A comparative case study of functional models to support system

architecture design
Sonia Ben Hamidaabc, Antoine Grandoub, Marija Jankovicb, Claudia Eckertd, Alain Hueta, Jean-Claude
Bocquetb
AIRBUS Defence & Space, Les Mureaux, France
b
Ecole Centrale Paris, Chatenay-Malabry, France
c
Institut d e Recherche Technologique SystemX, Palaiseau, France
d
Open University, Milton Keynes, England
a

Context
Why modelling functions matters?
Motivation
Improving understanding and knowledge capture
Methodology
Case study, Approaches selection & Evaluation criteria
Results
Advantages and limits for each approach
Discussion and Conclusion
Complementary use of modelling methods
A comparative case study of functional models to support system
architecture design

Context
System architecture: (1) the arrangement of functional elements; (2) the mapping
from functional elements to physical components; (3) the specification of the interfaces
among interacting physical components (Ulrich, 1995)
=> functional architecture = one facet of system architecture

Functions: allow to translate needs into physical structures that will meet those needs
But no clear and uniform definition of a function. Moreover, it seems impossible to describe
function objectively (Umeda et al., 1995)

Function modelling: a formal way to define and model functions

=> framework for overall system description
But more than 18 different function modelling approaches (Erden et al., 2008)
=> ambiguity in functional description
A comparative case study of functional models to support system
architecture design

Motivation
Main purposes of functional description (Tomiyama, 2013):

Represent the purpose of the artefact

Explain the behavior, structure
Capture customer requirements
Illustrate the overview of the system

Difficulties to use function modelling in industry environment:

Practice: Never used it, No added value, Not practical (Tomiyama et al., 2013)
Identify the distance between the model and the system
Identify if elements have been missed
Understand rationales

A comparative case study of functional models to support system

architecture design

Research design
Case study: Design of an intelligent refrigerator (Lewis et. al, 2013)
Which new services to enhance customer satisfaction?

Selection of the four modelling approaches:

Approach

Selected because

Problem definition process (Thuillier et al., 2010)

Is applied by industry to complex systems

Function-Behavior-State (Shimomura et al., 1998) Is one of the only process oriented approach
Functional representation to support idea
generation (Chakrabati et al., 2005)

takes into account existing solutions

Affordances (Cormier et al., 2013)

Is user-centric

A comparative case study of functional models to support system

architecture design

Selected criteria

Industry criteria

Research criteria (Summers, 2013)

Refine operational scenario until elementary

Scalability, Premature commitment, Construction
operation and function
Specifies functional interface between elementary
Construction
functions
Specifies behavior of elementary function

Behavior

Map Elementary function and flow on physical items

Consistency
and links
Verification capabilities (consistency checks)

Consistency

Simulate simple behavior

Behavior

Readability of models (easiness to review

communicate and present to non-specialist)
Ease of use/Ergonomics

Visibility
Flexibility,
proneness

A comparative case study of functional models to support system

architecture design

Closeness

of

mapping,

Error-

Results 1. Problem definition process

Step-by-step systematic method

Completeness of the model?

Rationale of the model

Results 2. Function-Behavior-State approach

Function: description of behavior abstracted by
human through recognition of the behavior for
utilization

Thinking
of
functions
and
their
performances at the same time
Discovering functions through a top-down
bottom-up approach
Poor readability and
alternatives management

not

functional

Results 3. Functional representation to support idea generation

Function: description of the action or effect
required by a design problem, or that is
supplied by a solution

Similarities of the problem to tackle with

existing systems
Difficult with an increased number of
components and interactions

Results 4. Affordances
Affordance: a behavior that can be exhibited
when the two subsystems interact. (Maier, 2011)

Thinking both of functional and nonfunctional needs

Explosion of elements

10

Discussion

11

Conclusion
Building and using functional models is not straightforward in early design
stages
We have identified four approaches with regard to their applicability in
industry
We discussed the merit and limits of each of them, and the complementary
use of these modelling methods

A comparative case study of functional models to support system

architecture design

12

References
Y. Shimomura, M. Yoshioka, H. Takeda, Y. Umeda, T. Tomiyama, Representation of design object based on the functional evolution process model, Journal of Mechanical Design.
120 (1998) 221229.
P. Cormier, A. Olewnik, K. Lewis, Towards a Formalization of Affordance Modeling in the Early Stages of Design, in: ASME 2013
P. Thuillier, J.-L. Wippler, Finding the Right Problem, in: D. Luzeaux, J.-R. Ruault, J.-L. Wippler (Eds.), Large Scale Complex Systems and Systems of Systems Engineering: Case
Studies, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2013: pp. 215253.
K. Ulrich, The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm, Research Policy. 24 (1995) 419440.
T. Tomiyama, T.J. Van Beek, A.A. Alvarez Cabrera, H. Komoto, V. DAmelio, Making function modeling practically usable, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and
Manufacturing. 27 (2013) 301309.
C. Eckert, That which is not form: the practical challenges in using functional concepts in design, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing. 27
(2013) 217231.
P.E. Vermaas, The coexistence of engineering meanings of function: four responses and their methodological implications, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis
and Manufacturing. 27 (2013) 191202.
M.S. Erden, H. Komoto, T.J. van Beek, V. DAmelio, E. Echavarria, T. Tomiyama, A review of function modeling: approaches and applications, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering
Design, Analysis and Manufacturing. 22 (2008) 147169.
N. Crilly, Function propagation through nested systems, Design Studies. 34 (2013) 216242.
E. Crawley, Introduction to System Architecture - Architecture to Value, (2007). http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/engineering-systems-division/esd-34-system-architecture-january-iap2007/lecture-notes/lec1.pdf.
C. Wu, B. Ciavola, J. Gershenson, A Comparison of Function-and Affordance-Based Design, in: ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and
Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2013
J.D. Summers, C. Eckert, A. Goel, others, Function in Engineering: Benchmarking Representations and Models, in: DS 75-2: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on
Engineering Design (ICED13), Design for Harmonies, Vol. 2: Design Theory and Research Methodology, Seoul, Korea, 19-22.08. 2013, 201.
J. Maier, Affordance Based Design: Theoretical Foundations and Practical Applications. Saarbrucken, Deutschland, VDM Verlag Dr. Muller GmbH & Co, 2011.
J.R. Maier, G.M. Fadel, Affordance: the fundamental concept in engineering design, in: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
J.R. Maier, G.M. Fadel, Comparing function and affordance as bases for design, in: ASME 2002 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and
Information in Engineering Conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2002
A.J.K. Pols, Characterising affordances: The descriptions-of-affordances-model, Design Studies. 33 (2012) 113125. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.007.
B.T. Ciavola, Reconciling Function-and Affordance-Based Design, MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, 2013

A comparative case study of functional models to support system

architecture design

13