Comparing Designers’ Problem-Solving Behavior in a Parametric Design Environment and a Geometric Modeling Environment
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Background
2.1. Design Environments—PDE and GME
2.2. Design Problem and Solution Spaces
3. Research Methods
3.1. Design Experiment
3.2. Coding Scheme—FBS Model
3.3. Problem-Solution Division in FBS Ontology
Problem/Solution Space | Design Issue | Design Process |
---|---|---|
Reasoning about problem | Requirement (R) Function (F) Expected behavior (Be) | 1 Formulation 7 Reformulation II 8 Reformulation III |
Reasoning about solution | Behavior derived from structure (Bs) Structure (S) | 2 Synthesis 3 Analysis 4 Evaluation 6 Reformulation I |
4. Results
Design Environments | Time (min) | Number of Segments | Coded Percentage (%) | Speed (Segments/min) |
---|---|---|---|---|
GME | 43.0 | 223 | 91.97 | 4.78 |
PDE | 47.4 | 240 | 92.45 | 4.68 |
4.1. Design Issue and Design Process Distribution
Participants | Problem Space | Solution Space | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
R | F | Be | Bs | S | ||||||
GME | PDE | GME | PDE | GME | PDE | GME | PDE | GME | PDE | |
Designer A | 2.44 | 1.79 | 11.71 | 4.02 | 18.05 | 13.39 | 26.83 | 28.13 | 40.98 | 52.68 |
Designer B | 1.67 | 1.15 | 7.50 | 3.45 | 12.92 | 20.69 | 37.08 | 39.08 | 40.83 | 35.63 |
Designer C | 2.96 | 1.99 | 3.70 | 1.49 | 13.33 | 5.97 | 31.11 | 37.31 | 48.89 | 53.23 |
Designer D | 2.17 | 0.82 | 4.35 | 3.29 | 22.61 | 25.10 | 31.74 | 30.04 | 39.13 | 40.74 |
Designer E | 2.98 | 1.29 | 9.79 | 4.29 | 18.30 | 24.89 | 30.64 | 25.75 | 38.30 | 43.78 |
Designer F | 0.47 | 0.39 | 6.05 | 9.41 | 12.56 | 27.84 | 25.58 | 22.35 | 55.81 | 40.00 |
Designer G | 8.94 | 2.25 | 11.17 | 9.01 | 30.17 | 35.59 | 22.91 | 18.92 | 26.82 | 34.68 |
Mean | 3.09 | 1.38 | 7.75 | 4.99 | 18.28 | 21.93 | 29.41 | 28.80 | 41.54 | 3.09 |
SD | 2.72 | 0.66 | 3.22 | 3.01 | 6.40 | 9.74 | 4.69 | 7.40 | 9.05 | 7.49 |
T | 2.0 | 2.07 | −1.25 | 0.41 | −0.408 | |||||
p | 0.093 | 0.084 | 0.257 | 0.696 | 0.697 |
Participants | Problem Space | Solution Space | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Formulation | Reformulation ΙΙ | Reformulation ΙΙΙ | Synthesis | Analysis | Evaluation | Reformulation Ι | ||
Designer A | GME | 6.1 | 6.8 | 7.6 | 15.9 | 26.5 | 16.7 | 20.5 |
PDE | 2.6 | 7.7 | 0 | 11.6 | 29.7 | 9.7 | 38.7 | |
Designer B | GME | 1.5 | 8.1 | 4.4 | 10.4 | 37 | 15.6 | 23 |
PDE | 0 | 15.9 | 0.9 | 14 | 30.8 | 29 | 9.3 | |
Designer C | GME | 2.4 | 7.1 | 1.2 | 8.3 | 27.4 | 11.9 | 41.7 |
PDE | 0.8 | 4.8 | 0 | 3.2 | 41.9 | 12.1 | 37.1 | |
Designer D | GME | 2.6 | 12.3 | 1.3 | 19.5 | 24.7 | 19.5 | 20.1 |
PDE | 1.2 | 11.4 | 1.2 | 15.7 | 16.9 | 23.5 | 30.1 | |
Designer E | GME | 3.5 | 9.9 | 2.1 | 14.2 | 22 | 20.6 | 27.7 |
PDE | 3.1 | 16.1 | 1.9 | 19.1 | 19.8 | 14.8 | 25.3 | |
Designer F | GME | 1.3 | 6 | 2.7 | 9.3 | 28.7 | 9.3 | 42.7 |
PDE | 4.1 | 18.1 | 5.3 | 19.9 | 13.5 | 17 | 22.2 | |
Designer G | GME | 9.1 | 10.1 | 3 | 18.2 | 16.2 | 24.2 | 19.2 |
PDE | 7.5 | 17.7 | 1.4 | 22.4 | 12.9 | 17.7 | 20.4 | |
Mean | GME | 3.8 | 8.6 | 3.2 | 13.7 | 26.1 | 16.8 | 27.8 |
PDE | 2.8 | 13.1 | 1.5 | 15.1 | 23.6 | 17.7 | 26.2 | |
SD | GME | 2.84 | 2.24 | 2.23 | 4.44 | 6.38 | 5.13 | 10.20 |
PDE | 2.53 | 5.23 | 1.81 | 6.43 | 10.80 | 6.65 | 10.22 | |
