Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
A survey of design philosophies, models, methods and systems
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

A survey of design philosophies, models, methods and systems

2,471
views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,471
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
153
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 301 Review Paper A survey of design philosophies, models, methods and systems ....; F 0 Evbuomwan, * BEng, MSc, PhD, DIC, CEng, MIStructE, S Sivaloganathan, BSc, MSc, PhD, CEng, FIMechE, MIEE, !IE(Sri Lanka) and A Jebb, BSc, PhD, DIC, CEng, MIMechE, MIEE · Engineering Design Centre, City University, London The study of the design process, design theory and methodology has been a preoccupation of engineers, designers and researchers over 1he fast four to jive decades. As the end of this millenium is approached and with the renewed inrerest around the world in engineeringdesign. it is fitting to examine the state of the art and currenr status of issues relating to design philosophies, theory and methodology.(Jeer the last 40 years, many approaches to design have been put forward by various researchers, designers and engineers, both in, 1cademia and industry, on how design ought to and might be carried out. These proposals on design have tended towards what has, orne to be regarded as design philosophies, design models and design methods. The thesis of !his paper is to discuss various aspects of,1eneric research in design, within the above classifications in the light of the work that has been done in the last four decades.Discussions will focus on various definitions of design, design theory and methodology, the nature and variety of design problems, designclassifications, philosophies, models, methods and systems.f ev words: design philosophies, design theory, design methodology, design models, design methods, design systems, design process,rrciduct design, computer aided design 1 INTRODUCTION theory and methodology. Further discussions will be on The design activity, although performed for many cen- the nature and features of the design process, the nature turies, did not, however, have any structure or organiz- and stages of thought in design, types of design prob-;.ttion to it. It was only just after the middle of this lems, product design classification and design goals.century that efforts began to give some formalism to theway design was done. What is design? Why is it done? How is it or can it be done? These questions have been 2.1 Definitions of designthe subject of discussions at various conferences on Several designers, engineers and researchers, fromengineering design and design methodology. In these observation and experience, have expressed their viewsconferences, which were held in the United Kingdom on the definition of design or what they consider designil-5), Europe (~10) and North America (11-18), a to be. Some of these viewpoints are expressed below:number of ideas were put forward on design method-ology. These ideas were mostly associated with design Feilden (19): Engineering Design is the use of scientificmodels, philosophies and methods or techniques as well principles, technical information and imagination inas applications, and they represented several schools of the definition of a mechanical structure, machine orthought on design and design methodologies. More system to perform prespecified functions with therecently, other researchers have started to report on maximum economy and efficiency.computer-based design systems . Finkelstein and Finkelstein (20): Design is the creative . The main focus of this paper is to give a detailed elu- process which starts from a requirement and defines acidatiOn of design philosophies, models, methods and contrivance or system and the methods of its realis-systems that have been proposed and developed over ation or implementation, so as to satisfy the require-the years. Discussions will centre on: definitions of ment. It is a primary human activity and is central todesign and design methodologies, the nature and fea- engineering and the applied arts.tures of design problems and the design process, as well Luckman (21): Design is a mans first step towards the~s the stages of thought in design and product classi- mastering of his environment . . . The process oftJcati?n. The nature and control of design goals will also design is the translation of information in the form ofbe discussed, including an extensive review of many requirements, constraints, and experience into poten-design models, methods and systems. This paper focuses tial solutions which are considered by the designer toon completely general aspects of engineering design meet required performance characteristics ... someresearch, and it should be noted that there is a large creativity or originality must enter into the processamount of other work in this area. for it to be called design. Archer (22): ·. . . design involves a prescription or 2 DESIGN, DESIGN THEORY AND DESIGN model, the intention of embodiment as hardware, and METHODOLOGY the presence of a creative step.The discussions in this section focus on definitions of Caldecote (23): . . . the basic design function ... todesign, as well as definitions and viewpoints on design design a product which will meet the specification, to design it so that it will last and be both reliable and; ~e liS was received on 3 June 1995 and was accepted for publication on easy to maintain, to design it so that it can be eco-· nrember /995.: Prnenr address: Deparrmenr of Civil Engineering, University of Newcastle. nomically manufactured and will be pleasing to the· •{ a.stle upon Tyne. eye. Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 2. : 302 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB The foregoing definitions of design reflect the various refinements) are proposed to the current design in viewpoints of the proponents. In general, certain key- order to move to a better design. words and phrases can be noted which have a strong 3. Design as an exploratory activity (29) involves an bearing on design. These include: needs, requirements, exploration-based model of design and describes the solutions, specifications, creativity, constraints, scientific design process as a knowledge-based exploration principles, technical information, functions, mapping, task. transformation, manufacture and economics. The word 4. Design as an investigative (research) process involves customer, although absent, seemed to be implicitly rep- an enquiry into the clients needs and expectations, resented by the words needs, requirements or available design techniques, previous similar design market. Taking account of these key words, design can solutions, past failures and successes, etc. be described as: 5. Design as a creative process (art) involves creating a design solution with the help of know-how, ingenu- The process of establishing requirements based on human ity, good memory, pattern recognition abilities, needs, transforming them into performance specification and functions, which are then mapped and converted random search in the solution space, lateral thinking, (subject to constraints) into design solutions (using cre- brainstorming, analogies, etc. ativity, scientific principles and technical knowledge) that 6. Design as a rational process (logic based) relates to can be economically manufactured and produced. checking and testing of proposed solutions, involving logical reasoning, mathematical analysis, computer simulation, laboratory experiments and field trials, 2.2 Viewpoints on design theory and methodology etc. The subjects of design theory and design methodology, 7. Design as a decision-making process (value based). although well discussed by researchers, have not been In the design process, designers usually make a lot of fully explicated. Some definitions have, however, been value judgements in adopting alternative courses of given to them by various designers and researchers, and action or choosing between competing design solu- are reported below. The American Society of Mechani- tions. Such judgements and evaluation are usually cal Engineers (ASME) (24) defines the field of design based on experience and criteria derived from the theory and methodology as . . . an engineering disci- customers or clients requirements. pline concerned with process understanding and 8. Design as an iterative process. The iterative activity organised procedures for creating, restructuring and is the most common process in design. Proposed pre- optimising artifacts and systems. Design theory is taken liminary designs are usually analysed with respect to as a collection of principles that are useful for explain- constraints and, if unsatisfactory, are revised based ing the design process and provide a foundation for the on experience and the results of the analysis. basic understanding required to propose useful method- 9. Design as an interactive process. Interactive design ologies. Design theory is about design; it explains what brings the designer directly into the process by design is or what is being done when desi~ning. On the forcing him or her to be an integral part of it. This is other hand, design methodology is a collection of pro- necessitated in situations where: (a) the design cedures, tools and techniques for designers to use when problem is ill-defined, (b) there are insufficient ana- designing. Design methodology is prescriptive as it indi- lytical tools developed to enable quantitative analysis cates how to do design, while design theory is descrip- and (c) there is little or no experience available or tive as it indicates what design is. Rabins et al. (25) state associated with the design problem. that ... design theory refers to systematic statements of The above views on the nature and features of the principles and experientially verified relationships that design process represent different facets of the overall explain the design process and provide the fundamental design process. They are dependent on the engineering understanding necessary to create a useful methodology or design domain from which the particular viewpoint for design. is expressed as well as the nature, type, variety and com- These viewpoints represent the first steps towards plexity of the particular artefact/process or system being defining what might be regarded as design theory and designed. Most of the viewpoints are, however, comple- design methodology. The definitions by ASME are par- mentary to each other. A comprehensive design system ticularly encompassing and are worth noting. must therefore be able to support these various facets of design involving: (a) a top-down and bottom-up approach, (b) the evolutionary process of design, (c) the 2.3 The nature and features of the design process knowledge-based/exploratory aspects of design, (d) the The design process for any design model usually investigative and search aspects of the design process. exhibits certain properties and features which represent (e) the creative process in design, (f) the logical reason- various associated viewpoints and philosophies, activ- ing process involved in design, (g) the iterative as well as ities and processes that occur during the process. These the interactive process involved in design, (h) the features as highlighted by several researchers (26-28) are making of decisions based on value judgements and (i) discussed below: the mathematical analysis and computational simula- tion processes performed during design. 1. Design as an opportunistic activity represents the case where both top-down and bottom-up approaches are used by the designer in an opportun- 2.4 The nature and stages of thought in design istic manner. 2. Design as an incremental activity involves an evolu- In the process of design, most designers tend to go tionary process. where changes (improvements or through certain stages, referred to here as stages of Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 3. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 303 thought, as they move from an abstract problem to a tures are introduced, which still bear some resem- realizable product. These are the divergent, transform- blance to existing variables or features, and the. ation and convergent stages of design: decomposition of the problem is known. but the sub-problems and various alternatives to their1. Divergence. This is the act of extending the boundary solution must be synthesized. In other situations, of a design situation in order to have a large enough alternative recombination of the sub-problems solution search space. The divergent search approach may yield new designs. It is also considered that aims to de-structure the original design brief, while solving the same problem in different ways, or identifying the features of the design situation that different problems in the same way (by analogy), will permit a valuable and feasible degree of change. would fall under this class. Divergent search is most productive in the initial (b) Creative designs. In this case new variables or stages of design. features are introduced which bear no similarity2. Transformation. This is the stage of pattern making, to variables or features in the previous prototype high-level creativity, flashes of insight, changes of set and the resulting design has very little resem- and inspired guesswork. The objective here is to blance to existing designs. For creative designs impose upon the results of the divergent search a no design plan is known, a priori, for the problem pattern that is precise enough to permit convergence under consideration. to a single design.3. Convergence. The main objective of the convergent Sriram et al. (32), in the light of the foregoing, stage is to progressively reduce secondary uncer- describes the creative-routine spectrum of design as tainties as fast as possible as well as ruling out alter- follows: At the creative end of the spectrum, the design natives. The end result of this stage should be the process might be nebulous (hazy), spontaneous, chaotic, reduction of the range of options to a single chosen and imaginative, whereas at the routine end, the design design as quickly and as cheaply as can be managed is precise, predetermined, systematic, and mathematical. and without the need for unforeseen retreats or recursion. 2.6 Product design classification The end result of any design process is a product or2.5 The variety of design problems system. Such products, depending on the engineeringA design is strongly influenced by the lifestyle, training discipline or domain, vary in one way or the other.and experience of the designer, and the creativity and Product variation also arises depending on the marketeffort a designer puts into a design varies, depending on segment, knowledge available, the design process andthe type of design problem (30). Design problems that manufacturing capabilities. In the light of general con-confront engineers and designers can be classified under straints, products can be classified as either over-the following types (30-33): constrained or underconstrained, and depending on the customer demands and competition in the market, some1. Routine designs. These are considered to be derived products are considered as static or dynamic. These from common prototypes with the same set of vari- various forms or classifications are discussed below (34, ables or features and the structure does not change. 35): Here a design plan exists, with sub-problem decom- position, alternatives and prototypical solutions 1. Static product designs. Static products are those known in advance. whose market share is undiminishing and no changes2. Redesigns. This involves modifying an existing design are being demanded in the product. The design to satisfy new requirements or improve its per- concept is already known from existing products, formance under current requirements. The end result and hence such products are considered to be con- of redesigns may also exhibit some form of creative, ceptually static (also referred to as dominant design). innovative or routine design content. Redesigns will 2. Dynamic product designs. Dynamic products have a be discussed under adaptive designs and variant limited life before the next generation supersedes designs. them. Here, development is focused on the product, (a) Adaptive, configurative or transitional designs. and the design process involves the development of These forms of design involve adapting a known new, radical and alternative designs. In discussing the system (solution principle remaining the same) to dynamic-static spectrum of products, Clausing (34) a changed task. They also involve improvements highlights the following types of products sand- on a basic design by a series of detail refine- wiched between the two extremes: (a) genesis ments. product, (b) radical product, (c) new product, (d) (b) Variant, extensional or parametric designs. This clean sheet (generational) product, (e) market- follows an extrapolative or interpolative pro- segment entry (new) product, (f) market-segment cedure. The design technique involves using a entry (generational) product, (g) associated product, proven design as a basis for generating further (h) variant product and (i) customized product. geometrically similar designs of differing capa- 3. Overconstrained product designs. These products cities. tend to exist in the high-technology markets. Here,3. Non-routine designs, original or new designs. These the design process evolves around analysing alterna- forms of design are also known as original designs tive proposals until the <;orrect (or most acceptable) and are classified into innovative and creative solution is found. Overconstrained products are designs. usually subjected to several constraints of function, (a) Innovative designs. Here new variables or fea- materials, manufacturing processes, some of which:g IMechE 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 4. 304 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB might be conflicting, and the product undergoes Cross (39), reporting on Lawsons work (40), whi< severaJ·analysis and trade-off situations. compared the ways in which designers and scientis 4. Underconstrained product designs (ideas centred). In solved the same problem, states that: The scientis the case of underconstrained designs, the design tended to use a strategy of systematically exploring tt activity is centred around bringing products into the problem, in order to look for underlying rules whic market to satisfy market demands. There are usually would enable them to generate the correct or optimur not very many constraints, and the designer has solution. In contrast, the designers tended to suggest ample room for innovation. The focus here is usually variety of possible solutions until they found one tha on the product concept, and materials and tech- was good or satisfactory. The evidence from the experi niques are chosen to satisfy the required function and ments suggested that scientists "problem-solve b; recognizable market style. Most industrial designs analysis", whereas designers "problem-solve by synthe fall into this category, and development is on aes- sis". Scientists use "problem-focused" strategies anc thetics, ergonomics and functionality. designers use "solution-focused" strategies. Thi5 5. Underconstrained product designs (skill based). This phenomenon was also observed in a creative design form of design focuses on the manufacturing aspects workshop organized at City University, London (41). of product development. Efforts are usually concen- Yoshikawa (42), in his paper on design philosophy, trated on the capabilities and skills available in the also discusses design from some philosophical view- company. points attributed to various designers who belong to the semantics, syntactics and past experience schools of thought. These viewpoints constitute the platform for2.7 Design goals most of the controversies in the design community. Some of them, however, complement each other, whileDesign goals can be defined as the purposes for design others are completely contradictory.actions and decisions taken in each design step. Theyguide the choice of what to do at each point during thedesign process (36). Design goals represent one or more 3.1 Semantics schooldecision points from a problem-solving point of view, This school of thought is attributed to Rodenacker (43).and they define some of the dimensions of the design The central dogma of this school is that any machine, asspace. Design goals do exhibit one kind of interaction an object of design, is something that transforms threeor the other in the form of: (a) goal conflicts, involving forms of inputs, viz. substance, energy and information,non-simultaneous achievement of two goals, (b) goal into three outputs respective to each input, but havingsharing, achieving a sub-goal helps achieve a goal other different states from the inputs. The differences betweenthan its ancestors in the goal tree, and (c) goal prerequi-sites, where one goal must be achieved before another the inputs and outputs are called functionality. Thegoal in a different part of the goal tree. Typical types of initial requirements are usually given in terms of thedesign goals include: (a) functionality goals, (b) per- functionality, which has to be analysed into a logicalformance goals, (c) knowledge goals and (d) design structure, which gives connections between sub-process goals. In the control and management of the functionalities. On decomposing the initial functionalitydesign process, there is need to explicate strategies for into finer sub-functionalities, these resulting sub-how to handle interacting design goals. functionalities are substituted with particular physical phenomena that realize the transformations respec- tively. 3 DESIGN PHILOSOPHIESThere have been various schools of thought expressed 3.2 Syntax schoolby designers and researchers as regards how design is, This school is associated with the effort made to givemight be or should be done. This undoubtedly has some formalism to the design process, and attention isresulted in controversy. Three schools of thought within paid to the procedural aspects of the design activitythe British design community were expressed by Broad- rather than on the design object itself. Here attemptsbent in the book Design: science: method (37). The first are made to abstract the dynamical or temporarygroup believed that the design process should be aspects from the design, neglecting the static aspects ofchaotic and creative, the second group believed that design as emphasized in the semantics school. Thedesign should be organized and disciplined, while the process of abstraction is considered as the premise forthird group argued that no design process should be improving the universality of design model~ belongingimposed on a designer (38). Support for the first view to this school, which are usually regarded as prescrip-point is usually based on the argument that the design tive models. This philosophy, which emphasizes thefunction is an art, and hence cannot be taught, which dynamical aspects of design, can be combined with theseems to imply that designers are born and not made. semantics one, which emphasizes the static aspects ofArcher (22), in support of the second viewpoint, com- design to achieve a more sophisticated design method-ments that: Systematic methods come into their own, ology.under one or more of three conditions: when the conse-quences of being wrong are grave; when the probabilityof being wrong is high (e.g. due to lack of prior 3.3 Past experience schoolexperience); and/or when the number of interacting Arguments put forward by those belonging to thisvariables is so great that the break-even point of man- school of thought are usually that universality, which ishour cost versus machine-hour cost is passed. the target of most design methodologists, is contradic-Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 5. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 305tory to practical usefulness and that the creativity of good number of these models emphasize the need todesigners can be hampered and may deteriorate if perform more analytical work, prior to the generationdesign methodologies are adopted. In this school of solution concepts (39). Models put forward by pro-emphasis is placed on the significance of case historie~ ponents of prescriptive models are discussed below.of design, including all necessary knowledge to be learntfor improving design ability. This school of thought is 4.1.1 Model by J. C. Jonesclosely associated with the view that the design abilitycannot be acquired efficiently in a theoretical manner This model by Jones (1) is principally made up of threebut by experience. stages, viz. analysis, synthesis and evaluation. At the analysis stage, the first activity involves producing a random list of factors related to the problem to be3.4 Summary solved and/or to its solution. These factors are thenThe above schools of thought, although they stand their classified into workable categories and sub-categories,ground in arguments, are relevant in one way or the after which the interactions between them are investi-other with respect to design. In todays world, it is gated. The final step then involves rewriting all theincreas!ngly becoming evident that design approaches design requirements into solution neutral performancebelongmg to the syntax (prescriptive models) school of specifications.thought are more likely to stand the test of time. In the synthesis stage, creative techniques like brain-Wallace (44) in his article points out that the engineer- storming (45, 46) are used to generate ideas and solu-ing design process cannot be carried out efficiently if it tions to the performance specifications. Limits are thenis left entirely to chance .. . and ... the aim of a sys- set for each partial solution within a range of dimen-tematic approach is to make the design process more sions, shape and variations in material properties thatvisible and comprehensible so that all those providing will satisfy any performance specifications. The nextinputs to the process can appreciate where their contri- step then involves combining compatible partial solu-butions fit in. Furthermore, the need to equip and train tions into combined solutions.young engineers as well as support collaborative design The last stage of this model is the evaluation stageteams will necessitate the adoption of a structured and which involves mainly two activities. These are (a)systematic approach to design. methods of evaluation and (b) evaluation for operation, manufacture and sales. Under methods of evaluation, Jones advocates the use of evaluation methods to detect 4 DESIGN MODELS errors at the stage when they can be most cheaply cor-Design models are the representations of philosophies rected. Such methods include evaluation by per-or strategies proposed to show how design is and may formance specifications and evaluation by use of precisebe done. Often, they are drawn as flow diagrams, judgements.showing the iterative nature of the design process by a This model emphasizes the need to establish specifi-feedback link. cations in a solution neutral form as well as investigat- In the past, design models that arose from various ing interactions between design factors. The synthesisphilosophical viewpoints have tended to belong to two stage does exhibit a bottom-up approach in developingmain classes, namely prescriptive and descriptive the overall design. The idea of evaluating the designs bymodels. The prescriptive models are associated with the the pre-operation, pre-production and pre-sales team issyntactics school of thought and tend to look at the a late occurrence in this model. These teams in adesign process from a global perspective, covering the modern manufacturing industry should be involvedprocedural steps (that is suggesting the best way some- right from the start of the design process. In this model,thing should be done). The descriptive models, on the they should be involved at the analysis stage.other hand, are concerned with designers actions andactivities during the design process (that is what is 4.1.2 Model by Asimowinvolved in designing and/or how it is done). More In representing the design activity, Asimow (47) showsrecently, another group of models known here as com- the process of design in three phases that bear on theputational models have started to emanate. These com- solution of the design project, while the part that dealsputational models place emphasis on the use of with the solution of subordinate problems is repre-numerical and qualitative computational techniques, sented as a sequence of operations as every step of theartificial intelligence techniques, combined with modern process proceeds. The three phases of design repre-computing technologies. Each of these design models, sented are the feasibility study phase, preliminary designalthough discussed under one of the above classes, share phase and detailed design phase:some characteristics of the other classes. 1. Feasibility study phase. In the feasibility study phase, the need for the project is established, after which the4.1 Prescriptive models based on the design process design problem is explored and the design param-These models in general tend to prescribe how the eters, constraints and major criteria identified. Plaus-design process ought to proceed and in some cases ible solutions are generated and then analysed forappear to suggest how best to carry out design. They their physical realizability, economic worthwhilenessalso attempt to encourage designers to adopt improved and financial feasibility.ways of working. They usually offer a more algorithmic 2. Preliminary design phase. In the preliminary designand systematic procedure to follow, and are often phase, the best design concept from among the viableregarded as providing a particular methodology. A solutions is selected. Mathematical models are then:Q !~hE 1996 Proc lnstn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 6. 306 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANA THAN AND A JEBB prepared for each of the solutions, upon which sensi- inary layouts and (f) the ·development of definitive tivity analysis is performed to establish the fineness layouts and final documentation. of the range within which the design parameters must be controlled, compatibility analysis is per- 4.1.5 Model by Watts formed to investigate the tolerances in the character- istics of major components and stability analysis is Watts (48) in his paper represents the design process by performed to examine the extent to which pertur- an iconic model of a designer or design team in bations of environmental or internal forces affect the dynamic relationship with an environment. The design design. The chosen concept finally goes through an process is described as consisting of three processes of optimization process, an evaluation process, a pre- analysis, synthesis and evaluation, as also proposed by diction process as well as an experimental design Jones (1). These processes are performed cyclicly from a process. The third, fourth and fifth steps in this lower (more abstract) level to a higher (more concrete) phase, if considered in todays terms, are somewhat level (representing design phases), as represented by the synonymous to Taguchis system, parameter and tol- helical path in Fig. 1. In moving from the abstract level erance design. to the concrete one, the designer or design team during 3. Detailed design phase. In this stage, capital budgets the design process frequently reiterate at one or more and time schedules are prepared for the design. The levels, and decisions are made along the way as shown sub-systems, components and parts of the product on the surface of the cylinder. A state function D of the are then completely designed. Assembly drawings are design is associated with the process path and can be then prepared for the components and sub-systems, externalized as a set of statements at intersections of the after which the prototype is constructed and tested path and the decision line. Various states of the design respectively. Further analysis of the prototype is then thus relate to the different levels. The design states (Dm, performed, before making minor revisions as con- Dn, etc.) give a vertical structure to the process and vergence is made towards the final design. proceed through analysis, synthesis of design concepts, evaluation of feasibility, optimization, revision and The design process as discussed by Asimow (47) is in communication.steps of analysis, synthesis, evaluation, decision, optim- The process can be considered complete when theization and revision. The important aspect here is that designer releases into E (a particular environment) athese six steps are repeated at each of the process communication P, being a set of prescriptions for thephases. embodiment of the design. The end to which P is a means is an artefact A. This possesses several functional4.1.3 Model by Pahl and Beitz attributes, some of which fulfil the need implied by N; others enhance the profits and reputation of thePahl and Beitz (33) represent their model of the design designer and the company while others could haveprocess in four main phases, which are: (a) clarification effects that are far reaching into the socioeconomicof the task, (b) conceptual design, (c) embodimentdesign and (d) detail design. The first phase of clari- environmentfication of the task involves the collection of informa-tion about the requirements in a solution neutral form. 4.1.6 Model by Marples (49)The second phase, which is the conceptual design phase, This model represents an attempt to abstract theinvolves the establishment of function structures, the process of design, as a result of design case studiessearch for suitable solution principles and their com-bination into concept variants. At the embodimentdesign phase, the designer starting from the concept CONCRETEdetermines the layout and forms and develops a techni-cal product or system in accordance with technical andeconomic considerations. At the last phase of the detaildesign, the arrangement, form, dimensions and surfaceproperties of all the individual parts are finally laid DECISIONdown, the materials specified, the technical and eco-nomic feasibility rechecked and all the drawings andother production documents produced. (E)4.1.4 Model by VDI 2221 (39)This model was produced by Germanys professionalengineers body, Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI), intheir guidelines VDI 2221, Systematic approach to thedesign of technical systems and products. The VDI D2221 model expresses the design process in seven stages.These stages involve (a) the clarification and definitionof the design task, (b) the determination of the requiredfunctions, (c) the search for solution principles for allsub-functions and combination into principal solutions, N(d) the division of the solution into realizable modules,(e) the developmem of key modules into a set of prelim- Fig. 1 The design model by WattsPart 8: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 7. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 307 carried out. These studies were used to illustrate design- 1. Programming: establishment of crucial issues and ing as a sequence of decisions leading from the original proposal of course of action statement of the requirements to the specification of the 2. Data collection: collection, classification and storing details of the hardware to be manufactured. The start- of data ing point in this model is a statement of the main 3. Analysis: identification of sub-problems, preparationy problem to be solved. This represents the starting node of design specifications, reappraisal of proposed pro-~ in the Marples tree. gramme and estimation1 From this node, sub-problems are derived that must 4. Synthesis: preparation of outline design proposalsf be solved before a solution to the main problem is pos- 5. Development: development of prototype design(s), sible. This involves a cyclic process of analysis of the preparation and execution of validation studies problem, theorizing solutions, delineating these solu- 6. Communication: preparation of manufacturing tions and modifying them (49, 50). Figure 2 shows a documents general representation of a typical sequence of the The above six stages were further classified and grouped design process. In this figure, the final solution is the into three phases, namely analytic, creative and execu- sum of the solutions a(21211), a(22211), a(22221) and tive. In describing his model, Archer comments that: a(232). If, for example, a(2) is preferred to a(l) or a(3), all ... the special features of the process of designing is the sub-problems p(21), p(22) and p(23) must be solved. that the analytic phase with which it begins requires Similarly, if a(222) is accepted as a solution to p(22), objective observation and inductive reasoning, while the then sub-sub-problems p(2221) and p(2222) must be creative phase at the heart of it requires involvement, solved. In the figure, a vertical line denotes a problem, subjective judgement, and deductive reasoning. Once while a slanting line denotes a solution. Eder (50) the crucial decisions are made, the design process con- further proposes that all precedent solutions to the tinues with the execution of working drawings, sched- main problem, such as competitors models, should also ules, etc., again in an objective and descriptive mood. appear on the design tree. This is analogous to competi- The design process is thus a creative sandwich. The tive assessment in quality function deployment (51). bread of objective and systematic analysis may be thick The model by Marples involves three principal or thin, but the creative act is always there in the phases of synthesis, evaluation and decision. At the syn- thesis phase, two activities are involved, that is the middle. Figure 3 shows the stages and phases of the design process as well as their interrelationships. search for possible solutions and the examination of proposed solutions. This phase is then followed by the evaluation of the viable solutions against certain cri- teria, before a final decision is made in choosing a par- 4.1.8 Model by Krick ticular solution. Krick (52) in his model describes the design process in five stages of problem formulation, problem analysis, search, decision and specification. The first step of 4.1.7 Model by Archer problem formulation involves defining clearly the design Archer (22) defines the nature of design methodology in problem to be solved. The next step involves analysing his model in six stages, viz.: the design problem and arriving at a detailed definition 0 POINT OF PROBLEM FORMULA noN a331 a332 a321 p3211 p3311 p3321 I p2111 i p222221 SOLUnON ACCEPnED SOLUnON REJECTED PROPOSED SOLUnON - AN AL nERNA TIVE A SUB-PROBLEM ARISING FROM ANY AL nERNA TIVE Fig. 2 The design model by Marples ~ I~1echE 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 8. 308 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB TRAINING BRIEF PROGRAMMING PROGRAMMING OBSERVATION EXPERIENCE MEASUREMENT j ANALYTICAL PHASE j INDUCTIVE REASONING DATA COillCTION DATA COLLECTION j j ANALYSIS ANALYSIS j CREATIVE j EVALUATION JUDGEMENT DEDUCTIVE SYNTIHESIS SYNTIHESIS PHASE REASONING DECISION j j DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT j j DESCRIP110N SOLUTION COMMUNICATION EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION TRANSLATION TRANSMISSION PHASE (c) MOOEL Of THE DESIGN PROCESS (b) MAJN PHASES Of DESIGN Fig. 3 The design model by Archerof the specifications, constraints and criteria. In the objective in that stage. In the first stage of clarifyingthird step, the search for and generation of alternative objectives, the objectives tree method is used to clarifysolutions is performed through inquiry, invention and design objectives and sub-objectives and the relation-research. The decision stage, which is the fourth step, ship between them. The function analysis method isinvolves the evaluation, comparison and screening of then used to establish the function required and thealternative solutions until the best solution evolves. system boundary of a new design at the second stage. InFinally, the fifth step, which is the specification stage, is the third stage involving setting of requirements, anperformed. This involves a detailed documentation of accurate specification of the performance required of athe chosen design with engineering drawings, reports design solution is done using the performance specifi-and possibly iconic models being the resulting output. cations method. The morphology chart method is then used at the fourth stage to generate the complete range of alternative design solutions for a product. In the fifth4.1.9 Model by Nigel Cross stage the design alternatives are evaluated using theIn representing his model, Cross (39) expresses the weighted objectives method to compare the utilitydesign process in six stages within a symmetrical values of alternative design proposals on the basis ofproblem-solution model, as shown in Fig. 4. The six performance against differently weighted objectives. Thestages are clarification of objectives, establishing func- sixth and final stage of improving details involves usingtions, setting requirements, generating alternatives, the value engineering method to increase or maintainevaluating alternatives and improving details. For each the value of a product to its purchaser while reducingof the stages, a design method is used to achieve the its cost to its producer. OVERALL PROBLEM • OVERALL SOLUTION (SUB - PROBLEMS ) SUB - SOLUTIONS Fig. 4 The design model by CrossPart 8: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 9. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 309 4.1.10 Model by Hubka Phase 4. Elaboration The model by Hubka (53) represents the design process Step 6. Detailing and elaboration in four phases and six stages or steps. These phases and steps in a procedural model, as shown in Fig. 5, are: Phase 1. Elaboration of assigned problem 4.1.11 Model by French Step 1. Elaborate or clarify assigned specifi- This model, as shown in Fig. 6, is based on the follow- cation ing activities of design (54): Phase 2. Conceptual design Step 2. Establish functional structures and 1. The analysis of the problem phase involving the Step 3. Establish concept identification of the need to be satisfied as precisely Phase 3. Laying out as possible or desirable Step 4. Establish preliminary layout and 2. The conceptual design phase involving the gener- Step 5. Establish dimensional layout ation of broad solutions in the form of schemes " a: wz~ - STATE OF MACHINE SYSTEM tJoe (CIRCLED STATEMENTS) - gs ~ 2 8 w ~--------------------------------------------,_--------------------~ ~ < 5 ESTABUSHED DESIGN u.. ...J c.:> CHARACTERISllCS OF THE DESIGN DOCUMENT ~ §~ MACHINE SYSTEM " :::E f- 1. DESIGN SPECIFlCA TlON 2.1 BLACK BOX DIAGRAM ESTABUSH TE~OI.OGICAL PRINCIPLE 2.2 ESTABUSH SEQUENCE ~ OPERATICN 2.3 2.4 NPLY liS IN TP AND BOUNDAAJES ~ liS 2.5 E51ABUSH GROUP1NG ~ FUNCTIONS 5 FUNCTION 2.6 STRUC11JRE Z ( FUNCTlDNAL STRUCTIJRE SCHEMAllC 2.7 ( OPTIMAL FUNCTlON STRUCTURE AI~ 3.1 INPUTS TO MS. IIOOE ~ ACTION MORPHOLOGICAL MATRIX 3.2 FAIIIUES ~ FUNCTION-CARRIERS 3.3, 3.4 CDNCEPTIJAL SCHEMA TlC 3.5 CONCEPT SKETCH 4.2 PARTs. ARRANCEIIENT. ROUGH FORM, SOME Dt.£NSIONS 4.3, 4.4 TYPE OF WATER1AL MD MANUFACTURlNG METHODS 4.5 4.6 ( OPTIIr.tAL PREUhiiNARY LAYOUT AI~ 5.2 OEF1N111£ ARRANG04ENT. FORM, ALL DIMENSIONS 5.3, 5.4 MATCR1AL AND MANUFACTURING METHODS, PARTIAL TOL£RANCES 5.5 DIMENSIONAL DIIIENSIONAL TRUE- TO- SCALE DIMENSIONAL! LAYOUT 1 LAYOUT 2 LAYOUT 5.6 ( OPTIMAL DIIIENSIONAL LAYOUT ) - I 6.1 - MACHINE ELEMENTS 0 RELEASE I 6.5 5.6. 5.7 ~ $§>$ (IdS REPRESENTATION ) DETAIL DRAWING ASSEMBLY DRAWING I Fig. 5 The design model by Hubkac; l!ect:E 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 10. :JlO N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB Proposed schemes are critically examined to see if they satisfy the needs, can be constructed, and how economic they are both in first cost and in function throughout their working life. Preliminary structural analyses are also carried out to check the broad ade- quacy of schemes. 4. Decision. After successive operations of conception and appraisal, it then becomes necessary to decide on a particular design scheme. Criteria for decision making may include both simplicity and distinction of the design, as well as constructability. · 5. Checking and elaboration. This is the stage where the designer makes sure of the adequacy of what is proposed and performs elaboration of necessary details. Here, models can be built and tested. Power- ful analytical techniques can also be employed in (a) defining the actions on the structure such as load, temperature difference, corrosion, etc., (b) analysing the effects of these actions and (c) comparing these SELECTED effects with a criterion of adequacy. The end result of SCHEMES the design process is the communication of the detailed design both in the form of drawings and text. 4.1.13 Total design activity model by Pugh (56) Pugh regards total design as the systematic activity necessary from the identification of the market/user need, to the selling of the successful product to satisfy that need-an activity that encompasses product, process, people and organization. The total des~gn activity model consists principally of a central design core, which in turn consists of market (user need), product design specification, conceptual design, detail design, manufacture and sales. The design process in this model proceeds, firstly, by identifying a need which, Fig. 6 The design model by French when satisfied, fits into an existing or a new market. From the statement of the need, the product design spe- cification (PDS), representing the specification of the3. The embodiment of schemes phase involving the product to be designed, is then formulated. The estab- development of generated schemes into greater lished PDS then acts as a mantle that envelops all the details subsequent stages in the design core, thus acting as the4. The detailing phase. where the selected scheme is control for the total design activity. Within this model, worked into finer details the design processes flow from market to sales, is an iterative one and recourse can be made to any of the4.1.12 Model by Sir Alan Harris (55) earlier stages, as new ideas and information emerge. This causes interactions between the different stages ofThis model is based on proposals regarding the teach- the design core. This model also recognizes the fact that,ing of design within the civil engineering discipline. The for effective and efficient design to be carried out, it ismodel consists of five stages, viz.: appreciation of the necessary to utilize various design techniques, to enabletask, conception, appraisal of concepts, decision, check- the designer/design team to operate the core activity.ing and elaboration: These design techniques or methods include:1. Appreciation of the task. This means discovering (a) discipline-independent ones which relate directly to what is needed and ascertaining what resources are the design core and can be applied to any product needed and from where. It involves finding out what or technology, such as tools for performing analysis, a client wants-regarded as the total function. synthesis, decision making, modelling, etc.;2. Conception. In this stage, based on the full digestion (b) specific discipline-dependent technique~ and tech~o­ of the facts generated from the previous stage, ideas logical knowledge such as stress analysis. hydraulics, of solutions should begin to emanate. Here the thermal analysis, thermodynamic analysis, elec- designer is putting together what is known of the tronics, etc. function of the work with tentative ideas of form, material and method of construction. This model also takes into account, within the overall3. Appraisal of concepts. This stage is where the search- product development process. the framework of plan- ing eye based on experience becomes invaluable. ning and organization. thus gaining insight into the wayPart B: Journal of Engineering :!anufacture ~!MechE 1996
