Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Function-Behaviour-Structure Ontology of Design

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design

Abstract

This chapter commences by introducing the background to the development of the Function-Behaviour-Structure (FBS) ontology. It then proceeds with an elaboration of the FBS ontology followed by the situated FBS framework which articulates a more detailed cognitive view. A series of exemplary empirical studies that use a coding scheme based on the FBS ontology is presented that demonstrates both the empirical support for the ontology and its applicability. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion on the role of this ontology and possible developments.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bergmann R (2002) Experience management: foundations, development methodology, and internet-based applications. Springer Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bickhard MH, Campbell RL (1996) Topologies of learning. New Ideas Psychol 14(2):111–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Clancey WJ (1997) Situated cognition: on human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  4. Crutcher RJ (1994) Telling what we know: The use of verbal report methodologies in psychological research, Psych Sci 5:241–244

    Google Scholar 

  5. De Kleer J, Brown JS (1984) A qualitative physics based on confluences. Artif Intell 24:7–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Erden MS et al (2008) A review of function modeling: approaches and applications. AIEDAM 22(2):147–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1993) Protocol Analysis; Verbal Reports as Data, MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gero JS (1990) Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Mag 11(4):26–36

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gero JS, Fujii H (2000) A computational framework for concept formation for a situated design agent. Knowl-Based Syst 13(6):361–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gero JS, Kan JWT, Pourmohamadi M (2011) Analysing design protocols: development of methods and tools. In: Chakrabarti A (ed) Research into design. Research Publishing, Singapore, pp 3–10

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gero JS, Kannengiesser U (2000) Towards a situated function-behaviour-structure framework as the basis of a theory of designing. In: Smithers T (ed) Workshop on development and application of design theories in AI in design research. Artificial intelligence in design’00. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, pp gk:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gero JS, Kannengiesser U (2002) The situated function-behaviour-structure framework. In: Gero JS (ed) Artificial intelligence in design’02. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 89–104

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gero JS, Kannengiesser U (2004) The situated function-behaviour-structure framework. Des Stud 25(4):373–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gero JS, Jiang H, Williams CB (2012) Does using different concept generation techniques change the design cognition of design students? ASME IDETC. DETC2012-71165

    Google Scholar 

  15. Goldschmidt G (1990) Linkography. In: Trappl R (ed) Cyberbetics and System 90, World Scientific, Singapore, pp 291–298

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gruber TR (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specification, Knowl Acquis 5:199–220

    Google Scholar 

  17. Guindon R (1990) Designing the design process: exploiting opportunistic thoughts. Human-Comput Interact 5:305–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jiang H, Gero JS, Yen CC (2013) Exploring designing styles using problem-solution indexes. Design computing and cognition’12, Springer Berlin (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kan J, Gero JS (2008) Acquiring information from linkography in protocol studies of designers. Des Stud 29(4):315–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kan JWT, Gero JS (2009) Using the FBS ontology to capture semantic design information in design protocol studies. In: McDonnell J, Lloyd P (eds) About: designing. Analysing design meetings. Taylor and Francs, London, pp 213–229.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kan JWT, Gero JS (2011a) Comparing designing across different domains: an exploratory case study. In: Culley S, Hicks B, McAloone T, Howard T, Reich Y (eds) Design theory and methodology. Design Society, Glasgow, pp 2:194–203

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kan JWT, Gero JS (2011b) Learning to collaborate during team designing: quantitative measurements. In: Chakrabarti A (ed) Research into design. Research Publishing, Singapore, pp 687–694

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kannengiesser U (2010) Towards a methodology for flexible process specification. Enterp Model Inf Syst Architect 5(3):44–63

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kannengiesser U, Gero JS (2006) Towards mass customized interoperability. Comput Aided Des 38(8):920–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kannengiesser U, Gero JS (2012) A process framework of affordances in design. Design Issues 28(1):50–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kruchten P (2005) Casting software design in the function-behavior-structure framework. IEEE Softw 22(2):52–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lammi M, Gero JS (2011) Comparing design cognition of undergraduate engineering students and high school pre-engineering students. In: 41st ASEE/IEEE frontiers in education, ASEE/IEEE, pp F4F:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  28. Liew P-S, Gero JS (2004) Constructive memory for situated design agents. AIEDAM 18(2):163–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pedersen, K, Emblemsvag, J, Bailey, R, Allen JK and Mistree, F: 2000, Validating design methods and research: the validation square. In: Proceedings of DETC’00, 2000 ASME design engineering technical conferences, Baltimore, MD, paper no. DETC2000DTM-14579

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schön DA, Wiggins G (1992) Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Des Stud 13(2):135–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sim SK, Duffy AHB (2003) Towards an ontology of generic engineering design activities. Res Eng Design 14(4):200–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Smith GJ, Gero JS (2005) What does an artificial design agent mean by being ‘situated’? Des Stud 26(5):535–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Suwa M, Gero JS, Purcell T (1999) Unexpected discoveries and s-inventions of design requirements: a key to creative designs. In: Gero JS, Maher ML (eds) Computational models of creative design IV. Key centre of design computing and cognition. University of Sydney, Sydney, pp 297–320

    Google Scholar 

  34. Van-Someren MW, Barnard YF, Sandberg JA (1994) The Think Aloud Method: A Practical Guide to Modelling Cognitive Processes, Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wilke W (1999) Knowledge management for intelligent sales support in electronic commerce. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  36. Williams CB, Gero JS, Lee Y, Paretti M (2011) Exploring the effect of design education on the design cognition of mechanical engineering students. ASME IDETC201, 1DETC2011-48357

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ziemke T (1999) Rethinking grounding. In: Riegler A, Peschl M, von Stein A (eds) Understanding representation in the cognitive sciences: does representation need reality? Plenum Press, New York, pp 177–190

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported here has been supported by multiple grants from the Australian Research Council, the US National Science Foundation (NSF Grant Nos: EEC-0934824, CMMI-0926908, IIS-1002079, CMMI-1161715) and the US Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study, George Mason University, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA

    John S. Gero

  2. Metasonic AG, Pfaffenhofen, Germany

    Udo Kannengiesser

Authors
  1. John S. Gero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Udo Kannengiesser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Product Design and Manufacturing, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India

    Amaresh Chakrabarti

  2. Campus Limpertsberg, Université du Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Lucienne T. M. Blessing

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gero, J.S., Kannengiesser, U. (2014). The Function-Behaviour-Structure Ontology of Design. In: Chakrabarti, A., Blessing, L. (eds) An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6337-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6338-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation