Next Article in Journal
How Users’ Familiarity, Perception of Policy Restrictions, and Effects of AVs Influence Their Willingness to Ride Them
Previous Article in Journal
Could Disengagement Reports Indicate Evolution of Autonomous Vehicles?
Previous Article in Special Issue
Revolutionizing Automotive Design: The Impact of Additive Manufacturing
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Vehicle Design Processes, 2nd Edition

by
Ralf Stetter
1,*,
Udo Pulm
2 and
Markus Till
1
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Ravensburg-Weingarten University of Applied Sciences, 88250 Weingarten, Germany
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Production Management, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, 20099 Hamburg, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vehicles 2025, 7(2), 33; https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7020033
Submission received: 28 March 2025 / Accepted: 8 April 2025 / Published: 9 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Vehicle Design Processes, 2nd Edition)

1. Introduction

This Special Issue reports on the current status of research concerning vehicle design processes. Designing vehicles is one of the most challenging tasks in engineering for several reasons. Considerable consumer expectations and intense global competition complicate vehicle design. Currently, dramatic changes are influencing vehicle design, mainly caused by the transition to electric drive systems and new vehicle application scenarios, especially in the Asian market. Cost-driven design is a necessity, and vehicles must be economical in terms of production, operation, and recycling. Sustainable design is also imperative in order to achieve ecological vehicles. The dynamics of vehicles must be considered in the design of all components, and lightweight design is of fundamental importance. Consumers expect convincing functional performance, high product quality, an appealing appearance, high reliability, interconnected functionality, and comprehensible and appealing user interfaces. Vehicles are expected to provide more and more additional services, also in connection with external service providers. These colossal requirements lead to complex multi-domain vehicle design processes because most of the important decisions are made in the design phase. Production optimization and intelligent operation are important topics, but flaws and insufficiencies in the design stage lead to considerable expenditure in later stages and suboptimal products. The design processes of vehicles involve thousands of engineers, who are spread out across the globe and need to consider multiple product versions and variants as well as multi-company product platforms. Testing necessities and legal issues frequently play an important role in these processes, and the economic and ecological quality of a product must be monitored throughout these processes. Vehicle safety and ergonomic quality must be considered even in the early stages. Naturally, only digital support makes these processes feasible. For all domains, powerful computer tools for synthesis, analysis, evaluation, and optimization have been created, and numerous attempts have been made to sensibly link the data used in all these tools. However, the multitude of domain-specific and generic data formats and the sheer size of the data still cause serious problems. Importantly, design is also connected with scheduling and project management because certain design decisions can lead to long-term testing and production preparation processes.
In recent years, research teams worldwide have proposed novel, expanded, and improved approaches, which may support, enhance, and streamline vehicle design processes. The promising approaches concentrate on the abstract levels of product modelling—especially the function level [1] and the level of abstract physics [2]. Leading companies in the field of vehicle development and production have made a shift from document-based process management to model-based systems engineering (MBSE), and several research groups have contributed to this transition [3,4,5]. A central scientific field in this context is the automation of design processes. Graph-based design languages (GBDLs) constitute an important example; they have led to a paradigm shift in design processes, enabling the integration of data, information, and knowledge into product and systems models and fostering design automation [6,7,8]. Another central scientific field emphasizes the expansion of the established design-for-X guidelines. Important examples are fault-tolerant design (FTD) [9], design for sustainability [10], and design for resilience [11]. Another promising field is the integration of control and diagnosis capabilities in vehicle components, focusing on smoother, more efficient operation and increased fault tolerance [12]. Several research groups have focused on the establishment of a full-scope digital twin of a vehicle that allows bi-directional interaction in real time and covers all the life-cycle stages of a vehicle [13]. Another set of approaches aims at the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in design, assembly, and production processes [14,15].
The listed challenges and the multitude of approaches concerning the multi-domain design processes of vehicles have led to a prominent need for research aimed at supporting design engineers in this endeavor. This Special Issue presents a collection of research in this area.

