Software options for support of three-dimensional CAD in the architectural design process : a critical evaluation by practitioners and educators /
The purpose of this study was to investigate the integration
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis Book |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[Place of publication not identified] :
[publisher not identified] ;
1994.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://proxy.library.tamu.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=741945391&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId=2945&RQT=309&VName=PQD |
| Summary: | The purpose of this study was to investigate the integration of three dimensional (3D) CAD techniques in the architectural design process. For this purpose, the study examined the CAD-using practitioners and educators' perceived importance levels of the generally-recognized 3D graphics features and work-support options in the different design phases. The study also attempted to examine whether different perceptions existed between practice and education with respect to the importance levels. The 3D features included in the research were wireframe, surface shading, solid modeling, 3D sketch, shadow, motion, color support, and photoreatism. The work- support options were engineering support, file transfer, and networking. The levels were determined with a five-level importance scale rating ranging from 0 (NOT important) to 4 (VERY important) throughout four architectural design phases, including 1) the predesign, 2) schematic design, 3) design development, and 4) construction document phase as specified by AIA. In May, September, and December 1993, survey questionnaires were mailed out to architectural practitioners and educators. The sample size for practice was 950 CAD-using practitioners employed in large and small architectural firms in four geographically disparate regions of California, Illinois, New York, and Texas. The sample for education was 195 academic members in the Association for Computer-Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA). The data analysis showed no regional difference in the mean scores. And there were no different perceptions between practitioners in large and small firms with respects to the importance levels throughout the design phases. However, some significant statistical differences were found between practitioners and educators. Generally, educators' importance levels were higher than those of practitioners. The 3D features of wireframe, solid modeling, and 3D sketch were most important in the schematic design phase, while shading, shadow, motion, color support, and photorealism were most important in the design development phase. The work- support option of file transfer was most important in the design development phase. On the other hand, engineering support and networking were most important in the construction document phase. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Vita. "Major Subject: Architecture". |
| Physical Description: | xiv, 170 leaves : illustrations ; 28 cm. Issued also on microfiche from University Microfilms Inc. |
| Bibliography: | Includes bibliographical references. |