A Case Study on Automotive Battery System Design - Title Page - MIT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In many cases, uncertainty and the risk of investment in flexibility is low. For example, TheBlack and Decker Lids Off is a jar opener. A natural extension of a jar opener might be a bottleand can opener. Hence the evolution to the “Open-It-All Center”, with the additional attributesfor opening bottles and cans. With this expected evolution, large reuse is possible from oneproduct to the next and open spaces may be created for the evolution. Tilstra et. al establishmethods for enhancing flexibility in future product design evolution in an industrial case study ofthe Lids Off jar opener(Tilstra, Backlund, Seepersad, & Wood, 2008).With expected productevolution, both the designer and the manufacturer enjoy the benefits of flexibility.Professor Olivier de Weck proposes a methodology to develop a flexible product line that isDeleted: dbased on a product platform using a flexible platform design process. Product design can beused to provide flexibility in manufacturing for shifting demand or requirements at a later date.Whereas traditional platforming provides flexibility within boundaries due to the definedinterfaces, de Weck’s seven step process is used to identify and value flexibility in the platformusing financial analysis.De Weck’s case study on automotive panel design assigns vehicle elements as flexible orDeleted: dinflexible, and determines the value of each. As an example, the floor pan is deemed inflexible;the roof panel is flexible. At the top-levelarchitecture, de Weck creates a differentiated productthat can respond to demand and requirements changes, while identifying key platformelements(de Weck, Suh, & Chang, Flexible product platforms: framework and case study,2007).Rather than taking the traditional design for commonality approach of using as manyidentical components as possible, de Weck has used a prioritization approach to flexibility.18
The methodology used by de Weck has many similarities to the work in this thesis, identifyinguncertainty and developing flexibility using real-options valuation methods. The primarydifference between this thesis and the case study on flexible product platforms is the uncertaintyin the core technology due to product innovation and the real-time support provided for Fordrather than merely another case study.2.7: Flexibility in R&DResearch and Development (R&D) is a highly uncertain investment. Due to the nature of R&D,there existshigh uncertainty in technology and market demand. Technology researched for oneapplication often finds a second, third, or fourth life in a new one. Post-Its are a ubiquitousexample, as the reusable glue was an innovation looking for a product, taking multiple years tofind a home on the work desk (3M).Flexible design in R&D is incorporated due to uncertainty. A microchip may be created withmultiple interfaces, in order to tolerate usage in a range of system applications. A FieldProgrammable Gate Array (FPGA) is a reconfigurable processor, used widely in R&D projectsprior to productization, where a dedicated processor will eventually be used. Leaving flexibilityin a component, system, or application allows the R&D team to acknowledge the risk that theirproduct may or may not be directly tied to a known end product or application. When theapplication becomes clear during product design, the FPGA might be replaced by a cheaper, nonflexiblededicated microchip.From a business standpoint, R&D is difficult to value. Just as the science and engineering teammust remain flexible due to the uncertain outcome of research, the business team must assess the19
Page 1 and 2: SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE DECISIONS UNDER
Page 4 and 5: SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE DECISIONS UNDER
Page 7 and 8: Figures and TablesTable 4.1: Curren
Page 9 and 10: untested, unknown technology like h
Page 11 and 12: Chapter 2: Literature Survey—Flex
Page 13 and 14: solutions, with a discussion of how
Page 15 and 16: may have extension beyond those pro
Page 17: Meyer defines the steps to product
Page 21 and 22: Chapter 3: Flexibility Valuation Mo
Page 23 and 24: action; the analyst continues to de
Page 25 and 26: 3.2: The Garage Case</stron
Page 27 and 28: The Garage Case is
Page 29 and 30: In a financial analysis, the engine
Page 31 and 32: outcome may have, optimistically, a
Page 33 and 34: ehavior, presenting the risk of exp
Page 35 and 36: ) Voltage/current may be different
Page 37 and 38: An FHEV or PHEV has different contr
Page 39 and 40: limited capacity for expansion, cau
Page 41 and 42: Chapter 6: Battery Thermal ControlH
Page 43 and 44: In fact, vehicles in the market alr
Page 45 and 46: 6.2: Flexibility Valuation Modeling
Page 47 and 48: This simulation’s primary assumpt
Page 49 and 50: Another interesting observation is
Page 51 and 52: wide range of uncertainties in both
Page 53 and 54: process with less risk. An investme
Page 55 and 56: Beyond the existing model, there ar
Page 57 and 58: Chapter 7: SummaryThe choices made
Page 59 and 60: Clayton, M. (2012, March 5). Chevy
Page 61 and 62: Stenquist, P. (2011, 1 28). New Yor
Page 63: Font: 11 ptPage 6: [22] Formatted M

A Case Study on Automotive Battery System Design - Title Page - MIT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?