Organization Scope . Actors includes - - Integrated ...

Integrated Product, Organization and Process

design

John Kunz

The big idea: Integrated Product, Organization and Process design can support, at least design, fabrication and assembly

Rate

Baseline

($K) Change

Year-1

(K$)

Revenue 100,000 2% 102,000

Cost of contracted work 85% 85,000 -2.0% 84,660

Cost of self-performed work 10% 10,000 2.0% 12,240

Gross Margin 5,000 5,100

Sales, G&A 2% 2,000 2,040

IT investment 70

Amortized costs of IT/yr 33% 23

Net income 3,000 3,037

Time to payback (years) 1.9

Net Income change (%) 1.2

*05-07-01

Finish

Final Program

Confirmation with

Pharmacology

Final Program

confirmation with LAR

KPFF

SRG Lab Task 37 Task 44 Project Mgt AEI Core Task 41 Task26 H Block Crew Task 23SRG / AEI

TechnicalAEI Core and

SRG LabHDCCO Costing

SRG

TechnicalKPFF

AEI Core

and TechHDCCO Core

Code Rev

ConsultantSolvent Tarter

H Block Crew

& Tech

SRG

Landscape

Tele Data

DesignCode Rev

Furniture

37.

*Reprogram

B#15 Shafts

34. *Finalize

Pharmacology

Program

33. *Finalize

LAR Program

32. *Finalize

Bio-Organic

Chemistry

Program

35. *Finalize

Protein Chemistry

Program 20. *Determine Scope of

package D including vivarium

changes

45. *Complete all

Basement/LAR Drawings

41. *Reprogram

bookends B#13 and

B#15

36. *Analyze

structural impacts

12. *Complete UG

utiliites

25. *Do Central Plant

design changes

19. *Determine vertical

utilities

22. *Complete catwalk drawings

52. Finalize landscape

26. *Finalize B#13 and

B#15

Exiting/architecural H

occupancy concept

*Lab and

vivarium

Programming

Complete

27. *Finalize B#13,

15 Shaft Size &

MEP Room

Locations

31.* AEI &

SRG

Determine

Design $/Time

Impact of

Change

23. *Reprogram

B#13 and B#15

Exterior Architecture

Bookend

Programming

Accepted by Genentech

Notice to proceed on

structural changes

Architect

program/MEP

oncepts

Established

By Design

Team

29. *Document

lab plan

1. *Redesign main MEP

distribution systems

SRG Management AEI Management

Genentech PM

SRG Lab Plan

Ken Mouchka

Task 27Task 38

Organization

5. *Finalize lab & Equipment

plans

Task 29

Task 28

30. *Approve

Change to

Design

Contract

21. *Prepare Plan Views for

Review of Concept w/City

39. *Finalize MEP

distribution and

section

Task4 Task22

Review 80%

documents

48. *Develop exiting

plan

49. Develop

reflected ceiling

plan

Turnover

reflected

ceiling plan to

AEI

Detailed Design 80 PC

Complete

3. Complete Tele Data Design

42. *Develop

Execution

Strategy

44. *Complete

B#14 Officing

Planning

18. *Detailed Lab

Program

Documentation

47. *Develop lab

DD plan

28. *Determine

segregation of lab

and tech space

G accept lab

equipment matrix

*Package B structural

modifications (CCD3A)

13. *Code Consultants

Review Concept for final

city Presentation

14. *HDCCO update Estimate of cost

of Program

Review skin changes w/db team

Lab Planning Program

Meetings with

Pharmacology

Lab planning Program Meeting with Protein

Chemistry

BMS Controls Meetings

(Weekly)

Lab Planning Program meeting with Bio

Organic 80% Drawing Review

Tele Data Coordination MeetingsSteel Detailing

Meetings

Genentech 80% Detailed Design

Review

Final Program

Confirmation with Officing

Weekly

Coordination

Meeting


Meetings with Directors

50. Designate size, location of

13 MEP, teledata rooms

54. KPFF design

stairs for 13/1438. *SRG

Reprogram 13/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

43. *Changes in Steel

Forwarded to Steel

Detailers

46. *RA Furnture

Concept Complete

MEP, Teledata room design

*Design Budget &

Schedule for Changes

Approved

*Notice to proceed

with detailed design

24. *Complete B13,4 H

block occupancy

requirements on MEP

systems

17. *Risick

reprogram solvent

distribution and waste

Issue 80%

MEP CDs

(20) Incorporate

80% MEP review

comments

(19) Genentech review

80% drawings

53. Incorporate

comments, complete

Architectural detail

2. Initial redesign MEP branch

lateral distribution

G accept

13/14

Interface

*City Accept

exiting

*Package C

skin

modifications

55. KPFF design

stairs for 15/14

40. *SRG

Reprogram 15/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

B13 MEP HVAC,

conduit, piping mains

completed

MEP 80% Review

comments

incorporated

Package D and UG

addendum issued:

underground utilities,

vivarium catwalk

10. Draft Alternate means

15. Jeff reprogram HMIS

(3) *AEI design MEP

HVAC, Conduit &

piping mains B13

16. *HDCCO Determine

Schedule Impact

City Approval of

Alternate Means

for Program

8. Review Alternate

Means w/impact on LEL

and LFFH

(21-4) Finalize MEP Details,

update specs and p&ID's

(8) *Revise

MEP loads, MEP

Equipment

schedules

finalized

(13,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,

control sequences

Work Process

Meetings

(6) Coord B13 MEP

floor section

4. complete all Interior Architcture

*Cal OSHA Recommend

Determination of LFFH

51. Designate size, location

of 14 MEP, teledata rooms G accept

15/14

Interface

*Accept project

scope:budget

by Genentech

*City Approval of

H Concept

*Exterior

Programming


*Turnover lab and

vivarium DD plan

to AEI

Object AttributeRequirement

Relationship Requirement

Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope

Product Scope . Building Spaces includes -

Project Goals

Project Goal . Capacity (people) >= 60 - ?o

Project Goal . Cost (M$) = 70 - ?o

Building

Goal . Net Energy Use (K-

BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building

Goal . Quality conformance

(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope

Organization Scope . Actors includes - -

Organization Goals

Organization Goal . Predicted . Cost (K$) - <= - ?o

Organization

Goal . Observed . Response

Latency (days) 3 <= - ?o

Organization

Goal . Predicted . Peak

Backlog (days) 3 <= - ?o

Organization

Goal . Predicted . rework

(FTE-days) - <= - ?o

Process

Process Goals

Process Goal . Peak Quality Risk < 0.50 - -

Process

Goal . Schedule Growth

(months) < - ?o

Process Goal . Completion Date <= 1/1/09 - ?o

Process Task . Action: Object

Process Task . Design: Actor Actor that designs

Process Task . Predict: Actor Actor that predicts

Process Task . Assess: Actor Actor that assesses

Process Task . Build: Actor Actor that builds

Function Product Behavior

Organization

Qualitative Threshhold values

http://www.stanford.edu/group/CIFE/images/VDC2.mov

11 July 2011 Chalmers Integrated Design 2

This week overview

Day Take-home

Monday Introduction:

Theory: integrated multi-disciplinary models and

analyses and multi-disciplinary Integrated Concurrent

Engineering;

Practice: lab; ICE session

Tuesday Theory: methods we now use to design organizations

as we design bridges;

Practice: lab

Thursday Theory: methods of integrated POP design and

analysis

Practice: initial presentations Object AttributeRequirement


Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope


Project Goals



Building


BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building


(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope


Organization Goals


Organization



Organization



Organization



Process

Process Goals


Process


(months) < - ?o








Organization



The next two weeks we will …

• Do integrated design and analysis with VDC

and the ABC of your POP - FFB based on a

PBS, OBS and WBS using ICE, DEEPAND

and MACDADI …

http://www.stanford.edu/~kunz/AVIs/VDC2.mov


Monday Learning goals

• Get basic familiarity with the POP project framework of

VDC

• Product – Organization – Process (POP)

• Function – Form – Behavior (FFB)

• Understand class organization, opportunities, methods

and expectations

• Motivate interest in Integrated Design enabled by

VDC:

• Opportunities in practice

• Fun, power and job opportunities of models, model-

based analyses


Chalmers Integrated Design Agenda: July 11

• Big ideas: Integrated design and analysis; VDC; ICE

• Introductions

• Models: how would you recognize one

• Business objectives

• Course objectives (and non-objectives)

• Course Organization

• ORID

*05-07-01

Finish

Final Program

Confirmation with

Pharmacology

Final Program


KPFF




SRG

TechnicalKPFF

AEI Core

and TechHDCCO Core

Code Rev


H Block Crew

& Tech

SRG

Landscape

Tele Data

DesignCode Rev

Furniture

37.

