Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Applying Engineering Design Ontology for Content Analysis of Team Conceptual Design Activity

  • Tomislav Martinec (a1), Stanko Škec (a1) (a2), Jelena Šklebar (a1) and Mario Štorga (a1) (a3)

Abstract

Studies of design activity have been dominantly reporting on different aspects of the design process, rather than the content of designing. The aim of the presented research has been the development and application of an approach for a fine-grain analysis of the design content communicated between designers during the team conceptual design activities. The proposed approach builds on an engineering design ontology as a foundation for the content categorisation. Two teams have been studied using the protocol analysis method. The coded protocols offered fine-grain descriptions of the content communicated at different points in the design session and enabled comparison of teams’ approaches and deriving some generalisable findings. For example, it has been shown that both teams focused primarily on the use of the developed product and the operands within the technical process, in order to generate new technical solutions and initial component design. Moreover, teams exhibit progress from abstract to concrete solutions as the sessions proceeded and focused on the functional requirements towards the end of the sessions.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Applying Engineering Design Ontology for Content Analysis of Team Conceptual Design Activity
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Applying Engineering Design Ontology for Content Analysis of Team Conceptual Design Activity
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Applying Engineering Design Ontology for Content Analysis of Team Conceptual Design Activity
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

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.

Corresponding author

Contact: Martinec, Tomislav, University of Zagreb, FSB, Department of Design, Croatia, tomislav.martinec@fsb.hr

References

Hide All
Ahmed, S. and Štorga, M. (2009), “Merged ontology for engineering design: Contrasting empirical and theoretical approaches to develop engineering ontologies”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 391407. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060409000146
Andreasen, M.M., Hansen, C.T. and Cash, P. (2015), Conceptual Design: Interpretations, Mindset and Models, Conceptual Design: Interpretations, Mindset and Models, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19839-2
Cash, P. and Štorga, M. (2015), “Multifaceted assessment of ideation: using networks to link ideation and design activity”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 26 No. 10-12, pp. 391415. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2015.1070813
Chiu, M.-L. (2002), “An organizational view of design communication in design collaboration”, Design Studies, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 187210. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00019-9
Cross, N. (2001), “Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity”, In: Newstatter, W. and McCracken, M. (Eds.), Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education, Elsevier, pp. 79103.
Danielescu, A., Dinar, M., MacLellan, C., Shah, J. and Langley, P. (2012), “The Structure of Creative Design: What Problem Maps Can Tell Us About Problem Formulation and Creative Designers”, ASME 2012 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences (IDETC) & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (CIE), Chicago, IL, USA, August 12-15, 2012, pp. 437446. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2012-70325.
Dorst, K. and Dijkhuis, J. (1995), “Comparing paradigms for describing design activity”, Design Studies, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 261274. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(94)00012-3
Ensici, A. and Badke-Schaub, P. (2011), “Information behavior in multidisciplinary design teams”, 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), , Denmark, August 15-19, pp. 414423.
Frankenberger, E. and Auer, P. (1997), “Standardized observation of team-work in design”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01607053
Gero, J.S. and Song, T. (2017), “The Decomposition/Recomposition Design Behavior of Student and Professional Engineers”, 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, OH, USA, June 25-28.
Goldschmidt, G. (2014), Linkography: Unfolding the Design Process, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Goldschmidt, G. (2016), “Linkographic Evidence for Concurrent Divergent and Convergent Thinking in Creative Design”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 115122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1162497
Hubka, V. and Eder, E. (1992), Engineering Design: General Procedural Model of Engineering Design, Heurista, Zürich.
Huet, G., Culley, S.J., McMahon, C.A. and Fortin, C. (2007), “Making sense of engineering design review activities”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 243266. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060407000261
Kan, J.W.T. and Gero, J.S. (2017), Quantitative Methods for Studying Design Protocols, Quantitative Methods for Studying Design Protocols, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-0984-0
Kleinsmann, M.S. (2006), Understanding Collaborative Design, PhD Thesis, TU Delft.
Kuusela, H. and Paul, P. (2000), “A comparison of concurrent and retrospective verbal protocol analysis”, American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 113 No. 3, pp. 387404. https://doi.org/10.2307/1423365
Li, Z. and Ramani, K. (2007), “Ontology-based design information extraction and retrieval”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 137154. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060407070199
Liikkanen, L.A. and Perttula, M. (2009), “Exploring problem decomposition in conceptual design among novice designers”, Design Studies, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 3859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.07.003
Martinec, T., Škec, S., Savšek, T. and Perišić, M.M. (2017), “Work Sampling for the production development: A case study of a supplier in European Automotive Industry”, Advances in Production Engineering and Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 375387. https://doi.org/10.14743/apem2017.4.265
Pourmohamadi, M. and Gero, J.S. (2011), “LINKOgrapher: An Analysis Tool to Study Design Protocols Based on FBS Coding Scheme”, 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, August 15-19, pp. 294303.
Sim, S.K. and Duffy, A.H.B. (2003), “Towards an ontology of generic engineering design activities”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 200223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-003-0037-1
Sonalkar, N., Mabogunje, A. and Leifer, L. (2013), “Developing a visual representation to characterize moment-to-moment concept generation in design teams”, International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 93108. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2013.773117
Stempfle, J. and Badke-Schaub, P. (2002), “Thinking in design teams - An analysis of team communication”, Design Studies, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 473496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00004-2
Škec, S., Cash, P. and Štorga, M. (2017), “A dynamic approach to real-time performance measurement in design projects”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 255286. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2017.1303665
Toh, C.A. and Miller, S.R. (2015), “How engineering teams select design concepts: A view through the lens of creativity”, Design Studies, Vol. 38, pp. 111138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.03.001
Valkenburg, A.C. (2000), The Reflective Practice in Product Design Teams, PhD Thesis, TU Delft.
Vuletic, T., Duffy, A., Hay, L., McTeague, C., Pidgeon, L. and Grealy, M. (2018), “The challenges in computer supported conceptual engineering design”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 95, pp. 2237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2017.11.003
Wasiak, J., Hicks, B., Newnes, L., Dong, A. and Burrow, L. (2010), “Understanding engineering email: The development of a taxonomy for identifying and classifying engineering work”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 4364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-009-0075-4
Wynn, D.C. and Eckert, C.M. (2017), “Perspectives on iteration in design and development”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 153184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0226-3
Yang, M.C. (2009), “Observations on concept generation and sketching in engineering design”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0055-0
Ziv-Av, A. and Reich, Y. (2005), “SOS - Subjective objective system for generating optimal product concepts”, Design Studies, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 509533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.12.001

Keywords

Applying Engineering Design Ontology for Content Analysis of Team Conceptual Design Activity

  • Tomislav Martinec (a1), Stanko Škec (a1) (a2), Jelena Šklebar (a1) and Mario Štorga (a1) (a3)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed