scholarly journals Can Pahl and Beitz’ systematic approach be a predictive model of designing?

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Udo Kannengiesser ◽  
John S. Gero
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Model ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
First Year ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Predictive Capacity ◽  
Design Issue ◽  
Prescriptive Model ◽  
Design Behaviour

Pahl and Beitz’ ‘Systematic Approach’ is generally seen as a prescriptive model of designing based on observations of professional design practice. In this paper, we examine whether this model can be used as a predictive model. This is done by testing its predictive capacity for the design behaviour of students that are formally taught design and design methods. The behavioural observations used in this study are based on protocols of 15 design sessions involving mechanical engineering students after their first year of design education and 31 design sessions of the students using various concept generation methods. The design protocols and the Systematic Approach are coded uniformly using the Function–Behaviour–Structure (FBS) design issue schema. Cumulative occurrence analysis is used to derive qualitative and quantitative measures as a basis for comparison between the Systematic Approach’s prediction and the students’ design behaviour. The results indicate that the Systematic Approach can predict some but not all of students’ design issue behaviour.

Can Design Teams Be Empathically Creative? A Simulation-Based Investigation on the Role of Team Empathy on Concept Generation and Selection

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Alsager Alzayed ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Jessica Menold ◽  
Jacquelyn Huff ◽  
Christopher McComb
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Computational Simulation ◽  
Idea Generation ◽  
First Year ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Design Activities ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Research on empathy has been surging in popularity in the engineering design community since empathy is known to help designers develop a deeper understanding of the users’ needs. Because of this, the design community has been invested in devising and assessing empathic design activities. However, research on empathy has been primarily limited to individuals, meaning we do not know how it impacts team performance, particularly in the concept generation and selection stages of the design process. Specifically, it is unknown how the empathic composition of teams, average (elevation) and standard deviation (diversity) of team members’ empathy, would impact design outcomes in the concept generation and selection stages of the design process. Therefore, the goal of the current study was to investigate the impact of team trait empathy on concept generation and selection in an engineering design student project. This was accomplished through a computational simulation of 13,482 teams of noninteracting brainstorming individuals generated by a statistical bootstrapping technique drawing upon a design repository of 806 ideas generated by first-year engineering students. The main findings from the study indicate that the elevation in team empathy positively impacted simulated teams’ unique idea generation and selection while the diversity in team empathy positively impacted teams’ generation of useful ideas. The results from this study can be used to guide team formation in engineering design.

Comparing Ideation Techniques for Beginning Designers

2016 ◽  
Vol 138 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanna R. Daly ◽  
Colleen M. Seifert ◽  
Seda Yilmaz ◽  
Richard Gonzalez
Keyword(s):  
Design Problem ◽  
Morphological Analysis ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Idea Generation ◽  
First Year ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Design Heuristics ◽  
Engineering Design Problem ◽  
Consensual Assessment Technique ◽  
Initial Idea

Concept generation techniques can help to support designers in generating multiple ideas during design tasks. However, differences in the ways these techniques guide idea generation are not well understood. This study investigated the qualities of concepts generated by beginning engineering designers using one of three different idea generation techniques. Working individually on an open-ended engineering design problem, 102 first year engineering students learned and applied one of three different ideation techniques—design heuristics, morphological analysis, or individual brainstorming (using brainstorming rules to generate ideas working alone)—to a given design problem. Using the consensual assessment technique, all concepts were rated for creativity, elaboration, and practicality, and all participants' concept sets were rated for quantity and diversity. The simplest technique, individual brainstorming, led to the most concepts within the short (25 minute) ideation session. All three techniques produced creative concepts averaging near the scale midpoint. The elaboration of the concepts was significantly higher with design heuristics and morphological analysis techniques, and the practicality was significantly higher using design heuristics. Controlling for number of concepts generated, there were no significant differences in diversity of solution sets across groups. These results demonstrate that the use of design heuristics does not limit the creativity of ideation outcomes, and helps students to develop more elaborate and practical ideas. Design heuristics show advantages in the initial idea generation phase for beginning engineering students. These findings point to specific strengths in different ideation techniques, and the value of exposing beginning designers to multiple techniques for idea generation.

Are you feeling me? An exploration of empathy development in engineering design education

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-57
Author(s):  
Mohammad Alsager Alzayed ◽  
Christopher McComb ◽  
Jessica Menold ◽  
Jackie Huff ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Empathy Development ◽  
Trait Empathy ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Having empathy in the design process can help engineers relate to the end user by identifying what and why certain experiences are meaningful. While there have been efforts to identify the factors that impact empathic tendencies in engineering, there has been limited evidence on how a students' trait empathy or empathic self-efficacy develops over a design project or what factors impact this development. The current study was developed to explore the development of students' trait empathy and empathic self-efficacy development and identify the underlying impact of the design project's context and course instructor through a study with 103 engineering students. Students' trait empathy and empathic self-efficacy were measured across each of the four design stages (problem formulation, concept generation, concept selection, and final conceptual design) during an 8-week project. The results highlight that students' trait empathy and empathic self-efficacy did not increase across design stages and the context of the design problem did not impact students' empathy development. Meanwhile, the course instructor negatively impacted students' empathic self-efficacy in one of the three course sections studied, and two of the three interviewed course instructors reduced the role of empathy in the concept generation and selection stages of the design process. These insights call for future research that could empirically assess the impact of trait empathy and empathic self-efficacy in driving design outcomes in the later design stages, which could increase engineering educators' awareness of the role of empathy in the engineering classroom.

scholarly journals Cognitive differences among first-year and senior engineering students when generating design solutions with and without additional dimensions of sustainability

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mo Hu ◽  
Tripp Shealy ◽  
Julie Milovanovic
Keyword(s):  
Brain Region ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Cortical Activation ◽  
First Year ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Number Of Solutions ◽  
Cognitive Differences ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Design Solutions ◽  
The Brain

Abstract The research presented in this paper explores how engineering students cognitively manage concept generation and measures the effects of additional dimensions of sustainability on design cognition. Twelve first-year and eight senior engineering students generated solutions to 10 design problems. Half of the problems included additional dimensions of sustainability. The number of unique design solutions students developed and their neurocognitive activation were measured. Without additional requirements for sustainability, first-year students generated significantly more solutions than senior engineering students. First-year students recruited higher cortical activation in the brain region generally associated with cognitive flexibility, and divergent and convergent thinking. Senior engineering students recruited higher activation in the brain region generally associated with uncertainty processing and self-reflection. When additional dimensions of sustainability were present, first-year students produced fewer solutions. Senior engineering students generated a similar number of solutions. Senior engineering students required less cortical activation to generate a similar number of solutions. The varying patterns of cortical activation and different number of solutions between first-year and senior engineering students begin to highlight cognitive differences in how students manage and retrieve information in their brain during design. Students’ ability to manage complex requirements like sustainability may improve with education.

Re-Engineering Design Education: Design Process and Learning Activities

1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl D. Sorensen ◽  
Robert H. Todd ◽  
Spencer P. Magleby ◽  
Alan R. Parkinson
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Teaching Methods ◽  
Process Design ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Functional Specification ◽  
Project Deliverables ◽  
Product And Process

Abstract To achieve superior product and process designs with “typical” engineering students requires careful attention to the design process that is taught and the teaching methods to be followed. The Integrated Product and Process Design (or Capstone) program at BYU has applied both. The Capstone program has been in operation for four years, with over 300 students having been through the program, and over 60 projects sponsored by industry. The design process taught in Capstone starts with a rapid cycle through to preliminary concept selection. The process is then repeated, starting with the development of a functional specification, which is followed by formalized concept generation and selection methods, layout and detailed part design using solid modelers, experimental and analytical methods for answering design questions, simultaneous part and manufacturing process design, prototype, and production sample. This design process includes a high degree of concurrent involvement from each of the disciplines on the project team. Non-traditional teaching methods that have proven useful in the class include the use of an industrial paradigm for the educational experience, the use of faculty coaches to mentor the student teams, the use of projects sponsored by industry with regular feedback from the industrial customer, just-in-time education so that students can see immediate application of what is taught, the use of skits and role-playing to teach interpersonal skills, and specific activities that help in the production of project deliverables. The use of this design process and these teaching methods has led to successful design education. Students, faculty, and industrial customers have all been pleased with the success of the Capstone program in producing superior design engineers.

REVERSE ENGINEERING: TENSION RATCHET DISSECTION PROJECT

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremiah Vanderlaan ◽  
Josh Richert ◽  
James Morrison ◽  
Thomas Doyle
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Engineering ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
First Year ◽  
Stepping Stones ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Final Project ◽  
Undergraduate Study ◽  
Solid Edge ◽  
Part Modeling

We are a group of engineering students, in our first year of undergraduate study. We have been selected from one thousand first year students and have competed and won the PACE competition. All engineers share a common general first year, but we have been accepted into Civil and Mechanical engineering. This project was assigned as the final project in the Design and Graphics course. The project we are tasked with, called the Cornerstone Design Project, is to first dissect a product, discover how it works, dimension each part and create a fully assembled model using CAD software (Solid Edge V20 in our case). As part of discovering how it works we must benchmark it so the device can be compared with competing products. The goal of the project is to develop a full understanding of part modeling and assembly in Solid Edge, learn proper measurement techniques, and learn the process of reverse engineering and product dissection. All of these tasks were stepping stones to help us fully understand how the device, and all its components, work.

Implementation of the Second-year course in an Engineering Professional Spine

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Umar Iqbal ◽  
Deena Salem ◽  
David Strong
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Research University ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Employability Skills ◽  
First Year ◽  
Computer Engineering ◽  
Core Courses ◽  
Second Year ◽  
First Time ◽  
Academic Year

The objective of this paper is to document the experience of developing and implementing a second-year course in an engineering professional spine that was developed in a first-tier research university and relies on project-based core courses. The main objective of this spine is to develop the students’ cognitive and employability skills that will allow them to stand out from the crowd of other engineering graduates.The spine was developed and delivered for the first time in the academic year 2010-2011 for first-year general engineering students. In the year 2011-2012, those students joined different programs, and accordingly the second-year course was tailored to align with the different programs’ learning outcomes. This paper discusses the development and implementation of the course in the Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) department.

First-Year Engineering Computing Courses in Canadian Engineering Programs

1969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Maw ◽  
Janice Miller Young ◽  
Alexis Morris
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Expected Value ◽  
Knowledge Development ◽  
First Year ◽  
Recent Past ◽  
Engineering Programs ◽  
Digital Computation ◽  
Pedagogical Philosophies ◽  
Introductory Computing

Most Canadian engineering students take a computing course in their first year that introduces them to digital computation. The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board does not specify the language(s) that can or should be used for instruction. As a result, a variety of languages are used across Canada. This study examines which languages are used in degree-granting institutions, currently and in the recent past. It also examines why institutions have chosen the languages that they currently use. In addition to the language used in instruction, the types and hours of instruction are also analyzed. Methods of instruction and evaluation are compared, as well as the pedagogical philosophies of the different programs with respect to introductory computing. Finally, a comparison of the expected value of this course to graduates is also presented. We found a more diverse landscape for introductory computing courses than anticipated, in most respects. The guiding ethos at most institutions is skill and knowledge development, especially around problem solving in an engineering context. The methods to achieve this are quite varied, and so are the languages employed in such courses. Most programs currently use C/C++, Matlab, VB and/or Python.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document