  • 11. ,, A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 311 if products should be designed within a business structure. 2221, the other models also contained in a moreJW The total design activity model is shown in Fig. 7. detailed form within each of their design phases/stages,)n the design activities that characterized a majority of the·a! 4.1.14 The BS 7000 design model (57) other models. The Watts model showed only the two e- ends of the design phase, that is abstract and concrete, This model commences with a feasibility study stage with the interval between represented by a cyclic and proceeds through conceptual design, embodiment (iterative, refining and progressive) process. design, detail design and design for manufacture stages. The models that were based on design acttv1ttes It also shows the output of each design stage in the included those by Jones, Marples, Archer, Krick, Cross form of design brief, concept drawings, layout drawings, and Harris. It can also be observed that in all of the detailed product definition and manufacturing instruc- models, three key activities were predominant, that is tions respectively. The model ends with a post-design·e analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Analysis was mostly support stage. It can be observed that this modelIS related to analysing the design problem, requirements derives from other models by Pahl and Beitz (33) andy and specifications. Synthesis was concerned with gener- French (54), with design for manufacture included as an·- ating ideas, proposing solutions to large or small design additional stage. This model is shown schematically inl) problems as well as exploring the design soiution space, Fig. 8.i, while evaluation involved the appraisal of design solu-g tions in order to establish whether they satisfied the 4.2 A critical appraisal of prescriptive modelse requirements and specifications and set corporate cri-,f An in-depth review of the prescriptive models on the teria. The sequence in general also tended to be analysis design process shows that a majority of them based the first, followed by synthesis and then evaluation. In thei procedural steps of their models on what can be re- model by Krick, synthesis was replaced by search and garded as design activities (that is analysis, synthesis, evaluation by decision. The model by Harris represent- evaluation, decisions, etc.), while others based their pro- ed analysis, synthesis and evaluation by appraisal of the cedural steps on what can be regarded as the phases/ task, conception and appraisal of concepts respectively. stages of design (that is conceptual design, embodiment It is not surprising that the three activities of analysis, design and detailed design). The models that were based synthesis and evaluation were predominant as they rep- on the phases of the design process include those of resent the core of the design process. If proper analysis Asimow, Pahl and Beitz, VDI 2221, Watts, Hubka and of the problem or requirements is not carried out, syn- French. With the exception of that of French and VDI thesizing solutions will be difficult and inappropriate Technology Technique TOTAL ACTIVITY UD~DHS CT S:PCClfJCAT!(l-j SYNTHESIS I CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Equa.t~s to Spec. J .~ECi-.ANISMS I DETAIL DESIGN Equ.:a.tPS to S:pN:. I OPTIMISATION I <C_______~DA~T~A_H~AN~D~L~IN~Gi 1 Df~~~~L~~~~L~w~, SPECIFICATION C::.~GANISED Fig. 7 The total design activity model by Pugh i; 1!echE 1996 Proc lnstn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 12. 312 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB FEASIBILITY STUDY DESIGN FOR MANUFACTURE POST DESIGN SUPPORT Fig. 8 The BS 7000 design modelsolutions might be the result. Once plausible solutions In the above equation, the matrix [A] represents theare created, there is then a need to evaluate, test and design relationship. In furthering his principles ofassess their fidelity to the originating requirements and design, Suh defines two axioms, which are:specifications as well as set criteria. Besides the three activities, there are, however, othernecessary activities that should be performed during the Axiom 1: the independent axiomdesign process, such as optimization, revision, data col- Maintain the independence of functional requirementslection, documentation, communication, selection, deci- (FRs).sion making, modelling, etc. Some of these activities Alternative statement 1: an optimal design alwayswere included in some of the models. maintains the independence of FRs. Alternative statement 2: in an acceptable design, the4.3 Prescriptive models based on product attributes DPs and FRs are related in such a way that a specific DP can be adjusted to satisfy its corresponding FRA majority of product or systems failures can be attrib- without affecting other functional requirements.uted to either or a combination of the following: (a)incorrect or excessive functional requirements, (b) con-tinuing alterations to functional requirements, (c) wrong Axiom 2: the information axiomdesign decisions and (d) the inability to recognize faultydecisions early enough to rectify them. Thus the exis- Minimize the information content of the design.tence of unacceptable designs as well as good designs Alternative statement: the best design is a functionallylends weight to the argument that there should be some uncoupled design that has the minimum informationfeatures or attributes that can distinguish between good content.and unacceptable designs. The foregoing reasoning Associated with these axioms are eight corollariesformed the basis of Suhs axiomatic approach to design (having a flavour of design rules) and sixteen theoremsbased on attributes of the design produced (58). Taguchi (propositions that follow from the axioms or other(59) also argues that the total costs at the point of pro- propositions). Suh also classifies designs into three cate-duction and at the point of consumption should be gories, namely uncoupled, coupled and decoupledminimum for good designs and this should be the goal designs. An uncoupled design is a design that obeys theof product development. He introduces a loss function independent axiom and any specific DP can be ~djustedas an attribute of the product designed which has to be to satisfy a corresponding FR. A coupled design hasminimized to achieve robust designs. some of the FRs dependent on other functions. When the coupling is due to an insufficient number of DPs4.3.1 Suh s axiomatic design model when compared to the number of FRs, they may be decoupled by adding additional DPs. A decoupledThe basic premise of Suhs (58) axiomatic approach to design may have more information content. ~n t~edesign is that there are basic principles that govern deci- axiomatic approach, the design model (process) IS sphtsion making in design, just as the laws of nature govern into four main aspects of: (a) problem definition, whichthe physics and chemistry of nature. He describes the results in the definition of FRs and constraints, (b) ide-design process as a mapping process between the func- ation or creation of ideas, which is the creative processtional requirements (FRs) in the functional domain and of conceptualizing and devising a solution, (c) analysisthe design parameters (DPs) in the physical domain. of the proposed solution, which involve~ the proc~ss ofMathematically this can be expressed as: determining whether the proposed solutiOn ts a rat~~nal {FR} = [A]{DP} solution that is consistent with the problem defirutton,Part 8: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 13. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 313 and (d) checking the fidelity of the final solution to the To achieve robustness, Taguchi suggests the follow- original needs. ing. sequence of events in .his design model: (a) systenr· design, (b) par~meter des~gn and (c) tolerance desi~ 43.2 Taguchis quality loss function model System design IS the physical embodiment of the func- tional requirements of the product, where special engin- The recent past has witnessed the shift in focus from eering and scientific knowledge is applied. Parameter on-line quality control to off-line quality. This has led design is the process of identifying the optimal settings to increasing focus on the integration of quality into the of various parameters under the control of the designer early design stage of product development Ensuring to limit variation. Tolerance design involves the control quality by design thus involves the use of structured off- of the variation in critical parameters when everything line methods to determine the design configurations else has failed to control the variation of performance that meet the customers needs and are robust, where within the required limit . robustness means that product performance character- istics are insensitive to variation in the manufacturing and operating environments (60). One of the main pro- 4.4 Descriptive models ponents of off-line quality control is the renowned Japanese, Professor Genichi Taguchi, who introduced Descriptive models emanated both from experience of the concept of quality loss or loss to society. individual designers and from studies carried out on Taguchis methodology is based on the precept that the how designs were created, that is what processes, strat- lowest cost to society represents the product with the egies and problem-solving methods designers used. highest quality, which is achieved by reducing variation These models usually emphasize the importance of gen- in product characteristics. This approach is expressed erating one solution concept early in the process, thus by what is called the loss function. The loss function is reflecting the solution focused nature of design think-he ing (39). The original solution goes through a process ofof a mathematical way of qualifying cost as a function of product variation. This loss function allows a determi- analysis, evaluation, refinement (patching and repair) nation to be made as to whether further reduction in and development (39, 62, 63). the variation will continue to reduce costs. The loss In their paper, Finger and Dixon (38) discuss descrip- function includes production costs as well as costs tive models from a different perspective and have identi- incurred by the customer during use (61). The simplest fied the research work in this area along two main lines:ItS form of the loss function is expressed by a quadratic 1. Research based on techniques from artificial intelli- relationship obtained from a Taylor series expansion, gence such as protocol analysis, involving systematicys and can be approximated by: gathering of data on how designers design.he L(Y) = k(Y- M) 2 2. Research based on modelling the cognitive process.fie where The aim of this research is to build computer-based"R L = loss associated with a particular performance cognitive models, which describe, simulate and characteristic Y emulate the mental processes and skills used by M = the performance target value designers while creating a design. k =loss parameter= LJD6 where 4.4.1 Model by March Lc = average loss to the customer when the per-ly formance characteristic is not within the limit The model of the design process proposed by Marchm Do (64) draws on the work of the American philosopher D 0 = customer tolerance limit Peirce on the three modes of reasoning, which are deduction, induction and abduction (production). Ines The loss function L(Y), which is shown graphically in rephrasing Peirces remarks, rational designing is con-ns Fig. 9, can thus be defined as the average of the finan- ceived as having three tasks:er cial loss due to deviations of the product characteristice- Y from the target function M over all customer condi- 1. The creation of a novel composition-accomplished!d tions up to the time required for the product life. by productive reasoningJ.e ? LCYl = k(Y-M)~!das!n:JsJe!d1ecit Lm _Lc~, l _ "·~ ~ ~ -i I II I;he- /1ss IisJi .~+Do:lin. Fig. 9 Taguchis quality loss function ~ 1le<:hE 1996 Proc lnstn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 14. 314 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB 2. The prediction of performance characteristics- from several viewpoints, (d) thinking with concepts and accomplished by deductive reasoning (e) thinking with basic elements: 3. The accumulation of habitual notions and estab- lished values, an evolving typology-accomplished 1. Thinking with outline strategies. The idea here is (a) by inductive reasoning. to be able to decide in advance what strategy (that is, a sequence or network of design actions or thoughts)Summarily, production (abduction) creates, deduction is to be adopted in the design process, (b) to be ablepredicts and induction evaluates. In this model the to compare what has been achieved in the designdesign process begins with the first phase of productive project with what was planned and (c) to be able toreasoning, which draws on a preliminary statement of produce strategies for producing strategies.required characteristics and some presuppositions 2. Thinking in parallel planes. This consists of detachedabout a solution, to produce the first design proposal. observation of the thoughts and actions of oneselfFrom the design suppositions and established theory, and ones colleagues during the design project, andthe first design proposal is then deductively analysed to attention is focused upon the pattern of thoughtpredict the expected performance characteristics. From while designing.the predicted performance characteristics, it is then pos- 3. Thinking from several viewpoints. Effort here issible to inductively evaluate further design possibilities directed at the solution to the design problem insteador suppositions. This cycle is then repeated, starting of at the process of finding it.from a revised statement of characteristics, resulting in 4. Thinking with concepts. This consists of imaginingfurther refinements and/or changes in the design propo- or drawing of geometric patterns that enable asal. The PDI (production/deduction/induction) model designer to relate the fundamental design methoddescribed above is shown in Fig. 10. (FDM) checklists to the pattern of his or her own memories and thoughts. The main purpose of this is to provide the designer with a memorable pattern of4.4.2 Model by Matchett the relationship between the design problem, theThe approach to design as enunciated by Matchett (65, design process and the solution.66) is also known as the fundamental design method 5. Thinking with basic elements. This thinking pattern(FDM). The aim of this approach is to enable a is the most rational of the five modes of thinking.designer to perceive and to control the pattern of The use of basic elements is to make the designerhis/her thoughts and to relate this pattern more closely aware of the large number of alternative actions thatto all aspects of a design situation. The approach are open to him or her at each point of decision.adopted by Matchett to design is built around five These basic elements are considered under seventhinking patterns. These are: (a) thinking with outline groups of: (a) decision options, (b) judgementstrategies, (b) thinking in parallel planes, (c) thinking options, (c) strategic options, (d) tactical options, (e) ) DESIGN , _________ THEORIES / DEDUCTION Fig. 10 The design model by MarchPart B ·Journal of Engmeering ~!anufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 15. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 3I5md relational options, (f) obstacle options and (9) concept options. (a) lir------F-Bs_ B o . IS, The primary roulette is intended to generate a varietyltS) of design alternatives. The actions here involve estab-ble lishing how each part of a design can be eliminated,tgn combined, standardized, transferred, modified or simpli- I - - - F - - Be-- S-- D --P to fied. The secondary roulette is intended to ensure that all changes introduced are compatible with each otherted and with all the needs. In using the fundamental design;elf method, the following procedure is recommended (66):nd 1. Study the design situation. Es Eo.~ht 2. Then identify provisionally the needs that the design is to satisfy. Ccir1po.r;son Process IS 3. Identify the primary functional need (that is the need Tro.nsforr1o. tion Processad that if not properly satisfied makes the fulfillment of all other needs pointless). Fig. 11 The evolutionary design modelng 4. Explore alternative principles upon which a means of a satisfying the primary need can be based. Designing in this model is based on the concept of anod 5. Complete an outline of a design capable of satisfying iterative cyclic process of generation and refinement ofvn both the primary and secondary needs. partial solutions which are evaluated using a model of IS 6. Review the functional effectiveness of this design. the environment.of 7. Review the material and work content in producinghe the design as well as the component quality. 4.5 Computational design modelsrn Neville (68) considers that computational models oftg. design play two major roles: firstly, that they are aer 4.4.3 Model by Gero-evolutionary design model (67) necessary part of the development of more effectiveat This model considers the design process as a series of CAD (computer aided design) tools and, secondly, that•n. transformations from one state of the design to another they play a role of supporting research into design~n state, for example transforming function F, structure S theory and methodology. Computational models con-nt and behaviour B into a design description D. The evo- sidered here focus on mapping function into structure:e) lutionary model is formulated with due cognizance of and investigate which are intended for computer imple- the use environment E the resulting product will be mentation. Within these models design is considered to exposed to as well as the originating designers intent I. be a process that maps an explicit set of requirements The resulting model is shown in Fig. 11 along with the into a description of a physically realizable product activities. The activities in this model are: which would satisfy these requirements plus implicit requirements imposed by the domain/environment (68). Formulation or design brief or specification: I-» F Emerging computational models are due to Agogino et Analysis: F -»Be al. (69), Mostow et al. (70), Dixon (71), Cagan and Synthesis: Be-» S Agogino (31), Gero (72) and Fitzhorn (73). Production of design description: S- » D Manufacture of the product: D-» P 5 DESIGN METHODS Simulation: S «-»E. Real world interaction: P «-»E. During the different phases of a design project and Evaluation: B.«-» Be(F), B.«-» Be(F) through the various stages of the design process, a Reformulation: B5 - » Be, B.-» Be number of design aids, tools and support systems are Simulated structure performance: S( «-»E.)-» B. used, in order to arrive at a realizable product and/or Actual product performance: P( «-»E.)-» B. process. These tools and aids are what are generally regarded as design methods. Design methods generally where I = designers intent, F =function (purpose of help to formalize and systematize activities within the product), S = structure (configuration of products design process and externalize design thinking, that is constituents), D = design description, B. = set of behav- they try to get the designers thoughts and thinking pro- iours of structure, Be = set of expected behaviours, cesses out of the head into charts and diagrams (39). B, = set of actual behaviour of the product, E. = actual Hubka (74) defines a design method as any system of environment, E, =simulated environment, P = actual methodical rules and directives that aim to determine product. The complete evolutionary design process the designers manner of proceeding to perform a par- model then incorporates the cross-over mechanism C, ticular design activity, and regulate the collaboration which allows for cross-breeding of different structures with available technical means .. .. Design methods sn from a population of structures to achieve a satisfac- were also considered to exhibit certain characteristics in tory design. The mutation mechanism M is also added terms of their usage, such as the goals the methods and used to mutate any unsatisfactory design structure serve, their general applicability, conditions under S. Both the cross-over and mutation mechanisms are which they can be used, whether the methods are not mutually dependent and are not necessarily both intended for single designers or for design teams, their applied at each step of the evolutionary design process. origins, how they function (modus operandi) and the ~ lleohE 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 2IO
  • 16. , , 316 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB time demanded by the methods. Taking into account plants, offshore facilities· and aerospace products (7 the above characteristics, design methods can be classi- Within the design environment, several functionali fied under the following broad headings: (a) methods and resource components exist, consisting of (a) genet intended to provide basic improvements in the way functionality, applicable throughout the design proce! designers work, (b) methods that act on the creative (b) specific functionality, relating to specific tasks in tl characteristics of the human being, (c) methods that design process, for example solid modelling, (c) to attempt to describe and master the problem situation resource, which is third party software employed 1 by means of strict logic and mathematics, (d) methods deliver enabling technology for addressing specif that prescribe methodical rules and regulations, which design tasks, (d) external information resource, such can significantly increase the overall probability of company-specific databases, and (e) programming Jar success, (e) methods based particularly on the know- guage resource, which includes languages lik ledge of the artifact being designed, (f) methods that FORTRAN, Modula-2, Prolog and Expert syster encourage the use of technical means and aids, and aim shells. This design environment is being implemented i towards automation of that part of the design process an integrated system architecture, consisting of fou and (g) combinations of the above methods appropriate layers based on a networked workstation environmen to the existing situation. Jones (66) in his book gives a The four layers are: (a) the distributed design protoco description of 35 design methods. These methods were (b) the design process management, (c) the design func classified broadly into the following: (a) prefabricated tionality and (d) the design repository. methods, (b) strategy control methods, (c) methods of exploring design situations, (d) methods of searching for 6.2 The integrated design framework ideas, (e) methods of exploring problem structures and (f) methods of evaluation. The design system under development at the Cambridg( Other design methods that have emerged within the University Engineering Design Centre is called the inte· recent past include the following: (a) design axioms, (b) grated design framework (IDF) (76). This system i~ design for manufacture, (c) design for assembly, (d) described as an open and flexible computer environ· design for disassembly, (e) design for the environment, ment, which is based on framework support modules (f) design for cost, (g) design for maintenance, (h) design (FSMs). These FSMs are being developed to aid . for reliability, (i) design for testing, (j) design for service- designers in specifying requirements, synthesizing and ability, (k) failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA), (1) evaluating solution concepts, performing embodiment robust engineering design, (m) Taguchi methods, (n) design, optimizing the configuration and manufacturing manufacturing process design rules, (o) finite element their products. analysis (FEA), (p) group technology, (q) fault tree analysis (FT A), (r) computer aided modelling (solid body modelling), (s) sketching input and (t) design 6.3 The Schemebuilder retrieval (design databases). Schemebuilder, the design system under development at Lancaster University Engineering Design Centre (77, 6 COMPUTER-BASED DESIGN SYSTEMS 78), is a conceptual design tool aimed at guiding designers through the vast range of design options In the recent past, several issues have been raised in the available to them. The aim is to facilitate the explora- design and research community about the limitations of tion of alternative conceptual schemes with an appro- currently available geometry-based computer aided priate allocation of function between mechanical, design (CAD) systems and their failure to accommodate electronic and software elements. Schemebuilder aims to other aspects of the design life-cycle, ranging from provide for the creation of a model of the system to be problem definition and specifications down to pro- designed, while giving advice on appropriate means. duction planning. Preliminary work in this regard The solution approach adopted uses Bond Graphs to (although limited) has focused on developing more inte- classify individual components, both by their function grated and robust design systems that can support not and the type of ports they possess. Associated with the only geometric modelling but can also accommodate Schemebuilder is the Layout module, which supports various design models, -design methods and techniques the preliminary embodiment phase of design. It is used as well as providing sufficient flexibility for the designer to quickly generate three-dimensional solid geometries to innovate and be creative. A major intention of such of selected schemes. systems is for them to be able to handle varying forms of design information in addition to geometric data. 6.4 Vehicles knowledge-based design environment Several of these systems will be discussed including those being developed in a number of the engineering The vehicles design environment (79), which is being design centres within the United Kingdom, who are developed by the Aerospace Corporation, Los Angeles, sponsored by the Engineering and Physical Sciences California, is a knowledge-based system with an inter- Research Council (EPSRC). active environment built to enhance, assist, simplify and expedite design activities under the guidance of designers. It is being developed to support varied styles 6.1 Integrated design environment of design, handle and evaluate multiple designs, provide The Engineering Design Centre at the University of meaningful status reports on the results obtained and Newcastle is concerned with the generic design pro- on the degree of completion of a design, provide a cesses and their integration, with particular reference to variety of analysis tools and create an open and exten- large made-to-order (MTO) products, such as power sible architecture in which new models, tools and design Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 17. A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 317 (75). the design object which should exhibit maximum simi- ality SPV larity to the designers own images about them. The 1eric Scenarios Applico tion architecture of this system and its components is shown cess, 1 the DODD in Fig. 12. The supervisor SPY is at the core of IIICAD and controls all the information flow. It also adds intel- tool B I.DDS ligence to the system by comparing user actions with i to CIDDL is the bose scenarios which describe standard design procedures, as longuoge) cific well as performing error handling when necessary. The lUI API h as @ integrated data description schema (IDDS) regiments Ian- like [;] the databases and knowledge-bases and relieves the user from the burden of specifying where and how· to store tern and retrieve data. din The IDDS has a kernel language called the integrated icur data description language (IDDL), which is used by all ent. Fig. 12 IIICAD architecture the system elements. IDDL is based on logic and the col, concepts of knowledge engineering. IIICAD also has a me- high-level interface called the intelligent user interface concepts may be added. The kernel of vehicles is written in Quintus Prolog and C on a Sun workstation. The (lUI), which is driven by scenarios written in IDDL. user interface is being built using X-windows, C++ The application interface (API) is used to secure the and the Interviews widget set. It also has links to exist- mapping between the central model descriptions about ing software tools (in Fortran and C) for graphics and a design object and the individual models used by appli- dge engineering analysis. cation programs. Such application programs can 1te- include programs for: (a) conceptual designs, (b) geo- Is metric and product modelling, (c) finite element analysis on- 6.5 An integrated CAD system (80) and other engineering analysis activities. lies This system was developed based on a model for the aid process of machine design, taking into account the md requirements of computer aided design (CAD), and con- 6.8 Design fusion project-CMU ED R C (83--85) ent sists of three main elements, that is product-defining The primary goal of this work is to infuse knowledge of rng models (PDM), which support modelling of product downstream activities of product development into the properties, product-defining data (PDD), which adjust upstream design process so that designs can be gener- the overall, general models to an appropriate size, given ated rapidly and correctly. The design space is hence the design problem, and operational principles (OP), viewed as a multi-dimensional space in which each which select the design methods with all the necessary dimension represents a different life-cycle objective such ~nt information about the process. The resulting integrated as fabrication, testing, serviceability and reliability. This77, and flexible CAD system consists of four main modules, system thus aims to provide an intelligent aid to theng which are: (a) the task analysis processor (AAP), (b) the designer which would help in the understanding of the >llS solution coordination processor (LKP), (c) the design interactions and trade-offs among these different andra- management system (KLS) and (d) the database (DB). conflicting requirements of a product or system. This·o- computer-based system surrounds the designer withal, 6.6 The design system MFK (81) expert modules that provide continuous feedback based to on incremental analysis of the design as it evolves. Thebe The primary objective in the development of this system was, on the basis of a traditional CAD system, to expert modules are called perspectives and can be usedOS. support the designer/design team through an object- to generate: (a) comments on the design, (b) information to that becomes part of the design and (c) portions of theon orientated component description offering an integrated knowledge-based analysis of the component. The geometry. These perspectives represent a collection ofhe modules (fabrication, assembly, etc.) that interact withcts system consists of an information generating synthesis part and an information processing analysis part. Also one another and with the designer. It integrates the per-ed spectives (expert modules) around a dynamic, sharedes included is the component model module, which adjoins both the synthesis and the analysis parts. Contained representation of the design. The shared representation within the component model is ·the product defining includes the geometric model of the design as well as data. Connected to the design system is a CAD system, the features, the constraints and the design record. The through an interactive/procedural interface. This design design record contains the design decisions that led to system allows different types of analysis to be per- the creation of a constraint or feature. The system archi-ng formed, such as design for production, tolerance tecture for the design fusion system is shown in Fig. 13.es.~r- analysis, cost and stress calculations as well as com-1d ponent search. 7 CONCLUSIONS of This paper has examined various design philosophies,es 6.7 Intelligent integrated interactive CAD system models, methods and systems, developed over the pastde few decades, including definitions of design, features of The philosophy of the intelligent integrated interactive1d CAD (IIICAD) system (82) is that it should support the the design process, types of design and product classi- a designer/design team in the entire design process using fications. Different approaches to design, representingn- unified models with rich functionalities for various various schools of thought in the design community,;n design activities. The system should also have models of were observed. These approaches, described in the forml96 :Q !MechE 19% Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 18. 318 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB Perspectives Constro.ints Fo.brico.tion Goo.ls Control Po.nel D Tes-ting E s I G N E R Fea--ture Noodles Reclo.no. tion GeoMetry Pa-nel Fig. 13 The design fusion system architecture of design models, were either prescriptive or descriptive. aspects of design, examining ways to support creativity, Prescriptive models represented the design process in innovation and generation of conceptual design solu-phases and/or stages, and prescribe how the design tions. It is in this aspect that there will be anprocess should be carried out, in an algorithmic and opportunity for design and manufacturing companies tosystematic way. Descriptive models, on the other hand, excel.were based on the strategies used by designers, andfocused on designers actions and activities during the REFERENCESdesign process. A majority of the models, especially the Jones, J. C. and Thornley, D. G. Conference on design methods.prescriptive ones, favoured the establishment of design September 1962 (Pergamon Press, London).requirements in a solution neutral form, that is without 2 Gregory, S. A. The design method, 1966 (Butterworth, London).reference to any specific solution. 3 Broadbent, G. H. and Ward, A. Design methods in architecture, 1969 (Lund Humphries, London). Design methods that can be used within most of the 4 Design: Science: Method, Proceedings of the 1980 Design Researchmodels, as well as currently emerging ones, were dis- Society Conference (Eds R. Jacques and J. A. Powell), 1981cussed. In general, these design methods consisted of (Westbury House, Guildford, Surrey).both manual and computer-based design aids, tools, 5 Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineeringtechniques and support systems used during the design design, ICED 89, Harrogate, 1989, WDK 18, Vols 1 and 2 (Mechanical Engineering Publications, London).process to: (a) arrive at a realizable product, (b) formal- 6 Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineeringize and systematize activities within the design process design, ICED 81, Rome, 1981, WDK 5.and (c) externalize design thinking in charts and dia- 7 Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineeringgrams. Current ongoing research involving computa- design, ICED 83, Kobenhavn, 1983, WDK 10. 8 Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineeringtional design models, as well as those aimed at design, ICED 85, Hamburg, 1985, WDK 12.developing comprehensive design systems, was dis- 9 Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineeringcussed. The aim of the survey was to examine the whole design, ICED 9I, Zurich, 1991, WDK 20.body of issues related to design theory and method- 10 Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering design, ICED 93, The Hague, 17-19 August 1993, WDK 22 (Ed. N.ology. Current research in engineering is encouraging. A F. M. Roozenburg), Vols 1, 2 and 3.lot of activities are still focused on the analytical and II Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineeringcomputational aspects of design. It is highly desirable design, ICED 87, Boston, 1987, WDK 13 (Ed. E. W. Eder), Vols 1that more research will start to focus on the synthesis and2.Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996
