Multidisciplinary Design Optimization through process integration in the AEC industry: Strategies and challenges

被引:32
|
作者
Diaz, Hector [1 ]
Alarcon, Luis F. [1 ]
Mourgues, Claudio [1 ]
Garcia, Salvador [2 ]
机构
[1] Pontificia Univ Catolica Chile, Sch Civil Engn, Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile
[2] Inst Tecnol & Estudios Super Monterrey, Sch Civil Engn, Campus Monterrey,Eugenio Garza Sada 2501 Sur, Monterrey, Mexico
关键词
Building Information Modeling; Process Integration and Design Optimization; Multidisciplinary Design Optimization; Parametric Modeling; Component Interoperability; Architecture-Engineering-Construction; MDO requisites; ZERO-ENERGY BUILDINGS; GENETIC ALGORITHMS; ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN; PERFORMANCE; SYSTEMS; SIMULATION; FRAMEWORK; ENVIRONMENTS; EXPLORATION; FEEDBACK;
D O I
10.1016/j.autcon.2016.09.007
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Recently Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO) has emerged in the Architecture-Engineering-Construction (AEC) industry to assist designers in making the design process more efficient, by achieving more design alternatives in less time. Currently, MDO is developed with software tools that work together and automatically. However, the technical requisites to develop MDO using Process Integration and Design Optimization (PIDO) platforms are not clearly specified in the design optimization literature. There are many difficulties not covered by the literature: especially the tools' behavior, and the strategies to deal with PIDO. To determine the technical requirements, the tools' behavior, the challenges of interoperability and viable strategies, we reviewed the literature and tested five tools. This paper presents the main behavior of the tools we studied, and explains the challenges and strategies to develop MDO through PIDO. We observed three technical tool requisites: component interoperability, tool automation, and model parameterization capabilities. We detected low openness levels of the tool interfaces that did not always enable a full integration with PIDO or permit access to model properties. The scarcity of commands and the presence of pop-up menus impeded performing analyses automatically. Moreover, most of the tools did not allow parametric associations among components, compatibility among themselves or the addition of custom components. The strategies proposed focused on testing the tool interfaces, to validate that each computational process runs automatically, and to confirm that parametric relationships and components are possible: The tools tested were not specifically designed to include full capability to work with PIDO, therefore, enhancements would be needed to meet the three requisites: component interoperability, automation and parameterization. Technological, documentation and programming challenges also emerged when working with tools. We demonstrated that only certain tools can be used with a PIDO platform. However, there may be still other requisites for MDO using different methods that can become the focus of future work. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:102 / 119
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] MULTIDISCIPLINARY PROCESS INTEGRATION AND DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF A CLASSROOM BUILDING
    Flager, Forest
    Welle, Benjamin
    Bansal, Prasun
    Soremekun, Grant
    Haymaker, John
    JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN CONSTRUCTION, 2009, 14 : 595 - 612
  • [2] The use of reinforced learning to support multidisciplinary design in the AEC industry: Assessing the utilization of Markov Decision Process
    BuHamdan, Samer
    Alwisy, Aladdin
    Danel, Thomas
    Bouferguene, Ahmed
    Lafhaj, Zoubeir
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL COMPUTING, 2022, 20 (02) : 216 - 237
  • [3] The interfaces between technologies and the design process in AEC industry
    Zardo, Paola
    Mussi, Andrea Quadrado
    da Silva, Juliano Lima
    ECAADE SIGRADI 2019: ARCHITECTURE IN THE AGE OF THE 4TH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, VOL 1, 2019, : 369 - 378
  • [4] Disaster-Resilient Design of Manufacturing Facilities Through Process Integration: Principal Strategies, Perspectives, and Research Challenges
    El-Halwagi, Mahmoud M.
    Sengupta, Debalina
    Pistikopoulos, Efstratios N.
    Sammons, Jeff
    Eljack, Fadwa
    Kazi, Monzure-Khoda
    FRONTIERS IN SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 1
  • [5] Challenges and opportunities in heterogenous integration during design and process co-optimization.
    Torres, J. Andres
    2024 IEEE 67TH INTERNATIONAL MIDWEST SYMPOSIUM ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS, MWSCAS 2024, 2024, : 865 - 866
  • [6] Semantic integration in distributed multidisciplinary design optimization environments
    Wang, YD
    Shen, WM
    Ghenniwa, H
    COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK IN DESIGN I, 2004, 3168 : 127 - 136
  • [7] Multidisciplinary collaborative optimization for parts design process
    Chen, Zhi-Gang
    Li, Meng-Qi
    Fu, Wei
    Zhou, Ting-Ming
    Liu, Zhi-Hui
    Zhongnan Daxue Xuebao (Ziran Kexue Ban)/Journal of Central South University (Science and Technology), 2012, 43 (03): : 947 - 952
  • [8] Editorial: Integration and optimization in the chemical process industry
    Florez-Orrego, Daniel
    Sharma, Shivom
    Navabi, Seyed
    FRONTIERS IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, 2022, 4
  • [9] Designing in complexity: Simulation, integration, and multidisciplinary design optimization for architecture
    Gerber, David Jason
    Lin, Shih-Hsin Eve
    SIMULATION-TRANSACTIONS OF THE SOCIETY FOR MODELING AND SIMULATION INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 90 (08): : 936 - 959
  • [10] Researchers extend the boundaries for integration and application of multidisciplinary design optimization
    Henson, Mike
    Hardin, Chris
    Cataldo, Giuseppe
    AEROSPACE AMERICA, 2022, 60 (11) : 11 - 11