Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorPatrick A. Purcell.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAriss, Fadi J. (Fadi Joseph)en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Architecture.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-05T13:52:17Z
dc.date.available2012-06-05T13:52:17Z
dc.date.copyright1986en_US
dc.date.issued1987en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/71068
dc.descriptionThesis (M.S.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Architecture, 1987.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 91-93).en_US
dc.description.abstractWhile the usefulness of CADD in the production stages of the architectural design process is now widely acknowledged, its true benefits for earlier, schematic design phases remain unclear. Due to the very subjective nature of that process and the complexity of its overlap with other design stages, schematic design is a difficult task to model and emulate, therefore making the appraisal of CADD as a design aid a delicate problem. The last few years have witnessed a large increase of PC based CADD systems, most of which aspire to qualify as "true design tools"; however, outside of product release announcements and industry comparative checklists in the professional press, there is little work on the assessment of the role of CADD systems in preliminary design. This thesis is an attempt to develop a strategy for the evaluation of CADD systems as a tool for design in its early conceptual stages. A specific system is selected and assimilated to a level of proficiency. Its main characteristics are then discussed and compared to the similar characteristics of another "standard" generic system, which is the most currently used system. They are analyzed in terms of their relevancy as effective design aids, based on my own observations of the system; they are also tested through a short design exercise. The purpose of the study is to identify what constitutes valid parameters for the assessment of a system performance. Its main functions are prioritized and investigated as to whether they truly assist the user in his design process, with a particular emphasis on geometric modelling, visualization and system interface. A set of performance criteria is derived along with their desirable attributes, so as to develop a comprehensive approach towards CADD evaluation.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Fadi J. Ariss.en_US
dc.format.extent[1], 93 leavesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectArchitecture.en_US
dc.titleDeveloping criteria for PC-CADD evaluations : a case studyen_US
dc.title.alternativePersonal Computer Computer-Aided Design and Drafting Systems evaluations, developing criteria foren_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeM.S.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Architecture
dc.identifier.oclc18252601en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record