Set-based concurrent engineering (SBCE), a process that develops sets of many design candidates for each subproblem throughout a design project, proposes several benefits compared to point-based processes, where only one design candidate for each subproblem is chosen for further development. These benefits include reduced rework, improved design quality, and retention of knowledge to use in future projects. Previous studies that introduce SBCE in practice achieved success and had very positive future outlooks, but SBCE encounters opposition because its core procedures appear wasteful as designers must divide their time among many designs throughout the process, most of which are ultimately not used. The impacts of these procedures can be explored in detail through open-source computational tools, but currently few exist to do this. This work introduces the Point/Set-Organized Research Teams (PSORT) modeling platform to simulate and analyze a set-based design process. The approach is used to verify statements made about SBCE and investigate its effects on project quality. Such an SBCE platform enables process exploration without needing to commit many projects and resources to any given design.

Modern day building design projects require multidisciplinary expertise from architects and engineers across various phases of the design (conceptual, preliminary, and detailed) and construction processes. The Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) community has recently shifted gears toward leveraging design optimization techniques to make well-informed decisions in the design of buildings. However, most of the building design optimization efforts are either multidisciplinary optimization confined to just a specific design phase (conceptual/preliminary/detailed) or single disciplinary optimization (structural/thermal/daylighting/energy) spanning across multiple phases. Complexity in changing the optimization setup as the design progresses through subsequent phases, interoperability issues between modeling and physics-based analysis tools used at later stages, and the lack of an appropriate level of design detail to get meaningful results from these sophisticated analysis tools are few challenges that limit multi-phase multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) in the AEC field. This paper proposes a computational building design platform leveraging concurrent engineering techniques such as interactive problem structuring, simulation-based optimization using meta models for energy and daylighting (machine learning based) and tradespace visualization. The proposed multi-phase concurrent MDO framework is demonstrated by using it to design and optimize a sample office building for energy and daylighting objectives across multiple phases. Furthermore, limitations of the proposed framework and future avenues of research are listed.

Set-based design (SBD), sometimes referred to as set-based concurrent engineering (SBCE), has emerged as an important component of lean product development (LPD) with all researchers describing it as a core enabler of LPD. Research has explored the principles underlying LPD and SBCE, but methodologies for the practical implementation need to be better understood. A review of SBD is performed in this article in order to discover and analyse the key aspects to consider when developing a model and methodology to transition to SBCE. The publications are classified according to a new framework, which allows us to map the topology of the relevant SBD literature from two perspectives: the research paradigms and the coverage of the generic creative design process (Formulation–Synthesis–Analysis–Evaluation–Documentation–Reformulation). It is found that SBD has a relatively low theoretical development, but there is a steady increase in the diversity of contributions. The literature abounds with methods, guidelines and tools to implement SBCE, but they rarely rely on a model that is in the continuum of a design process model, product model or knowledge-based model with the aim of federating the three Ps (People–Product–Process) towards SBCE and LPD in traditional industrial contexts.

On s’intéresse au problème de l’optimisation multidisciplinaire, lorsque les disciplinessont prises en compte par des critères qui sont des fonctionnelles de solutionsdistribuées d’équations aux dérivées partielles. Pour le cas de deux disciplines, onpropose une stratégie dans laquelle l’optimisation est décomposée en deux phases : (a) unephase d’optimisation coopérative au cours de laquelle les critères sont améliorés à chaqueitération, et (b) une phase d’optimisation concurrentielle réalisée par un jeu de Nashassocié à un partage adapté des variables.

This paper presents a novel formulation of the configuration-design problem that achieves the benefits of the concurrent engineering (CE) design paradigm. In CE, all design concerns (manufacturability, testability, etc.) are applied to an evolving design throughout the design cycle. CE identifies conflicts early on, avoids costly redesign, and leads to better products. Our formulation is based on a distributed dynamic interval constraint-satisfaction problem (DDICSP) model. Persistent catalog agents map onto DDICSP variables and constraint agents map onto DDICSP constraints. These agents use a set of operations and heuristics to navigate the design space to eliminate sets of designs until a solution is found. Experimental results show that an architecture where each catalog agent resides on a separate computer has performance advantages over nondistributed approaches.

Concurrent engineering is often viewed either from a technical point of view—that is, as a problem that can be solved by creating and integrating computer-based tools—or from an organizational point of view—that is, as a problem that can be solved by creating and reorganizing teams of designers. In this paper we argue that concurrent engineering requires both technical and organizational solutions, and we call the result concurrent design. We believe that the essence of concurrent design is the myriad of interactions that occur at the interfaces among all of the members of a design team and all their tools. Solving either the technical or organizational problems by assuming away the interactions will not solve the problems of concurrent design.

In this paper we present two case studies of concurrent design in practice that have changed our assumptions about design and which have changed our research agenda. We also present the evolution of concurrent design research at the Carnegie Mellon Engineering Design Research Center. In our research, we have designed, manufactured, and used our own tools as well as observed their use by others—where the tools include mobile computers, design analysis programs, and information organization tools. Through this process, we have learned about design education and design practice, and we have uncovered new issues for design research. We see the interactions among design research, practice, and education as essential to understanding concurrent design.

Integrating multiple engineering perspectives is critical to designing ever more complex products, but this introduces great potential for miscommunication leading to design conflicts. The SHADE (SHAred Dependency Engineering) project is defining agent infrastructure technology that supports dynamic, knowledge-based communication among heterogeneous engineering tools, collaboration systems, and conflict management systems. Building on technologies for defining a shared formal vocabulary and protocols for exchanging information, SHADE is developing facilitators that assist in locating and disseminating information. The result is a flexible infrastructure that helps existing engineering tools work together more effectively, and that supports a variety of new conflict management approaches. This article outlines the facilitation and application agents created by SHADE, and provides an in-depth example of their application to an engineering task.

An approach to providing computational support for concurrent design is discussed in the context of an industrial cable harness design problem. Key issues include the development of an architecture that supports collaboration among specialists, the development of hierarchical representations that capture different characteristics of the design, and the decomposition of tasks to achieve a trade-off between efficiency and robustness. An architecture is presented in which the main design tasks are supported by agents – asynchronous and semiautonomous modules that automate routine design tasks and provide specialized interfaces for working on particular aspects of the design. The agent communication and coordination mechanisms permit members of an engineering team to work concurrently, at different levels of detail and on different versions of the design. The design is represented hierarchically, with detailed models maintained by the participating agents. Abstractions of the detailed models, called “agent model images,” are shared with other agents. In conjunction with the architecture and design representations, issues pertaining to the exchange of information among different views of the design, management of dependencies and constraints, and propagation of design changes are discussed.

Conflicts are likely to arise among participants in a collaborative design process as the inevitable outgrowth of the differing perspectives and viewpoints involved. The opportunities for conflict are magnified if many perspectives are brought to bear on a common artifact early in the design process, as in concurrent engineering or integrated engineering. Design advice tools can assist in the process of resolving these conflicts by making critiques and suggestions conveniently available to design participants, and by offering a fair means of evaluating and comparing suggested alternatives for compromise solution. In previous work we introduced a protocol based on notions of economic utility by which design advice systems can recognize conflict and mediate negotiation fairly. This protocol allowed design teams to express the desire to maximize or minimize the values of design parameters over totally ordered bounded domains of values, such as real numeric intervals. In this paper we extend this approach by allowing expressed preferences of design teams to be qualitative as well as quantitative, by allowing teams to express interest in parameters before they actually come into existence, and by relaxing many other of the earlier restrictions on the ways teams may express their preferences.

The Explorer parametric design assistant, an interactive tool that provides intelligent support for searching concurrent-engineering trade-spaces under multiple, conflicting objectives, is described. The system provides a convenient means for specifying multiple, cross-disciplinary constraints in terms of tables, formulas, and logical sentences. Based on these data, the system performs interactive constraint checking, computes feasible designs, and provides graphical analysis facilities, allowing users to compare designs based on multiple criteria. As a first application, Explorer has been used as a printed circuit board (PCB) construction design assistant. In initial tests, Explorer has helped users to find design configurations not previously considered that yield comparable performance and cost while offering better manufacturability and reliability. The capabilities and use of the Explorer system are described in detail, the underlying technologies are outlined, and an evaluation of the prototype system is presented.

A difficult task in concurrent engineering tasks is to provide appropriate manufacturability feedback to the designer in a timely manner. Many tools provide designers with cost and manufacturability evaluations, but they do not necessarily help the designer to identify what aspects of the design to change in order to improve it from a manufacturing perspective. A computer-assisted concurrent-engineering technology is described which identifies cost-critical tolerances in the design and generates cost-reducing design suggestions. The purpose of the system is to help focus the designer’s attention on the specific aspects of the design that influence manufacturing cost. This can aid the designer in optimizing the manufacturing costs of prismatic, one-off parts created on a CNC machining center. This work uses a program called the Manufacturing Evaluation Agent to produce cost-reducing design suggestions. The Manufacturing Evaluation is made up of two portions: a manufacturing planner and a suggestion generator. The manufacturing planner, P3, takes a design and generates a manufacturing constraint net that represents all manufacturing steps and their sequencing. Each constraint in the network has a label indicating the portions of the design (or manufacturing environment) that gave rise to that constraint. The Suggestion Generator analyzes the manufacturing constraint net to find the cost-critical areas, and uses the labels to find the portions of the design responsible for these cost-critical parts of the manufacturing plan. By pinpointing the cost-critical areas of the design and suggesting alternatives, the Manufacturing Evaluation Agent can help the de-signer to more quickly develop a superior design. This results in more rapid turnaround time, lower cost designs, and fewer engineering change orders once the design is sent to the factory floor.

Le caractère spécifique d'une machine spéciale nécessite l'élaboration d'un cahier des charges dans lequel le client exprime son besoin. Il oriente et réalise cette étape en fonction de ses habitudes, sans qu'il n'existe une réelle méthode. En retour, le fournisseur consulté, au travers de son offre, s'engage à satisfaire ce besoin en termes de performances, de coûts, de délais et de qualité.Ainsi, la méthodologie proposée définit une stratégie d'élaboration et de maîtrise du cahier des charges. Elle permet d'assister le donneur d'ordres dans la formalisation de son besoin initial et d'aider le constructeur à traduire ce besoin et à analyser les aspects critiques associés afin d'élaborer un plan d'actions en diminution de risques lui permettant de satisfaire les exigences du client.

Under the concept of a global economy, enterprises are assigning design and production environments around the world in different areas. A serious issue of information exchange emerges as companies use traditional hardware and very distinct software appropriate to their field of expertise. To overcome the problem of low productivity due to the interruption of information, the concept of simultaneous engineering and concurrent design becomes very significant. In this article an agent-based ship design system is developed to support cooperation in distributed ship design environments. Above all, the conflicts that occur while sharing knowledge in the system must be resolved. One approach is to adopt a case-based conflict resolution strategy formulated to resolve current conflict on the basis of similar previously resolved cases in agent-based collaborative design system environments. To do this, conflict cases that occur in the initial ship design stage are extracted. On the basis of the extracted cases, a case base is constructed. In addition, a conflict resolution handler located in the superagent called a facilitator, an agent to control other subagents, is developed to treat conflict problems effectively by case-based reasoning. The case-based conflict resolution strategy is evaluated by applying it to a collaborative design process in the initial ship design stage, especially the machinery outfitting design, the preliminary design, the hullform design, and the structural design. Through the help of the collaboration of the design agents, the facilitator, the conflict resolution handler, and the case-based system, a designer can make decisions based on similar previously resolved cases.

Concurrent Engineering needs a series of measures (or measurement criteria) that are distinct to each process, and a set of metrics to check (and validate) the outcome when two or more of the life-cycle processes are overlapped or required to be executed in parallel. Because product realization involves concurrent processes that occur across multiple disciplines and organizations, appropriate measures and the methods of qualifying metrics are essential. Inevitably, such concurrent processes generate design conflicts among multiple life-cycle concerns. Individual assurances of satisfying life-cycle design criterion (one at a time) do not capture the most important aspect of Concurrent Engineering—the system perspective—meaning achieving a well-balanced trade-off among the different life-cycle design measures. While satisfying life-cycle design measures in a serial manner only those, which are not in conflict, are occasionally met. The paper first describes a set of life-cycle measures and metrics and explains how those could be used for gaining operational excellence. Second, this paper provides an insight into the mechanisms (such as knowledge-based systems, rule-based simulation, and rule-based optimization) to ensure an effective trade-off across different life-cycle measures, customer requirements, and their inclusion into a product design, development, and delivery (PD3) process.

The paper describes a set of seven fundamental principles for achieving “best concurrency and simultaneity.” The concurrent approach is gaining worldwide attention at this moment. The paralleling of life-cycle activities and process restructuring are being deemed necessary by more and more industries. An automobile product development process example is used in this paper to illustrate many aspects of these seven principles. The principles help the concurrent teams, first, to define how to decompose the product, process and work activities and then, how to arrange these decomposed activities so that “best concurrency and simultaneity” can be achieved.