innovation-led multi-disciplinary undergraduate design ... · journal of engineering design 3 (aiaa...

Journal of Engineering DesigniFirst, 2011, 1–26

Innovation-led multi-disciplinary undergraduate designteaching

D.R. Hayhursta*, K.T. Kedwardb, H.T. Sohb and K.L. Turnerb

aDepartment of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, The University of Manchester, George BeggBuilding C4, Sackville Street, Manchester M13 9PL, UK; bDepartment of Mechanical and Environmental

Engineering, Engineering II, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5050, USA

(Received 23 August 2010; final version received 26 November 2010 )

This paper arises from observations made by the principal author, while on a recent sabbatical at theUniversity of California at Santa Barbara, USA, regarding innovation-led undergraduate design teaching.This paper reports parallel educational approaches with those used in the UK in terms of design managementand industry-led design for manufacture small group projects led by leading industrialists. However, thispaper reports changes in the core mechanical engineering curriculum within the fields of micro-electronicmechanical systems and life sciences, not prevalent within the UK. In both of these areas, there is aneed for cross-disciplinary bridging courses, which introduce new vocabulary, scientific principles, andexperimental techniques. These courses require space to be created in what are often overcrowded curricula.This paper presents solutions to these problems so that new approaches can be developed for innovation-leddesign education within these cross-disciplinary fields.

Keywords: multi-disciplinary; innovation; undergraduate; design teaching

1. Introduction

This discussion paper presents an assessment of methods used to teach design to undergraduatesand presents views on potential new developments. It is widely acknowledged by educators thata major objective should be to produce engineering graduates with a strong cross-disciplinaryoutlook. This viewpoint arises from the observation that most significant advances, which impacton society, arise from the interaction between technologies. The purposes of this paper are to makea position statement; present a critical review; and give a forward perspective on new developmentsin undergraduate teaching, which might best underpin cross-disciplinary innovation-led wealthcreation through design.

This paper is presented in three parts: Part 1 relates to the management aspects of design, andwhile recognising inputs from science and technology, it concentrates on their management; Part 2concentrates on the science and technology drivers which underpin innovative design and includesa range of attributes from discovery science to the application of established engineering principles

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0954-4828 print/ISSN 1466-1837 online© 2011 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/09544828.2010.544248http://www.informaworld.com

Downloaded By: [Dobler, Lore][University of California, Santa Barbara] At: 16:57 29 April 2011

2 D.R. Hayhurst et al.

to new multi-disciplinary developments; and Part 3 addresses opportunities for curriculum changerequired to underpin future development of wealth creation through technology-driven innovativedesign.

2. Part 1

2.1. Management-related aspects of design

Section 2 focuses on three topics where management-related aspects of design are crucial; theyare (i) Synergy between design management, marketing, and concept design; (ii) design for globalmanufacture; (iii) environment, energy, and total lifecycle design. Each topic is now addressedin turn.

2.1.1. Synergy between design management, marketing, and concept design

2.1.1.1. Overview. One of the first to publicly articulate the importance of managing mar-keting in the design process was Prime Minister Thatcher, in her address ‘Design or Decline’in 1986 (Thatcher 1986). It was aimed at the need for designers to be aware of marketplaceneeds, quality, delivery on time, and what people are prepared to pay for – in short, perceivedvalue. These notions have been taught in Management Schools around the world for decades,and the relevant attributes required for engineers are an appreciation of market segmentationand targeting; the use of marketing tools to collect relevant data on current and future saleableproducts and systems; and the need to feed this information into the design brief or product spec-ification. Even today, this process is not always well managed, and often ‘headstrong’ engineerswho believe they ‘know the market’ take short cuts, and consequently, lay themselves open tomissing opportunities. In the industrial environment, ‘marketing’ is often treated as being syn-onymous with ‘sales’, and inappropriately trained personnel are involved in decision-making.Furthermore, the management of the interface between marketing and engineering design is donebest by personnel who have been educated in, or who have experience of, both domains. Suchpeople are in short supply, and this is one area where multi-disciplinary engineers can play animportant role.

Further recognition came in 1988 from Augustine (1988), then an American industry leader,in his observation that ‘In basic research and science, America has done very well (noting thenumber of Nobel Prizes in physics, chemistry and medicine during the 80’s). In the next step,application of this technology, America is still very good, but losing this lead.’An example of thisis the trend favouring foreign invention. Augustine goes on to assert that ‘Excellence in researchand technology is not enough. During the very period when America dominated technology andengineering, we lost the lead in the marketplace. There’s another major ingredient, and this ismanaging the technology.’

Other concerns were expressed, based on a retrospective evaluation of the increased emphasison basic science and mathematics, regarding the concomitant decrease in laboratory work andprofessional education which accompanied the Post World War II Engineering Science Movement(Halpin 1994). Although deemed to be a ‘successful reform’, the consequence was perceived bymany to be an ‘over-correction’, that is, the D in R&D (Research & Development) was lost.In addition, an unwritten view pervaded the US defence agencies in the mid-1990s: that thediscipline of design had declined to a point of national alarm and shame . . . had failed to meetAmerica’s needs . . . and engineering schools devoted their time to theory and analysis rather thanto design. In 1992, an editorial by a representative group of a prestigious US National Society


Journal of Engineering Design 3

(AIAA Academic Affairs Committee 1992) offered the following: ‘With few exceptions, mostengineering faculty/academics fully understand neither the role of design nor the design process’.

Clearly, there is a need for a conscious effort to address this management/technology/designfor manufacture imbalance in future undergraduate curriculum developments.

2.1.1.2. Undergraduate curriculum and teaching implications. The issues raised in the earliersection have previously been addressed in undergraduate curriculum by a two-pronged approach:first, by Marketing modules taught by Management School personnel, and secondly, by groupdesign projects (Hayhurst et al. 1994) that build on this. The presence of senior engineers fromindustry, who can relate the project to current market conditions within their own industry,considerably enhances the process. It is the presence of such ‘broad-based’ professional engi-neers within the university involved in the teaching/instruction process that can so effectivelyinfiltrate best professional/industrial practice. This presents a challenge, since it requires bothcurriculum space and cash resource to attract the best industrialists into the university teachingenvironment.

2.2. Design for global manufacture

The composition of a nation’s engineering wealth creation activity, for products sold inter-nationally, tends to be closely coupled with technological capability level, labour costs, andvolume of production. There are three types of operations. First, in the high-technology domain,countries such as the USA and UK rely on factors such as discovery science, high-technologyinnovation, and manufacturing methods which are underpinned by high technology, for exam-ple, aircraft, airframes, aero-engines, high-performance automobiles, micro-electromechanicalsystems (MEMS), automation and robotics, medical diagnostics/scanners, and pharmaceuticals.These industries require highly trained graduates and postgraduates, linked and underpinned byworld-leading research teams. Secondly, at the other end of the spectrum, one has wealth creationalactivity that exploits low labour costs in countries such as Mexico, Brazil, Malaysia, India, andChina, with the technology input, if any, being made in the originating, entrepreneurial, nation.Thirdly, there is the category where high-technology products involve design in the technologi-cally advanced nation, sometimes with elements of manufacture, which is then coupled with thelow-cost manufacture and assembly in an overseas state. Often, the final assembly of the artefacttakes place in the country where the products are consumed.

In the following three sections, various aspects of the above-mentioned three types of operationsare reviewed and implications stated for undergraduate engineering design curriculum.

2.2.1. Activity segmentation to exploit knowledge, skill, and labour force bases

Segments of world markets are competed for on product-price, by using the ability to manufac-ture and assemble globally at a significantly lower cost than that which could be achieved bydesign/manufacture in the home nation alone. Very often, those who benefit most are the firstto recognise an opportunity. But having done so, the selection of the balance and make-up ofactivities is usually an operation driven by logistics, finances, and risk. The activity relies entirelyon the ability to transmit electronically huge amounts of data, quickly and without error, and it isthe Internet that provides this global infrastructure.

The engineering aspects are related to the use of computer-aided design, computer-aided man-ufacture, and shared databases, with the use of International Standards for engineering design,manufacture, and information technology (IT) being the key elements.



2.2.2. Role of IT

In the global activity related to product/component design and manufacture, there is a needto generate digital product representations; perform product lifetime simulations, often using thefinite element method; and transfer such data to the manufacturing/planning, machining, forming,and shaping operations in a different country. While commercial software is available to do this,there is a need to continually update and improve performance, and to take advantage of the resultsfrom recent research.

The driver for change comes from faster computer networks, faster computers, commercialconfidentiality, and intellectual property. And, in an overall sense, it comes from the reduction oftime from product conception to the assembly of a product, manufactured internationally.

2.2.3. Undergraduate curriculum implications

The topics discussed above: computer-aided design, component analysis, product shape specifi-cation, manufacturing product specification, etc., are not uniformly included in the curriculum inall universities. This is due to the prevalence of a view that they have a strong skill-based elementand are thought to be best learnt and appreciated in industry following graduation. There is anopposing view that argues that the key elements should be taught to permit the formal teachingof the overall integration of the key elements of global manufacture. If this is accepted, then thereis a need for careful curriculum revision; in particular, it is desirable to expose students to iden-tification of novel opportunities, financing, planning, transportation, logistics, and cross-culturalworking using electronic communications.

Probably, the best way to educate undergraduates in these domains is to run group designprojects, led by a practising senior member of a global engineering company. Alternatively, twogroups of students from two universities in different countries can work on a common design/

manufacture project. Such ventures have been carried out very successfully under the RoyalAcademy of Engineering (2005a) scheme in Visiting Professors in the Principles of EngineeringDesign.

2.3. Environment, energy, and total lifecycle design

2.3.1. Overview

Total lifecycle design concepts are being actively addressed in an attempt to design products andsystems which, over their lifetime, are capable of reducing energy consumption and environmentalimpact, to levels that are significantly less than current equivalents for existing products of compa-rable functional specification. This has led to the introduction of new design constraints/metricsthat address total lifecycle costs, starting with design, leading through manufacture, usage, andrepair/upgrading of product/system performance, through to disposal/decommissioning. As partof these changes, new emphases/considerations have been introduced, for example, material recy-clability and possible use of biodegradable materials, and the mid-life prolongation of lifespansthrough design/technology/aesthetic/ergonomic reinvigoration.

In relation to material recyclability, these are not new concepts, and material selection proce-dures exist that can be adapted and used to optimise selection. With regard to design principlesfor mid-life reinvigoration, as applied to consumer products, there are parallels that can be madewith other branches of engineering: for example, where a design lifetime of 30+ years is the normand where the principles of decision-making for maintenance and part/module replacement havebeen established.



For discussion purposes, a good example is the prolongation of the lifetime of passengerautomobiles from 6–10 years to 30+ years. The principal issues are how to update/reinvigorate avehicle three to four times in a lifetime, involving possibly the shape, colour, engine performance,efficiency, and suspension characteristics. These can be addressed by well-known modular designtechniques and by the identification of those modules that will have a 30+ year lifetime, and thosethat will have shorter lifetimes and require replacement. The most dramatic change will be thetype of contract that the consumer will have with the manufacturer/service supplier, and not thefamiliar sales plus a 3-year warranty, but a contract to support, maintain, and update over the30+ years.

In short, the concepts of design for extended lifetime, which are well accepted in power andchemical plant design and operation, in building elevator, air conditioning, and escalator design,will permeate such markets as the capital-intensive area of jet engines and of passenger automo-biles. These moves may well require government inducements through taxation incentives, butthey can have a desirable impact on society’s use of materials and energy and on the environment.

2.3.2. Undergraduate curriculum and teaching implications

The design principles of total lifecycle design as applied through materials and mechanical engi-neering to high-volume products are likely to evolve from those established in Civil, Structural,Building Services, Architecture, and Chemical Engineering; in short, a technology adaptationand transfer is needed. The required techniques are available for the identification and design ofindividual units or groups of components, and for the integration of units into the whole design.Also, experience exists for teaching them. However, the great challenge is the management ofthe total lifecycle design process, in particular, the identification of (i) individual product/systemunits, (ii) design criteria, and (iii) constraints at both the individual and integrated unit levels: forexample, legal and contractual aspects, and forecasting over 30+ years.

In terms of curriculum developments, most of these topics can be covered by sequences oflectures delivered as part of a larger course; however, probably the most impactful way forward,particularly with respect to skill and experientially based activities, would be through enquiry-based learning (EBL) methods. In the latter, small groups of students (four to six) engage in enquiryand self-learning, underpinned by specialist academic staff support and guided by a senior profes-sional engineer from a relevant industry. This could be seen as part of the programme of sustainabledevelopment of the type led by The Royal Academy of Engineering (2005b) and underscored bythe Engineering Council (2009). This is often seen as a deviation from the traditional educational‘engineering solutions-based approach’, where students are taught to apply theory to the solutionof tightly defined problems, over to a ‘problem-based approach’, where students are challenged tounderstand major engineering-related problems that society faces, but which cannot be addressedby classical methods of engineering analysis alone.

2.4. Discussion of Part 1

The undergraduate curriculum implications of the ‘management-related aspects of design’ dis-cussed in Section 2 fall into two categories: first, the imparting of knowledge via conventionallectures and examinations, and secondly, the imparting of experience and wisdom through work-ing in small group multi-disciplinary EBL projects, led by specialist academics and seniorindustrialists. These two aspects are now addressed.

In the first case, the majority of lecture content comes from knowledge and experience trans-fer from other disciplines: for example, management, marketing, IT, data base technology,and civil/structural engineering. The difficulties are their inclusion in what is an overcrowded



curriculum. This results in the need to identify what is old and out of date and no longer relevantto contemporary needs and practices, and hence, its expulsion from the existing curriculum isneeded, so creating space for new developments.

In the second case, design projects and EBL require time and inputs by experienced professionalengineers. Their coordination and management is a time-consuming activity. If success is to beachieved, the onerous nature of the approach, coupled with the need for appropriate academicstaff levels, has to be recognised. The value of such staff should not be denigrated since theirexpertise often has an intuitive, non-analytical dimension, and sometimes, it does not resonatewith the university management preference for exceptional and focused researchers. In addition,the need must be recognised to fund and to attract the support of key professionals from leadingindustries; they should be hired to play a key role both in undergraduate curriculum design andteaching/instruction and in assessment.

An alternative approach is not to separate the curriculum into the two distinct phases describedabove, since it can create a significant disconnect between the formal lectures on marketing, etc.,and the implementation of the relevant principles in group projects. This disconnect is often appar-ent when students perceive non-engineering lectures to be ‘woolly’, non-numerate, and unrelatedto the more analytical aspects of their course. Hence, by integrating the formal lectures on market-ing, etc., with a group project and timing their delivery to coincide with the point at which the stu-dents require a knowledge input, they achieve better knowledge assimilation. In addition, the useof selected multi-disciplinary industrialists to run/monitor/assess projects enhances this process.

While recognising that exposure to multi-disciplinary knowledge such as marketing and financeis crucial to the success of innovation in engineering education and practice, it is felt that thesetopics have been increasingly addressed over recent years with the effect that the barrier to progressis not how and by whom this should be done, but instead how can sufficient space be generatedin a busy curriculum. For this reason, priority will not be given in this paper to finding spaceto teach marketing and finance when addressing the innovation process, instead the focus willbe the accessing of broader knowledge within the field of engineering/science such as software,micro-electronic devices, and life sciences (LS).

3. Part 2

3.1. Technology-driven aspects of design

3.1.1. National recognition for educational and curriculum change

As mentioned in the previous paragraphs, several opportunities for injecting motivation and inspi-ration into undergraduate educational development currently exist both as part of a potential finalyear undergraduate lecture series and through industry-driven design projects. It has long beenrecognised that practice-oriented approaches serve an invaluable role in engineering education.One such example was presented by Herbert (2001) of Massachusetts Institute of Technology(MIT). The paper cites an initiative ‘Conceive–Design–Implement–Operate’ that embraces a deepworking knowledge of scientific fundamentals in the context of real product development. Also,such an initiative strengthens ties between academe and industry.

Over a decade ago, the US National Board of Engineering Education presented a white paper(Good 1993) under the title ‘Major Issues in Engineering Education’. The paper raised thefollowing issues:

The question is not whether students have enough exposure to the fundamentals of engineering science, but whetherthey are exposed to enough material beyond the fundamentals to prepare them to be effective practitioners, well-rounded professional citizens, and leaders in our highly technological world.



It went on to advocate the development of practice-oriented graduate study options at both master’sand doctoral levels.

In addition, the US National Science Foundation (NSF) (2004) included in their announcementfor Engineering Research Centers (ERCs) a statement that indicates the breadth of governmentsupport, to quote: ‘. . . to build competence in engineering practice, and to produce graduates withthe depth and breadth of education needed for leadership throughout their careers’.

Hence, there is a clear recognition from US sources for an undergraduate education that providesa direct input from fundamental science and engineering to the needs of society, possibly throughthe design process.

3.1.2. Multi-disciplinary design innovation: an overview

The fields in which there is greatest potential for wealth creation through technology-driven inno-vation are those that fall on the boundaries between two or more traditional domains. More specif-ically, they involve the physics of the constituent systems that comprise a complete engineeringsystem, mathematical formulations, and interactive computer modelling/analysis/optimisationcapability for decision-making in design. Very often, the physics involves nonlinear behaviourand interactions between the constituent physical systems, which individually are not linear. Theresult is that to optimise product/system designs in a multi-metric space can involve several localminima, removed from a global minimum. Hence, differentiation, discrimination, and evaluationof nonlinear computer modelling are vital parts of the design process.

Digital computers, numerical methods, tailor-made software, and finite element modellingsystems that are being used are all taking on an increasing role as key engineering design decision-making tools. This is not only true at the detailed design stage, but because of the second-ordernonlinear interactions, it can also involve concept design.

This trend is particularly relevant across multi-disciplinary engineering domains, e.g. materials,engineering structures, fluid flows, heat transfer, and noise and reactive flows. However, theindustrial requirement to be able to deal with strong interactions between such disciplines is notreflected in undergraduate and postgraduate curriculum development. In academe, a traditional,more parochial, approach is found in most undergraduate and taught postgraduate courses, wheretransgressions across boundaries occur as and when necessary, as opposed to following a plannedand structured educational approach. In contrast, a more forward-looking stance has been taken bysoftware houses that have probably been more responsive to multi-disciplinary industrial needs.

In research, some schools (e.g. Feyel et al. 1997, Ladeveze and Nouy 2002, Dureisseix et al.2003) have investigated this as part of determining how best to carry out modelling computationsthat involve the physics of different constituent elements. In particular, the issue addressed iswhen and how to use parallel or serial computer processing in the numerical solution/modellingof multi-physics problems.

In an educational sense, there is a need to give instruction, provide steerage, and make assess-ment in these areas that involve theory, analysis, and problem-solving through the use of tailoredsoftware, and there is also a need to identify suitably skilled educators to underpin these bur-geoning activities. Probably, the best skilled group, working in an allied environment, is thepostgraduate research student community.

It is these technology-driven aspects that are addressed in Section 3: in particular, those that laydown a foundation of engineering and scientific principles, and that underpin analysis for design.

Against the above-described background, the questions posed in Section 3 of the paper are

(i) do courses have the appropriate spread of multi-physics and science modules;(ii) do they provide the necessary education and guidance to underpin the level of multi-

disciplinary interaction required for analysis and decision-making in design;(iii) how should undergraduate and taught postgraduate courses best evolve?



To inform this process, some examples are first discussed in Section 3. In Section 3.2, newdevelopments that relate to the fields of aerospace design and multi-functional materials arecovered; in Section 3.3, some aspects of MEMS are presented; and in Section 3.4, biologicaldevices associated with the LS are addressed.

3.2. Section 1

3.2.1. Aerospace design with composites: recent and ongoing developments

3.2.1.1. Overview. Historically, aerospace engineering developments have been technologyled. The incentive has been provided by the requirement for weight saving, fuel efficiency, andperformance in concert with the acute desire for passenger safety, in the case of commercial air-craft. Such incentives proved to be major factors in the case of advanced carbon fibre-reinforcedpolymer and matrix composites (PMCs). One of the most significant illustrations of the advantagesof advanced composites is, ironically, found in the ill-fated attempt to develop large composite fanblades for the RB211 engine by Rolls Royce in 1968 (Kedward and Ward 2000). This developmentexemplifies the opportunities that can be brought about by concurrent advances in several tech-nologies, as cited in an earlier section. However, this scenario provides a characteristic warning ofthe need for timing, as judged by technology readiness/maturity, and can be used to educationaladvantage to alert final-year undergraduate and graduate students of the need to recognise techno-logical maturity. The decision to make the initial selection of carbon-fibre-reinforced PMCs wasmade by Rolls Royce during, or soon after, the early ‘Sales Period’ with very limited support-ing engineering evaluation. Contemporary approaches such as ‘Integrated Product and ProcessDevelopment’ have subsequently emerged to reduce the risk of premature technology insertionin advanced high-technology products and systems.

Twenty-five years later, General Electric Aircraft Engines timed the introduction of advancedcomposite technology for large composite fan blades in their GE90 engine; the latter has been inproduction now for over 10 years. The lesson learned from these crucial technological develop-ments can now be used for educational purposes; such case studies graphically ‘bring to light’ thesignificance of practice-oriented product development.

The commercial transport aircraft industry has exercised caution in its commitment to applyadvanced PMCs for airframes. During 2004–2005, Boeing announced their intention to utilise50% composites for the new B787 ‘Dreamliner’ airplane. Such caution is not untypical of thecommercial aircraft community. For instance, aircraft fuselage evolution is shown in Figure 1;the period of 44 years to 1947 shows dramatic design changes, while the period of 45 years to1992 reflects a near ‘stagnant’ aircraft configuration.

This lack of evolution raises the question: ‘When will there be a renaissance for the longhaul (commercial or military) transport aircraft category?’The previously mentioned Boeing 787and its European competitor, the A340, do not change this trend significantly, although otherinnovations have been introduced, such as the aforementioned extensive application of PMCs toprimary aircraft structure. However, the first-generation blended wing body (BWB), illustrated inFigure 2, does respond to the above question, and importantly, serves as a source of inspiration forthe emerging students of aerospace engineering. It also stimulates multi-disciplinarity with regardto the development of next-generation structural materials for this radically different structuralconfiguration. The more extensive use of advanced composites in the BWB, which enables thehuge wingspan of 106 m shown in Figure 2, coupled with superior aerodynamics, is responsiblefor its considerably enhanced performance envelope.

The technology driver for these developments is for superior analysis/simulation techniques forstructural integrity, aerodynamic performance, design, and manufacture of advanced compositesystems, which permit shorter lead times for product entry to market. In short, it is for the more



Figure 1. Aircraft design evolution: the first and second 44 years. Adapted from: Liebeck (2004).

Figure 2. First-generation BWB aircraft. Dimensions in metres. Adapted from: Liebeck (2004).

aggressive application of new technologies and their associated analysis techniques. To highlightthese drivers, some developments are now discussed which relate to the less conservative designof military aircraft.

3.2.1.2. Low-observable aerospace vehicle design. One further incentive to aid in the devel-opment of a multi-disciplinary outlook of the engineering undergraduate students concerns



opportunities for designing multi-functional structures. Unfortunately, the classified nature ofthis subject renders it difficult to focus on specific examples. Nevertheless, it should be noted thatthe interface between two disciplines of engineering, that is, aerospace and mechanical, on theone hand, and electrical, on the other, must be closely integrated to achieve demanding structuralintegrity and radar or acoustic signatures. An example of effective interfacing between the above-mentioned two technologies culminated from the desired integration of radar absorbing materials(RAMs), which must function as a radar absorbing structure (RAS). The F-117A Nighthawk (USAir Force 2010) shown in Figure 3 is an example of a vehicle that has benefited in this way.A multi-layer, sandwich structure can be configured to defeat radar detection, while maintaining alightweight, flight-worthy structural performance. The motivation in this case was provided by theintolerable weight penalties involved with early RAM designs which, from a systems engineeringviewpoint, tended towards unifunctional, parasitic concepts.

The resolution of the problem was brought about by acknowledging the need to manage indus-trialists, physicists, and engineers to achieve a functional awareness of each others’ disciplines.This was achieved by running mutual educational programmes, within the design project team,where each discipline educated the other disciplines. The same team that would subsequentlyexecute the design function was used.

In short, the concurrent achievement of team building, technological/scientific competence, anddesign awareness was found to be necessary for timely success. Hence, it is vital that undergraduateindustry-driven design projects involve multi-disciplinary teams that require EBL within a projectteam environment.

Some aspects of the above-mentioned requirements are now addressed with respect to thedesign/manufacture of hypersonic flight vehicles.

3.2.1.3. Hypersonic flight vehicles.

Overview. The desire to fly across the Pacific rim, or from northern to southern hemispheres inan acceptably short time, has introduced the need for civil aircraft that fly at hypersonic speeds.The stringent requirements of zero pollution and protection of the earth’s ozone layer requirenew engine and fuel technologies. Hence, there is a need to design and build hypersonic vehicleswith new high-temperature engines; construct lightweight airframes, shaped appropriately for

Figure 3. Lockheed F-117A Nighthawk: use of high-performance composites and low-observable technology (photo:US Air Force 2010).



hypersonic flight; and engineer control surfaces for navigation through relevant speed regimes.In short, this involves design in a multi-disciplinary domain that embraces super/hypersonicflight, reactive flows associated with new engine technology, and heat transfer from the highertemperature engines. The novel aspect of the design process is that it is not possible to designby prototype development, since hypersonic flow experiments are necessarily small scale andendure very short periods. Hence, there is a need to supplement testing with multi-disciplinarycomputer-based analysis and simulation.

The role of computer simulation in design. In Figure 4(a), an artist’s impression of the NASAhypersonic vehicle Hyper X-43 (NASA Langley Research Center 2010) with the engine mountedon the under-body is shown; this is used here as a discussion example. In Figure 4(b), a computermodel of the same vehicle, which has been used to produce the computational fluid dynamics(CFD) flow fields, is shown; high velocities are given in red and lower velocities in blue. Highvelocities can be seen around the engine inlet on the under-body; and it is in this region thattemperatures of the airframe structure are likely to be very high and require cooling to maintainthe material and vehicle structure within the limits required for acceptable lifetimes. Hence, inthis region of the airframe, there is a need to computer model/simulate

(i) flow fields and associated heating effects;(ii) combustion and related engine temperatures;

(iii) heat transfer and structural temperature fields;(iv) failure modes and life expectancy for the airframe materials and types, considered in the

light of (i), (ii), and (iii).

To permit operation in the required hypersonic design envelope, it is necessary to addressnew multi-functional materials. An example is given in Figure 5 (Kim et al. 2004) of a platethat permits air cooling through its core, appropriate flexibility/stiffness in use with combinedthermomechanical loading, and good structural integrity. Figure 5(a) shows a heat transfer testrig, and the colour contours in Figure 5(b) show the experimentally determined distribution of

Figure 4. Hyper X-43 vehicle Langley Research Centre. (a) image #-1997-00031 and (b) CFD image #EL-1997-00028(NASA Langley Research Center 2010).



Figure 5. Forced air convection cooling of a multi-functional material/structure: (a) testing for transient measurementwith liquid crystal thermography and (b) disruption of local Nusselt number on end-wall at Re = 4680. Adapted from:Kim et al. (2004).

Nusselt number, Nu, that relates to through-thickness heat transfer. Here, Nu = hd/k, where h isthe transverse heat transfer coefficient, d is the length scale of the lattice structure separating thewalls, and k is the thermal conductivity of the coolant fluid flowing between the parallel plates.

The industrial challenge, therefore, is to design and manufacture new multi-functional materialsand to integrate them into structures of the type discussed above while satisfying the appro-priate structural integrity requirements. What is clearly apparent is the key role of computermodelling/simulation in this process. The discrete simulations listed in (i)–(iv) above are highlynonlinear in themselves, and when they have been integrated in a full multi-physics simulation,the nonlinear interactions produce unusual and often unexpected effects.

The moral is that design cannot be done by simple addition of individual solutions, for example,those for combustion, flow, heat transfer, structural integrity, and materials. Instead, it is necessaryto carry out fully integrated multi-physics numerical simulations. It is, therefore, imperative thatthese changes be reflected in undergraduate curriculum and in the teaching of design.

As an example, the design objective of a student project could be to select materials and asandwich structure for the component shown in Figure 5 that will sustain in-plane and out-of-plane forces, transverse thermal gradients, and avoid failure. This component could be used as amulti-disciplinary example, in which students can compare computed results with experimental



data. The challenge would be to balance through-thickness heat transfer against coupled structuralstiffness and strength while varying plate thickness and the geometry of the lattice structure.

3.2.1.4. Aerospace vehicle design with composites: new curriculum. To conclude the sectionrelating to aerospace vehicle design with composites, it is appropriate to provide a ‘best practice’example of a final year undergraduate, 3-month-long, group project assignment run at the Univer-sity of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB), which has proven successful when measured againstthe attributes discussed above.

Best practice example. The project comprises the design of a space-shuttle remote manipulatorarm subsystem (Figure 6) with a design specification appropriately modified to suit the knowl-edge base/capability of students (Kedward 2010). The project has been introduced to UCSB byindustrial staff, who provide critique in mid-term and final review/assessments. This injectionof industrial realism provides essential constraints to the design process such as those related tomanufacture, costing, and scheduling. The project was selected as a multiple constraint, multi-disciplinary, design for manufacture and assembly project. Students are expected to design thespace-shuttle manipulator arm to meet the multiple constraints of maximum stiffness for minimumweight, absence of vibration, and avoidance of thermal effects, coupled with accurate positionalcontrol.

In Phase 1 (5-week duration), the manipulator arm design is developed by starting with abaseline metallic alloy (aluminium) arm. Students are encouraged to follow their instincts andassess the design of an aluminium alloy structure. Arm stiffness, vibrational characteristics, andthermal distortion requirements are addressed in preparation for an oral briefing and a writtenreport at mid-term, that is, a ‘Preliminary Design Report’. It rapidly becomes apparent to thestudents that the aluminium alloy ‘starter concept’ is not viable, and that the design constraintscan only be satisfied by exploiting the properties of advanced composites.

For Phase 2 (5-week duration), the drive and actuating mechanism of the arm is developedbased on the structural design determined in Phase 1. Motor selection, gear drive tradeoffs for

Figure 6. Undergraduate composite design project at UCSB: shuttle remote manipulator arm (Kedward 2010).



a specified manipulation activity are designed by the student teams, and a final design review,comprising the oral briefing and written report, is presented to conclude the project.

This core design activity includes formal lectures, quizzes, and homework, and a final examina-tion, a process that provides a finishing education, which prepares graduate students for industry.The student motivation has proven to be a major beneficial factor, derived from the excitementgenerated by this appealing space-age project.

In an overall sense, the project serves to underline (i) the importance of multi-disciplinaryproject team working, and (ii) a common theme of analysis/optimisation for airframe design withlightweight composite materials.

Undergraduate curriculum. From the discussions presented in Sections 3.1.1–3.2.1.3, it is evi-dent that two themes emerge for consideration for curriculum change: first, the formal teachingof the finite element method through a multi-disciplinary approach, for example, fluid flow,heat transfer, dynamics, and structural integrity; and secondly, design teaching through exciting,industry-led, projects that focus on multi-disciplinary group projects.

Nonlinear finite element analysis is usually taught to engineering undergraduates within therelevant physical disciplines, for example, fluid flow, heat transfer, structures, vibrations, andmaterial processing. But, with few exceptions, interaction and interconnectivity between the dis-ciplines are often neglected. It is clear that curriculum change is needed to engender interactionand symbiosis between disciplines, and to exemplify this in multi-parameter, multi-disciplinarygroup design projects. However, in whatever form finite element analysis is taught, any self-respecting curriculum will reflect the importance of a basic understanding of the fundamentalunderpinning physical and mathematical principles, and will avoid concentrating on the use ofnumerical software and finite elements analysis packages as black-box tools.

In relation to teaching design through multi-disciplinary industry-led group projects, threeaspects provide a common theme:

(i) technological multi-disciplinarity;(ii) industry led, that is, senior industrialists become involved in the educational process, with

the specific remit of introducing key factors such as manufacture, costs, and scheduling;(iii) group projects which can be run in a style that reflects best industrial practice – with each

student taking on a key responsibility for a subset of the overall project.

Two new multi-disciplinary aspects are now addressed: in Section 3.3, MEMS; and inSection 3.4, engineering aspects of the LS.

3.3. Section 2

3.3.1. Micro-electromechanical systems

3.3.1.1. Multi-disciplinarity. MEMS encompasses more than what the strict definition of theterm implies. Many devices grouped into the MEMS broad definition utilise transduction mech-anisms that are not electromechanical. There can be fluidic elements, electronic or magneticsensors or actuators, integrated circuits, and more. Many MEMS contain mechanical elementsand/or fluidic elements, both of which are strong fundamental units in a mechanical engineeringcurriculum. Therefore, MEMS provides a very useful application area in which to stimulate andtrain mechanical engineers. In addition, the interdisciplinary nature of MEMS provides a usefulexample to motivate the need for continued learning, and the ability to interface with engineersand scientists of other disciplines, in order to facilitate scientific cross-disciplinarity, and theassociated wealth creational growth.



Two of the most common MEMS devices in society today are inertial sensors (accelerometers)(Senturia 2000) and micro-mirror devices (Senturia 2000) found in portable projection systems.Both of these applications utilise some key benefits offered by MEMS: small size, high sensi-tivity, wafer-level manufacturing processes (i.e. decreased cost), and array manufacturing. Thesedevices are manufactured using wafer-level fabrication technology, similar to that utilised in themanufacture of microprocessor chips. The fabrication is compatible with integrated circuit tech-nology, so that, in many cases, a device and its controlling circuitry can be manufactured on asingle chip. These devices are often not only small, but also require low power for operation, andthus do not affect the normal function of a system they are monitoring.

Figure 7 shows a schematic of a micro-accelerometer (Turner 2010). The operation of this deviceis quite simple. The structure consists of a proof mass, cf. central square region, which moves inresponse to external inertial forces. The proof mass is held in place by flexures, or ‘springs’, cf.top left and bottom right inserts. The motion of the proof mass is sensed by transducers. The mostcommon micro-accelerometers utilise capacitive transducers, either comb drives (Senturia 2000)or parallel plates (Senturia 2000), cf. top right insert. This device provides an ideal platform inwhich to introduce students of mechanical engineering to the elements of design. There are bothmechanical and electro-mechanical aspects to the design. The springs, in their simplest form,are merely structural cantilever or fixed–fixed beam structures. However, due to stresses inducedduring fabrication, the structures are often designed with stress relief built-in.

In the MEMS courses developed at UCSB, accelerometers are utilised in the teaching of thebasic principles of MEMS. Using a simple commercially viable device, students can practise andexplore not only the structural design, but also the interdependent nature of the three aspects:the design of fabrication processes (manufacturing), transduction mechanisms, and mechanical

Figure 7. Image of a micro-mechanical accelerometer. The spring supports, sensor capacitors, and mass section areshown in detail (Turner 2010).



design. The idea that an effective design must take all of these factors into consideration at theconcept design stage is a powerful one. A MEMS accelerometer is simple enough to illustratethese principles while having all elements readily understood by students.

3.3.1.2. Design methodologies. As one previous DARPA Program Manager used to say,‘MEMS starts with ME’. Mechanical engineers have a tremendous potential to lead the MEMSarea. Although the MEMS application space will fluctuate, currently, the MEMS field providesa unique opportunity to educate students in the interdisciplinary area that involves mechanical,electrical, physics, and micro-manufacture, together with the need to model/simulate interac-tive second-order effects. The generation of this awareness and provision of an education inthe basic physical principles are essential if students are to compete successfully in a global,interdisciplinary market.

In order to successfully design MEMS devices, a strong foundation in basic mechanics isessential. This knowledge is covered in traditional mechanical engineering curriculum. Statics,dynamics, mechanics of materials, and design and manufacturing courses are very important to themechanical aspects of MEMS design. However, more than that, engineers must also understandthe basics of other transduction mechanisms, including electromagnetic, piezo-electric, and piezo-resistive, etc. Any well-educated engineer can easily pick up the basic concepts of these cross-disciplinary topics when presented with the essential material, and formal teaching is not alwaysrequired. At UCSB, sets of bridging courses have been developed to teach mechanical engineersthe fundamentals in other fields that are essential for MEMS designers. Basic course sets aretaught at both undergraduate graduate levels, with the latter achieving the same goals, but at amore sophisticated level.

The success of the course sets derives from the hands-on laboratory components. This has alsobeen shown to have significance in the job placement of undergraduates. Undergraduates whohave successfully completed their course set have gone on to get jobs in MEMS companies, jobstypically not offered to engineers at the Bachelor of Science (BS) level. In the undergraduateprogramme, the course set is offered as upper division electives. This works well, as studentscan take bridging courses in whatever area they choose. MEMS is just one application area inwhich students choose to specialise. The first part of the course set focuses on the fundamentalsof MEMS, with an introduction to the application area, the theory fundamentals, and applicationsof mechanics to MEMS. The second part of the course set is a hands-on laboratory unit, wherestudents learn basic micro- and nanofabrication techniques. This is essential to fully understandthe design/manufacturing interdependency. The students fabricate and test some basic MEMSstructures, typically an accelerometer. Students work on their designs in teams of three to four,and in this way, they get a more realistic design experience.

At the graduate level, the objectives of the course set are somewhat different. At this level, thegoal is to bring mechanical engineering Ph.D. candidates to speed up on transduction technology.The first part of the course set is interdisciplinary and a requirement for the students specialisingin microsystems. Fundamentals of electromagnetic and semiconductor theory are covered. Thesecond part of the course set concentrates on the design and fabrication of microsystems. Again,rather than a survey course, this teaches fundamentals of fabrication technology to make studentsproficient in utilising the fabrication tools for MEMS technology. Following this course set,students should be able to take other graduate-level courses in the collaborative fields that interfacewith the MEMS domain.

3.3.1.3. Summary. Introducing undergraduate and postgraduate students to an interdisci-plinary subject such as microsystems technology proves to be extremely valuable. The knowledgeand skills required to interface with other subject areas are invaluable, and they prove very use-ful to engineers as they move into their careers. The course emphases must be quite different



depending on the level. The goal of an undergraduate course is to help teach future engineers howto interface and to work in areas that are cross-disciplinary. The goal of a postgraduate course ismore to educate future scientists, and engineers in the fundamentals of other areas that they willneed, if they are to successfully work in a cross-disciplinary field such as MEMS. By keepingthese distinct goals in mind, students of both levels will definitely gain from the introductionof cross-disciplinary application areas into the curriculum. At both levels, laboratory elementsprovide a significant skill and knowledge enhancement.

The success of the UCSB approach is due to two principal features: firstly, the bridging coursesthat teach the fundamental engineering science principles in fields other than mechanical engi-neering that are essential to MEMS design, and secondly, the student group (teams of three to four)projects that involve design of a MEMS artefact, its fabrication or manufacture, and performancetesting.

3.4. Section 3

3.4.1. Engineering at the Interface with Life Sciences

3.4.1.1. Opportunities for engineers. It has been over 40 years since Moore (1965) made hisfamous observation that an exponential growth in the number of transistors per integrated circuitwill occur, and that the trend would continue. Among many reasons that account for the successof integrated circuit technology that deeply affects our lives at many levels, perhaps the mostimportant factor is the economics of ‘batch fabrication’. This refers to the fact that all of thecomponents on a chip, now approaching a billion devices, are made in a parallel fashion all atonce, driving down the cost per device exponentially. Currently, we are in the midst of anotherprofound revolution – a revolution driven by our emerging understanding of the molecular basisof life and its relationship to human disease. This revolution is further fuelled by a convergenceof many disciplines including physics, chemistry, and all branches of engineering.

Since the invention of the optical microscope, almost every major breakthrough in biology ormedicine followed a breakthrough in technology. For example, one of cornerstones of modernbiotechnology is the capability to amplify DNA through the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)process (Saiki et al. 1985). PCR has revolutionised biology and medicine, and it affects ourmodern society with its applications ranging from archaeology (O’Rourke et al. 2000), forensicscience (Honda et al. 1999) to gene therapy (Hortobagyi et al. 2001). After the discovery thatDNA polymerase could be used to make many copies of a single DNA template molecule, two keydevelopments took place. First, biochemists isolated a thermostable DNA polymerase that allowedhigh-temperature reactions (>95◦C) involved in annealing, amplification, and denaturation of thePCR chemistry (Perler et al. 1996). Secondly, engineers developed efficient thermocycler instru-mentation, thereby greatly simplifying and automating the process. It is this multi-disciplinaryconvergence that rapidly propelled the dissemination of PCR technology to the worldwide scien-tific community. A multitude of other examples of such convergence include the development ofDNA sequencers, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, and fluorescenceactivated cell sorters, to name a few. Such interdisciplinary convergence of science and technologyoffers vast and unprecedented opportunities for research, discovery, and wealth creation.

