Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7tmb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-01T07:09:14.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A review of functionality modelling in design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009

Julian Winsor  and
Kenneth MacCallum
Julian Winsor
Affiliation:
GIMT, Singapore
Kenneth MacCallum
Affiliation:
CAD Centre, University of Strathclyde 75 Montrose Street Glasgow GI IXJ, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recently there has been an increase in the number of computer aided design systems developed explicitly representing knowledge about the functionality of engineering designs. Reviewing these systems provides an understanding of the methods workers use to encapsulate knowledge of functionality within their systems. A number of issues are addressed to reveal the nature of their approaches. The developers' perception of functionality is discussed to identify variations in understanding of function and to establish the existence of any consensus. Methods of representing this knowledge are examined, thereby identifying representation types or combinations used and the advantages to be gained from any single representation. Illustrations of the manipulation of function shows how this type of knowledge can be used to support reasoning during early stage design. A survey of relationships with other design characteristics as a testimony to the manipulation of functionality is used to impact other aspects of a design. Through knowledge of relationships some models of the design process are posited by workers. A study of these bears evidence of the role of function in design and the stages at which its use is significant.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 1994 , pp. 163 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bobrow, D, 1985, Qualitative Reasoning About Physical System. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cassirer, E, 1923, Science and Function. Open Court Publishing/Dover.Google Scholar
Chakrabarti, A, 1989, Functional Synthesis in Mechanical Conceptual Design. Technical report, Cambridge University Engineering Department, Internal Report.Google Scholar
Chakrabarti, A, Bligh, T and Holden, T, 1992, “Towards a decision-support framework for the embodiment-phase of mechanical design”. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 7 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandrasckaran, B, 1989, “A framework for design problem solving”. Research in Engineering Design 1 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, G,Seaton, M, Simpson, J and Kirkpatrick, E (eds) 1985, Chamber Concise 20th Century Dictionary. W & R Chambers Ltd.Google Scholar
de, Kleer J, 1979, Causal and Teleological Reasoning in Circuit Recognition. PhD thesis, MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Technical Report 529.Google Scholar
de, Kleer J, 1984, “How circuits work”. Artificial Intelligence, 24(3) 205–280.Google Scholar
de, Kleer J and Brown, J, 1984, “A qualitative physics based on confluences”. Artificial Intelligence 24.Google Scholar
de Kleer, J and Brown, J, 1986, “Theories of causal ordering”. Artificial Intelligence 29 33–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eastman, C, 1982, “Recent developments in representation in the science of design”. In: IEEE, Design Automation Conference Proceedings, Nashville, TN, 29 06–1 07.Google Scholar
Eastman, C, 1987, “Fundamental problems in the development of computer based architectural design models”. In: Design Abstractions.Google Scholar
Eastman, C, Bond, A and Chase, S, 1989, A Formal Approach for Product Model Information. Research Report 3, Graduate School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of California, 11.Google Scholar
Elm, W, 1988, Functional Structure Methodology. Westinghouse Electrical Corporation (unpublished).Google Scholar
Ernst, C and Newell, A, 1969, GPS: A Case Study in Generality and Problem Solving. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Faltings, B, 1991, “Qualitative models in conceptual design”. In: Proceedings of the first Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Design, pp 645–663.Google Scholar
Finger, S and Rinderle, J, 1989a, Transforming Behavioural and Physical Representations of Mechanical Designs. Technical report, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
Finger, S and Rinderle, J, 1989b, “A transformational approach to mechanical design using a bond graph grammar”. In: First ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Montreal, Quebec, 09.Google Scholar
Forbus, K, 1984, “Qualitative process theory”. Artificial Intelligence 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbus, K, 1988a, “Intelligent computer aided engineering design”. Al Magazine, Fall, 23–36.Google Scholar
Forbus, K, 1988b, “Qualitative physics: Past, future and present”. In: Schrobe, H (ed.) Exploring Artificial Intelligence: A Survey on talks from the national conferences on Artificial Intelligence, pp 239–296, Morgan- Kauffman.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbus, K, 1988c, “QPE: Using assumption-based truth maintenance for qualitative simulation”. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering. 3(4) 200–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, H and Fowler, F, (eds.), 1984, The Oxford English Dictionary (7th Ed.). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, P and Newell, A, 1971, “A model for functional reasoning in design”. In: Proceedings IJCAI, pp 621–639.Google Scholar
Gawthrop, P, 1989, “Symbolic generation of robot of simulations”. In: Third European Simulation Congress, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Gawthrop, P and Smith, L, 1990, “An environment for the specification, design, operation, maintenance and revision of manufacturing control systems”. In: UKIT 1990 Conference, Southampton, UK.Google Scholar
Gawthrop, P and Smith, L, 1992, MetaModelling. Manuscript in preparation, Control Group, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Gawthrop, P, Marrison, N and Smith, L, 1990, MTT: A Bond Graph Toolbox. Technical report, Control Group, The University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Gero, J, Lee, H and Tham, K, 1991, “Behaviour: A link between function and structure in design”. In: IFIP W.G. 5.2. Workshop on Intelligent CAD, Columbus, OH, 30 09-3 10.Google Scholar
Goel, A, 1991, “Representation of design functions in experience-based design”. In: IFIP W.G. 5.2 Workshop on Intelligent CAD, Columbus, OH, 30 09-3 10.Google Scholar
Goel, A and Chandrasekaran, B, 1989, “Functional representation of designs and redesign problem solving”. In: Proceedings Eleventh International conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, MI, 08.Google Scholar
Hoover, S and Rinderle, J, 1989, “A synthesis strategy for engineering devices”. Submitted to Research in Engineering Designs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundal, M, 1988, “Methods for systematic development of function structures with application to computers”. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED '88, pp 197–206, Budapest.Google Scholar
Hundal, M, 1990, “Research in design theory and methodology in West Germany”. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, pp 235–238, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 09.Google Scholar
Imamura, S, Kojima, T and Sekiguchi, H, 1988, “A study on the object oriented product model– Representation of Geometry and dimension”. Annals of the CIRP 37 127–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Y and Simon, H, 1988, “Causality in device behaviour”. Artificial Intelligence 29 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Y and Simon, H, 1986b, “Theories of causal ordering: A reply to de Kleer and Brown”. Artificial Intelligence 29 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joskowicz, L, 1988a, Mechanism Comparison and Classification for Redesign. Technical Report RC 14573 (65152), IBM Research Division, TJ Watson Research Center, NY.Google Scholar
Joskowicz, L, 1988b, “Reasoning about the kinamatics of mechanical devices”. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering.Google Scholar
Joskowicz, L and Addanki, S, 1988, Innovative Design of Kinematic Pairs. Technical Report RC 14506 (64962), IBM Research Division, TJ Watson Research Center, NY.Google Scholar
Karnopp, D and Rosenberg, R, 1975, System Dynamics: A Unified Approach. Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuipers, B, 1984, “Commonsense reasoning about causality: Deriving behaviour from structure”. Artificial Intelligence 24 169–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuipers, B, 1986, “Qualitative simulation.” Artificial Intelligence. 29 289–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, K, 1987, “Mechanical design simplification using function description language”. In:Proceedings of the 15th North American Manufacturing Research Conference (NAMRC), Bethlehem, PA, 05 27–29.Google Scholar
MacCallum, K, Duffy, A and Green, S, 1987, “Intelligent concept design assistant”. In:Design Theory for CAD: IFIP WG 5.2 Working Conference. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Mitchell, W, 1989, The Logic of Architecture. MIT, Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T, Steinberg, L and Shulman, J, 1985, A Knowledge-Based Approach to Design. Technical Report LCSR-TR-65, Computer Science Department, Rutgers University, 01.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pahl, G and Beitz, W, 1984, Engineering Design. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Paynter, H, 1961, Analysis and Design of Engineering Systems. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, J, 1984, On Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction, An Approach to Cognitive Engineering. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Rinderle, J, Colburn, E, Hoover, S, Paz-Souldon, J and Watton, J, 1989, “Form-function characteristics of electro-mechanical designs”. In: Design Theory '88: Proceedings of the 1988 NSF Grantee Workshop on Design Theory and Methodology. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Rodenacker, W, 1976, Methodisches Konstruieren. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, K, 1982, Konstruieren mit Konstruktions Katalogen. Springer.Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, K, Franke, H and Simonek, R, 1971, “Algorithmischeses Auswahlverfahren zur Konstruktion mit Katalogen”. Feinwerktechnik 75 337–345.Google Scholar
