Science versus design; comparable, contrastive or conducive?

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216305%3A26210%2F13%3APU106898" target="_blank" >RIV/00216305:26210/13:PU106898 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/68407700:21460/13:00201609

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.009" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.009</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.009" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.009</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Science versus design; comparable, contrastive or conducive?

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Science and design are two completely separated areas of expertise with their own specialists. Science analyses the existing world to create new knowledge, design uses existing knowledge to create a new world. This tunnel-vision mentality and narrow-minded approach is dangerous for problem solving, where a broad view on potential solutions is required to realise a high-quality answer on the defined problem. We state that design benefits from scientific methods, resulting in a more effective design process and in better products, while science benefits from a design approach, resulting in more efficient and effective results. Our philosophy is illustrated using examples from the field of biomedical engineering. Both methods can benefit tremendously fromeach other. By applying scientific methods, superior choices will be made in the design process. With design, more accurate, effective and efficient science will be performed.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Science versus design; comparable, contrastive or conducive?

Popis výsledku anglicky

Science and design are two completely separated areas of expertise with their own specialists. Science analyses the existing world to create new knowledge, design uses existing knowledge to create a new world. This tunnel-vision mentality and narrow-minded approach is dangerous for problem solving, where a broad view on potential solutions is required to realise a high-quality answer on the defined problem. We state that design benefits from scientific methods, resulting in a more effective design process and in better products, while science benefits from a design approach, resulting in more efficient and effective results. Our philosophy is illustrated using examples from the field of biomedical engineering. Both methods can benefit tremendously fromeach other. By applying scientific methods, superior choices will be made in the design process. With design, more accurate, effective and efficient science will be performed.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

JR - Ostatní strojírenství

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2013

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials

ISSN

1751-6161

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

41

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

7

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

12

Strana od-do

1516-1527

Kód UT WoS článku

000318837500019

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—