A Comparison of Educational Perspectives on VDI 2221 and Axiomatic Design

Patrick Kröpfl , Christian Landschützer , Hannes Hick , Wajih Haider Awan , Christopher A. Brown
{"title":"A Comparison of Educational Perspectives on VDI 2221 and Axiomatic Design","authors":"Patrick Kröpfl ,&nbsp;Christian Landschützer ,&nbsp;Hannes Hick ,&nbsp;Wajih Haider Awan ,&nbsp;Christopher A. Brown","doi":"10.1016/j.procs.2025.01.073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Engineering design methods play a crucial role in both academia and industry. These systematic approaches facilitate product and system development, allowing for innovative solutions and refinements. Specifically, this paper will compare two common engineering design methods Axiomatic Design (AD) and VDI 2221 in terms of their application in teaching and their transferability to industry, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Firstly, a quantitative comparison of the two methods will be conducted. Comparative factors will include scope, accessibility, required prior knowledge, and the availability of tools for each method. Following this, insights from teaching experiences at the Technical University of Graz and Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) will be discussed, focusing on the teachability of the methods. This will provide insights into the effectiveness and suitability of the methods for higher education. The transfer potential of the methods to SMEs will be derived from these. Finally, the findings and improvement potential will be summarized, and possibilities for the knowledge transfer of engineering design methods to SMEs will be formulated.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20465,"journal":{"name":"Procedia Computer Science","volume":"253 ","pages":"Pages 94-103"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Procedia Computer Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187705092500081X","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

Engineering design methods play a crucial role in both academia and industry. These systematic approaches facilitate product and system development, allowing for innovative solutions and refinements. Specifically, this paper will compare two common engineering design methods Axiomatic Design (AD) and VDI 2221 in terms of their application in teaching and their transferability to industry, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Firstly, a quantitative comparison of the two methods will be conducted. Comparative factors will include scope, accessibility, required prior knowledge, and the availability of tools for each method. Following this, insights from teaching experiences at the Technical University of Graz and Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) will be discussed, focusing on the teachability of the methods. This will provide insights into the effectiveness and suitability of the methods for higher education. The transfer potential of the methods to SMEs will be derived from these. Finally, the findings and improvement potential will be summarized, and possibilities for the knowledge transfer of engineering design methods to SMEs will be formulated.
VDI 2221与公理化设计的教育视角比较
工程设计方法在学术界和工业界都起着至关重要的作用。这些系统的方法促进了产品和系统的开发,允许创新的解决方案和改进。具体而言,本文将比较两种常见的工程设计方法公理设计(AD)和VDI 2221在教学中的应用和对工业的可转移性,特别是对中小型企业(SMEs)。首先,对两种方法进行定量比较。比较因素将包括范围、可及性、所需的先验知识,以及每种方法的工具可用性。在此之后,将讨论格拉茨技术大学和伍斯特理工学院(WPI)的教学经验,重点是方法的可教性。这将为高等教育方法的有效性和适用性提供见解。这些方法对中小企业的转移潜力将由此产生。最后,总结研究结果和改进潜力,并制定工程设计方法向中小企业知识转移的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信