Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T02:14:14.579Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SUPPORTING EARLY STAGES OF DESIGN METHOD VALIDATION - AN APPROACH TO ASSESS APPLICABILITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Matthias Eisenmann ,
Patric Grauberger  and
Sven Matthiesen
Matthias Eisenmann*
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Patric Grauberger
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Sven Matthiesen
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
*
Eisenmann, Matthias, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, IPEK - Institute of Product Engineering, Germany, matthias.eisenmann@kit.edu

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.

Design method validation is an important research activity in method development. But the design method's applicability is often left out in validation, although it is a necessary step and it enables further validation steps. Currently, there is a lack of support for the assessment of design method applicability. We present an approach to provide support for iterative studies on three aspects of design method applicability. We evaluate the approach in a single case study. In the study, we investigate the applicability of a method for model building in analysis, in three iterative steps of the approach. Application of the approach produced valuable insights on the method applicability. The results show how aspects of applicability can be assessed using the presented approach. Therefore, the approach can contribute to the standardisation of design method validation, especially for early stages of validation, which is currently discussed in the community.

Keywords

Research methodologies and methodsDesign methodsEvaluationDesign method validationExperimental design research
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 2821 - 2830
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
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), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Beckmann, G., Gebhardt, N., Bahns, T. and Krause, D. (2016), “Approach to transfer methods for developing modular product families into practice”, in DESIGN2016, May 16-19,Dubrovnik, Croatia, Design Society, pp. 1185–1194.Google Scholar
Beckmann, G. and Krause, D. (2013), “Process visualisation of product family development methods”, in ICED13, August 19-22 2013, Seoul, Korea, Design Society, Castle Cary, Somerset, pp. 169–178.Google Scholar
Blessing, L.T.M. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009), DRM, a Design Research Methodology, Springer, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakrabarti, A. and Lindemann, U. (2016), Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice, Springer International Publishing, Cham.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daalhuizen, J. and Badke-Schaub, P. (2011), “The use of methods by advanced beginner and expert industrial designers in non-routine situations: a quasi-experiment”, International Journal of Product Development, Vol. 15 No. 1/2/3, p. 54. 10.1504/IJPD.2011.043661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, C., Stacey, M.K. and Clarkson, P.J. (2003), “The spiral of applied research: A methodological view on integrated design research”, in ICED 03, August 19-21, Design Society, Glasgow.Google Scholar
Eisenmann, M. and Matthiesen, S. (2020), “Identifying reasons for a lack of method application in engineering design practice – an interview study”, in DESIGN2020, October 26-29, Dubrovnik, Croatia, Design Society, pp. 2495–2504. 10.1017/dsd.2020.261.Google Scholar
Gericke, K., Eckert, C. and Stacey, M. (2017), “What do we need to say about a design method”, in ICED17, August 21-25, Vancouver, Canada, Curran Associates Inc, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 101–110.Google Scholar
Grauberger, P., Wessels, H., Gladysz, B., Bursac, N., Matthiesen, S. and Albers, A. (2019), “The contact and channel approach – 20 years of application experience in product engineering”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 1–25. 10.1080/09544828.2019.1699035.Google Scholar
Isaksson, O., Eckert, C., Panarotto, M. and Malmqvist, J. (2020), “You need to focus to validate”, in DESIGN2020, October 26-29, Dubrovnik, Croatia, Design Society, pp. 31–40. 10.1017/dsd.2020.116.Google Scholar
Kroll, E. and Weisbrod, G. (2020), “Testing and evaluating the applicability and effectiveness of the new idea-configuration-evaluation (ICE) method of conceptual design”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 103–122. 10.1007/s00163-019-00324-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marxen, L. and Albers, A. (2012), “Supporting validation in the development of design methods”, in DESIGN2012, Dubrovnik, Croatia, Design Society.Google Scholar
Matthiesen, S. (2021), “Gestaltung – Prozess und Methoden”, in Bender, B. and Gericke, K. (Eds.), Pahl/Beitz Konstruktionslehre, 9th ed., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 397–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motte, D., Bjärnemo, R. and Jönson, G. (2018), “Evaluation of a method supporting the integration of packaging development into product development using an assessment framework for methodologies under development”, in TMCE 2018, May 07-11, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain, TU Delft, Delft, the Netherlands, 471-486.Google Scholar
Motte, D. and Eriksson, M. (2016), “Assessment framework for a methodology under development – application to the pda methodology”, in TMCE2016, May 09-13, Aix-en-Provence, France, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, pp. 373–388.Google Scholar
Nelius, T. and Matthiesen, S. (2019), “Experimental Evaluation of a Debiasing Method for Analysis in Engineering Design”, in ICED19, August 05-08, Delft, The Netherlands, Design Society, pp. 489–498. 10.1017/dsi.2019.53.Google Scholar
Pedersen, K., Emblemsvag, J., Bailey, R., Allen, J.K. and Mistree, F. (2000), “The “Validation Square” - Validating Design Methods”, in DETC'00, September 10-13, Baltimore, Maryland, ASME Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Üreten, S., Beckmann, G., Schwenke, E., Krause, D. and Cao, S. (2017), “Continuing Education and Personalization of Design Methods to Improve their Acceptance in Practice – An Explorative Study”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 60, pp. 524–529. 10.1016/j.procir.2017.01.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Üreten, S., Eisenmann, M., Nelius, T., Cao, S., Matthiesen, S. and Krause, D. (2019), “A Concept Map for Design Method Experiments in Product Development – A Guideline for Method Developers”, in DFX2019, September 18-19, Jesteburg, Germany, Design Society. 10.35199/dfx2019.13.Google Scholar