scholarly journals Virtual Instruments for Urban Design Decision-Making Process

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Aurel Schnabel ◽  
Shuva Chowdhury
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Urban Design ◽  
Virtual Instruments ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Design Decision

No description supplied

scholarly journals Virtual Instruments for Urban Design Decision-Making Process

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Aurel Schnabel ◽  
Shuva Chowdhury
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Urban Design ◽  
Virtual Instruments ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Design Decision

No description supplied

Open Building, Energy and Sustainability: The Import of Leed™ Rating

2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-54
Author(s):  
Robert J. Koester
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Building Energy ◽  
Problem Definition ◽  
Building Construction ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Strategic Design ◽  
Design Build ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
And Function

This paper addresses opportunities available for meeting sustainability objectives in building construction by using the conceptual alignments of Open Building and LEED™ Rating. These two systems utilize hierarchical, scalar categorizations to structure issues of design as a set of nested constructs and function as methodologies for affecting both problem definition and the management of strategic design process. Each system addresses the distribution of control in the design decision−making process as a positioning of decisions in space and time. Establishing the correlation of the two systems can facilitate the conversation among all participants involved in the origination, construction, use, and management of buildings−and their systems−as they seek to assure the sustainability of what they design, build, and use.

Simplifying Iterations in Cross-Functional Design Decision Making

1997 ◽  
Vol 119 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Krishnan ◽  
S. D. Eppinger ◽  
D. E. Whitney
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Catalytic Converter ◽  
Sequential Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Functional Design ◽  
Sequential Decision ◽  
Diagnostic Systems ◽  
Design Quality ◽  
And Task

In this paper, we consider the cross-functional design decision making process and discuss how sequential decision making leads to a degradation in design quality even when downstream design tasks are not rendered infeasible by preceding upstream decisions. We focus on the problem of simplifying the design iterations required to address this quality loss. Two properties, called sequence invariance and task invariance, are introduced to help reduce the complexity of subsequent design iterations. We also discuss how these properties may be used by designers in situations where mathematical descriptions of the design performance characteristics are unavailable. We illustrate the utility of these properties by showing their applicability to the design of catalytic converter diagnostic systems at a major U.S. automotive firm.

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF A TWO-STAGE QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE URBAN DESIGN PROCESS

space&FORM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (48) ◽  
pp. 205-222
Author(s):  
Łukasz Rosiak ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Urban Design ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Research Technique ◽  
The City

The aim of the article is to present how urban planners use the potential of a questionnaire. The intention of the designers is to incorporate this study into two different phases of urban design. The first will be a questionnaire relating to the diagnosis of the condition. The second test will be performed at a later stage of works, during the assessment of spatial solutions. This questionnaire will be an assessment of spatial solutions. In the article, the author in this work, will try to explain the important this research technique is in the decision-making process of urban design. For this purpose, he will use the example of developing a local revitalization plan for the so-called "Old Town" of the city of Wołomin.

Value-Driven Design Process: A Systematic Decision-Making Framework Considering Different Attribute Preferences From Multiple Stakeholders

2016 ◽  
Vol 139 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Zhuang ◽  
Ming Hu ◽  
Fatemeh Mousapour
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Architectural Design ◽  
Sustainable Design ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Problem Definition ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Multiple Stakeholders

In general, architectural design is a loosely structured, open-ended activity that includes problem definition, representation, performance evaluation, and decision making. A number of approaches have been proposed in the literature to organize, guide, and facilitate the design process. The main objective of this paper is to seek a logical and rigorous means to aid in developing an optimized design that is acceptable to the customer or user of the product. The convention design approaches heavily involve decision making, which is integral to the architectural design process and is an important element in nearly all phases of design. There is a need to reframe the decision-making process to transform and improve the design process in order for finial building to achieve the performance goals. The first step in making an effective design decision is to understand the stakeholders' and team players' (architect, engineer, client, and consultant) different preferences based on their needs, experiences, and expectations of the project. In this paper, we first provide an overview about conventional decision-making method and process, identify the existing attributes that contribute to decision making in design, and outline the obstacles present in making optimized sustainable design decisions due to the uncertainty of different stakeholders' preferences. Then, we present one case study to identify and compare different preferences among engineering students, practicing architects, and the general public, and we analyze how the three groups attribute different weight to the major design attributes. This paper provides some novel insights into a value-driven sustainable design process, and it will be one of the building blocks for creating a framework to integrate game theory into the design decision-making process, considering multiple stakeholders' perspectives and preferences for building attributes as future research tasks.

scholarly journals An Ontology for Reusable and Executable Decision Templates

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhenjun Ming ◽  
Guoxin Wang ◽  
Yan Yan ◽  
Joseph Dal Santo ◽  
Janet K. Allen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Resource Selection ◽  
Procedural Knowledge ◽  
Attribute Selection ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Selection Decisions ◽  
Rigorous Mathematical Model

Engineering design is increasingly recognized as a decision making process. Providing decision support is crucial to augment designers' decision-making capability in this process. In this paper, we present a template-based ontological method that integrates the decision-making mechanism with problem-specific information; thus, it can provide design decision support from both the “construct” and the “information” perspectives. The “construct,” namely, decision-making mechanism, is the utility-based Decision Support Problem (u-sDSP), which is a rigorous mathematical model that facilitates designers making multi-attribute selection decisions under uncertainty, while the information for decision making is archived as u-sDSP templates and represented using frame-based ontology to facilitate reuse, execution, and consistency-maintaining. This paper is an extension of our earlier work on the ontological modeling of the compromise decisions. The unique advantage of this ontology is that it captures both the declarative and procedural knowledge of selection decisions and represents them separately, thus facilitating designers reusing, executing previous documented decision knowledge to effect new decisions. The efficacy of ontology is demonstrated using a rapid prototyping (RP) resource selection example.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document