Worlds and transformations: Supporting the sharing and reuse of engineering design knowledge

Design involves the formulation of a solution, such as a product specification, from initial requirements. Design in industrial and other contexts often involves the building and use of models that allow the designer to test hypotheses and learn from possible design decisions prior to building the physical product. The building and testing of models is a design process in its own right. Previous work in knowledge management, design rationale and the psychology of design has demonstrated that designers often vary from prescriptive methodologies of the design process and have problems appropriately describing their design activity in order to support design collaboration and the reuse of design artefacts. Drawing on this work, we support design collaboration and reuse structured according to key transformational episodes in the design process and the design artefacts they produce. To support this, we characterise the design task as progressing through a series of worlds, each comprising its own concepts and vocabulary, and supported by its own design tools. The design process can then be described in terms of important transformations that are made from one world to the next. This allows a targeted approach to rationale capture integrated with work practice and associated with products of the design process. This approach has been successfully deployed and tested in two industrial engineering companies. Findings included improved collaboration in design teams, effective reuse and improved training for new members of the design team. This work has more general implications for the development of design rationale methods and tools to support the design process.

[1]  Jan L. Top,et al.  Engineering ontologies , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  Stefan Decker,et al.  Creating Semantic Web Contents with Protégé-2000 , 2001, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[3]  Ian Dennis,et al.  Cognitive processes in engineering design: a longitudinal study , 1994 .

[4]  Petra Badke-Schaub,et al.  Thinking in design teams - an analysis of team communication , 2002 .

[5]  Donald A. Schön Designing: Rules, types and worlds , 1988 .

[6]  Simon P. Davies,et al.  Characterizing the program design activity : neither strictly top-down nor globally opportunistic , 1991 .

[7]  John Seely Brown,et al.  Book Reviews : The Social Life of Information By John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2000. 320 pages , 2000 .

[8]  Jay Bal,et al.  Implementing virtual teamworking: Part 2 – a literature review , 2001 .

[9]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  Computer Models of Thought and Language , 1974 .

[10]  Bernard P. Zeigler,et al.  Theory of Modelling and Simulation , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[11]  Philip Powell,et al.  Co-opetition and knowledge transfer , 1999, DATB.

[12]  Hideaki Takeda,et al.  Physical concept ontology for the knowledge intensive engineering framework , 2004, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[13]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation , 1984 .

[14]  Tamara Sumner,et al.  Designers and their tools: computer support for domain construction , 1996 .

[15]  Allan MacLean,et al.  Reasoning with Design Rationale: practical experience with design space analysis , 1994 .

[16]  Karen L. Myers,et al.  Acquiring Design Rationale Automatically Acquiring Design Rationale Automatically , 2022 .

[17]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Structure of Ill Structured Problems , 1973, Artif. Intell..

[18]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Learning from Notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation , 1992, CSCW '92.

[19]  Andrés Gómez de Silva Garza,et al.  Case-Based Reasoning in Design , 1995, IEEE Expert.

[20]  Alison Kidd,et al.  The marks are on the knowledge worker , 1994, CHI '94.

[21]  Randall Davis,et al.  Naturally conveyed explanations of device behavior , 2001, PUI '01.

[22]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Engineering design methods , 1989 .

[23]  Linden J. Ball,et al.  Representing design rationale to support innovative design reuse: a minimalist approach , 2001 .

[24]  Richard Buchanan,et al.  Wicked Problems in Design Thinking , 1992 .

[25]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[26]  Ram D. Sriram,et al.  A web-based system for design artifact modeling , 2000 .

[27]  Richard M. Young,et al.  Options and Criteria: Elements of design space analysis , 1991 .

[28]  Pericles Loucopoulos,et al.  A generic model for reflective design , 2000, TSEM.

[29]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Building Problem Solvers , 1993 .

[30]  Paul Mulholland,et al.  KNOWLEDGE SUPPORT FOR VIRTUAL MODELLING AND SIMULATION , 2003 .

[31]  Werner Schiehlen,et al.  Virtual nonlinear multibody systems , 2003 .

[32]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Deployment of an ontological framework of functional design knowledge , 2004, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[33]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use , 1996 .

[34]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[35]  Frank M. Shipman,et al.  Seeding, evolutionary growth and reseeding: supporting the incremental development of design environments , 1994, CHI '94.

[36]  Paul Mulholland,et al.  Knowledge support of simulation model development by reuse , 2006 .

[37]  Svetan Ratchev,et al.  Inter- and Intra-Organisational Barriers to Sharing Knowledge in the Extended Supply-Chain , 2000 .

[38]  Marek Hatala,et al.  A methodological approach to supporting organizational learning , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[39]  George J. Klir,et al.  Architecture of Systems Problem Solving , 1985, Springer US.