Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Thoughts on benchmarking of function modeling: Why and how

  • Matthew Bohm (a1), Claudia Eckert (a2), Chiradeep Sen (a3), Venkatamaran Srinivasan (a4), Joshua D. Summers (a5) and Pieter Vermaas (a6)...
  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Thoughts on benchmarking of function modeling: Why and how
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Thoughts on benchmarking of function modeling: Why and how
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Thoughts on benchmarking of function modeling: Why and how
      Available formats
      ×

Abstract

Copyright

Corresponding author

Reprint requests to: Joshua D. Summers, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, 203 Fluor Daniel Engineering Innovation Building, Clemson, SC 29634-0921. E-mail: jsummer@clemson.edu

References

Hide All
Agyemang, M., Turner, C. J., & Linsey, J. (2017). Transforming functional models to critical chain models via expert knowledge and automatic parsing rules for design analogy identification. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 501511.
Albers, A., Thau, S., & Alink, T. (2008). Support of design engineering activity through C & CM-temporal decomposition of design problems. Proc. Tools and Methods for Competitive Engineering Conf. (Horvath, I., Ed.), pp. 295306, Izmir, Turkey.
Andreasen, M.M., & Hein, L. (1987). Integrated Product Development. London: IFS Publications.
Arlitt, R.M., Stone, R.B., & Tumer, I.Y. (2016). Impacts of function-related research on education and industry. In Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice (Chakrabarti, A., & Lindemann, U., Eds.), pp. 7799. New York: Springer.
Bracewell, R.H., & Sharpe, J.E.E. (1996). Functional descriptions used in computer support for qualiative scheme generation—“Schemebuilder.” Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 10(4), 333345.
Buede, D.M. (2011). The Engineering Design of Systems (Sage, A.P., Ed.), 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Caldwell, B.W., Thomas, J., Sen, C., Mocko, G.M., & Summers, J.D. (2012). The effects of language and pruning on function structure interpretability. Journal of Mechanical Design 134(6), 61001.
Chandrasekaran, B. (2005). Representing function: relating functional representation and functional modeling research streams. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 19(2), 6574.
Collins, J.A., Hagan, B.T., & Bratt, H.M. (1976). The failure-experience matrix—a useful design tool. Journal of Engineering for Industry 98(3), 1074.
Crilly, N. (2010). The roles that artefacts play: technical, social and aesthetic functions. Design Studies 31(4), 311344.
Deng, Y.M. (2002). Function and behavior representation in conceptual mechanical design. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 16(5), 343362.
Eastman, C.M. (1969). Cognitive processes and ill-defined problems: a case study from design. Proc. Joint Int. Conf. Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 69, pp. 669–690. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Eckert, C. (2013). That which is not form: the practical challenges in using functional concepts in design. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27(3), 217231.
Erden, M.S., Komoto, H., van Beek, T.J., D'Amelio, V., Echavarria, E., & Tomiyama, T. (2008). A review of function modeling: approaches and applications. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 22(2), 147169.
Freeman, P., & Newell, A. (1971). A model for functional reasoning in design. Proc. 2nd Int. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1–21, London, September.
Gericke, K., & Eisenbart, B. (2017). The integrated function modeling framework and its relation to function structures. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 436457.
Gero, J., & Kannengiesser, U. (2002). The situated-function-behaviour-structure framework. In Artificial Intelligence in Design (Gero, J., Ed.), pp. 89104. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Gill, A.S., Summers, J.D., & Turner, C.J. (2017). Comparing function structures and pruned function structures for market price prediction: an approach to benchmarking representation inferencing value. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 550566.
Goel, A.K. (1997). Design, analogy, and creativity. IEEE Intelligent Systems 12(3), 6270.
Goel, A.K. (2013). One 30-year-long case study: 15 principles: implications of the artificial intelligence methodology for functional modeling. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27(3), 203215.
Goel, A.K., Rugaber, S., & Vattam, S. (2009). Structure, behavior, and function of complex systems: the structure, behavior, and function modeling language. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 23(1), 23.
Haskins, C., & Forsberg, K. (2011). Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities. San Diego, CA: INCOSE.
Hirtz, J., Stone, R., McAdams, D., Szykman, S., & Wood, K. (2002). A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Research in Engineering Design 13(2), 6582.
Hubka, V., & Eder, W.E. (1988). Theory of Technical Systems: A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design, Vol. 1. New York: Springer Verlag.
Kirschman, C.F., & Fadel, G.M. (1998). Classifying functions for mechanical design. Journal of Mechanical Design 120(3), 475482.
Linz, P. (2011). An Introduction to Formal Languages and Automata, 5th ed. Sudberry, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
Lucero, B., Adams, M., & Turner, C.J. (2017). Introduction to quantitative engineering design methods via controls engineering. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 458475.
Mokhtarian, H., Coatanea, E., & Henri, P. (2017). Function modeling combined with physics-based reasoning for assessing design options and supporting innovative ideation. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 476500.
Otto, K., & Wood, K. (2001). Product Design, 1st ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Blessing, L., Feldhusen, J., Grote, K.-H.H., & Wallace, K. (2013). Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, Vol. 11, 3rd ed. London: Springer-Verlag.
Peruzzini, M., Raffaeli, R., Malatesta, M., & Germani, M. (2017). Towards a function-based IT platform for variants redesign of household appliances. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 512534.
Qian, L., & Gero, J.S. (1996). Function–behavior–structure paths and their role in analogy-based design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 10(4), 289312.
Rodenacker, W. (1971). Methodisches Konstruieren. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Sasajima, M., Kitamura, Y., Ikeda, M., & Mizoguchi, R. (1995). FBRL: a function and behavior representation language. Proc. Int. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, Montreal.
Schultz, J., Mathieson, J., Summers, J.D., & Caldwell, B. (2010). Limitations to function structures: a case study in morphing airfoil design. Proc. ASME Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering Conf. Buffalo, NY: ASME.
Sembugamoorthy, V., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1986). Functional representation of devices and compilation of diagnostic problem-solving systems. In Experience, Memory, and Reasoning (Kolodner, J., & Riesbeck, C.K., Eds.), pp. 4753. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sen, C., Summers, J.D., & Mocko, G.M. (2011). A protocol to formalise function verbs to support conservation-based model checking. Journal of Engineering Design 22(11–12), 765788.
Shishko, R., & Aster, R. (1995). NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, NASA Special Publication 6105. Washington, DC: NASA.
Srinivasan, V., Chakrabarti, A., & Lindemann, U. (2012). A framework for describing functions in design. Proc. Int. Design Conf., pp. 1111–1122. Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Stapenhurst, T. (2009). The Benchmarking Book: A How-to-Guide to Best Practices for Managers and Practitioners. Amsterdam: Butterworth Heinemann.
Summers, J.D., Eckert, C., & Goel, A.K. (2013). Function in engineering: benchmarking representations and models. Proc. Int. Conf. Engineering Design. Seoul: Design Society.
Summers, J.D., Eckert, C.M., & Goel, A.K. (2017). Function in engineering: benchmarking representations and models. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 401412.
Tomko, M., Nelson, J., Nagel, R., Bohm, M.R., & Linsey, J.S. (2017). A bridge to systems thinking in engineering design: an examination of students’ ability to identify functions at varying levels of abstraction. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 535566.
Ullman, D.G. (2010). The Mechanical Design Process, 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ullman, D.G., Dietterich, T.G., & Stauffer, L.A. (1988). A model of the mechanical design process based on empirical data. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 2(1), 3352.
Ulrich, K., & Eppinger, S.D. (2008). Product Design and Development, 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Umeda, Y., Ishii, M., Yoshioka, M., Shimomura, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1996). Supporting conceptual design based on the function-behavior-state modeler. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 10(4), 275288.
Vermaas, P.E. (2009). The flexible meaning of function in engineering. Proc. 17th Int. Conf. Engineering Design, Vol. 2, pp. 113–124. San Fransisco, CA: Design Society.
Vermaas, P.E. (2013). On the coexistence of engineering meanings of function: four responses and their methodological implications. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27(3), 119.
Vermaas, P.E., & Eckert, C. (2013). My functional description is better! Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 27(3), 187190.
Vescovi, M., Iwasaki, Y., Fikes, R., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1993). CFRL: a language for specifying the causal functionality of engineered devices. Proc. 11th National Conf. Artificial Intelligence. Washington, DC: American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
Yang, S., Patil, L., & Dutta, D. (2010). Function semantic representation (FSR): a rule-based ontology for product functions. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 10, 31001.
Yildirim, U., Campean, F., & Williams, H. (2017). Function modelling using the system state flow diagram. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31(4), 413435.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed