Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:37:55.066Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agile Lightweight Design - The Extended Target Weighing Approach in ASD - Agile Systems Design Using Functional Modelling with the C&C2-Approach

Part of: Lightweight Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Albert Albers ,
Sven Matthiesen ,
Sven Revfi ,
Christopher Schönhoff ,
Patric Grauberger  and
Jonas Heimicke

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.

The context of product development can be understood as transformation of needs into technical solutions under the continuous handling of uncertainties. These result particularly in early development phases from a lack of technical knowledge. In order to counter the uncertainties, companies are increasingly implementing agile approaches, which mostly originate in the area of software development. Although these are suitable for flexible handling of project management activities and lead to an increased reactivity of the development team, they do not address the early and continuous integration of technical knowledge into the process. With the aim of optimizing mechatronic systems with regard to their lightweight design potentials, in this article a method is developed that supports agile development with the goal of lightweight design. Therefore, it combines a method for functional modelling with a function-based lightweight design method. The targeted integration of technical knowledge has shown that lightweight design potentials can be optimized iteratively in agile approaches. As an initial validation, the applicability of the method was demonstrated in a development project.

Keywords

Lightweight designEmbodiment designDesign methodologyAgile Mechatronic System DevelopmentPGE - Product Generation Engineering
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 2667 - 2676
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) 2019

References

Albers, A., Heimicke, J., Hirschter, T., Richter, T., Reiß, N., Maier, A. and Bursac, N. (2018a), “Managing Systems of Objectives in the agile Development of Mechatronic Systems by ASD – Agile Systems Design”, in NordDesign 2018, Linköping, Sweden.Google Scholar
Albers, A., Heimicke, J., Walter, B., Basedow, G.N., Reiß, N., Heitger, N., Ott, S. and Bursac, N. (2018b), “Product profiles. Modelling customer benefits as a foundation to bring inventions to innovations”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 253–258.Google Scholar
Albers, A., Moeser, G. and Revfi, S. (2018c), “Synergy effects by using SysML models for the lightweight design method “extended target weighing approach””, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 70, pp. 434–439.Google Scholar
Albers, A., Rapp, S., Spadinger, M., Richter, T., Birk, C., Marthaler, F., Heimicke, J., Kurtz, V. and Wessels, H. (2019a), “The Reference System in PGE - Product Generation Engineering: A Generalized Understanding of the Role of Reference Products and Their Influence on the Development Process”, KIT Scientific Working Papers, Vol. 96, Karlsruhe, Germany.Google Scholar
Albers, A., Revfi, S. and Spadinger, M. (2017b), “Extended target weighing approach - Identification of lightweight design potential for new product generations”, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED17), Vancouver, August 21-25, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 367–376.Google Scholar
Albers, A., Revfi, S. and Spadinger, M. (2019b), “Funktionsbasierte Entwicklung leichter Produkte”, in: Henning, F. and Moeller, E. (Eds.), Handbuch Leichtbau. Methoden, Werkstoffe, Fertigung. München, Carl Hanser Verlag. [in press].Google Scholar
Albers, A., Wagner, D., Ruckpaul, A., Hessenauer, B., Burkardt, N. and Matthiesen, S. (2013), “Target Weighing – A New Approach for Conceptual Lightweight Design in Early Phases of Complex Systems Development”, Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 13), Seoul, August 19-22, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 301–310.Google Scholar
Albers, A. and Wintergerst, E. (2014), “The Contact and Channel Approach (C&C²-A): Relating a System's Physical Structure to Its Functionality”, in Chakrabarti, A. and Blessing, L.T.M. (Eds.), An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design: Philosophy, Approaches and Empirical Explorations, Springer, pp. 151–172.Google Scholar
Boehm, B. and Turner, R. (2003), “Using risk to balance agile and plan- driven methods”, Computer, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 57–66.Google Scholar
Cooper, R.G. (1990), “Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products”, Business Horizons, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 44–54.Google Scholar
Ehrlenspiel, K. and Meerkamm, H. (2017), Integrierte Produktentwicklung. Denkabläufe, Methodeneinsatz, Zusammenarbeit. 6., vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, München, Wien, 2017.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, F. (1991), Wertanalyse Gewicht: Methodische Gewichtsreduzierung - am Beispiel von Industrierobotern, Paderborn, Univ., Dissertation, 1991, VDI-Verl, Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
Gero, J.S. and Kannengiesser, U. (2014), “The Function-Behaviour-Structure Ontology of Design”, in Chakrabarti, A. and Blessing, L.T.M. (Eds.), An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design: Philosophy, Approaches and Empirical Explorations, Springer, pp. 263–283.Google Scholar
Gloger, B. (Ed.) (2016), Scrum: Produkte Zuverlässig und Schnell Entwickeln, 5., überarbeitete Auflage, Carl Hanser Verlag, München.Google Scholar
Kopp, G., Burkhardt, N. and Majic, N. (2019), “Leichtbaustrategien und Bauweisen”, in: Henning, F. and Moeller, E. (Eds.), Handbuch Leichtbau. Methoden, Werkstoffe, Fertigung. München, Carl Hanser Verlag. [in press].Google Scholar
Leichtbau, B.W. (2017), available at: https://www.leichtbau-bw.de/leichtbau/unsere-mission.html (accessed 23 November 2018).Google Scholar
Matthiesen, S. (2002), “Ein Beitrag zur Basisdefinition des Elementmodells “Wirkflächenpaare & Leitstützstrukturen” zum Zusammenhang von Funktion und Gestalt technischer Systeme”, Dissertation, Forschungsberichte des Instituts für Maschinenkonstruktionslehre und Kraftfahrzeugbau, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Karlsruhe, 2002.Google Scholar
Matthiesen, S., Grauberger, P., Sturm, C. and Steck, M. (2018), “From Reality to Simulation – Using the C&C²-Approach to Support the Modelling of a Dynamic System”, in Procedia CIRP, Elsevier B.V.Google Scholar
Meboldt, M., Matthiesen, S. and Lohmeyer, Q. (2012), “The Dilemma of Managing Iterations in Time-to-Market Development Processes”, Paper Presented at MMEP, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Morkos, B., Shankar, P. and Summers, J.D. (2012), “Predicting requirement change propagation, using higher order design structure matrices: an industry case study”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 23 No. 12, pp. 905–926.Google Scholar
Plattner, H., Meinel, C. and Leifer, L. (2011), Design Thinking: Understand – Improve – Apply, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Ponn, J. and Lindemann, U. (2011), Konzeptentwicklung und Gestaltung technischer Produkte, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Posner, B., Binz, H. and Roth, D. (2013), “Operationalisation of the value analysis for design for lightweight: The function mass analysis”, Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Seoul, August 19–22, 2013, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 271–280.Google Scholar
Revfi, S., Spadinger, M., Kraus, F. and Albers, A. (2019), “Function-based benchmarking to identify competitor-based lightweight design potentials”, 29th CIRP Design Conference, 2019 [accepted].Google Scholar
Ropohl, G. (1975), Einführung in die Systemtechnik.: Systemtechnik—Grundlagen und Anwendungen, Carl Hanser Verlag, München.Google Scholar
Ruckpaul, A., Kriltz, A. and Matthiesen, S. (2014), “Using Eye Tracking to Understand the Engineering Designers’ Behavior in Synthesis-Driven Analyzing Processes - Experiences in Study Design”, Ascona, Schweiz.Google Scholar
Schmidt, D.M., Schenkl, S.A., Wickel, M.C., Braun, M. and Maurer, M. (2013), “Interpreting knowledge maps using structural criteria”, Paper Presented at ICED'13, Seoul, South Corea.Google Scholar
Schmidt, T.S., Weiss, S. and Paetzold, K. (2017), “Agile development of physical products. an empirical study about motivations, potentials and applicability”, University of the German Federal Armed Forces.Google Scholar
Smith, R.P. and Morrow, J.A. (1999), “Product development process modeling”, Design Studies, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 237–261.Google Scholar
Snowden, D.J. and Boone, M.E. (2007), “A leader's framework for decision making”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 85 No. 11, pp. 68–77.Google Scholar
Suh, N.P. (1998), “Axiomatic design theory for systems”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 189–209.Google Scholar
Unselt, T., Schöneburg, R. and Waldherr, D. (2004), “Structural performance: challenges within the area of tension between safety, lightweight and economics”, VDI Berichte, No. 1833, pp. 367–380.Google Scholar
VDI 2221 (2018), Entwicklung technischer Produkte und Systeme - Modell der Produktentwicklung, Vol. 03.100.40 No. 2221:2018-03 Blatt 1, Beuth Verlag.Google Scholar
Weber, C. (2014), “Modelling Products and Product Development Based on Characteristics and Properties”, in Chakrabarti, A. and Blessing, L.T.M. (Eds.), An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design: Philosophy, Approaches and Empirical Explorations, Springer, pp. 327–352.Google Scholar
Wynn, D.C. and Clarkson, P.J. (2018), “Process models in design and development”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 161–202.Google Scholar