Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T09:23:05.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Distinction of Domain-Specific and Cross-Domain Linkage Types for Engineering Change Management

Part of: Design Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Robert Wilms ,
David Inkermann ,
Vadym Finn Cemmasson ,
Michael Reik  and
Thomas Vietor
Robert Wilms*
Affiliation:
TU Braunschweig; Volkswagen AG
David Inkermann
Affiliation:
TU Braunschweig;
Vadym Finn Cemmasson
Affiliation:
TU Braunschweig;
Michael Reik
Affiliation:
Volkswagen AG
Thomas Vietor
Affiliation:
TU Braunschweig;
*
Contact: Wilms, Robert, Volkswagen AG, Group Engineering Processes & IT, Germany, r.wilms@tu-braunschweig.de

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Engineering Changes (ECs) are substantial elements of the design process of technical products and are in particular relevant for companies due to enormous additional costs and time delays they can cause. In order to better understand ECs and realize efficient Engineering Change Management (ECM), different approaches exist. One aspect of ECM are change propagation analysis, which try to analyze knock-on effects of an EC on other product elements or the development process. How ECs can propagate is in particular difficult to assess for complex products realized within different engineering domains (mechanical, electrical and software engineering). To address this challenge, ECs are classified, strategies to cope with ECs are presented and change propagation approaches are analyzed in this paper. Thereby a lack of indicators for cross-domain propagation is identified. To overcome this issue, the distinction of domain-specific and cross-domain linkage types is proposed and a set of linkage types is presented. Further research is motivated to integrate these linkage types in product models while also considering processes and organizational structures as additional dimensions of ECM.

Keywords

Engineering Change ManagementDesign processComplexitySystems Engineering (SE)
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 1125 - 1134
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Albers, A., Kurrle, A. and Klingler, S. (2016), “The Connected Car: A system-of-systems: Exploration of challenges in development from experts view”, 16th International Stuttgart Symposium, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Automobilwoche (2018), “Kennzahlen des Wandels. Unternehmen, Innovationen, Umsätze - schon wenige Ziffern zeigen, wie sich die Autoindustrie verändert”, Automobilwoche, Vol. 29 No. October, p. 28.Google Scholar
Browning, T.R., Fricke, E. and Negele, H. (2006), “Key concepts in modeling product development processes”, Systems Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 104–128.Google Scholar
Burkacky, O., Deichmann, J., Doll, G. and Knochenhauer, C. (2018), “Rethinking car software and electronics architecture”, available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/rethinking-car-software-and-electronics-architecture (accessed 4 May 2018).Google Scholar
Chucholowski, N., Langer, S., Ferreira, M. and Forcellini, F.A., Maier, A. (2012), “Engineering change management report 2012”, CiDaD-Working Paper Series, 08th ed.Google Scholar
Clarkson, P.J., Keller, R. and Eckert, C.M. (2005), “Multiple views to support engineering change management for complex products”, 3rd International Conference on Coordinated & Multiple Views in Exploratory Visualization - CMV 2005, London.Google Scholar
Clarkson, P.J., Simons, C. and Eckert, C.M. (2001), “Predicting change propagation in complex design”, 2001 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Deubzer, F. (2005), “Der Änderungsmanagement Report 2005”, CiDaD-Working Paper Series, 1st ed.Google Scholar
Deubzer, F., Kreimeyer, M. and Lindemann, U. (2006), “Exploring strategies in change management: Current status and activity benchmark”, International Design Conference - Design 2006, Dubrovnik.Google Scholar
Eckert, C.M., Clarkson, P.J. and Zanker, W. (2004), “Change and customisation in complex engineering domains”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Eigner, M. (Ed.) (2014), “Modellbasierte Virtuelle Produktentwicklung”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Fricke, E., Gebhard, B., Negele, H. and Igenbergs, E. (2000), “Coping with changes. causes, findings and strategies”, Systems Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 169–179.Google Scholar
Gerst, M., Eckert, C.M., Clarkson, P.J. and Lindemann, U. (2001), “Innovation in the tension of change and reuse”, International Conference On Engineering Design - ICED 2001, Glasgow.Google Scholar
Giffin, M., Weck, O., de Bounova, G., Keller, R., Eckert, C. and Clarkson, P.J. (2009), “Change propagation analysis in complex technical systems”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 131 No. 8.Google Scholar
Inkermann, D., Huth, T. and Vietor, T. (2018), “Towards cross-domain release engineering: potentials and challenges for automotive industry”, 10th International Conference on Adaptive and Self-Adaptive Systems and Applications - ADAPTIVE 2018, Barcelona.Google Scholar
Jarratt, T., Eckert, C.M., Caldwell, N. and Clarkson, P.J. (2011), “Engineering change. an overview and perspective on the literature”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 103–124.Google Scholar
Jarratt, T., Eckert, C.M. and Clarkson, P.J. (2004a), “Engineering Change”, in Clarkson, P.J. and Eckert, C.M. (Eds.), Design process improvement: A review of current practice, Springer-Verlag, London.Google Scholar
Jarratt, T., Eckert, C.M. and Clarkson, P.J. (2004b), “Development of a product model to support engineering change management”, International Symposium on Tools and Methods for Concurrent Engineering 2004, Lausanne.Google Scholar
Jarratt, T., Eckert, C.M. and Clarkson, P.J. (2004c), “Pitfalls of engineering change: change practice during complex product design”, 14th CIRP Design Seminar, Cairo.Google Scholar
Keller, R., Eger, T., Eckert, C.M. and Clarkson, P.J. (2005), “Visualising Change Propagation”, International Conference On Engineering Design - ICED 2005, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Lindemann, U. (Ed.) (2016), “Handbuch Produktentwicklung”, Carl Hanser Verlag, München.Google Scholar
Lindemann, U. and Reichwald, R. (1998), “Integriertes Änderungsmanagement”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Maurer, M., Winner, H. and Prokop, G. (Eds.) (2018), “Automotive Systems Engineering II”, Springer International Publishing AG.Google Scholar
Riviere, A., DaCunha, C. and Tollenaere, M. (2003a), “Performances in Engineering Changes Management”, in Gogu, G., Coutellier, D., Chedmail, P. and Ray, P. (Eds.), Recent Advances in Integrated Design and Manufacturing in Mechanical Engineering, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 369–378.Google Scholar
Riviere, A., Féru, F. and Tollenaere, M. (2003b), “Controlling product related engineering changes in the aircraft industry”, International Conference On Engineering Design - ICED 2003, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Terwiesch, C. and Loch, C.H. (1999), “Managing the process of engineering change orders. The case of the climate control system in automobile development”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 160–172.Google Scholar
Wilberg, J., Elezi, F., Tommelein, I.D. and Lindemann, U. (2015), “Using a systemic perspective to support engineering change management”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 61, pp. 287–292.Google Scholar
Wilms, R., Cemmasson, V.F., Inkermann, D. and Vietor, T. (2019), “Identifying Cross-Domain Linkage Types to Support Engineering Change Management and Requirements Engineering”, 29th CIRP Design Conference (submitted Paper), Póvoa de Varzim, Portugal.Google Scholar
Yildirim, U. and Campean, F. (2013), “An Enhanced Interface Analysis Method for Engineering Change Management”, in Abramovici, M. and Stark, R. (Eds.), Smart Product Engineering, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 191–200.Google Scholar