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

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Two case studies from the Stanford Graduate School of Business Problem Statement

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Sustainability case study reveals:  Steel vs. Concrete Structure Decision Actual Process Failed Designers struggle to share processes Structure:SteelConcrete Material Responsibility ?? Lacked ability to perform model based Life Cycle Assessment Embodied Energy Steel Concrete Results: Discussion Forum Analysis Results No Results = Stakeholder goals not met Problem Statement Successful Process Existed

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Sustainability case study reveals:  Steel vs. Concrete Structure Decision Actual Process Failed Successful Process Existed Designers struggle to share processes Structure:SteelConcrete Material Responsibility ?? Lacked ability to perform model based Life Cycle Assessment Embodied Energy Steel Concrete Results: Discussion Forum Analysis Results No Results = Stakeholder goals not met Problem Statement Take away from this case study: –I could not find a design process to meet stakeholder goals –Even though this process had already been used in my firm

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Day lighting case study reveals:  Observed Louver Configuration Design Process Designers struggle to understand processes Input: Architecture Model Output: Day Light Video –Options Considered : 2-3 Louver Configurations –Total Design Time Per Option: 30 hours –Non-Value Added Time Per Option: 15 hours Problem Statement Time Per Design Task

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Day lighting case study reveals:  Observed Louver Configuration Design Process Designers struggle to understand processes Input: Architecture Model Output: Day Light Video –Options Considered : 2-3 Louver Configurations –Total Design Time Per Option: 24 hours –Non-Value Added Time Per Option: 16 hours Problem Statement Time Per Design Task Take away from this case study: –Process is often repeated –Process is inefficient. –No investment in improving process –….until principals saw this slide

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 The Big Idea: Web-based Collaborative Process Integration Platform CommunicateIntegrateVisualize Share processesMix & customize processesProcess metrics Understand processesAutomate processesSolution spaces

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 My contribution: Web-based Collaborative Process Integration Platform CommunicateIntegrateVisualize Share processesMix & customize processesProcess metrics Understand processesAutomate processesSolution spaces

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Outline  Intuition Story  Research Question  Research Method  Expected Contributions  Discussion

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Process integration platform  Project: Stanford Graduate School of Business  Organization: Day Lighting Consultant  Options: Two atrium shapes  Goals: Reduce energy use; achieve good day light; be beautiful. A scenario to explain the tool Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Legend Narrative convention (Haymaker, 2006) Information Dependency Automated Manual What does the information look like? Barrel color indicates the status of the source information. Green = up-to-date Red = not updated Tool Used Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 A proposed platform Designers organize design problem (Haymaker, 2006) Arup : Stanford Graduate School of Business Process Integration Platform Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Designer observes other’s design Arup : Stanford Graduate School of Business Process Integration Platform Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Designer starts lighting analysis by searching for appropriate processes Arup : Stanford Graduate School of Business Process Integration Platform SEARCH RESULTS Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 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 Process Integration Platform Arup 9478: Greendale Apartment Unit jrogers: Should we invest in automating this process? Normanrock: Yes, I’ll send a meeting request to divide up the work. COMMENTS a b 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 SEARCH RESULTS (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 c PROCESS USAGE Range, Average Iteration Time (hrs) 8 to 40, 22 # of Iterations1 to 15, 3 Designer evaluates search result And chooses two appropriate processes Process Integration Platform Enlighten 32842: Park Place Offices Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Save information to process Arup : Stanford Graduate School of Business Process Integration Platform Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Use process to produce results Arup : Stanford Graduate School of Business Process Integration Platform Intuition

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Research Question  What is a design process sharing methodology?  How does implementing this methodology affect design process efficiency and effectiveness? Research Question

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Process Modeling Process Modeling Human Computer Interaction Human Computer Interaction Knowledge Management Research Method 1. Synthesize literature in other fields and verify with survey and case studies in AEC. 2. Develop methodology for design process sharing. 3. Develop a web-based collaborative tool to test the methodology. 4. Measure the effect of this methodology on AEC design processes. Research Method

