Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T16:58:03.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ENVIRONMENT-BASED DESIGN (EBD): USING ONLY NECESSARY KNOWLEDGE FOR DESIGNER CREATIVITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Jiami Yang ,
Yi Dou  and
Yong Zeng
Jiami Yang
Affiliation:
Concordia University University of Calgary
Yi Dou
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Yong Zeng*
Affiliation:
Concordia University
*
Zeng, Yong, Concordia University, Canada, yong.zeng@concordia.ca

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.

Design is a highly nonlinear chaotic dynamic process with many possible solutions, which requires enormous knowledge for designers. This paper investigates how environment-based design (EBD) methodology can help designers use only necessary knowledge for their creativity based on three methods: information search, knowledge acquisition and knowledge application. The methods are applied in an aircraft pylon design, which is evaluated by two aerospace design specialists. The paper discussed the different roles of EBD for novice and expert designers in regard to overcoming emotion and knowledge barriers to achieving designer creativity.

Keywords

Conceptual designDesign methodologyCreativityEnvironment-based design (EBD)knowledge
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 1675 - 1684
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), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Ahmed, S., Wallace, K.M. and Blessing, L.T.M. (2003), “Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks”, Research in Engineering Design, Springer Verlag, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1–11, doi: Akao.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akao, Y. (1972), “New product development and quality assurance deployment system”, Standardisation and Quality Control, Vol. 25, pp. 243–246.Google Scholar
Altshuller, G.S. (1984), Creativity as an exact science: the theory of the solution of inventive problems, Gordon and Breach Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becattini, N., Borgianni, Y., Cascini, G. and Rotini, F. (2020), “Investigating users’ reactions to surprising products”, Design Studies, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 69, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.05.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boppe, C.W. (1987), Aerodynamic analysis for aircraft with nacelles, pylons, and winglets at transonic speeds, NASA.Google Scholar
Chandrasekaran, B., Johnson, T.R. and Smith, J.W. (1992), “Task-structure analysis for knowledge modeling”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 124–137, https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/130994.131002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, M., Chen, Z., Kong, L. and Zeng, Y. (2005), “Analysis of medical devices design requirements”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 9 No. 61–70, p. 11.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2011), Design thinking: understanding how designers think and work, Berg Publishers, Oxford; New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, A. and Sarkar, S. (2015), “Forecasting technological progress potential based on the complexity of product knowledge”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, Vol. 90, pp. 599–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorst, K. and Cross, N. (2001), “Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem-solution”, Design Studies, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 425–437, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emami, A., Packard, M.D. and Welsh, D.H.B. (2020), “On the cognitive microfoundations of effectual design: The Situated Function–Behavior–Structure framework”, Management Decision, Vol. 59 No. 5, pp. 953–972, https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2019-1479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eris, O. (2004), Effective inquiry for innovative engineering design, Vol. 10, Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorineschi, L. and Rotini, F. (2021), “Novelty metrics in engineering design”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 32 No. 11, pp. 590–620, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2021.1928024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAA. (2003), Type certificate data sheet E35NE, United States Department of Transportation.Google Scholar
Gero, J.S. (1990), “Design prototypes: A knowledge representation schema for design”, AI Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 26–36.Google Scholar
Gero, J.S. and Kannengiesser, U. (2004), “The situated function-behaviour-structure framework”, Design Studies, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 373–391, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goel, A. and Chandrasekaran, B. (1988), “Functional Representation of Designs and Redesign Problem Solving”, Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
Goel, A.K., Rugaber, S. and Vattam, S. (2009), “Structure, behavior, and function of complex systems: The structure, behavior, and function modeling language”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 23–35, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0890060409000080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackett, K.C. and Schofield, M.R. (1992), Aircraft wing pylon extensions for minimized aerodynamic penalties (US Patent 5,102,069), April.Google Scholar
Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2003), “A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to C-K theory”, presented at the International conference on engineering design.Google Scholar
Hennessey, B.A., Amabile, T.M. and Mueller, J.S. (2011), “Consensual assessment”, Editor(s): Mark, A. Runco, Steven, R. Pritzker, Encyclopedia of Creativity (Second Edition), Academic Press, pp. 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubka, V. and Eder, W. (1988), Theory of technical systems: a total concept theory for engineering design, Springer-Verlag, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonge, J. d. (1997), Review of Aeronautical fatigue investigations in the Netherlands during the period (March 1995-March 1997), Contract Report No. No. NLR TP 97153, The Netherlands: National Aerospace Laboratory NLR., Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Liu, W. and Zeng, Y. (2009), Conceptual modeling of design chain management towards product lifecycle management, in Chou, S.-Y., Trappey, A., Pokojski, J. and Smith, S. (Eds.), Global Perspective for Competitive Enterprise, Economy and Ecology, Springer London, pp. 137–148.Google Scholar
Lloyd, P. and Scott, P. (1995), “Difference in similarity: interpreting the architectural design process”, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, SAGE Publications Ltd STM, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 383–406, https://dx.doi.org/10.1068/b220383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, L., Wang, Y., Xu, C. and Li, X. (2022), “Online robotics technology course design by balancing workload and affect”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 131–158, https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JID-210026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, J.R.A. and Fadel, G.M. (2009), “Affordance based design: A relational theory for design”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 13–27, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0060-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinou, J.-M. and Berjot, M. (2013), Aircraft engine attachment pylon having a rear engine attachment provided with a self-locking nut (US patent 8.413,925B2), 9 April.Google Scholar
Mohammadi, A., Yang, J., Borgianni, Y. and Zeng, Y. (2022), “Barriers and enablers of TRIZ: a literature analysis using the TASKS framework”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-01-2022-0066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moir, I. and Seabridge, A.G. (2003), Civil Avionics Systems, Professional Engineering Publishing Limited., Suffolk, UK.Google Scholar
