{"title":"A Hypermedia Model for Supporting Energy Design in Buildings","authors":"Khaled A. Al-Sallal","doi":"10.52842/conf.acadia.1994.039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Several studies have discussed the limitations of the available CAAD tools and have proposed solutions [Brown and Novitski 1987, Brown 1990, Degelman and Kim 1988, Schuman et al 1988]. The lack of integration between the different tasks that these programs address and the design process is a major problem. Schuman et al [1988] argued that in architectural design many issues must be considered simultaneously before the synthesis of a final product can take place. Studies by Brown and Novitski [1987] and Brown [1990] discussed the difficulties involved with integrating technical considerations in the creative architectural process. One aspect of the problem is the neglect of technical factors during the initial phase of the design that, as the authors argued, results from changing the work environment and the laborious nature of the design process. Many of the current programs require the user to input a great deal of numerical values that are needed for the energy analysis. Although there are some programs that attempt to assist the user by setting default values, these programs distract the user with their extensive arrays of data. The appropriate design tool is the one that helps the user to easily view the principal components of the building design and specify their behaviors and interactions. Data abstraction and information parsimony are the key concepts in developing a successful design tool. Three different approaches for developing an appropriate CAAD tool were found in the literature. Although there are several similarities among them, each is unique in solving certain aspects of the problem. Brown and Novitski [1987] emphasize the learning factor of the tool as well as its highly graphical user interface. Degelman and Kim [1988] emphasize knowledge acquisition and the provision of simulation modules. The Windows and Daylighting Group of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) emphasizes the dynamic structuring of information, the intelligent linking of data, the integrity of the different issues of design and the design process, and the extensive use of images [Schuman et al 19881, these attributes incidentally define the word hypermedia. The LBL model, which uses hypermedia, seems to be the more promising direction for this type of research. However, there is still a need to establish a new model that integrates all aspects of the problem. The areas in which the present research departs from the LBL model can be listed as follows: it acknowledges the necessity of regarding the user as the center of the CAAD tool design, it develops a model that is based on one of the high level theories of human-computer interaction, and it develops a prototype tool that conforms to the model.","PeriodicalId":297016,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA)","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.acadia.1994.039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Several studies have discussed the limitations of the available CAAD tools and have proposed solutions [Brown and Novitski 1987, Brown 1990, Degelman and Kim 1988, Schuman et al 1988]. The lack of integration between the different tasks that these programs address and the design process is a major problem. Schuman et al [1988] argued that in architectural design many issues must be considered simultaneously before the synthesis of a final product can take place. Studies by Brown and Novitski [1987] and Brown [1990] discussed the difficulties involved with integrating technical considerations in the creative architectural process. One aspect of the problem is the neglect of technical factors during the initial phase of the design that, as the authors argued, results from changing the work environment and the laborious nature of the design process. Many of the current programs require the user to input a great deal of numerical values that are needed for the energy analysis. Although there are some programs that attempt to assist the user by setting default values, these programs distract the user with their extensive arrays of data. The appropriate design tool is the one that helps the user to easily view the principal components of the building design and specify their behaviors and interactions. Data abstraction and information parsimony are the key concepts in developing a successful design tool. Three different approaches for developing an appropriate CAAD tool were found in the literature. Although there are several similarities among them, each is unique in solving certain aspects of the problem. Brown and Novitski [1987] emphasize the learning factor of the tool as well as its highly graphical user interface. Degelman and Kim [1988] emphasize knowledge acquisition and the provision of simulation modules. The Windows and Daylighting Group of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) emphasizes the dynamic structuring of information, the intelligent linking of data, the integrity of the different issues of design and the design process, and the extensive use of images [Schuman et al 19881, these attributes incidentally define the word hypermedia. The LBL model, which uses hypermedia, seems to be the more promising direction for this type of research. However, there is still a need to establish a new model that integrates all aspects of the problem. The areas in which the present research departs from the LBL model can be listed as follows: it acknowledges the necessity of regarding the user as the center of the CAAD tool design, it develops a model that is based on one of the high level theories of human-computer interaction, and it develops a prototype tool that conforms to the model.
一些研究已经讨论了现有CAAD工具的局限性,并提出了解决方案[Brown and Novitski 1987, Brown 1990, Degelman and Kim 1988, Schuman et al . 1988]。这些程序处理的不同任务和设计过程之间缺乏集成是一个主要问题。Schuman等人[1988]认为,在建筑设计中,在合成最终产品之前,必须同时考虑许多问题。Brown和Novitski[1987]和Brown[1990]的研究讨论了在创造性建筑过程中整合技术考虑所涉及的困难。问题的一个方面是在设计的初始阶段忽略了技术因素,正如作者所认为的那样,这是由于工作环境的改变和设计过程的费力性质造成的。目前的许多程序都要求用户输入大量的能量分析所需的数值。尽管有一些程序试图通过设置默认值来帮助用户,但这些程序用大量的数据数组分散了用户的注意力。适当的设计工具是帮助用户轻松查看建筑设计的主要组件并指定它们的行为和交互的工具。数据抽象和信息简约是开发成功设计工具的关键概念。在文献中发现了三种不同的方法来开发合适的CAAD工具。虽然它们之间有一些相似之处,但在解决问题的某些方面,每一个都是独特的。Brown和Novitski[1987]强调了该工具的学习因素及其高度图形化的用户界面。Degelman和Kim[1988]强调知识获取和模拟模块的提供。劳伦斯伯克利实验室(LBL)的Windows和Daylighting小组强调信息的动态结构、数据的智能链接、设计和设计过程中不同问题的完整性以及图像的广泛使用[Schuman et al . 19881],这些属性顺便定义了超媒体这个词。使用超媒体的LBL模型似乎是这类研究中更有前途的方向。然而,仍然需要建立一种新的模式,将问题的各个方面结合起来。本研究与LBL模型的不同之处在于:承认以用户为中心的CAAD工具设计的必要性,开发了基于人机交互高级理论的模型,并开发了符合该模型的原型工具。