No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
AN APPROACH TO ENHANCE PRODUCT UNIVERSALITY USING VAGUE NUMBERS DURING INITIAL DESIGN PHASE
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 July 2021
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Universal design facilitates all user, a convenient interaction with the environment, product and services without the need for any adaptation and specialized designs. Recent studies have shown that designers and manufacturers are focusing only on a limited group of users during product development. Current design process or methodology cannot cater to all set of users i.e. Fully Abled People (FAP), Specially Abled People (SAP), and Differently Abled People (DAP) due to complexity in need interpretation. Identification and extraction of needs of diverse user set is a complex problem. Generally, information gathered from the users is linguistic in nature and comprises of uncertainties and ambiguities, which hamper conversion of users’ requirements into product attributes to deliver universal solutions. The aim of this work is to eliminate these uncertainties and extract the actual needs of all users. This work proposes the integration of Universal Product Design model with generic design process to improve universal product design practice. Linguistic preferences of the users are captured and converted into vague numbers to identify the important product attributes and provides a systematic framework of need prioritization.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Aslaksen, F., Bergh, S., Bringa, O.R. and Heggem, E.K. (1997), Universal Design: Planning and Design for All, available at: http://home.online.no/~bringa/universal.htm.Google Scholar
Benktzon, M. (1993), “Designing for our future selves: the Swedish experience”, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 19–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biihler, C. (1996), “Approach to the analysis of user requirements in assistive technology”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 17, pp. 187–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, C.W., Green, L. V., Lekwijit, S., Lu, L. and Escobar, G. (2019), “Assessing the impact of service level when customer needs are uncertain: An empirical investigation of hospital step-down units”, Management Science, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 751–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chou, J.R. (2012), “A linguistic evaluation approach for universal design”, Information Sciences, Vol. 190, pp. 76–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, P.J., Waller, S. and Cardoso, C. (2015), “Approaches to estimating user exclusion”, Applied Ergonomics, Elsevier Ltd and The Ergonomics Society, Vol. 46, pp. 304–310.Google ScholarPubMed
Connell, B.R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., et al. (1997), “The Center for Universal Design - Universal Design Principles”, available at: http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm (accessed 25 April 2015).Google Scholar
Cooper, A. (1999), The Inmates Are Running the Asylum, The Inmates Are Running the Asylum, available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-99786-9_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirbilek, O. and Demirkan, H. (2004a), “Universal product design involving elderly users: a participatory design model.”, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 361–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirbilek, O. and Demirkan, H. (2004b), “Universal product design involving elderly users: A participatory design model”, Applied Ergonomics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirbilek, O. and Sener, B. (2003), “Product design, semantics and emotional response”, Ergonomics, Vol. 46 No. 13-14, pp. 1346–1360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geng, X., Chu, X. and Zhang, Z. (2010), “Expert Systems with Applications A new integrated design concept evaluation approach based on vague sets”, Expert Systems With Applications, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 37 No. 9, pp. 6629–6638.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, I. and Morer, P. (2016), “Ergonomics for the inclusion of older workers in the knowledge workforce and a guidance tool for designers”, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 53, pp. 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, H.-Z., Bo, R. and Chen, W. (2006), “An integrated computational intelligence approach to product concept generation and evaluation”, Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 567–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keates, S. Clarkson, P.J. (2004), Countering Design Exclusion: An Introduction to Inclusive Design, Springer ed.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAdams, D.A. and Kostovich, V. (2011), “A Framework and Representation for Universal Product Design”, International Journal of Design, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 29–42.Google Scholar
Plos, O., Buisine, S., Aoussat, A., Mantelet, F. and Dumas, C. (2012), “A Universalist strategy for the design of Assistive Technology”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 42 No. 6, pp. 533–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preiser, Wolfgang F. E., Smith, K.H. (Ed.). (2011), Universal Design Handbook Second Edition, Second Edi., McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Qing Shen, Y.J. (2010), “Fuzzy Sets, Rough Sets and Vague Sets”, 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), No. 2, pp. 461–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reich, Y., Konda, S.L., Monarch, I.A., Levy, S.N. and Subrahmanian, E. (1996), “Varieties and issues of participation and design”, Design Studies, Elsevier, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seder, A.M.F. and Alhazza, M.H.F. (2014), “Review on the Theory Of Attractive Quality Kano Model”, Journal of Advanced Science and Engineering Research, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 88–102.Google Scholar
Singh, R. and Das, P.P. (2020), “An Approach to Develop Accessible and Affordable Products”, Procedia CIRP, Elsevier B.V., Vol. 91, pp. 489–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R., Seniaray, S. and Saxena, P. (2020), “A framework for the improvement of frugal design practices”, Designs, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R. and Tandon, P. (2016), “User values based evaluation model to assess product universality”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Elsevier B.V, Vol. 55, pp. 46–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edward, Steinfeld and Jordana, Maisel. (2012), Universal Design: Creating Inclusive Environments, John Wiley & Sons, available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2.Google Scholar
Tiwari, V., Jain, P. and Tandon, P. (2016), “Advanced Engineering Informatics Product design concept evaluation using rough sets and VIKOR method”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 16–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, K.T., Eppinger, S.D. and Yang, M.C. (2020), Product Design and Development Seventh Edition.Google Scholar
Vanderheiden, Gregg, Tobias, J. (2000), “Universal design of consumer products: Current industry practice and perceptions”, Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 congress.Google Scholar
Xu, Q., Jiao, R.J., Yang, X., Helander, M., Khalid, H.M. and Opperud, A. (2009a), “An analytical Kano model for customer need analysis”, Design Studies, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, Q., Jiao, R.J., Yang, X., Helander, M., Khalid, H.M. and Opperud, A. (2009b), “An analytical Kano model for customer need analysis”, Design Studies, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access