Abstract
In this paper, two measures are proposed for valuation of size and coupling complexities of design products as abstracted by three distinct representations. The proposed size complexity measure is based on the information theoretic definition of complexity that connects the complexity of a design to the level of entropy, or uncertainty, inherent in the design product. The proposed coupling complexity measure evaluates the decomposability of the graph-based representation of design products. To validate the proposed measures, an experiment is conducted to calculate the complexities of three consumer products based on three product representations, namely, function structure, connectivity graph, and parametric associativity graph. The findings indicate that coupling and size are independent measures of a product’s complexity. Thus, it is recommended that both measures should be used. Further, the complexity of a product is not independent of the choice of representation model used to describe the product. This suggests that the complexity of a product will vary with the selected view. Finally, it is shown that the two approaches for measuring complexity of a product are generalizable and can be applied to different representations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ameri F (2007) Parametric associativity graph. Automation in Design Research Group, Clemson University, Technical Report
Anderson PH (1999) Complexity theory and organization science. Organization science, vol 10, No 3, Special issue: application of complexity theory to organization science, pp 216–232
Baader F, Nutt W (2003) The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications. Cambridge University Press, London
Balazs M (1999) Design simplification by analogical reasoning. Phd dissertation, Computer science. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester
Balazs M, Brown D (2002) Design simplification by analogical reasoning. In from knowledge intensive CAD to knowledge intensive engineering, by Cugini and Wozny. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 29–44
Bashir H, Thomson V (2001) Models for estimating design effort and time. Des Stud 22:141–155
Boffetta G, Cencini M, Falcioni M, Vulpiani A (2002) Predictability: a way to characterize complexity. Phys Rep 356:367–474
Boothroyd G, Dewhurst P (1987) Product design for assembly. Boothroyd Dewhurst Inc., Wakefield
Braha D, Maimon O (1998a) A mathematical theory of design: foundations, algorithms, and applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Braha D, Maimon O (1998) The measurement of a design structural and functional complexity. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 28(4):527–535
Dixon J, Duffey M, Irani R, Meunier K, Orelup M (1988) A proposed taxonomy of mechanical design problems. Computers in engineering conference. ASME, San Francisco, pp 41–46
El-Haik B, Yang K (1999) The components of complexity in engineering design. IIE Trans 31:925–934
Fitzhorn P (1994) Engineering design as a computable function. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 8:35–44
Grassberger P (1991) Randomness, information, and complexity. Mexican School on Statistical Mechanics. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 59–99
Hirtz J, Stone RB, Mc Adams DA, Szykman S, Wood KL (2002) A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Res Eng Des 13(2):65–82
Du D-Z, Ko K (2000) Theory of computational complexity. Wiley, New York
Kolmogorov A (1983) Combinatorial foundations of information theory and the calculus of probabilities. Russ Math Surv 38:29–40
Loui MC (1996) Computational complexity theory. ACM 50th anniversary symposium: perspectives in computer science, vol 28, No. 1, pp 47–49
Pahl G, Beitz W (1996) Engineering design: a systematic approach. Springer, New York
Rodriguez-Toro CA, Tate SJ, Jared GEM, Swift KG (2003) Complexity metrics for design (simplicity + simplicity = complexity). Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 217(5):721–725
Simon H (1998) The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge
Suh NP (1990) The Principles of Design. Oxford University Press, New York
Suh N (2001) Axiomatic design: advances and applications. Oxford University Press, New York
Summers JD (2004) Development of a domain and solver independent method for mechanical engineering embodiment design. PHD Dissertation, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe
Summers JD, Shah JJ (2003) Developing measures of complexity for engineering design. Design engineering technical conferences. ASME, Chicago, DTM-48633
Summers JD, Lacroix Z, Shah JJ (2002) Case-based design facilitated by the design exemplar. In: International conference on artificial intelligence in design. Kluwer, Cambridge, pp 453–476
Teegavarapu S, Snider M, Summers JD, Lonny T, Mica G (2007) A driver for selection of functionally inequivalent concepts at varying levels of abstraction. J Des Res (in press)
Ullman D (2003) The mechanical design process. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York
Vaidya A, Shah JJ (2003) Design shell for parametric design at embodiment stage. Design engineering technical conferences. ASME, Chicago, DAC-48788
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ameri, F., Summers, J.D., Mocko, G.M. et al. Engineering design complexity: an investigation of methods and measures. Res Eng Design 19, 161–179 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0053-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0053-2