Uncovering the specificities of CAD tools for industrial design with design theory – style models for generic singularity

Abstract According to some casual observers, computer-aided design (CAD) tools are very similar. These tools are used to design new artifacts in a digital environment; hence, they share typical software components, such as a computing engine and human–machine interface. However, CAD software is dedicated to specific professionals – such as engineers, three-dimensional (3D) artists, and industrial designers (IDs) – who claim that, despite their apparent similarities, CAD tools are so different that they are not substitutable. Moreover, CAD tools do not fully meet the needs of IDs. This paper aims at better characterizing CAD tools by taking into account their underlying design logic, which involves relying on recent advances in design theory. We show that engineering CAD tools are actually modeling tools that design a generic variety of products; 3D artist CAD tools not only design but immediately produce single digital artifacts; and ID CAD tools are neither a mix nor an hybridization of engineering CAD and 3D artist CAD tools but have their own logic, namely to create new conceptual models for a large variety of products, that is, the creation of a unique original style that leads to a generic singularity. Such tools are useful for many creative designers beyond IDs.

[1]  Lee Markosian,et al.  Art-based rendering of fur, grass, and trees , 1999, SIGGRAPH.

[2]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  Teaching innovative design reasoning: How concept–knowledge theory can help overcome fixation effects , 2011, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[3]  Pascal Le Masson,et al.  Design theory: history, state of the art and advancements , 2013 .

[4]  Benoit Weil,et al.  Addressing Constraints Creatively: How New Design Software Helps Solve the Dilemma of Originality and Feasibility , 2015 .

[5]  Yoram Reich,et al.  A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH OF DESIGN THEORIES USING GENERATIVENESS AND ROBUSTNESS , 2011 .

[6]  Akin Osman Kazakci,et al.  Conceptive Artificial Intelligence: Insights from design theory , 2014, ArXiv.

[7]  Jami J. Shah,et al.  Derivation of a standard set of geometric constraints for parametric modeling and data exchange , 2001, Comput. Aided Des..

[8]  Marc Alexa,et al.  FiberMesh: designing freeform surfaces with 3D curves , 2007, ACM Trans. Graph..

[9]  Chris A McMahon,et al.  Development and application of an integrated approach for parametric associative CAD design in an industrial context , 2011 .

[10]  Charles T. Loop,et al.  Approximating subdivision surfaces with Gregory patches for hardware tessellation , 2009, ACM Trans. Graph..

[11]  Steve Caplin,et al.  Principles Of Design , 2011 .

[12]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  Towards an ontology of design: lessons from C–K design theory and Forcing , 2013 .

[13]  Shuming Gao,et al.  Multi-level assembly model for top-down design of mechanical products , 2012, Comput. Aided Des..

[14]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  Design theory at Bauhaus: teaching “splitting” knowledge , 2016 .

[15]  Nira Dyn,et al.  Four-point curve subdivision based on iterated chordal and centripetal parameterizations , 2009, Comput. Aided Geom. Des..

[16]  Dinghua Zhang,et al.  Virtual Clay Modeling System with 6-DOF Haptic Feedback , 2009 .

[17]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  ILoveSketch: as-natural-as-possible sketching system for creating 3d curve models , 2008, UIST '08.

[18]  S. H. Choi,et al.  A multi-material virtual prototyping system , 2005, Comput. Aided Des..

[19]  Gérard Morel,et al.  Traceability and management of dispersed product knowledge during design and manufacturing , 2011, Comput. Aided Des..

[20]  Bertrand Rose,et al.  Decisional Model for KBE Implementation in a Commercial CAD Software , 2012 .

[21]  N. Patrikalakis,et al.  Methods for feature-based design of heterogeneous solids , 2004 .

[22]  Benoit Weil,et al.  Design theories as languages of the unknown: insights from the German roots of systematic design (1840–1960) , 2013 .

[23]  Borut Golob,et al.  A feature-based approach towards an integrated product model including conceptual design information , 2000, Comput. Aided Des..

[24]  Michael Tovey,et al.  Styling and design: intuition and analysis in industrial design☆ , 1997 .

[25]  Theodore Lim,et al.  A fuzzy psycho-physiological approach to enable the understanding of an engineer's affect status during CAD activities , 2014, Comput. Aided Des..

[26]  Djemel Ziou,et al.  An unified approach for a simultaneous and cooperative estimation of defocus blur and spatial shifts , 2004, Image Vis. Comput..

[27]  Yoram Reich,et al.  Topological structures for modeling engineering design processes , 2003 .

[28]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  C-K design theory: an advanced formulation , 2008 .

[29]  Yong Zeng,et al.  A science-based approach to product design theory Part I: formulation and formalization of design process , 1999 .

[30]  Yong Zeng,et al.  A physiological study of relationship between designer's mental effort and mental stress during conceptual design , 2014, Comput. Aided Des..

[31]  Jami J. Shah,et al.  Assembly modeling as an extension of feature-based design , 1993 .

[32]  Sylvain Lefebvre,et al.  Procedural texture preview , 2012, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[33]  Ellen Yi-Luen Do,et al.  Ambiguous intentions: a paper-like interface for creative design , 1996, UIST '96.

[34]  David W. Rosen,et al.  Special issue: Advances in representation and reasoning for mechanical CAD , 1993 .

[35]  G. Dodds,et al.  Virtual DesignWorks--designing 3D CAD models via haptic interaction , 2004, Comput. Aided Des..

[36]  David W. Rosen,et al.  Feature-based design: Four hypotheses for future CAD systems , 1993 .

[37]  Satoshi Matsuoka,et al.  Teddy: A Sketching Interface for 3D Freeform Design , 1999, SIGGRAPH Courses.

[38]  Yong Zeng,et al.  A science-based approach to product design theory Part II: formulation of design requirements and products , 1999 .

[39]  Charlie C. L. Wang,et al.  Shape optimization for human-centric products with standardized components , 2014, Comput. Aided Des..

[40]  Jim Clark,et al.  Use of 3D Non-Contact Digitisation and 3D Touch Modelling Systems within Automotive Seating Design , 2001 .

[41]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Cognitive, collaborative, conceptual and creative - Four characteristics of the next generation of knowledge-based CAD systems: A study in biologically inspired design , 2012, Comput. Aided Des..

[42]  Patrick Osborne,et al.  Computer-assisted animation of line and paint in Disney's Paperman , 2012, SIGGRAPH '12.

[43]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  Incorporating user shape preference in engineering design optimisation , 2011 .

[44]  Charles T. Loop,et al.  Approximating Catmull-Clark subdivision surfaces with bicubic patches , 2008, TOGS.

[45]  Imre Horváth,et al.  Fundamentals of next generation CAD/E systems , 2012, Comput. Aided Des..

[46]  Joseph J. LaViola,et al.  CavePainting: a fully immersive 3D artistic medium and interactive experience , 2001, I3D '01.

[47]  Tomás Dorta,et al.  The ideation gap:: hybrid tools, design flow and practice , 2008 .

[48]  Dmitry Sokolov,et al.  Approximate convex hull of affine iterated function system attractors , 2012 .

[49]  Jie Zhang,et al.  Product modeling framework based on interaction feature pair , 2013, Comput. Aided Des..

[50]  Hyungki Kim,et al.  Feature-based 3D CAD Modeling on Smart Device Using Multi-touch Gesture , 2013 .

[51]  Akin Kazakçi,et al.  Lack of integration between engineering industrial design processes: an analysis based on the historical evolution of professions and tools , 2013 .

[52]  Michael Tovey.  Concept design CAD for the automotive industry , 2002 .

[53]  Levent Burak Kara,et al.  Conceptual design and modification of freeform surfaces using dual shape representations in augmented reality environments , 2012, Comput. Aided Des..