A development process that merges modeling and simulation with DFSS provides a versatile incubator for innovation. Model-driven development techniques allow a design to be captured and simulated using mathematical models—or virtual prototypes—across a range of abstraction levels. Through virtual prototyping, a broad range of new ideas can be quickly evaluated, optimized for cost, and efficiently put into production.

Challenges of a DFFS approach
A variety of methodologies exist for implementing a DFSS approach. Most incorporate some combination of the basic elements or phases shown in the table below.

Many organizations have turned to DFSS methodologies to systematically build in quality at each step of the process. However, as products become more complex and sophisticated, the DFSS approach presents several specific challenges.

Simply implementing DFSS in the context of a complex development process that involves a number stakeholders and variety of technologies can be daunting. In addition, DFSS methodologies require a commitment to systematic design experimentation—but the significant overhead of collecting data from physical experiments to optimize a design can become prohibitively cumbersome, expensive, and time consuming.

A model-driven design process that incorporates virtual prototyping can help address these challenges. Such a combined approach can be implemented using Mentor Graphics' tool SystemVision—a mixed signal, multi-discipline modeling and simulation environment—and the Minitab statistical application with an add-in that provides access to SystemVision virtual prototyping capabilities.

A model-driven development process manages design complexity
A model-driven development process provides a structure for managing a complex design process—from functional requirements through architectural definition to component design completion. The engineering lifecycle is guided by a series of models at different levels of abstraction. Design functionality is directly linked back to the original requirements and functional specifications at each stage of development.

Minitab with SystemVision provides the framework and tools to support such a model-driven development process. The design is managed through a model hierarchy starting at the functional specification stage, moving down through the architectural design stage, and then to the most detailed, component-level implementation stage of the process, as shown below.

System architects, system- and component-level engineers, and Six Sigma practitioners can explore design options and make trade-offs at appropriate levels of abstraction, whether at the functional or specification, architectural, or implementation level.