Improving Design Workflow in Architectural Design Applications

Presentation Doctoral Seminar16/06/2006 Leuven (Belgium)

A B C D

Overview

A – IntroductionB – Design Workflow in BIM SoftwareC – An Integrated Design Environment for ArchitectureD - Implementation of Possible Improvements

A B C D

A - Introduction

1. Problem Statement2. Methodology3. Framework to describe Design Process

A B C D

1. Problem Statement

– Several commercial architectural design applications

– Increasing attention to Building Information Modeling (BIM)

– Clear focus on construction documentation– Less support for the design workflow,

especially in the early design stages

A B C D

2. Methodology

– MERODE method for the development of the CORE Object Model

– study and teaching of current commercial CAAD applications

– database of design applications– participation in online forums and

workshops on CAD, BIM and Digital Design– study of data exchange formats– literature study on CAAD research and

development

A B C D

3. Framework to describe Design Process

3.1 – Conceptual Framework3.2 – CORE Object Model

A B C D

3.1. Conceptual Framework

Design Phases

Scale Levels

Grids

Transitions

Evaluation Tests

A B C D

3.2. CORE Object Model

Theoretical framework

Class Structure + relationships

Entity-Relationshipdiagrams

Object-Event table

Graphical Representations

A B C D

B – Design Workflow in BIM Software

1. Autodesk Architectural Desktop2. Autodesk Revit3. Graphisoft ArchiCAD4. Conclusion

A B C D

1. Autodesk Architectural Desktop

– uses AutoCAD as CAD-engine– support for different representations– no bi-directional connection between walls

and the surrounding spaces– one-way conversion of massing model into

building elements– no direct support for building stories

A B C D

2. Autodesk Revit

– standalone BIM application– allows different representations– massing tools to define ‘freeform’

building volume– mass model creates building elements– one-way update of building elements after

modifications to massing model

A B C D

3. Graphisoft ArchiCAD

– standalone BIM application– different representations– support for scale-sensitive objects– spaces (“Zones”) only partly connected to

enclosing building elements

A B C D

4. Conclusion

support of transitions is limited in current BIM software

– architect/designer expects free design exploration

– design phase transitions are mostly supported through representations

– support for scale level transitions is often not bi-directional

example of master plan adjustment

A B C D

C – An Integrated Design Environment for Architecture

1. Introduction & Concept2. Building Project Data Structure3. Representation of Building Data4. Transitions between Design Phases & Scale Levels5. Integration of Evaluation Tests6. Prototype Application

A B C D

1. Introduction & Concept

storing design decisions– follow the workflow of an architect– using building semantics

providing feedback during design– evaluation tests (simulations)– allow design exploration

development platform for research– data structure– prototype application

A B C D

2. Building Project Data Structure

Custom C++ data structurebased on CORE Object Model

Architectural Design Entities

Generic Property System

A B C D

3. Representation of Building Data

A B C D

4. Transitions between Design Phases and Scale Levels

Scale Level Transition– change scope of building– not-chronological– focus on different design elements

Design Phase Transition– change detail of elements– chronological– focus on element composition

A B C D

5. Integration of Evaluation Tests

Extraction Tests– geometric or rendering export– quantity calculation– simple cost estimation

Data Generation Tests– using Extended Properties– integrate results in project– cost estimation on different Scale Levels

A B C D

6. Prototype Application

− Evaluating the data structure− Integration of tests− Exploring representation options− Enabling transitions− Hybrid CAD/3D application

− no commercial software application− limited resources of research group

− test versions on different platformsSGI IRIX, GLUT, Win32/MFC, Qt/HOOPS

A B C D

D – Implementation of Possible Improvements

1. Creating a grid of Reference Points2. Add Classification Information3. Connect Properties4. The Resulting Effect on Transitions

A B C D

1. Creating a Grid of Reference Points

– shared positions between CAAD Entities– moving control points adjust all connected

elements– can be split up into:

• 2D part = XY position (grids often don’t change over floor levels)

• relative height referencee.g. floor levels, split floors

grid adjustment influences the building block

height references and point references

A B C D

2. Add Classification Information

– use ISO 13567 Layer naming standard as attributes of building elements

– avoid use of layers(which act as 1D vector of info)

– apply BB/SfB classification instead(based on CI/SfB)

A B C D

3. Connect Properties

– allow custom interdependencies between properties of building elements

– could support expressions, to allow more elaborate connections

– embed design intent/information into the elementse.g. alignments, equalities, constraints...

Example 1

Set Height of Wall 1 = Height of Wall 2

Example 2

Set Start of Wall 1 = Point 2 of Floor 3

Example 3

Set Z-position of Floor 2 = Floorlevel 1 + Height of Wall 1

Example 4

Set # stairs on Stair 1 = roundof( (Floorlevel 2 - Floorlevel 1) / 0.175m )

etc...

A B C D

4. The Resulting Effect on Transitions

– connect elements from different Scale Levels through grid of Reference Points

– control Representations through Element Classification

– store element relations through Property Connections

– Design Phase transitions through adding element information and adjusting representation

– Scale Level transitions through connection of respective Reference Points and generating additional elements

Difficulties ?1. Create Building Elements if required2. Adapt modifications on all levels3. Going back and forth during

modifications

Difficulties ?1. Going from inf.flat element to element

with thickness might require offset or repositioning= not as automatic design decision

2. The reverse transition does not remove information, but rather hides it

A B C D

Conclusion

General Conclusion– Current commercial design applications have limitations in

the design workflow– IDEA+ suggests improvements, through enabling Design Phase &

Scale Level transitions– This is illustrated with a Prototype Application

Future Research– Modre focus on embedding design decisions into Project Data– Integrated aspects from Constraint Modeling

and Parametric Design– Apply Prototype in Design Exercises

A B C D

Thank you for your attention

More information on:http://www.asro.kuleuven.be/idea