Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Guiding conceptual design through behavioral reasoning

  • Published:
Research in Engineering Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a model for conceptual design based on an explicit behavioral reasoning step to guide the design process. Rather than mapping directly from function to form, we treat conceptual design as a two-step process, first transforming functional requirements to a behavioral description and then matching physical artifacts to this behavior. We believe that behavior, in terms of physical principles and phenomena, provides a natural bridge between functional requirements and physical artifacts. Behavioral reasoning breaks preconceived links between functions and artifacts, allowing for innovative solutions to be found. A new representation calledbehavior graphs (derived from bond graphs) has been developed to facilitate behavioral reasoning. This paper discusses behavior graphs and their use in a design synthesis model that generates systems of pre-defined embodiments (e.g., motor, spring, valve) to meet functional requirements given in terms of input and output parameters (e.g., force, pressure, displacement, voltage). An experimental computer program implementing this model is discussed and illustrative examples presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D. Bobrow (ed.),Qualitative Reasoning about Physical Systems, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Bradshaw, “Evaluating Design Using Knowledge of Purpose and Knowledge of Structure”,IEEE Expert, pp. 33–40, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, April 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Cagan and A. Agogino, “Inducing Constraint Activity in Innovative Design”,Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing (AI EDAM), pp. 47–61, vol. 5, no. 1, Academic Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. deKleer and J. Brown, “A Qualitative Physics Based on Confluences”,Qualitative Reasoning About Physical Systems, pp. 7–84, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Dixon, M. Duffey, R. Irani, K. Munier and M. Orelup, “A Proposed Taxonomy of Mechanical Design Problems”, Proceedings of the ASME Computers in Engineering Conference, San Francisco, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, August 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Doyle, “Reasoning About Hidden Mechanisms”, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-89), pp. 1343–1349, Detroit, Morgan-Kaufmann Publishing, Los Atlos, August 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  7. S. Finger and J. Rinderle, “A Transformational Approach to Mechanical Design Using a Bond Graph Grammar”, Proceedings of the First ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, pp. 107–116, Montreal, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Gero, “Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design”,AI Magazine, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 26–36, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, winter 1900.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Gero, H. Lee and K. Tham, “Behavior: A Link Between Function and Structure in Design”, Preprints of the IFIP WG 5.2 Working Conference on Intelligent CAD (IntCAD '91), pp. 201–230, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, October 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  10. I. Horvath, “Methodology for Expert-system-based Support of Conceptual Machine Design”, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 425–432, vol. 4, no. 6, Pergamon Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  11. M. Hundal, “Conceptual Design of Technical Systems — A Computer-Based Approach”, Proceedings of the 1991 NSF Design and Manufacturing Systems Conference, University of Texas at Austin, pp. 1041–1049, January 1991, published by Society of Manufacturing Engineers.

  12. S. Kannapan and K. Marshek, “An Algebraic and Predicate Logic Approach to Representation and Reasoning in Machine Design”,Mechanical Machine Theory, pp. 335–353, vol. 25, no. 3, Pergamon Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  13. S. Kota, “A Qualitative Matrix Representation Scheme for the Conceptual Design of Mechanisms”, Proceedings of the 21st Biennial Mechanisms Conference — The 1990 ASME Design Technical Conferences, pp. 217–230, Chicago, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Marples, “The Decisions of Engineering Design”,IRE Transactions on Engineering Management, pp. 55–70, vol. EM-8, no. 2, June 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. Murthy and S. Addanki, “PROMPT: An Innovation Design Tool”, Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 637–642, Seattle, Morgan Kaufmann Publishing, Los Atlos, July 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. National Research Council,Improving Engineering Design: Designing For Competitive Advantage, National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  17. D. Navinchandra, “Innovative Design Systems: Where are we, and where do we go from here?”, Technical Report CMU-RI-TR-90-01, The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Navinchandra, K. Sycara and S. Narasimhan, “A Transformational Approach to Case-Based Synthesis”,Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing (AI EDAM), pp. 31–45, vol. 5, no. 1, Academic Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. G. Pahl and W. Beitz,Engineering Design, K. Wallace (ed.), Design Council, London, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Prabhu and D. Taylor, “Some Issues in the Generation of the Topology of Systems with Constant Power-Flow Input-Output Requirements”, Proceedings of the 1988 ASME Design Automation Conference, Advances in Design Automation, pp. 41–48, Kissimmee, Fla., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  21. D. Prabhu and D. Taylor, “Synthesis of Systems from Specifications Containing Orientations and Positions Associated with Generalized Flow Variables”, Proceedings of the 1989 ASME Design Automation Conference, pp. 273–280, Montreal, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  22. P. Pu, “Simulating Both Dynamic and Kinematic Behaviors of Mechanical Mechanisms”,Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, pp. 136–155, vol. 6, no. 3, Elsevier Science Publishers, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. R. Rinderle and L. Balasubramaniam, “Automated Modeling to Support Design”, Proceedings of the Second ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, pp. 281–290, Chicago, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. Rosenberg and D. Karnopp,Introduction to Physical System Dynamics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  25. K. Roth, “Design Models and Design Catalogs”, Proceedings of the 1987 International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 87), pp. 60–67, Boston, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, 1927, August 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J. Sticklen, A. Kamel and W. Bond, “Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Computations in a Functional Framework”,Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1–10, vol. 4, no. 1, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  27. T. Taura and H. Yoshikawa, “A Metric for Intelligent CAD”, Presented at the 1991 IFIP WG 5.2 Intelligent Computer Aided Design Conference (IntCAD91), The Phio State University, Columbus, Ohio, October 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  28. K. Ulrich and W. Seering, “Functional Sharing in Mechanical Design”, 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-88, Minneapolis, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, August 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  29. K. Ulrich and W. Seering, “Synthesis of Schematic Descriptions in Mechanical Design”,Research in Engineering Design, pp. 3–18, vol. 1, no. 1, Springer-Verlag, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Y. Umeda, H. Takeda, T. Tomiyama and H. Yoshikawa, “Functions, Behaviour, and Structure”, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference, Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, pp. 177–193, Boston, Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, July 1990, Computational Mechanics Publications and Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  31. B. Williams, “Interaction-based Invention: Designning Novel Devices from First Principles” Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pp. 349–356, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, August 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  32. R. Welch and J. Dixon, “Conceptual Design of Mechanical Systems”, Proceedings of the Third ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Miami, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  33. R. Welch and J. Dixon, “Representing Function, Behavior and Structure during Conceptual Design”, Accepted for publication in the Proceedings of the Fourth ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Scottsdale, Ariz., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, September 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA

    Richard V. Welch

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA

    John R. Dixon

Authors
  1. Richard V. Welch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John R. Dixon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The work presented in this paper was carried out at the Mechanical Design Automation Laboratory, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Welch, R.V., Dixon, J.R. Guiding conceptual design through behavioral reasoning. Research in Engineering Design 6, 169–188 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01607277

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01607277

Keywords

Search

Navigation