Evaluation in engineering design is a multifaceted activity both in terms of the level of detail of the activity and in terms of when the activity takes place within the overall design process. This special edition can be considered in this context.
We have grouped the six papers into three pairs that reflect the various facets that we have identified. The first pair of papers are from the ‘Design for’ camp, with its critical influence on the early stage of the design process. These papers deal with two novel topics; namely, the evaluation of assembly quality, rather than single-component quality, and the assessment of the potential for recovery of elements of the artifact for a variety of reuses. The latter particularly relates to the ‘capacity of the function to be recovered’, in the context of recycling, reuse, energy recovery, and so on.
The next two papers look at the evaluation from the customer’s point of view, by the introduction of two techniques, to create a prototype that is less than a physical prototype but more than a virtual prototype. These papers both reflect on the important and emerging research topic of product representations. However, to understand this conundrum it will be necessary to read the papers!
The final papers work at a very detailed level, investigating the evaluation of the errors that can occur in computer-aided design models, particularly when they are moved between systems and computers. This is increasingly important as engineering design is undertaken across globally distributed networks and models have to be moved across applications, so that the full benefits from integrated computer-aided engineering systems can be obtained. The final paper deals with evaluating and optimizing designs by the introduction of a new technique, which is then demonstrated and evaluated with a number of case studies.
It is interesting that it has been possible to identify these groupings and, arguably, in the engineering design area the linking of the related, however loosely, can only be a beneficial thing for the development of new techniques and their more widespread adoption. Thus, these papers represent an interesting set of activities and we hope that you will enjoy this selection that we have put together. We would be interested to receive any comments either to the Editor, Professor Derek Sheldon, or to any members of the Editorial Board.
Best wishes.
Steve Culley and John Clarkson
Guest Editors