2. A Detailed Summary of the Contents of This Special Issue

The level of product modelling concerning abstract physics is receiving increasing attention. Stetter [16] proposed an integrated framework for abstract physics modeling (IF4APM) suited for innovative vehicle design processes. In a connected study, Schuchter et al. [17] applied graph-based design languages (GBDLs) to digital integrated design and assembly-planning processes for sports vehicles. The application of the proposed framework led to two machine-executable V-models for product and assembly system development in the scope of model-based systems engineering (MBSE). It is important to note that both approaches are universal and can be used in the development and production of components for the automotive industry, their assemblies, and entire vehicles. Mieth and Gauterin [18] proposed a concise set of methods that serves as a methodological framework for the evaluation of vehicle drive systems. Their procedure involves evaluating different drive concepts based on defined criteria and comparing these evaluations with one another. To cope with the diversity of requirements in the automotive development landscape, Kexel et al. [19] developed a generic and holistic methodical systems engineering approach for virtual plug-in hybrid concept development and optimization under real-world boundary conditions. Weitz et al. [20] described the design of a lifting actuator for modular vehicles with autonomous capsule-changing capabilities and comprehensively demonstrated the dimensioning of all main components according to the boundary conditions. The development of a new plastic-intensive medium-pressure plate (MPP), forming part of a fuel-cell system, together with a steel plate meeting all mechanical and chemical requirements, was the focus of the extensive study reported by Anand et al. [21]. Elsewhere, Keil et al. [22] aimed to evaluate and optimize the effectiveness of software-in-the-loop (SiL) simulations in the vehicle software testing process. They focused on supporting the testing process by shifting specific test cases from hardware-in-the-loop (HiL) test benches to SiL-based simulations. Sun and Lee [23] aimed to explore the impact of product design dimensions on electric vehicle (EV) purchase intentions to provide a theoretical basis for companies’ differentiation strategies and reflect the impact of product design on purchase intention. The emergence of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) has led to a novel approach to safety event analysis consisting of integrating textual, visual, and audio modalities. Accordingly, the framework proposed by Abu Tami et al. [24] leverages the logical and visual reasoning power of MLLMs, directing their output through object-level question–answer (QA) prompts to ensure accurate, reliable, and actionable insights for investigating safety-critical event detection and analysis. Vecchiato et al. [25] described the conceptualization, design, topology optimization, manufacturing, and validation of a hydraulic brake caliper for Formula SAE race cars made of Scalmalloy®, an innovative Al-Mg-Sc alloy that had never before been adopted to manufacture a brake caliper. Panchenko et al. [26] focused on the prediction of the residual wear resources of the composite brake pads of a modernized brake system used in freight wagons. Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) encompasses two primary strategies: adapting traditional designs for 3D printing and developing designs specifically optimized for additive manufacturing. In this vein, the concise review compiled by Hamza et al. [27] focuses on the automotive sector, systematically examining DfAM’s potential to redefine vehicle design, production processes, and industry standards.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed equally to this work. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

This Special Issue was successfully organized with the support of the editorial team of the journal Vehicles. The guest editors also wish to thank all the authors whose valuable work was published in this Special Issue and the reviewers for evaluating the manuscripts and providing helpful suggestions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Wichmann, R.L.; Gericke, K.; Eisenbart, B. Analysing risk to function fulfilment: Applying the function integrity diagnosis and documentation method. J. Eng. Des. 2021, 32, 346–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Tröster, P.M.; Schmidt, D.; Albers, A. A Designation Guide for Consistent Cross-System-Level Modeling of Embodiment Function Relations. Procedia CIRP 2023, 119, 1222–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Graessler, I.; Wiechel, D.; Oezcan, D.; Taplick, P. Tailored metrics for assessing the quality of MBSE models. Proc. Des. Soc. 2024, 4, 2545–2554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Henderson, K.; McDermott, T.; Salado, A. MBSE adoption experiences in organizations: Lessons learned. Syst. Eng. 2024, 27, 214–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tao, F.; Ma, X.; Liu, W.; Zhang, C. Digital Engineering: State-of-the-art and perspectives. Digit. Eng. 2024, 1, 100007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Voss, C.; Petzold, F.; Rudolph, S. Graph transformation in engineering design: An overview of the last decade. AI EDAM 2023, 37, e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Borowski, J.; Rudolph, S. A Digital Machine-Executable V-Model for a Formula Student Racing Car. In International Stuttgart Symposium; Springer Fachmedien: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2024; pp. 325–335. [Google Scholar]
  8. Neumaier, M.; Schopper, C.; Gundlach, T.; Gast, C.; Döring, D.; Rudolph, S. Automated packing and piping in an Airbus A320 main landing gear bay: An industrial development case study. CEAS Aeronaut. J. 2024, 15, 1201–1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Stetter, R. Fault-Tolerant Design and Control of Automated Vehicles and Processes; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  10. Kumar, A.; Rajak, D.K.; Kumar, P.; Rathee, S. (Eds.) Smart Electric and Hybrid Vehicles: Design, Modeling, and Assessment by Industry 4.0 Approaches; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  11. Barrero-Arciniegas, H.A.; Bataleblu, A.A.; Don, D.; Rauch, E.; Matt, D.T. Design Parameters for Resilience in Cyber-Physical Production Systems. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2025, 253, 2316–2326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Witczak, M.; Pazera, M. Towards integrated tracking fault-tolerant control for Takagi-Sugeno systems. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE 63rd Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Milan, Italy, 16–19 December 2024; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2024; pp. 2068–2073. [Google Scholar]
  13. Trauer, J.B. On the Conception and Implementation of Digital Twins–Supporting Companies in the Development of Digital Twins. Ph.D. Dissertation, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  14. Rudolph, S. On Some Artificial Intelligence Methods in the V-Model of Model-Based Systems Engineering. In Proceedings of the MODELSWARD, Rome, Italy, 21–23 February 2024; pp. 386–393. [Google Scholar]
  15. Wang, Y.; Xu, S.; Bwar, K.H.; Eisenbart, B.; Lu, G.; Belaadi, A.; Fox, B.; Chai, B.X. Application of machine learning for composite moulding process modelling. Compos. Commun. 2024, 48, 101960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Stetter, R. Innovative Vehicle Design Processes Based on the Integrated Framework for Abstract Physics Modeling (IF4APM). Vehicles 2024, 6, 1345–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Schuchter, T.; Till, M.; Stetter, R.; Rudolph, S. Digital Integrated Design and Assembly Planning Processes for Sports Vehicles Using the Example of a Skateboard. Vehicles 2025, 7, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mieth, R.; Gauterin, F. Comparative Assessment for Holistic Evaluation of Drive Systems. Vehicles 2024, 6, 403–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kexel, J.; Müller, J.; Herkenrath, F.; Hermsen, P.; Günther, M.; Pischinger, S. Virtual Plug-In Hybrid Concept Development and Optimization under Real-World Boundary Conditions. Vehicles 2024, 6, 1216–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Weitz, F.; Ostendorff, N.; Frey, M.; Gauterin, F. Lifting Actuator Concept and Design Method for Modular Vehicles with Autonomous Capsule Changing Capabilities. Vehicles 2024, 6, 1070–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Anand, S.; Mielke, F.; Heidrich, D.; Fang, X. Optimization, Design, and Manufacturing of New Steel-FRP Automotive Fuel Cell Medium Pressure Plate Using Compression Molding. Vehicles 2024, 6, 850–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Keil, R.; Tschorn, J.; Tümler, J.; Altinsoy, M. Evaluation of SiL Testing Potential—Shifting from HiL by Identifying Compatible Requirements with vECUs. Vehicles 2024, 6, 920–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sun, Z.; Lee, B. Exploring Factors Influencing Electric Vehicle Purchase Intentions through an Extended Technology Acceptance Model. Vehicles 2024, 6, 1513–1544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Abu Tami, M.; Ashqar, H.; Elhenawy, M.; Glaser, S.; Rakotonirainy, A. Using Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) for Automated Detection of Traffic Safety-Critical Events. Vehicles 2024, 6, 1571–1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Vecchiato, L.; Capraro, F.; Meneghetti, G. Design, Topology Optimization, Manufacturing and Testing of a Brake Caliper MADE of Scalmalloy® for Formula SAE Race Cars. Vehicles 2024, 6, 1591–1612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Panchenko, S.; Gerlici, J.; Lovska, A.; Ravlyuk, V.; Dižo, J. Prediction of Residual Wear Resources of Composite Brake Pads of a Modernized Brake System of Freight Wagons. Vehicles 2024, 6, 1975–1994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hamza, A.; Bousnina, K.; Dridi, I.; Ben Yahia, N. Revolutionizing Automotive Design: The Impact of Additive Manufacturing. Vehicles 2025, 7, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Stetter, R.; Pulm, U.; Till, M. Vehicle Design Processes, 2nd Edition. Vehicles 2025, 7, 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7020033

AMA Style

Stetter R, Pulm U, Till M. Vehicle Design Processes, 2nd Edition. Vehicles. 2025; 7(2):33. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7020033

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stetter, Ralf, Udo Pulm, and Markus Till. 2025. "Vehicle Design Processes, 2nd Edition" Vehicles 7, no. 2: 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7020033

APA Style

Stetter, R., Pulm, U., & Till, M. (2025). Vehicle Design Processes, 2nd Edition. Vehicles, 7(2), 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7020033

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop