{"title":"Competitive Conceptual Design of Engineering Systems","authors":"Z. Bzymek","doi":"10.1115/imece1999-0787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper discusses design resulting from a unique design competition as an indicator of the verification of scientific design principles as given by Shu Nam 1990. A single enactment of the design problem is used as a case study to illustrate different points of this paper. The focus of the paper is on the creative aspect of idea generation and the checking of subsystems as well as the complete system enactment for function and performance. In an annual design competition the same problem was issued to a number of design teams. The number of teams varied from nine to eighteen in different years and two to three designers were in a team. The design was performed by seniors in mechanical engineering. To generate concepts, Osborn’s method of brain storming was applied. The brain storming was done in the groups of two to three designers. It was applied to the entire system and subsequently to subsystems. After the abstract design was accomplished, prototypes were built and tested. A competition was held in which each design group prototype earned a figure of merit score based on its performance in a performance run. The figure of merit formula used to dtetermine the winner of the competition and race course for performance run were given to the designers at the time they were given the design problem statement. The results were verified by an expert evaluation with Mechanical Engineering faculty members serving as experts. Every prototype was competing with others in the same exact conditions. The results of the design competition provide a unique set of data which may be considered an experiment in design technique. Some concluding remarks concerning design methodology are stated.","PeriodicalId":166122,"journal":{"name":"Conceptual and Innovative Design for Manufacturing","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conceptual and Innovative Design for Manufacturing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/imece1999-0787","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper discusses design resulting from a unique design competition as an indicator of the verification of scientific design principles as given by Shu Nam 1990. A single enactment of the design problem is used as a case study to illustrate different points of this paper. The focus of the paper is on the creative aspect of idea generation and the checking of subsystems as well as the complete system enactment for function and performance. In an annual design competition the same problem was issued to a number of design teams. The number of teams varied from nine to eighteen in different years and two to three designers were in a team. The design was performed by seniors in mechanical engineering. To generate concepts, Osborn’s method of brain storming was applied. The brain storming was done in the groups of two to three designers. It was applied to the entire system and subsequently to subsystems. After the abstract design was accomplished, prototypes were built and tested. A competition was held in which each design group prototype earned a figure of merit score based on its performance in a performance run. The figure of merit formula used to dtetermine the winner of the competition and race course for performance run were given to the designers at the time they were given the design problem statement. The results were verified by an expert evaluation with Mechanical Engineering faculty members serving as experts. Every prototype was competing with others in the same exact conditions. The results of the design competition provide a unique set of data which may be considered an experiment in design technique. Some concluding remarks concerning design methodology are stated.
本文讨论了一个独特的设计竞赛所产生的设计,作为验证Shu Nam 1990所提出的科学设计原则的指标。本文以一个设计问题的实例来说明本文的不同观点。本文的重点是创意方面的想法产生和子系统的检查,以及完整的系统的功能和性能的制定。在一年一度的设计竞赛中,同样的问题被发给了许多设计团队。在不同的年份,团队的数量从9到18不等,一个团队有2到3名设计师。设计是由机械工程专业的大四学生完成的。为了产生概念,我们采用了奥斯本的头脑风暴方法。头脑风暴是在两到三个设计师的小组中进行的。它被应用于整个系统,随后应用于子系统。抽象设计完成后,原型被建立和测试。在比赛中,每个设计小组的原型根据其在性能运行中的表现获得了一个分数。设计人员在收到设计问题陈述的同时,获得了用于确定竞赛获胜者和性能运行的赛道的价值公式。结果由机械工程系教师作为专家进行了专家评价。每个原型都在相同的条件下与其他原型竞争。设计竞赛的结果提供了一组独特的数据,可以被认为是设计技术的实验。最后对设计方法作了总结。