Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:46:42.271Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TOWARDS A DEBATE ON THE POSITIONING OF ENGINEERING DESIGN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Chris McMahon ,
Claudia Eckert  and
Georges Fadel
Chris McMahon*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol;
Claudia Eckert
Affiliation:
The Open University;
Georges Fadel
Affiliation:
Clemson University
*
McMahon, Christopher, University of Bristol Department of Mechanical Engineering United Kingdom, [email protected]

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.

This paper is an invitation to a debate on the positioning of engineering design as a field of research. The paper lists a multiplicity of interpretations of design, questioning whether they are sufficient to describe engineering design in all its variety. Following a critical analysis of attempts to describe design's unique characteristics, and observations on the nature of design made from outside of the design research community, it presents a list of situations of design that the authors have observed in engineering practice, describing especially the relationship between design, technology and society. The paper then explores what these situations imply about the questions researchers should ask about the nature of design knowledge and expertise, and examines how the different situations might be categorised, before exploring the positioning of engineering design research with respect to other academic disciplines, in particular management and the human and earth sciences. The paper concludes with a call to a debate on the nature of engineering design with the aim to define this field more clearly to ourselves and to others.

Keywords

Design practiceDesign theoryTechnology
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 3169 - 3178
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), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Ahmed, S., Wallace, K. and Blessing, L. (2003), “Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 14 No. (1): pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-002-0023-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, M. (1994). “Modelling — the language of the designer”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544829408907876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, M., Howard, T. and Bruun, H. (2014), “Domain Theory, its models and concepts”, In: Chakrabarti, A. and Blessing, L. (Eds), An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design, Springer, London, pp. 173–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arthur, W.B. (2009), The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves, Simon & Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
Badke-Schaub, P. and Frankenberger, E. (1999), “Analysis of design projects”, Design Studies, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(99)00017-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, T. (2008), “Design thinking”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 6, pp. 84–92.Google ScholarPubMed
Bucciarelli, L. (1994), Designing Engineers, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Constant, E. (1980), The Origins of the Turbojet Revolution, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (1982), “Designerly ways of knowing”, Design Studies, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 221–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(82)90040-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temple, M. (2010), The Design Council Review, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.Google Scholar
De Weck, O., Roos, D. and Magee, C. (2011), Engineering Systems: Meeting Human Needs in a Complex Technological World, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.10.7551/mitpress/8799.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dym, C., Agogino, A., Eris, O., Frey, D. and Leifer, L. (2005), “Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning”, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, M. (1971), Conceptual Design for Engineers, Springer-Verlag, London.Google Scholar
Gericke, K., Eckert, C., Campean, F., Clarkson, P.J., Flening, E., Isaksson, O., Kipouros, T., Kokkolaras, M., Köhler, C., Panarotto, M. and Wilmsen, M. (2020), “Supporting designers: moving from method menagerie to method ecosystem”. Design Science, Vol. 6, https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2003), “A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to CK theory”, DS 31: Proceedings of ICED 03, the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm, August 19-21, 2003, The Design Society.Google Scholar
Hatchuel, A., and Benoit, W. (2009), “CK design theory: an advanced formulation”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0043-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazelrigg, G. (1998). “A framework for decision-based engineering design”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 120, pp. 653–658. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2829328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, T. (1993), Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Maister, D. (1993), Managing the Professional Service Firm, Simon and Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
Mankins, J. (1995), Technology Readiness Levels: A White Paper, Office of Space Access and Technology, NASA.Google Scholar
McMahon, C. (2021), “Situations, patterns, exploration and exploitation in engineering design”, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Vol. 6 No. 4.Google Scholar
Olson, J. (2013), “The purposes of schooling and the nature of technology: the end of education?” In: Clough, M., Olson, J. and Niederhauser, D. (Eds), The Nature of Technology, Brill Sense, Boston, pp. 217–248.10.1007/978-94-6209-269-3_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G. and Beitz, W. (1984), Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Pugh, S. (1991), Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering, Addison-Wesley, Wokingham.Google Scholar
Shigley, J. (1963), Mechanical Engineering Design, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Simon, H. (1996), The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edition, MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar