Al-Rqaibat, Sana'A Mohammad (2019) A framework for the implementation of digital technologies in the concept stage of the architectural design process. PhD thesis, Virginia Tech, USA.
Abstract
The use of digital tools such as Sketchup, Rhino, AutoCAD and others is now commonplace in the architectural design process. These tools have advantages for time management and support the iterative nature of design, while also providing an efficient connection to later stages of design development and construction documentation. However, it could be argued that the use of digital tools during the ideation and concept phases of designing limits the cognitive connection between thought and the hand that is present in freehand sketching. If we accept that this cognitive connection is foundational to the design process, then new digital sketching tools are needed that have features similar to freehand sketching while processing sketches to 2D and 3D representations that are translatable to 3D printing, digital fabrication, and eventually Building Information Modeling. What this new tool might be is currently unclear. The purpose of this research is to identify the characteristics of a next generation of sketching tools that could support ideation activities in the concept stage of architectural design. The results will help to design a roadmap for the implementation of digital technologies in the architectural design process. This research will contribute to a shift in the implementation of digital tools in the architectural design process. This research relied on multiple data sources. First, a logical argument tactic was used to develop the research design model through a comprehensive review of the scholarly work that addresses the design process in the concept stage and the role of sketching and digital tools throughout these processes. Second, case study observation and interviews were used to explore how architects and architectural students at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) use sketching, 3D modeling, and existing digital tools to represent, develop, iterate, and communicate their design ideas in the concept stage and how the tools they used affect their design process. Third, two immersive case studies were conducted to identify and develop the characteristics of a digital sketching tool. The last step was to determine consensus for the appropriateness of the To-Be model through Delphi tactics.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Jones, James R; Harrison, Steven R; Galloway, William U and Webster, Dane |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural design process; digital tools; concept stage; sketching |
| Index terms: | interview, design process, 3D printing, documentation, digital fabrication, digital technology, architectural design, time management, polytechnic, building information modelling, case study, research design, architect, implementation, 3D modelling, design development |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, profession, research design and methodology, computing systems, design methods, project controls, educational institutions, information systems, design practice, professional development, contractual arrangements, computational design, manufacturing, design process |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Digital Applications, Time Control, Research Practice, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Education, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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