No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The impact of specialized software on concept generation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 May 2024
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.
Software implementations of traditional engineering design methods can potentially enrich the original methods. A study was conducted to better understand how concept generation can be facilitated using software. Participants of the study were asked to generate concepts using either specialized software, or by using traditional means, for applying function-means modeling and morphological matrices. A concept concretization metric was used to evaluate the results, which indicated that there are both positive and negative aspects of performing concept generation using specialized software.
- Type
- Design Methods and Tools
- Information
- Creative Commons
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
Almefelt, L., 2005a. Balancing properties while synthesising a product concept--a method highlighting synergies, in: Proceedings of ICED 05. Presented at the ICED 05, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Almefelt, L., 2005b. Requirements-driven product innovation : methods and tools reflecting industrial needs. PhD Thesis. Doktorsavhandlingar vid Chalmers tekniska högskola. Ny serie: 2400. Chalmers tekniska högskola.Google Scholar
Chagouri, T., Al-Darwish, F., Sharif, A., Al-Hamidi, Y., 2021. Product Design Journey: Novel Tool Changer, in: IMECE2021. Volume 9: Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2021-72124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gedell, S., Johannesson, H., 2013. Design rationale and system description aspects in product platform design: Focusing reuse in the design lifecycle phase. Concurr. Eng. 21, 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063293X12469216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gontarski, T. de L., Scalice, R.K., 2021. Educational tool based on a morphological matrix for design alternative generation for use in railway wagon design. 31st CIRP Des. Conf. 2021 CIRP Des. 2021 100, 822–827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.05.037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaksson, O., Eckert, C., others, 2020. Product Development 2040: Technologies are just as good as the designer's ability to integrate them. Des. Soc. Rep. DS107. https://doi.org/10.35199/report.pd2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, H., Chu, X., Xue, D., Chen, D., 2017. A systematic decision making approach for product conceptual design based on fuzzy morphological matrix. Expert Syst. Appl. 81, 444–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.03.074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmqvist, J., 1997. Improved Function-means Trees by Inclusion of Design History Information. J. Eng. Des. 8, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544829708907955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinsson Bonde, J., Mallalieu, A., Panarotto, M., Isaksson, O., Almefelt, L., Malmqvist, J., others, 2022. Morpheus: The Development and Evaluation of a Software Tool for Morphological Matrices, in: DS 118: Proceedings of NordDesign 2022, Copenhagen, Denmark, 16th-18th August 2022. pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.35199/NORDDESIGN2022.38Google Scholar
Norell Bergendahl, M., 1992. Stödmetoder och samverkan i produktutveckling (Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary). TRITA-MAE. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Ölvander, J., Lundén, B., Gavel, H., 2009. A computerized optimization framework for the morphological matrix applied to aircraft conceptual design. Comput.-Aided Des. 41, 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2008.06.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., Harriman, R.A., 2007. Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, Springer. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sales de Araujo Júnior, C., 2001. Acquisition of product development tools in industry: a theoretical contribution (PhD thesis). Technical University of Denmark.Google Scholar
Shah, J.J., Kulkarni, S.V., Vargas-Hernandez, N., 2000. Evaluation of Idea Generation Methods for Conceptual Design: Effectiveness Metrics and Design of Experiments. J. Mech. Des. 122, 377–384. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1315592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, N.P., 1998. Axiomatic Design Theory for Systems. Res. Eng. Des. 10, 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001639870001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjalve, E., 1979. A short course in industrial design. Newnes. https://doi.org/978-0-408-00388-9Google Scholar
Ulrich, K.T., Eppinger, S.D., Yang, M.C., 2020. Product design and development. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York.Google Scholar
Zwicky, F., 1967. The Morphological Approach to Discovery, Invention, Research and Construction, in: Zwicky, F., Wilson, A.G. (Eds.), New Methods of Thought and Procedure. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 273–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access