A new conceptual design approach for overcoming the flaws of functional decomposition and morphology

References

• Akao, Yoji. 1990. Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design. Cambridge: Productivity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Akay, D., O. Kulak, and B. Henson. 2011. “Conceptual Design Evaluation Using Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Information Axiom.” Computers in Industry 62 (2): 138–146. doi: 10.1016/j.compind.2010.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altshuller, G. S. 1984. Creativity as an Exact Science: The Theory of the Solution of Inventive Problems. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Science.
   Google Scholar
• Andreasen, M. M. 1980. “Machine Design Methods Based on a SystematicApproach – Contribution to a Design Theory.” PhD diss. (In Danish), Department of Machine Design, Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Aurisicchio, M., and R. Bracewell. 2013. “Capturing an Integrated Design Information Space with a Diagram-based Approach.” Journal of Engineering Design 24 (6): 397–428. 10.1080/09544828.2012.757693. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2012.757693
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becattini, N., G. Cascini, and F. Rotini. 2014. “An OTSM-TRIZ Based Framework towards the Computer-Aided Identification of Cognitive Processes in Design Protocols.” In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Design Computing and Congnition, edited by J. S. Gero and H. Sean, 103–122. London: University College.
   Google Scholar
• Bonnema, G. M., and F. J. A. M. Van Houten. 2006. “Use of Models in Conceptual Design.” Journal of Engineering Design 17 (6): 549–562. 10.1080/09544820600664994. doi: 10.1080/09544820600664994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A., and T. P. Bligh. 2001. “A Scheme for Functional Reasoning in Conceptual Design.” Design Studies 22 (6): 493–517. doi: 10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00008-4
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N. 2000. Engineering design Methods_Strategies for Product Design. 3rd ed. J. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N., and K. Dorst. 2001. “Creativity in the Design Process: Co-evolution of Problem–solution.” Design Studies 22 (5): 425–437. 10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6. doi: 10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6
   Google Scholar
• Dorst, K. 2006. “Design Problems and Design Paradoxes.” Design Studies 22 (3): 4–17.
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, A. H. B., M. M. Andreasen, K. C. MacCallum, and L. N. Reijers. 1993. “Design Co-ordination for Concurrent Engineering.” Journal of Engineering Design 4 (4): 251–261. doi: 10.1080/09544829308914785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eckert, C., T. Alink, and A. Ruckpaul. 2011. “Different Notions of Function: Results from an Experiment on the Analysis of an Existing Product.” Journal of Engineering Design 22 (11–12): 811–837. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2011.603297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evbuomwan, N. F. O., S. Sivaloganathan, and A. Jebb. 1996. “A Survey of Design Philosophies, Models, Methods and Systems.” Journal of Engineering Manufacture 210 (4): 301–320. doi: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1996_210_123_02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorineschi, L., F. S. Frillici, and P. Rissone. 2015. “A Comparison of Classical TRIZ and OTSM-TRIZ in Dealing with Complex Problems.” Procedia Engineering 131: 86–94. 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.350. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.350
   Google Scholar
• French, M. J. 1999. Conceptual Design for Engineers. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Hatchuel, A. 2002. “Towards Design Theory and Expandable Rationality: The Unfinished Program of Herbert Simon.” Journal of Management and Governance 5 (3–4): 260–273.
   Google Scholar
• Hatchuel, A., B. Weil, and P. Masson. 2012. “Towards an Ontology of Design: Lessons from C–K Design Theory and Forcing.” Research in Engineering Design 24 (2): 147–163. 10.1007/s00163-012-0144-y. doi: 10.1007/s00163-012-0144-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heller, J. E., A. Schmid, M. Löwer, and J. Feldhusen. 2014. “The Dilemma of Morphological Analysis in Product Concept Synthesis – New Approaches for Industry and Academia.” In Proceedings of Design 2014, the 13th International Design Conference, edited by D. Marjanovic, M. Štorga, N. Pavkovic, and N. Bojcetic, 201–210. Dubrovnik: Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, University of Zagreb; Glasgow: The Design Society.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, J. C., and D. G. Thornley. 1962. Conference on Design Methods. London: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Khomenko, N., R. De Guio, L. Lelait, and I. Kaikov. 2007. “A Framework for OTSM TRIZ-based Computer Support to be Used in Complex Problem Management.” International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology 30 (1–2): 88–104. doi10.1504/IJCAT.2007.015700. doi: 10.1504/IJCAT.2007.015700
   Google Scholar
• Kroll, E. 2013. “Design Theory and Conceptual Design: Contrasting Functional Decomposition and Morphology with Parameter Analysis.” Research in Engineering Design 24 (2): 165–183. 10.1007/s00163-012-0149-6. doi: 10.1007/s00163-012-0149-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll, E., P. Le Masson, and B. Weil. 2014. “Steepest-first Exploration with Learning-based Path Evaluation: Uncovering the Design Strategy of Parameter Analysis with C–K Theory.” Research in Engineering Design 25 (4): 351–373. 10.1007/s00163-014-0182-8. doi: 10.1007/s00163-014-0182-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leenders, R. T. A. J., J. M. L. Van Engelen, and J. Kratzer. 2007. “Systematic Design Methods and the Creative Performance of New Product Teams: Do They Contradict or Complement Each Other?” Journal of Product Innovation Management 24 (2): 166–179. 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00241.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00241.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Masson, P., and B. Weil. 2012. “Design Theories as Languages of the Unknown: Insights from the German Roots of Systematic Design (1840–1960).” Research in Engineering Design 24 (2): 105–126. 10.1007/s00163-012-0140-2. doi: 10.1007/s00163-012-0140-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malmqvist, J. 1997. “Improved Function-means Trees by Inclusion of Design History Information.” Journal of Engineering Design 8 (2): 107–117. 10.1080/09544829708907955. doi: 10.1080/09544829708907955
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marples, D. L. 1961. “The Decisions of Engineering Design.” IRE Transactions on Engineering Management EM-8 (2): 55–71.
   Google Scholar
• Pahl, G., W. Beitz, J. Feldhusen, and K. H. Grote. 2007. Engineering Design. 3rd ed. London: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Pugh, S. 1991. Total Design Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Sarkar, P., and A. Chakrabarti. 2014. “Ideas Generated in Conceptual Design and their Effects on Creativity.” Research in Engineering Design 25 (3): 185–201. 10.1007/s00163-014-0173-9. doi: 10.1007/s00163-014-0173-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savanovic, P., and W. Zeiler. 2009. “Morphology: A Tool for Reflection in Building Design Action.” In International Conference on Engineering Design, Stanford, CA, August 24–27.
   Google Scholar
• Tomiyama, T., P. Gu, Y. Jin, D. Lutters, C. Kind, and F. Kimura. 2009. “Design Methodologies: Industrial and Educational Applications.” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 58 (2): 543–565. 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.003. doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ullman, D. G. 2010. The Mechanical Design Process. 4th ed. New York: Mc Graw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich, K. T., and S. D. Eppinger. 2003. Product Design and Development. 4th ed. Irwin: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Vollbracht, G. R. 1986. “The Time for CAEDM is now.” In Proceedings of the Fourth National Conference on University Programs in Computer-Aided Engineering, Design and Manufacturing, pp. 86–92. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, R. D. 1966. “The Elements of Design.” In The Design Method, edited by S. A. Gregory, 85–95. London: Butterworths.
   Google Scholar