Systems Engineering versus Design Methodology

  • U. Lindemann


Systems Engineering, with its long tradition of success in dealing with complex systems, includes a number of methods and tools that are integral parts of Design Methodology. As research is an ongoing process, generating new results and insights, transferring and adopting further elements out from Systems Engineering has a lot of potential. This will be demonstrated with some case studies of using matrix and graph methods to handle structural complexity. The cases deal with requirement analysis in a product-service system, knowledge exchange in practice, design to cost of mechatronic systems, and planning of material flow in a complex construction environment.


Knowledge Transfer System Engineer Design Methodology Quality Function Deployment Knowledge Component 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Braun StC, Lindemann U (2009): How to generate design rules for cost-efficient design of mechatronic products. In: International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED09. Stanford University, California, USA, Design SocietyGoogle Scholar
  2. Browning T (2001): Applying the Design Structure Matrix to System Decomposition and Integration Problems: A Review and New Directions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48(3):292–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Danilovic M, Browning T (2004): A Formal Approach for Domain Mapping Matrices (DMM) to Complement Design Structure Matrices (DSM). In: Design Structure Matrix (DSM) International Workshop, Cambridge UK: University of Cambridge, EDCGoogle Scholar
  4. Eben KGM, Lindemann U (2010): Structural analysis of requirements – interpretation of structural criterions. In: International dependency and structure modelling conference DSM’10. Hanser, MunichGoogle Scholar
  5. Eppinger SD, Salminen V (2001): Patterns of Product Development Interactions. In: International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED01), Glasgow IMechEGoogle Scholar
  6. Furtmeier F, Graebsch M, Elezi F, Tommelein ID, Lindemann U (2010): MDM as a process mapping tool in lean construction. In: International dependency and structure modelling conference DSM’10. Hanser, MunichGoogle Scholar
  7. Gorbea C, Hellenbrand D, Srivastava T, BiedermannW, Lindemann U (2010): Compatibility Matrix Methodology Applied to the Identification of Vehicle Architectures and Design Requirements. Design 2010 Conference, DubrovnikGoogle Scholar
  8. INCOSE (2010): Homepage, strategic initiatives:Google Scholar
  9. Lindemann U, Maurer M, Braun Th (2009): Structural complexity management. Springer BerlinGoogle Scholar
  10. Maurer M (2007): Structural Awareness in Complex Product Design. München Dr. HutGoogle Scholar
  11. Maurer M, Klinger H, Benz A (2009a): Applying the Structural Complexity Management to Knowledge Transfer in SMEs. In: First International Conference on Innovation through Knowledge Transfer, Research with Impact, InnovationKT’09, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Maurer M, Biedermann W, Cole M, D’Avanzo J, Dickmanns D (2009b): Airport security: From single threat aspects to valid scenarios and risk assessment. In: 1st Annual Global Conference on Systems and Enterprises (GCSE), Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. Maurer M, Kesper H (2011): eFMEA – Raising Efficiency of FMEA by Matrix-Based Function and Failure Networks. In: International Conference on Research into Design 2011, Bangalore, (accepted and under publication)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • U. Lindemann
    • 1
  1. 1.Technische Universität MünchenGarchingGermany

Personalised recommendations