A Comparative Analysis of Techniques in Engineering Design

  • Srikanth M. Kannapan
  • Kurt M. Marshek


This chapter describes the application of seven approaches to support three basic task types of design (design selection, parametric design, and design synthesis). The specialization of these approaches to practical design techniques is analyzed and illustrated with examples.


Design Object Design Requirement Speed Ratio Graph Transformation Class Hierarchy 
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. Agogino, A. M., A. Almgren, 1987, Symbolic Computation in Computer Aided Optimal Design, Expert Systems in Computer Aided Optimal Design, J. S. Gero (Editor), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 267–284.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, D. G., S. Kannapan, D. L. Taylor, 1992, Product Development Process Dynamics, Proc. ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conf., Scottsdale, AZ, pp. 257–266.Google Scholar
  3. Bendsoe, M. P., N. Kikuchi, 1988, Generating Optimal Topologies in Structural Design Using a Homogenization Method, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 71, pp. 197–224.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowen, J., P. O’Grady, 1990, A Technology for Building Life-Cycle Advisers, Proc. of Computers in Engineering 1990, Vol. 1, ASME, Boston, MA, August 5–9, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, D. C., B. Chandrasekaran, 1983, An Approach to Expert Systems for Mechanical Design, IEEE Computer Society Trends and Applications ‘83, NBS, Gaithersburg, MD, May 1983, pp. 173–180.Google Scholar
  6. Buchsbaum, F., F. Freudenstein, 1970, Synthesis of Kinematic Structure of Geared Kinematic Chains and Other Mechanisms, J. of Mechanisms, Vol. 5, pp. 357–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cagan, J., A. M. Agogino, 1992, Dimensional Variable Expansion—A Formal Ap- proach to Innovative Design, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 3, pp. 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dietterich, T. G., D. G. Ullman, 1987, FORLOG: A Logic-Based Architecture for Design, Expert Systems in Computer-Aided Design, John Gero (Editor), IFIP, Amsterdam, North Holland, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
  9. Dixon, J. R., A. Howe, P. R. Cohen, M. K. Simmons, 1987, Dominic I: Progress Toward Domain Independence in Design by Iterative Redesign, Engineering with Computers, Vol. 2, pp. 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixon, J. R., M. K. Simmons, 1984, Expert Systems for Design: Standard V-Belt Drive Design as an Example of the Design-Evaluate-Redesign Architecture, Proc. ASME Computers in Engineering Conf, Las Vegas, NV, August 12–16.Google Scholar
  11. Dyer, M. G., M. Flowers, J. Hodges, 1986, Edison: An Engineering Design Invention System Operating Naively, Proc. of the 1st Intl. Conf. on Applications of Al to Engineering Problems, Southhampton, U.K., Vol. 1, pp. 327–341.Google Scholar
  12. Eastman, C. M., A. H. Bond, 1991, Application and Evaluation of an Engineering Data Model, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 185–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Falkenhainer, B., K. D. Forbus, 1991, Compositional Modeling: Finding the Right Model for the Job, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 51, pp. 95–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Finger, S., J. Rinderle, 1989, A Transformational Approach to Mechanical Design Using Bond Graph Grammars, Proc. ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conf, Montreal, Canada, pp. 107–116.Google Scholar
  15. Gero, J. S., 1985, Design Optimization, Academic Press Inc., New York, NY.Google Scholar
  16. Goel, A., B. Chandrasekaran, 1990, A Task Structure for Case-based Design, Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, November, pp. 587–592.Google Scholar
  17. Gupta, R., M. J. Jakiela, 1992, Qualitative Simulation of Kinematic Pairs via Smallscale Interference Detection, Proc. ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conf., Scottsdale, AZ, pp. 351–363.Google Scholar
  18. Hundal, M. S., 1990, A Systematic Method for Developing Function Structures, Solutions and Concept Variants, Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Joskowicz, L., 1990, Mechanism Comparison and Classification for Design, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 1, pp. 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kannapan, S., K. M. Marshek, G. Gerbert, 1991, A Framework for a Design Library for Mechanical Transmissions, Proc. of 1991 NSF Design and Manufacturing Systems Conf., Austin, TX, January 9–11, pp. 1079–1088.Google Scholar
  21. Kannapan, S., K. M. Marshek, 1991, Design Synthetic Reasoning, Parts I, III and III, Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol. 26, No. 7, pp. 711–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kannapan, S., K. M. Marshek, 1991, Evaluating the Patentability of Engineered Devices, Proc. Artificial Intelligence in Design, Edinburgh, Scotland, Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 683–701.Google Scholar
  23. Kannapan, S., K. M. Marshek, 1992, Engineering Design Methodologies: A New Perspective, In Intelligent Design and Manufacturing, ed. A. N. Kusiak, John Wiley and Sons, pp. 3–38.Google Scholar
  24. Kannapan, S., K. M. Marshek, 1992, A Schema for Negotiation between Intelligent Design Agents in Concurrent Engineering, In Intelligent Computer Aided Design, eds. D. C. Brown, M. B. Waldron and H. Yoshikawa, IFIP Transactions B, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  25. Karandikar, H., R. Srinivasan, F. Mistree, W. J. Fuchs, 1989, Compromise: An Effective Approach for the Design of Pressure Vessels using Composite Materials, Computers and Structures, Vol. 33, No. 6, pp. 1465–1477.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klein, M., 1992, Detecting and Resolving Conflicts among Cooperating Human and Machine-based Design Agents, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, Vol. 7, pp. 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kota, S., 1990a, Qualitative Motion Synthesis: Towards Automating Mechanical Systems Configuration, Proc. of the 1990 NSF Design and Manufacturing Systems Conf., Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, pp. 77–91.Google Scholar