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Process Modeling Process Modeling Human Computer Interaction Human Computer Interaction Knowledge Management Develop characteristics for the design process sharing methodology Transparent Incentivizing Usable Computable Scalable Searchable Modular Sharable Research Method  From Survey –User-Friendly –Crowd-Sourcing –Information Referencing –Broad –Searchable  From Case Studies –Scalable –Modular –Transparent  From Literature:

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Process model characteristics Transparent Quickly and accurately understood by all Modular “Creative solutions are built from the recombination of existing ideas” (Hargadon & Bechky 2006) Searchable Algorithms that predict users’ intent by self-learning Usable Intuitive, embedded in design process Scalable From analyzing the entire campus to an individual steel connection Sharable Easy setting of access privileges, a standard for communicating processes Incentivized To use processes To develop new processes Computable Capable of driving processes automatically Research Method

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 AEC Design Process Modeling Process Modeling Human Computer Interaction Human Computer Interaction Knowledge Management AEC Design Research Method 1. Synthesize literature in other fields and verify with survey and case studies in AEC. 2. Develop methodology for design process sharing. 3. Develop a web-based collaborative tool to test the methodology. 4. Measure the effect of this methodology on AEC design processes. Methodology Research Method

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Measure Existing Processes Proposed breakdown of modeling tasks PLAN MODELPOST-PROCESS

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Measure Existing Processes PLAN tasks TASK TYPEDEFINITIONVALUE ADDED? PLAN 1search look for best practice process and modeling methods. No 2attain obtain software, models, geometry, drawings, codes, etc. No 3strategize identify design goals, constraints, and context and decide appropriate modeling process. Yes 4develop create new tools and methods to facilitate design process with the intent of reuse. Yes

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Measure Existing Processes MODEL tasks TASK TYPEDEFINITIONVALUE ADDED? MODEL 5translate / filter redefine information in a new format; simplify, regroup, or take a subset of information. No 6generate define a model of the physical world for the first time. Yes 7setup / preprocess give instruction to the computer about how to analyze the model you generated. Yes 8calculate Converting inputs to outputs according to formulas, tables, graphs, etc. No

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Measure Existing Processes TASK TYPEDEFINITIONVALUE ADDED? POST-PROCESS 9interpret / validate understand results and assess whether the simulation results are reasonable. Yes 10troubleshoot / fix find problems with the model, correct the problems. No 11document results communicate results and design intent. No 12document process communicate design tasks and assumptions. No POST-PROCESS tasks

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Efficiency is measured by timing process tasks Measure Existing Processes Research Method Effectiveness is measured by MACDADI value of design Non-Value Added Tasks = No Color Value Added Tasks = Color

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Introduce a new process or collect processes from around the world  Post the processes on a website. Research Method

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Without Tool Efficiency = 50%Effectiveness = With Tool Efficiency = 92%Effectiveness = Measure the difference before & after the use of the tool RESEARCH METHOD

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Measure efficiency before & after the use of the tool RESEARCH METHOD

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Efficiency 30% mostly b/c transfer/filter time 11 hrs. Contributions to Knowledge  Question 2: How does implementing this methodology affect process efficiency & effectiveness? AEC Design  Question 1: What is a design process sharing methodology? Methodology Applied to AEC Design Contribution A methodology for communicating processes supported by evidence of its impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of design processes in AEC. Design value remained constant, so effectiveness unchanged Expected Contribution

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Expected impact on industry  Lay the foundation for continuous improvements in design process efficiency and effectiveness  Which permit improved multi-disciplinary design optimization  Which is essential for improving the sustainability of the built environment. Expected Contribution

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 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. Acknowledgements

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Data Schema

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 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*

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Organization Data Schema Organization* Company Title Name

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 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

Reid Senescu and John Haymaker Copyright 2008 Graph Data Schema Node* Node ID Product Reference* Organization Reference* Process Reference* Node Dependency* Iterative Continuous View Process Perspective ID Process Title Process Description Node ID* Node Location in the GUI Visualization Information (Details not shown here)