ARTICLE engineering design process
T engineering design
he United States is currently in a
period of economic unrest that
has resulted in problems for the
manufacturing sector, housing market, and
ultimately the loss of jobs. These crises
cannot easily be solved with a typical
design process of brainstorming and “what
if” scenarios. A more detailed problem-
solving and design process is needed to
search for many solutions that will help
improve the well-being of American
citizens. Even though engineers, using the
engineering design process, have typically
come up with creative ideas to solve
problems, many technology education,
science, and math teachers are also using
this method to prepare their students for
the future. No longer are their activities
confined to the typical lesson plan. Many
integrate content from outside their fields
that they would not normally include in the
curriculum to try to optimize the students’
learning experience.
8 Technology and Children May 2009
process
The engineering design process is
a method used by engineers and is
defined as a procedure used to meet an
identified need. The method includes a
combination of components to help guide
the decision-making process, and helps
optimize solutions that use mathematical
and scientific principles to meet a stated
objective (Eide, Jenison, Mashaw, &
Northup, 2002).
Engineers apply the engineering design
process that uses a combination of
elements and steps to solve problems.
Holtzapple and Reece (2008) state that the
method includes the following elements
(p. 118):
• Synthesis – combining various
elements into an integrated whole.
by Sonya Draper
• Analysis – using mathematics,
science, engineering techniques,
and economics to quantify the
performance of various options.
• Communication – writing and oral
presentation.
• Implementation – executing the plan.
The steps used by the National Center for
Engineering and Technology Education
(NCETE), which were adapted from the
Dartmouth Engineering Design Model
(Frye, 1997) are listed below:
1. Identification of a need
(consumer, and company)
The consumer’s want (need) for a
product to perform some desired
function results in the company
solving the problem to make a profit
on the sale of the products.
2. Definition of the problem/
specifications (design problem)
What product will function to
satisfy the consumer’s need and the
company’s need? Constraints are
limitations within which the solution
must be confined. Constraints also
include what materials should be
considered, what costs should be
limited, etc. Criteria are targets that
the product’s performance must meet.
Specifications often are determined
based on the criteria. Specifications
are detailed requirements of the
product that is going to be designed
and manufactured (Holtzapple &
Reese, 2008).
3. Search (for existing design)
In the research phase, search for
existing designs to save time and
money by not “reinventing the

wheel.” Note that new innovative
solutions may need to be developed.
Utilize the Internet, journals, expert
authorities, library resources, books,
etc.
4. Develop designs
Sketch out all ideas. It is important
that the design meets the criteria,
constraints, and specifications of the
system. Focus on how the solution is
supposed to perform.
5. Analysis (of alternative designs;
may include simulations…)
Analysis of the design will include
mathematical calculations that will
predict the behavior of the design.
Mathematical and scientific analysis
may also help an engineer to optimize
a solution so that it will perform better
than the original idea.
6. Decision (decision matrix)
• Determine the best solution
that meets the specifications of
the design and the constraints
imposed and identified. What
“trade-offs” were made, and how
was the product optimized? Using
a decision matrix also helps
to optimize the final solution
because it helps you get the
most out of a solution based on
criteria.
• In the decision matrix above,
the engineering design team
had three ideas for a solution to
a problem. Their main criteria
were cost, safety, and ease of
use of the product. They decided
that cost should account for 30
percent of the importance of
criteria; safety is 20 percent, and
ease of use is 50%. So it is most
important to the team that the
solution idea they choose is easy
to use. Next, the engineering
design team rated each solution
idea on a scale from 1 to 10, with
1 being worst and 10 being best.
ARTICLE
Decision Matrix
Criteria Importance % Idea #1 Idea #2 Idea #3
10 5 4
Cost 30% 10 x 30=300 5 x 30 = 150 4 x 30 = 120
4 9 9
Safety 20% 4 x 20 = 80 9 x 20 = 150 9 x 20 = 180
5 6 3
Easy to Use 50% 5 x 50 = 250 6 x 50 = 300 3 x 50 = 150
Notice that for cost, Idea #1 has engineering design
the highest rating of 10. However, versus other forms of
it is only rated at 5 for being easy design
to use. Next, the team multiplied
the Importance by the Rating to The NCETE, with the leadership of
come up with a factor for each Wicklein (2006), determined that those
idea and criterion. The factors major steps in the engineering design
for each idea are then added to process that help to distinguish engineering
come up with a total rating for design from other forms of design are:
each idea. In the example above, designing under constraint, optimization of
the best idea turns out to be solutions using mathematical and scientific
Idea #1. principles, and predictive analysis used to
7. Test the prototype and verify the determine how a solution should behave
solution (provide iteration as before the solution is implemented. The
needed) NCETE refers to these together as COPA.
Collect and make a list of all items The use of mathematics and science in
(specifications, parts, bills of materials, the design process for COPA has been
engineering sketches) needed to missing in design activities in technology
develop a prototype and create a education.
report for management. Then actually
build a working model and test it. These engineering design concepts have
8. Communication (summarization been supported as an integral part of
report) the process. Wicklein (2006) stated that,
Provide a narrative and drawings to “the results of an engineering-focused
communicate the design process. curriculum will strengthen the technology
In-depth narrative and drawings are education program as well as provide a
used to communicate the design much-improved overall school curriculum.
to management. A PowerPoint™ Students, parents, teachers, and school
presentation may also be used to administrators will all benefit from this
convey points. type of collaborative arrangement.” He
also included optimization, analysis, and
Some steps can be repeated as needed as predication as essential elements in the
the engineering design process proceeds. curriculum. Childress and Rhodes’ (2008)
Delphi study on infusing engineering
design into the schools through technology
education supported the COPA concepts
Article 9
ARTICLE
Mars Rover
and found that, “in order to infuse
engineering design into the curriculum, the
related engineering design concepts have
to be identified” (p. 6).
activity: optimize the
path for Mars Sojourner
The engineering design process can be
used in an activity to help elementary
school students learn about angles and
triangles by integrating math, science,
and technology in a technology education
lesson plan. Below is a brief scenario:
Define the problem: Identify the
constraints and criteria for success
Review the principles of the Pythagorean
Theorem (a 2 + b2 = c2). What is the
shortest path for the Mars solar rover to
travel to reach the indicated location on the
picture? Teachers create the criteria, and
students’ complete a decision matrix. For
example, if the rover is charged one hour
of sunlight, how would that affect travel?
This will help the students to optimize and
predict the path of the rover before the
solution is implemented.
Search
Students can utilize textbooks and the
Internet to search for different examples of
10 Technology and Children May 2009
relationships between the three sides of a
right triangle.
Develop designs
Students draw paths around the specific
constraints and limits imposed on the
criteria. Learners sketch out all their ideas
and compare differences in their designs
using the Pythagorean Theorem. For
example, if the rover is charged one hour
of sunlight (criteria), which path would it
take on the picture to conserve power and
travel the shortest path (time) to reach its
destination.
Analysis
Students will perform an analysis on
solutions using the Pythagorean Theorem
by locating the right triangles and the
hypotenuse (the side opposite the right
angle). This will help them understand the
relationship between the three sides of a
right triangle.
Alternative solutions
Students will determine the best solution
that meets the requirements and satisfies
the constraints.
Decision
Students will list the “trade-offs” and/or
sacrifices they made to come to their final
decision(s). Additionally, the learners will
indicate how they optimized their solutions
by choosing certain combinations of
individual criteria items that resulted in the
highest overall satisfaction of the sum of all
criteria items.
Teachers, using the engineering design
process to create technology education
lesson plans, can help optimize how
students’ problem solve and design.
Learners who are able to apply content
from their math, science, and technology
education classes to an activity are able
to solve more complex problems than
learners receiving a traditional lesson that
only focuses on one of the content areas.
references
Childress, V. W., & Rhodes, C. (2008).
Engineering outcomes for grades 9-12.
The Technology Teacher, 67(7), 5-12.
Eide, A, Jenison, R., Mashaw, L. &
Northup, L. (2002). Engineering:
Fundamentals and problem solving.
New York City: McGraw-Hill.
Frye, E. (1997). Engineering problem
solving for mathematics, science,
and technology education. Hanover,
NH: Trustees of Dartmouth College.
Retrieved March 9, 2009, from http://
thayer.dartmouth.edu/teps/book.html.
Holtzapple, M. T., & Reese, W. D. (2008).
Concepts in engineering (2nd ed.).
New York: McGraw Hill.
Wicklein, R. C. (2006). Five good
reasons for engineering as the focus
for technology education. The
Technology Teacher, 65(7), 25-29.
Sonya R. Draper is an assistant professor
in the Department of Graphic Communi-
cation Systems and Technological Studies
at North Carolina A&T State University in
Greensboro, North Carolina. She can be
reached at drapers@ncat.edu.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.