*Reprogram

B#15 Shafts

34. *Finalize

Pharmacology

Program

33. *Finalize

LAR Program

32. *Finalize

Bio-Organic

Chemistry

Program

35. *Finalize

Protein Chemistry



changes

45. *Complete all


41. *Reprogram

bookends B#13 and

B#15

36. *Analyze

structural impacts

12. *Complete UG

utiliites


design changes


utilities




B#15


occupancy concept

*Lab and

vivarium

Programming

Complete

27. *Finalize B#13,

15 Shaft Size &

MEP Room

Locations

31.* AEI &

SRG

Determine

Design $/Time

Impact of

Change

23. *Reprogram

B#13 and B#15


Bookend

Programming



structural changes

Architect

program/MEP

oncepts

Established

By Design

Team

29. *Document

lab plan




Genentech PM

SRG Lab Plan

Ken Mouchka

Task 27Task 38

Organization


plans

Task 29

Task 28

30. *Approve

Change to

Design

Contract



39. *Finalize MEP

distribution and

section

Task4 Task22

Review 80%

documents


plan

49. Develop

reflected ceiling

plan

Turnover

reflected

ceiling plan to

AEI


Complete


42. *Develop

Execution

Strategy

44. *Complete

B#14 Officing

Planning

18. *Detailed Lab

Program

Documentation

47. *Develop lab

DD plan

28. *Determine

segregation of lab

and tech space

G accept lab

equipment matrix





city Presentation


of Program



Meetings with

Pharmacology


Chemistry


(Weekly)




Meetings


Review

Final Program


Weekly

Coordination

Meeting





54. KPFF design


Reprogram 13/14

interface, exiting,

stairs


Forwarded to Steel

Detailers

46. *RA Furnture

Concept Complete


*Design Budget &


Approved

*Notice to proceed



block occupancy

requirements on MEP

systems

17. *Risick

reprogram solvent


Issue 80%

MEP CDs

(20) Incorporate

80% MEP review

comments


80% drawings

53. Incorporate

comments, complete




G accept

13/14

Interface

*City Accept

exiting

*Package C

skin

modifications

55. KPFF design

stairs for 15/14

40. *SRG

Reprogram 15/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

B13 MEP HVAC,


completed

MEP 80% Review

comments

incorporated

Package D and UG

addendum issued:


vivarium catwalk



(3) *AEI design MEP

HVAC, Conduit &

piping mains B13


Schedule Impact

City Approval of

Alternate Means

for Program

8. Review Alternate


and LFFH



(8) *Revise

MEP loads, MEP

Equipment

schedules

finalized


control sequences

Work Process

Meetings

(6) Coord B13 MEP

floor section


*Cal OSHA Recommend




15/14

Interface

*Accept project

scope:budget

by Genentech

*City Approval of

H Concept

*Exterior

Programming


*Turnover lab and

vivarium DD plan

to AEI



Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope


Project Goals



Building


BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building


(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope


Organization Goals


Organization



Organization



Organization



Process

Process Goals


Process


(months) < - ?o








Organization



Traditional product models

+: Work in practice

: Ambiguities to

stakeholders

: computer analysis ...?

– Show value to owner

– List components

– Estimate cost

– Plan construction

– Identify interferences


Models

• Physical

• Statistical

• Mathematical

Symbolic

Graphic

*05-07-01

Finish

Final Program

Confirmation with

Pharmacology

Final Program


KPFF




SRG

TechnicalKPFF

AEI Core

and TechHDCCO Core

Code Rev


H Block Crew

& Tech

SRG

Landscape

Tele Data

DesignCode Rev

Furniture

37.

*Reprogram

B#15 Shafts

34. *Finalize

Pharmacology

Program

33. *Finalize

LAR Program

32. *Finalize

Bio-Organic

Chemistry

Program

35. *Finalize

Protein Chemistry



changes

45. *Complete all


41. *Reprogram

bookends B#13 and

B#15

36. *Analyze

structural impacts

12. *Complete UG

utiliites


design changes


utilities




B#15


occupancy concept

*Lab and

vivarium

Programming

Complete

27. *Finalize B#13,

15 Shaft Size &

MEP Room

Locations

31.* AEI &

SRG

Determine

Design $/Time

Impact of

Change

23. *Reprogram

B#13 and B#15


Bookend

Programming



structural changes

Architect

program/MEP

oncepts

Established

By Design

Team

29. *Document

lab plan




Genentech PM

SRG Lab Plan

Ken Mouchka

Task 27Task 38

Organization


plans

Task 29

Task 28

30. *Approve

Change to

Design

Contract



39. *Finalize MEP

distribution and

section

Task4 Task22

Review 80%

documents


plan

49. Develop

reflected ceiling

plan

Turnover

reflected

ceiling plan to

AEI


Complete


42. *Develop

Execution

Strategy

44. *Complete

B#14 Officing

Planning

18. *Detailed Lab

Program

Documentation

47. *Develop lab

DD plan

28. *Determine

segregation of lab

and tech space

G accept lab

equipment matrix





city Presentation


of Program



Meetings with

Pharmacology


Chemistry


(Weekly)




Meetings


Review

Final Program


Weekly

Coordination

Meeting





54. KPFF design


Reprogram 13/14

interface, exiting,

stairs


Forwarded to Steel

Detailers

46. *RA Furnture

Concept Complete


*Design Budget &


Approved

*Notice to proceed



block occupancy

requirements on MEP

systems

17. *Risick

reprogram solvent


Issue 80%

MEP CDs

(20) Incorporate

80% MEP review

comments


80% drawings

53. Incorporate

comments, complete




G accept

13/14

Interface

*City Accept

exiting

*Package C

skin

modifications

55. KPFF design

stairs for 15/14

40. *SRG

Reprogram 15/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

B13 MEP HVAC,


completed

MEP 80% Review

comments

incorporated

Package D and UG

addendum issued:


vivarium catwalk



(3) *AEI design MEP

HVAC, Conduit &

piping mains B13


Schedule Impact

City Approval of

Alternate Means

for Program

8. Review Alternate


and LFFH



(8) *Revise

MEP loads, MEP

Equipment

schedules

finalized


control sequences

Work Process

Meetings

(6) Coord B13 MEP

floor section


*Cal OSHA Recommend




15/14

Interface

*Accept project

scope:budget

by Genentech

*City Approval of

H Concept

*Exterior

Programming


*Turnover lab and

vivarium DD plan

to AEI



Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope


Project Goals



Building


BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building


(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope


Organization Goals


Organization



Organization



Organization



Process

Process Goals


Process


(months) < - ?o








Organization


4 January 2011 CEE 111/211 8

Virtual Design and Construction: fundamental method of this integrated design and analysis class

• Use of integrated multi-disciplinary computer-based performance models and analyses of design–construction projects – Product (building, device, service)

– Organization

– Work Process

• to support (explicit, public) business

objectives – Describe: Visualize and describe project

– Explain reasons for designs and choices

– Evaluate choices

– Predict project performance

*05-07-01

Finish

Final Program

Confirmation with

Pharmacology

Final Program


KPFF




SRG

TechnicalKPFF

AEI Core

and TechHDCCO Core

Code Rev


H Block Crew

& Tech

SRG

Landscape

Tele Data

DesignCode Rev

Furniture

37.

*Reprogram

B#15 Shafts

34. *Finalize

Pharmacology

Program

33. *Finalize

LAR Program

32. *Finalize

Bio-Organic

Chemistry

Program

35. *Finalize

Protein Chemistry



changes

45. *Complete all


41. *Reprogram

bookends B#13 and

B#15

36. *Analyze

structural impacts

12. *Complete UG

utiliites


design changes


utilities




B#15


occupancy concept

*Lab and

vivarium

Programming

Complete

27. *Finalize B#13,

15 Shaft Size &

MEP Room

Locations

31.* AEI &

SRG

Determine

Design $/Time

Impact of

Change

23. *Reprogram

B#13 and B#15


Bookend

Programming



structural changes

Architect

program/MEP

oncepts

Established

By Design

Team

29. *Document

lab plan




Genentech PM

SRG Lab Plan

Ken Mouchka

Task 27Task 38

Organization


plans

Task 29

Task 28

30. *Approve

Change to

Design

Contract



39. *Finalize MEP

distribution and

section

Task4 Task22

Review 80%

documents


plan

49. Develop

reflected ceiling

plan

Turnover

reflected

ceiling plan to

AEI


Complete


42. *Develop

Execution

Strategy

44. *Complete

B#14 Officing

Planning

18. *Detailed Lab

Program

Documentation

47. *Develop lab

DD plan

28. *Determine

segregation of lab

and tech space

G accept lab

equipment matrix





city Presentation


of Program



Meetings with

Pharmacology


Chemistry


(Weekly)




