Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T05:02:58.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From a literature review of product configuration definitions to a reference framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2014

Gudmundur Oddsson  and
Klaes R. Ladeby
Gudmundur Oddsson*
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland
Klaes R. Ladeby
Affiliation:
GEA Group AG, Soeborg, Denmark
*
Reprint requests to: Gudmundur Oddsson, Department of Industrial Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Iceland, Hjardarhaga 2-6, Reykjavik 107, Iceland. E-mail: gvo@hi.is
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents a reference framework for the configuration process. The reference framework is established through an extensive review of existing literature, and as such consolidates an extensive theoretical base. The review of literature shows a broadening of the understanding of the configuration task. The definition of the configuration task is somewhat ambiguous because different research groups define configuration tasks differently. This paper proposes a reference framework for configuration that permits a more precise understanding of a configuration task, a definition of the basic concepts in product configuration, and a total configuration system view that describes how operators come together to perform the configuration task in the configuration process. We will define the product, the product model, the configuration task, and the configuration system, and put the whole thing into perspective with the theory of technical systems, where we describe the configuration process and the different abstraction level of configurations. We will also use our resulting framework to describe sales configuration, technical configuration, and reconfiguration. We do this to synthesize previous work, to clarify and make coherent definitions of relevant terms, to extent the definition of product configuration to include “softer” products like information and service, and finally, to give a comparative framework to analyze work done in the field of product configuration. The total configuration system, together with the definition of key concepts, comprises a strong reference framework when working with, developing, and analyzing configuration systems.

