Implementing shared function modelling in practice: experiences in six companies developing mechatronic products and PSS

References

• Alink, T. 2010. “Bedeutung, Darstellung und Formulierung von Funktionen für das Lösen von Gestaltungsproblemen mit dem C&C-Ansatz.” Diss., Institut für Produktentwicklung, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe.
   Google Scholar
• Alink, T., C. Eckert, A. Ruckpaul, and A. Albers. 2010. “Different Function Breakdowns for One Existing Product: Experimental Results.” In Design Computing and Cognition – DCC, edited by J. Gero, 405–425. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Almefelt, L. 2005. “Balancing Properties While Synthesising a Product Concept: A Method Highlighting Synergies.” Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED2005.
   Google Scholar
• Andreasen, M. M. 2003. “Improving Design Method Usability Be a Mindset Approach.” In The Future of Design Methodology, edited by H. Birkhofer, 209–218. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Andreasen, M. M.. 2011. “45 Years with Design Methodology.” Journal of Engineering Design 22 (5): 293–332. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2010.538040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreasen, M. M., C. T. Hansen, and P. Cash. 2015. Conceptual Design: Interpretations, Mindsets and Models. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Araujo, C., H. Benedetto-Neto, A. C. Campello, F. M. Segre, and I. C. Wright. 1996. “The Utilization of Product Development Methods: A Survey of UK Industry.” Journal of Engineering Design 7 (3): 265–277. doi: 10.1080/09544829608907940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aurisicchio, M., R. Bracewell, and G. Armstrong. 2012. “The Function Analysis Diagram: Intended Benefits and Coexistence with Other Functional Models.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing – AIEDAM 27 (3): 249–257.
   Google Scholar
• Aurisicchio, M., R. Bracewell, and B. L. Hooey. 2016. “Rationale Mapping and Functional Modelling Enhanced Root Cause Analysis.” Safety Science 85: 241–257. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.12.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aurisicchio, M., N. Eng, J. Ortiz-Nicolas, P. Childs, and R. Bracewell. 2011. “On the Functions of Products.” Proceedings of the 18thInternational Conference on Engineering Design – ICED.
   Google Scholar
• Becattini, N., Y. Borgianni, G. Cascini, and F. Rotini. 2012. “Model and Algorithm for Computer-aided Inventive Problem Analysis.” Special issue on “Fundamentals of next generation CAD/E systems”. Computer-Aided Design 44: 961–986. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2011.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Beek, T. J., and T. Tomiyama. 2009. “Connecting Views in Mechatronic Systems Design, a Functions Modelling Approach.” Proceedings of ASME 2009 International Conference on Mechatronic and Embedded Systems and Applications.
   Google Scholar
• Birkhofer, H., and H. Kloberdanz. 2005. “An Extensive and Detailed View of the Application of Design Methods and Methodology in Industry.” International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED.
   Google Scholar
• Blessing, L. T. M. 1997. Applying Systematic Design: The Flight Refuelling Probe Project. CUED/C-EDC/TR 48. Cambridge: EdC Cambridge Engineering Design Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Blessing, L. T. M., and A. Chakrabarti. 2009. DRM: A Research Design Methodology. London: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Blessing, L. T. M., and N. Upton. 1997. “A Methodology for Preliminary Design of Mechanical Aircraft Systems.” AIAA/SAE World Aviation Congress, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston (USA).
   Google Scholar
• Bone, M., and R. Cloutier. 2010. “The Current State of Model Based Systems Engineering: Results from the OMG SysML Request for Information 2009.” Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Systems Engineering Research.
   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. doi: 10.1080/09544820600664994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, J. W., T. N. Reid, C. Eckert, and K. Ramani. 2015. “Comparing Functional Analysis Methods for Product Dissection Tasks.” Journal of Mechanical Design 137: 081101-1–081101-10. doi: 10.1115/1.4030232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldwell, B. W., C. Sen, G. M. Mocko, and J. D. Summers. 2011. “An Empirical Study of the Expressiveness of the Functional Basis.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 25 (3): 273–287. doi: 10.1017/S0890060410000442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrara, M., P. Garbacz, and P. Vermaas. 2011. “If Engineering Function Is a Family Resemblance Concept: Assessing Three Formalization Strategies.” Applied Ontology 6 (2): 141–163.
   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
• Chakrabarti, A., P. Sarkar, B. Leelavathamma, and B. S. Nataraju 2005. “A Functional Representation for Aiding Biomimetic and Artificial Inspiration of New Ideas.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design and Manufacturing (AIEDAM) 19: 113–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandrasekaran, B. 2005. “Representing Function. Relating Functional Representation and Functional Modelling Research Streams.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing (AI EDAM) 19 (2): 65–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandrasekaran, B., and J. Josephson. 2000. “Function in Device Representation.” Engineering with Computers 16 (3-4): 162–177. doi: 10.1007/s003660070003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiang, W.-C., A. Pennathur, and A. Mital. 2001. “Designing and Manufacturing Consumer Products for Functionality: A Literature Review of Current Function Definitions and Design Support Tools.” Integrated Manufacturing Systems 12 (6): 430–448. doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000006108
   Google Scholar
• Crilly, N. 2010. “The Role That Artefacts Play: Technical, Social and Aesthetical Functions.” Design Studies 31 (4): 311–344. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2010.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, N. 2008. Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Daalhuizen, J. 2014. “Method Usage in Design: How Methods Function as Mental Tools for Designers.” Diss., Delft University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Deng, Y. 2002. “Function and Behaviour Representation in Conceptual Mechanical Engineering.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing (AI EDAM) 16 (5): 343–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eckert, C. 2013. “That Which Is Not Form: The Practical Challenges in Using Functional Concepts in Design.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27 (3): 217–231. doi: 10.1017/S089006041300022X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eder, W., and S. Hosnedl. 2010. Introduction to Design Engineering: Systematic Creativity and Management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenbart, B., K. Gericke, and L. T. M. Blessing. 2013. “An Analysis of Functional Modeling Approaches Across Disciplines.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27 (3): 281–289. doi: 10.1017/S0890060413000280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenbart, B., K. Gericke, and L. T. M. Blessing. 2016a. “Taking a Look at the Utilisation of Function Models in Interdisciplinary Design: Insights from Ten Engineering Companies.” Research in Engineering Design (Open Access).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenbart, B., K. Gericke, and L. T. M. Blessing. 2016b. “A DSM-based Framework for Integrated Function Modeling: Concept, Application and Evaluation.” Research in Engineering Design (Open Access).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenbart, B., C. Mandel, K. Gericke, and L. T. M. Blessing. 2015. “Integrated Function Modelling: Comparing the IFM Framework with SysML.” Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M., and M. E. Graebner. 2007. “Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges.” Academy of Management Journal 50 (1): 25–32. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erden, M., H. Komoto, T. J. van Beek, V. D’Amelio, E. Echavarria, and T. Tomiyama. 2008. “A Review of Function Modeling. Approaches and Applications.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing (AI EDAM) 22 (2): 147–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ericson, A., and T. Larsson. 2005. “A Service Perspective on Product Development. Towards Functional Products.” Proceedings of 12th International Product Development Management Conference – CBS.
   Google Scholar
• Far, B. H., and H. Elamy. 2005. “Functional Reasoning Theories. Problems and Perspectives.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing (AI EDAM) 19 (2): 75–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• French, M. J. 2002. Insight, Design Principles and Systematic Invention. Engineering Design Synthesis. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Frost, R. B. 1999. “Why Does Industry Ignore Design Science?” Journal of Engineering Design 10 (4): 301–304. doi: 10.1080/095448299261218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gausemeier, J., U. Frank, J. Donoth, and S. Kahl. 2009. “Specification Technique for the Description of Self-optimizing Mechatronic Systems.” Research in Engineering Design 20 (4): 201–223. doi: 10.1007/s00163-008-0058-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gausemeier, J., U. Lindemann, and G. Schuh. 2004. Planung der Produkte und Fertigungssysteme für die Märkte von morgen – Ein praktischer Leitfaden für mittelständische Unternehmen des Maschinen- und Anlagenbaus. Frankfurt am Main: VDMA Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Gericke, K., J. Kramer, and C. Roschuni. 2016. “An Exploratory Study of the Discovery and Selection of Design Methods in Practice.” Journal of Mechanical Design 138: 1–10. doi: 10.1115/1.4034088
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gericke, K., C. Roschuni, and J. Kramer. 2015. “Discovery and Evaluation of Design Methods in Practice: An Empirical Study.” Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference IDETC/CIE 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Gero, J. S. 1990. “Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Scheme for Design.” AI Magazine 11 (4): 26–36. doi: 10.1109/62.63160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goel, A. 2013. “A 30-Year Case Study and 15 Principles: Implications of an Artificial Intelligence Methodology for Functional Modeling.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27 (3): 203–215. doi: 10.1017/S0890060413000218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, C. T., and M. M. Andreasen. 2002. “Two Approaches to Synthesis Based on the Domain Theory.” In Engineering Design Synthesis: Understanding, Approaches, and Tools, edited by A. Chakrabarti, 93–108. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hubka, V., and W. Eder. 1988. Theory of Technical Systems: A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• ISO. 2012. ISO/EC 19505-1: Information technology – Object Management Group, Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Iwasaki, Y., R. Fikes, M. Vescovi, and B. Chandrasekaran. 1993. “How Things Are Intended to Work: Capturing Functional Knowledge in Device Design.” Proceedings of international joint conferences AI, AAAI.
   Google Scholar
• Jansson, D. G., and S. M. Smith. 1991. “Design Fixation.” Design Studies 12 (1): 3–11. doi: 10.1016/0142-694X(91)90003-F
   Google Scholar
• Kroll, P., and P. Kruchten. 2003. The Rational Unified Process Made Easy: A Practitioner’s Guide to the RUP. Amsterdam: Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Kruchten, P. 2004. The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Kurfman, M., M. Stock, R. B. Stone, J. Rajan, and K. L. Wood. 2003. “Experimental Studies Assessing the Repeatability of a Functional Modeling Derivation Method.” Journal of Mechanical Design 125 (4): 682–639. doi: 10.1115/1.1625400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, B., and K. Dorst. 2009. Design Expertise. Oxford: Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• López-Mesa, B., and B. Bylund. 2011. “A Study of the Use of Concept Selection Methods from Inside a Company.” Research in Engineering Design 22: 7–27. doi: 10.1007/s00163-010-0093-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maher, M., and H. Tang. 2003. “Co-evolution as a Computational and Cognitive Model of Design.” Research in Engineering Design 14 (1): 47–64. doi: 10.1007/s00163-002-0016-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, J. R., and G. M. Fadel. 2001. “Affordance: The Fundamental Concept in Engineering Design.” Proceedings of the ASME International omiyamaDesign Engineering Technical Conferences & Computer and Information in Engineering Conference IDEC/CIE.
   Google Scholar
• Maier, A., M. Kreimeyer, U. Herfeld, F. Deubzer, U. Lindemann, and J. Clarkson. 2006. “Reflecting Communication: A Key Factor for Successful Collaboration between Embodiment Design and Simulation.” Proceedings of the 9thInternational Design Conference –DESIGN.
   Google Scholar
• Matzen, D. 2009. “A Systematic Approach to Service Oriented Product Development.” Diss., DTU Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Moehringer, M., and J. Gausemeier. 2002. “An Interface Specification for Principle Solutions Supporting the Cross-domain Design of Mechatronic Systems.” Proceedings of the International Design Conference – DESIGN2002.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, P., M. Schmidt-Kretschmer, and L. T. M. Blessing. 2007. “Function Allocation in Product-service-systems: Are There Analogies between PSS and Mechatronics?” Proceedings of the AEDS Workshop.
   Google Scholar
• OMG. 2012. OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysMLTM) Specification. Accessed 12 April 2014. http://www.omg.org/spec/SysML/1.3/.
   Google Scholar
• Paetzold, K. 2006. “On the Importance of a Functional Description for the Development of Cognitive Technical Systems.” Proceedings of 9th International Design Conference – DESIGN.
   Google Scholar
• Pahl, G., W. Beitz, J. Feldhusen, and K.-H. Grote. 2007. Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ponn, J. C. 2007. “Situative Unterstuetzung der Methodischen Konzeptentwicklung Technischer Systeme.” Diss., Technical University of Munich.
   Google Scholar
• Robotham, A. J. 2010. “The Use of Function/Means Trees for Modelling Technical, Semantic and Business Functions.” Journal of Engineering Design 13 (3): 243–251. doi: 10.1080/09544820110108944
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roozenburg, N. F. M., and J. Eekels. 1995. Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods. A Wiley Series in Product Development Planning, Designing, Engineering. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Scheffer, L., L. Lavagno, and G. Martin 2006. EDA for Implementation, Circuit Design, and Process Technology. London: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, C., J. D. Summers, and G. M. Mocko. 2013. “A Formal Representation of Function Structure Graphs for Physics-based Reasoning.” Journal of Computational and Information Science in Engineering 13 (2): 021001–021013. doi: 10.1115/1.4023167
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shostack, G. L. 1982. “How to Design a Service.” European Journal of Marketing 16 (1): 49–63. doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000004799
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, V., A. Chakrabarti, and U. Lindemann. 2012. “A Framework for Describing Functions in Design.” Proceedings of 12th International Design Conference–DESIGN.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, R., G. Beier, A. Figge, and T. Woehler. 2010. “Cross-domain Dependency Modelling – Wow to Achieve Consistent System Models with Tool Support.” European Systems Engineering Conference – EuSEC2010.
   Google Scholar
• Stetter, R. 2016. “Adoption and Refusal of Design Strategies, Methods, and Tools in Automotive Industry.” In Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice, edited by A. Chakrabarti, and U. Lindemann, 451–464. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, R. B., and K. L. Wood. 2000. “Development of a Functional Basis for Design.” Journal of Mechanical Design 122 (4): 359–370. doi: 10.1115/1.1289637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tjalve, E. 1978. Systematische Formgebung für Industrieprodukte. Copenhagen: The Institute for Product Development, IPU.
   Google Scholar
• Tomiyama, T., P. Gu, E. Lutters, and C. Kind. 2009. “Design Methodologies: Industrial and Educational Applications.” CIRP Annals 58: 543–565. doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomiyama, T., T. J. van Beek, A. A. Alvarez Cabrera, H. Komoto, and V. D’Amelio. 2013. “Making Function Modeling Practically Usable.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27 (8): 301–309. doi: 10.1017/S0890060413000309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukker, A., C. van den Berg, and U. Tischner. 2006. “Product-services: A Specific Value Proposition.” In New Business for Old Europe, edited by A. Tukker, and U. Tischner, 22–34. Sheffield: Greanleaf Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Tushman, M., W. H. Newman, and E. Romanelli. 1986. “Convergence and Upheaval: Managing the Unsteady Pace of Organizational Evolution.” California Management Review 29 (1): 29–44. doi: 10.2307/41165225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ullman, D. 2010. The Mechanical Design Process. McGraw-Hill Series in Mechanical Engineering. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich, K., and S. D. Eppinger. 2008. Product Design and Development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
   Google Scholar
• Umeda, Y., and T. Tomiyama. 1997. “Functional Reasoning in Design.” IEEE Expert 12 (2): 42–48. doi: 10.1109/64.585103
   Google Scholar
• US DoD. 2001. Systems Engineering Fundamentals. Fort Belvoir, USA: Defence Acquisition University Press.
   Google Scholar
• VDI. 1993. VDI 2221 – Systematic Approach for the Design of Technical Systems and Products. Berlin: Beuth Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• VDI. 2004. VDI 2206: Design Methodology for Mechatronic Systems. Berlin: Beuth Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Vermaas, P. E. 2013. “The Coexistence of Engineering Meanings of Function: Four Responses and Their Methodological Implications.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27 (3): 191–202. doi: 10.1017/S0890060413000206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Visser, W. 1991. “Evocation and Elaboration of Solutions: Different Types of Problem-Solving Actions. An Empirical Study on the Design of an Aerospace Artifact.” Proceedings of the Third COGNITIVA Symposium.
   Google Scholar
• Wallace, K. 2011. “Transferring Design Methods into Practice.” In The Future of Design Methodology, edited by H. Birkhofer, 239–248. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Warell, A. 1999. “Introducing a Use Perspective in Product Design Theory and Methodology.” Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computer and Information in Engineering Conference IDEC/CIE.
   Google Scholar
• Watanabe, K., S. Mikoshiba, T. Tateyama, Y. Shimomura, and K. Kimita. 2011. “Service Design Methodology for Cooperative Services.” Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computer and Information in Engineering Conference IDETC/CIE.
   Google Scholar
• Weilkiens, T. 2008. Systems Engineering mit SysML: Modellierung, Analyse, Design. Heidelberg: dpunkt.verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf, B. 2011. “Design Methods—What Reaches Industrial Practice?” In Research into Design, edited by A. Chakrabati, 414–421. Singapore: Research Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Zahner, D., J. V. Nickerson, B. Tversky, J. E. Corter, and J. Ma. 2010. “A Fix for Fixation? Rerepresenting and Abstracting as Creative Processes in the Design of Information Systems.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24 (02): 231–244. doi: 10.1017/S0890060410000077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwicky, F. 1989. Entdecken, Erfinden, Forschen im Morphologischen Weltbild - Mit Diagrammen. Glarus, Germany: Baeschlin-Verlag.
   Google Scholar