|
Design for excellence, Design for Excellence, or Design For Excellence (DFX or DfX), are terms and expansions used interchangeably in the existing literature, 〔Andrew B. Kahng, DfX and Signoff: The Coming Challenges and Opportunities, Keynote Address, IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI (ISVLSI), 2012.〕〔Saraju Mohanty, DFX for Nanoelectronic Embedded Systems, Keynote Address at First IEEE Sponsored International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Embedded System, CARE-2013, http://care.iiitdmj.ac.in/Keynote_Speakers.html〕〔The DfX concept, http://www.ami.ac.uk/courses/topics/0248_dfx/〕 where the ''X'' in ''design for X'' is a variable which can have one of many possible values.〔 〕 In many fields (e.g., very-large-scale integration (VLSI) and nanoelectronics) ''X'' may represent several traits or features including: manufacturability, power, variability, cost, yield, or reliability. 〔Saraju Mohanty, Chapter 3 Nanoelectronics Issues in Design for excellence, "(Nanoelectronic Mixed-Signal System Design )", ISBN 978-0071825719 and 0071825711, 1st Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2015.〕This gives rise to the terms design for manufacturability (DfM, DFM), design for variability (DfV), design for cost (DfC). Similarly, other disciplines may associate other traits, attributes, or objectives for ''X''. Under the label ''design for X'', a wide set of specific design guidelines are summarized. Each design guideline addresses a given issue that is caused by, or affects the traits of, a product. The design guidelines usually propose an approach and corresponding methods that may help to generate and apply technical knowledge to control, improve, or even invent particular traits of a product. From a knowledge-based view, the design guideline represents an explicit form of knowledge, that contains information about ''knowing-how-to'' (see Procedural knowledge). However, two problems are prevalent. First, this explicit knowledge (i.e., the design guidelines) were transformed from a tacit form of knowledge (i.e., by experienced engineers, or other specialists). Thus, it is not granted that a freshman or someone who is outside of the subject area will comprehend this generated explicit knowledge. This is because it still contains embedded fractions of knowledge or respectively include non-obvious assumptions, also called context-dependency (see e.g. Doz and Santos, 1997:16-18). Second, the traits of a product are likely to exceed the knowledge base of one human. There exists a wide range of specialized fields of engineering, and considering the whole life cycle of a product will require non-engineering expertise. For this purpose, examples of design guidelines are listed in the following. ==Rules, guidelines, and methodologies along the product life cycle== DfX methodologies address different issues that may occur in one or more phase of a product life cycle: * Development phase * Production phase * Use phase * Disposal phase Each phase is explained with two dichotomous categories of tangible products to show differences in prioritizing design issues in certain product life cycle phases: * Consumer durables * Capital goods Non-durables that are consumed physically when used, e.g. chocolate or lubricants, are not discussed. There also exist a wide range of other classifications because products are either a) goods b) service or c) both (see OECD and Eurostat, 2005:48). Thus, one can also refer to whole product, augmented product, or extended product. Also the business unit strategy of a firm are ignored, even though it significantly influences priority-setting in design. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Design for X」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|