Chapter 13 Engineered Artifacts

 

Abstract

Technical artifacts are thought to be distinct from natural and social artifacts in that they are human-made to perform functions, and their functions stem directly from their physical structure.This paper examines how technical artifacts, which are human-made objects designed to perform specific functions based on their physical structure, can be categorized into engineered and non-engineered types. It explores criteria to differentiate between artifacts created through engineering and those resulting from other creative or design activities. The core argument is that whether an artifact is considered engineered largely depends on the functional requirements and specifications established before the design process begins. This discussion also contributes to understanding what constitutes engineering as a discipline.

13.1 On Social and Technical Artifacts

This essay discusses the distinction between engineered artifacts and other types of created artifacts, focusing on the role of functional specifications in defining engineered artifacts. It refers to Kroes' analysis of how artifacts possess a dual nature: one based on human intentions and the other on their physical structure. While structural and functional descriptions can be independent (a structure can serve multiple functions and a function can be achieved through various structures), in engineering, there's often a deliberate alignment of these aspects.

The paper contrasts technical artifacts like a knife, which functions due to its physical properties, with social objects like money, whose function is defined by social agreement rather than physical form. However, it argues that modern banknotes, such as a €10 note, are also technical artifacts. They are intricately designed with specific physical properties to fulfill their function as money, considering aspects like durability, security, and ease of use.

The paper posits that while social agreement is necessary for a banknote's functionality, its physical properties are equally crucial. For instance, a banknote must be physically identifiable and distinguishable from counterfeit money. This physical aspect is significant in the design and production process, making the banknote both a social and a technical artifact. The essay concludes that artifacts can be placed on a spectrum from technical to socio-technical to social, without a clear dividing line.

13.2 Engineered Artifacts

This section of the article delves into what it means for an artifact to be "engineered," distinguishing it from other human-made artifacts. The author debates the definition and scope of engineering, acknowledging that it's a flexible term used to describe a specific type of human activity. The idea is compared to the concept of 'tallness' in people, which is clear in some cases but arbitrary in others. Similarly, what is considered 'engineering' can vary based on context or purpose.

The author uses the example of a €10 banknote to explore this concept. While the banknote's creation involves engineers and aligns with engineering practices, defining it as engineered solely based on who works on it seems insufficient. The author suggests that the extensive use of scientific and technical knowledge, as well as sophisticated machinery in the production of banknotes, are typical of engineering, but not exclusive to it.

The article proposes that the engineering nature of an object like a banknote might be better understood through the processes used in its design and production, focusing on engineering design methodology. However, the author admits not having delved deeply into the actual methodology used in banknote design and production.

The conclusion suggests that it was the functional requirements of the banknote – its durability, security, portability, and others – that instinctively indicated its engineered nature. The simultaneous satisfaction of these diverse and specific requirements suggested an engineering process. The author posits that the nature of an artifact's functional requirements and technical specifications is essential in determining whether it is engineered, indicating that the process of translating functional needs into detailed technical specifications is a core aspect of engineering.

13.3 On Functional Requirements and Specifications

This section discusses the concept of engineered artifacts, focusing on their functional requirements and specifications. The author uses the example of money, contrasting naturally occurring objects like gold nuggets and gemstones with banknotes to illustrate the difference between objects that are not engineered and those that are. While a natural object can fulfill certain functions (like being scarce or authenticatable), it isn't engineered since its form isn't deliberately made to meet specific functional requirements. In contrast, banknotes have evolved from simple paper documents to highly engineered artifacts with detailed, prescribed performance requirements due to advancements in printing technology and the need for security against counterfeiting.

The author then explores different types of designing, including crafting, inventing, engineering design, and artistry, noting that they all produce artifacts with a dual nature of function and structure. However, the key difference lies in the nature of the functional requirements and how they are specified. For instance, in artistry and personal projects like landscaping, the functional requirements may be vague, qualitative, and subject to change. In contrast, in engineering design, functional requirements are typically specific, detailed, and quantitative, leading to more predictable outcomes.

The article also discusses invention, differentiating it from engineering design. Perhaps a more appropriate juxtaposition of invention and engineering design is given by Hales and Gooch (2004 , p122), who write,

An inventor comes up with ideas that may or may not be worth pursuing, and every now and then the chances are that a viable idea will surface. In some cases, it becomes a winner. A design engineer defines a technical problem based on a set of requirements and sets off to find the most appropriate solution to the problem within defined constraints of time, money, and other resources.

Invention is often seen as more uncertain and open-ended compared to engineering design, which works within well-defined functional requirements and constraints. The author uses the Wright brothers' development of powered flight as an example, highlighting the transition from their early, less-defined, inventive efforts to later, more structured, engineered work that led to the creation of a practical airplane meeting specific performance specifications.

In conclusion, the author argues that the nature and specificity of functional requirements and specifications are key in determining whether an artifact is engineered. This distinction is illustrated through the comparison of the Wright brothers' early experimental flyers and their later, more functionally defined airplanes that met explicit performance requirements.

13.4 Concluding Remarks

In the concluding remarks, the author suggests that determining whether an artifact is engineered should be based primarily on the nature of the functional requirements and specifications set before its design and development. This approach is preferred over focusing on the processes used during the creation of the artifact. The author argues that engineered artifacts are characterized by functional requirements and specifications that are explicit, quantitative, detailed, technical, copious, diverse, coupled, conflicting, recondite, and definitive.

The author acknowledges that these characteristics might not always be clear-cut, much like the boundary between short and tall is ambiguous. This ambiguity suggests that different types of creative design activities, such as artistry, crafting, inventing, or engineering, often blend into each other, and many artifacts may fall into gray areas regarding their classification.

While the process of translating functional requirements and specifications into a physical form is crucial in understanding engineering as an activity, the author emphasizes that this process is often driven by the nature of the requirements and specifications themselves. For example, in software engineering, the detailed determination of requirements and specifications is crucial in aligning with traditional engineering processes.

The author concludes by stating that engineered artifacts cannot be exclusively associated with the work of individuals who hold the title of engineer. Instead, the defining aspect of an engineered artifact lies in its adherence to specific types of functional requirements, regardless of who is responsible for the design process. This means that non-credentialed individuals might create engineered designs, while some credentialed engineers may not directly contribute to the translation of functional requirements into the physical form of an artifact.