This study describes the approach to integrate Six-sigma and Robust Design approaches on a US Marine Corps (USMC) program. Six Sigma and Robust Design techniques are tightly coupled to ensure that a design is both manufacturable and also serves the needs of the US Marines. Six Sigma is an aggressive (stretch) goal that sets a high standard of excellence for the development of a world class quality product (Short Range Anti-tank Weapon - SRAW) for the US Marines. This study also describes how the design team is linking Six Sigma and Robust Design, to ensure that a very complex product, with many steps and processes involved in its manufacture, can be recognized as a superior one.

NASA hosts an annual competition called The Great Moonbuggy Race at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. In the Spring of 2001, the Mechanical Engineering Senior Design Class was divided into three teams and requested to design and build a device for competition. The design criterion was to build a human-powered device capable of carrying one male and one female student across a half mile of simulated lunar terrain. Time was a key criterion as entries were timed on their speed of assembly as well as speed through the course. Other important criteria included safety of the drivers, un-assembled dimensions, inclusion of simulated equipment that an actual moonbuggy would need, and maximum turning radius. The cost of the project had to be within a specified budget of $750. Our moonbuggy, which was constructed under the given budget, survived both runs on the course without any damage. We finished in the top ten of the competition.

Globalization of engineering design teams occurs both in industry and also in the engineering classroom. Strategic needs for operating multi-site operations and inter-organizational alliances call for more effective boundary-spanning partnerships: inter-divisional, inter-organizational, and often, multi-country partnerships. This paper reports a multi-discipline research study — involving engineering, anthropology and telecommunications elements — on global engineering design teams. US engineering students from mechanical, chemical, and electrical engineering worked together with counterparts from China and the Netherlands. The students learned advanced telecommunication media and transcultural communication skills needed to carry out the tri-continental design project. They used an active learning process called transcultural incident reporting that focuses on cultural and power issues that must be managed in order to accomplish high quality design. The engineers’ reports show a gain in understanding of the cultural and power issues that affect boundary-spanning project performance.

This paper discusses a new approach to teaching a senior-level mechanical systems design course at the University of Rhode Island. The MCE401 class was split into 9 teams, each with four students. Team members were selected to complement their learning styles. To each team, additional 4 students from the URI Business school were added. In the Fall semester, each team selected one of several different, product-oriented design projects or proposed their own project topic subject to certain requirements. The students were asked to perform a patent search, to critique related products, to prepare a marketing study, to propose a design of this product, and to realize their design using a 3-D solid-modeling software. At the end of the Fall semester, groups competed for funding for activities in the following Spring term that included building prototypes of their design, formulating business plans for commercialization, and applying for patent protection. The new proposed format gave students better understanding and exposure to the entrepreneurial process of product design and innovation.

Every student in the Mechanical Engineering Technology Department must complete a Senior Capstone Design Project course sequence as a requirement for the partial fulfillment of the Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering Technology degree. Mechanical Engineering Technology students at the University of Cincinnati must design, build, and test their product for the satisfactory completion of the Senior Design Project course sequence. At many institutions the capstone projects do not include the build and test components. This paper gives a short description of the Senior Design course sequence, the list of pre-requisite design courses, the design process used by the students to complete their projects. It addresses issues, such as, team versus individual projects, industrial versus personal projects, etc. It also describes typical projects, two of which are being used in industry with minor modifications.

Completing a Senior Design Project is a graduation requirement for all the students in the Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET) Department at the University of Cincinnati. The project consists of a four-course sequence resulting in a working product. This group of courses is designed to help students synthesize and apply the knowledge and skills they have acquired prior to their senior year. It also makes them use their abilities to solve open-ended problems and prepares them for the transition to a non-academic environment. The completed projects are assessed by a team of practicing engineers during the Technical Exposition Day (Tech Expo). This paper describes the process which all students must go through to complete their senior capstone design projects with design, build, and test requirements.

A course on manufacturing materials and processes was improved by dividing it into units identified by automotive components such as the piston, body panel, and tail light. To teach around the cycle within each module, the “WHY”, “WHAT”, “HOW”, and “WHAT IF” teaching objectives are addressed and a variety of learning activities are utilized; e.g.. lecturing with visual aids, computer-aided instruction, guided laboratory tests, company visits, problem solving, design sessions, and team projects. Presented and discussed are the contents of the course introduction, nine automotive units, and two capstone experiences. Based upon student evaluations of the course, covering topics in a framework of automobile parts was appreciated. However, the most preferred learning activity was guided laboratory tests. Proposed future work includes the development of additional process laboratories and a CD on material-process-structure-properties interrelationships.

Glassblowers observed the generation of sound in the presence of temperature gradients over one hundred years ago. It was less than twenty years ago that the reverse process — the use of high-amplitude sound to produce refrigeration — was first demonstrated. Due to the discovery of the “hole-in-the-ozone” and the ratification of the Montreal Protocols, research in thermoacoustics has accelerated during the past decade. In 1992, an electrically powered thermoacoustic refrigerator was placed in orbit on the Space Shuttle and a larger thermoacoustic chiller for shipboard electronics was operated to cool radar equipment for a week on board a US Navy destroyer in 1995. More recently, a heat-driven thermoacoustic device, built by the team at Los Alamos, was used to liquefy natural gas at a rate in excess of 140 gal/day by burning part of the gas stream.

This paper describes a thermal system analysis, design, and optimization project that has been successfully used for two years in an introductory engineering thermodynamics course. The project has provided the students with an opportunity to gain a first-order understanding of the optimization process through the use of spreadsheets and math applications packages. The assignment has been based on the modeling and optimization of a non-ideal gas turbine cycle for use in an Unlimited Class Hydroplane. Student teams are guided through the five steps of the engineering design process including 1.) “information gathering” using mostly web-based material; 2.) “problem definition and alternative generation” using the rules published by the Unlimited Class Hydroplane Racing Association; 3.) “evaluation” of the alternatives using a predictive model based upon thermodynamic principles; 4.) “decision making” using graphical and numerical results generated by spreadsheets and math applications packages; and 5.) “presentation” of the design recommendations in both oral and written reports. Compressor pressure ratio and isentropic efficiencies for the compressor and turbine were the three design variables. Penalty functions were assigned to each to account for component cost, weight, volume, and complexity. The objective function was defined as the ratio of “shaft power to total penalty units” and was maximized using surface plots generated in Excel 97 . The optimal solution was also obtained using Mathcad 8.0 , Mathematica 3.0 , Solver (an add-in tool for Excel 97 ), and Ada 95 , a general programming language. Animated surface plots clearly illustrated the underlying mathematical operations of optimizing a system of non-linear equations.

Overall vehicle design entails the subsidiary design — concurrent engineering — of the numerous subsystems that make up the vehicle. The engineer(s) in charge of the overall design must coordinate the work and integrate the designs of several “independent” subsystem design teams. That coordination and integration is achieved by specification of a particular set of constraints, imposed upon each design team. As the overall design proceeds, as a result of feedback from and review of the work of the individual teams, these constraints may be adjusted. Then many of the subsystems need to be re-designed. This procedure is carried out, iteratively, until “convergence” is achieved. That is, until the overall design is “suitable and satisfactory” in the judgment of the engineer in charge of the overall design, in consultation — directly or indirectly — with the “customer(s).” Better yet, the iterative procedure is continued until a rational objective function for the overall vehicle is optimized. In order to facilitate this concurrent engineering process, it is desirable that the design decisions, being made by the subsystem design teams, explicitly take into account the customers’ weighted desiderata for the overall system. In this paper, it is shown how the methods of thermoeconomic decomposition can be applied (in conjunction with the rational objective function for the overall design presented in Part I) to deduce objective functions for optimizing the design of energy-conversion subsystems . An illustrative case study is presented, for the design-selection of an engine and a generator for a light aircraft.

Selected as one of the 2001 ASME / IMECE industrial highlight sessions, this panel focuses on the paradigm shift from the traditional capstone design course structure towards new design experiences formulated through industry-university educational partnerships. Such partnerships feature collaboration of multidisciplinary student, faculty and industrial teams for product and process realization. The two-session symposium addresses the following topics: • Integrated product and process design • Modern design methodologies integration • Frameworks for university and industrial partnerships • Recruitment, student profiles, graduation and placement • Effective evaluation of student, team and project • Grading and motivation techniques • Program assessments and outcomes • Implementation, institutionalization, and sustainability strategies The ten-person panel brings together a group of faculty, program administrators, students and industrial sponsors from three different undergraduate engineering programs incorporating the new industry-university educational partnerships. The panel discussion highlights the attributes, pros/cons, obstacles/challenges, lessons learned, intellectual property issues, project failure drivers, role of industrial liaisons, recruitment, the effect on faculty and student participants, and program outcomes. The university programs represented are Brigham Young University, University of Florida, and Lehigh University. The symposium organizers extend many thanks to the panelists and session chairs for providing the program content and energized discussions required for making this panel and symposium a success. Last but not least, R. Keith Stanfill’s continual behind-the-scenes leadership and assistance in bringing together the key elements of the program is greatly appreciated.

The guiding principles adopted for teaching the Comprehensive Mechanical Design course in the Department of Mechanical Engineering of Auburn University are presented. These were introduced to better serve the need for well-trained engineering personnel, where technical skills must be combined with good communication and management skills.

The subject symposium on “Partnering to Succeed: Keys to Managing Technology Development, Risk and Globalization” is held under the sponsorship of Engineering and Technology Management (E&TM) Group at the 2001 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (IMECE) with its congress highlight topic of “Progress Through Partnerships: Team Approaches for Today’s Economy,” following a success of the 2000 ASME IMECE E&TM Group Symposium on “Successfully Managing the Risk and Development of Your Business and Technology” with its congress highlight topic of “Beyond the Traditional Boundaries.” The 2000 symposium counted over 500 attendees (1), (2) , increased by more than 2.5 times from about 200 attendees for all the sessions organized for IMECE 1999 by three divisions of the E&TM Group. The original proposal for these 2000 and 2001 IMECE symposia, shown in Appendix, was submitted to then E&TM Group Vice President Arnold Rothstein by the author at the Technology & Society (T&S) and Management Division Executive Committee and E&TM Group Operating Board meetings at IMECE 1999 in Nashville. E&TM Group Representative Kenneth Home and session track leaders were instrumental in carrying out these symposia, with the cooperation and support of Arnold Rothstein and his successor Jeff Rode, Division Chairs John Paul and Robert Bums (T&S), Steven Nichols (Management Division), and David Pyatt (Safety Engineering and Risk Analysis Division (SERAD)) and other members of the division executive committees and the group operating board. The current paper introduces key issues to be discussed at the subject “twenty-six session” symposium for ASME 2001 IMECE, with trends of our time and the originally proposed symposium concept taken into consideration.

Globally distributed engineering design teams face many additional challenges to their success over traditional teams where the team members are co-located. Not only are these international teams burdened with the tasks of proper team formation and selection of effective communication tools, but they must also overcome the barriers of distance, time, language, and culture. Virtual teams can be effective when proper communication tools are implemented and team management issues are understood. The practice of engineering has become an international practice, and the concept of team work has taken on a new level of interaction. In the near future, virtual teams will evolve from being a competitive business edge to common practice. Key issues are discussed in this paper.

Action Science is a research and intervention method based on values of valid information, informed choice, and internal commitment. It is particularly helpful to people facing complex problems for which there are no simple solutions. It aids in detecting and correcting errors, building a mutual understanding of underlying assumptions and reasoning. It is very useful in discovering the reasons people seem to repeat the same approaches, even when the results are less than desired. It is also useful in successfully designing and implementing the knowledge transfer systems that are increasingly relied upon to improve safety in federal facilities. The author explores the latest concepts about the different ways know-how gained by teams can be shared for improving safety. He shares his own thoughts and experiences wrestling with the difficulties involved and inventing new approaches to addressing old problems and enduring myths.

RISK MANAGEMENT IN THE PROGRAM/PROJECT ENVIRONMENT: The Risk Management process is assuming greater influence in the process of Project and Program Management. The requirements of NPG 7120.5A [NPG, 1998] have created inroads for the results of identifying risk to influence project decisions. Program needs and the interdependencies of risks among projects are receiving increasing attention on major JPL projects. Creating Risk Management plans and requiring risk reporting are beginning to make project personnel aware of the benefit of identifying and mitigating potential future adverse consequences and understanding the trade-offs involved in spending reserves for prevention as opposed to recovery from problems. Risk-based decision-making in the planning phase is allowing risks balancing to be considered, and hard decisions in the cost-capped environment require even reduction in expected mission return in order to provide adequate performance assurance. RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS USED IN DESIGN AND ASSURANCE: The paper will describe the use of Risk-revealing checklists and compilations of engineering guidance principles as enabling tools for comprehensive risk identification. Also, effective risk assessment methods (such as Failure Modes Effects Analyses (FMEAs), and Probabilistic Risk Analyses (PRAs) will be discussed. Tracking tools appropriate to maintaining cognizance of risk will be covered. INTEGRATING RISK AND MANAGING PROJECT RESOURCES: JPL is in the process of identifying a standardized Risk Management methodology, which is based on the two pioneering methodologies developed on the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) and Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) projects. Criteria for assessing risk will be “normalized” with tailoring allowed. Database tools are available now to support this approach for flight projects. The Risk Management team at JPL has developed such a tool, which is in use on many of our projects. An advanced version of the JPL tool has been demonstrated which will provide options for quantitative analysis and resource management trade-offs. Implementation of risk tracking metrics in cost and schedule management systems, and design tools, will allow change to be quickly detected. Also, experience on the MGS project suggests that project management can make effective use of risk impact assessments based on cost, and can therefore gain insight into the effective use of project reserves. Utilizing common risk metrics between the risk management process and design metrics, Problem/ Failure Reports (PFRs), earned value reporting, and other management areas will provide more confidence in the impact of project decisions. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS AND THE SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT OFFICE (SMO): The requirement to balance faithful service to the project customer while at the same time provide an objective assessment of the health of the project to the JPL administration and to the agency will be facilitated through the SMO function. Risk Assessments using criteria common to those that the project uses but identification and assessment by independent “eyes” will allow added possibility for early detection and correction of problems. This will enhance the Risk Management effectiveness on the project, and undoubtedly increase the likelihood of mission success.

As part of a risk management campaign to enhance readiness and protect the capability of the force, the US Army leadership directed an Aviation Safety Investment Strategy Team (ASIST) to chart a path toward breakthrough gains in aviation safety. The ASIST Team was chartered to define measurable accident prevention goals and identify the most important Army-wide investments needed to achieve them. The means to achieve the Army goals will be the integration of accident prevention and risk management requirements into the Aviation planning, programming, and budgeting system. The team has completed an in-depth analysis of accident experience involving all force-modernized aircraft during the last 5 years. Currently, the team is prioritizing and validating requirements in various areas of doctrine, training, leader development, organization, materiel, and soldier performance. Completing this work has required the team to develop analysis models and techniques significantly different than those previously employed in Army aviation. This paper will outline these methods and assess future requirements to shape safety analysis to support risk management decisions.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and Deutsches Zentrum Für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR) e. V. are working together to create a Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA). One of the key elements of the modification of the Boeing 747-SP aircraft to be used is a new door system that both protects the infrared telescope during flight by covering the aircraft cavity within which the telescope resides and following the telescopes motion to provided an unvignetted view of the sky. The intentions of this paper are: describe the value added by a productive interaction of reliability engineering with the integrated product design team at NASA Ames Research Center which is responsible for design of this “cavity door” system; to point out key reliability improvement strategies applied to the cavity door system; and to offer a few principles to guide interaction of reliability engineers with a design team.

Brief Theory of Inventive Problems Solving (BTIPS) is a compact and somewhat simplified and changed version of TIPS (Theory of Inventive Problems Solving). BTIPS is as effective as TIPS, but easier to learn and apply. Designed to support the most uncontrollable phase of design “creative design synthesis” [12], it provides a handy tool for industry. The purpose of this presentation, which includes explanations, notes and examples, is to provide a stepping stone toward making the method more commonly available to industry and academia. Brief TIPS (BTIPS) is based on Altshuller’s TRIZ (Teoria Reshenia Izobretatielnyh Zadatch), Invention Machine’s research team contributions and the author’s experience in practical design, design research, consulting and teaching of engineering design. The basic algorithm in BTIPS is shorter than in TRIZ; the list of Principles is somewhat changed; some Effects are added - some skipped; and, Prediction of systems interactions is simplified. BTIPS may be used with or without a computer. If used with a computer, Invention Machine v.2.1 for Windows or TechOptimizer would be very useful packages. This presentation should be treated as a companion paper to reference [3].

Implementing a Mechanical Integrity (MI) system provides immediate benefits. This paper identifies some of those benefits, and looks at ways you can leverage your MI system by using its information and data. Means for gaining greater benefit include Risk Based Inspection (RBI), Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) studies, Root Cause Analysis, plus other assessments. This paper discusses where these assessments fit into the MI system and their effectiveness. An RBI study description is included that demonstrates the effectiveness of using MI data and information to reap additional benefits. The outcome of the study was an immediate financial improvement of $1,600,000 by canceling an internal inspection and they by avoiding a one-day facility shutdown. This equated to an immediate return on investment of 16:1. Additional other savings were also identified. The project team estimated that the computerized MI records halved the effort to complete the study, providing an additional saving to the company of $100,000.