20161124 - Final Presentation - Luuk Moonen - brede versie

Improving the design process: Automated verification of client specific requirements using rule checking techniques

Improving the design process: Automated verification of client specific requirements using rule checking techniquesL.T. (Luuk) Moonen

Master thesis presentation24-11-2016

1

INTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

15.00017.000Source: http://www.unlimitedtuning.nl/chiptuning-ford-fiesta-7-1-6-tdci-econetic-95-pk.html2

2

14,2% of the total costs of a project are related to design errors (Lopez & Love, 2012)

INTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 3

3

Introduction of Integrated ContractsShift in responsibilityProving performanceIntegrally working together

Growing importance in Information management in design process

Changing the construction sectorINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 4

4

Design process in the Construction Sector


VERANDERING VAN VERANTWOORDELIJKHEID UIT LEGGEN EN WAT EEN KLANT NU VRAAGT, IK WIL EEN GEBOUW EN HET MOET PRETTIG ZIJN5


6

PerformancenounUK/pf.mnsperformancenoun(ACTIVITY)How well a person, machine, object etc. does a piece of work or an activity


7

Proving performance is checking your design (information)


8

Does a design comply with the clients needs & requirements?


HIERNA BIM9

BIM?Managing design information in a construction projectBuilding Information Model(Iing)

Source: BAM 2014INTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 10

10

Information streams in design process

Object data in 3d modelRequirements data in a database


11

Proving performance

Object data in 3d modelRequirements data in a database


12

Requirement verificationCurrent process

Manual processError proneTime consumingNot standardized

++


13

Requirement verificationINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Manual data checking

14

14

Automation of verification?


15

Research questionHow can verification of client specific requirements be automated and improve the design process?


16

Research GoalEvaluating the implications and possibilities of automated verification & Improving information streamlining in the design processINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 17

17

How?Identifying the implications of automated verification in the design process by building a requirement checker

Focus onVerification of Client specific requirements in the Design process


18

Why is a checker for client specific requirements not available yet?Difficulties in the design processDifficulties in available rule checking techniques

INTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Project 1Project 2Project 3Project 4Project 5AverageProject Year201620152015201420142014,8Total amount of Reqs.3982153335304742129845354,2Square meters13.0006.70032.00040.00080.00034.340Requirements per m20,3060,2290,1100,1190,1620,19Value Requirements9,8%10,4%11,6%12,5%6,2%10,1%Object Requirements22,0%19,9%41,8%37,8%14,5%27,2%Space Requirements55,7%31,4%23,6%64,1%58,3%46,6%Reqs. usable in BIM17,3%13,7%7,2%15,1%7,9%12,2%

19

Structure in requirements is missingInconsistent development in design process19

ContentsDesign processStructure in requirementsDevelopment in the design processRule checkingTool developmentConclusionRecommendation


20

Requirementsa requirement is a statement that defines a need with associated constraints and conditions(ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, 2015)INTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 21

21

Client specific requirementsINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

22

22

Structure in requirementStructuring in applicabilityNeed requirement performanceStructuring in built-upProperty existenceProperty valueCardinality / amountRelationINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 23

23

Development in the design processINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

24

24

Variables in the design processINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

25

25

Improving the understanding of requirementsINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

26

26

Found structure in the design processINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

Structure in requirementsStructure in needStructure in build-upStructure in applicability to elementsStructure in building model elements

27

Op deze manier kunnen we de data structureren27

What is Rule CheckingModelRulesetIssue ReportAssessing designs on the basis of the configuration of the objects, their relations or attributes

All walls must at least be 2,5m highWalls > 2500mmShow walls < 2500mmINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

28

28

ModelData consistencyRulesAmbiguityExecutionHard coded executionHigh expertise in programming, data structure and the construction domainUpdateability

DifficultiesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

29

29

Flexible in useEasy to expandUnderstandable for the construction expertTime saving and error reducing in comparison to the current verification process

Requirements checker goalsINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

30

30

Architecture of the checker

RequirementsBIM dataObject type LibraryObjectsSpacesPropertiesInference rulesConstraint Templates


31

31

Enabling the checker: BIM dataBIM data represented as IFC file


Source: W3C, 2007Source: BuildingSMART, 2013conversionSemantic web standard RDF(Resource Description Framework)

IFC FileIndustry Foundation Classes32

32

Enabling the checker: Object type libaryINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Space classesObject classesProperties

BAM:INTERNALWALL33

33

Object type libary: SpacesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Standardization of spaces

34

34

Object type libary: ObjectsINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Naming all objects in a building in an understandable way

35

35

Object type libary: PropertiesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Enabling the use of properties of elements in a building

PropertyExplanationSourceSpace ContainmentAn element is contained in a spaceIFC:IfcRelContainedInSpatialStructureAcoustic RatingAn element has an acoustic ratingIFC: Pset_AcousticRatingClassification CodeAn element has a Classification codeIfcClassificationCombustibilityAn element must have the property combustible set to true or falseIFC: Pset_Combustable Gross areaA space has a gross area of XIFC: Pset_Space GrossAreaPlannedPlacement in an elementAn element is placed in an elementIFC: IfcRelVoidsElement & IfcRelFillsElementSizeAn element has a certain sizeIFC: Pset_SizeHeightAn element has a certain heightIFC: Pset_HeightProduct containmentAn element exists in a spaceIFC:IfcRelContainedInSpatialStructureFire ratingAn element has a fire ratingIFC: Pset_FireRatingMaterialAn element has a certain materialIFC: Pset_MaterialCostsAn element has a certain costExternal Referencing

36

36

CONSTRUCT { ?s a bam:InternalWall . }WHERE {?s a/rdfs:subClassOf* ifcowl:IfcWall .?s pset:isExternal false .}Enabling the checker: Inference rulesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

Creating a connection between data and understable human language concepts

Defining the concept & Defining the concept Office Space Internal wall

CONSTRUCT { ?s a bam:OfficeSpace . }WHERE { ?s a ifcowl:IfcSpace . ?s ifcowl: longName_ IfcSpatialStructureElement ?y. ?y a ifcowl:IfcLabel . ?y express:hasString OfficeSpace . }

37

37

Enabling the checker: Constraint templatesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION Defining the constraint templatesDefined with the use of the applicabilityExistence templatesSpace templatesSpace relation Templates

StructureType ExistenceProperty ExistenceProperty ValueCardinality/amountRelation/containment

38

38

Enabling the checker: Constraint templatesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

VALUE PROPERTYType existenceProperty existenceProperty valueCardinalityBasic templates

39

39


VALUE OBJECT SPACE RELATIONSpace type amountSpace type valueSpace space relationSpace object containmentBasic Space templates

40

40


VALUE VALUE

OBJECT PROPERTY VALUESpace object propertySpace object amountSpace object valueSpaces wall relation: valueSpace relation templates

41

41


VALUESpaces wall relation: valueConstraint template: Spaces - wall relation; valueStatementExampleCONSTRUCT { _:b0 a spin:ConstraintViolation . _:b0 spin:violationRoot ?s . _:b0 spin:violationLevel spin:Warning .}WHERE { ?s a ?objectClass . ?s qrw:isBoundaryOf ?o . ?o a ?spaceClass(X) . ?s qrw:isBoundaryOf ?o2 . ?o2 a ?spaceClass(Y) . FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?s ?p ?o3 . FILTER (?o3 operator ?a) . } .}CONSTRUCT { _:b0 a spin:ConstraintViolation . _:b0 spin:violationRoot ?s . _:b0 spin:violationLevel spin:Warning .}WHERE { ?s a bam:internalWall . ?s qrw:isBoundaryOf ?o . ?o a bam:OfficeSpace . ?s qrw:isBoundaryOf ?o2 . ?o2 a bam:HorizontalMovementSpace . FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?s pset:acousticRating ?o3 . FILTER (?o3 > 55) . } .}

Office spaces shouldnt have problems with noise nuisance from adjacent hallwaysAll walls between a office space and a horizontal movement space should have an acoustic rating of at least XTemplate: Spaces wall relation; Value

42

42

Using the checkerINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

43

43

Using the checkerINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

Created elements in Object Type LibraryFound structure in requirements

Check requirements Intuitively

44

44

Using the constraint templatesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

45

45


46

46


47

47


48

48


49

49


50

50

Executing the checker: Use case validationINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

51

51


52

52


[ a spin:ConstraintViolation ; spin:violationLevel spin:Warning ; spin:violationRoot ] . 53

53

DiscussionINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

BenefitsFlexible in useEasy to expandUnderstandable for the laymenTime saving in comparison to the current verification process

Semantic web standard is very useful to built a knowledge system54

54

DiscussionINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

LimitationsData qualityRequirements definitionApplication development and usage55

55

ConclusionINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

Design processImprovement required in iteration steps from need towards a performanceIncrease standardization of space and object classificationLack in standardization of defining requirement Decrease variation in level of detail in requirements

56

56

Conclusion

Requirement CheckerChecking can only be done when design process improvements are realizedChecking of requirements relies heavily on defining performance


57

Conclusion

Research question;

How can verification of client specific requirements be automated and improve the design process?

standardization in defining requirements following the steps in iteration from need to performanceUsing object type libaries, semantic data and modular constraint templatesINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION 58

58

Recommendation

Research improvementsApplication completenessSystem requirementsAdvanced use case validationHigh level requirements checking


59

RecommendationINTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

Standardization in space functionality (nation-wide)Process improvementsUsage of object type libaries and semantic web standard in the design processImprovement of the applicationMultiple useUsage during designUsing the checker as design tool

60

60

Questions?INTRODUCTION DESIGN PROCESS RULE CHECKING TOOL DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION

61

61

1.3 Internal Spaces

1.3.1 Movement Space

1.3.2 Technical Space

1.3.3 Sanitary Space

1.3.4 Function Space

1.3.5 User Space

1.2.1 Department

1.2.2 Buidling Level

1.2.3 Building Compartment

1.2 Building Segment

1.1 Building Area

1.1.1 Function Area

1. Building Type

1.1.2 User Area

1.2.4 Building Wing

1.3.6 Undefined Space

Possible mapping

1.3.1.1 Vertical Movement Space

1.3.2.1 Basic Technical Space

1.3.3.1 Toilet Space

1.3.4.1 Industrial Space

1.3.5.1 Living Space

1.3.1.X

1.3.6.1 Elevator Shaft Space

1.3.2.X

1.3.3.X

1.3.4.X

1.3.5.X

1.3.6.X

Possible mapping

Documents

20161124 - Final Presentation - Luuk Moonen - brede versie