Design of Design Methodology for Autonomous Robots
We present a methodology for deriving design methodology for autonomous robots. We designed this methodology in the context of a robotics course in high schools. The motivation for designing this new methodology was improving the robots’ robustness and reliability and preparing students for becoming better designers. The new methodology proved to be highly successful in designing top quality robots. In the methodology design, we explored and adapted design 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 comprehensive design, we selected a synergetic integration of six methods to compose the methodology for this product context: conceptual design, fault tolerant design, atomic requirements, using fuzzy logic for the control of robotics systems, creative thinking method, and microprogramming design.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Reich, Y., Kolberg, E., Levin, I.: Designing designers. In: Proceedings of International conference on engineering design, ICED 2005, Melborne (2005)Google Scholar
- 2.Verner, I., Waks, S., Kolberg, E.: Upgrading Technology Towards the Status of High School Matriculation Subject: A Case Study. Journal of Technology Education 9(1), 64–75 (1997)Google Scholar
- 3.Kolberg, E., Reich, Y., Levin, I.: Project-Based High School Robotics Course. International journal of Engineering Education 19(4), 557–562 (2003)Google Scholar
- 5.Reich, Y., Kolberg, E., Levin, I.: Designing contexts for learning design. International Journal of Engineering Education 22(3), 489–495 (2006)Google Scholar
- 6.Barrows, H.: How to Design a Problem Based Curriculum for the Pre-Clinical Years. Springer, N.Y (1985)Google Scholar
- 7.Clark Jr., E.T.: Designing and Implementing an Integrated Curriculum: A Student-Centered Approach. Holistic Education Press, Brandon (1997)Google Scholar
- 8.Diamond, R.M.: Designing and Assessing Courses and Curricula: A Practical Guide, Jossey-Bass, San-Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
- 9.Ullman, D.G.: The Mechanical Design Process. McGraw-Hill, N.Y (1992)Google Scholar
- 10.Dieter, G.E.: Engineering Design: A Materials and Processing Approach. McGraw-Hill, Singapore (2000)Google Scholar
- 11.Levin, I., Kolberg, E., Reich, Y.: Robot Control Teaching with a State Machine Based Design Method. International Journal of Engineering Education 20(2), 202–212 (2004)Google Scholar
- 13.Subrahmanian, E., Konda, S.L., Levy, S.N., Reich, Y., Westerberg, A.W., Monarch, I.: Equations aren’t enough: Informal modeling in design. AI EDAM 7(4), 257–274 (1993)Google Scholar
- 14.Nevo, D.: Useful Evaluation: Evaluating Educational and Social Projects, Massada, Israel (Hebrew) (1989)Google Scholar
- 15.Marshall, C.: Goodness criteria: are they objective or judgment calls? In: Guba, E.G. (ed.) The paradigm dialog, Goodness Criteria, Sage publications, California (1990)Google Scholar