T | 1.41 | –2.233 | 1.368 | –0.643 | 0.687 | –0.287 | 0.338 | |
p | 0.207 | 0.067* | 0.220 | 0.544 | 0.518 | 0.784 | 0.747 |
4.2. Problem-Solution Index
4.3. Co-Evolution of Problem and Solution in the PDE and GME
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix: Design Brief
- For site design, consider the traffic route, parking area, and outdoor activity space.
- For the building design, consider the entrance and façade; focus on conceptual design and do not consider detailed layout.
- Area: Building area is around 6000 m2, one or two stories.
- The two functional areas can be combined in a single building or separately.
- For site design, consider the traffic route and parking area.
- For the building design, consider the entrance and façade; focus on conceptual design and do not consider detailed layout.
- Area: Building area is around 6000 m2 one or two stories.
Requirements:
Outcomes:
References
- Iordanova, I.; Tidafi, T.; Guité, M.; de Paoli, G.; Lachapelle, J. Parametric Methods of Exploration and Creativity during Architectural Design: A Case Study in the Design Studio. In Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures, Montréal, Canada, 17–19 June 2009; pp. 423–439.
- Schnabel, M.A. Parametric Designing in Architecture. In Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures, Sydney, Australia, 11–13 July 2007.
- Qian, C.Z.; Chen, V.Y.; Woodbury, R.F. Participant Observation Can Discover Design Patterns in Parametric Modeling. In Proceedings of 27th International Conference on the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture, Halifax, UK, 1–7 October 2007.
- Abdelmohsen, S.; Do, E.Y.-L. Analyzing the Significance of Problem Solving Expertise and Computational Tool Proficiency in Design Ideation. In Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures, Montreal, Canada, 17–19 June 2009.
- Chien, S.-F.; Yeh, Y.-T. On Creativity and Parametric Design—A Preliminary Study of Designer’s Behaviour When Employing Parametricdesign Tools. In Proceedings of 30th International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, Prague, Czech Republic, 12–14 September 2012.
- Dorst, K.; Cross, N. Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem-solution. Des. Stud. 2001, 22, 425–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; Gero, J.; Yen, C.C. Exploring Designing Styles Using a Problem-Solution Index. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition, College Station, TX, USA, 7–9 June 2012.
- Bilda, Z.; Demirkan, H. An insight on designers’ sketching activities in traditional versus digital media. Des. Stud. 2003, 24, 27–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kan, J.W.T.; Gero, J.S. The Effect of Computer Mediation on Collaborative Designing. In Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, Yunlin, Taiwan, 22–25 April 2009.
- Woodbury, R. Elements of Parametric Design; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Kolarevic, B. Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing; Spon Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, J.H.; Gu, N.; Jupp, J.; Sherratt, S. Evaluating Creativity in Parametric Design Processes and Products: A Pilot Study. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition, College Station, TX, USA, 7–9 June 2012.
- Ostwald, M.J. Systems and Enablers: Modeling the Impact of Contemporary Computational Meth-Ods and Technologies on the Design Process. In Computational Design Methods and Technologies: Applications in CAD, CAM and CAE Education; IGI Global: Pennsylvania, PA, USA, 2012; pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Schön, D.; Wiggins, G. Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Des. Stud. 1992, 13, 135–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cross, N. Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work; Berg Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Kruger, C.; Cross, N. Solution driven versus problem driven design: Strategies and outcomes. Des. Stud. 2006, 27, 527–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gero, J.S. Design prototypes: A knowledge representation schema for design. AI Mag. 1990, 11, 26–36. [Google Scholar]
- Maher, M.L.; Poon, J. Modelling design exploration as co-evolution. Comput. Aided Civ. Eng. 1996, 11, 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lawson, B. How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified; Architectural Press: Burlington, MA, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, M.J.; Maher, M.L. Creative Design and Spatial Cognition in a Tangible User Interface Environment. In Proceedings of the international conference of Computational and Cognitive Models of Creative Design VI, Heron Island, Australia, 10–14 December 2005.
- Helms, M.E.; Goel, A.K. Analogical Problem Evolution in Biologically Inspired Design. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition, College Station, TX, USA, 7–9 June 2012.
- Cross, N.; Dorst, K.; Christiaans, H. Analysing Design Activity; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Ericsson, K.A.; Simon, H.A. Verbal reports as data. Psychol. Rev. 1980, 87, 215–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kan, J.W.T.; Gero, J.S. Using the FBS Ontology to Capture Semantic Design Information in Design Protocol Studies. In About: Designing—Analysing Design Meetings; Taylor & Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, M.J.; Maher, M.L. The impact of tangible user interfaces on spatial cognition during collaborative design. Des. Stud. 2008, 29, 222–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gero, J.; Tang, H.-H. Concurrent and Retrospective Protocols and Computer-Aided Architectural Design. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, Shanghai, China, 5–7 May 1999.
- Kan, J.W.T.; Gero, J.S. Can Entropy Indicate the Richness of Idea Generation in Team Designing? In Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, New Delhi, India, 28–30 April 2005.
- Kan, J.W.T.; Gero, J.S. Studing Software Design Cognition. In Software Designers in Action: A Human-Centric Look at Design Work; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Kan, J.W.T.; Gero, J.S. Acquiring information from linkography in protocol studies of designing. Des. Stud. 2008, 29, 315–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gero, J.; Jiang, H.; Williams, C.B. Design Cognition Differences When Using Structured and Unstructured Concept Generation Creativity Techniques. In Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Design Creativity, Glasgow, UK, 18–20 September 2012.
- Simon, H.A. The structure of ill-structured problems. Artif. Intell. 1973, 4, 181–201. [Google Scholar]
- Maher, M.L.; Tang, H.H. Co-evolution as a computational and cognitive model of design. Res. Eng. Des. 2003, 11, 47–63. [Google Scholar]
- Schön, D.A. Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Knowl. Based Syst. 1992, 5, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldschmidt, G.; Porter, W.L. Design Representation; Springer: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Zeiler, W.; Savanovic, P.; Quanjel, E. Design Decision Support for the Conceptual Phase of the Design Process. In Proceedings of International Association of Societies of Design Research, Hongkong, 12–15 November 2007.
- Cross, N. Expertise in design: An overview. Des. Stud. 2004, 25, 427–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Yu, R.; Gu, N.; Ostwald, M. Comparing Designers’ Problem-Solving Behavior in a Parametric Design Environment and a Geometric Modeling Environment. Buildings 2013, 3, 621-638. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings3030621
Yu R, Gu N, Ostwald M. Comparing Designers’ Problem-Solving Behavior in a Parametric Design Environment and a Geometric Modeling Environment. Buildings. 2013; 3(3):621-638. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings3030621
Chicago/Turabian StyleYu, Rongrong, Ning Gu, and Michael Ostwald. 2013. "Comparing Designers’ Problem-Solving Behavior in a Parametric Design Environment and a Geometric Modeling Environment" Buildings 3, no. 3: 621-638. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings3030621