Keywords

DefinitionFrameworkProduct Configuration
Type
Regular Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 28 , Issue 4: Design of Complex Engineered Systems , November 2014 , pp. 413 - 428
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andreasen, M.M. (1991). Design methodology. Journal of Engineering Design 2(4), 321–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, M.M. (1994). Modelling—the language of the designer. Journal of Engineering Design 5(2), 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, R.A., & Chung, M.J. (1995). Maznaging engineering data for complex products. Research in Engineering Design—Theory Applications and Concurrent Engineering 7(4), 215–231.Google Scholar
Barker, V.E., & O'Connor, D.E. (1989). Expert systems for configuration at Digital: XCON and beyond. Communications of the ACM 32(3), 298–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertalanffy, L.V. (1950). An Outline of General System Theory (1st ed.). London: Thomas Nelson and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertalanffy, L.V. (1972). The history and status of general systems theory. Academy of Management Journal 15(4), 407–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1998). Contextual Design—Defining Customer-Centered Systems. San Francisco, CA: Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B.A., Budgen, D., Turner, M., & Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software 80(4), 571–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briere-Cote, A., Rivest, L., & Desrochers, A. (2010). Adaptive generic product structure modelling for design reuse in engineer-to-order products. Computers in Industry 61(1), 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D.C. (1998). Defining configuring. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 12(4), 301–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, X.H., Jiao, J.X., & Tseng, M.M. (2002). Product family modeling and design support: an approach based on graph rewriting systems. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 16(2), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, K., & Jensen, K.L. (2005). Framework for assessing configuration readiness. Proc. 3rd Interdisciplinary World Congr. Mass Customization and Personalization.Google Scholar
Erens, F., & Verhulst, K. (1997). Architectures for product families. Computers in Industry 33(2–3), 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felfernig, A. (2007). Standardized configuration knowledge representations as technological foundation for mass customization. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 54(1), 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felfernig, A., Friedrich, G.E., & Jannach, D. (2000). UML as domain specific language for the construction of knowledge-based configuration systems. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 10(4), 449–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felfernig, A., Friedrich, G., Jannach, D., Stumptner, M., & Zanker, M. (2003). Configuration knowledge representations for Semantic Web applications. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 17(1), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forza, C., & Salvador, F. (2002). Managing for variety in the order acquisition and fulfilment process: the contribution of product configuration systems. International Journal of Production Economics 76(1), 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forza, C., & Salvador, F. (2007). Product Information Management for Mass Customization: Connecting Customer, Front-Office and Back-Office for Fast and Efficient Customization. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Forza, C., & Salvador, F. (2008). Application support to product variety management. International Journal of Production Research 46(3), 817–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franke, D.W. (1998). Configuration research and commercial solutions. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 12(4), 295–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giarratano, J.C., & Riley, G. (2005). Expert Systems: Principles and Programming, 4th ed.Boston: Thomson.Google Scholar
Gimenez, D.A., Vegetti, M., Leone, H.P., & Henninga, G.P. (2008). PRoduct ONTOlogy: defining product-related concepts for logistics planning activities. Computers in Industry 59(2–3), 231–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gzara, L., Rieu, D., & Tollenaere, M. (2003). Product information systems engineering: an approach for building product models by reuse of patterns. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 19(3), 239–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haag, A. (1998). Sales configuration in business processes. IEEE Intelligent Systems 13, 78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haug, A. (2007). Representation of Industrial Knowledge—as a Basis for Developing and Maintaining Product Configurators. PhD Thesis. Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark.Google Scholar
Haug, A., Hvam, L., & Mortensen, N.H. (2010). A layout technique for class diagrams to be used in product configuration projects. Computers in Industry 61(5), 409–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haug, A., Ladeby, K., & Edwards, K. (2009). From engineer-to-order to mass customization. Management Research News 32(7), 633–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegge, H.M.H., & Wortmann, J.C. (1991). Generic bill-of-material: a new product model. International Journal of Production Economics 23(1–3), 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helo, P.T., Xu, Q.L., Kyllonen, S.J., & Jiao, R.J. (2010). Integrated vehicle configuration system—connecting the domains of mass customization. Computers in Industry 61(1), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopgood, A.A. (2000). Intelligent Systems for Engineers and Scientists (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, G.Q., Li, L., & Chen, X. (2008). ppXML: a generic and extensible language for lifecycle modelling of platform products. Computers in Industry 59(2–3), 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubka, V., & Eder, W.E. (1988). Theory of Technical Systems—A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hvam, L. (1999). A procedure for building product models. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 15(1), 77–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hvam, L., Malis, M., Hansen, B., & Riis, J. (2004). Reengineering of the quotation process: application of knowledge based systems. Business Process Management Journal 10(2), 200–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, P. (1999). Introduction to Expert Systems (3rd ed.). Essex: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Jiao, J.X., & Tseng, M.M. (1999). An information modeling framework for product families to support mass customization manufacturing. CIRP Annals 1999—Manufacturing Technology, 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, F.L., Kimura, F., Kjellberg, T., Lu, S.C.Y., van der Wolf, A.C.H., Ating, L., ElMaraghy, H.A., Eversheim, W., Iwata, K., Suh, N.P., Tipnis, V.A., & Weck, M. (1993). Product modelling. CIRP Annals 42(2), 695–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard-Barton, D. (1987). The case for integrative innovation: an expert system at Digital. Sloan Management Review 29(1), 7–19.Google Scholar
Luh, Y.P., Chu, C.H., & Pan, C.C. (2010). Data management of green product development with generic modularized product architecture. Computers in Industry 61(3), 223–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magro, D. (2010). COCONF: conceptual language-based configuration. AI Communications 23(1), 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mailharro, D. (1998). A classification and constraint-based framework for configuration. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 12(4), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannisto, T., Peltonen, H., Martio, A., & Sulonen, R. (1998). Modelling generic product structures in STEP. Computer-Aided Design 30(14), 1111–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannisto, T., Peltonen, H., Soininen, T., & Sulonen, R. (2001). Multiple abstraction levels in modelling product structures. Data & Knowledge Engineering 36(1), 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, J. (1982). R1: A rule-based configurer of computer systems. Artificial Intelligence 19(1), 39–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, J. (1993). R1 (“XCON”) at age 12: lessons from an elementary school achiever. Artificial Intelligence 59(1–2), 241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mckay, A., Erens, F., & Bloor, M.S. (1996). Relating product definition and product variety. Research in Engineering Design—Theory Applications and Concurrent Engineering 8(2), 63–80.Google Scholar
Mittal, S., & Frayman, F. (1989). Towards a generic model of configuration tasks. Proc. Int. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1395–1401. San Francisco, CA: Kaufmann.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, F.J., MacCallum, K.J., Hogg, T.D., & Yu, B. (1996). Product structuring in a small manufacturing enterprise. Computers in Industry 31(3), 281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabin, D., & Weigel, R. (1998). Product configuration frameworks—a survey. IEEE Intelligent Systems 13(4), 42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvador, F., & Forza, C. (2004). Configuring products to address the customization–responsiveness squeeze: a survey of management issues and opportunities. International Journal of Production Economics 91(3), 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schierholt, K. (2001). Process configuration: combining the principles of product configuration and process planning. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 15(5), 411–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartze, S. (1996). Configuration of Multiple-Variant Products—Application Orientation and Vagueness in Customer Requirements. vdf Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH Zurich BWI Betriebswissinschaftliches Institut.Google Scholar
Shaw, N.K., Bloor, M.S., & Pennington, A.d. (1989). Product data models. Research in Engineering Design 1(1), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snavely, G.L., & Papalambros, P.Y. (1993). Abstraction as a configuration design methodology. Advances in Design Automation 65 (pt.) 1, 297–305.Google Scholar
Soininen, T., & Tiihonen, J. (1997). Product Configurators—Information System Support for Configurable Products. Technical report TKO-B137, Laboratory of Information Processing Science, Helsinki University of Technology.Google Scholar
Soininen, T., Tiihonen, J., Mannisto, T., & Sulonen, R. (1998). Towards a general ontology of configuration. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design Analysis and Manufacturing 12(4), 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stonebraker, P.W. (1996). Restructuring the bill of material for productivity: a strategic evaluation of product configuration. International Journal of Production Economics 45(1–3), 251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stumptner, M. (1997). An overview of knowledge-based configuration. AI Communications 10(2), 111–125.Google Scholar
Svensson, D., & Malmqvist, J. (2002). Strategies for product structure management at manufacturing firms. Transactions of the ASME—S-Computing and Information Science in Engineering (1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teije, A.T., Harmelen, F.v., Schreiber, A.T., & Wielinga, B.J. (1998). Construction of problem-solving methods as parametric design. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 49(4), 363.Google Scholar
Tseng, M.M., & Piller, F.T. (2005). The Customer Centric Enterprise—Advances in Mass Customization and Personalization. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.Google Scholar
Ulrich, K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research Policy 24(3), 419–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdouw, C.N., Beulens, A.J.M., Trienekens, J.H., & Verwaart, T. (2010). Towards dynamic reference information models: readiness for ICT mass customisation. Computers in Industry 61(9), 833–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, W., & Liu, J.K. (2008). OWL/SWRL representation methodology for EXPRESS-driven product information model—part I. Implementation methodology. Computers in Industry 59(6), 580–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Z.D., Xie, S.Q., & Yang, W.Z. (2008). A case study on STEP-enabled generic product modelling framework. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 21(1), 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar