AMP-EMBODY ERASMUS Intensive Programme Delft 8-24 July 2013, Netherlands Final instruction Aggregated conclusions and tips Christos Spitas, Petra Badke-Schaub

AMP-EMBODYERASMUS Intensive ProgrammeDelft 8-24 July 2013, Netherlands

Final instruction

Aggregated conclusions and tipsChristos Spitas, Petra Badke-Schaub

Vasilios Spitas


Learning objectives• Educate students in

different complimentary advanced methods and tools for embodiment design developed in the four partner universities

• Provide a comprehensive practice experience to students, useful in itself to build up original design knowledge and to support and substantiate the learning process and competence acquisition


Learning objectives• Educate students in

reflecting on their design process and competences, gaining essential skills for sustained growth and life-long learning (modern ICT-assisted design protocol analysis)

• Produce students with well-integrated competence in Embodiment Design in the context of Product Engineering


Analysis of design protocols: Process

Challenge• Embodiment Design:

complex, costly and mission-critical phase in product design and engineering

• Often involving large development teams

How far it was met• Process: effective? tackled

complexity?

• Process: teamwork, team roles systematised? Belbin


Examples

Space antenna• Material suitability for deep

space/ temperature extremes?

• Minimum weight violated!• Vibration modes! (bending,

torsion)• Ambiguity in engineering

drawings• Validation?


Examples

Spinnaker• Load case!• But which material?• Weight/ density, flotation

not considered!• Engineering of hoisting

points!• Ambiguity in engineering



conten

t

proces

s

analy

sis

heures

is/ id

eation

evalu

ation

choice

none/ uncle

ar

more sp

ecific

static/

unknown

more ab

stract

oral ex

chan

ge

writing/

drawing

calcu

lating

search

ing for in

fo

silent/

unknown

passive

/ apath

ic

stress

ed/ a

nxious

relax

ed flow

good/ p

lausib

le

unclear

poor/ mist

ake

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

121-221-251 average


conten

t

proces

s

analy

sis

heures

is/ id

eation

evalu

ation

choice

none/ uncle

ar

more sp

ecific

static/

unknown

more ab

stract

oral ex

chan

ge

writing/

drawing

calcu

lating

search

ing for in

fo

silent/

unknown

passive

/ apath

ic

stress

ed/ a

nxious

relax

ed flow

good/ p

lausib

le

unclear

poor/ mist

ake

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

121-221-251


Implem

entor

Co-ordinato

r

Shap

erPlan

t

Resource

Inve

stiga

tor

Monitor E

valuato

r

Team

worke

r

Completer

Finish

er

Speci

alist

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Average Belbin role score (self-evaluation)

conten

t

proces

s

analy

sis

heures

is/ id

eation

evalu

ation

choice

none/ uncle

ar

more sp

ecific

static/

unknown

more ab

stract

oral ex

chan

ge

writing/

drawing

calcu

lating

search

ing for in

fo

silent/

unknown

passive

/ apath

ic

stress

ed/ a

nxious

relax

ed flow

good/ p

lausib

le

unclear

poor/ mist

ake

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

121-221-251 average


Tips (for junior engineers)• Employ analysis as

‘systematic decomposition’, not as ‘thinking about a problem’

• Perform heuresis as ‘systematic synthesis’ etc formal mappings, not as ‘inspired ideation’

• Perform evaluation as an objective mathematics-based operation, not as an intuitive or ‘democratic’ process

• Make all choices explicit; anticipate them and plan beforehand supporting evaluations


Tips (for junior engineers)• Plan and cluster your

work in targeted/ focused short-cycle (time-bound) work packages, each comprising meaningful sequences of analysis, heuresis, evaluation and choice

• Do not engage in unplanned ‘spaghetti’ sessions. Check your time vs. your plan. Develop error handling procedures.

• Manage your knowledge (searching) and computational resources


Tips (for junior engineers)• Be clear in your interim

and final outputs (TDP, validations). Pay attention to detail and follow communication standards. These will be used by others down the project value chain and must be adequate and complete.

• A design that cannot defend itself does not pass the next stage gate.

• Be positive. Be patient. Stay focused. Engineering design can involve a lot of tedium and does not have to be fun to be done.


Analysis of design protocols: Content

Challenge• Systematic ability to analyse

requirements and synthesise appropriate solutions is essential for innovation and success in a highly competitive global environment

• 'Turning function into embodiment'

How far it was met• Quality/ focus of interim

results, solutions

• How far, how specific?


Examples

Electromotor flange

• Over-constrained, functional tolerances not considered!

• Too many parts! Simplicity?• Ambiguity in engineering


• Reduce complexity –– But not too complex– Simplification

• Problem was not ill-defined

• Not understanding how the thing works

• Missing – reduced goal


Didactic programme Reflection

Context (cultural, presentation)

KnowledgeEmbodiment design

AMPMethods


CRITICAL SITUATIONS

TASK TEAM PROCESS

Problem analysis and definition

Coordination Management of disturbances

Idea generation Climate Planning (manage-ment of resources)

Solution analysis and decision

Conflicts

Individual: Cognitive – motivational – emotional processes


Embodiment design systematise product engineering

Object – system – goal analysis

Design with uncertainty

C & C2 approach


CRITICAL SITUATIONS

TASK


Coordination Managment of disturbances

Idea generation Climate Planing (management of ressources)


Conflicts


TRIZ

Design with uncertainty/C & C2

Idea mappingd

OCG


Embodiment design is….

interaction

methodology

reflection


CRITICAL SITUATIONS: Reflection

TASK TEAM PROCESS


Coordination Managment of disturbances

Idea generation Climate Planning (manage-ment of resources)


Conflicts


BELBIN

Eye-tracking

Smart pen

AMP-EMBODYERASMUS Intensive ProgrammeDelft 8-24 July 2013, NetherlandsTASK:

COGNITIVE PROCESSES

Dealing with uncertaintyReduction of complexity


TASKCognitive processes: – need to reduce complexity, – need to economise: to save time and effort

Routine patterns– Humans tend to follow established practices– their range of thinking and acting is limited- also in new

situations • reduced goal elaboration• reduced analysis

AMP-EMBODYERASMUS Intensive ProgrammeDelft 8-24 July 2013, NetherlandsConsequences in situations of uncertainty

1. thinking and acting is centred at the self - not at the problem

2. prevention of self-reflection

3. avoidance of further exploration

4. groupthink


1. Setting goals 2. Developing strategies3. Coordination: scheduling procedural tasks

and responsibilities in order to accomplish the goals

Process: Planning is a higher cognitive task

AMP-EMBODYERASMUS Intensive ProgrammeDelft 8-24 July 2013, NetherlandsWHY?

Motivational system: self-protection

1. Need for affiliation = to feel integrated in a group

2. Need for control = to feel assured to know what is going to happen

3. Need for competence = perceived competence to satisfy the basic needs


The vicious circle of failures

no adaptation – no change


Cognitive-motivational model explaining deficiencies in planning & decision making

feeling of competence

-

need for control

emotional strain

-physiological activation

-

choice of well-known rules and

schemata

avoidance of further mental

load

+

quick decisions no decisions

+

uncertainty

+

+

-

aggression regression resignation

low exploration: search of new information

+

-

DOiNG RIGHT? DOiNG WRONG


shaper

teamworker


implementor


Design with Uncertainty

Flow??


All roads leading to ….

DELFT

DELFT

DELFT


Your way to ….

DELFT

DELFT

DELFT

THANK YOU

Documents

AMP-EMBODY ERASMUS Intensive Programme Delft 8-24 July 2013, Netherlands Final instruction Aggregated conclusions and tips Christos Spitas, Petra Badke-Schaub