Influences of design tools on the original and redesign processes

References

• Annamalai Vasantha, G. V., & Chakrabarti, A. (2010). Assessment of design tools for knowledge capture and reuse. International conference on modelling & management of engineering processes, University of Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Bilda, Z., & Demirkan, H. (2003). An insight on designers' sketching activities in traditional versus digital media. Design Studies, 24, 27–50.
   Google Scholar
• Bilda, Z., & Gero, J. S. (2005). Do we need CAD during conceptual design? In B.Martens & A.Brown (Eds.), Computer aided architectural design futures (pp. 155–164). The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Black, A. (1990). Visible planning on paper and on screen: The impact of working medium on decision-making by novice graphic designers. Behaviour & Information Technology, 9, 283–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blessing, L., Chakrabarti, A., & Wallace, K. (1995). A design research methodology. In V.Hubka, et al. (Ed.), Proceedings of international conference on engineering design (pp. 502–507). Heurista: Zurich, Prague.
   Google Scholar
• Bonnardel, N., & Zenasni, F. (2010). The impact of technology on creativity in design: An enhancement?Creativity and Innovation Management, 19, 180–191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A. (2001a). Sharing in design: Categories, importance and issues. Proceedings of the international conference on engineering design (ICED01), Design methods for performance and sustainability (pp. 563–570). Bury St Edmonds/London: Professional Engineering Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A. (2001b). Improving efficiency of procedures for compositional synthesis by using bidirectional search. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 15, 67–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A. (2004). A new approach to structure sharing. ASME Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 4, 11–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A., Bligh, T. P., & Holden, T. (1992). Towards a decision-support framework for the embodiment phase of mechanical design. International Journal for AI in Engineering, 7, 21–36.
   Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A., Sarkar, P., & Leelavathamma, N. B. (2005). A functional representation for aiding biomimetic and artificial inspiration of new ideas. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 19, 113–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cham, J. G., & Yang, M. C. (2005). Does sketching skill relate to good design?Proceedings ASME 2005 international design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering conference. Long Beach, CA; Philadelphia, PA: ASME.
   Google Scholar
• De Bono, E. (1970). Lateral thinking: Creativity step by step. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Elsen, C., Darses, F., & Leclercq, P. (2010). An anthropo-based standpoint on mediating objects: Evolution and extension of industrial design practices. In J. S.Gero (Ed.), Design Computing and Cognition DCC'10 (pp. 55–74). The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fish, J., & Scrivener, S. (1990). Amplifying the minds eye: Sketching and visual cognition. Leonardo, 23, 117–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge, USA: MIT.
   Google Scholar
• Goldschmidt, G. (1994). On visual design thinking: The vis kids of architecture. Design Studies, 15, 158–174.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah, R., Joshi, S., & Summers, J. D. (2012). A user study of interpretability of engineering design representations. Journal of Engineering Design, 23, 443–468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewson, R. (1994). Marking & making: A characterisation of sketching for typographic design (PhD thesis). Open University, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, R., & Paulson, B. C.Jr. (2008). Discontinuity in organisations: Identifying business environments affecting efficiency of knowledge flows in PLM. International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, 3, 21–36.
   Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, R., & Rahimian, F. P. (2010). Comparison of CAD and manual sketching tools for teaching architectural design. Automation in Construction, 19, 978–987.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonson, B. (2005). Design ideation: The conceptual sketch in the digital age. Design Studies, 26, 613–624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, T. (2001). The art of innovation: Lessons in creativity from IDEO, America's leading design firm. New York, NY: Currency/Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Kwon, J., Choi, H., Lee, J., & Chai, Y. (2005). Free-hand stroke based NURBS surface for sketching and deforming 3D contents. PCM 2005, Part I. LNCS, 3767, 315–326.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think: The design process demystified. Oxford: Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, B. (2002). CAD and creativity: Does the computer really help?Leonardo, 35, 327–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levet, F., Granier, X., & Schlick, C. (2006). 3D sketching with profile curves. LNCS, 4073, 114–125.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, Y.-C., Chakrabarti, A., & Bligh, T. P. (2000). A computational framework for concept generation and evaluation in mechanical design: Further developments of FuncSION. In J. S.Gero (Ed.), Artificial Intelligence in Design'00 (pp. 499–519). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Maher, M. L., Rosenman, M., & Merrick, K. (2007). Agents for multidisciplinary design in virtual worlds. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 21, 267–277.
   Google Scholar
• McKoy, F. L., Vargas-Hernández, N., Summers, J. D., & Shah, J. J. (2001). Influence of design representation on effectiveness of idea generation. In Proceedings of ASME 2001 international design engineering technical conference and computers and information in engineering conference, Pittsburgh, PA. Paper no DTM-DETC 2001–21685. 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Nagai, Y., & Taura, T. (2006). Formal description of concept synthesizing process for creative design. Design computing and cognition (DCC'06) (pp. 443–460). The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Rahimian, P. F., Ibrahim, R., & Jaafar, F. Z. (2008). Feasibility study on developing 3D sketching in virtual reality (VR) environment. International Journal on Sustainable Tropical Design Research & Practice, 3, 60–78.
   Google Scholar
• Renzulli, J. S., Owen, S. V., & Callahan, C. M. (1974). Fluency, flexibility, and originality as a function of group size. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 8, 107–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, B. F., & Radcliffe, D. F. (2009). Impact of CAD tools on creative problem solving in engineering design. Computer-Aided Design, 41, 136–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, B. F., Walther, J., & Radcliffe, D. F. (2007). Creativity and the use of CAD tools: Lessons for engineering design education from industry. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129, 753–760.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenman, M. A., & Gero, J. S. (1996). Modelling multiple views of design objects in a collaborative CAD environment. Computer-Aided Design, 28, 193–205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkar, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (2007). Understanding search in design. International conference on engineering design (ICED07), Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Sarkar, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (2008). The effect of representation of triggers on design outcomes. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 22, 101–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkar, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (2011). Assessing design creativity. Design Studies, 32, 348–383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkar, P., Phaneendra, S., & Chakrabarti, A. (2008). Developing engineering products using inspiration from nature. ASME Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 8, 031001 (9 pages).
   Google Scholar
• Sartori, J., Pal, U., & Chakrabarti, A. (2010). A methodology for supporting ‘transfer’ in biomimetic design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 24, 483–505.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, V., & Chakrabarti, A. (2009). SAPPhIRE – An approach to analysis and synthesis. 17th international conference on engineering design (ICED09), Stanford, USA, 23–27 August 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, V., & Chakrabarti, A. (2010a). Investigating novelty-outcome relationship in engineering design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 24, 161–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, V., & Chakrabarti, A. (2010b). An integrated model of designing, special issue on knowledge based design. ASME Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 10, 031013 (10 pages).
   Google Scholar
• Stacey, M., & Eckert, C. (2003). Against ambiguity. Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 12, 153–183.
   Google Scholar
• Stones, C. M., & Cassidy, T. (2007). Comparing synthesis strategies of novice graphic designers using digital and traditional design tools. Design Studies, 28, 59–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stones, C. M., & Cassidy, T. (2010). Seeing and discovering: How do student designers reinterpret sketches and digital marks during graphic design ideation?Design Studies, 31, 439–460.
   Google Scholar
• Whitefield, A. (1986). An analysis and comparison of knowledge use in designing with and without CAD. In A.Smith (Ed.), Proceedings of CAD. London: Butterworths.
   Google Scholar
• Won, P. H. (2001). The comparison between visual thinking using computer and conventional media in the concept generation stages of design. Automation in Construction, 10, 319–325.
   Google Scholar