  • 19. r i A SURVEY OF DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES, MODELS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS 319 12 Proceedings of the 1988 NSF Grantee Workshop on Design theory based models of design processes. Res. in Engng Des., 1989, 1, and methodology, Design Theory 88 (Eds S. L. Newsome, W. R. 51-67. Spillers and S. Finger), 1989 (Springer-Verlag, New York). 39 Cross, N. Engineering design methods, 1991 (John Wiley, London). 13 Proceedings of First International Conference on Design theory 40 Lawson, B. R. Cognitive strategies in architectural design. In and methodology, Montreal, Canada, September 1989, DE Vol. 17 Developments in design methodology (Ed. N. Cross), 1984, pp. 209- (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York). 220 (John Wiley, London). 14 Proceedings of Second International Conference on Design theory 41 Creative Engineering Workshop, School of Engineering, City Uni- and methodology, Chicago, Illinois, 16-19 September 1990, DE versity, London, 15-18 December 1993. Vol. 27 (Ed. J. Rinderle) (American Society of Mechanical Engin- 42 Yoshikawa, H. Design philosophy: the state of the art. Ann. CIRP, eers, New York). !989, 38(2), 579-586. 15 Proceedings of Third International Conference on Design, theory 43 Rodenacker, W. G. Methodisches Konstruieren, 1970 (Springer- and methodology, Miami, Florida, 22-25 September 1991, DE Vol. Verlag, Berlin). . 31 (Ed. L.A. Stauffer) (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 44 Wallace, K. M. Better by design. Mfg Engr, May 1989, 35-36. New York). 45 Osborn, A. F. Applied imagination, 1963 (Scribeners & Sons, New 16 Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Design, theory York). and methodology, Scottsdale, Arizona, 13-16 September 1992, DE 46 Gordon, W. J. J. Synectics: the development of creative capacity, Vol. 42 (Eds D. L. Taylor and L.A. Stauffer) (American Society of 1961 (Harper and Row, New York). Mechanical Engineers, New York). 47 Asimow, M. Introduction to design, 1962 (Prentice-Hall, Engle- 17 Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Design, theory wood Cliffs, New Jersey). and methodology, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 19-22 September 48 Watts, R. D. The elements of design. In The design method (Ed. S. 1993, DE Vol. 53 (Ed. L. A. Stauffer) (American Society of A. Gregory), 1966, pp. 85-95 (Butterworth, London). Mechanical Engineers, New York). 49 Marples, D. L. The decisions of engineering design, 1960, pp. 1-16 18 Proceedings of Sixth International Conference on Design, theory (The Institution of Engineering Designers, London). and methodology, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 11-14 September 1994 50 Eder, W. E. Definitions and methodologies. In The design method (Ed. L. A. Stauffer) (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, (Ed. S. A. Gregory), 1966, pp. 19-31 (Butterworth, London). New York). 51 Evbuomwan, N. F. 0., et al. Quality function deployment-past, 19 Feilden, G. B. R., et al. Engineering design (The Feildens Report), present and future. lOth ISPE/IFAC International Conference on 1963 (Her Majestys Stationery Office, London). CAD/CAM, robotics and factories of the future, CARS & FOF 94, 20 Finkelstein, L. and Finkelstein, A. C. W. Review of design method- Ottawa, Canada, 21-24 August 1994, pp. 596-601. ology. lEE Proc., June 1983, 130 (Part A, No.4). 52 Krick, E. V. Engineering and engineering design, 2nd edition, 1969 21 Luckman, J. An approach to the management of design. In Devel- (John Wiley, New York). opments in design methodology (Ed. N. Cross), 1984, pp. 83-97 53 Hubka, V. Design for quality and design methodology. J. Engng (John Wiley, London). Des., 1992, 3{1), 5-15. 22 Archer, L. B. Systematic method for designers. In Developments in 54 French, M. J. Conceptual design for engineers, 1st edition, 1971 design methodology (Ed. N. Cross), 1984, pp. 57-82 (John Wiley, (The Design Council, London). London). 55 Harris, A. J. Can design be taught. Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs, August 23 Caldecote, V. The design team in relation to the individual 1980, Part 1, No. 68, 409-416. designer. The practice of and education for engineering design. 56 Pugh. S. Total design-integrated methods for successful product Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, 1963-4, 178(3B), 16-19. engineering, 1st edition, 1990 (Addison-Wesley, England). 24 Goals and priorities for research in engineering design, 1986 57 BS 7000, Management of design, January 1990 (British Standards (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York). Institution, London). 25 Rabins, M., et al. Design theory and methodology-a new disci- 58 Sub, N. The principles of design, 1988 (Oxford University Press, pline. Mech. Engng, August 1986, 23-27. New York). 26 Rzevski, G. On the design of a design methodology. In Design: 59 Taguchi, G. Introduction to quality engineering: designing quality Science: Method, Proceedings of the 1980 Design Research Society into products and processes, 1986 (Asian Productivity Organis-ty, Conference (Eds R. Jacques and J. A. Powell), 1981, pp. 6-17 ation, Tokyo, Japan).lu- (Westbury House, Guildford. Surrey). 60 Sanchez, S. M., et al. Quality by design. In Concurrent engineering: 27 Banares-Alcantara, R. Representing the engineering design automation, tools and techniques (Ed. A. Kusiak), 1993, Ch. 10, pp.an process: two hypotheses. In Artificial intelligence in design con- 235-286 (John Wiley, New York).to ference (Ed. J. S. Gero), 1991, pp. 3-22 (Butterworth-Heinemann, 61 Ertas, A. and Jones, J. C. The engineering design process, 1993 Oxford). (John Wiley, New York). 28 Gero, J. S. A system for computer-aided design in architecture. In 62 Ullman, D. G. and Diettrich, T. A. Mechanical design method- Computer aided design (Eds J. Viletstra and R. F. Wielinga), 1973 ology-computers in engineering, 1986, pp. 173-180 (American (North Holland. Amsterdam). Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York).JdS. 29 Smithers. T. AI-based design versus geometry-based design, or 63 Ullman, D. G., Stauffer, L. A. and Diettrich, T. A. Preliminary why design cannot be supported by geometry alone. Computer results of an experimental study of the mechanical design process. Aided Des., 1989. 21(3), 141-150. In Proceedings from the NSF Workshop on the design process (Ed.1re. 30 Juster, N. P. The design process and design methodologies. Tech- M. B. Waldron), 1987, pp. 145-188 (Ohio State University, nical report. University of Leeds. May 1985. Oakland, California).rch 31 Cagan, J. and Agogino, A.M. Dimensional variable expansion-a 64 March, L. The logic of design. In Developments in design method-lSI formal approach to innovative design. Res. in Engng Des., 1991, 3, ology (Ed. N. Cross), 1984. pp. 265-276 (John Wiley, London). 75-85. 65 Matchett, E. and Briggs, A. H. Practical design based on methoding 32 Sriram. D., et al. Knowledge-based system applications in engin- (fundamental design method). In The design method (Ed. S. A. 2 eering design: research at MIT. AI Mag., Fall !989, 10(3), 79-96. Gregory), 1966, pp. 183-199 (Butterworth, London). 33 Pahl, G. and Beitz, W. Engineering design. Original German 66 Jones, J. C. Design methods-seeds of human futures, 1970 (John·ng Edition, 1st edition, 1971: English Edition (Ed. K. Wallace), !984 Wiley, London). (The Design Council. London). 67 Hybs, I. and Gero, J. S. An evolutionary process model of design.ng 34 Clausing, D.P. Toral quality detelopment-the derelopment of com- Des. Stud., July 1992, 13{3), 273-290. petitire new products. March !994 (American Society of Mechan- 68 Neville, G. E. Computational models of design processes. In Pro-ng ical Engineers Press. New York). ceedings of the 1988 NSF Grantee Workshop on design theory and 35 ledland, A. J. The computer based design process. 1986 (Kogan methodology, Design Theory 88 (Eds S. L. Newsome, W. R. Spill-ng Page. London). ers and S. Finger), 1989, pp. 82-96 (Springer- Verlag, New York). 3<i lostow, J. Toward better models of the design process. AI Mag., 69 Agogino, A. M., et al. AI/OR computational model for integratingng Spring 1985.44-57. qualitative and quantitative design methods. Proceedings of NSF:--1. 37 Broadbent, G. H. Design methods-13 years after-a review. In Engineering in Design Conference, University of Massachusetts, Design: science: method (Eds R. Jacques and J. A. Powell), 1980, Amherst, Massachusetts. 11-14 June 1989, pp. 97-112.nq pp. 3-5 {Westbury House. Guildford. Surrey). 70 Mostow, J., et al. A domain-independent model of knowledge- 1 38 Finger, S. and Dixon, J. R. A review of research in mechanical based design. In Proceedings of the 1988 NSF Grantee Workshop engmeering design. Part I: descriptive. prescriptive. and computer- on design theory and methodology, Design Theory 88 (Eds S. L. ~ 1iechE 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
  • 20. ., 320 N F 0 EVBUOMWAN, S SIVALOGANATHAN AND A JEBB Newsome, W. R. Spillers and S. Finger), 1989, pp. 97-99 (Springer- 78 Oh, V. K. and Sharpe, J. E. E. Integrated computer support for Verlag, New York). interdisciplinary system design: In Methodologies, techniques, and 71 Dixon, J. R. Iterative redesign and respecification: research on tools for design development (Eds M. M. Tanik et al.), Vol. 5, computational models of design processes. In Proceedings of the PD-Vol. 64-5, Proceedings of Second Biennial European Joint 1988 NSF Grantee Workshop on design theory and methodology, Conference on Engineering systems design and analysis, London, Design Theory 88 (Eds S. L. Newsome, W. R. Spillers and S. 4-7 July 1994, pp. 107-114 (American Society of Mechanical Finger), 1989, pp. 104-107 {Springer-Verlag, New York). Engineers, New York). 72 Gero, J. S. AI and new computational models of design. Interna- 79 Gillam, A. Vehicle knowledge-based design environment. J. Space- tional Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE) craft and Rockets, May-June 1993, 30(3), 342-347. Colloquium on Knowledge-based systems in civil engineering, 80 Beitz, W. and Feldhuseo, J. Management systems and program Beijing, China, 1993, pp. 25-32. concepts for an integrated CAD process. Res. in Engng Des~ 1991, 73 Fitzhorn, P. A. Engineering design is a computable function. Artif. 3, 61-74. Intel/. for Engng Des., Analysis and Mfg, 1994, 8, 35-44. 81 Meerkamrn, H. Design system MFK-an important step towards 74 Hubka, V. Design tactics = methods + working principles for an engineering workbench. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Pim B, 1993, design engineers. International Conference on Engineering design, 207(B2), 105-116. ICED, Kobenhavn, 15-18 August 1983, pp. 16-34. 82 Akrnan, V., et a/. A fundamental and theoretical framework for an 75 Chawdhry, P. K. Integration and management of concurrent intelligent CAD system. Computer Aided Des., July-August 1990, design activities. Proceedings of the International Conference on 22(6), 352-367. Engineering design, jcED 93, The Hague, 17-19 August 1993, 83 Finger, S., et a/. Design support systems for concurrent engineer- WDK 22 (Ed. N. F. M. Roozenburg), Vol. 3, pp. 1481-1485. ing: a case study in large power transformer design. Proceedings 76 Bauert, F. and Ball, N. R. The integrated design framework: of the International Conference on Engineering design, ICED 93, blackboards as a communication medium between designers and The Hague, 17-19 August 1993, WDK 22 (Ed. N. F. M. Roozen- software medium. Proceedings of the International Conference on burg), Vol. 3, pp. 1433-1440. Engineering design, ICED 93, The Hague, 17-19 August 1993, 84 Finger, S., Fox, M. S., Prinz, F. B. and Rinderle, J. R. Concurrent WDK 22 (Ed. N. F. M. Roozenburg), Vol. 3, pp. 1351-1358. design. Appl. Artif. Intell., 1992, 6(3), 257-283. 77 Bracewell, R. H., et a/. Schemebuilder, a design aid for the concep- 85 Finger, S. and Dixon, J. R. A review of research in mechanical tual stages of product design. Proceedings of the International engineering design. Part 2: representations, analysis, and design Conference on Engineering design ICED 93, The Hague, 17-19 for the life cycle. Res. in Engng Des., 1989, 1, 121-137. August 1993, WDK 22 (Ed. N. F. M. Roozenburg), Vol. 3, pp. 1311-1318. Part 8: Journal of Engineering Manufacture © !MechE 1996

×