IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v19y2016i3p278-298.html

Structure‐Based System Dynamics Analysis of Engineering Design Processes

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Kasperek
  • Daniel Schenk
  • Matthias Kreimeyer
  • Maik Maurer
  • Udo Lindemann

Abstract

The dynamic process behavior of Engineering Design Processes (EDPs) needs to be understood in order to distribute resources appropriately as well as for cost and schedule calculation. Currently, structural and behavioral modeling approaches are used in the context of EDP management. In many use cases, it is essential to have at hand both the static structural view and the dynamic behavioral one. Currently, however, the two modeling approaches cannot be sufficiently combined. Within this work, a framework for the structure‐based System Dynamics analysis of EDPs is presented. It uses structural models as a basis for constructing System Dynamics models to simulate the process behavior and thereby supports understanding the correlation of process structure and behavior. This framework was iteratively developed by conducting case studies and consists of three layers, a five‐step procedure and special support for the transformation of the models. For the validation, a subset of the design process at a large German commercial vehicle manufacturer has been chosen. Based on the application of the framework during a six‐month project at the company, the industrial experts rated the framework as beneficial for the purpose of optimizing EDPs. Furthermore, they stated that the transparent representation of the sequence of the process, influencing factors and control variables in combination with the quantitative data had improved their understanding of the overall process.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Kasperek & Daniel Schenk & Matthias Kreimeyer & Maik Maurer & Udo Lindemann, 2016. "Structure‐Based System Dynamics Analysis of Engineering Design Processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 278-298, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:19:y:2016:i:3:p:278-298
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21353
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21353?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tyson R. Browning & Ernst Fricke & Herbert Negele, 2006. "Key concepts in modeling product development processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 104-128, June.
    2. A. Terry Bahill & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2009. "Comparison of dynamic system modeling methods," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 183-200, September.
    3. Robert P. Smith & Steven D. Eppinger, 1997. "Identifying Controlling Features of Engineering Design Iteration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 276-293, March.
    4. Jason E. Bartolomei & Daniel E. Hastings & Richard de Neufville & Donna H. Rhodes, 2012. "Engineering Systems Multiple‐Domain Matrix: An organizing framework for modeling large‐scale complex systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 41-61, March.
    5. Eppinger, Steven D. & Browning, Tyson R., 2012. "Design Structure Matrix Methods and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262017520, December.
    6. Kenneth G. Cooper, 1980. "Naval Ship Production: A Claim Settled and a Framework Built," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 20-36, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher M. Schlick & Soenke Duckwitz & Sebastian Schneider, 2013. "Project dynamics and emergent complexity," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 480-515, December.
    2. Joglekar, Nitin R. & Ford, David N., 2005. "Product development resource allocation with foresight," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 72-87, January.
    3. Manuel E. Sosa & Jürgen Mihm & Tyson R. Browning, 2013. "Linking Cyclicality and Product Quality," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 473-491, July.
    4. Samina Karim & Chi‐Hyon Lee & Manuela N. Hoehn‐Weiss, 2023. "Task bottlenecks and resource bottlenecks: A holistic examination of task systems through an organization design lens," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(8), pages 1839-1878, August.
    5. Babak Heydari & Mohsen Mosleh & Kia Dalili, 2016. "From Modular to Distributed Open Architectures: A Unified Decision Framework," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 252-266, May.
    6. Pedro Parraguez & Steven Eppinger & Anja Maier, 2016. "Characterizing Design Process Interfaces as Organization Networks: Insights for Engineering Systems Management," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 158-173, March.
    7. Lin, Jun & Chai, Kah Hin & Wong, Yoke San & Brombacher, Aarnout C., 2008. "A dynamic model for managing overlapped iterative product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 378-392, February.
    8. Uwe Beyer & Oliver Ullrich, 2022. "Organizational Complexity as a Contributing Factor to Underperformance," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Morgan Dwyer & Bruce Cameron & Zoe Szajnfarber, 2015. "A Framework for Studying Cost Growth on Complex Acquisition Programs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 568-583, November.
    10. Mohammad Hossein Azin & Hessam Zandhessami, 2025. "Strategic Alignment Patterns in National AI Policies," Papers 2507.05400, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2025.
    11. Pedota, Mattia & Cicala, Francesco & Basti, Alessio, 2025. "Human agents, generative AI, and innovation: A formal model of hybrid creative process," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    12. Robert Schmidt & Kasper Sanchez Vibaek & Simon Austin, 2014. "Evaluating the adaptability of an industrialized building using dependency structure matrices," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1-2), pages 160-182, February.
    13. Kaushik Sinha & Seok‐Youn Han & Eun Suk Suh, 2020. "Design structure matrix‐based modularization approach for complex systems with multiple design constraints," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 211-220, March.
    14. George P. Richardson, 2014. ""Model" teaching III: Examples for the later stages," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(4), pages 291-299, October.
    15. Juntao Zhang & Cecilia Haskins & Yiliu Liu & Mary Ann Lundteigen, 2018. "A systems engineering–based approach for framing reliability, availability, and maintainability: A case study for subsea design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(6), pages 576-592, November.
    16. Nazarizadeh, Farzaneh & Alemtabriz, Akbar & Zandieh, Mostafa & Raad, Abbas, 2022. "An analytical model for reliability assessment of the rail system considering dependent failures (case study of Iranian railway)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    17. Khraisha, Tamer, 2020. "Complex economic problems and fitness landscapes: Assessment and methodological perspectives," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 390-407.
    18. Andreas Poller, 2020. "Exploring and managing the complexity of large infrastructure projects with network theory and model‐based systems engineering—The example of radioactive waste disposal," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 443-459, July.
    19. Lin, Jun & Qian, Yanjun & Cui, Wentian & Goh, Thong Ngee, 2015. "An effective approach for scheduling coupled activities in development projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 97-108.
    20. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:19:y:2016:i:3:p:278-298. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.