| Summary: | Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, System Design & Management Program, 2004. === Includes bibliographical references (p. 131). === Automobiles are becoming increasingly complicated and are creating more of a challenge for the engineering teams working on them. This thesis focuses on improving the methods of managing powertrain attributes and the interactions between them. We are concentrating on the particular attributes of Shift Quality, Performance Feel, Driveability, and Trailer Towing. Engineering work to achieve specific attributes is currently handled attribute by attribute and the system is brought together later. This lack of a more holistic view results in a large amount of engineering rework as attributes are balanced. Reducing or eliminating this rework is the goal. A Design Structure Matrix (DSM) was used to document interactions between the powertrain attributes, sub-attributes and design parameters. Research on various reporting formats was done to determine the best method to communicate the interactions. DSM experts were interviewed about the benefits and pitfalls of using a DSM for reference. Several surveys were done to determine engineering's familiarity with various methods of displaying system interactions and their preferences for reporting the interactions. We also compared the interactions to existing CAE capability to determine the current state of attributes management. The DSM showed numerous interactions between powertrain attributes, other vehicle attributes and design parameters. The analysis of existing CAE tools showed a significant percentage of interactions are not currently being modeled. The responses to survey questions on output methods indicated that a DSM, while being an excellent tool for capturing the interactions, might not be the best tool for displaying the interactions to engineers. The surveys revealed that === (cont.) engineers are looking for more information than a DSM or any systems interactions model contain, such as probability that an interaction exists, expected direction and levels of the interaction, and quick and simple methods for better understanding of these potential interactions. This desired level of detail highlights the need to share Lessons Learned, develop a corporate knowledge base and develop best practices. A review of the organizational structure and engineering focus indicated that increased focus is needed on powertrain attributes to better match customer expectations. Additionally, organizational structure changes are recommended to increase visibility of powertrain attributes. === by Daniel J. Rinkevich [and] Frederick P. Samson. === S.M.
|
|---|
