Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Case studies of coordination activities and problems in collaborative design

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

Abstract

The design and engineering of large, complex electromechanical artifacts for use in space requires the integration of many engineering groups, spread across the components of the artifact and across the customer and suppliers. And within each engineering group there is a need to integrate the many diverse skills required, such as electrical, mechanical, thermal, software and materials. This paper describes the results of a study conducted from the Summer of1992 through the Fall of1993 at a medium sized aerospace company. The study had two goals. The first goal was to identify project delays that were due to poor coordination and integration. The second goal was to identify the activities which occupy engineers at the company and to rank the activities by the level of frustration and wasted effort encountered in performing them. The first goal was accomplished by studying25 problem cases, compiled and classified into six problem categories: information acquisition (24% of cases), information access (32% of cases), knowledge access (4% of cases), decision interdependence (8% of cases), activity management (12% of cases) and agent access (16% of cases). The delays associated with information acquisition, information access and knowledge access range from 1 day to as much as a year; they range from 1 day to a week for the other categories. The second goal, to identify the activities which occupy engineers and to rank the activities by the frustration and wasted effort encountered, was accomplished by conducting a survey, circulated to 30 engineers across five different departments. The participants were required to track the time spent in seven different activities over an actual 5 day week. They also estimated the time they would spend on these activities in a typical week on a percentage basis. The percentages of time spent were: information gathering (13.7%—actual; 12.2%—typical), problem, solving/thinking (28.0%—actual; 29.8%—typical), documentation (23.5%—actual; 19.5%—typical), planning (7.8%—actual; 8.5%—typical), negotiating (7.6%—actual; 9.8%—typical), support and consulting (17.1%—actual; 18.1%—typical) and other (2.3%—actual; 2.1%—typical). The participants also rated the activities from 1 (most frustrating) to 7 (least frustrating). The average scores, beginning with the most frustrating, were: 3.33-information gathering, 3.48-negotiation, 3.56-documentation, 3.67-support/consulting, 3.9-planning, 4.52-problem solving/thinking and 6.67-other.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from ¥17,985 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  1. Kitzmiller, C.; Jagannathan, V. (1989) Design in a distributed blackboard framework, Intelligent CAD. I: Proceedings of IFIP TC/WG 5.2 Workshop on Intelligent CAD, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 223–233

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pennell, J.P.; Winner, R.I. (1989) Concurrent engineering: practices and prospects, GLOBECOM '89: IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference and Exhibition—Communications for the 1990s and Beyond, Vol. 1, IEEE, New York, 647–655

    Google Scholar 

  3. Proceedings of the ACM 1992 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Association for Computing Machinery, New York

  4. Crabtree, R.A.; Fox, M.S.; Baid, N. (1994) Towards an understanding of collaborative design activities, Technical Report, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto Canada

  5. Prasad, B.; Morenc, R.S.; Rangan, R.M. (1992) Information management for concurrent engineering: research issues, Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, Vol. 1, The Institute of Concurrent Engineering, 3–20

  6. McNeese, M.D.; Zaff, B.S.; Brown, C.E.; Citera, M.; Wellens, A.R. (1992) The role of a group centered approach in the development of computer supported collaborative design technologies, Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting

  7. Kleinman, D.L. (1990) Coordination in human teams: theories, data, models, IFAC 11th Triennial World Congress, Tallinn, Estonia

  8. Lindeman, D.; Wijaya, L. (1992) Managing design structure data in a concurrent engineering environment, ASME 1992 Conference: Engineering Data Management: Key to Integrated Product Development, New York, 97–104

  9. Biliris, A.; Zhao, H. (1991) Design versions in a distributed CAD environment, Proceedings of the Eighth Annual International Phoenix Conference on Computers and Communication, IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, DC 354–359

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sinclair, M.A.; Siemieniuch, C.E.; John, P.A. (1989) A user centred approach to define high-level requirements for next-generation CAD systems for mechanical engineering, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 36, 4, 262–270

    Google Scholar 

  11. Thomas, R.; Drury, R. (????) Team Communication in Complex Projects, First International Conference on Engineering Management, 187–197

  12. Garcia, A.C.B.; Howard, H.C. (1992) Acquiring knowledge through design decision justification, AI EDAM, Vol. 6, Issue 1, Academic Press, New York, 59–71

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wallace, K.M., Hales, C. (1987) Detailed analysis of an engineering design project, Proceedings of ICED'87, 94–101

  14. Uejio, W.H.; Carmody, S.; Ross, B. (1991) An electronic project notebook from the electronic design notebook (EDN), General Electric Corporate Research and Development Center, Schenectady, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Louie, J. (1995) An analysis of a pen-based tool for acquiring engineering design information, MSC Thesis, TR-EIL-95-1, Enterprise Integration Laboratory, Industrial Engineering Department, University of Toronto

  16. Boettner, D.; Ward, A. (1992) Design compilers and the labelled interval calculus, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Vol. I, Academic Press, San Diego, CA

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fox, M.S.; Finger, S.; Gardner, E.; Navin chandra, D.; Safier, S.; Shaw, M. (1992) Design fusion: an architecture for concurrent design, Knowledge Aided Design (Green, M. Editor). Academic Press, San Diego, 157–196

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, 4 Taddle Creek Road, MSS IA4, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Robert A. Crabtree, Mark S. Fox & Nirmal K. Baid

Authors
  1. Robert A. Crabtree
  2. Mark S. Fox
  3. Nirmal K. Baid

Corresponding author

Correspondence toMark S. Fox.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from ¥17,985 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Advertisement

[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2026 Movatter.jp