Omitted technical measures: establishing evidence for the necessity of problem formulation and validation in system alternative selection.

IF 3.5 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
Research in Engineering Design Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-06-24 DOI:10.1007/s00163-026-00488-y
Casey E Eaton, Kelly X Campo, August Longhurst, Bryan Mesmer
{"title":"Omitted technical measures: establishing evidence for the necessity of problem formulation and validation in system alternative selection.","authors":"Casey E Eaton, Kelly X Campo, August Longhurst, Bryan Mesmer","doi":"10.1007/s00163-026-00488-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Design and acquisition of large-scale complex engineered systems can use technical measures to compare system alternatives through setting constraints on those measures and/or providing objectives using the measures. Selecting a technical measure set can be uncertain, with little selection guidance available, and difficult to validate, potentially leading to omitting technical measures. This research examines the impact of omitting technical measures on system alternative selection using a case study of real-world technical measures and system alternatives. A requirements-based constraint framework and an optimization-based objective function framework are developed using a set of real-world technical measures. The research models how omissions of technical measures lead to choosing a different system alternative. The impacts are demonstrated through an application of the NASA Human Landing System (HLS) using 13 system alternatives, including the systems proposed to NASA by Blue Origin, SpaceX, and Dynetics. The research finds that omissions in the constraint framework open the design space, potentially changing the system alternative chosen. Omissions in the objective function framework alter the indicated ordinal preference for the system alternatives, changing the system alternative chosen. An omitted technical measure on the side of the acquirer may change the system alternative selected, directing millions of dollars towards a specific organization and system. This research highlights the practical impacts of omissions of technical measures for awarding contracts during system acquisition. The likelihood of omissions, the difficulty to validate outcomes, and the impacts of omissions demonstrated in this research form evidence that the connection amongst problem formulation, problem solving, and validation must be emphasized if used for system alternative selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":49629,"journal":{"name":"Research in Engineering Design","volume":"37 3","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13294313/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Engineering Design","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-026-00488-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Design and acquisition of large-scale complex engineered systems can use technical measures to compare system alternatives through setting constraints on those measures and/or providing objectives using the measures. Selecting a technical measure set can be uncertain, with little selection guidance available, and difficult to validate, potentially leading to omitting technical measures. This research examines the impact of omitting technical measures on system alternative selection using a case study of real-world technical measures and system alternatives. A requirements-based constraint framework and an optimization-based objective function framework are developed using a set of real-world technical measures. The research models how omissions of technical measures lead to choosing a different system alternative. The impacts are demonstrated through an application of the NASA Human Landing System (HLS) using 13 system alternatives, including the systems proposed to NASA by Blue Origin, SpaceX, and Dynetics. The research finds that omissions in the constraint framework open the design space, potentially changing the system alternative chosen. Omissions in the objective function framework alter the indicated ordinal preference for the system alternatives, changing the system alternative chosen. An omitted technical measure on the side of the acquirer may change the system alternative selected, directing millions of dollars towards a specific organization and system. This research highlights the practical impacts of omissions of technical measures for awarding contracts during system acquisition. The likelihood of omissions, the difficulty to validate outcomes, and the impacts of omissions demonstrated in this research form evidence that the connection amongst problem formulation, problem solving, and validation must be emphasized if used for system alternative selection.

遗漏的技术措施:在系统方案选择中建立问题制定和验证必要性的证据。
大型复杂工程系统的设计和获取可以使用技术措施,通过对这些措施设置约束和/或提供使用这些措施的目标来比较系统备选方案。选择技术度量集可能是不确定的,可用的选择指导很少,并且难以验证,可能导致忽略技术度量。本研究通过对现实世界的技术措施和系统方案的案例研究,考察了省略技术措施对系统方案选择的影响。基于需求的约束框架和基于优化的目标函数框架采用了一套现实世界的技术措施。该研究模拟了技术措施的遗漏如何导致选择不同的系统替代方案。通过美国宇航局载人着陆系统(HLS)的应用程序演示了这些影响,使用了13种系统替代方案,包括由蓝色起源、SpaceX和动力公司向美国宇航局提出的系统。研究发现,约束框架中的遗漏打开了设计空间,潜在地改变了所选择的系统替代方案。目标函数框架中的遗漏改变了对系统备选方案的指示顺序偏好,从而改变了所选择的系统备选方案。在收购方方面,遗漏的技术措施可能会改变所选择的系统替代方案,将数百万美元导向特定的组织和系统。本研究强调了在系统采办过程中遗漏技术措施对授予合同的实际影响。遗漏的可能性、验证结果的难度以及本研究中所展示的遗漏的影响证明,如果用于系统替代选择,必须强调问题制定、问题解决和验证之间的联系。
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
Research in Engineering Design
Research in Engineering Design 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
审稿时长
18 months
期刊介绍: Research in Engineering Design is an international journal that publishes research papers on design theory and methodology in all fields of engineering, focussing on mechanical, civil, architectural, and manufacturing engineering. The journal is designed for professionals in academia, industry and government interested in research issues relevant to design practice. Papers emphasize underlying principles of engineering design and discipline-oriented research where results are of interest or extendible to other engineering domains. General areas of interest include theories of design, foundations of design environments, representations and languages, models of design processes, and integration of design and manufacturing. Representative topics include functional representation, feature-based design, shape grammars, process design, redesign, product data base models, and empirical studies. The journal also publishes state-of-the-art review articles.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书