3.4.1.2. Challenges of curriculum broadening. Within the current engineering curriculum, typ-ical undergraduate students (with the exception of bioengineering and some chemical engineeringundergraduates) often are not able to take formal courses in (bio)chemistry or molecular biologyas their free electives. Thus, many engineering students who are interested in graduating in thefield of biotechnology tend to be intimidated, as they lack formal foundations in (bio)chemistryor molecular biology, and as a result, they tend to forgo their opportunities in the field. Thus, there



is a need to identify and develop effective means to excite young engineering students, and toprovide them with a multi-disciplinary ‘broadening’ education in bioengineering, biotechnology,and biomedical engineering while majoring in a more established engineering discipline. Onesuch approach is described here.

3.4.1.3. Providing fundamentals of biochemistry and molecular biology for engineers. Duringtheir second and third years of the undergraduate curriculum, students are usually exposed to theircore courses with significant loads in their respective disciplines, so it is unlikely that they will bewilling to take core courses in (bio)chemistry or molecular biology as their free electives. In orderto provide interested students with the necessary background, a possible solution may be to offerintense elective bridging course sequences in their final year that provides solid fundamentalswith an intense laboratory component that provides hands-on experience. It is envisioned thatthis course would be designed as a ‘Mezzanine Level’ bridging course, so that the class wouldbe a mixture of advanced undergraduates and beginning graduate students, who share interest inbiotechnology. A possible scenario for such a sequence could be the following.

Bridging course (1) Fundamentals of genetics and biotechnology: This course would exposestudents to the central concepts in modern biology and biotechnology including transcription andtranslation from DNA to proteins, prokaryotic genetics and metabolism, and terminate with theintroduction to eukaryotic cell signalling pathways and disease. In essence, this course would bea combination of prokaryotic and eukaryotic genetics compressed into a single course throughconcentrated lectures, as well as a significant laboratory component.

Bridging Course (2) Modern biotechnology: The objective of this course would be to pro-vide engineering students, without formal biological training, with the main concepts of modernbiotechnology, so that they are able to explore the question: what do the tools of modernbiotechnology do, and what kinds of new capabilities will be needed in the future?

For example, part of the course could be focused on the exploration of the protocols andtechnologies for high-throughput DNA sequencing that include clone isolation, template amplifi-cation, Sanger extension, purification, and electrophoretic analysis (Paegel et al. 2003) (Figure 8).The example in Figure 8 shows the conventional macro-scale DNA sequencing sample processingand electrophoretic analysis; the process takes approximately 45 h for sample sizes of the orderof 20 μl. For applications in medical diagnostics and forensic investigations, this throughput istoo slow and too expensive, and sample sizes are too large. The micro-re-engineering of the pro-cess for on-chip application would overcome these reservations; reductions of in-process timeand sample volumes of the order of a factor of 10 are believed possible. If achieved, this wouldprovide considerable techno-business opportunities. Hence, the chosen example would make stu-dents aware of the possibilities, needs, and benefits of using engineering principles to miniaturisehardware; reduce the volumes of throughput samples; compress operational timescales; makefacilities accessible at low cost; and provide significant societal improvements.

Some other key concepts in this course might include the following topics:

(i) Recombinant DNA technology and gene sequencing(ii) Advanced methods of molecular and cellular separation

(iii) Modern genetic analysis including DNA micro-arrays(iv) Proteomics and high-throughput protein analysis(v) Immunological methods

A well-designed laboratory component and group-based design projects (teams of three to fourstudents) that focus on a specific area of biotechnology are envisaged.



Figure 8. A flowchart of a sample processing for DNA sequencing. From Paegel et al. (2003).



In addition, both bridging courses (1) and (2) would be designed to provide a flavour of howthese key concepts in biotechnology link to engineering fundamentals that the students havelearned in earlier years (e.g. diffusion, fluid dynamics, circuits, heat transfer, etc).

Presently, some UK universities offer biomedical engineering courses; while these are theexception, it is possible for undergraduate engineers of any discipline to take optional mod-ules, for example, tissue engineering, physiology, orthopaedics, etc. In this way, the mechanicalengineering undergraduates can take the equivalent of a bridging course.

In conclusion, the authors believe that a well-conceived sequence of a traditional engineeringeducation during the second and third years, capped off by mezzanine bridging elective/coursesequences, will provide undergraduates with the vocabulary and the fundamental science in theiradopted non-engineering discipline. Furthermore, the bridging courses would integrate with/haveembedded within them team project work that involves artefact design, fabrication/manufacturing,and performance testing. The bridging courses will provide an effective means of demonstratingthe application of engineering fundamentals in product/artefact design within their chosen non-engineering discipline. In addition, they will create an entry, with more informed choices, topostgraduate education/research or to the engineering industry.

3.4.2. Curriculum developments: MEMS and LS

In this section, the common trends that are apparent from Sections 3.3.1 and 3.4.1 are identified.The introduction of novel multi-disciplinary design-related teaching at UCSB in MEMS and inthe LS has been extremely successful, with take-up on these courses growing steadily over thelast 5–10 years. In part, this has been driven by student awareness that following graduation aftertaking such courses leads to well-paid first employment with unique career opportunities.

More generally, both MEMS and LS have emerged in the regular engineering curriculumwithin the last decade or so, and in comparison with the mature cross-disciplinary developments,for example, with composites in aerospace, they can be regarded as quiescent. Their quiescentnature is brought about by vocabulary and knowledge gaps that put in place barriers to take-upby undergraduate engineers with conventional backgrounds. To resolve this, the developmentat undergraduate level in both the MEMS and LS areas, outlined in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.4.1,respectively, relates to bridging electives/courses. With the emphasis being on optionality, stu-dents are free to configure the multi-disciplinary mix of their modules to form the degree coursebest suited to their chosen career progression. Hence, of the order of two modules spread overthe final 2 years of an undergraduate, engineering/material course would seem to provide therequired entree.

What is apparent about these quiescent disciplines is that curriculum development at under-graduate level is research led, and involves transfer from, and possibly sharing with, provenpostgraduate modules. To stimulate such new developments, it is important that provision is madeof adequate time slots in undergraduate courses and, of course, infrastructure, for example, labo-ratories and tutorials. Hence, it is by managing this process that new bridging electives/courseswill be created to enable students to make their informed choice of educational programme tosupport their career progression.

In connection with the running of multi-disciplinary group design projects, it is clear thatthey are not the norm within the quiescent disciplines; instead, laboratory-based assignmentsoften with capital-intensive equipment are necessary to impart knowledge and engender newskills. Hence, unlike the mature disciplines, where near-market professional, undergraduategroup design projects are widely accepted, projects are required in the quiescent disci-plines that are skill–knowledge based while involving multi-disciplinary team working, design,fabrication/manufacture, and product testing.



3.4.3. Discussion of Part 2

At the end of Section 3.1.2, three questions were posed in connection with the setting down, atundergraduate level, of a foundation of engineering and science principles that underpin analysisfor design. The principal aspects are now addressed.

3.4.3.1. Spread of multi-physics/science-based modulesMature engineering disciplines. There is a case for restructuring the teaching of classical disci-plines such as structures, statics, dynamics, fluids, thermodynamics, computers, and materials tobreak out of a ‘silo-based’mode of thinking, to one that stimulates an integrated approach throughcross-disciplinary modelling and simulation.

Quiescent MEMS and LS disciplines. Space is needed in the curriculum for electives/coursesthat enable undergraduate students to interface with and metamorphose from classical engineeringto other disciplines. To facilitate this process, access is needed for small groups of student tocapital-intensive laboratory equipment. The latter will engender the learning of new vocabulary,scientific principles, and laboratory-based manufacturing techniques associated with quiescentdisciplines.

3.4.3.2. Balance between taught modules and innovation-led multi-disciplinary design projects.To accept the presence, in the final 2 years of undergraduate courses, of quiescent disciplines suchas MEMS and LS means that space must be generated within the curriculum to create opportunitiesfor students wishing to be educated in these disciplines. There is much that is traditional inengineering curricula, often protected by the ‘old barons’, which, it has to be recognised, is welloverdue for replacement. Such fields/modules have their place, but can often be dealt with fullyand adequately, outside the undergraduate course, by specialised MSc courses.

In mature engineering disciplines, such as aerospace composite materials, the benefits ofcross-disciplinary industry-driven group projects are vital to the teaching of engineering sci-ence principles, the generation of synergy between disciplines, and the stimulation of thecreation of innovative design solutions. The management of this process, awareness of it byacademics/teachers, and its teaching through projects are all vital. For example, the need forplanning of ambitious projects, which stretch all concerned, the need to direct the solution searchinto a cross-disciplinary domain, and the need for constant review and adaptive planning are allkey messages to be taught and underscored in practice by professionals, both from industry andacademe, working alongside students. The choice of multi-disciplinary field is not important;however, what is crucial is that students are exposed to this experience in progressively increasingconcentration throughout their undergraduate course. The role of the hand-picked industry-basedprofessional, imported from industry into the university environment, cannot be overstated.

In short, the replacement of the weaker or outdated ‘older’ modules by those in the newerquiescent key disciplines is recommended. The balance between ‘taught’ modules and industry-led innovation projects should be maintained. However, the latter should focus on the managementof cross-disciplinary interactions in order to stimulate novel innovative developments.

3.4.3.3. Management of curriculum change. As discussed in Section 2, engineering curricula,worldwide, tend to focus on engineering science, theory, and principles rather than on the teachingof the principles for application in design decision-making. There is a need to produce graduateswho are competent in both theory and its application in multi-disciplinary domains where con-vergence occurs between science and technology; it is in these domains where there is a hugepotential for discovery, innovation, new products and wealth creation. Hence, new design coursesare needed to meet these needs.



Current curricula have swung excessively away from laboratory experimentation to computer-based numerical modelling, when it is the ‘hands-on’ aspects of laboratory work that engenderthe intuitive, ‘finger-tip’ feel for the use of materials and instrumentation as related to componentand system design. There is a need to redress this balance in favour of design for manufacture.

Space has to be created in what is typically an overcrowded undergraduate curriculum toallow the introduction of new courses that pertain to new technologies, which are inevitablyunderpinned by multi-physics and cross-disciplinary developments. This can probably only bedone by recognising that elements of the curriculum in the final years of undergraduate coursesare subsequently used in industry by only a small percentage of graduates. These elements are,therefore, best taught through specialist MSc courses; hence, some final year courses will thentake on the role of bridging courses, and free up time for the introduction of new courses.

Undergraduates in their final years need to be able to select groups of courses that allow in-depthspecialisation of their choice for preparation for their chosen career progression. Undergraduatesare the first to know those sectors in which the most highly paid jobs exist, these are usuallyassociated with scarcity levels in the new technology sectors, and undergraduates need to be ableto respond to key industrial changes.

The challenge of change management of engineering curricula has to be taken up by senioracademics.

4. Part 3

4.1. Opportunities for curriculum change

4.1.1. Design – management – organisation-related topics

This paragraph is related principally to Section 2, and the needs defined therein can be satisfiedby the following.

(i) Formal lecture courses that have been well developed over the years, for delivery to under-graduates, and can be used to set the scene and to transfer underpinning knowledge ofcore material on key topics, for example, management of projects, market dynamics, andstimulation of innovation.

(ii) Industry-led group projects run on selected topics, geared to teach how industry uses engi-neering principles, combined with heuristic and other non-engineering-based techniques, tosolve design problems related to marketing, wealth creation, and sustainable developments.

(iii) A fusion of (i) and (ii) such that lecture courses are tailored to underpin specific aspects ofthe design project. When tailored in this way, the approach is closer to EBL, and knowledgeimparted in lectures is synchronised with the needs of the project.

4.1.2. Technology-driven aspects of multi-disciplinary design/innovation: introductory andbridging lecture courses

This section is related principally to the formal lecture teaching aspects discussed in Section 3, andto the need for lectures on non-engineering topics required to establish a knowledge/vocabularybase necessary to permit cross-disciplinary interaction. This is particularly important for thequiescent disciplines discussed in Sections 3.3 and 3.4. The needs set out in Section 3 can besatisfied by the following.

(i) Recognition of the need to teach the techniques, and underlying theory, of numerical simula-tion involving multi-disciplines and multi-physics problems required for analysis in design,



and establishment of appropriate courses to underpin the entire design experience. Thesecourses are necessary to support finite element analysis in design of components and systemswhere several second-order nonlinear effects interact. Such courses would be taught midwaythrough the entire course.

(ii) Formal bridging courses delivered to engineering undergraduates in non-engineering disci-plines, for example, anatomy, biology, and medicine, etc. These lecture courses will engenderlearning and knowledge acquisition capable of underpinning technology-driven, multi-physics, cross-disciplinary analysis in design. Such electives/courses would be availableduring the latter two years of the entire course.

4.1.3. Technology-driven aspects of multi-disciplinary design/innovation: design projectsinvolving cross-disciplinary analysis for design

This section relates to the design project curriculum aspects of Section 3, and the needs definedtherein can be satisfied by the following.

(i) Individual or group undergraduate projects, or assignments, constructed to teach theprinciples that underpin the interaction and synergy between disciplines of interest.

(ii) Projects that require preliminary/concept design to be carried out and steer students towardsanalysis that captures the ‘broad outlines’with sufficient accuracy to permit decision-making,without the need for complete/detailed computer/finite element analyses. Such projectswould be staged in the earlier part of the entire course.

(iii) Projects that facilitate exposure of students to design/multi-physics analysis that involvesthe use of finite element modelling software for component/system analysis and designdecision-making. Since this subject area is a burgeoning one and the most vibrant area ofactivity is at the postgraduate research level, it is advocated that postgraduate researchers beinvolved in the educational development of their younger undergraduate peers. Such projectswould be staged in the latter part of the entire course.

4.1.4. Engines for change management

Probably, the greatest requirement created in the last decade or so is the need to free up time inovercrowded curricula. This requirement has been generated by the need to rectify weaknessesin the physical sciences of students entering university, and also by the requirement of the pro-fessional institutions to teach in more depth during the final years of courses. Hence, the need isclear for the expulsion of out-of-date material from current curricula, and without it, none of theproposals contained herein can be acted on fully.

University educators in engineering science and, in particular, those committed to developingthe teaching of engineering component/systems/product design may rightly say: ‘what is new’and offer the comment: ‘the need for curriculum review has been apparent for decades; but, toachieve significant change is difficult’. The barriers to change are many fold:

(i) Industry wants graduates who are known quantities – like the successful ones they haverecruited over previous years from a small select number of universities. Despite being rep-resented on departmental advisory committees, industry has not been a primary engine forcourse change. In fact, it can be argued that it is the academic staff, through their research andconsequent involvement with industry, who initiate forward-looking curriculum development.Industry, therefore, has not always provided the expected forward vision and drive.

(ii) The curricula of university engineering courses are strongly influenced by the need to gainaccreditation of the professional institutions. The latter have traditionally been conservative,and curriculum change has not been on top of their agenda. Probably, the most notable effort



to change this situation in the UK was made by the Committee of Inquiry into the EngineeringProfession, chaired by Sir Monty Finniston (1980); however, the outcome was a compromiseas elaborated in a study by Jordan and Richardson (1984), who summarised the events asfollows:

It is now widely accepted that British governments find radical policy change difficult to Secure – especiallywhere such change threatens to disturb a well-developed interest group network. The Report of the Committeeof Inquiry into the Engineering Profession (1980), chaired by Sir Monty Finniston, Engineering Our Future,was interesting because it proposed a very radical change in the way in which the engineering profession wasorganized and regulated. In essence, Sir Monty wished to displace the established engineering institutions. Astudy of the long and complex saga following the publication of the Finniston report is a good test of the system’scapacity for policy innovation as well as an illustration of the common conflict between state intervention andprofessional self-regulation. What finally emerged, The Engineering Council, can be seen as the outcome of aprocess of bargaining, which preserved the power of the professional institutions.

The effects of the inquiry on course curriculum were to introduce course units on the useand processing of materials as incorporated in design for manufacture, and group projects aspart of a 4-year MEng degree. Some three decades later, these elements are evident as coursecomponents, but the financial input required to maintain and reinvigorate them has sufferedby a sequence of financial stringencies over the same period.

This scenario clearly demonstrates the significance of intervention at government level ifchanges are to be brought about that are associated with the regulation of the engineeringprofession, and curriculum evolution required to meet future national industrial needs. Italso highlights the importance of ongoing reviews, managed change, and the provision ofnecessary targeted, secured, government funding.

(iii) Perhaps one of the most significant developments over recent decades has been the role ofthe National Academies, their ability to lobby government, and their function of securingfunding and distributing it. There have been many success stories, as indicated in this paper,and perhaps it is the National Academies that can be the engine for change management.

5. Conclusions

The responsibility for educating the next generation of engineers with a sound grasp of fun-damental principles, yet with the versatility and adaptability to function effectively in a highlycompetitive global environment, is a profound challenge. In accepting this challenge, a teachingphilosophy that is practice and mission orientated is advocated for undergraduate engineeringcourses such as design.

Engineering curricula, worldwide, tend to focus on engineering science, theory, and principlesrather than on the teaching of the principles for application in design decision-making. There is aneed to produce graduates who are competent in both theory and its application in a professional,multi-disciplinary, design for manufacture, industrial context; and to enable undergraduates intheir final years to select groups of courses that allow in-depth specialisation in preparation fortheir chosen career progression. The challenge of change management of engineering curriculahas to be taken up by senior academics.

In the latter context, it is advocated that the National Academies are best positioned to stimulatethe curriculum change that the professional institutions have been slow to bring about.

A desirable approach is one which balances the fundamental science and practice-oriented(applications) aspects in engineering educational programmes. The emphasis would increasinglyacknowledge synergy with new disciples such as the LS, medical sciences, and MEMS.

The education of undergraduates in the principles of marketing and in project managementcan be achieved using well-established management courses and appropriately structured groupprojects. Such courses can be staged in the earlier years of the entire engineering course.



The crucial role of analysis and computer simulation in design decision-making is acknowl-edged. In particular, the need to accurately model the performance of artefacts, machines, andsystems that involve the first- and second-order interactions and synergy between the differentmulti-disciplinary components of an entire system is acknowledged. However, it is preferable toavoid the use of ‘black-box’ approaches with software packages, and instead, focus on teachingthe underpinning fundamental engineering science principles.

Space has to be generated within the established engineering curriculum for the so-calledquiescent disciplines, that is, established courses will need to be replaced by new ones in thequiescent disciplines. The vocabulary/knowledge gaps of the average engineering undergraduatewithin these disciplines require that bridging courses/electives be provided to enable students totake up these new electives and progress along novel career tracks. Some of these electives willinvolve team project work that will link artefact design, fabrication/manufacture, and performancetesting with hands-on experience involving capital-intensive fabrication/manufacture hardware.

Furthermore, the additional advantage attained from the proposed philosophy is the enrichmentof the understanding of fundamental principles. This would be achieved by motivating studentsthrough exposure to open-ended problem-solving in a competitive environment with their peersor peer groups. Exposure to and supervision by experienced professional design engineers areessential for the rounded formation of designers. Also, the approach facilitates the developmentof holistic aptitudes and of an ability to function effectively in multi-disciplinary project teams.

Design projects should be selected to invoke interdisciplinary convergence of science andtechnology, since it offers vast and unprecedented opportunities for discovery, innovation, andwealth creation. In addition, it is important to recognise that access is required to funds to hirethe best professional designers from industry, who are able to teach undergraduates, relate to bestindustry practice, and empathise with the above-mentioned design-teaching philosophies.

Acknowledgements

The paper was prepared while Professor David R. Hayhurst was on sabbatical leave at The Materials and MechanicalEngineering Departments, University of California at Santa Barbara, USA; he acknowledges financial support provided,through a Global Research Award, by The Royal Academy of Engineering of the United Kingdom.

References

AIAA Academic Affairs Committee, 1992. U. S. National Society, AIAA Bulletin, March, p. B44.Augustine, N. R., 1988. How to manage technology, Mitre Matters, 7 March, 1–2.Dureisseix, D., et al., 2003. A multi-time-scale strategy for multiphysics problems: application to poroelasticity.

International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering, 1 (4), 387–400.Engineering Council. 2009. Engineering council guidance on sustainability [online].Available from: http://www.engc.org.

uk/about-us/sustainability [Accessed 17 December 2010].Feyel, F., et al., 1997. Application du calcul parallele aux modeles a grand nombre de variables interne. In: C.R. 3rd

Proceedings of the Colloque National en calcul de structure, Giens, France, 20–23 May, 309–314.Finniston, M., 1980. Engineering our future, committee of inquiry into the engineering profession. London: HMSO,

Profession Command Paper 7794.Good, M.L., 1993. Industry needs and the curriculum. Issues in Engineering Education, 2. Washington, DC: Board on

Engineering Education, National Research Council. Presented as a white paper at a regional symposium of the USNational Board on Engineering Education.

Halpin, J.C., 1994. Then Chief Engineer, US Air Force, Aeronautical Systems Center, Dayton, OH, USA, December.Hayhurst, D.R., Alsop, M., and Stone, P.G., 1994. The wealth creation process: experiential learning through competitive

industry-led group design projects and underpinning lectures. Journal of Engineering Design, 5 (4), 315–337.Herbert, W., 2001. Practice – plus fundamentals – makes perfect. ASEE PRISM, January, 30–32.Honda, K., Roewer, L., and de Knijff, P., 1999. Male DNA typing from 25-year-old vaginal swabs using Y chromosomal

STR polymorphisms in a retrial request case. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44 (4), 868–872.Hortobagyi, G.N., et al., 2001. Cationic liposome-mediated E1A gene transfer to human breast and ovarian cancer cells

and its biologic effects: a phase I clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19 (14), 3422–3433.



Jordan, A.G. and Richardson, J.J., 1984. Engineering a consensus: from the Finniston report to the Engineering Council.Public Administration, 62 (4), 383–400.

Kedward, K.T., 2010. Design Project Assignment ME 156B [online]. Santa Barbara, CA: Department of Mechanicaland Environmental Engineering, University of California. Available from: http://www.me.ucsb.edu/∼me156b/

project_1.html [Accessed 20 August 2010].Kedward, K.T., and Ward, D.D., 2000. The development and application of composites for large aeroengine fan blades.

In: A. Kelly and C. Zweben, eds. Comprehensive Composite Materials, vol. 6, 6.11. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 209–221.Kim, T., Hodson, H.P., and Lu, T.J., 2004. Fluid flow and endwall heat-transfer characteristics of an ultralight lattice-frame

material. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 47 (6–7), 1129–1140.Ladeveze, P. and Nouy, A., 2002. Une stratégie de calcul multiéchelle avec homogénéisation en espace et en temps.

Comptes-Rendus Mécanique, 330 (10), 683–689.Liebeck, R.H., 2004. Design of the blended wing body subsonic transport. Journal of Aircraft, 41 (1), 10–25.Moore, G.E., 1965. Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics, 38 (8), 114–117.NASA Langley Research Center, 2010. Hyper X-43 [online]. Available from: http://lisar.larc.nasa.gov/BROWSE/

hyperx.html [Accessed 20 August 2010].O’Rourke, D.H., Hayes, M.G., and Carlyle, S.W., 2000. Ancient DNA studies in physical anthropology. Annual Review

of Anthropology, 29, 217–242.Paegel, B.M., Blazej, R.G., and Mathies, R.A., 2003. Microfluidic devices for DNA sequencing: sample preparation and

electrophoretic analysis. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 14 (1), 42–50.Perler, F.B., Kumar, S., and Kong, H., 1996. Thermostable DNA polymerases.Advances in Protein Chemistry, 48, 377–435.Saiki, R., et al., 1985. Enzymatic amplification of beta-globin genomic sequences and restriction site analysis for diagnosis

of sickle cell anemia. Science, 230 (4732), 1350–1354.Senturia, S.D., 2000. Microwave design, 1st ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.Thatcher, M., 1986. Address to CBI congress ‘Design or Decline’ centre point, London.The Royal Academy of Engineering. 2005a. Visiting professors’ schemes: visiting professors in the principles of engi-

neering design [online].Available from: http://www.raeng.org.uk/education/vps/default.htm [Accessed 17 December2010].

The Royal Academy of Engineering. 2005b. Engineering for sustainable development: guiding principles [online].Available from: http://www.raeng.org.uk/events/pdf/Engineering_for_Sustainable_Development.pdf [Accessed 17December 2010].

Turner, K.L., 2010. SEM images prepared in the laboratory at the Mechanical and Environmental Engineering Department,UCSB, California, of a commercially available adxl accelerometer from analog devices. AIAA Academic AffairsCommittee, 1992, U.S. National Society AIAA Bulletin, March, p. B44.

US Air Force, 2010. F-117A Nighthawk [online]. Available from: http://beqiraj.com/wallpaper/f117/index.asp[Accessed 20 August 2010].

US National Science Foundation (NSF), 2004. Announcement for Engineering Research Centers (ERC’s) [online].Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04570/nsf04570.htm [Accessed 20 August 2010].


innovation-led multi-disciplinary undergraduate design ... · journal of engineering design 3 (aiaa...

Documents