Abstract
Picking the best design solution among a small collection of viable alternatives is
often a part of engineering design. The traditional method to do it is the weighted multicriteria decision procedure. However, the Axiomatic Design (AD) framework does not employ weighting factors to deal with design preferences. Instead, AD uses the careful placing of each design range. This paper stresses the reasons AD does not include weighting factors—an imaginary flaw that teachers and designers should not attempt to change because that would break the rational soundness of AD teaching and practice. A numerical example supports our rationale.
often a part of engineering design. The traditional method to do it is the weighted multicriteria decision procedure. However, the Axiomatic Design (AD) framework does not employ weighting factors to deal with design preferences. Instead, AD uses the careful placing of each design range. This paper stresses the reasons AD does not include weighting factors—an imaginary flaw that teachers and designers should not attempt to change because that would break the rational soundness of AD teaching and practice. A numerical example supports our rationale.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 012054 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering |
| Volume | 1235 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2022 |
| Event | The 25th Edition of IManEE 2021 International Conference - Iași, Romania Duration: 21 Oct 2021 → 22 Oct 2021 |