Computing Trade-Offs in Robust Design: Perspectives of the Mean Squared Error
Loading...
Date
2011
Authors
Shin, Sangmun
Samanlıoğlu, Funda
Cho, Byung Rae
Wiecek, Margaret M.
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pergamon-Elsevier Science Ltd
Open Access Color
Green Open Access
Yes
OpenAIRE Downloads
OpenAIRE Views
Publicly Funded
No
Abstract
Researchers often identify robust design as one of the most effective engineering design methods for continuous quality improvement. When more than one quality characteristic is considered an important question is how to trade off robust design solutions. In this paper we consider a bi-objective robust design problem for which Pareto solutions of two quality characteristics need to be obtained. In practical robust design applications a second-order polynomial model is adequate to accommodate the curvature of process mean and variance functions thus mean-squared robust design models frequently used by many researchers would contain fourth-order terms. Consequently the associated Pareto frontier might be non-convex and supported and non-supported efficient solutions needs to be generated. So the objective of this paper is to develop a lexicographic weighted-Tchebycheff based bi-objective robust design model to generate the associated Pareto frontier. Our numerical example clearly shows the advantages of this model over frequently used weighted-sums model. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Description
Keywords
Quality control, Bi-objective robust design, Weighted-sums method, Lexicographic weighted-Tchebycheff method, Mean-squared-error model, Lexicographic weighted-Tchebycheff method, Weighted-sums method, Mean-squared-error model, Quality control, Bi-objective robust design
Fields of Science
0209 industrial biotechnology, 02 engineering and technology, 0101 mathematics, 01 natural sciences
Citation
WoS Q
Q1
Scopus Q
Q1

OpenCitations Citation Count
45
Source
Computers & Industrial Engineering
Volume
60
Issue
2
Start Page
248
End Page
255
PlumX Metrics
Citations
CrossRef : 24
Scopus : 41
Captures
Mendeley Readers : 33
SCOPUS™ Citations
43
checked on Feb 13, 2026
Web of Science™ Citations
41
checked on Feb 13, 2026
Page Views
7
checked on Feb 13, 2026
Downloads
280
checked on Feb 13, 2026
Google Scholar™