Meetings


Review

Final Program


Weekly

Coordination

Meeting





54. KPFF design


Reprogram 13/14

interface, exiting,

stairs


Forwarded to Steel

Detailers

46. *RA Furnture

Concept Complete


*Design Budget &


Approved

*Notice to proceed



block occupancy

requirements on MEP

systems

17. *Risick

reprogram solvent


Issue 80%

MEP CDs

(20) Incorporate

80% MEP review

comments


80% drawings

53. Incorporate

comments, complete




G accept

13/14

Interface

*City Accept

exiting

*Package C

skin

modifications

55. KPFF design

stairs for 15/14

40. *SRG

Reprogram 15/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

B13 MEP HVAC,


completed

MEP 80% Review

comments

incorporated

Package D and UG

addendum issued:


vivarium catwalk



(3) *AEI design MEP

HVAC, Conduit &

piping mains B13


Schedule Impact

City Approval of

Alternate Means

for Program

8. Review Alternate


and LFFH



(8) *Revise

MEP loads, MEP

Equipment

schedules

finalized


control sequences

Work Process

Meetings

(6) Coord B13 MEP

floor section


*Cal OSHA Recommend




15/14

Interface

*Accept project

scope:budget

by Genentech

*City Approval of

H Concept

*Exterior

Programming


*Turnover lab and

vivarium DD plan

to AEI

AEC IT investment by General Contractor

Rate

Baseline

($M) Change

Revenue 100,000 22%

Cost of work 85% 85,000 -2.0%

CM, Design, GC fees 10% 10,000 2.0%

Gross Margin 5,000

Sales, G&A 2% 2,000

IT investment 1,000

Amortized costs of IT/yr 33%

Net income 3,000

Time to payback (years)

Year-1

122,000

101,260

14,640

6,100

2,440

333

3,327

3.1

3-

year

payb

ack



Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope


Project Goals



Building


BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building


(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope


Organization Goals


Organization



Organization



Organization



Process

Process Goals


Process


(months) < - ?o








Organization



Multidisciplinary Design and Analysis – using VDC

Disciplines:

• Architecture

• Engineering

• Construction

• Operations

Stakeholders:

• Design – build

professionals

• Owner

• Others

Design

• Virtual

• Graphical

• Object-based

Analysis

• Model-based

when possible

• Quantitative

when possible

• Multi-

Stakeholder

• Graphical

description


Integrated design and analysis Big Ideas

• Build VDC project models early and often, before committing large money or time

• What – Objectives, Designs and Behaviors of Product, process,

organization

• How: – Detailed: to show the product, process, organization entities that

use > 10% of project time, money

– Virtual: in the computer

– Visual: multi-discipline, multi-view, for multiple stakeholders

– Integrated: relating the product, organization and process

– Objective-based: set and track explicit public objectives

11

Plus-Delta of Civil Engineering

• Provides fixed physical

assets and wealth

• High global demand for

infrastructure and

housing

• Opportunity to impact

global climate challenge

significantly

12

Plus-Delta of Civil Engineering

• Provides fixed physical

assets and wealth

• High global demand for

infrastructure and

housing

• Opportunity to impact

global climate challenge

significantly

• Low productivity

compete with other ways

to spend $

• High energy use and

rising energy costs

• Structural reliability <<

societal need (Chile)

Persson, Sustainable City of

Tomorrow

Guilllermo Gomez, PUChile

US Department of Commerce,

compiled by P. Teicholz

13

An example: Malmo, Sweden

The best example of

sustainable development in

the world:

– Best design and analysis

methods (~2000)

– Best construction

methods

– Project provides some

good data on

performance vs.

predicted

But

• Energy: 20 of 20 buildings used more than predicted

– Prefabrication needed for intended energy performance

• Land: much greater density needed even for next project

– Development model did not last even a decade

• Data granularity: so coarse that improvement difficult to plan

• Human capital: people on project mostly lost to next phase

CEE 243 March 29 14

Malmo, Sweden: Actual energy

much worse than Predicted

CEE 243 March 29 15

Malmo, Sweden: Actual energy

much worse than Predicted

Fundamental issue: outcome reliability

• Structures (Chile, post-earthquake) -- good:

– ~500K/~5M homes damaged or destroyed: <2σ

– ~4 joint failures /~100 in (collapsed) buildings: 2σ

– 4/~10,000 post-1985 buildings collapsed in major

damage area: >3σ

• Energy – not good:

– 20/20 buildings used more energy than predicted –

Malmo, Sweden, 2001 (range 70 – 340% greater)

– 121 LEED buildings use 30% more energy per

square foot than average for U.S. buildings

• Neither structure nor energy performance meets

societal needs

16

Fundamental issue: process reliability

• Structures (Chile, post-earthquake)

