The variation management framework (VMF): A unifying graphical representation of robust design

References

• Adiano, C., and A. V. Roth. 1994. Beyond the house of quality: Dynamic QFD. Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology 1 (1):25–37.
   Google Scholar
• Bartolomei, J. E., D. E. Hastings, R. de Neufville, and D. H. Rhodes. 2012. Engineering systems multiple-domain matrix: An organizing framework for modeling large-scale complex systems. Systems Engineering 15 (1):41–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boorla, S.M., and T. J. Howard. 2016. Production monitoring system for understanding product robustness. Advances in Production Engineering & Management 11 (3):159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouza-Rodríguez, J. B., A. Comesaña-Campos, and A. Menéndez-Díaz. 2014. A graphical method to assist quality decisions throughout the product development process. Quality Engineering 26 (4):467–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakhunashvili, A., P. M. Johansson, and B. L. Bergman. 2004, January. Variation mode and effect analysis. In Reliability and Maintainability, 2004 Annual Symposium-RAMS (pp. 364–369). IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen M., T. J. Howard, and J. J. Rasmussen. 2012. The foundation for robust design - enabling robustness through kinematic design and design clarity. Proceedings of the International Design Conference - DESIGN ‘12, Croatia, pp. 817–826.
   Google Scholar
• Cross N. 2008. Engineering design methods 4th ed. Chichester, UK: Wiley Press.
   Google Scholar
• DIN ISO 286. 1990. Iso System of limits and fits. Germany: Beuth Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Dantan, J. Y., A. Hassan, A. Etienne, A. Siadat, and P. Martin. 2008. Information modeling for variation management during the product and manufacturing process design. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) 2 (2):107–118.
   Google Scholar
• Ebro, M., and T. J. Howard. 2016. Robust design principles for reducing variation in functional performance. Journal of Engineering Design 27 (1–3):75–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eifler T., M. Ebro, and T. J. Howard. 2013. A Classification of the industrial relevance of robust design methods. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Vol. 9, pp. 427–436.
   Google Scholar
• Eppinger S.D., and T. R. Browning. 2012. Design structure matrix methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Franceschini, F., and D. Maisano. 2015. Prioritization of QFD customer requirements based on the law of comparative judgments. Quality Engineering 27 (4):437–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forslund, K., A. Dagman, and R. Söderberg. 2006. Visual sensitivity: Communicating poor quality. In DS 36: Proceedings DESIGN 2006, the 9th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia.
   Google Scholar
• Forslund, K., M. Karlsson, and R. Söderberg. 2013. Impacts of geometrical manufacturing quality on the visual product experience. International Journal of Design 7 (1):69–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghiya, K. K., A. Terry Bahill, and W. L. Chapman. 1999. QFD: Validating robustness. Quality Engineering 11 (4):593–611.
   Google Scholar
• Göhler, S. M., M. Ebro, and T. J. Howard. 2016a. Mechanisms and coherences of robust design methodology: A robust design process proposal. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1180952.
   Google Scholar
• Göhler S. M., D. Frey, and T. J. Howard. 2016b. A model-based approach to associate complexity and robustness in engineering systems. Research in Engineering Design. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0236-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Göhler S. M., T. Eifler, and T. J. Howard. 2016c. Robustness Metrics: Consolidating the multiple approaches to quantify Robustness. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design - special issue on “Simulation-based Design under Uncertainty” 138 (11):111407 (12 pages).
   Google Scholar
• Huittinen, O. 2015. Mechanics design methods and customer experienced visual appearance in color and part interface combinations. Masters Thesis, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland. http://dspace.cc.tut.fi/dpub/handle/123456789/22957.
   Google Scholar
• IDLB (I Download Blog). 2012. How the iphone5 is made. http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/09/12/how-the-iphone-5-is-made/
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. B., Munch, N., Howard, T. J. and Pedersen, S. N. 2015. Robust design of sounds in mechanical mechanisms. In ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (pp. V05CT08A020-V05CT08A020). New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, P., A. Chakhunashvili, S. Barone, and B. Bergman. 2006. Variation mode and effect analysis: a practical tool for quality improvement. Quality and reliability engineering international 22 (8):865–876.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johannesson, P., B. Bergman, T. Svensson, M. Arvidsson, Å. Lönnqvist, S. Barone, and J. Maré. 2013. A robustness approach to reliability. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 29 (1):17–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. J., and B. R. Cho. 2002. Development of priority-based robust design. Quality Engineering 14 (3):355–363.
   Google Scholar
• Kovach, J., and B. R. Cho. 2008. Solving multiresponse optimization problems using quality function-based robust design. Quality Engineering 20 (3):346–360.
   Google Scholar
• Krogstie, L., M. Ebro, and T. J. Howard. 2014. How to implement and apply robust design: Insights from industrial practice. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 26 (11–12):1387–1405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.934520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marguet, B., N. Chevassus, D. E. Whitney, and R. Mantripragada. 2000. Variation management in design for aircraft assembly (No. 2000-01-1729). SAE Technical Paper. doi:10.4271/2000-01-1729
   Google Scholar
• Muteau, S., and P. Fahrner. 2009. U.S. Patent No. 7,479,246. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
   Google Scholar
• Okholm, A. B., M. Rask, M. Ebro, T. Eifler, M. Holmbeg, and T. J. Howard. 2014. Improving process capability database usage for robust design engineering by generalising measurement data. In DS 77: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 13th International Design Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, S. N., M. E. Christensen, and T. J. Howard. 2016. Robust design requirements specification: A quantitative method for requirements development using quality loss functions. Journal of Engineering Design 27 (8):544–567. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2016.1183163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schvaneveldt, S. J., and T. Enkawa. 1992. Variability and quality loss in services: Concepts and countermeasures. Total Quality Management 3 (3):233–242.
   Google Scholar
• Suh, N. P. 1990. The principles of design. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Suh, N. P. 2001. Axiomatic design: Advances and applications. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taguchi G., S. Chowdhury, and Y. Wu. 2005. Taguchi's quality engineering handbook. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, A. C., S. Donnelly, and B. Ertan. 2000. More than just robust design: Why product development organizations still contend with variation and its impact on quality. Research in Engineering Design 12 (3):127–143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornton, A. C. 2004. Variation risk management: Focusing quality improvements in product development and production. Somerset, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Wagersten, O., K. Forslund, C. Wickman, and R. Söderberg. 2011. A framework for non-nominal visualization and perceived quality evaluation. In ASME 2011 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (pp. 739–748). New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Zaitsev, N., and S. Dror. 2013. Water quality function deployment. Quality Engineering 25 (4):356–369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar