Excellence in Engineering Design Education: How we think and How we aught to think

1. Institute for Innvoation & Design in Engineering Texas A&M University Excellence in Engineering Design Education: How we think and How we aught to think ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

2. How do we think? Configurationally – most often analogically. Evolutionary - Can we do this analog better? Within our comfort zone. Our thoughts are constraint driven. We have tunnel vision – We go for the answer. For the sake of efficiency and sufficiency. There is nothing wrong with this Except There are better ways of thinking! ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

3. Why is the Natural Thought Pattern so Configurational? • Less cognitive effort is required to identify an event by comparing it with prior knowledge rather than interpreting it by its properties. • Convenient to modify previous solutions. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

4. Natural Thought Process -Its Implication to Innovation • A configurational solution is conceived almost immediately after the problem presentation. • This solution is invariably not innovative. • Once conceived, it causes design fixation. It prevents the consideration of alternatives. • Thus, the designer is prematurely locked into a common solution. • This hampers innovation. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

5. How to Improve the Natural Thought Process? • Making a conscious effort to evoke the informational core by: • Identifying Conceptual properties • Identifying the critical parameter • Questioning every decision • Considering several alternative solutions. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

6. Let us enable innovation by: By also thinking: • Conceptually • Revolutionary • Outside our comfort zone With: • Funnel vision • Concept-Configuration Looping • Skillful Questioning and • Critical Parameter Identification ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

7. Engineering Design Process Stages in Design Activity Output Design Methodologies & Techniques Function Structure Development & Order of Magnitude Calculations Cognitive Strategies Abstraction, Critical Parameter Identification Conceptual Thinking Constructive Questioning Parameter Analysis & Concept Selection Functional Design Principles Manufacturing Design Principles Simulation & Rapid Prototyping ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

8. Evolution of Need Statement (Abstraction) Colloquial Deceleration Decelerate a car at a controlled rate Energy dissipation rate • Dissipate the kinetic energy of a car at a required rate Rate of energy transformation Transform the translational kinetic energy of a car at the highest acceptable rate Abstract Example:Car Brakes Evolution of Critical Parameter To stop a car • Reduce the speed of a car from 60 mph to 0 mph in less than 120 ft Stopping distance Stopping distance (Qualitative) Reduce the speed of a car as fast as possible ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

9. Discover the REAL NEED! Through: Abstraction, Good Conceptual Thinking and Precise identification of critical parameters Discover the: REAL NEED expressed as an active noun-verb pair Plus the Critical Functional Constraint In 10 words or fewer. (You may ad an adjective and/or adverb - or phrase.) IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO DO THIS THEN YOU DO NOT KNOW YOUR NEED! ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

10. If you do not know the NEED You will be: • unable to quantify the magnitude of the design task. • unable to justify the sufficiency of your solution. • unable to effectively, efficiently and innovatively execute an effective, efficient and innovative design. You will: • Do many extensive ( read “expensive”) iterations. • Go through extensive development. • END UP WITH A SUB-OPTIMAL DESIGN. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

11. Abstraction is: • The Process by which a perceived need is progressively transformed, from a colloquially expressed statement of a design task into a functionally precise definition of a need, expressed in technically fundamental and quantifiable terms ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

12. Critical Parameter Identification Critical Parameter  Make or Break Issue • Critical Parameter Identification(CPI): • Identify the key issue: • Embedded in the design need • Associated with a concept • Associated with a specific configuration • Pointers toward a Critical Parameter frequently are: • Gradients (in time or space) • Interfaces (Functional or Configurational) ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

13. Loom Example: Reduce the noise of the shuttle ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

14. Loom Example : The Design Task • For higher production rates, it is necessary to increase the velocity of the shuttle. • The shuttle should be stopped at each end and restarted in the opposite direction. • This involves noise. • The NEED is to reduce noise without lowering the speed. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

15. Evolution of Need Statement (Abstraction) Colloquial Deceleration Decelerate a car at a controlled rate Energy dissipation rate • Dissipate the kinetic energy of a car at a required rate Rate of energy transformation Transform the translational kinetic energy of a car at the highest acceptable rate Abstract Example:Design the brakes for a car. Evolution of Critical Parameter To stop a car • Reduce the speed of a car from 60 mph to 0 mph in less than 120 ft Stopping distance Stopping time (Qualitative) Reduce the speed of a car as fast as possible ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

16. Constraint • Constraint is a condition imposed by the stated design requirements. • It defines the envelope within which a function must be satisfied. • Constraints often determine the difficulty of the design task. • Some constraints are “Must be”. • Some constraints are “Would like to be”. • Identifying the critical functional constraint in a manner that is quantifiable is the task. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

17. How not? How? What What? not? When Why Why? When? not? not? N N E E D E E D Who Where Where? Who? not? not? Five “WH’s” and “HOW” How to Question? ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

18. Some Important Questions What is not required? When is it not required? Where is it not required? Who does not require it? • “What” is required? • “When” is it required? • “Where” is it required? • “Who” requires it? • “Why” is it required? • “How” is the solution constrained? • IS IT REQUIRED AT ALL? ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

19. Constraining the Solution space • Each constraint eliminates possible solutions. • To foster innovation, it is important to identify only the real constraints and eliminate fictitious constraints. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

20. Technological Evolution ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

21. Comfort Zones • Zone of confidence 2. Zone of discomfort 1 2 3. Zone of rejection 3 ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

22. Funneling of Concept Solution Space Sample many different concepts Converge rapidly To one optimal conceptual solution Sample big – Converge rapidly ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

23. Two Spaces Model: Knowledge Base • Configurations • Based on the practical or engineering basis • Concepts • Provides the theoretical or scientific foundation ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

24. Two Spaces Model: The Design Process Design can be viewed as an iterative movement between the two knowledge domains achieved through the use of the two distinct thinking modes. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

25. Concept • Any natural law, physical principle (or effect) or mathematical relationship that can be applied to address the design need. • Concepts represent ideas for meeting the design need. • The governing equation for a concept represent the interrelationship between various parameters. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

26. Configuration • Configuration is the physical realization or embodiment of a concept. • A configuration originates as a preliminary sketch and is developed into detail drawings as the design process progresses. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

27. Concept-Configuration Model Configuration Space Particularization • Configuration of abstract principles/ concepts • Fosters convergent thinking Example • Mechanical removal of heat from interface is realized in the form of disc brakes Concept Space Generalization • Abstraction of specific information to fundamental concepts • Fosters divergent thinking Example • Overheated drum brake requires removal of heat from the interface ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

28. Concept-Configuration Model Original Need Creative Synthesis Critical Parameter Identification Concept Generation Using Various Techniques Config-uration Space Concept Space Evaluation Filter Rede-fined Need Evaluation against design requirements Requires 3 successful cycles to validate a concept Three conceptually different conceptual solutions ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

29. Conceptual Difference • The ideas or concepts are conceptually different when: • the underlying scientific principle or governing effect for each concept is different. • The concepts do not share the same critical design parameter. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

30. Are these designs conceptually different? • Orifice plate, nozzle and venturi share the same concept: Bernoulli’s principle. Therefore, they are conceptually similar. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

31. Conceptually Different Solutions: Flow Measurement Concepts: • Bernoulli’s principle, Change in resistance with temperature., Aerodynamic lift & Aerodynamic drag. ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.

32. Design Philosophy Design Techniques Design Methods Design Stages & Design Outputs Need Statement Need Analysis Function Structure Development & Constraint Analysis Object-Function Method Function Structure Design Specifications Concept-Configuration Model Concept Generation & Selection Concept Generation Techniques Conceptual Design 3 Design Concepts Abstraction, Critical Parameter Identification, Questioning & Conceptual Thinking Selected Concept Embodiment Design Design Principles & Optimization Design Layout Detailed Design & Product Creation Engineering Drawings Manufacturing Design Principles Product Prototype TAMU- IIDE Engineering Design Methodology ASME Houston Sept. 23 2004.