Nguyen, T.A. and Zeng, Y. (2012), “A theoretical model of design creativity: Nonlinear design dynamics and mental stress-creativity relation”, Journal of Integrated Design & Process Science, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 65–88, https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/jid-2012-0007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, T.A. and Zeng, Y. (2017), “A theoretical model of design fixation”, International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, Vol. 5 No. 3–4, pp. 185–204, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2016.1207566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ommi, A. and Zeng, Y. (2018), “Defining the appropriate course project for fostering the expected cognitive competencies: EBD approach to an engineering design course”, Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, R., Niewoehner, R. and Elder, L. (2019), The Thinker's Guide to Engineering Reasoning: Based on Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools., Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Popovic, V. (2004), “Expertise development in product design—strategic and domain-specific knowledge connections”, Design Studies, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 527–545, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.05.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, P. and Chakrabarti, A. (2011), “Assessing design creativity”, Design Studies, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 348–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, J., Smith, S. and Vargas-Hernandez, N. (2003), “Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness”, Design Studies, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp.111–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spofford, H.M., Wakeman, T.G., Bellia, D.L., Joseph, T.P., Wilson, G.H., Cencula, J.E., Tegarden, F.W., et al. (1994), “Aircraft engine thrust mount (US patent 5320307)”, June.Google Scholar
Su, C., Akgunduz, A. and Zeng, Y. (2022), “Design education: learning design methodology to enrich project experience”, Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA), https://dx.doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, N.P. (1990), The Principles of Design, 1 edition., Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Sun, X., Zeng, Y. and Zhou, F. (2011), “Environment-Based Design (EBD) Approach to Developing Quality Management Systems: a Case Study”, Transactions of the SDPS, Vol. 15, pp. 53–70.Google Scholar
Tan, S., Zeng, Y., Chen, B., Bani Milhim, H.K. and Schiffauerova, A. (2012), “Environment Based Design Approach to Integrating Enterprise Applications”, Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, p. 031003, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4007171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, S., Zeng, Y., Huet, G. and Fortin, C. (2013), “Effective reverse engineering of qualitative design knowledge: A case study of aerospace pylon design”, Vol. 55911, presented at the International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, p. V004T05A026–V004T05A026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, S., Zeng, Y. and Montazami, A. (2011), “Medical devices design based on EBD: a case study”, Biomedical Engineering, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 3–15, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0116-2_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, K. and Ahmed, S. (2003), “How Engineering Designers Obtain Information”, in Lindemann, U. (Ed.), Human Behaviour in Design: Individuals, Teams, Tools, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 184–194, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-07811-2_19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, M. and Zeng, Y. (2009), “Asking the right questions to elicit product requirements”, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 283–298, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09511920802232902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X., Nguyen, T.A. and Zeng, Y. (2015), “Influence of information collection strategy in problem formulation on design creativity through mental stress: a theoretical analysis”, presented at the DS 80-11 Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 15) Vol 11: Human Behaviour in Design, Design Education; Milan, Italy, 27-30.07. 15, pp. 91–100.Google Scholar
Wang, X., Zeng, Y., Arntzen, A.A., Kim, K.-Y. and Liu, Y. (2017), “Organizational capability: skills related to organizational knowledge”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1–3, https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/jid-2017-0010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wen, Z. (Edward), Teng, M.F., Han, L. and Zeng, Y. (2022), “Working memory models and measures in language and bilingualism research: integrating cognitive and affective perspectives”, Brain Sciences, Vol. 12 No. 6, p. 729, https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12060729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J., Quan, H. and Zeng, Y. (2022), “Knowledge: The good, the bad, and the ways for designer creativity”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 33 No. 12, pp. 945–968, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2022.2161300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J., Yang, L., Quan, H. and Zeng, Y. (2021), “Implementation barriers: A TASKS framework”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 25 No. 3 & 4, pp. 134–147, https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JID-210011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2001), Axiomatic Approach to the Modeling of Product Conceptual Design Processes Using Set Theory, University of Calgary, Calgary.Google Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2002), “Axiomatic theory of design modeling”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, p. 28.Google Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2004), “Environment-based formulation of design problem”, Transactions of the SDPS, Vol. 8, pp. 45–63.Google Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2008), “Recursive object model (ROM)—Modelling of linguistic information in engineering design”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 612–625, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2008.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2012), “Environment-based design (EBD)”, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, pp. 237–250, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC2011-48263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2015), “Environment-based design (EBD): A methodology for transdisciplinary design+”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 5–20, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC2011-48263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. (2020), “Environment: The first thing to look at in conceptual design”, Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 45–66, https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JID200005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. and Cheng, G.D. (1991), “On the logic of design”, Design Studies, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 137–141, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(91)90022-O.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. and Gu, P. (1999), “A science-based approach to product design theory Part I: formulation and formalization of design process”, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 331–339, doi: 10.1016/S0736-5845(99)00028-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Y. and Gu, P. (2001), “An environment decomposition-based approach to design concept generation”, presented at the ICED’01: international conference on engineering design, pp. 525–532.Google Scholar