CIFECENTER FOR INTEGRATED FACILITY ENGINEERING Design Exploration Assessment Methodology: Testing the Guidance of Design Processes

This paper introduces the Design Exploration Assessment Methodology (DEAM) for comparing the impact of differences in process on outcome for given design problems. Current practice fails to reliably generate high performing alternatives in part because it lacks systematic means to compare existing or emerging design processes. Researchers lack empirical methods and data to evaluate design challenges and the strategies available to address them. In this paper we document, and then apply DEAM to professional implementation of six design strategies across two design challenges using the charrette test method. Results compare strategies according to the performance of the solution(s) generated. For the strategies and challenges investigated, more information during design does not always assist the designer to produce better performing alternatives. We discuss possible explanations, and conclude with a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of DEAM as an evaluation method. Initial findings demonstrate that DEAM is a method capable of providing meaningful comparison of strategies in the domain of energy efficient design challenges. building length = 10-20 meters). Decision: the selection of an option (i.e., a number of windows = 2; building length = 12.75 meters). Alternative: a combination of decisions about options. Stakeholder: a party with a stake in the selection of alternatives. Goal: declaration of intended properties of alternatives. Preference: weight assigned to a goal by a stakeholder. Constraint: limit placed on options. Impact: alternative's estimated performance according to a specified goal. Requirement: limit placed on impacts. Objective: union of stakeholders, goals, preferences and constraints. Value: net performance of an alternative relative to all objectives. Dimensions Challenge: a set of decisions to be made ranging from simple to complex. Strategy: a procedure to generate decisions ranging from none to advanced. Exploration: a history of decisions made ranging from misled to guided. Design Process: implementation of a strategy to a challenge resulting in an exploration. Guidance: variation in exploration produced by applying different strategies to a given challenge. Spaces Objective space: set of stakeholders, goals, preferences and constraints. Alternative space: feasible (explored or unexplored) alternatives for a given challenge. 2 Impact space: analyzed impacts of alternatives relative to goals, determined to be acceptable or unacceptable according to requirements. Value space: values of the set of alternatives generated during an exploration. We use italics throughout this paper to indicate explicit reference to these definitions.