Simon, H, 1952, “On the definition of the causal relation”. Journal of Philosophy 49 517–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, J, 1982, The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, J and Smith, D, 1972, “Data-base abstractions: Generalizations and abstractions”. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 2(2) 105–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturges, R, 1981, The Function of Value Engineering. Technical report, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
Sturges, R, Kilani, M and O'Shaughnessy, K, 1991, An Extension of Function Logic Representations for Preliminary Design. Technical report, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie-Mellon University, 04.Google Scholar
Taura, T and Yoshikawa, H, 1991, “A metric space for intelligent CAD”. In: IFIP W.G. 5.2 Workshop on Intelligent CAD. Columbus, OH, 30 09-3 10.Google Scholar
Ulrich, T and Seering, W, 1989, “Synthesis of schematic descriptions in mechanical design”. Research in Engineering Design 1 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umeda, Y, Takeda, H, Tomiyama, T and Yoshikawa, H, 1990, “Function, behaviour and structure”. In:Proceedings of Al in Engineering '90, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Urdang, L, 1989, Synonym Dictionary. Longman.Google Scholar
Weld, D and de, Kleer J, 1990, Readings in Qualitative Reasoning About Physical Systems. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Williams, B, 1984, “Qualitative analysis of MOS circuits”. Artificial Intelligence 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B, 1991, “Interaction-based design: Constructing novel devices from first principles”. In: IFIP W.G. 5.2 Workshop on Intelligent CAD, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
Yoshikawa, H, Bo, K and Lillehagen, F, (eds.), “CAD framework guided by general design theory”. In:CAD Systems Framework. pp 241–344, North-Holland.Google Scholar
Akman, V, ten Hagen, P, Rogier, J and Veerkemp, P, 1987, “Knowledge engineering in design”. Technical report, Department of Interactive System, Center for Mathematics and Information Science (CWI), Kruislaan 413, 1098 Si Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Andreasen, M, 1985, “Methodology for layout design (‘ENTWERFEN’)”. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, 257–267, Hamburg, 26–2808.Google Scholar
Andreasen, M, 1990, “Strengthening the DFA rules by dispositional mechanisms”. In: 11th International Conference on Assembly Automation, Dearborn, MI, 11–14 11.Google Scholar
Bandekar, V, 1989, “Causal models for diagnostic reasoning”. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 4(2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blundell, J, 1990, “Functional design”. In: Proceedings of Manufacturing International '90, Part 2: Advances in Manufacturing Systems, Atlanta, GA, 25–28 03.Google Scholar
Bobrow, D, 1985, Qualitative Reasoning About Physical System. MIT, Press.Google Scholar
Bredeweg, B and Wielinga, B, 1988, “Integrating qualitative reasoning approaches”. In: Proceedings of ECAI-88, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
Bylander, T, 1988, “A critique of qualitative simulation from a consolidation viewpoint”, Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 18(2) 03/04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bytheway, C, 1985, “Basic function determination techniques”. In: Proceedings of Fifth National Meeting, volume 11. Society of American Value Engineers.Google Scholar
Cross, N, 1989, Engineering design methods. Wiley.Google Scholar
Davis, R, 1984, “Diagnostic reasoning based on structure and behaviour”. Artificial Intelligence 24 347–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, J, 1986, “Artificial intelligence and design: A mechanical engineering view”. In: Engineering Applications.Google Scholar
Dormoy, J and Raiman, O, 1990, “Assembling a device”. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 3(4) 216–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duhovnik, J, 1990, “Function classification of structure elements in CAD”. In: International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED '90, 810–821, Dubrovnik, 28–31 08.Google Scholar
Eastman, C, 1990, Explorations of the Cognitive Process in Design. Technical Report AD671158, Computer Science Department, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Eswaran, K and Chamberlin, D, 1975, “Functional specifications of a subsystem for data base entry”. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Very Large Databases, ACM.Google Scholar
Fenves, S and Baker, N, 1988, “Spatial and functional representation language for structural design”. In: IFIP WG 5.2, Expert Systems in Computer-Aided Design. Elsevier, 19–22 09.Google Scholar
Finger, S and Dixon, J, 1989, “A review of research in mechanical engineering design. Part II: Representations, analysis, and design for life cycle”. Research in Engineering Design 1 121–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finger, S and Rinderle, J, 1989, Representation of Mechanical Designs. Technical report, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
Forbus, K, 1981, “Qualitative reasoning about physical process”. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-81. Vancouver, BC, Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
French, M, 1985, Conceptual Design for Engineers. Design Council, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, M, 1990, “Function costing: A potential aid to designers”. Journal of Engineering Design 1(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabowski, H and Seiler, W, 1985, “Techniques, operations and models for functional and preliminary design phases”. In: H, Yoshikawa (ed.), Design and Synthesis 17–22, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Grinman, M, Nishnevich, V and Rokhlin, V, 1990, “Functional designing of the future of the turbine plants”. In: International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED '90, 245–250, Dubrovnik, 28–31 08.Google Scholar
Gui, J, 1990, “Function-behaviour-structure machine design model and its use in assembly sequence planning”. Journal of Engineering Design. 1(3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauck, P and Taylor, D, 1991, “Deriving physical design constraints from functional topologies”. Research in Engineering Design 2 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, P, 1979, “The naive physics manifesto”. In: D, Michie (ed.), Expert systems in the Micro-Electronic Age pp 242–269, Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, P, 1945, “The second naive physics manifesto”. In: J, Hobbs and R, Moore (ed.), Formal Theories of the Commonsense world 468–485, Ablex.Google Scholar
Horvath, I, 1990, “Selection and combination of part segments by function”. In: International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED '90, pp 91–98, Dubrovnik, 28–31 08.Google Scholar
Hubka, V, 1982, Principles of Engineering Design. Butterworth Scientific.Google Scholar
Hubka, V, 1985, “Attempts and possibilities for rationalisation of engineering design”. In: H, Yoshikawa (ed), Design and Synthesis pp 133–138, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Hubka, V, 1989, “A scientific approach to engineering design”. Design Studies 8(3), 07.Google Scholar
Hundal, M, 1990, “Research in design theory and methodology in West Germany”. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international Conference on Design Theory and Methodology. pp 235–238, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 09.Google Scholar
Hundal, M and Byrne, J, 1990. “Computer-aided generation of function block diagrams in a methodological design procedure”. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, pp 251–257, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 09.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Y, 1988, Model Based Reasoning of Device Behaviour with Causal Ordering. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Y and Simon, H, 1986, “Theories of causal ordering; A reply to de Kleer and Brown”. Artificial Intelligence 29 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, A, 1988, Functional modelling: A new development in computer aided design. Technical report, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Johnson, A, 1991, “Designing by functions”. Design Studies 12(1); 51–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kota, S and Lee, CL, 1990, “Functional framework for hydraulic systems design using abstraction/decomposition hierarchies”. In: Proceedings of ASME International Computers in Engineering, New York.Google Scholar
Kota, S and Ward, A, 1990, “Functions, structures, and constraints in conceptual design”. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, pp 239–250, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 09.Google Scholar
Kuipers, B and Berleant, D, 1988, “Using incomplete qualitative knowledge in qualitative reasoning”. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp 324–329, American Association for Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
Kuipers, B, de Kleer, J and Brown, J, 1981, Mental Models; A Critic. Working Papers in Cognitive Science 17, Tufts University, Medford, MA.Google Scholar
Lai, K and Wilson, W, 1987, “FDL: A language for functional description and rationalisation in mechanical design”. In: Computers in Engineering, ASME, pp 87–94, New York.Google Scholar
Margolis, D and Karnopp, D, 1979, “Bond graphs for flexible multibody systems”. Transactions of the ASME 101; 50–57.Google Scholar
Nayak, P, Joskowicz, L and Addanki, S, 1991, “Context-dependent behaviors: A preliminary report”. In: IFIP W. C. 5.2 Workshop on Intelligent CAD. Columbus, OH, 30 09–3 10.Google Scholar
Novak, G, 1976, Computer Understanding of Physics Problems Stated in National Language. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Popplestone, R, 1985, “The applications of artificial intelligence techniques to design systems”. In: H, Yoshikawa (ed.), Design and Synthesis, pp 453–458. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Popplestone, R, 1987, “The Edinburgh designer system as a framework for robotics: The design of behaviour”. Al EDAM, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pu, P, 1989, Qualitative Simulation of Ordinary and Intermittent Mechanisms. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Pugh, S, 1985. “CAD/CAM–Its effect on design understanding and progress”. In: International Conference on CAD/CAM, Robotics and Automation, Tuscon, 02.Google Scholar
Pugh, S and Morley, I, 1988, Total Design. Design Division, University of Strathclyde.Google Scholar
Pugh, S and Smith, D, 1976, “CAD in the context of engineering design–the designers viewpoint”. In: CAD 76 Proceedings pp 193–198.Google Scholar
Rinderle, J, 1982, Measures of Functional Coupling in Design. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rinderle, J and Suh, N, 1989, “Measures of functional coupling in design”. In: Journal of Engineering for Industry pp 383–388, 11.Google Scholar
Rodenacker, W and Baumgarth, R, 1976, “Die Vereinfachung der Gerate beginnt mit der Funktionsstruktur The Simplification of Devices Begins with the Function Structure”. Konstruktion 28 479–482.Google Scholar
Roth, K, 1985, “Modellbildung fur das methodische Konstruieren ohne und mit Rechnerunterstutzung Model Formation for Methodical Designing without and with Computer Support”. In: International Conference on Engineering Design. ICED '5 Hamburg, pp 633–644.Google Scholar
Roy, U and Liu, C, 1988, “Establishment of functional relationships between product components in assembly database”.CAD 21 561–569.Google Scholar
Scmekel, H, 1989, “Functional models and design solutions”. Annals of the CIRP. 01.Google Scholar
Sembugamoorthy, V and Chandrasekaran, B, 1984, Functional Representation of Devices and Compilation of Diagnostic Problem-Solving Systems. Technical report, AI Group, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Shrager, J, 1988, “Issues and direction in qualitative physics: Special edition from the 1987 workshops”. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 3(3) 122–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siewiorek, D, Giuse, D, Birmingham, W, Hirsch, M, Rao, V and York, G, 1982, DEMETER Project: Phase 1 (1984). Technical report, Carnegie-Mellon University. University of London.Google Scholar
Smithers, T, Conkie, A, Doheny, J, Logan, B and Millington, K, 1989, “Design as intelligent behaviour: An AI in design research programme”. In: Fourth International Conference on Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, Cambridge, UK, 11–14 07.Google Scholar
Sriram, D, Stephanopoulos, G, Logcher, R, Gossard, D, Grolean, N, Serrano, D and Navinchandro, D, 1989, “Knowledge-based system applications in engineering design: Research at MIT”. Al Magazine. 10(3) 79–95.Google Scholar
Stadlbauer, H, 1991, Functional-Skeletons: From Specification to Design. Technical report, Institute of Flexible Automation, Technology University of Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Stadlbauer, H, 1991, Functionality-Oriented Geometric Modelling. Technical report, Institute of Flexible Automation, Technology University of Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Stadlbauer, H, 1991, The Application of Functional-Skeletons to Reduce the Complexity of Finite Element Analysis. Technical report, Institute of Flexible Automation, Technology University of Vienna.Google Scholar
Steels, L, 1989, Diagnosis with a Function-Fault Model. Hemisphere Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sticklen, J and Chandrasekaran, B, 1989, “Integrating classification-based compiled level reasoning with function-based deep reasoning.” Hemisphere Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Struss, P, 1987, “Multiple representation of structure and function in an intelligent environment”. In: J, Gero (ed), Expert Systems in Computer-Aided Design. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, E, Podnar, G and Westerberg, A, 1990, A Shared Computational Environment for Concurrent Engineering. Technical report, Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
Ulrich, K, 1988, Computational and Pre-Parametric Design. PhD thesis, MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, T and Seering, W, 1988, “Computation and conceptual design”. In: Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing. 4(3/4) 309–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, T and Seering, W, 1988, “Conceptual design: Synthesis of systems components”. In: Intelligent and Integrated Manufacturing Analysis and Synthesis, pp 57–66, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.Google Scholar
Ulrich, T and Seering, W, 1988, “Function sharing in mechanical design”. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp 342–346, American Association for Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
Yoshikawa, H, 1981, “General design theory and intelligent behaviour”. In: Sata, T and Warman, E (eds.) Man-Machine Communication in CAD/CAM, pp 35–53, North-Holland.Google Scholar
Yoshikawa, H, 1982, “General design theory and a CAD system”. In: Man-Machine Communication in CAD/CAM, Proceedings of IFIP WG 5.2/5.3 Working Conference (Tokyo). North-Holland.Google Scholar