  28. Kota, S., C-L. Lee, 1990b, A Computational Model for Conceptual Design: Configuration of Hydraulic Systems, Proc. of NSF Design and Manufacturing Systems Conf., Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, Jan. 8–12, pp. 93–104.Google Scholar
  29. Kuppuraju, N., P. Ittimakin, F. Mistree, 1985, Design through Selection: A Method that Works, Design Studies, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lander, S. E., 1989, Knowledge-based Systems for Cooperating Experts, Computer and Information Sciences Technical Report 91–28, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  31. Lyons, J. L., 1982, Lyons’ Valve Designer’s Handbook, Van Nostrand Reinhold Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  32. MacDonald, J. G. F., 1973, Power Operable Pivot Joint, United States Patent 3, 731, 546, May 8.Google Scholar
  33. Maher, M., S. Fenves, 1985, HI-RISE: An Expert System for the Preliminary Structural Design of High Rise Buildings, Knowledge Engineering in Computer Aided Design, (Editor) J. S. Gero, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 125–135.Google Scholar
  34. McDermott, D., 1978, Circuit Design as Problem Solving, Proc. IFIP Workshop on AI and Pattern Recognition in CAD, ed. J-C. Latombe, North Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 227–259.Google Scholar
  35. McDermott, J., 1982, Rl: A Rule-Based Configurer of Computer Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 19, pp. 39–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitchell, T. M., S. Mahadevan, L. I. Steinberg, 1985, LEAP: A Learning Apprentice for VLSI Design, Proc. IJCAI, Los Angeles, California, pp. 573–580.Google Scholar
  37. Mostow, J., M. Barley, 1987, Automated Re-Use of Design Plans, Proc. Intl. Conf on Engineering Design, Boston, Aug. 17–20, ASME, Vol. 2, pp. 632–647.Google Scholar
  38. Mullins, S., J. R. Rinderle, 1991, Grammatical Approaches to Engineering Design, Part 1: An Introduction and Commentary, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Murthy, S. S., S. Addanki, 1987, PROMPT An Innovative Design Tool, AAAI-87, pp. 637–642.Google Scholar
  40. Navinchandra, D., K. P. Sycara, S. Narasimhan, 1991, A Transformational Approach to Case-based Synthesis, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design and Manufacturing, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 31–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Prabhu, D. R., D. L. Taylor, 1989, Synthesis of Systems from Specifications Containing Orientations and Positions Associated with Flow Variables, 1989 ASME Design Automation Conf, Montreal, Canada, September 17–21, pp. 273–280.Google Scholar
  42. Rinderle, J. R., 1991, Grammatical Approaches to Engineering Design, Parts II: Melding Configuration and Parametric Design by Attribute Grammars, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sim, S. K., Y. W. Chan, 1991, A Knowledge-based Expert System for Rolling Element Bearing Selection in Mechanical Engineering Design, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 125–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., 1988, Optimization by Decomposition: A Step from Hierarchic to Non-hierarchic Systems, Technical Report TM-101494, September, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA.Google Scholar
  45. Sriram, D., R. Logcher, A. Wong, S. Ahmed, 1991, An Object-Oriented Framework for Collaborative Engineering Design, In Computer-Aided Cooperative Product Development, eds. D. Sriram, R. Logcher, S. Fukuda, Springer-Verlag, pp. 51–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stefik, M., 1981, Planning with Constraints (MOLGEN: Part 1), Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 16, pp. 111–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sussman, G. J., G. L. Steele, 1980, CONSTRAINTS-A Language for Expressing Almost-Hierarchical Descriptions, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 14, pp. 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sycara, K. P., 1990, Negotiation Planning: An AI Approach, European Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 46, pp. 216–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Takeda, H., T. Tomiyama, H. Yoshikawa, 1992, A Logical and Computable Framework for Reasoning in Design, Proc. ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conf, Scottsdale, AZ, pp. 167–174.Google Scholar
  50. Topping, B. H. V., 1983, Shape Optimization of Skeletal Structures: A Review, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 109, No. 8, pp. 1933–1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ulrich, K. T., 1988, Computation and Pre-Parametric Design, PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  52. Ward, A. C., 1989, A Theory of Quantitative Inference for Artifact Sets, Applied to a Mechanical Design Compiler, PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  53. Williams, B., 1989, Invention from First Principles via Topologies of Interaction, PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  54. Wood, K. L., E. K. Antonsson, 1990, Modeling Imprecision and Uncertainty in Preliminary Engineering Design, Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 305–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Srikanth M. Kannapan
  • Kurt M. Marshek

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations