1. Managing Design Knowledge Managing & Exchanging Knowledge Underlying Aerospace Engineering Design Decisions
Scottie-Beth Fleming & Dr. Amy R. Pritchett
June 15, 2015
ASEE’s 122nd Annual Conference & Exposition
NSF, grant number DGE

2. Aerospace Engineering Design
Engineering design is a structured approach to developing, validating, and implementing complex systems
Multiple points of interaction
Overlapping, interdependent, and often conflicting design parameters
Design is like a jig saw puzzle– each person has a different component. Have to fit the pieces together.
Images from
Pahl et al, 2007; Cross, 2006; DAU, 2001

3. Aerospace Engineering Design
Industry has expressed a need for engineering graduates to use effective approaches to system design, integration, and synthesis
Design is like a jig saw puzzle– each person has a different component. Have to fit the pieces together.
Images from
Dutson et al., 1997

4. Aerospace Engineering Design Education
Capstone design can cultivate students’ skills to
Use understanding of the engineering design process to examine the full context of the design problem [ABET student outcome (c)]
Collaborate on multidisciplinary teams [ABET student outcome (d)]
Communicate effectively [ABET student outcome (g)]
Senior Design
Capstone Course
Images from
ABET, 2014; Woods et al, 2000; Paretti, 2008

5. Aerospace Engineering Design Education
However, novice aerospace engineers are often unable to
integrate multidisciplinary design considerations
translate preferences, constraints, and decisions to others also engaging in the design process
Examine the role of managing and exchanging knowledge underlying aerospace engineering design decisions.
Senior Design
Capstone Course
Images from
Ahmed et al, 2004; Daly et al., 2001; Fleming & Coso, 2014; Gertler, 2014; Griffin, 2005; NTSB, 2013; Oakley et al, 2004; Richey, 2005

6. Scholarship of Integration
“giving meaning to isolated facts, putting them in perspective…making connections across the disciplines, placing the specialties in larger context, illuminating data in a revealing way, often educating nonspecialists too.” (Boyer, 1990)
Aerospace Engineering Design Process
Literature from Org Behavior, I/O Psych, Education, Design
Frame the design context
Identify critical behaviors
Scholarship reconsidered
Strategies for managing and exchanging design knowledge
Boyer, 1990

7. AE Design Context: MultiTeam System
Operations & Manufacturing
Testing and Evaluation
Chief Engineer
System Integration
Technical Components
Certification
Concept
Multidisciiplinary, collaborative, integrated

8. Shared Knowledge “Common ground" among collaborators
Used to survey and respond to environment
Engineering design teams are not always aware of interdisciplinary considerations
Clark & Schaefer, 1981; Cramton, 2001; Keysar, Barr, Balin, & Paek, 1998
Image from
Image from

9. Boeing 787 Case
“In retrospect, we may apply tighter test criteria or seek to understand test criteria a little more” ~Mike Sennett
Operations & Manufacturing
Testing and Evaluation
Chief Engineer
System Integration
Engineering designers must recognize the considerations and constraints of disciplines outside their own expertise
Technical Components
Certification
Movement to distributed design process with multiple teams.
Boeing 787 was designed by 47 different companies working on 89 technical systems. located globally in 10 countries and 16 states, 7 languages, 8 time zones
However, technical problems with 787 led to late delivery and major technical problems in flight, particularly with the Lion Battery (designed by a Japanese company). VP of engineering and chief project engineer for 787 would have questioned battery maker GS Yuasa more. ‘In retrospect, we may apply tighter test criteria or seek to understand test criteria a little more,’
Electrical Systems
Concept
LiIon Batteries
Special Conditions
NTSB, 2013

10. Goal Alignment Design teams share at least one high-level goal
More detailed goals and design requirements should remain consistent with the high-level goals.
However, detailed design preferences and specific discipline-based goals do not necessarily align
Griffin, 2005; Marks et al 2001; Mathieu et al, 2001; Mesmer-Magnus & DeChurch, 2009; Richey, 2005
Image from

11. C-5 and F-111 Cases
C-5 Galaxy
F-111 Aardvark
High-level design goal explicitly defined and understood at the start of the design process
Conflicting high-level design goals caused the Navy to terminate the F-111B variant
Design teams should specify and prioritize goals early in the design process, and continuously monitor progress toward mission accomplishment
Griffin, 2005; Richey, 2005
Images from

