Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Knowledge-Level Model for Concurrent Design

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes the development and validation of a knowledge-level model of concurrent design. Concurrent design is characterised by the extent to which multidisciplinary perspectives influence all stages of the product design process. This design philosophy is being increasingly used in industry to reduce costs and improve product quality. We propose an essentially rational model for concurrent design and report on our validation of the model through studies with designers. We outline some of the limitations of current computational techniques needed to support negotiation in the design cycle and consider some of the implications of this for the development of systems to support concurrent design.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. Mira and A.P. del Pobil, Preface to 11th International Conference on Engineering Applications of AI and Expert Systems, Benicassim, Castellon, Spain, 1–4 June 1998 (Proc. IEA-98-AIE), vol. 1. Methodology and Tools in Knowledge-Based Systems, edited by J. Mira, A.P. del Pobil, and M. Ali, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1415, Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3–540–64582–9.

  2. T. Smithers, “On knowledge level theories of design process,” in Artificial Intelligence in Design, edited by J.S. Gero and F. Sudweeks, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 561–579, 1996.

  3. R. Oxman, “Cognition and design,” Design Studies, vol. 17, pp. 337–340, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  4. G. Pahl and W. Beitz, Engineering Design (Copyright the Design Council), Springer-Verlag, 1984.

  5. H. Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, 1969.

  6. D. Schon, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think, Avebury, 1991.

  7. H. Shiva Kumar, S. Suresh, C.S. Krishnamoorthy, S.J. Fenves, and S. Rajeev, “GENCRIT: A tool for knowledge based critiquing in engineering design,” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8, pp. 239–259, 1994.

  8. S. Desa and J.M. Schmitz, “The development and implementation of a comprehensive concurrent engineering method: Theory and application,” SAE Transactions, vol. 100, pp. 1041–1049, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R.F. Schmidt and M. Schmidt, Computer Aided Concurrent Integral Design, Springer-Verlag, 1996.

  10. C. Kruger and B. Wielinga, “A KADS model for the industrial design task,” in Proceedings of the Third KADS Meeting, Munich, Germany, 1993.

  11. A. Bernaras and W. Van de Velde, “Design,” in CommonKADS Library for Expertise Modelling: Reusable Problem Solving Components, edited by J. Breuker and W. Van de Velde, IOS Press, chap. 8, 1995.

  12. B. Chandrasekaran, “Design problem solving: A task analysis,” AI Magazine, Winter 1990.

  13. B.G. Silverman, “Survey of expert critiquing systems: Practical and theoretical frontiers,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 35,no. 4, pp. 107–127, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. G. Fischer and T.A. Mastaglio, “Conceptual framework for knowledge-based critic systems,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 7,no. 4, pp. 355–378, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Fruchter, M.J. Clayton, H. Krawinkler, J. Kunz, and P. Teicholz, “Interdisciplinary communication of design critique in the conceptual design stage,” Computing in Civil and Building Engineering. Proc. Fifth Intl. Conf. on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering ICCCBE, ASCE, New York, pp. 377–384, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. Barker, C. Short, I. Tranter, A. Meehan, and B. Parkinson, “Modelling the concurrent engineering environment using artificial intelligence techniques,” AIENG '95; 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, Udine, Italy, 4–6 July 1995.

  17. R. Barker, C. Short, I. Tranter, A. Meehan, and B. Parkinson, “Critiquing and the concurrent design process,” in Proc. 3rd International Conference on Concurrent Engineering and Electronic Design Automation: CEEDA-96, edited by Meehat, Poole UK, EPIC, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Klein and S.C. Lu, “Conflict resolution in cooperative design,” Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, Computational Mechanics Publications, vol. 4,no. 4, 1989.

  19. K.J. Werkman, “Negotiation as an aid in concurrent engineering,” Issues in Design Manufacture Integration 39 ASME, pp. 23–30, 1991.

  20. J.V. Harrington and H. Soltan, “Negotiation in a knowledge-based concurrent engineering design environment,” Expert Systems, vol. 12,no. 2, pp. 139–147, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Molina, A.H. Alashaab, T.I.A. Ellis, R.I.M. Young, and R. Bell, “Review of computer-aided simultaneous engineering systems,” Research in Engineering Design: Theory Applications and Concurrent Engineering, vol. 7,no. 1, pp. 38–63, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  22. S.P. Davies, “Effects of concurrent verbalisation on design problem solving,” Design Studies, vol. 16,no. 1, pp. 102–116, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  23. K. Dorst, “Analysing design activity: New directions in protocol analysis,” Design Studies, vol. 16,no. 2, pp. 139–142, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  24. P. Lloyd, B. Lawson, and P. Scott, “Can concurrent verbalisation reveal design cognition?” Design Studies, vol. 16,no. 2, pp. 237–259, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  25. P. Lloyd and P. Scott, “Discovering the design problem,” Design Studies, vol. 15,no. 2, pp. 125–140, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J.L. Kolodner, “Powers of observation in creative design,” Design Studies, vol. 17,no. 4, pp. 385–416, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  27. W. Visser, “Two functions of analogical reasoning in design: A cognitive psycology approach,” Design Studies, vol. 17,no. 4, 1996.

  28. D.H. Sonnenwald, “Communication roles that support collaboration during the design process,” Design Studies, vol. 17,no. 4, pp. 277–301, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  29. G. Schreiber, B. Weilinga, and J. Breuker (Eds.), KADS: A Principled Approach to Knowledge-Based System Development, Academic Press, 1993.

  30. S. Pugh, Total design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering, Addison Wesley, 1991.

  31. J.K.C. Kingston, Design by Exploration: A Proposed CommonKADS Inference Structure, Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute, University of Edinburgh, AIAI-TR; 155, 1994.

  32. B. Lawson, How Designers Think, Butterworth, 1990.

  33. A. Goel, “Integration of case-based reasoning and model-based reasoning for adaptive design problem solving,” Department of Computer and Information Science, Ohio state University, US, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  34. G. Fischer, A.C. Lemke, and T. Mastaglio, “Critics: An emerging approach to knowledge-based human-computer interaction,” Int. J. Man-Machine Studies, vol. 35, pp. 695–721, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  35. S.T.C. Wong, “Preference-based decision making for cooperative knowledge-based systems,” ACM Trans. on Information Systems, vol. 12,no. 4, pp. 407–435, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  36. K. Sycara, “Multiagent compromise via negotiation,” in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, edited by L. Gasser and M. Huns, Pitman, vol. 2, pp. 119–137, 1989.

  37. G. Zlotkin and J.S. Rosenschein, “Mechanism design for automated negotiation and its application to task oriented domains,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 86, pp. 195–244, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sheffield Hallam University, Pond Street, Sheffield, S1 1WB, UK

    Robin Barker, Anthony Meehan & Ian Tranter

Authors
  1. Robin Barker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Meehan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian Tranter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barker, R., Meehan, A. & Tranter, I. A Knowledge-Level Model for Concurrent Design. Applied Intelligence 10, 113–122 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008315617418

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008315617418

Search

Navigation