Name
Title | ||
|---|---|---|
How to evaluate reading and interpretation of differently structured engineering design rationales |
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Documented engineering design rationale has the potential to become a key source of information about past designs. Ease of comprehension of design rationale might play a crucial role in ensuring that the full potential of documented information is realized and that the effort and time necessary to capture design rationale pay off. This research proposes an empirical methodology for evaluating how structuring design rationale and supplying it with visual nontextual cues influences reading and interpretation. The study compares reading and interpretation of technical documentation presented in different formats to engineering graduate trainees in the aerospace industry. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2008 | 10.1017/S0890060408000231 | AI EDAM |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
different format,crucial role,aerospace industry,full potential,engineering graduate trainee,key source,past design,documented engineering design rationale,design rationale,empirical methodology,aerospace engineering,issue based information system,structural engineering,knowledge management | Aerospace,Issue-Based Information System,Systems engineering,Computer science,Technical documentation,Engineering design process,Structuring,Design rationale,Management science,Comprehension,IDEF6 | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
22 | 4 | 0890-0604 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
3 | 0.60 | 10 |
Authors | ||
4 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marco Aurisicchio | 1 | 41 | 4.14 |
| Marina Gourtovaia | 2 | 8 | 1.80 |
| Rob Bracewell | 3 | 37 | 2.99 |
| Ken Wallace | 4 | 42 | 4.10 |