Abrishami, S; Goulding, J and Rahimian, F (2021) Generative BIM workspace for AEC conceptual design automation: Prototype development. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(2), pp. 482-509. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The integration and automation of the whole design and implementation process have become a pivotal factor in construction projects. Problems of process integration, particularly at the conceptual design stage, often manifest through a number of significant areas, from design representation, cognition and translation to process fragmentation and loss of design integrity. Whilst building information modelling (BIM) applications can be used to support design automation, particularly through the modelling, amendment and management stages, they do not explicitly provide whole design integration. This is a significant challenge. However, advances in generative design now offer significant potential for enhancing the design experience to mitigate this challenge. Design/methodology/approach: The approach outlined in this paper specifically addresses BIM deficiencies at the conceptual design stage, where the core drivers and indicators of BIM and generative design are identified and mapped into a generative BIM (G-BIM) framework and subsequently embedded into a G-BIM prototype. This actively engages generative design methods into a single dynamic BIM environment to support the early conceptual design process. The developed prototype followed the CIFE “horseshoe” methodology of aligning theoretical research with scientific methods to procure architecture, construction and engineering (AEC)-based solutions. This G-BIM prototype was also tested and validated through a focus group workshop engaging five AEC domain experts. Findings: The G-BIM prototype presents a valuable set of rubrics to support the conceptual design stage using generative design. It benefits from the advanced features of BIM tools in relation to illustration and collaboration (coupled with BIM's parametric change management features). Research limitations/implications: This prototype has been evaluated through multiple projects and scenarios. However, additional test data is needed to further improve system veracity using conventional and non-standard real-life design settings (and contexts). This will be reported in later works. Originality/value: Originality and value rest with addressing the shortcomings of previous research on automation during the design process. It also addresses novel computational issues relating to the implementation of generative design systems, where, for example, instead of engaging static and formal description of the domain concepts, G-BIM actively enhances the applicability of BIM during the early design stages to generate optimised (and more purposeful) design solutions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | ai; conceptual design; generative design; genetic algorithm; space syntax |
| Index terms: | integrity, workspace, building information modelling, workshop, modelling, implementation, automation, early design stage, fragmentation, change management, prototype, space syntax, design process, genetic algorithm, focus group, conceptual design, generative design, integration, methodology, construction project, collaboration, cognition |
| Subjects: | design process, urban design, production management, automation and robotics, health safety and environment, algorithms, research methods, management, design practice, information systems, cognitive psychology, organizational analysis, design methods, business, data collection methods, construction type, analytical methods, contractual arrangements, modelling and simulation |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here