Problem space exploration

Let me show you my plan for sending a probe home to Venus. Also, "Please excuse the crudity of this model. I didn't have time to build it to scale or to paint it."-Back to the Future. Doc. I added this quote as it truly applies to this submission, but in defense of the following concepts, which are a compilation of proven technology from past works by others as well as my own work, so would just require modifications to operate at the higher temperatures and pressures known to be present on the beautiful planet, Venus. Please note that this concept requires some modification to existing components that are currently available and is a complete redesign of the probe, so is not just about the sensors as per the competition's specifications which had to be altered for many good reasons explained below. VENUS ROVER GENERAL CONCEPT This proposal is based, well proven and verified circuitry that will be modified and tested to work at Venus ambient conditions.

Looking beyond the presented problem can allow new perspectives to emerge, opening up the possibility of more varied solutions. Little research exists about how engineering designers engage in this process, which we call problem exploration. In a study with engineering students, each student talked aloud as they worked to create design solutions; next, we asked them to explain their problem focus and to define the problem they addressed in each solution. The protocols revealed multiple cognitive strategies used to structure and frame the presented problem in alternative ways. Further research is aimed at empirically-based design tools to support problem exploration in engineering design.

Looking beyond the presented problem can allow new perspectives to emerge, opening up the possibility of more varied solutions. Little research exists about how engineering designers engage in this process, which we call problem exploration. In a study with engineering students, each student talked aloud as they worked to create design solutions; next, we asked them to explain their problem focus and to define the problem they addressed in each solution. The protocols revealed multiple cognitive strategies used to structure and frame the presented problem in alternative ways. Further research is aimed at empirically-based design tools to support problem exploration in engineering design.

The way a design problem is structured influences the types of solutions that can be generated and may have an impact on the creativity and innovation of those solutions. Thus, this paper explores cognitive strategies used by professional engineers and designers to identify and reframe design problems. A sample of 218 problem descriptions were collected from various sources and analyzed to see how the problem definitions evolved during design. The analysis resulted in the extraction of 42 problem exploration heuristics evident in designers' re-crafting of the presented problem to inform the development of instructional materials to help improve the problem exploration skills of both engineering design students and practitioners.

The growing trend of co-creation and co-design in cross-cultural design teams presents challenges for the design thinking process. We integrate two frameworks, one on reasoning patterns in design thinking, the other on the dynamic constructivist theory of culture, to propose a situation specific framework for the empirical analysis of design thinking in cross-cultural teams. We illustrate the framework with a qualitative analysis of 16 episodes of design related conversations, which are part of a design case study. The results show that cultural knowledge, either as shared by the cross-cultural team or group specific knowledge of some team members, shape the reasoning patterns in the design thinking process across all the 16 episodes. Most of the design discussions were approached by the designers as problem situations that were formulated in a backward direction, where the value to create was known first. Then the designers were using available cultural knowledge to articulate the unknown what to design (products/services) and how the design would work (the working principles of product/services). In conclusion, we demonstrate a novel approach for understanding how cultural knowledge shapes core design thinking in specific situations.

This paper uses the concept of framing as a means of examining design process. It explores in detail interactions between a small design team as they collaborate to design a workshop which forms part of a larger project. Elements of framing practice, namely, moving, reflecting and reframing are used to draw attention the decision-making constructed as a failure to benefit from frame discipline. Set in the context of a substantial data set documenting a design project taking place within contemporary industrial design practice, analysis of this specific episode is used to discuss frame discipline as a characteristic of design expertise.

Looking beyond the presented problem can allow new perspectives to emerge, opening up the possibility of more varied solutions. Little research exists about how engineering designers engage in this process, which we call problem exploration. In a study with engineering students, each student talked aloud as they worked to create design solutions; next, we asked them to explain their problem focus and to define the problem they addressed in each solution. The protocols revealed multiple cognitive strategies used to structure and frame the presented problem in alternative ways. Further research is aimed at empirically-based design tools to support problem exploration in engineering design.

Design problems evolve throughout many typical design processes. Little research has focused on the extent to which design problems evolve and the role that various factors play in this evolution. In this research, we drew from data gathered for the Design Thinking Research Symposium that traced a design team's process as they progressed from the end of a large-scale user data-gathering phase to a deeper understanding of the problems to be addressed. Analysis revealed evidence of three factors that impacted the way the design problem was defined—the structure of the co-creation sessions, cultural perceptions and norms of the team and the users, and user data and its translation by the team. Understanding factors that guide the definition of the design problem can support designers in expanding their awareness in design decision making and problem solving because they can be more reflective and explicit about how and why their understanding of the design problem changes and more intentional about exploring the design problem space.