12. Information Sharing Awareness of the distribution of information
the collective exchange and utilization of knowledge and expertise previously held by a limited number of group members
Awareness of the distribution of information
Understanding of the approaches for sharing information
Understanding of how information can be integrated into design decisions.
While effectively distributed knowledge increases creativity and productivity, it is also can hinder overall team effectiveness (van Ginkel & van Knippenberg, 2009). Team members may fail to exchange relevant information (Stasser & Titus, 1985; van Ginkel & van Knippenberg, 2009) or to integrate pertinent information into reasoning for design decisions (van Ginkel & van Knippenberg, 2009). Team members’ approaches to sharing information thus become an important feature of effective team coordination (Bunderson & Sutcliff, 2002; Jehn & Shah, 1997; Mesmer-Magnus & Dechurch, 2009).
Additionally, it is critical to consider the expertise of the designer, which can cause knowledge needs, awareness, and requests to vary (Ahmed & Wallace, 2004). Novice designers may ask relevant questions when aware of their knowledge needs, leading to pertinent information sharing. However, when novice designers are unaware of their knowledge needs, they are subsequently unable to ask questions or to employ a clear design strategy that is capable of learning to the pertinent information sharing. Conversely, expert designers tend to employ a well-defined design strategy when problem-solving, without being explicitly aware of the utilized strategic knowledge (Ahmed et al., 2003).
While research has investigated the openness and uniqueness of information sharing, limited work has been done to jointly consider these two dimensions (Fleming & Coso, 2014). Fleming and Coso (2014) suggests future research should include expanded definitions of openness and uniqueness to also incorporate aspects of relevancy. To operationalize the relevancy of information sharing, a consideration must be made for how information is integrated or abstracted into final design decisions (Fleming & Coso, 2014). Aurisicchio, Bracewell, and Wallace similarly found that more research is needed on the information needs of engineering designers (Aurisicchio, Bracewell, & Wallace, 2010; Aurisicchio et al., 2012; Aurisicchio, Bracewell, & Wallace, 2013).
Bunderson & Sutcliff, 2002; Jehn & Shah, 1997; Mesmer-Magnus & Dechurch, 2009; Stasser & Titus, 1985; Miranda & Saunders, 2003
Image from

13. AE Design Team Strategies
Rolls-Royce Design Teams
Boeing 787 Dreamliner
Informal communications across working groups allows for timely task feedback and reflection
Chief project engineer for 787 recognized communication and collaboration failures
Develop a collaborative strategy which incorporates information about team resources, member expertise, critical design events, and the changing nature of the design environment
Collaborative processes can observed and managed
Information sharing is a critical mechanism for enabling constructive feedback on collaborative process
“In retrospect, we may apply tighter test criteria or seek to understand test criteria a little more” Mike Sennett testimony to NTSB, April 2014
Images from
Baird et al, 2000; NTSB, 2013

14. Strategies for managing & exchanging design decisions
Goal Alignment
Shared Knowledge
Design teams should specify and prioritize goals early in the design process, and continuously monitor progress toward mission accomplishment
Engineering designers must recognize the considerations and constraints of disciplines outside their own expertise
Information Sharing
Designers should develop a collaborative strategy which incorporates information about team resources, member expertise, critical design events, and the changing nature of the design environment
Workshop for Managing & Exchanging Design Decisions
Problem Scoping & Design Integration

15. Workshop Wrapper: Systems Engineering
Top-down comprehensive, iterative and recursive problem solving process, applied sequentially through all stages of development
Decompose problem into manageable subsystems
Systematic process: approach dependent on culture of company and engineering discipline
Goal oriented: objective and requirements are determined by stakeholders
Synthesize interdependent design parameters into integrated solution
Image copied from Systems Engineering Fundamentals (2001)
Defense Acquisition University Press, 2001; van Lamsweerde & Letier, 2000; NASA 2007

16. Problem Scoping System Decomposition Stakeholder Identification
Information Gathering
Mission Decomposition
Requirements Definition

17. Design Integration Jig-Saw, Role-Playing Activity
Participants become “experts” on one system component
System experts redistribute to multidisciplinary teams
Negotiate high-level design objectives and constraints
Identify critical design metrics of effectiveness

18. Final Thoughts Aerospace Engineering Design Process
Strategies for Knowledge Management & Exchange
Intervention Design

19. This work was sponsored by the NSF, grant number DGE-0644493
Thank you! Questions?
This work was sponsored by the NSF, grant number DGE