Introduction This paper is concerned with incentives for the take-up and use of e-vehicles that are in place in different European countries. Especially, it analyses Norway and Austria, in order to establish and understand factors influencing the competitiveness of e-vehicles and potential market penetration. Norway currently enjoys the world's largest take-up of electric cars per capita, achieved through an extensive package of incentives. Austria has used the concept of Model Regions with government support to stimulate market introduction. So far, this has been a less effective approach. Methods The paper brings in and combine analyses of national travel survey data and web surveys to e-vehicle owners and non-e-vehicle owners. It considers socio-economic factors including convenience and time savings due to e-vehicle policies. Results Analysing national travel surveys, we find a considerable potential for e-vehicles based on people's everyday travel. Social networks play a crucial role in spreading knowledge about this relatively new technology. The take-up of battery electric vehicles correlates relatively closely with the user value of e-vehicle incentives. The fiscal effects of evehicle incentives are non-trivial -especially in the longer run. The cost of lifting a new technology into the market by means of government incentives is significant. We point to the importance of a strategy for the gradual phasing out of evehicle policies in countries with large incentives when the cost of vehicles goes down and the technology improves. Conclusions Successful market uptake and expansion of electric vehicles requires massive, expensive and combined policies. Central government backing, long term commitment and market-oriented incentives help reduce the perceived risk for market players like car importers and allow the e-vehicle market to thrive. For countries with low e-vehicle market shares the potential is promising. Battery electric vehicles are already a real option for the majority of peoples' everyday trips and trip chains. However, their relative disadvantages must be compensated by means of incentives -at least in the initial market launch phase. Diffusion mechanisms play a sizeable role. The lack of knowledge in the population at large must be addressed.

In therapeutic flexible endoscopy a team of physician and assistant(s) is required to control all independent translations and rotations of the flexible endoscope and its instruments. As a consequence the physician lacks valuable force feedback information on tissue interaction, communication errors easily occur, and procedures are not cost-effective. Current tools are not suitable for performing therapeutic procedures in an intuitive and user-friendly way by one person. A shift from more invasive surgical procedures that require external incisions to endoluminal procedures that use the natural body openings could be expected if enabling techniques were available. This paper describes the design and evaluation of a robotic system which interacts with traditional flexible endoscopes to perform therapeutic procedures that require advanced maneuverability. The physician uses one multi-degree-of-freedom input device to control camera steering as well as shaft manipulation of the motorized flexible endoscope, while the other hand is able to manipulate instruments. We identified critical use aspects that need to be addressed in the robotic setup. A proof-of-principle setup was built and evaluated to judge the usability of our system. Results show that robotic endoscope control increases efficiency and satisfaction. Participants valued its intuitiveness, its accuracy, the feeling of being in control, and its single-person setup. Future work will concentrate on the design of a system that is fully functional and takes safety, cleanability, and easy positioning close to the patient into account.

Abstract. Undergraduates need a teaching style that fits their limited experience. Especially in systems engineering this is an issue, since systems engineering connects to so many different stakeholders with so many different concerns while the students have experienced only thus far only a few of these concerns and met only few stakeholders. Students need to become aware of the inherent ambiguities, uncertainties, and unknowns in the systems world, in contrast to the focused world of mono-disciplinary engineering. There is a difference between the more traditional engineering disciplines (mechanical, electrical, etc.) and the upcoming and broader disciplines like industrial design engineering and systems engineering itself.

No abstract

Abstract. Creating complex systems from scratch is time consuming and costly, therefore a good development strategy often chosen by companies is to evolve existing systems. The understanding that a company has about the impact change has on the system determines its ability to cope with system evolution. Reuse of knowledge and experience becomes therefore, essential. Complex systems are usually the result of a multidisciplinary team, which means that an effective way to capture, organize and present this knowledge, in a fashion that can be used by different disciplines and departments is crucial. Typically, some of this knowledge is present in the form of text documents. However, much of that knowledge is usually lost or hidden, especially in long-lived systems. This leads to unexpected problems that could be prevented if the company had reused the knowledge it already has.In this paper system evolution barriers are discussed, and a method to cope with them is provided. Some companies such as Toyota have already identified the advantages of using an A3 approach 2

Systems architecting is the design phase where the top‐level functions and performance of a system are distributed over the system's parts, its environment, and its users. Up till now, system architects had to largely learn the required skills in practice. Some courses exist that teach the right attitude and mindset for the system architect. However, methods for architecting that can be implemented in a computer tool are virtually nonexistent. Earlier we presented a method, FunKey Architecting, which may aid the system architect in the early phase of design. In combination with TRIZ a design tool is created, which can be used to simplify and improve system architectures. It aims at supporting both the system designer and the specialist designers working on systems. The main topic of the paper is the application of the method in two industrial cases. The one case is an environment where new technology has to be developed and state of the art physics have to meet machine construction principles. The other case is in an industry where well‐proven technology is used in such a way that high‐performance machines are created. A third application of the FunKey tool is performed by students at the University of Twente. The context of each case and the results will be described. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 14

Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is a concept that aligns with both current and future mobility demands of users, namely intermodal, personalized, on-demand and seamless. Although the number of shared mobility, electric mobility and multimodal passenger transport users is rapidly growing, until now, the list of MaaS and electric Mobility as Service (eMaaS) providers is quite short. This could partly be explained by the lack of a common architecture that facilitates the complex integration of all actors involved in the (e)MaaS ecosystem. The goal of this publication is to give an overview of the state of the art regarding (e)MaaS’ ecosystems and architectures. Moreover, it aims to support the further development of eMaaS by proposing a definition and a novel system architecture for eMaaS. Firstly, the state of the art of the MaaS ecosystem is reviewed. Secondly, the eMaaS ecosystem that builds upon our definition of eMaaS is described and the MaaS system- and technical- architectures found in literature are reviewed. Finally, an eMaaS architecture that focuses on the integration of MaaS and electric mobility systems is presented. With the definition, ecosystem and system architecture presented in this work, the aim is to support the further development of the eMaaS concept.

The article will present an innovative educational project to introduce Systems Engineering to third year's students in industrial design engineering at the University of Twente.In a short period the students are confronted with new technology, namely sensors and actuators. They have to apply this technology in a complex situation, the design of a home climate system or an intelligent automobile. They work in large groups without tutor. In parallel a basic course on systems engineering is given to provide the students with tools for handling this situation. The aim is that students are forced to apply the systems engineering tools in a concrete situation, thus directly experiencing the benefits. The project is implemented and the article describes the context, the goals, the setup, and the experiences of both teachers and students. The article concludes with an evaluation of the first and second year it has been executed 1: IntroductionSystems engineering is considered to be an important discipline for now and in the future as the products that will be created are increasingly more complex and have to be created in ever shorter development times [2,13]. Therefore engineers should at least be aware of the potential of systems engineering to handle these situations. Even more so for students in programs that deal with a broad spectrum of disciplines like industrial design engineering. However, it is generally believed that becoming an experienced systems engineer requires several years of working in the specific environment [8].To introduce Systems Engineering, the third year's students do a project that gives them the opportunity to practice some of the systems engineering tools in a complex situation. This article will describe the setup of the project in Section 4, after having explained the curriculum in Section 2 and the relevance of systems engineering to the industrial designer in Section 3. The results and an evalution are given in Sections 5 and 6, respectively. 2: Industrial Design Engineering at the University of Twente Third Theoretical Courses SASProject Bachelor assignmentYear Minor large portion of technology in order to educate "De Twentse Ontwerper" (designer from Twente) with the slogan "Create the Future" in mind, see [3]. To achieve that, the curriculum consists of courses in drawing and designing, ergonomics, technology, philosophy and social sciences. Both the curriculum and the project centered approach to education are treated in short.Following the Bologna-agreement, the technical curricula at the University of Twente adopt a three-year Bachelor of Science, and a two-year Master of Science program. The first year of the Bachelor program (see Table 1 and [3,6]) is an introduction that deals with nearly all areas of the industrial design field. In the following two years each area is treated more in depth. Each part of the curriculum has a certain theme like designing a consumer product, design of smart products, or design for a specific target group.The department of Engineering T...