Developing validating performance assessment tasks concepts geometrical optics
A main challenge in designing decision making support to support such a participatory process is to find the right trade-off between simplicity and detail.Several popular tools for sustainable PSS concept evaluation are based on qualitative marks based on a checklist (e.g., in [7,19]), or on simple scoring scales (e.g., ).After a systematic review of the literature, the paper describes the main results from a multiple case study conducted in collaboration with two Swedish manufacturing companies with experience on PSS design.Based on these findings, the paper prescribes a five-step iterative process for the systematic assessment of value and sustainability of PSS concepts, which is later applied in the design of a fully electrical load carrier.Hence, it is far from evident how sustainability-related criteria shall be defined in conjunction with more traditional performance parameters, and how they shall be “mixed and matched” with, for instance, quality, time, and cost in PSS design decision-making [25,26].
A large network of stakeholders is typically involved in the design of the PSS eco-system.
For instance, making a product more durable for lasting along several life cycles may hinder resource efficiency in the design, even if this strategy may generate a positive net value in the long term .
Similarly, modifying the PSS hardware to improve components’ accessibility—so to improve serviceability, maintainability, and changeability—may weaken its construction, thus its performances in operation .
DRM consists of four stages: Research Clarification (RC), Descriptive Study I (DS-I), Prescriptive Study (PS), and Descriptive Study II (DS-II).
This paper covers a review-based RC, comprehensive DS-I and PS, and an initial DS-II.