Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Designing winning robots by careful design of their development process

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Research in Engineering Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present a comprehensive robot development process and its evaluation. We designed this process in the context of a robotics course in high schools. The motivation for designing this new process was improving the robustness and reliability of robots developed by students and preparing students for becoming better designers. The newly designed process proved to be highly successful in designing top quality robots. In the process design, we explored and adapted existing design tools and methods to the specific designers, the nature of the product, the environment, the product needs, and the design context goals. At the end of this thorough design, we selected a synergetic integration of six tools and methods to compose the new comprehensive development process for this product context: conceptual design, fault-tolerant design, atomic requirements, fuzzy logic for control, creative thinking, and microprogramming-based design. The design skills of the students that learned the design process and the performance of robots they designed and participated in an international robotics contest were examined. The high school teams that studied the proposed process won the first places in an international contest. The robots developed by the students had better performance than robots built by engineers and faculty teams. Professional experts rated the robots’ designs as excellent. The students that studied the process demonstrated high level of diverse design skills including creativity and design management capabilities. Additionally, they improved their science subject grades and their attitude toward engineering. Both the results obtained by the study and the authors’ experience in teaching robotics demonstrate that the proposed robot development process could be taught successfully in high school and that it leads to superior robotic products. Our experience also indicates that this process could serve industry design by improving the robustness of robots operating in uncertain environments and supporting fast change management practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See http://www.best-of-robotics.org/brics-in-a-nutshell, accessed 8.8.2013.

  2. See http://www.best-of-robotics.org/brics-in-a-nutshell/robot-development-process, accessed 8.8.2013.

  3. See http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/DARPA_Robotics_Challenge.aspx, accessed 5. 5. 2013.

  4. There are more than 20,000 universities in the world. www.webometrics.info/methodology.html, accessed 2.6.12. Updated count (1. 1. 14) lists over 21,000 and estimated number of high education institutes of about 40,000.

  5. BIST is an off-line test that is activated by a push button switch. When pushed, special test software is initiated, and when it finishes running, it reports the status of the robot's subsystems.

  6. Unless otherwise stated, significance in the statistical analyses was set to 5 %.

  7. See http://rcj.robocup.org/dance.html.

  8. http://www.robocup2012.org.

References

  • Abramovici M, Breuer MA, Friedman AD (1990) Digital systems testing and testable design, Revised Printing. IEEE Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrawala AK, Rauscher TG (1976) Foundations of microprogramming. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahlgren DJ (2001) Fire-fighting robots and first-year engineering design: trinity college experience. In: Proceedings of 2001 IEEE frontiers in education conference, Reno, pp S2E-1–S2E-6

  • Ahlgren DJ, Verner IM (2002) Integration of a fire-fighting robot contest in multi-level engineering education. In: Proceedings of the ASEE annual conference, Session 2620

  • Akao Y, Mazur GH (2003) The leading edge in QFD past, present and future. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 20(1):20–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonelli R, Costa L, Eustachio A, Queiroz R, Martins F, Mello A (2013) Development of a methodology focused on the improvement of both: ergonomics and comfort of commercial vehicle seats, SAE Technical Paper 2013-36-0216

  • Atkinson AO (1985) Design for manufacturability: computer-integrated design and manufacturing for product development, SAE Technical Paper 851587

  • Avizienis A (1976) Fault-tolerant systems. IEEE Trans Comp C25(12):1304–1312

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Baily C, Yin C (2009) Design for reliability of power electronics modules. Microelectron Reliab 49(9–11):1250–1255

    Google Scholar 

  • Baranov S (1994) Logic synthesis for control automata. Kluwer, Netherlands

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Barrows H (1985) How to design a problem based curriculum for the pre-clinical years. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker KH, Maunsaiyat S (2002) Using Thai students’ attitudes and concepts of technology. J Tech Educ 13(2):6–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Hanan U, Reichsfeld O (2008) Thinking mechatronics. Ort Israel, Tel-Aviv

    Google Scholar 

  • Betzer N (2002) The knowledge constructing process and the design process constructing among high achiever pupils through project-based-learning (PBL), PhD thesis (Hebrew), School of Education, Tel-Aviv Univ, Tel-Aviv

  • Boser RA, Palmer JD, Daugherty MK (1998) Students attitudes toward technology in selected technology education programs. J Tech Educ 10(1):4–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson J, Murphy RR (2005) How UGVs physically fail in the field. IEEE Trans Robot 21(3):423–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter WC, Montgomery HC, Preiss RJ, Reinheimer HJ (1964) Design of serviceability features for the IBM system/360. IBM J Res Dev 8(2):115–126

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen C (2001) Design for the environment: a quality-based model for green product development. Manag Sci 47(2):250–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark ET Jr (1997) Designing and implementing an integrated curriculum: a student-centered approach. Holistic Education Press, Brandon

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen R, Lipon MG, Dai MQ, Benhabib B (1992) Conceptual design of a modular robot. J Mech Des 114(1):117–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawley E, Malmqvist J, Ostlund S, Brodeur D (2007) Rethinking engineering education: The CDIO approach. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow K (2002) Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), DRM associates. http://www.npd-solutions.com/fmea.htm

  • Dahmus JB, Gonzales-Zugasti JP, Otto KN (2001) Modular product architecture. Des Stud 22(5):409–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dertien E (2006) Dynamic walking with Dribbel—design and construction of a passivity-based walking robot. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 3:118–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond RM (1998) Designing and assessing courses and curricula: a practical guide. Jossey-Bass, San-Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieter GE (2000) Engineering design: a materials and processing approach. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke DW (1998) Configuration research and commercial solutions, AI EDAM, Special Issue: Configuration Design, 12(4):295–300, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Frey DD, Herder PM, Wijnia Y, Subramanian E, Katsikopoulos KV, Clausing DP (2009) An evaluation of the Pugh controlled convergence method. Res Eng Design 20:41–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galster M, Eberlein A, Moussavi M (2007) Atomic requirements for software architecting. In: SEA ‘07 proceedings of the 11th IASTED international conference on software engineering and applications. ACTA press, pp 143–148

  • Gemster G, Leenders AAM (2001) How integrating industrial design in the product development process impacts on company performance. J Prod Innov Manag 18(1):28–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göransson B, Gulliksen I, Boivie I (2003) The usability design process: integrating user-centered systems design in the software development process, Special Issue: Bridging the Process and Practice Gaps Between Software Engineering and Human Computer Interaction. Softw Process Improv Practice 8(2):111–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habib S (ed) (1988) Microprogramming and firmware engineering methods. van Nostrand, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz R (1999) Creative problem solving in engineering design, PhD Thesis, Tel-Aviv University, Faculty of Engineering

  • Hubka V (1974) Theorie der Maschinensysteme (Theory of Machine Systems). Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwarsson S, Stahl A (2003) Accessibility, usability and universal design—positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disabil Rehabil 25(2):57–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones JL, Seiger BA, Flynn AM (1999) Mobile Robots: inspiration to implementation, Second edn. A. K. Peters Ltd, Natick

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kitano H (ed) (1998) RoboCup-97: Robot Soccer World Cup 1. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolberg E, Reich Y, Levin I (2003) Project-based high school mechatronics course. Int J Eng Educ Spec Issue Mechatronics Eng Educ 19(4):557–562

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolberg E, Reich Y, Levin I (2005) Transforming Design Education by Design. In Proceedings of IDETC/CIE 2005 and ASME 2005, California, USA

  • Kolberg E, Reich Y, Levin I (2007a) Design of Design methodology for autonomous robots. In Proceedings of RoboCup 2007 Symposium, Atlanta, USA July 9–10, (CD Proceedings)

  • Kolberg E, Reich Y, Levin I (2007b) Express engineering change management. In Proceedings of international conference on engineering designs, ICED 07, Paris, France

  • Lee CC (1990) Fuzzy logic in control systems: fuzzy logic controller II. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 20(2):419–435

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Levin I, Karpovsky M (1998) On-line self-checking of microprogram control units, 4-th IEEE international on-line testing workshop, Capri, Compendium of papers, pp 153–159

  • Levin I, Levit V (1998) Control ware for learning with mobile robots. Comput Sci Educ 8(3):181–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin I, Mioduser D (1996) A multiple-constructs framework for teaching control concepts. IEEE Trans Educ 39(4):488–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin I, Sinelnikov V, Karpovsky M (2001) Synthesis of ASM-based Self-Checking Controllers. In: Proceedings of EUROMICRO IEEE symposium on digital systems design. Architectures, methods, and tools, warsaw, Poland, pp 87–93

  • Levin I, Kolberg E, Reich Y (2004a) Robot control teaching with a state machine based design method. Int J Eng Educ 20(2):234–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin I, Levit V, Salzer H (2004b) Atomic specifications and controlware design. WSEAS Trans Comput 3(3):774–782

