1 / 37

CIFE Summer Program September 11, 2008

A Methodology for Communicating Design Processes Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford University. CIFE Summer Program September 11, 2008. Problem Statement. Two case studies from the. Stanford Graduate School of Business. Problem Statement.

freya-bullock
Download Presentation

CIFE Summer Program September 11, 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Methodology for Communicating Design Processes Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford University CIFE Summer Program September 11, 2008

  2. Problem Statement Two case studies from the Stanford Graduate School of Business

  3. Problem Statement Sustainability case study reveals: Designers struggle to share processes • Steel vs. Concrete Structure Decision Actual Process Failed Successful Process Existed Embodied Energy Discussion Forum • Lacked ability to perform model based Life Cycle Assessment Steel Concrete Results: Analysis Results • No Results = Stakeholder goals not met

  4. Problem Statement Sustainability case study reveals: Designers struggle to share processes • Steel vs. Concrete Structure Decision Actual Process Failed Successful Process Existed • Take away from this case study: • I could not find a design processto meet stakeholder goals • Even though this process had already been used in my firm Embodied Energy Discussion Forum • Lacked ability to perform model based Life Cycle Assessment Steel Concrete Results: Analysis Results • No Results = Stakeholder goals not met

  5. Problem Statement Day lighting case study reveals: Designers struggle to understand processes • Observed Louver Configuration Design Process Input: Architecture Model • Options Considered : 2-3 Louver Configurations • Total Design Time Per Option:30 hours • Non-Value Added Time Per Option: 15 hours Time Per Design Task Output: Day Light Video

  6. Problem Statement Day lighting case study reveals: Designers struggle to understand processes • Observed Louver Configuration Design Process Input: Architecture Model • Options Considered : 2-3 Louver Configurations • Total Design Time Per Option:24 hours • Non-Value Added Time Per Option: 16 hours • Take away from this case study: • Process is often repeated • Process is inefficient. • No investment in improving process • ….until principals saw this slide Time Per Design Task Output: Day Light Video

  7. The Big Idea: Web-based Collaborative Process Integration Platform

  8. My contribution: Web-based Collaborative Process Integration Platform

  9. Outline • Intuition Story • Research Question • Research Method • Expected Contributions • Discussion

  10. Intuition Process integration platform A scenario to explain the tool • Project: Stanford Graduate School of Business • Organization: Day Lighting Consultant • Options: Two atrium shapes • Goals: Reduce energy use; achieve good day light; be beautiful.

  11. Intuition Legend Narrative convention (Haymaker, 2006) Manual Tool Used Automated Information Dependency What does the information look like? Barrel color indicates the status of the source information. Green = up-to-date Red = not updated

  12. Intuition A proposed platform Designers organize design problem (Haymaker, 2006) Process Integration Platform Arup 130676: Stanford Graduate School of Business

  13. Intuition Designer observes other’s design Process Integration Platform Arup 130676: Stanford Graduate School of Business

  14. Intuition Designer starts lighting analysis by searching for appropriate processes Process Integration Platform Arup 130676: Stanford Graduate School of Business SEARCH RESULTS

  15. Intuition Designer evaluates search result And chooses two appropriate processes Process Integration Platform Arup 9478: Greendale Apartment Unit PROCESS INFO Project: Arup E Cubed Lab Projects With This Process Process Type: Day Light Software Required Developer: Robert Cole Process Used: 2 times Links Copied: 31 times Used Most By: Engin Ayaz Other Users of this Process More Usage Details a SEARCH RESULTS SEARCH RESULTS PROCESS INFO Project: Arup 9876 Office Building Projects With This Process Process Type: Day Light Software Required Developer: Robert Cole Process Used: 2 times Links Copied: 31 times Used Most By: Engin Ayaz Other Users of this Process More Usage Details b COMMENTS jrogers: Should we invest in automating this process? Normanrock: Yes, I’ll send a meeting request to divide up the work. Process Integration Platform (a) Designer browses search results; (b) looks at process info; finds two appropriate processes. (c) Works with user community, to begin automating an inefficient process. (d) selects this process for inclusion into his project. 3 Enlighten 32842: Park Place Offices c

  16. Process Integration Platform Intuition Arup 130676: Stanford Graduate School of Business Save information to process

  17. Process Integration Platform Intuition Arup 130676: Stanford Graduate School of Business Use process to produce results

  18. Research Question Research Question • What is a design process sharing methodology? • How does implementing this methodology affect design process efficiency and effectiveness?

  19. Research Method Research Method • Synthesize literature in other fields and verify with survey and case studies in AEC. • Develop methodology for design process sharing. • Develop a web-based collaborative tool to test the methodology. • Measure the effect of this methodology on AEC design processes. Process Modeling Human Computer Interaction KnowledgeManagement

  20. Research Method Develop characteristics for the design process sharing methodology • From Survey • From Literature: Process Modeling Human Computer Interaction • User-Friendly • Crowd-Sourcing • Information Referencing • Broad • Searchable • From Case Studies • Scalable • Modular • Transparent Transparent Scalable KnowledgeManagement Incentivizing Computable Usable Modular Searchable Sharable

  21. Research Method Process model characteristics

  22. Research Method Research Method AEC Design AEC Design • Synthesize literature in other fields and verify with survey and case studies in AEC. • Develop methodology for design process sharing. • Develop a web-based collaborative tool to test the methodology. • Measure the effect of this methodology on AEC design processes. Process Modeling Human Computer Interaction KnowledgeManagement Methodology

  23. Measure Existing Processes Proposed breakdown of modeling tasks MODEL POST-PROCESS PLAN

  24. Measure Existing Processes PLAN tasks

  25. Measure Existing Processes MODEL tasks

  26. Measure Existing Processes POST-PROCESS tasks

  27. Research Method Measure Existing Processes Effectiveness is measured by MACDADI value of design Efficiency is measured by timing process tasks Non-Value Added Tasks = No Color Value Added Tasks = Color

  28. Research Method Introduce a new process or collect processes from around the world • Post the processes on a website.

  29. RESEARCH METHOD Measure the difference before & after the use of the tool

  30. Expected Contribution Contributions to Knowledge • Question 2: How does implementing this methodology affect process efficiency & effectiveness? • Question 1: What is a design process sharing methodology? Contribution A methodology for communicating processes supported by evidence of its impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of design processes in AEC. Efficiency 30% mostly b/c transfer/filter time 11 hrs. AEC Design Design value remained constant, so effectiveness unchanged Methodology Applied to AEC Design

  31. Expected Contribution Expected impact on industry • Lay the foundation for continuous improvements in design process efficiency and effectiveness • Which permit improvedmulti-disciplinary design optimization • Which is essential for improving the sustainability of the built environment.

  32. Acknowledgements Sir Ove Arup founded his practice in London in 1946 based on a belief in ‘total design’ — the integration of the design process and the interdependence of all the professions involved, the creative nature of engineering, the value of innovation and the social purpose of design.

  33. Data Schema

  34. Product Data Schema • Product* • File Name* • Software Format • Software Version • Suffix • Status • Preview Reference • Content Reference • Option Set Name* • Option Name* • Continuous or Discrete • Version Set Name* • Version Name* • Object Set Name* • Object Name*

  35. Organization Data Schema • Organization* • Company • Title • Name

  36. Process Data Schema • Process* • Action • Input Formats* • Output Formats* • Tool • Tool Name • Tool Version or Language • Tool Icon Reference • Time Metric 1 • Time Metric 2 • Time Metric 3 • Automation Status • Interoperability Reference

  37. Graph Data Schema • View • Process Perspective ID • Process Title • Process Description • Node ID* • Node Location in the GUI • Visualization Information • (Details not shown here) • Node* • Node ID • Product Reference* • Organization Reference* • Process Reference* • Node Dependency* • Iterative • Continuous

More Related