Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-w5vf4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-18T01:37:37.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How to facilitate comparability among product models: applying a standardizing description approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Lukas Paehler  and
Sven Matthiesen
Lukas Paehler*
Affiliation:
IPEK - Institute of Product Engineering at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
Sven Matthiesen
Affiliation:
IPEK - Institute of Product Engineering at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
*
lukas.paehler@kit.edu

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

During a design process, designers are supported by several purposive product models. To enable designers to switch between them, researchers need to consider the linking of product models during their development. To assist researchers in doing so, the capabilities of a standardizing description approach, stances towards product models, was investigated. The results show that the description approach was able to identify indicators of linking possibilities by facilitating comparability. This is a step towards assisting researchers in considering the linking of product models systematically.

Keywords

design modelsengineering designmodel-based engineering (MBE)design research

Information

Type
Design Information and Knowledge
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 443 - 452
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Albers, A., Matthiesen, S., Revfi, S., Schönhoff, C., Grauberger, P. and Heimicke, J. (2019), “Agile lightweight design - The extended target weighing approach in ASD - Agile systems design using functional modelling with the C&C2-approach”, Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 2667–2676. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.273.Google Scholar
Alizon, F., Shooter, S.B. and Simpson, T.W. (2007), “Improving an existing product family based on commonality/diversity, modularity, and cost”, Design Studies, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, M.M. (1994), “Modelling—The Language of the Designer”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544829408907876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browning, T.R. (2001), “Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 292–306. https://doi.org/10.1109/17.946528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buur, J. and Andreasen, M.M. (1989), “Design models in mechatronic product development”, Design Studies, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(89)90033-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& E, C.. GmbH, Fein Service (2023), “WSG 8-115 (50/60Hz, 220/230V) - 72220108230”, available at: https://etk.fein.de/spc/index.php?r=item%2Flist&id=4162 (accessed 12 October 2023).Google Scholar
Eisenbart, B., Gericke, K. and Blessing, L. (2011), “A framework for comparing design modelling approaches across disciplines”, paper presented at ICED, 15.-19.08.2011, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Eisenbart, B., Gericke, K. and Blessing, L.T.M. (2017), “Taking a look at the utilisation of function models in interdisciplinary design: insights from ten engineering companies”, Res Eng Design, Vol. 28, pp. 299–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0242-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetz, S., Schleich, B. and Wartzack, S. (2018), “A new approach to first tolerance evaluations in the conceptual design stage based on tolerance graphs”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 75, pp. 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.04.030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grauberger, P., Goetz, S., Schleich, B., Gwosch, T., Matthiesen, S. and Wartzack, S. (2020), “A CONCEPTUAL MODEL COMBINATION FOR THE UNIFICATION OF DESIGN AND TOLERANCING IN ROBUST DESIGN”, Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsd.2020.12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, T.R. (1993), “A translation approach to portable ontology specifications”, Knowledge Acquisition, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 199–220. https://doi.org/10.1006/knac.1993.1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubka, V. and Eder, W.E. (1990), “Design Knowledge: Theory in Support of Practice”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 97–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544829008901646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D.E., Snider, C. and Hicks, B. (2020), “A FRAMING OF DESIGN AS PATHWAYS BETWEEN PHYSICAL, VIRTUAL AND COGNITIVE MODELS”, Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsd.2020.128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohn, A. (2014), Entwicklung einer Wissensbasis für die Arbeit mit Produktmodellen [Development of a knowledge base for the work with product models], Dissertation, Technische Universität München.Google Scholar
Leu, M.C., Wu, J.C. and Liu, X.F. (2009), “Axiomatic functional and object-oriented product design framework”, CIRP Annals, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2009.03.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, A.M., Wynn, D., Howard, T.J. and Andreasen, M.M. (2014), “Perceiving Design as Modelling: A Cybernetic Systems Perspective”, in Chakrabarti, A. and Blessing, L. (Eds.), An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design: Philosophy, Approaches and Empirical Explorations, Springer London, London, pp. 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_7.Google Scholar
Matthiesen, S., Grauberger, P., Bremer, F. and Nowoseltschenko, K. (2019a), “Product models in embodiment design: an investigation of challenges and opportunities”, SN Applied Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1115-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthiesen, S., Grauberger, P., Hölz, K., Nelius, T., Bremer, F., Wettstein, A., Gessinger, A., Pflegler, B., Nowoseltschenko, K. and Voß, K. (2018), Modellbildung mit dem C&C²-Ansatz in der Gestaltung - Techniken zur Analyse und Synthese. https://doi.org/10.5445/IR/1000080744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthiesen, S., Grauberger, P. and Schrempp, L. (2019b), “Extended Sequence Modelling in Design Engineering – Gaining and Documenting Knowledge about Embodiment Function Relations with the C&C 2 -Approach”, Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1483–1492. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.154.Google Scholar
Paehler, L., Grauberger, P. and Matthiesen, S. (2023), “Rethinking how we describe product models in engineering design research”, Preprint. https://doi.org/10.5445/IR/1000164204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W. and Wallace, K. (Eds.) (1996), Engineering Design, Springer London, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3581-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajan, Palani, van Wie, P.K., Campbell, M., Wood, M., and Otto, K.L., K.N. (2005), “An empirical foundation for product flexibility”, Design Studies, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 405–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.09.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimmler, T.U. and Eppinger, S.D. (1994), “Integration Analysis of Product Decompositions”, in 6th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, 11.09.1994 - 14.09.1994, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp. 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC1994-0034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Štorga, M., Andreasen, M.M. and Marjanović, D. (2010), “The design ontology: foundation for the design knowledge exchange and management”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 427–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820802322557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturm, C., Gwosch, T. and Matthiesen, S. (2020), “A modeling approach to identify the influences of relevant system parameters on drive train vibrations”, paper presented at INTER-NOISE 2020, 2020-8-23 - 2020-8-26, Seoul, Republic of Korea.Google Scholar
Weidmann, D., Isemann, M., Kandlbinder, P., Hollauer, C., Kattner, N., Becerril, L. and Lindemann, U. (2017), “Product Models in Mechatronic Design: Literature Analysis on the Interdisciplinary Character of Product Models”, in 2017 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) 09.07.2017 - 13.07.2017, Portland, OR, IEEE, pp. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.23919/PICMET.2017.8125397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar