Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T05:06:45.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FUNCTIONS AND OUTCOMES OF BIOLOGICALLY-INSPIRED DESIGN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Nicklas Werge Svendsen ,
Torben Anker Lenau  and
Claus Thorp Hansen
Nicklas Werge Svendsen*
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark
Torben Anker Lenau
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark
Claus Thorp Hansen
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark
*
Svendsen, Nicklas, Technical University of Denmark Denmark, [email protected]

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.

Research in biologically-inspired design (BID) practice often focus on team composition or ideation based on an already discovered fascinating biological solution principle. However, how are the outcome of the early design phases affecting BID projects' quality?

In this study, historical data from 91 reports from student teams documenting their BID efforts from a 3-week course constitute the data source. Thus, the relationship between design problem types, function types, functions descriptions and BID projects' quality is addressed.

The study show that especially design problem types and function descriptions affect the BID projects' quality. For instance, BID projects dealing with open-ended problems yield better results than redesign problems with existing solutions operating in a very domain-limited solution space. Next, BID projects obtain the best results when using functions as drivers for analogy searching rather than properties. Finally, BID projects with certain function types seem to have more complicated conceptualization phases.

Keywords

Bio-inspired design/biomimeticsDesign practiceDesign processFunction descriptionsDesign problem types
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 3091 - 3100
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

Andreasen, M. M., Hansen, C. T. and Cash, P. (2015) Conceptual Design - Interpretations, Mindset and Models, Conceptual Design, ‘Interpretations, Mindset and Models’.10.1007/978-3-319-19839-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chirazi, J. et al. (2019) ‘What do we learn from good practices of biologically inspired design in innovation?’, Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 9(4), pp. 1–16. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app9040650.Google Scholar
Far, B. H. and Elamy, A. H. (2005) ‘Functional reasoning theories: Problems and perspectives’, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, pp. 75–88.Google Scholar
Gero, J. S. (1990) ‘Design prototypes. A knowledge representation schema for design’, AI Magazine, 11(4), pp. 26–36.Google Scholar
Hashemi Farzaneh, H. (2020) ‘Bio-inspired design: the impact of collaboration between engineers and biologists on analogical transfer and ideation’, Research in Engineering Design. Springer London, 31(3), pp. 299–322. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-020-00333-w.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helms, M. and Goel, A. K. (2014) ‘The Four-Box Method: Problem Formulation and Analogy Evaluation in Biologically Inspired Design’, Journal of Mechanical Design, 136(11), p. 111106. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4028172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helms, M., Vattam, S. S. and Goel, A. K. (2009) ‘Biologically inspired design: process and products’, Design Studies. Elsevier Ltd, 30(5), pp. 606–622. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2009.04.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubka, V. and Eder, W. E. (1984) Theory of Technical Systems - A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design. 2nd edn. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, London, Paris, Tokyo: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Lenau, T. A. et al. (2010) ‘Engineering design of an adaptive leg prosthesis using biological principles’, 11th International Design Conference (design 2010), pp. 331–340.Google Scholar
Lenau, T. A. (2018) ‘Paradigms for biologically inspired design’, Proceedings of SPIE. https://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2296560.Google Scholar
Liu, K. and Jiang, L. (2011) ‘Multifunctional integration: From biological to bio-inspired materials’, ACS Nano, 5(9), pp. 6786–6790. https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/nn203250y.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McHugh, M. L. (2012) ‘Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic’, Biochemica Medica, 22(3), pp. 276–282. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/89395.10.11613/BM.2012.031CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagel, J. K. et al. (2019) ‘Preliminary findings from a comparative study of two bio-inspired design methods in a second-year engineering curriculum’, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. https://dx.doi.org/10.18260/1-2--33187.Google Scholar
Pahl, G. and Beitz, W. (2007) Engineering Design - A Systematic Approach, Springer. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.Google Scholar
Rovalo, E. et al. (2019) ‘Growing the practice of biomimicry: opportunities for mission-based organisations based on a global survey of practitioners’, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management. Taylor & Francis, 7325. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1634254.Google Scholar
Sane, S. P. (2016) ‘Bioinspiration and biomimicry: What can engineers learn from biologists?’, Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 19(1), pp. 1–6. https://dx.doi.org/10.6180/jase.2016.19.1.01.Google Scholar
Stone, R. B. and Wood, K. L. (2000) ‘Development of a functional basis for design’, Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 122(4), pp. 359–370. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.1289637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vattam, S., Helms, M. and Goel, A. K. (2007) ‘Biologically-Inspired Innovation in Engineering Design: A Cognitive Study’, Technical Report, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, p. 41.Google Scholar
Vermaas, P. E. (2013) ‘The coexistence of engineering meanings of function: Four responses and their methodological implications’, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, 27(3), pp. 191–202. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0890060413000206.Google Scholar