Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR DECISION MAKING IN ENGINEERING DESIGN
Committee on Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R2
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study by the Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design was conducted under grant no. NSF/DMI-9908549 from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
Library of Congress Control Number XXX
International Standard Book Number XXX
Copies available in limited supply from:
Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20418
202–334–3505
email: bmaed@nas.edu
Additional copies are available for sale from:
National Academy Press
Box 285 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20055 800–624–6242 202–334–3313 (in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an advisor to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I.Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the-Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Wm A.Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
OCR for page R4
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
This page in the original is blank.
OCR for page R5
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
COMMITTEE ON THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR DECISION MAKING IN ENGINEERING DESIGN
ROBERT J.EAGAN (chair),
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico
BETH E.ALLEN,
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
CORBETT D.CAUDILL,
GE Aircraft Engines, Cincinnati, Ohio
RONALD A.HOWARD,
Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
J.STUART HUNTER,
Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
CHRISTOPHER L.MAGEE,
Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, Michigan
SIMON OSTRACH,
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
WILLIAM B.ROUSE,
Enterprise Support Systems, Norcross, Georgia
Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design Staff
CUNG VU, study director (until December 1, 2000)
ARUL MOZHI, study director (from December 1, 2000)
TONI MARECHAUX, board director
TERI THOROWGOOD, research associate
JUDY ESTEP, senior project assistant
Government Liaison
GEORGE HAZELRIGG,
National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia
OCR for page R6
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
BOARD ON MANUFACTURING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN
JOSEPH G.WIRTH (chair),
Raychem Corporation (retired), Mt. Shasta, California
F.PETER BOER,
Tiger Scientific, Inc., Boynton Beach, Florida
JOHN G.BOLLINGER,
University of Wisconsin, Madison
HARRY E.COOK,
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
PAMELA A.DREW,
The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington
ROBERT EAGAN,
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico
EDITH M.FLANIGEN,
UOP Corporation (retired), White Plains, New York
JOHN W.GILLESPIE, JR.,
University of Delaware, Newark
JAMIE C.HSU,
General Motors Corporation, Warren, Michigan
RICHARD L.KEGG,
Milacron, Inc. (retired), Cincinnati, Ohio
JAY LEE,
United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, Connecticut
JAMES MATTICE,
Universal Technology Corporation, Dayton, Ohio
CAROLYN W.MEYERS,
North Carolina A&T University, Greensboro
JOE H.MIZE,
Oklahoma State University (retired), Stillwater
FRIEDRICH B.PRINZ,
Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
JAMES B.RICE, JR.,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
DALIBOR F.VRSALOVIC,
Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, California
JOEL SAMUEL YUDKEN,
AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C.
TONI MARECHAUX, director
OCR for page R7
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
PREFACE
Design is a process by which human intellect, creativity, and passion are translated into useful artifacts. The practice of engineering design involves not only pure and applied sciences, behavioral and social sciences, and economics but also many aspects of business and law. A designer must work effectively with a team composed of members of different disciplines and make tens or even hundreds of decisions for simple products and thousands of decisions for complex products. Tools to aid designers extend from design guides and rules of thumb that capture experience to synthetic environments that allow the designer to fly through virtual models.
This study focuses on the development and use of tools and approaches for decision making in engineering design. It also examines the preparation that undergraduate students receive for applying decision analysis tools.
The Committee on Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design reviewed some of the relevant literature and consulted experts to seek clarification as needed. In assessing commonly used design methodologies the committee also heard presentations about design engineering practices for a complex product (jet engine); management decisions for a commercial product (Chevrolet Corvette); and methods and tools used in risk analysis and design of a one-of-a-kind product (a space exploration vehicle).
The committee, though small, brought wide-ranging expertise in economics, decision theory, academic research, and industrial practice. This diversity was valuable in deliberations and instructive in the difficulties of communicating across disciplinary areas, especially in the study of decision analysis for engineering design.
Robert J.Eagan, chair
Committee on Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
OCR for page R8
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
This page in the original is blank.
OCR for page R9
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Committee on Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design would like to thank the following individuals for their presentations: Wm A.Wulf, National Academy of Engineering; Steve Barrager, independent consultant; David Halstead, GE Aircraft Engines; John Taylor, NASA; and Greg Wyss, Sandia National Laboratories. In addition, the committee acknowledges Karen Padilla, Sandia National Laboratories, for typing several editions of the manuscript.
This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets the institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The content of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Ernest R.Blood, Caterpillar Inc.; Clive L.Dym, Harvey Mudd College; Jay Lee, University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee; Steven C. Lu, University of Southern California; Farrok Mistree, Georgia Institute of Technology; and David J. Vander Veen, General Motors.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by George Dieter, University of Maryland, appointed by the Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
OCR for page R10
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
This page in the original is blank.
OCR for page R11
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
1
INTRODUCTION
4
PRIOR STUDIES
4
THE CHANGING NATURE OF ENGINEERING DESIGN
5
CURRENT STUDY
6
REFERENCES
7
2
DECISION MAKING IN ENGINEERING DESIGN
8
3
BASIC TOOLS FOR APPLIED DECISION THEORY
12
THE DECISION BASIS
13
FRAMING
15
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
17
4
METHODS, THEORIES, AND TOOLS
20
CONCURRENT ENGINEERING
20
TOOLS TO OBTAIN STAKEHOLDER INPUT
22
The Pugh Method
22
Quality Function Deployment
22
Decision Matrix Techniques
24
Analytic Hierarchy Process
26
TOOLS AND METHODS TO ADDRESS VARIABILITY, QUALITY, AND UNCERTAINTY
27
Projected Latent Structure
29
Taguchi Method
29
Six Sigma
30
METHODS AND TOOLS FOR GENERATING ALTERNATIVES
30
Design Information Systems, Support Systems, And Environments
30
Triz
31
FORMAL METHODS FOR REPRESENTING DESIGN PROBLEMS
32
Engineering Design: A Synthesis Of Views
32
Suh’s Axiomatic Design
33
Yoshikawa’s General Design Theory
34
A Mathematical Framework For Engineering Design
35
DECISION MAKING IN MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND ECONOMIC FIELDS
36
Decision Making In Economics
36
Game Theory
38
SUMMARY OF METHODS, THEORIES, AND TOOLS
38
REFERENCES
41
5
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN EDUCATION AND RESEARCH
44
APPENDIXES
47
A ACCREDITATION BOARD FOR ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY 2000
49
B INVITED SPEAKERS
52
C BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS
53
D COMMITTEE USAGE
55
OCR for page R12
Theoretical Foundations for Decision Making in Engineering Design
FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURES
2–1
Decision process in the context of business and Environment
8
2–2
Decisions framed in relevant context
9
3–1
The quality of a decision
13
3–2
The problem space for characterization and decision-making
14
3–3
The decision hierarchy
15
3–4
The decision process
16
3–5
Decision diagram
16
3–6
Decision diagram for design of a dual-sport motorcycle
18
3–7
Tornado diagram
18
3–8
The decision quality spider
19
4–1
The House of Quality
23
4–2
A cascade of evaluation matrices
24
4–3
General format of the decision matrix
25
4–4
Decision matrix for access door attachment
25
4–5
Decision making in the context of variation
28
4–6
Scope of artificial intelligence in design
31
TABLES
ES–1
Summary of Tools and Applications Examined
2
2–1
Framing a Decision in the Relevant Context
10
4–1
Comparison Between Concurrent Versus Linear (Serial) Engineering
21
4–2
Summary of Tools and Applications Examined
39
