Mechatronic Design - Still a Considerable Challenge

Abstract

Development of mechatronic products is traditionally carried out by several design experts from different design domains. Performing development of mechatronic products is thus greatly challenging. In order to tackle this, the critical challenges in mechatronics have to be well understood and well supported through applicable methods and tools. This paper aims at identifying the major challenges, by conducting a survey of the most relevant research work in mechatronic design. Solutions proposed in literature are assessed and illustrated through a case study in order to investigate, if the challenges can be handled appropriately by the methods, tools, and mindsets suggested by the mechatronic community. Using a real world mechatronics case, the paper identifies the areas where further research is required, by showing a clear connection between the actual problems faced during the design task, and the nature of the solutions currently available. From the results obtained from this research, one can conclude that although various attempts have been developed to support conceptual design of mechatronics, these attempts are still not sufficient to help in assessing the consequences of selecting between alternative conceptual solutions across multiple domains. We believe that a common language is essential in developing mechatronics, and should be evaluated based on: its capability to represent the desired views effectively, its potential to be understood by engineers from the various domains, and its effect on the efficiency of the development process.

Collective understanding of system behavior : incorporating simulations in conceptual systems design

“…For example, Torry-Smith et al [Torry-Smith et al, 2011] present a comprehensive literature review in which they identify nineteen reported engineering challenges. Of those nineteen, at least ten deal directly with communication.…”

“…In addition to the comprehensive review of [Torry-Smith et al, 2011], earlier work of the author [Haveman, 2009] has identified needs of system architects through a series of interviews with system architects at several companies developing complex systems (radar systems, medical devices, printers, consumer products). Here, eleven needs were identified of which five were classified as communication needs.…”

“…These are listed in Table 2.4. While some of those are reflected in the challenges identified by [Torry-Smith et al, 2011], the second need mentions an interesting aspect, namely the desire to reduce irrelevant information while still delivering the right information. [Borches, 2010] applied this concept in the A3 Architecture Overview method, by restricting the presented information to two sides of an A3 paper.…”

“…Physics based simulations have succeeded in bridging gaps to other engineering disciplines, but not to the "non-technical" disciplines. While effort has been put into aligning the concepts and languages used by various disciplines to create a universally understood language, this has so far been unsuccessful [Torry-Smith et al, 2011]. Furthermore, in conceptual system design, many stakeholders are loosely involved in the design Table 4.2 -Overview of challenges in communication of simulations in conceptual system design Accommodate multiple disciplines In the conceptual stage of systems engineering, a broad audience is involved.…”

“…As one model seems to be a holy grail [Torry-Smith et al, 2011], multiple views have to be used that cover and relate to a wide and essential range of stakeholder viewpoints. The A3AO method as described by [Borches, 2010] uses this approach and has proven to be successful as a multidisciplinary communication tool in industry.…”