Reflecting communication: A key factor for successful collaboration between embodiment design and simulation

Journal of Engineering Design

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 265-287

  Maier, A M ^a   Kreimeyer, M ^b   Lindemann, U ^b   Clarkson, P J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Automotive engineering; Collaborative design; Communication assessment method; Computer aided design computer aided engineering integration; Design management; Design process improvement; Industrial case study; Product development

Indexed keywords

EID: 69249208682     PISSN: 09544828     EISSN: 14661837     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09544820701864402     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Allen, T.J., 1977. Managing the flow of technology: technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information within the R&D organization. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press.
2. Almefelt, L. et al., 2003. Exploring requirements management in the automotive industry. In: International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED), Stockholm, Sweden, 19-21 August 2003, Glasgow, The Design Society.
3. Andersson, K., 1999. A design process model for multiview behaviour simulations of complex products. In: ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences DETC'99, Las Vegas, NV, 12-15 September 1999.
4. Argyris, C. and Schön, D., 1978. Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
5. Armstrong C.G. et al., 2002. Integrating CAE concepts with CAD geometry. In: The 3rd International Conference on Engineering Computational Technology, Prague, Czech Republic, 4-7 September 2002.
6. Badke-Schaub, P. and Frankenberger, E., 1999. Analysis of design projects. Design Studies, 20 (5), 465-480.
7. Bucciarelli, L.L., 1994. Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Burr, H. et al., 2004. CAx/EDM integration - enabler for methodical benefits in the design process. In: International Design Conference (Design 2004), Cavtat, Croatia, 17-20 May 2004, Glasgow: The Design Society.
9. Busseri, M.A. and Palmer, J.M., 2000. Improving teamwork: the effect of self-assessment on construction design teams. Design Studies, 21 (3), 223-238.
10. Chrissis, M.B., Konrad, M., and Shrum, S., 2003. CMMI. Guidelines for process integration and product improvement. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
11. Clark, K.B. and Fujimoto, T., 1991. Product development performance. Strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
12. Crosby, P.B., 1979. Quality is free. New York: McGraw Hill.
13. Danilovic, M., 1999. Loop - leadership and organization of integration in product development. Thesis (PhD) Linköpings University, Linköping.
14. De Martino, T., Falcidieno, B., and Haszinger, S., 1998. Design and engineering process integration through a multiple view intermediate modeller in a distributed object-oriented system environment. Computer-Aided Design, 30 (6), 437-452.
15. Deubzer, F. et al., 2005. A structured holistic approach for the integration of CAD and CAE environments. In: ProSTEP iViP Science Days 2005, Darmstadt, Germany, 28-29 September 2005, Darmstadt, Germany: ProSTEP iViP Association.
16. Forsen, J. and Hoffmann, R., 2002. Assoziative FE-Netze in der Karosserieentwicklung [Associative FE-meshes in the body-in-white development]. VDI Report 1701. VDI-Gesellschaft für Fahrzeug- und Verkehrstechnik, Düsseldorf, Germany.
17. Fraser, P., Farrukh, C., and Gregory, M., 2003. Managing product development collaborations - a process maturity approach. Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B, 217 (B11), 1499-1519.
18. Fraser, P., Moultrie, J., and Gregory, M., 2002. The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in assessing product development capability. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, IEMC, Cambridge, UK, 18-20 August 2002.
19. Großmann, T., 1998. Future orientation of CAE applications in the passenger car development. Report. VDI, Düsseldorf.
20. Hales, C., 2000. Ten critical factors in the design process. In: ASM/ASME Conference on Failure Prevention Through Education - Getting to the Root Cause, Strongsville Materials Parks, OH, May 2000, 49-55.
21. Herfeld, U., 2007. Matrix-basierte Verknüpfung von Komponenten und Funktionen zur Integration von Konstruktion und numerischer Simulation. Thesis (PhD). Technische Universität München, München.
22. Hoopes, D.G. and Postrel, S., 1999. Shared knowledge, glitches, and product development performance. Strategic Management Journal, 20 (9), 837-865.
23. Kleiner, S., Anderl, R., and Gräb, R., 2003. A collaborative design system for product data integration. Journal of Engineering Design, 14 (4), 421-428.
24. Kreimeyer, M. et al., 2005. A survey on efficient collaboration of design and simulation in product development. In: 23&sup&rd&/sup& CADFEM Users' Meeting 2005, International Congress on FEM Technology with ANSYS CFX and ICEM CFD Conference, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany, Technical Report.
25. Kreimeyer, M. et al., 2006a. Effiziente Zusammenarbeit von Konstruktions- und Simulationsabteilungen in der Automobilindustrie. Report. Technische Universität München.
26. Kreimeyer, M. et al., 2006b. Function-driven product design in virtual teams through methodical structuring of requirements and components. In: 8th Biennial ASME Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis, Torino, Italy 4-6 July 2006.
27. Luhmann, N., 1995. Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
28. Maier, A.M., 2007. A grid-based assessment method of communication in engineering design. Thesis (PhD). University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
29. Maier, A.M., Eckert, C.M., and Clarkson, P.J., 2006a. Identifying requirements for communication support: a maturity grid-inspired approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 31 (4), 663-672.
30. Maier, A.M. et al., 2006b. Reflecting communication: a key factor for successful collaboration between embodiment design and simulation. In: International Design Conference (Design 2006), Cavtat, Croatia, 15-18 May 2006, Glosgow: The Design Society, 1483-1490.
31. Maier, A. et al., 2008. Exploration of correlations between factors influencing communication in complex product development. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, 16(1), 37-59.
32. Mocko, G.M. and Fenves, S.J., 2003. A survey of design-analysis integration issues. Report 6996. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NISTIR), Washington, DC.
33. Pulm, U., 2004. Eine systemtheoretische Betrachtung der Produktentwicklung. Thesis (PhD). Technische Universität München.
34. Rangan, R. et al., 2005. Streamlining product development processes: a survey of product lifecycle management - implementations, directions and challenges. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 9 (5), 227-237.
35. Sapuan, S.M., Osman, M.R., and Nukman, Y., 2006. State of the art of the concurrent engineering technique in the automotive industry. Journal of Engineering Design, 17 (2), 143-157.
36. Schelkle, E. and Klamser, H., 2002. CAE simulations for passive safety focused on the Porsche Cayenne - the transition to new technologies. In: 4th European LS-DYNA Conference, 22-23 May, 2003, Ulm, Germany.
37. Wallace, K., 1990. A systematic approach to engineering design. In: M. Oakeley, ed. Design management. A handbook of issues and methods. Oxford: Blackwell, 206-218.