Store
Grounds
Mix Coffee
and Water
Store
Coffee
Common
Function
Brew
Coffee
Coffee
Basic
Model
Water
Filter
Thermos
Karafe
Auto Shutoff, Clock
Adjustable
Heater
Frothing
Attachment
KF130
KF145
KF170
KF180
KF185
KF190
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Sectional
Sectional Modularity
Modularity at
at Nippondenso
Nippondenso
• Nippondenso can make 288 different panel meters
from variations of 8 modules (17 different parts)
PENNSTATE
© T. W.
©S
T.IMPSON,
W. SIMPSON
2001
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Rolling
Rolling Chassis
Chassis Module
Module
• Consists of brake, fuel, steering, and exhaust systems,
suspension, and driveline assembled to the frame
• Largest and most
complex module
provided by suppliers
• Used in both truck and
SUV manufacturing,
accounting for 25% of
vehicle content
• Dana’s rolling chassis
saved DaimlerChrysler
$700 million at the
Dodge Dakota facility
Source:
• Kimberly, W., 1999, “Back to the Future,” Automotive Engineer, May , 24 (5), pp. 62-64.
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Smart
Smart
common car features
PENNSTATE
Source: http://www.smart.com
© T. W. SIMPSON
Mercedes
Mercedes Vario
Vario Research
Research Car
Car
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Mercedes
Mercedes Vario
Vario Research
Research Car
Car
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Mercedes
Mercedes Vario
Vario Research
Research Car
Car
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Mercedes
Mercedes Vario
Vario Research
Research Car
Car
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Scale-based
Scale-based Product
Product Families
Families
• Develop a product platform that
can be “scaled” or “stretched” in
one or more dimensions to
satisfy a variety of market niches
• Boeing 737 is divided into
3 platforms:
Initial-model (100 and 200)
Classic (300, 400, and 500)
Next generation (600, 700,
800, and 900 models)

• The Boeing 777 has also
been designed knowing
that it will be “stretched”
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Boeing
Boeing 737
737 Interior
Interior Layouts
Layouts
737-600
737-300
110 passengers (8 first class)
737-700
737-400
737-800
737-500
PENNSTATE
737-900
© T. W. SIMPSON
Dimensions
Dimensions of
of Boeing
Boeing 737-300,
737-300, -400,
-400, and
and -500
-500
• All three aircraft share common height and width...
…but their fuselage lengths are different:
Boeing 737-300
PENNSTATE
Boeing 737-400
Boeing 737-500
© T. W. SIMPSON
Example
Example Leveraging
Leveraging Strategies:
Strategies: Rolls
Rolls Royce
Royce Engines
Engines
• Rolls Royce scales its aircraft engines to satisfy a variety
of requirements and expedite testing/certification
Reference:
(Rothwell and
Gardiner, 1990)

Incremental improvements and variations made to increase thrust
and reduce fuel consumption

RTM322 is common to turboshaft, turboprop, and turbofan engines

When scaled 1.8x, RTM322 serves as the core for RB550 series
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Universal
Universal Motor
Motor Platform
Platform
• Universal motor is most common
component in power tools
• Challenge: redesign the universal
motor to fit into 122 basic tools
with hundreds of variations
geometry and axial profile common
stack length varied from 0.8”-1.75”
to obtain 60-650 Watts
fully automated assembly process
material, labor, and overhead costs
reduced from $0.51 to $0.31
labor cost reduced from $0.14 to
$0.02

PENNSTATE
650
Watts
• Result: a common platform where
Electric motor field components
prior to standardization
60
0.8”
Stack length
1.75”
Universal motor variants
© T. W. SIMPSON
Opportunity:
Opportunity: Product
Product Platform
Platform Definitions
Definitions
• Challenge: what requirements enable a platform?
• For example, in automobiles:
common wheel-base? width?
common front and rear track?
A3

Σ
163.5
34.1
98.9
30.4
Beetle
Volkswagen (A-platform)
vs.
Honda (Accord platform)
Σ
161.1
?
98.9
?
Golf IV
Σ
163.3
33.9
98.9
30.6
Octavia
Σ
177.6
36
98.9
42.7
Source:
Source: (Naughton, 1997)
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Opportunity:
Opportunity: Manufacturing
Manufacturing Platforms
Platforms
• Bosch manufactures braking systems for GM, Toyota, etc.
What types of partial commonization are most essential for
manufacturing complexity reduction?
How can our manufacturing strategy best enable savings from
product commonization?

• Challenge: Simulate alternative manufacturing layouts
Step in the mannual process of the TMC8 line out
Step in the mannual process of the Assembly cell
Assembly cell
TMC8 machine line out
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Opportunity:
Opportunity: Wed-Based
Wed-Based Platform
Platform Customization
Customization
• Challenge:

Capitalize on web-based
customization trends in
the automobile industry:
– identify key enablers
and drivers
– identify limiting
factors that
hinder growth
Examine platform
architecture and
process capabilities
required to enable
web-based
automotive
customization
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Opportunity:
Opportunity: Flexible
Flexible Production
Production Technology
Technology
• F.A.S.T. = Flexible Automotive Structures Technology
• F.A.S.T. = Product flexibility + production flexibility
• Challenge:

Develop Activity-Based Costing
Analysis tool to support rapid
manufacturing cost estimation
for hydro-formed and roll-formed
parts within automotive frame
Baseline design
PENNSTATE
Targeted variants
© T. W. SIMPSON
Production
Production Cost
Cost Estimation
Estimation Framework
Framework
to
to Support
Support Product
Product Family
Family Design
Design
• Objective:

Develop a production cost framework based on Activity-Based
Costing ABC to facilitate product family decision-making
• ABC steps:
1. Describe a company’s production system
2. Identify and classify major activities and resources
3. Collect cost for each activity
4. Select cost-driver bases
5. Measure activity costs per unit of cost-driver bases, assign the
costs to each product
• Example:

Estimate the production costs of hydroforming processes for
automotive components
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Example:
Example: Hydroforming
Hydroforming Processes
Processes
Hydroforming processes for automotive body structures
Hydroformed parts in automobiles:
A. Roof Headers
B. Instrument Panel Supports
C. Radiator Supports
D. Engine Cradles
E. Roof Rail
F. Frame Rails
Process steps for hydroforming processes
1. Close die
PENNSTATE
2. Fill with water
3. Move cylinders and
regulate water pressure
4. Open press and
unload component
© T. W. SIMPSON
Activity
Activity Flow
Flow and
and Resources
Resources
1. Describe the production system
S to ra g e
S to ra g e
L a s e r trim
L a s e r trim
B lo w
o ff
B lo w
o ff
in e
In l s h
a
W
In li
n
Wa e
sh
End
c u ttin g
2. Identify and classify major
activities and resources
Resources:
• Labor, machinery, robots, tools,
materials, utilities, capital,
building, poka-yoka, etc.
End
c u ttin g
F in a l
h y d ro fo rm in g
F in a l
h y d ro fo rm in g
P re c ru sh
P re c ru sh
D r y in g
Material Flow
Unit-activities (U): operation
Batch-activities (B): material handling,
transfer, and storage
Product-activities (P): repair and
maintenance
Facility-activity (F): support
Lube
R o ta r y
d ra w b e n d e r
PENNSTATE
L a s e r trim
R o ta r y
d ra w b e n d e r
Storage
operator
Sensor
station
robot
transfer
Inspection
load/unload
© T. W. SIMPSON
Activities
Activities and
and Cost-Drivers
Cost-Drivers
3. Collect costs for each activity
4. Select cost-driver bases
Activity
Cost
Activity Level/driver
Activity
Operation
Activity Level/driver
In-line washer
P
Material
U
Pre-crush station
P
Labor
U
Support equipment
P
B
Robots
P
Laser (4 items)
P
Automation
P
Material transfer
Scrapping
P/machine hours
Repair and maintenance (7
items)
RM machinery
P/machine hours
RM labor
P/machine hours
Utilities (30 items)
Oil, gas, electricity
Support
Receiving and Shipping
F/plants
Inventory
F/plants
Quality
F/plants
Human resource
F/plants
P/machine hours
Capital
PENNSTATE
Cost
CNC bending
P
Accounting
F/plants
Dry and lubrication
P
Others (12 items)
F/plants
Hydroforming
P
Fringe Benefits
P/laborers
© T. W. SIMPSON
Activity
Activity and
and Cost
Cost Allocation
Allocation
5. Measure activity costs and assign costs to each product
Breakdown of Production Costs of Hydroforming Processes
20.4%
22.5%
2.1%
7.2%
9.3%
18.7%
0.5%
1.5%
3.2%
5.0%
Capital
Fringe
Electic Power
Misc.
2.8%
6.9%
Labor (direct)
Oil & Gas
Oils grease compound wate
Maintenance Mach & Equip
Labor (indirect)
Purchased Service
Scrap
Tube Cost
Note: only 22.5% of total expenses accounts for the consumption of direct
resources: direct labor (2.1%) and material cost (20.4%)
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Extensions
Extensions to
to Product
Product Platforms
Platforms
• Production costing for product platforms:

