skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Perceived Importance of Engineering Requirements Based on Origin: An Experimental Study
Requirements play a pivotal role within the engineering design process as they provide parameters and guidelines, as well as defining the success of a project. While there is significant research that explores how to elicit requirements, there is little experimental exploration of how engineers prioritize requirements based on the stakeholder sources for the requirements. Non- technical factors may affect the prioritization of the requirements. A user study was conducted with sixty- six third year mechanical engineering undergraduate students participating in the experiment. Each student was provided two design problems with a requirements document for each. For one of the requirement documents, participants were also provided information on the stakeholder owner of the requirement (sources). Although all of the requirement sources affected the weight given to requirements – typically in the positive direction – it is found that the source had a statistically significant influence on perceived criticality for only 25% of the requirement cases. To conclude, the sources did prove to affect the prioritization of the requirements. Future work will explore how the sources influence requirements based on different typologies, such constraints versus criteria, or requirements with and without numerical targets.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1829008
PAR ID:
10184479
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Digital Proceedings of TMCE 2020
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)
    Growth of the Internet-of-things has led to complex system-on-chips (SoCs) being used in the edge devices in IoT applications. The increased complexity is demanding designers to consider several critical factors, such as dynamic requirement changes, long application life, mass production, and tight time-to-market deadlines. These requirements lead to more complex security concerns. SoC manufacturers outsource some of the intellectual property cores integrated on the SoC to untrusted third-party vendors. The untrusted intellectual properties can contain malicious implants, which can launch attacks using the resources provided by the on-chip interconnection network, commonly known as the network-on-chip (NoC). Existing efforts on securing NoC have considered lightweight encryption, authentication, and other attack detection mechanisms such as denial-of-service and buffer overflows. Unfortunately, these approaches focus on designing statically optimized security solutions. As a result, they are not suitable for many IoT systems with long application life and dynamic requirement changes. There is a critical need to design reconfigurable security architectures that can be dynamically tuned based on changing requirements. In this article, we propose a tier-based reconfigurable security architecture that can adapt to different use-case scenarios. We explore how to design an efficient reconfigurable architecture that can support three popular NoC security mechanisms (encryption, authentication, and denial-of-service attack detection and localization) and implement suitable dynamic reconfiguration techniques. We evaluate our proposed framework by running standard benchmarks enabling different tiers of security and provide a comprehensive analysis of how different levels of security can affect application performance, energy efficiency, and area overhead. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    Verification activities increase an engineering team’s confidence in its system design meeting system requirements, which in turn are derived from stakeholder needs. Conventional wisdom suggests that the system design should be verified frequently to minimize the cost of rework as the system design matures. However, this strategy is based more on experience of engineers than on a theoretical foundation. In this paper, we develop a belief-based model of verification of system design, using a single system requirement as an abstraction, to determine the conditions under which it is cost effective for an organization to verify frequently. We study the model for a broad set of growth rates in verification setup and rework costs. Our results show that verifying a system design frequently is not always an optimal verification strategy. Instead, it is only an optimal strategy when the costs of reworking a faulty design increase at a certain rate as the design matures. 
    more » « less
  3. A key challenge in engineering design problem framing is defining requirements and metrics. This is difficult, in part, because engineers must make decisions about how to treat qualitative and subjective issues, like stakeholder preferences, about how to prioritize different requirements, and about how to maintain tentativeness and ill-structuredness in the solution space. And this is made more challenging in light of the function of requirements in other types of engineering problems, like feasibility analysis, in which the requirements should converge on a decision. Given these challenges, it is unsurprising that there is limited research on how first-year students approach such work, how they make sense of requirements, and how their conceptualizations of requirements change with instruction. Our purpose in this study is to investigate students’ initial understanding and use of engineering requirements in a specific problem solving context. We developed a survey to measure students’ perceptions related to engineering requirements based on constructs derived from the literature on engineering requirements. We implemented the survey in a first-year and in senior courses for the purpose of validating items using factor analysis. Following this, we conducted analysis of survey and interview data restricted to the first-year course, including epistemic beliefs and analysis of students’ agency. Through exploratory factor analysis, we found that factors did not converge around constructs as described in the literature. Rather, factors formed around the forms of information leveraged to develop requirements. Through qualitative analysis of students’ responses on the survey and to interviews, we evaluated the extent to which students expressed agency over their use of requirements to make decisions within a course project. We describe implications of this exploratory study in terms of adapting research instruments to better understand this topic. Further, we consider pedagogical implications for first year programs and beyond in supporting students to develop ownership over decision making related to engineering requirements. 
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)
    Abstract In this study, we focus on crowdsourcing contests for engineering design problems where contestants search for design alternatives. Our stakeholder is a designer of such a contest who requires support to make decisions, such as whether to share opponent-specific information with the contestants. There is a significant gap in our understanding of how sharing opponent-specific information influences a contestant’s information acquisition decision such as whether to stop searching for design alternatives. Such decisions in turn affect the outcomes of a design contest. To address this gap, the objective of this study is to investigate how participants’ decision to stop searching for a design solution is influenced by the knowledge about their opponent’s past performance. The objective is achieved by conducting a protocol study where participants are interviewed at the end of a behavioral experiment. In the experiment, participants compete against opponents with strong (or poor) performance records. We find that individuals make decisions to stop acquiring information based on various thresholds such as a target design quality, the number of resources they want to spend, and the amount of design objective improvement they seek in sequential search. The threshold values for such stopping criteria are influenced by the contestant’s perception about the competitiveness of their opponent. Such insights can enable contest designers to make decisions about sharing opponent-specific information with participants, such as the resources utilized by the opponent towards purposefully improving the outcomes of an engineering design contest. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    Design researchers have long sought to understand the mechanisms that support creative idea development. However, one of the key challenges faced by the design community is how to effectively measure the nebulous construct of creativity. The social science and engineering communities have adopted two vastly different approaches to solving this problem, both of which have been deployed throughout engineering design research. The goal of this paper was to compare and contrast these two approaches using design ratings of nearly 1000 engineering design ideas paired with a qualitative study with expert raters. The results of this study identify that while these two methods provide similar ratings of idea quality, there was a statistically significant negative relationship between these methods for ratings of idea novelty. Qualitative analysis of recordings from expert raters’ think aloud concept mapping points to potential sources of disagreement. In addition, the results show that while quasi-expert and expert raters provided similar ratings of design novelty, there was not significant agreement between these groups for ratings of design quality. The results of this study provide guidance for the deployment of idea ratings in engineering design research and evidence for the development and potential modification of engineering design creativity metrics. 
    more » « less