Advertisement

Heuristic guidelines to support conceptual design

  • Elena MuletEmail author
  • Rosario Vidal
Original Paper

Abstract

The creativity or unforeseeable nature of the design process, especially during the conceptual phase, makes it difficult to apply current design methodologies to aid designers and help them to reach a conceptual solution in an effective manner. In this paper we present some guidelines, based on experimental data about the evolution of the design process, with which to improve the effectiveness of the conceptual phase, above all as regards finding solutions. Here, effectiveness is taken as meaning quickly reaching a design solution that satisfies the requirements of the problem. Some of the guidelines obtained allow the effectiveness of a designer or a group of designers to be enhanced and are oriented towards controlling the divergence and convergence of the design space. Some guidelines for the development of interactive computer systems to aid designers are also put forward.

Keywords

Design experiment Conceptual design Idea generation Function Requirement Creative methods 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research is funded by Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology project DPI2002-04357-C03-01.

References

  1. Boden M (1999) Computer Models of Creativity. In: Sternberg R (ed) Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press, London, pp 351–372Google Scholar
  2. Campbell M, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2003) The a-design approach to managing automated design synthesis. Res Eng Des 14:12–24Google Scholar
  3. Candy L (1997) Computers and creativity support: knowledge, visualization and collaboration. Knowl Based Sys 10(1):3–13CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Candy L, Edmonds E (1996) Creativity design of the lotus bicycle: implications for knowledge support system research. Des Stud 17(1):71–90Google Scholar
  5. Candy L, Edmonds E (2000) Creativity enhancement with emerging technologies. Commun ACM 43(8):62–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chakrabarti A (2001) Towards hybrid methods fors. In: Proc. ICED′01 13th International Conference on Engineering Design, Imeche, GlasgowGoogle Scholar
  7. Chakrabarti A, Bligh TP (1996) An approach to functional synthesis of solutions in mechanical conceptual design part Iii: spatial configuration. Res Eng Des 2:116–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coyne R, Newton S, Sudweeks F (1993) A connectionist view of creative design reasoning. In: Gero J, Maher M (eds) Modeling creativity and knowledge-based creative design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 177–210Google Scholar
  9. Gero J (1990) Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI mag 11(4):26–36Google Scholar
  10. Gero JS (1996) Creativity, emergence and evolution in design. Knowl Based Syst 9:435–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goldschmidt G (1990) Linkography: Assessing Design Productivity. In: Proc. 10th European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, Cybernetics and systems World Scientific Pub Co, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrison S, Minneman S (1996) A bike in hand: a study of 3-D objects in design. In: Cross N, Christiaans H, Dorst K (eds) Analysing design activity. Wiley, Chichester, pp 417–436Google Scholar
  13. Li Q, Zhang WJ (1998) Computer Comparison of Design Knowledge. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 212 Part B: 635–645Google Scholar
  14. Liu Y, Bligh T, Chakrabarti A (2003) Towards an ideal approach for concept generation. Des Stud 24:341–355Google Scholar
  15. Maher M, Poon J (1996) Modelling design exploration as co-evolution. Microcomput Civ Eng 11(3):195–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maher M, Zhao F (1993) Dynamic associations for creative engineering design. In: Gero J, Maher M (eds) Modeling creativity and knowledge-based creative design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 329–351Google Scholar
  17. Mulet E, Vidal R, Bermell-García P (2003) Influences of representations on designing and implications for computer-based design synthesis. In: Proc. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 03, Design Society, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  18. Mulet E, Vidal R, Bermell-García P (2003) Influences of representations on designing and implications for computer-based design synthesis. In: Proc. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, StokholmGoogle Scholar
  19. Nidamarthi S, Chakrabarti A, Bligh TP (2001) Improving requirement satisfaction ability of the designer. In: Proc. International Conference in Engineering Design, ICED, 1 Imeche, Glasgow, UKGoogle Scholar
  20. Parmee IC (2001) Evolutionary and adaptive computing in engineering design. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Parmee I, Bonham C (2000) Towards the support of innovative conceptual design through interactive designer/evolutionary computing strategies. artificial intelligence for engineering design. Anal Manuf (AIEDAM) 14:3–16Google Scholar
  22. Purcell A, Gero J (1998) Drawings and the design process. Des Stud 19(4):389–430Google Scholar
  23. Schütze M, Sache P, Römer A (2003) Support value of sketching in the design process. Res Eng Design 14:89–97Google Scholar
  24. Shea K, Cagan J, Fenves S (1997) A shape annealing approach to optimal truss design with dynamic grouping of members. ASME J Mech Des 119(3):388–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Takeda H, Veerkamp P, Tomiyama T, Yoshikawa H (1990) Modeling design processes. AI Mag 11(4):37–48Google Scholar
  26. Takeda H, Yoshioka M, Tomiyama T, Shimomura Y (1996) Analysis of design protocol by functional evolution process model. In: Cross N, Christiaans H, Dorst K (eds). Analysing design activity. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp 187–209Google Scholar
  27. Ullman D, Wood S, Craig D (1990) The importance of drawing in the mechanical design process. Comput Graph 14(2):263–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Umeda Y, Takeda H, Tomiyama T, Yoshikawa H (1990) Function, behaviour, and structure. In: Gero J (ed) Applications of artificial intelligence in engineering V. 1. Springer, Berlin, pp 177–194Google Scholar
  29. Van der Lugt R (2003) Relating the Quality of the Idea Generation Processs to the Quality of the Resulting Ideas. In: Proc. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 03, Design Society, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  30. VanderLugt R (2000) Devoloping a graphic tool for creative problem solving in design groups. Des Stud 21(5):505–522Google Scholar
  31. Vidal R, Mulet E, Gómez-Senent E (2004a) Effectiveness of the means of expression in creative problem solving in design groups. J Eng Des 15(3):285–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vidal R, Mulet E, Gómez-Senent E (2004) Effectiveness of the means of expression in creative problem solving in design groups. J Eng Des 15(3):285–297Google Scholar
  33. Visser W (1996) Two functions of analogical reasoning in design:a cognitive-psychology approach. Des Stud 17:417–434Google Scholar
  34. Wiegers T, Horváth I, Vergeest J, Opiyo E, Kuczogi G (1999) Requierements for highly interactive system interfaces to support conceptual design. In: Kals H, Houten Fv (eds) Integration of process knowledge into design support systems. Kluwer, Enschede, pp 69–78Google Scholar
  35. Woodbury R (1993) A Genetic Approach to Creative Design. In: Proc. Modeling Creativity and Knowledge-based Creative Design, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering and ConstructionUniversitat Jaume ICastellónSpain

Personalised recommendations