CAMBRIA: Interacting with Multiple CAD Alternatives
Computer-aided design (CAD) tools aim to assist designers in their professional work, one key aspect of which is devising, evaluating, and choosing among multiple design alternatives. Yet, with few and limited exceptions, current tools handle just a singl
- PDF / 3,275,249 Bytes
- 19 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 90 Downloads / 174 Views
, Halil Erhan
, and Robert Woodbury
School of Interactive Arts and Technology, Simon Fraser University, Surrey, Canada {skolaric,herhan,rw}@sfu.ca
Abstract. Computer-aided design (CAD) tools aim to assist designers in their professional work, one key aspect of which is devising, evaluating, and choosing among multiple design alternatives. Yet, with few and limited exceptions, current tools handle just a single design model at a time, forcing users to adopt various ad hoc tactics for handling multiple design alternatives. Despite considerable prior work, there are no general, effective strategies for supporting design alternatives. New tools are needed to develop such strategies: to learn how designers’ behavior changes with support for multiple alternatives. In this article, we describe CAMBRIA, a multi-state prototype tool we developed for working with multiple 2D parametric CAD models in parallel. We describe the outcomes of an analytical evaluation of CAMBRIA using the Cognitive Dimensions framework. Keywords: Computer-aided design design
CAD
Parametric CAD
Interaction
1 Introduction Many designers work with multiple, simultaneously-available design alternatives. We observe this behavior in different domains such as architectural, product, industrial and mechanical design, but also in drawing, painting, sculpting, and fine arts in general. Numerous empirical studies, likewise, report instances of designers developing, and then simultaneously working with multiple design solutions in parallel, in architectural design [1–4], engineering design [5, 6], graphic design [7, 8], and website design [9]. The need for alternatives-enabled work can be further confirmed by instances of expert opinion1, as well as explained by theoretical accounts based on first perceptual principles, such as those governing the human visual system [11] or human perception in general [12]. As an illustration of the use of alternatives in a professional setting (that is, in the wild), Fig. 1 shows nine alternative models of the Elephant House designed by the architectural firm Foster + Partners, and constructed from 2002–2008 at Copenhagen Zoo in Denmark. 1
For instance, N. Cross wrote that ‘consideration of alternative solution concepts might save time and effort in the long run’ [10].
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017 G. Çağdaş et al. (Eds.): CAAD Futures 2017, CCIS 724, pp. 81–99, 2017. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-5197-5_5
82
S. Kolarić et al.
Fig. 1. Example of multiple design alternatives used in the wild in architectural design: Elephant House (images by Brady Peters/Buro Happold/Foster + Partners [13]).
Traditional materials, such as wood, corrugated fiberboard, and acrylic, were used to build this collection of physical models or maquettes. The designer can walk around the table stocked with such models, view them, compare them, and evaluate them according to different criteria, including the overall aesthetic impression, the sense of proportion, and their suitability for the environmental context. Based on such co
Data Loading...
