What does it mean to design somethi

What does it mean to design something? Is engineering design different from other kinds of design?

PEOPLE HAVE been designing things for as long as we can archaeologically uncover. Our earliest ancestors designed flint knives and other tools to help meet their most basic needs. Their wall paintings were designed to tell stories and to make their primitive caves more attractive. Given the long history of people designing things, it is useful to set some context for engineering design and to start developing a vocabulary and a shared understanding of what we mean by engineering design.

WHERE AND WHEN DO ENGINEERS DESIGN?

What does it mean for an engineer to design something? When do engineers design things?
Where? Why? For whom?
An engineer working for a large company that processes and distributes various food products could be asked to design a container for a new juice product. She could work for a design-and-construction company, designing part of a highway bridge embedded in a larger transportation project, or for an automobile company that is developing new instrumentation clusters for its cars, or for a school system that wants to design specialized facilities to better serve students with orthopedic disabilities.
There are common features that make it possible to identify a design process and the context in which it occurs. In each of these cases, three “roles” are played as the design unfolds. First there is a client, a person or group or company that wants a design conceived.
There is also a user who will employ or operate whatever is being designed. Finally, there is a designer whose job is to solve the client’s problem in a way that meets the user’s needs.
The client could be internal (e.g., a person at the food company in charge of the new juice product) or external (e.g., the government agency that contracts for the new highway system). While a designer may relate differently to internal and external clients, it is typically the client who motivates and presents the starting point for design. That is why a designer’s first task is to question the client to clarify what the client really wants and translate it into a form that is useful to her as an engineer. We’ll say more about this in Chapter 3 and beyond.
It is worth noting that the client, the user, and even the designer may not always be three or even two different people: In a small start-up, for example, the designer may be the client, and may also rely on his or her own personal experience as a user when initiating a design. Similarly, for an internal project, the roles may again merge. However, for most design projects, it is useful to distinguish between the three roles and their respective responsibilities—as anyone who has used beta versions of software can testify because all too often, software designers imagine that their own experience is sufficient for every user!
The user is a key player in the design effort. In the contexts mentioned above, the
users are, respectively, consumers who buy and drink a new juice drink, drivers on a new interstate highway, and students with orthopedic disabilities (and their teachers). Users have a stake in the design process because designs have to meet their needs. Thus, the designer, the client, and the user form a triangle, as shown in Figure 1.1. The designer has to understand what both the client and users want and need. Often the client speaks to the designer on behalf of the intended users, although anyone who has sat in a cramped seat on a commercial flight would have to ask both airlines and airplane manufacturers who they think their users are!
The public also has a stake in many designs, for example, a new interstate highway.
While the notion of the public may seem to be implicit in the user, this is not always the case. Explicitly identifying who is affected by a design is important, because it may raise ethical issues in design projects, as we will explore in Chapter 17.
It is clear that both designer and client have to understand what the users want and
what the public demands in a design. In Chapter 2, we will describe design processes that model how engineers interact with and communicate their design thinking to clients and potential users. In Chapters 3–5, we will identify some tools to organize and refine that thinking.
Engineering designers work in many different kinds of environments: small and large companies, start-up ventures, government, not-for-profit organizations, and engineering
Figure 1.1 The designer–client–user triangle shows three parties involved in a design effort: a client, who has objectives that must be realized; the users of the design, who have their own wishes; the designer, who must design something that can be built and that satisfies everybody.
services firms. Designers will see differences in the size of a project, the number of
colleagues on the design team, and their access to relevant information about what users want. On large projects, many designers will be working on details of a project that are so confined that much of what we describe in this book may not seem immediately useful. The
designers of a bridge abutment, an airplane fuel tank, or components of a computer
motherboard are not likely to be as concerned with the larger picture of what clients and users want from the entire project because the system-level design context has already been established. These are detailed design problems in which more general design issues have already been decided. However, all projects begin with conceptual design. Thinking about the size and mission of an airplane will have been done before fuel tank design begins, and the overall performance parameters of the computer motherboard will be determined prior to selecting specific chips.
Large, complex projects often lead to very different interpretations of client project
statements and of user needs. One has only to look at the many different kinds of
skyscrapers that decorate our major cities to see how architects and structural engineers envisage different ways of housing people in offices and apartments. Visible differences also emerge in airplane design (Figure 1.2) and wheelchair design (Figure 1.3). Each of these sets of devices could result from a simple, common design statement: Airplanes are

Figure 1.2 Several aircraft, each of which “safely transports people or goods through the air,” and each of which was designed for a different mission.
Figure 1.3 A collection of “personal mobility devices to transport people unable to use their legs,” that is, a set of very different wheelchairs.
“devices to transport people and goods through the air,” and wheelchairs are “personal mobility devices for people who are unable to use their legs.” However, the different products that have emerged represent different concepts of what clients and users wanted (and what designers perceived they wanted) from these devices. Designers have to clarify what clients want and then translate those wants into an engineered product.
The designer–client–user triangle also prompts us to recognize that the interests of the three players might diverge and consider the consequences of such divergence. The presence of multiple interests creates an interaction of multiple obligations, and these obligations may conflict. For example, the designer of a juice container might consider metal cans, but easily “squashed” cans are a hazard if sharp edges emerge during the squashing. There could be trade-offs among design variables, including the material of which a container is to be made and the container’s thickness. The choices made in the final design could reflect different assessments of the possible safety hazards, which in turn could lay a foundation for potential ethics problems. Ethics problems, which
we will discuss in Chapter 17, occur because designers have obligations not only to clients and users, but also to their profession and to the public at large, as detailed in the codes of ethics of engineering societies. Thus, ethics issues are always part of the design process.
Another aspect of engineering design practice that is increasingly common in projects and firms of all sizes is that teams do design. Many engineering problems are inherently multidisciplinary (e.g., the design of medical instrumentation), so there is a need to understand the requirements of clients, users, and technologies in very different ways. This requires that teams be assembled to understand and address such different needs. The widespread use of teams clearly affects how design projects are managed, another recurring theme of this book.
Engineering design is a multifaceted subject. In this book, we offer a framework to
facilitate productive thought about the conceptual issues and the resulting choices made early in the design of many different engineered products.

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

Thiết kế một cái gì đó có nghĩa là gì? Kỹ thuật thiết kế khác nhau từ các loại thiết kế? Những người đã được thiết kế điều cho miễn là chúng tôi có thể archaeologically phát hiện ra. Tổ tiên của chúng tôi sớm nhất thiết kế flint dao và các công cụ khác để giúp đáp ứng nhu cầu cơ bản nhất của họ. Bức tranh tường của họ được thiết kế để kể câu chuyện và để làm cho hang động nguyên thủy của họ hấp dẫn hơn. Cho lịch sử lâu dài của người thiết kế những thứ, đó là hữu ích để đặt một số bối cảnh cho thiết kế kỹ thuật và để bắt đầu phát triển một vốn từ vựng và một sự hiểu biết chung của những gì chúng tôi có ý nghĩa của thiết kế kỹ thuật.Ở ĐÂU VÀ KHI LÀM KỸ SƯ THIẾT KẾ? Những gì nó có nghĩa là cho một kỹ sư thiết kế một cái gì đó? Khi làm kỹ sư thiết kế những điều? Ở đâu? Tại sao? Dành cho ai? Một kỹ sư làm việc cho một công ty lớn mà xử lý và phân phối sản phẩm thực phẩm khác nhau có thể được yêu cầu để thiết kế một container cho một sản phẩm nước trái cây mới. Cô có thể làm việc cho một công ty thiết kế và xây dựng, thiết kế một phần của một cây cầu đường cao tốc nhúng trong một dự án giao thông vận tải lớn hơn, hoặc cho một công ty ô tô phát triển cụm thiết bị mới cho chiếc xe của mình, hoặc cho một hệ thống trường học muốn thiết kế các tiện nghi đặc biệt để phục vụ tốt hơn học sinh Khuyết tật chỉnh hình. Không có tính năng phổ biến mà làm cho nó có thể để xác định một quá trình thiết kế, có bối cảnh trong đó nó xảy ra. Trong mỗi người trong số những trường hợp này, ba "vai trò" được chơi như thiết kế mở ra. Lần đầu tiên có là một khách hàng, một người hoặc nhóm hay công ty muốn một thiết kế hình thành. Đó cũng là một người sử dụng những người sẽ sử dụng hoặc sử dụng bất cứ điều gì được thiết kế. Cuối cùng, có là một nhà thiết kế mà công việc là để giải quyết vấn đề của khách hàng trong một cách đáp ứng nhu cầu của người dùng. Khách hàng có thể được nội bộ (ví dụ, một người ở công ty thực phẩm chịu trách nhiệm sản phẩm nước trái cây mới) hoặc bên ngoài (ví dụ như, cơ quan chính phủ rằng hợp đồng cho hệ thống mới). Trong khi một nhà thiết kế có thể liên quan một cách khác nhau để khách hàng nội bộ và bên ngoài, nó thường là khách hàng những người thúc đẩy và trình bày điểm khởi đầu cho thiết kế. Đó là lý do tại sao một nhà thiết kế nhiệm vụ đầu tiên là cho câu hỏi của khách hàng để làm rõ những gì khách hàng thực sự muốn và dịch nó thành một hình thức đó là hữu ích để cô ấy như một kỹ sư. Chúng tôi sẽ nói thêm về điều này trong chương 3 và hơn thế nữa.Nó là đáng chú ý rằng các khách hàng, người sử dụng, và thậm chí là các nhà thiết kế có thể không luôn luôn là ba hoặc thậm chí có hai người khác nhau: trong một khởi động nhỏ, ví dụ, các nhà thiết kế có thể là khách hàng, và có thể cũng dựa vào kinh nghiệm cá nhân của mình như là một người sử dụng khi bắt đầu thiết kế một. Tương tự như vậy, cho một dự án nội bộ, các vai trò có thể một lần nữa hợp nhất. Tuy nhiên, đối với hầu hết các dự án thiết kế, nó là hữu ích để phân biệt giữa ba vai trò và trách nhiệm tương ứng của họ — như bất cứ ai đã sử dụng phiên bản beta của phần mềm có thể làm chứng vì tất cả các quá thường xuyên, phần mềm thiết kế tưởng tượng rằng kinh nghiệm của riêng họ là đủ cho mọi người sử dụng! Người sử dụng là một cầu thủ quan trọng trong nỗ lực thiết kế. Trong bối cảnh đề cập ở trên, các users are, respectively, consumers who buy and drink a new juice drink, drivers on a new interstate highway, and students with orthopedic disabilities (and their teachers). Users have a stake in the design process because designs have to meet their needs. Thus, the designer, the client, and the user form a triangle, as shown in Figure 1.1. The designer has to understand what both the client and users want and need. Often the client speaks to the designer on behalf of the intended users, although anyone who has sat in a cramped seat on a commercial flight would have to ask both airlines and airplane manufacturers who they think their users are! The public also has a stake in many designs, for example, a new interstate highway. While the notion of the public may seem to be implicit in the user, this is not always the case. Explicitly identifying who is affected by a design is important, because it may raise ethical issues in design projects, as we will explore in Chapter 17. It is clear that both designer and client have to understand what the users want and what the public demands in a design. In Chapter 2, we will describe design processes that model how engineers interact with and communicate their design thinking to clients and potential users. In Chapters 3–5, we will identify some tools to organize and refine that thinking. Engineering designers work in many different kinds of environments: small and large companies, start-up ventures, government, not-for-profit organizations, and engineeringFigure 1.1 The designer–client–user triangle shows three parties involved in a design effort: a client, who has objectives that must be realized; the users of the design, who have their own wishes; the designer, who must design something that can be built and that satisfies everybody.services firms. Designers will see differences in the size of a project, the number of colleagues on the design team, and their access to relevant information about what users want. On large projects, many designers will be working on details of a project that are so confined that much of what we describe in this book may not seem immediately useful. The designers of a bridge abutment, an airplane fuel tank, or components of a computer motherboard are not likely to be as concerned with the larger picture of what clients and users want from the entire project because the system-level design context has already been established. These are detailed design problems in which more general design issues have already been decided. However, all projects begin with conceptual design. Thinking about the size and mission of an airplane will have been done before fuel tank design begins, and the overall performance parameters of the computer motherboard will be determined prior to selecting specific chips. Large, complex projects often lead to very different interpretations of client project statements and of user needs. One has only to look at the many different kinds of skyscrapers that decorate our major cities to see how architects and structural engineers envisage different ways of housing people in offices and apartments. Visible differences also emerge in airplane design (Figure 1.2) and wheelchair design (Figure 1.3). Each of these sets of devices could result from a simple, common design statement: Airplanes are

Figure 1.2 Several aircraft, each of which “safely transports people or goods through the air,” and each of which was designed for a different mission.
Figure 1.3 A collection of “personal mobility devices to transport people unable to use their legs,” that is, a set of very different wheelchairs.
“devices to transport people and goods through the air,” and wheelchairs are “personal mobility devices for people who are unable to use their legs.” However, the different products that have emerged represent different concepts of what clients and users wanted (and what designers perceived they wanted) from these devices. Designers have to clarify what clients want and then translate those wants into an engineered product.
The designer–client–user triangle also prompts us to recognize that the interests of the three players might diverge and consider the consequences of such divergence. The presence of multiple interests creates an interaction of multiple obligations, and these obligations may conflict. For example, the designer of a juice container might consider metal cans, but easily “squashed” cans are a hazard if sharp edges emerge during the squashing. There could be trade-offs among design variables, including the material of which a container is to be made and the container’s thickness. The choices made in the final design could reflect different assessments of the possible safety hazards, which in turn could lay a foundation for potential ethics problems. Ethics problems, which
we will discuss in Chapter 17, occur because designers have obligations not only to clients and users, but also to their profession and to the public at large, as detailed in the codes of ethics of engineering societies. Thus, ethics issues are always part of the design process.
Another aspect of engineering design practice that is increasingly common in projects and firms of all sizes is that teams do design. Many engineering problems are inherently multidisciplinary (e.g., the design of medical instrumentation), so there is a need to understand the requirements of clients, users, and technologies in very different ways. This requires that teams be assembled to understand and address such different needs. The widespread use of teams clearly affects how design projects are managed, another recurring theme of this book.
Engineering design is a multifaceted subject. In this book, we offer a framework to
facilitate productive thought about the conceptual issues and the resulting choices made early in the design of many different engineered products.