Increasing the number of products is likely to create new activities and raise
the level of use of existing activities during production
ABC is the most appropriate costing method to address the production
costs for product variety
On the contrary, product platforms are formed by sharing parts and
subassemblies under companies’ strategy and play an economical role in
reducing production costs by restraining new activity generation and
increase of the level of existing activities
• To estimate the cost savings generated by product platforms,
designers need to investigate two types of cost savings during
production:
1.Savings from shared resources (e.g., machine, tooling, space, etc) and
2.Savings from reduced level of activities (e.g., reduced part handling, etc).
• Designers can then suggest product platforms for new family
design by identifying high cost savings in production
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON
Closing
Closing Remarks
Remarks
• Product platform design is a difficult task involving:

all of the complexities of product development compounded
by the need to design multiple products simultaneously
innovative, creative solutions to satisfy a variety of customer
requirements and market niches efficiently and effectively
• The key to a successful product family is the product
platform around which it is derived:
multiple platform leveraging strategies
module-based product family
Management
scale-based product family
& Marketing

Challenge is to ensure that the
product family is “optimal” for
the company and its customers!
PENNSTATE
$
Design &
Engineering
Manufacturing
& Production
© T. W. SIMPSON
References
References
• Muffatto, M. (1999) Introducing a Platform Strategy in Product Development,
International Journal of Production Economics, 60-61, 145-153.
• Meyer, M. H. & Lehnerd, A. P. (1997) The Power of Product Platforms: Building
Value and Cost Leadership, The Free Press, New York.
• Park, J. and Simpson, T. W. (2004) Development of a Production Cost
Estimation Framework to Support Product Family Design, International Journal
of Product Research, in press.
• Simpson, T. W. (2004) Product Platform Design and Customization: Status and
Promise, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and
Manufacturing, 18(1), in press.
PDFs available on-line at: http://edog.mne.psu.edu/simpson-pubs.html
• Simpson, T. W., Siddique, Z. and Jiao, J., eds., Product Platform and Product
Family Design: Methods and Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, New
York, forthcoming (Summer 2005).
• To learn more about product families, visit my course website for ME/IE 597B:
Designing Product Families: http://www.me.psu.edu/simpson/courses/me597b/
• Participate in the 2005 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf. (Sept. 24-28,
2005, Long Beach, CA): http://www.me.washington.edu/~asmeda/2005DAC/
PENNSTATE
© T. W. SIMPSON