Strategic Methodology for Formulating Affordance Structure Matrix (ASM) to Design Phase: A Case Study Approach

Full text

Strategic Methodology for Formulating
Affordance Structure Matrix (ASM) to
Design Phase: A Case Study Approach
Soma Bhattacharyaa, V. Paul C. Charlesrajb,
J. Uma Maheswariaand S. P. Sreenivas Padalaa
aIndian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India
bRICS School of Built Environment, New Delhi NCR 201313, India
18-20 May 2016
@ASU, Tempe AZ USA
2016

Agenda
✓Introduction
✓Motivation for the Study
✓Proposed Design Methodology
✓Case Study Application
✓Summary
2
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
Source: Maier et al. (2008)

Introduction
•Traditional Design Methodology
•Main Focus –Function
•Closed System –without considering User Actions (Affordance)
•May lead to counter-intuitive behavior
•Need for considering design as an open system involving the
environment
•Complex interactions among Users and Artifacts
•Interactions are inherently more powerful paradigm for computing than
algorithms
•In addition to algorithmic-based design approaches, user action-
based design may be considered for improved design efficiency
•Affordance-based Design
•Captures two-way interactions
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
3

Need for the Study
•Change Management in Construction
•Importance of capturing Client Requirements
•Design of facilities is experience-driven rather than process
orientation
•Error-prone
•Important aspects of design of facilities
•System and Subsystem Requirements
•Interactions among Subsystems and Users
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
4

…Need for the Study
•Requirements in the early stages
of the design vs. Interactions in
the later stages
•Lack of structured methodology to
capture these interactions, which
is an integral part of a complex
system design as in the case of
construction projects
•Need for a single platform or tool
which can simultaneously cater to
both requirements and system
interactions and thereby improve
design efficiency
•Impacts Project Performance
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
5

Affordance
• Affordance is “Perception of the environment leads to a course of action”
•Gibson (1977)
• Affordance can be defined as “the actionable relation between the environment
and an actor” (a person or animal or an object/artifact)
•Maier (1989)
• “Affordances are properties of the environment taken relative to an observer.”
•Wells (2002)
•In the perspective of design, Affordance can be defined based on how a function
is interacting with its surroundings.
• ‘’a design can’t be separated from certain attribute like semantic (by literal), semi-
rational, fuzzy-algorithmic, predicative, subjective, and unpredictable nature of
humanity, because everything is always designed for human use, usually
designed by humans themselves, and situated within an extended context of a
complex world’’
•Maier et al. (2011)
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
6

More Definitions…
•Artifact
•An object which is not naturally present but occurs as a result of the
preparative or investigative procedure is termed as an artifact in
general in design.
•In simpler term artifact is what we are interested in design or what is
the desire of the end user
•User
•The ecological surroundings where and artifact will be used or
operated consists of its users.
•The users could be the human who will be personally using the
product, the environment where it is situated, the surrounding objects
which might interact with it in the course of its operation are all
considered as the user for that particular artifact.
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
7

More Definitions…
•Artifact-Artifact Affordance (AAA)
•In a complex multi-artifact system the different artifacts need to remain
in Harmony and in Equilibrium to achieve a sustainable design
•All requirements which one artifact has to provide to each others are
defined as the artifact-artifact affordance
•Essence of affordance is reciprocity; AAA invokes the reciprocity or the
trade-off of deign which leads to an improved design
•More significant when there is a multi-designer interface
•Artifact User Affordance (AUA)
•Expectations or the integrated functionality the artifact provides to its
users in the entire lifecycle of the artifacts
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
8

In Essence
•A better-improved design is the one where there is an overall increase
in the affordance, which can be achieved by three ways.
•First ideate new and additional affordances.
•Second is to improve the value of the existing positive affordances without
minimizing other positive affordances.
•Third is to decrease the effect of negative affordance
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
9

Affordance Structure Matrix (ASM)
•Affordance Structure Matrix (ASM) proposed by Maier et al.,
(2007) embodies the concepts of affordance and inspired by
matrix tools - House of Quality (HOQ) and Design Structure
Matrix (DSM)
•ASM is a tool to represent interactions and compare
requirements information with the physical structure at the
conceptual stage
•Requirements information on design is termed as the
affordance of the systems
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
10

Generic Representation of Affordance
Structure Matrix
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
11
Artifacts
Artifact-User Affordance
(AUA)
Users
METRICS
Artifact-Artifact
Affordance
(AAA)
User-User
Affordance
(UUA)
METRICS

ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
12
1
1 2
2
Adapted from Maier et al., 2007
Proposed Design
Process Methodology

Application in
Case Project
Design of Solid Control Room/Shale Shaker Room in a Jack UP Rig Facility
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
13

Purpose of the Facility
•Solid control system to separate solids from drilling mud
•Drilling mud is used in drilling process on the seabed to
lubricate and cool the drill bit
•However, while drilling, solids generating from seabed cutting
obstructs the drilling process that has to be separated in shale
shaker machine and reuse the drilling mud
•This facility comprises of many sub-artifacts
•It is critical to capture the AAA & AUA for a better design
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
14

Development of ASM…
•Step 1: Desire
•Design phase begins with client’s or user’s “Desire “. In this case study, desire
is design of a SS room of a jack-up rig drilling platform
•Step 2: Functional Schema
•Proposed SS room to house six shale shaker machines (SS machines) which
are solid controls, with all its accessories with entry, exit and to enable the
machine to operate for a life of 25 years.
•While deciding the functional schema of SS room, more information has to be
coarse grain from the real world to check whether any artifacts available in
the market performing the same function.
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
15

…Development of ASM
•Step 3: Environmental reciprocation
•While designing the artifact, the designer has to check in what
environment this artifact is finally going to be built and used after that.
•Marine Environment; Users
•Check for Mutuality; Ecology; Imperfection
•Step 4: User Identification
•The ultimate aim of any design is how well the human can use artifact
functionally
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
16
Drilling Operator
Maintenance User
HVAC Maintenance user
Electrical maintenance user
International Maritime Authority
NORSOK

…Development of ASM
•Step 5: Artifact User Affordance
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
17
S. No
User
-Artifact Affordances
1
All SS machines are to be accessible from every side
2
Diverter house box to be accommodated
3
Access to be provided to the diverter house
4
Noise level outside less than 60 Db
5
Life 25 years
6
2 Door size 2.5x3 meter
7
Provide adequate ventilation
8
Provide adequate illumination
9
Trolley movement within room to be afforded
10
Dynamic loading due to trolley movement to be afforded
11
Passive fire protection to be afforded
12
Window to the shaker control room to be afforded
13
A monorail with two ton capacity to be accommodated
14
Two safe escape to be provided
15
A stretcher movement to be afforded
16
Firewater piping to be accommodated
S. No
User
-Artifact Affordances
17
One side of the room will have a ballast tank. Pressure for the
same to be afforded
18
Pipe supports to be able to be installed
19
Weight to be within prescribed limit
20
Escape shall be minimum 2.3 meter height as per norsok
s002
21
Solas
(safety of life at Sea) requirement met
22
PSA(Petroleum safety Authority)
23
NMA(national Maritime Authority) regulation to be met
24
Local law requirement to be
25
Economy/cost to be optimized
26
Corrosion in marine environment to be afforded
27
corrosion under insulation to be avoided
28
Clean design to be afforded
29
Easy cleaning to be afforded
30
Vibration generated in shale shaker room to be within limits
31
Welding to be afforded
32
Erection to be afforded

…Development of ASM
•Step 6: Analysis and refinement of Affordances
•Are all the affordances viable, affordable, and justifiable?
•Is it sufficient if the SS machines are accessible from three sides only?
•Step 7: Probabilistic refinement of Affordances.
•All the requirements expected in the lifetime of the artifacts? If not,
refine the affordances accordingly
•What is the probability of fire hazard? If the probability is very low, eliminate the
requirement of passive fire protection and keep only active fire protection
arrangement
•Step 8: Analyse schema viability against refined affordances
•Check whether the functional schema is still valid for all the affordances
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
18

…Development of ASM
•Step 9: Define the sub-artifacts
•based on the affordances and functional schema
•sub-artifacts which have direct interactions with users
and other sub-artifacts have to be generated
•Step 10: Establish artifacts’ functional horizon
•For each artifact, its functions and extent of functionality
are defined
•Step 11: Identify system Property
•the required affordances are converted to system
property for all the artifacts
•affordance is that all sub-artifacts are to be accommodated and
then dimension is the system property
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
19
S. No
Sub artifacts
1
Six Shale Shaker Machine
2
2 doors
3
Control room Window
4
Diverter box
5
Access platform to Diverter box
6
Trolley movement Space
7
Firewater Piping
8
Mud Piping
9
Fire extinguishers
10
HVAC ducts
11
Electrical Trays
12
Instrument cable trays
13
2
-ton capacity Monorail
14
Pipe/Tray/Duct Penetrations
15
Noise insulation panel
16
Lights
17
Bulkheads/Decks

…Development of ASM
•Step 12: Define system property upper and lower limit
•Step 13: Check System property input, output Sequence
•Size of the SS room would depend on the size of the SS machine
•Step 14: Refinement of Artifact-Artifact Affordance
•Step 15: Develop Roof of ASM (AAA interaction matrix)
•Step 16: Develop Main Body of ASM (AUA interaction matrix)
•Step 17: Numerically Simulate the AAA index
•Step 18: Numerically Simulate the AUA index
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
20

…Development of ASM
•Step 19: Analyse data and identify user/artifact relative
importance
•Identification of weaker links in AAA & AUA to improve the design
•Considerably increases the positive affordance
•Step 20: Calculate Total Affordance Index
•Total Affordance Index (Sum of AAA and AUA) is calculated to find out
which artifact or a group of artifacts will be the key governor and will
lead the design
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
21

…Development of ASM
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
22
Lights
Bulkhaeds/Decks
HVAC ducts
Electrical Trays
Instrument cable trays
2 ton capacity Monorial
Pipe/Tray/Duct Penetrations
Noise inculation panel
Diverter box
Access platform to Diverter box
Trolly movement Spcae
103
54
S
S
AAA
Six shale shaker Machine
Electrical item maintenance user
Firewater Piping
Mud Piping
Fire extinguishers
L
L
M
S
M
M
M
L
L
L
L
L
S
M
S
L
L
L
M
L
M
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
M
S
M
S
L
L
M
M
M
L
L
S
M
L
M
M
L
L
L
M
L
L
S
S
L
S
S
M
L
S
L
M
S
L
L
M
L
M
L
L
S
L
L
M
M
S
M
L
M
L
M
L
S
L
L
M
S
S
M
L
S
L
L
L
M
L
M
L
L
M
S
S
L
S
S
M
S
M
L
L
S
M
L
S
L
M
L
M
L
S
S
L
M
M
S
M
S
M
M
L
L
S
L
S
S
S
S
L
L
S
S
S
74
S
L
72
93
75
96
L
87
M
S
L
S
S
S
S
M
L
S
L
S
L
M
L
M
L
L
L
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
L
S
S
S
M
M
L
L
L
S
L
S
S
M
M
L
L
L
L
S
S
L
S
S
L
L
S
S
L
L
L
L
L
S
L
L
S
L
S
S
S
L
42
L
S
S
M
M
M
L
46
S
S
S
S
L
L
M
M
M
26
46
56
28
L
S
39
64
M
M
S
M
M
40
52
S
S
S
70
64
50
48
123
95
112
L
L
22
16
38
40
66
S
S
M
M
M
S
S
S
S
L
S
L
L
M
S
38
103
137
Numerical value of AAA
Numerical value of AUA
Scaled value of AUA
104
56
60
91
34
70
108
119
173
176
48
58
71
114
74
36
48
M
40
66
34
40
56
L
S
S
S
S
S
Numerical index of AAA & AUA
Norsok as an user
175
173
120
141
46
39
75
167
71
85
103
68
58
S
Shaker maintenance user
IMO as an user
L
S
L
L
L
S
L
L
Total
AUA
AUA
2 doors
Control room Window
HVAC item maintenance user
Owner
Fabricators
Drilling operator
86
68
117
60
71
100
150
22
AAA
Interaction
matrix
AUA
Interaction
matrix
Users
Artifacts
Relative importance of users
= 2227

AAA
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
23

AUA
•Noise inoculation panel
•Instrument cable trays
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
24

Summary
•Early capture of affordances and the concept of AAA, AUA and DAA
and DDA adds a process approach to the conventional design
•Designer Artifact Affordance (DAA) and Designer Designer Affordance (DDA)
may also be critical in some designs
•Impact of User User Affordance (UUA)?
•An ASM-based Design Process Methodology has been proposed for
improved design efficiency
•Needs Validation
•Positive opinion from design experts
•Probable extension of time would be a hindrance to start with
•Promise for information cataloging, leading to archived knowledge
for use in future projects
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
25

References…
•Wegner, P. (1997). Why Interaction is More Powerful than Algorithms, Communications of the ACM, 40 (5), 80-91.
•Project Management Institute. (2008). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 4th
edn, Newtown square, Pennsylvania
•Gibson, J. J. (1977).The Theory of Affordances, in: R. Shaw and J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing.
Toward an Ecological Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 67-82.
•Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception, Classic ed., Psychological Press, New York.
• Wells, A. J. (2002). Gibson’s affordances and Turing’s theory of computation, Ecological Psychology, 14(3), 141–180
•Maier, J.R.A. (2011). Affordance Based Design: Theoretical Foundations and Practical Applications, VDM Verlag Dr.
Muller GmbH & Co, Saarbrucken, Deutschland.
•Maier, J.R.A., Ezhilan, T. and Fadel, G.M. (2007). The Affordance Structure Matrix –A Concept Exploration And
Attention Directing Tool For Affordance Based Design, ASME 2007 International Design Engineering Technical
Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA , 4–7 September,
2007.
•Steward. D. V. (1981). The Design Structure System: A Method for Managing the Design of Complex Systems. IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management, 28 (3), 71-74.
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
26

…References
•Maier. J.R.A. and Fadel, G.M. (2007). Identifying Affordances, Proceedings of ICED 2007, the 16th International
Conference on Engineering Design, Paris, France, 28-31 July, 2007.
•Maier, J.R.A. and Fadel, G.M. (2006). Affordance Based Design: Status and Promise, Proceedings of IDRS 2006,
International Design Research Symposium, Seoul, South Korea, 10-11 November, 2006.
•Huang, J., Chen, Y., Zhang, Z., Xie, Y. (2014). A part affordance–based approach for detailed design process planning
in collaborative environment, Concurrent Engineering: Research & Applications, 22(4), 291-308.
•Maier, J. R. A., Fadel. G. M. (2009). An affordance-based approach to architectural theory, design, and practice. Design
Studies, 30(4), 393-414.
•Maier, J. R. A., Fadel, G. M. (2009). Affordance Based Design: A Relational Theory for Design, Research in Engineering
Design. 20(1): 13-27.
•Lim, J.S., Kim, Y.S. (2009). Affordance Feature Reasoning in Some Home Appliances Products, 19th CIRP Design
Conference: Competitive Design, Cranfield, United Kingdom, 30-31 March, 2009.
•Galvao, A.B. and Sato, K. (2005). Affordances in Product Architecture: Linking Technical Functions and User
Requirements. Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Long Beach, California, 24-28
September, 2005.
•Maier, J.R.A, Sandel, J. and Fadel, G.M. (2008). Extending the affordance structure matrix - Mapping design structure
and requirements to behaviour, Proceedings of the 10th International DSM Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 11-12
November, 2008.
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
27

Thank You for your Attention!
Questions & Suggestions…
Contact for further information
umapaul@civil.iitd.ac.in / vpcharlesraj@rics.org
ICSDEC 2016 @ ASU 18-20 May 2016
28