No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
ASSESSING, AGGREGATING AND VISUALISING PRELIMINARY DESIGN INFORMATION MATURITY TO SUPPORT COLLABORATIVE DESIGN
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 June 2020
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Engineering projects involve the progressive development of preliminary information until a final design is reached. Appreciating its status may help make better decisions about task sequencing and may reduce unnecessary iteration. We present an approach to 1) elicit this maturity, 2) aggregate several of its facets per subsystem and generate insights for task prioritisation, and 3) overlaying this information in Augmented Reality onto a physical prototype. The progress is discussed and it is proposed that the approach can aid understanding, communication and management of design progress.
Keywords
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Antonsson, E.K. and Otto, K.N. (1995), “Imprecision in Engineering Design”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 117 No. B, pp. 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2836465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballou, D.P. and Pazer, H.L. (2003), “Modeling completeness versus consistency tradeoffs in information decision contexts”, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 240–243. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2003.1161595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanco, E., Grebici, K. and Rieu, D. (2007), “A unified framework to manage information maturity in design process”, International Journal of Product Development, Vol. 4 No. 3/4, pp. 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpd.2007.012495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browning, T.R. et al. (2002), “Adding value in product development by creating information and reducing risk”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 443–458. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2002.806710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, P.J. and Hamilton, J.R. (2000), “Signposting, A Parameter-driven Task-based Model of the Design Process”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 18–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001630050021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culley, S.J. et al. (2005), “An assessment of quality measures for engineering information sources”, ICED 05: 15th International Conference on Engineering Design. Barton, Australia, 2005, Engineers Australia, pp. 443–456.Google Scholar
Dym, C.L. (1994), “Representing designed artifacts: The languages of engineering design”, ARCO 1994, Vol. 1, pp. 75–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02736181Google Scholar
Eversheim, W. et al. (1997), “Information management for concurrent engineering”, European Journal of Operational Research, North-Holland, Vol. 100 No. 2, pp. 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(96)00288-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grebici, K. (2007), La maturité de l'information et le processus de conception collaborative, [PhD Thesis], Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble.Google Scholar
Krishnan, V., Eppinger, S.D. and Whitney, D.E. (1997), “A Model-Based Framework to Overlap Product Development Activities”, Management Science, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.43.4.437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, J.F. et al. (2014), “Simulating progressive iteration, rework and change propagation to prioritise design tasks”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 283–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-014-0174-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, H. (1996), “The multiple dimensions of information quality”, Information Systems Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 79–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580539608906992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schrader, S., Riggs, W.M. and Smith, R.P. (1993), “Choice over uncertainty and ambiguity in technical problem solving”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 10 No. 1-2, pp. 73–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/0923-4748(93)90059-rCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stacey, M. and Eckert, C.M. (2003), “Against Ambiguity”, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 153–183. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023924110279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tahera, K., Earl, C. and Eckert, C.M. (2017), “A Method for Improving Overlapping of Testing and Design”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 64 No. 2, pp. 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2017.2654223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terwiesch, C., Loch, C.H. and De Meyer, A. (2002), “Exchanging Preliminary Information in Concurrent Engineering: Alternative Coordination Strategies”, Organization Science, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 402–419. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.4.402.2948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thunnissen, D.P. (2005), Propagating and mitigating uncertainty in the design of complex multidisciplinary systems, [PhD Thesis], California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Wynn, D.C., Grebici, K. and Clarkson, P.J. (2011), “Modelling the evolution of uncertainty levels during design”, International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-011-0131-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, R.K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California, USA.Google Scholar
You have
Access
Open access