Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T17:21:21.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of the functional basis using an information theoretic approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2010

Chiradeep Sen ,
Benjamin W. Caldwell ,
Joshua D. Summers  and
Gregory M. Mocko
Chiradeep Sen
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA
Benjamin W. Caldwell
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA
Joshua D. Summers
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA
Gregory M. Mocko
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A metric for computing the information content of function models in mechanical engineering design is proposed. Function models are graph-based representations used to describe the functionality of engineered artifacts, where the nodes are function verbs and the edges are the objects of action. The functional basis, a controlled vocabulary of these verbs and nouns organized in a three level hierarchy, is intended to support consistent representation of function models. The Design Repository is a Web-based archive of function models of consumer products described with the functional basis. This paper presents the theoretical underpinnings of a metric for the information content of function models, the assumptions required to support it, the definitions of key terms associated with it, and its practical interpretation. Finally, the metric is used to study the usefulness of the functional basis through a series of experiments on function models within the Design Repository. The results of the experiment indicate that the secondary level of the functional basis is the most beneficial to designers, both in terms of information content and information density.

Keywords

Design RepositoryFunction ModelsFunctional BasisInformation ContentInformation Theory
Type
Special Issue Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 24 , Issue 1: Design Computing and Cognition , February 2010 , pp. 87 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Albers, A., Matthiesen, S., Thau, S., & Alink, T. (2008). Support of design engineering activity through C&CM—temporal decomposition of design problems. TMCE 2008 Symp., Izmir, Turkey.Google Scholar
Arunajadai, S.G., Stone, R.B., & Tumer, I.Y. (2002). A framework for creating a function-based design tool for failure mode identification. ASME 2002 Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., Montreal, Canada.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatta, S., Goel, A., & Prabhakar, S. (1994). Innovation in analogical design: a model-based approach. 3rd Int. Conf. Artificial Intelligence in Design (AID-94), Lausanne, Switzerland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, B.W., Sen, C., Mocko, G.M., Summers, J.D., & Fadel, G.M. (2008). Empirical examination of the functional basis and design repository. 3rd Int. Conf. Design Computing and Cognition, Atlanta, GA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandrasekaran, B. (2005). Representing function: relating functional representation and functional modeling research streams. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 19(1), 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, J.A., Hagan, B.T., & Bratt, H.M. (1976). Failure-experience matrix—a useful design tool. Journal of Engineering for Industry B 98(3), 1074–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cover, T.M., & Thomas, J.A. (2006). Elements of Information Theory (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley–Interscience.Google Scholar
Deng, Y.M. (2002). Function and behavior representation in conceptual mechanical design. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 16(5), 343–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gero, J.S. (1990). Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine 11(4), 26–36.Google Scholar
Goel, A.K., & Bhatta, S.R. (2004). Use of design patterns in analogy-based design. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18, 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartley, R.V.L. (1928). Transmission of Information. Bell System Technical Journal 7(1928), 535–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirtz, J., Stone, R.B., McAdams, D.A., Szykman, S., & Wood, K.L. (2002). A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Research in Engineering Design 13(2), 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keuneke, A.M. (1991). Device representation—the significance of functional knowledge. IEEE Expert 6(2), 22–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirschman, C.F., & Fadel, G.M. (1998). Classifying functions for mechanical design. Journal of Mechanical Design 120(3), 475–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitamura, Y., Kashiwaseb, M., Fuseb, M., & Mizoguchia, R. (2004). Deployment of an ontological framework of functional design knowledge. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18(2), 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitamura, Y., Koji, Y., & Mizoguchi, R. (2005). An ontological model of device function and its deployment for engineering knowledge sharing. First Workshop FOMI 2005—Formal Ontologies Meet Industry, Castelnuovo del Garda (VR), Italy.Google Scholar
Kitamura, Y., & Mizoguchi, R. (2003). Ontology-based description of functional design knowledge and its use in a functional way server. Expert Systems With Applications 24, 153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurfman, M.A., Stone, R.B., Rajan, J.R., & Wood, K.L. (2001). Functional modeling experimental studies. ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf., Pittsburgh, PA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurtoglu, T., Campbell, M.I., Gonzales, J., Bryant, C.R., & Stone, R.B. (2005). Capturing empirically derived design knowledge for creating conceptual design configurations. 2005 ASME Int. Design Engineering and Technical Conf., Long Beach, CA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mocko, G.M., Summers, J.D., Fadel, G.M., Teegavarapu, S., Maier, J.R.A., & Ezhilan, T. (2007). A modelling scheme for capturing and analyzing multi-domain design information: a hair dryer design example. 16th Int. Conf. Engineering Design, Paris.Google Scholar
Otto, K.N., & Wood, K.L. (2001). Product Design Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., & Grote, K.H. (2007). Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. London: Springer–Verlag London Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodenacker, W. (1971). Methodisches Konstruieren. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.Google Scholar
Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27, 379–423, 623–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sridharan, P., & Campbell, M.I. (2005). A study on the grammatical construction of function structures. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 19, 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, R.B., Tumer, I.Y., & Stock, M.E. (2005). Linking product functionality to historic failures to improve failure analysis in design. Research in Engineering Design 16(2), 96–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, R.B., & Wood, K.L. (2000). Development of a functional basis for design. Journal of Mechanical Design 122(4), 359–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Summers, J.D., & Ameri, F. (2008). An algorithm for assessing design complexity through a connectivity view. Proc. TMCE 2008, Izmir, Turkey.Google Scholar
Summers, J.D., & Shah, J.J. (2003). Developing measured of complexity for engineering design. ASME 2003 Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., Chicago.Google Scholar
Szykman, S., Racz, J.W., & Sriram, R.D. (1999). The representation of function in computer-based design. 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf., Las Vegas, NV.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tumer, I.Y., & Stone, R.B. (2001). Analytical methods to evaluate failure potential during high-risk component development. 2001 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf., Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Ullman, D.G. (1992). The Mechanical Design Process. New York: McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
Umeda, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1995). FBS modeling: modeling scheme of function for conceptual design. 9th Int. Workshop on Qualitative Reasoning.Google Scholar
Vucovich, J., Bhardwaj, N., Ho, H.-H., Ramakrishna, M., Thakur, M., & Stone, R. (2006). Concept generation algorithms for repository-based early design. ASME 2006 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., Philadelphia, PA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar