Working principles in conceptual engineering
The following comments are based on an example (G-Train) that is in its early stages of conceptualization and that is not intended to focus on "the technical benefits of a solution" but on "the correct work methodology" in conceptual engineering, timely attending to aspects related to wealth/diversity/divergence of thought:
-
Step 1: Sketch definition levels
As has already been said repeatedly, it is essential "not to saturate working memory" during the divergent stage of thinking. To do this we try not to attend to the details (in the first instance) but to expand/diversify the ideas. The best tool for this is our own "working memory" whose limited capacity quickly saturates and needs to be converted into sketches. The sketches should be "telegrams to the core of ideas" and not definition plans that lead us to pay attention to technological details. The latter is something that we will end up doing in advanced stages of conceptual engineering, but especially in the basic engineering and detailed engineering stages.
The following image illustrates very well the levels of definition of the sketches (as reflections of design thinking):
And it can represent "the divergent moment" that exists in conceptual engineering, in which we try to generate quantity and diversity of ideas before evaluating them, validating them and immersing ourselves in their details. For this, the sketching levels that are most useful to us are those with a low level of definition:
In the particular example that we are using at this moment (G-Train) it can be said that we advance (without exhausting its possibilities) with sketches of the lowest levels of definition, although some of them are already drawn in CADD:
-
Step 2: The working principles
When working in the conceptual stage it is important to define the Desired Useful Effect but also to be aware of the working principles that we propose to solve them. Otherwise, our ability to generate ideas may be limited by an exclusive focus on a particular working principle, like a tree blocking the forest.
For this reason you will see that the first of this series of conceptual sketches cites "working principles" (perhaps limited in types and quantity, depending on what can be grasped at that moment) and positions the idea in one of them in particular:
-
Step 3: Analytical depth of the DUE
It is crucial to avoid the mistake of thinking that "once stated, the DUE (Desired Useful Effect) is immovable." We must be aware that "the design process is a learning process" about a certain problem, its variables and implications, the qualities of its solutions, etc. Learning is an "iterative deepening" process and, therefore, nothing that is stated can remain immovable and be overcome as "step number N" of a procedural sequence. We must always be willing to review what we understood and stated, which seems like a "setback in the development of design" but is actually "a deepening" whose consequences are always positive: improving or even destroying erroneous patterns of thinking.
In this simple example, after devising an implementation for the working principle "Distributed volumetric action: centripetal acceleration" it is a good time to stop for a few moments to analyze what really happens when implementing it.
We will surely discover aspects and details that we had not taken into account. For example: the sketch of a train that rotates at a certain speed and generates a centripetal acceleration usable as a replacement for gravity "always works qualitatively" since the sketch does not even suggest dimensions or numerical values.
But "when quantifying the phenomenon" we realize that the habitat has an appreciable size and that "this artificial gravity" is modified in module and angle in its different parts. That is, an astronaut at the highest level of the habitat would experience a different gravity than another at its lowest level (which would not be tragic because on Earth there are also changes in gravity at sea level or on a mountain).
But it's not just that: an "undesired effect" is discovered that takes the form of "lateral thrust" because the resulting vector of the acceleration also changes its angle!!!
The latter does not happen in implementations similar to G-Train in empty space because there is no natural gravity like there is on a planet (on the Moon g/10 and on Mars g/3). This "natural gravity of the planet" is a constant vertical component that is added vector-wise to the "variable artificial" horizontal component (depending on the radius R) that we generate by rotation.
This small quantitative discovery makes us see that the radii of gyration that should really be used must be "large with respect to the size of the habitat" so that the phenomenon of variation of the "resulting g" is not significant:
-
Step 4: Numbers can change everything
Although we are in a conceptual stage, we go through quantitative instances that are essential to "bring down to earth" purely qualitative concepts.
In general, such quantitative stages are accompanied by sketches of a higher degree of definition (within the general low level) that already have dimensions considered fundamental to "really see the idea in operation."
Sometimes, numbers are capable of changing everything "even for the worse" and destroying concepts that seemed promising "on a qualitative level." For this reason we affirm that the design process is iterative (it resembles, and this author firmly believes that "it is", a learning process) and alternates between stages of "synthesis (generation of ideas)" and "analysis (validation of ideas). " as expressed by the icon of the design method developed by the author for the FCEIA-UNR M25-Synthesis of Mechanisms and Machines chair:
Texts in the figure, translated:
Design as synthesis and analysis cycles: (S+A)^N method
SYNTHESIS
Creativity
Divergent thinking
Global vision of the entire problem
Proposals to provide the Desired Useful Effect
ANALYSIS
Rationality
Visions located in components of the problem
Convergent thinking
DESIGN
Cognitive flexibility
Alternating thinking
Reduction or elimination of initial conflict
Synthesis and Analysis Cycles controlled by the level of satisfaction of the Desired Utility Effect (DUE)
Note. Graphical representation of the alternation between synthesis and analysis as a damped wave as the initial conflict is reduced (and the DUE is satisfied) after "N" cycles. Source: concept and illustration prepared by the author.
-
Step 5: Links
This tutorial comes from:
and continues in:
...
