Foundational Issues of Engineering Design

Publisher Summary Making designs or plans for new technical artefacts points to a feature of human agency that extends far beyond the domain of material production. One makes all kinds of plans in the sense of considered series of actions, which may or may not involve the use or making of technical artefacts. Modern engineering design is a science-based activity but that does not make it a branch of applied science. The solving of design problems is taken to be something very different from the solving of scientific problems. Designing is considered as the salient feature of technology that distinguishes it from science. The idea is the function or functional requirements that the thing to be designed (i.e. the system, component or process) is expected to satisfy. These functional requirements are related, in turn, to certain human ends (or needs). If the designed artefact meets all the specifications, it is deemed suitable to realize the desired function. Whether that indeed turns out to be the case depends very much on whether the list of specifications adequately meets the functional requirements. If it does and if the reasoning from end to function has also been performed adequately, then the designed artefact may be expected to be a reliable means to the specified end.

[1]  Peter Kroes,et al.  Modelling infrastructures as socio-technical systems , 2006, Int. J. Crit. Infrastructures.

[2]  M. Franssen Arrow’s theorem, multi-criteria decision problems and multi-attribute preferences in engineering design , 2005 .

[3]  John L. Pollock The Logical Foundations of Means‐End Reasoning , 2002 .

[4]  Peter Kroes Technical Artifacts, Engineering Practice, and Emergence , 2009 .

[5]  Ch Kees Dorst,et al.  Design and use as plans: an action-theoretical account , 2002 .

[6]  Sir Charles Prestwood Lucas Greater Rome and Greater Britain: THE NATURAL AND THE ARTIFICIAL , 2010 .

[7]  Pieter E. Vermaas,et al.  Technical functions: a drawbridge between the intentional and structural natures of technical artefacts , 2006 .

[8]  Peter Kroes,et al.  Coherence of structural and functional descriptions of technical artefacts , 2006 .

[9]  Krister Segerberg,et al.  Getting started: Beginnings in the logic of action , 1992, Stud Logica.

[10]  Isabelle Reymen,et al.  Improving design processes through structured reflection : a domain-independent approach , 2001 .

[11]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  Function in Device Representation , 2000, Engineering with Computers.

[12]  Christopher W. Johnson,et al.  What are emergent properties and how do they affect the engineering of complex systems? , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[13]  Luca Chittaro,et al.  Reasoning about function and its applications to engineering , 1998, Artif. Intell. Eng..

[14]  Laurent Magnin,et al.  Elements about the Emergence Issue: A Survey of Emergence Definitions , 2006, Complexus.

[15]  Peter Kroes,et al.  Treating socio-technical systems as engineering systems: some conceptual problems , 2006 .

[16]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Structure of Ill-Structured Problems , 1977 .

[17]  Balasubramanian Chandrasekaran,et al.  Representing function: Relating functional representation and functional modeling research streams , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[18]  John S. Gero,et al.  That what, the how, and the shy in design , 1994, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[19]  Peter Kroes,et al.  A Semantics for Means-end Relations , 2006, Synthese.

[20]  Pieter E. Vermaas,et al.  Actions Versus Functions: A Plea for an Alternative Metaphysics of Artifacts , 2004 .

[21]  Mark Perlman,et al.  The Modern Philosophical Resurrection of Teleology , 2004 .