Framework and metrics for assessing the guidance of design processes

DS 58-1: Proceedings of ICED 09, the 17th International Conference on Engineering Design

Volumn 1, Issue , 2009, Pages 411-422

  Clevenger, Caroline M ^a   Haymaker, John ^a  

^a Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

Design Guidance; Design Space; Metrics; Multidisciplinary Decision making; Objective Space; Solution Space; Sustainable Building

Indexed keywords

DESIGN GUIDANCE; DESIGN SPACE; METRICS; MULTIDISCIPLINARY DECISION-MAKING; OBJECTIVE SPACE; SOLUTION SPACE; SUSTAINABLE BUILDING;

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN; INTELLIGENT BUILDINGS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

STRUCTURAL DESIGN;

EID: 84858850519     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (30)

1. American Institute of Architects, "National Association of Counties Adopts AIA Challenge of Carbon Neutral Public Buildings by 2030," press release July 30, 2007.
2. Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). P.L. 110-140 (H.R.6.) Energy Independence And Security Act (EISA) of 2007.
3. Watson, I., Perera, R. Case-Based Design: a Review and Analysis of Building Design Applications. Journal of Artificial Intelligence for engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing AIEDAM, 1997, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp 59-87.
4. Chachere, J., Haymaker, J. Framework for Measuring Rationale Clarity of AEC Design Decisions, 2008, CIFE Technical Report, TR177, Stanford University.
5. Cross, N. Expertise in Design: an overview, Design Studies, 2004, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 427-441.
6. Papamichael, K., LaPorta, J., and Chauvert, H. Building Design Advisor: automated integration of multiple simulation tools. Automation in Construction, 1998, 6 4 pp. 341-352.
7. Cross, R., Roozenburg, N. Modelling the Design Process in Engineering and Architecture, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 3, No 4, 1992.
8. Bazjanac, V. Building Energy Performance Simulation Presentation, 2006. Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, University of California, VVT Technical Research Centre of Finland.
9. Papamichael, K., Protzen, J.P. The limits of intelligence in design. Proceedings of the Focus Symposium on Computer-Assisted Building Design Systems 4th International Symposium on Systems Research, Informatics and Cybernetics, 1993, Baden-Baden, Germany.
10. Tate D, Nordlund M., A design process roadmap as a general tool for structuring and supporting design activities. SDPS J Integrated Design and Process, 1998, Sc 2(3): 11-19.
11. Deru, M., Torcellini, P.A. Improving Sustainability of Buildings Through a Performance-Based Design Approach. 2004 Preprint, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) NREL/CP-550-36276.
12. US Green Building Council, LEED (Buildings: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), Environmental Building rating System Criteria, 1996.
13. ISO 10303-11:2004 Industrial automation systems and integration - Product data representation and exchange - Part 11: Description methods: The EXPRESS language reference manual.
14. Lamsweerde, A., Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Guided Tour. Proceedings RE'01, 5th IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, Toronto, 249-263.
15. Payne, J., Bettman, J., Schkade, D. Measuring Constructed Preferences: Towards a Building Code. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, December, 1999, Vol 19, Numbers 1-3.
16. Earl C., Johnson J. and Eckert C 'Complexity', Chapter 7 in Design Process Improvement - a review of current practice, 2005, Springer.
17. Kotonya G, Sommerville I. Requirements engineering: processes and techniques, 1997 (Wiley, Chichester).
18. Ross, A. M., Hastings, D. E., Warmkessel, J. M., and Diller, N. P.,Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration as Front End for Effective Space System Design, 2004, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 41, No. 1.
19. Dorst, K and Cross, N., Creativity in the Design Process: co-evolution of problem-solution, Design Studies, 2001, 22 pp 425-437.
20. Maher, M. L., Poon, J., Boulanger, S., Formalising Design Exploration As Co-Evolution: A Combined Gene Approach, Advances in Formal Design Methods for CAD, 1996,(Gero, J S and Sudweeks, F eds.), Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
21. Gero, J S, Creativity, emergence and evolution in design. Knowledge-Based Systems, 1996, Vol 9, pp. 435-448.
22. Briand, L., Morasca, S., Basili, V., Defining and validating high-level design metrics, University of Maryland at College Park, College Park, MD, 1994.
23. Bashir, H. A., and Thompson, V. Metrics for design projects: a review. Design Studies, 1997, 20(3), 163-277.
24. Shah, J., Vargas-Hernandez, N., and Smith, S., Metrics for Measuring Ideation Effectiveness, Design Studies, 2003, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 111-134.
25. Simpson, T., Rosen, D., Allen, JK, Mistree, Farrokh, Metrics for Assessing Design Freedom and Information Certainty in the Early Stages of Design, Proceeding of the 1996ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers in Engineering Conference, August ' 8-22, 1996, Irvine California.
26. Haymaker J., Communicating, Integrating, and Improving Multidisciplinary Design Narratives, International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition, 2006, 635-653 (Springer, Netherlands).
27. Ross, A. Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration with Concurrent Design as a Value-Centric Framework for Space System Architecture and Design. Dual-SM, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003.
28. Edvardsson E. and Hansson S.O. (2005). 'When is a goal rational?'. Social Choice and Welfare 24: 343-36.
29. Smith, R., Eppinger, R., A predictive model of sequential iteration in engineering design, Management Science 43 (8) (1997).
30. Flager, F., Soremekun, G, Welle, B., John Haymaker, J., Bansal, P., Multidisciplinary Process Integration and Design Optimization of a Classroom Building, CIFE Technical Report #TR175 October 2008.