    Google Scholar 

  • Li CL (1996) A qualitative and heuristic approach to the conceptual design of mechanisms. Eng Appl Artific Intel 9(1):17–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mangir TE, Avizienis A (1982) Fault-tolerant design for VLSI: effect of interconnect requirements on yield improvement of VLSI designs. IEEE Trans Comput C31(7):609–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin F (1994) Learning engineering by building a robot, PhD thesis, Department of Media Arts and Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  • Morag I (2003) Ergonomics in design: The quarterly of human factors applications HFES 11: 6–11, published by SAGE

  • Mukherjee SS, Kontz M, Reinhardt SK (2002) Detailed design and evaluation of redundant multi-threading alternatives. In: Proceedings 29th annual international symposium on computer architecture, pp 99–110

  • Myung S, Han S (2001) Knowledge-based parametric design of mechanical products based on configuration design method. Expert Syst Appl 21(2):99–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson VP (1990) Fault-tolerant computing: fundamental concepts. Computer 23(7):19–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitchumani V (2005) Design for manufacturability. In: Proceedings of design automation conference, Asia and South Pacific

  • Prasad B (1996) Concurrent engineering fundamentals: integrated product and process organization, vol 1. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh S (1991) Total design: integrated methods for successful product engineering. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich Y (2008) Preventing breakthroughs from breakdowns. In: Proceedings of the 9th Biennial ASME conference on engineering systems design and analysis ESDA2008, Haifa, Israel

  • Reich Y (2010) My method is better! Res Eng Design 21(3):137–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reich Y, Kolberg E, Levin I (2005) Designing designers. In: Proceedings of international conference on engineering design, ICED 05, Melbourne

  • Reich Y, Kolberg E, Levin I (2006) Designing contexts for learning design. Int J Eng Educ 22(3):489–495

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhee SJ, Ishii K (2003) Using cost based FMEA to enhance reliability and serviceability. Adv Eng Inform 17(3–4):179–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Salzer H, Levin I (2004) Atomic requirements in teaching logic control implementation. Int J Eng Educ 20(1):46–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Shriver B, Smith B (1998) The anatomy of a high-performance microprocessor: a systems perspective. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos

    Google Scholar 

  • Sklar E, Eguchi A (2005) RoboCupJunior: Four Years Later. In: Nardi D, Riedmiller M, Sammut C, Victor JS (eds): RoboCup 2004: Robot Soccer World Cup VIII. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, New York, pp 172–183

  • Subrahmanian E, Konda SL, Levy SN, Reich Y, Westerberg AW, Monarch I (1993) Equations aren’t enough: informal modeling in design. AI EDAM 7(4):257–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Thrun S, Burgard W, Fox D (2006) Probabilistic robotics. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Tummala RL, Mukherjee R, Xi N, Aslam D, Dulimarta H, Xiao J, Minor M, Dangi G (2002) Climbing the walls: presenting two underactuated kinematic designs for miniature climbing robots. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 4:10–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullman DG (1992) The mechanical design process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich K (1995) The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Res Policy 24(3):419–440

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Verner I, Waks S, Kolberg E (1997) Upgrading technology towards the status of high school matriculation subject: a case study. J Technol Educ 9(1):64–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Volk K, Yip WM, Lo TK (2003) Hong Kong Pupils’ attitudes toward technology: the impact of design and technology programs. J Tech Educ 15(1):48–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Vozchikov L (2013) Ergonomics method research vehicle mirrors effectiveness 3D Universal model impact classification, SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-2765

  • Wang L, Shen W, Xie H, Neelamkavil J, Pardasani A (2002) Collaborative conceptual design—state of the art and future trends. Comput Aided Design 34(13):981–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youn BD, Park YH, Choi KK (2003) Hybrid analysis method for reliability-based design optimization. J Mech Des 125(2):221–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LH (1965) Fuzzy sets and systems. System Theory 1965:29–39

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang WH, Beckers P, Fleury C (1995) A unified parametric design approach to structural shape optimization. Int J Numer Meth Eng 38(13):2283–2292

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ziv-Av A, Reich Y (2005) SOS—Subjective objective system for generating optimal product concepts. Des Stud 26(5):509–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering, Bar-Ilan University, 52900, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Eli Kolberg

  2. Faculty of Engineering, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Yoram Reich

  3. School of Education, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Ilya Levin

Authors
  1. Eli Kolberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoram Reich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ilya Levin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoram Reich.

Additional information

Small parts of this paper appeared previously in different publications by the authors and are included in the reference list. However, this is the first and only comprehensive description of the study goals, design, research methodology, results and conclusions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kolberg, E., Reich, Y. & Levin, I. Designing winning robots by careful design of their development process. Res Eng Design 25, 157–183 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-014-0171-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-014-0171-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation