The Design Process

It is important to understand the different stages of design to appreciate the potential problems. The traditional process uses a variety of software tools including Schematic (i.e. basic layout only), 2D (plans and elevations), 3D (representation of plans and elevations in 3 dimensions) or BIM (3D models defining volumetric, material and ‘smart’ component detail).

Although there are different definitions, it is common to describe the design process as a progression through 5 stages (or if BIM tools are used, 1 Model with 5 coordination reviews).

These stages can be summarised as follows:

    1. Spatial Design

Early or concept design – intended really as an overview of the project where design/cost alternatives can be considered.

    2. Preliminary Construction Design

A model that defines basic quantities, areas and volumes.

    3. Construction Design

The next stage – products to be used are defined in generic form – e.g. Steel Partition.

    4. Product Design

Progression of information continues. At this stage specific products are defined – e.g. Paroc Steel Wall.

    5. Maintenance Design

Also referred to as the ‘As-Built’ design, representing how the project was actually built.

The Design Process – Why it can (and does) go wrong

To complete the design process the skills of many professionals are needed, including:

The list can appear endless. Each will create their own designs and critically, each design will impact on the others.

Designs have to be transferred between the multiple disciplines. The inevitable result is that some data is lost or misinterpreted. At each phase of the design, data has to be re-entered, creating further possibilities for information loss. The designs also have to be co-ordinated to ensure that trades do not overlap with their products or services.

And of course design teams use different software tools to create their designs and those can be any combination of schematic, 2D, 3D and BIM. The final ‘nail in the coffin’ is that many of these tools do not communicate with each other, necessitating manual interpretation and thereby creating a whole new source of potential errors.

It should also not be forgotten that the designs are used as the basis for the Cost, Planning and Facilities Management teams to perform their services.

The permutations of trades, types of design and software tools in even the most basic projects are extensive and consequently the prospect for errors is vast.

At each of the key stages we are ‘re-inventing the wheel’ and losing much of what we have learned.

What does it cost?

It is perhaps not surprising that actual data on the potential cost implications is not readily available. Every project and design team is different so there is no simple calculation.

What is certain is that even the most experienced professionals can get it wrong and wrong can be very costly.

Can the situation be improved?

The good news is that there are processes and technologies that are primarily designed to tackle the problem. However, these processes and technologies necessitate a re-thinking of the way we work when using traditional methods. Article 2 of this issue, ‘Integrated Project Delivery’, looks at a solution.