– ~4 joint failures /~100 in (collapsed) buildings: 2σ

• Sources of failure - infrequent but important problems:

quality of joint construction, material composition, soft story

design, asymmetrical designs

• Energy:

– ↑ prediction variability:

• ↑ Inter-tool with same designer

• ↑ Inter-consultant with same tool

– ↑ component performance variability, e.g., infiltration from

leaky building joints (Malmo)

• Structure and energy performance:

– Good (historically), but

– Neither meets societal needs

17

18

AEC Breakthrough Objectives

Practice: 2002 Objective: 2015

Schedule 1-6 y Design

~1.5 y Construct

Variance 5-100%

1 y Design

< .5 y Construct

Variance < 5%

Cost Variance 5-30% Variance < 5%

Delivered quality Large Variance

Good?

Productivity impact?

0 variance, by POE

Great, by POE

++ productivity

Safety Good Better

Sustainability Poor 25% better than 2002

Globalization Some >= 50% of supply and

sales

19

(Multiple) Predictable performance objectives:

*Changed in 2010

Controllable Process

[Conformance to plans]

Outcome

[Performance]

Product, organization,

process designs

Latency: mean <= 1; 95% within 2

working days

Safety: 0 lost hours

Coordination activity:

planned, explicit, public,

informed > 90%

Field-generated Requests for

Information: 0

Schedule: 95% on-time

performance

Facility managed

Scope: 100% of items

with > 2% of value, time,

cost or energy

Rework volume: 0 (for field

construction work); objective = 10-

20% (virtual work)

Cost: >= 95% of

budgeted items within 2%

of budgeted cost

Prediction basis: > 80%

of predictions founded

*Function (quality) conformance

(%): >= 99%

Delivered Scope: 100%

satisfaction

Design versions: 2 or

more >= 80%

Schedule conformance (%): >=

80%

*Sustainability: >75%

better energy, water,

materials, than 2002,

profitably

Staff trained in VDC: >=

4/project

Cost conformance (%): >= 95%


Wasted human, technical, and biological resources

Photos: Courtesy SPS

Source: http://mainegov-

images.informe.org/spo/recycle/focus/midmaine/landfill.jpg


VDC models use and require lots of tools

Organization

Project specifications Revit

Bentley

Architecture

Tekla

Structures VDT MSP P6 POP MACDADI

Product functional objectives (goals) yes yes

Product systems and components scope yes yes some names

Product behavior specification and values yes yes

Organization functional objectives (goals) yes yes

Organization responsibility for components, systems

& tasks yes

Organization scope yes names names

Organization behavior specification and values yes yes

Process Task functional objectives (scope) yes yes

Process Task scope yes yes yes names

Process behavior specification and values yes yes

Project goals and assessed goodness yes yes

Project options yes

Project preferences, qualitative threshold values yes

Product Process Integrated project

Models


VDC analyses use and require lots of tools

Organization

Project specifications Revit

Bentley

Architecture

Tekla

Structures VDT MSP P6 POP MACDADI

Model-based analysis

Product component interference (3D) yes yes

Product cost estimation - BldgExplorer IFC

Product daylight - Ecotect gbXML

Product energy - Bentley/EDSL Tas n/a direct

Product energy - Ecotect gbXML

Product energy - Equest IFC

Product energy - GBS gbXML

Product energy - IES plugin

Product energy - Riuska IFC

Product Quantity Takeoff (QTO) yes yes

Product Rentable space yes yes

Product Structural analysis - Revit Structures direct

Product Structural analysis -Tekla yes

Project actor risk yes

Project cost yes

Project task schedule risk yes

Project Time-space conflict (4D) - Jetstream direct

Product Process Integrated project

Models


Integrated design and analysis – using VDC –

provides

Integrating theoretical framework to

• Describe functional intent and designs

• Describe and predict engineering behaviors

• Systematically manage projects and the

business using the predictions and observed

data, to

• Achieve measurable business objectives


POP model content: POP models help make managerial levers visible to all

• Columns:

– Functions

• Program Function, Schedule, Cost, Sustainability, ….

– Form (Scope) -- design choices

• L-B: x10

• Product forms = content of a “BIM”

– Behaviors (predicted, observed)

• Functional performance

• Cost

• Value

• Schedule

• …

• Rows

– Product

– Organization

– Process (design +

construction)

Template


In-class exercise

• For a new-generation cell phone, define:

– Product functions: product design intent, to include

• Power

• Telephone access

• Additional services

– Product design forms: designed scope, e.g., buttons, …

– Product behaviors: observable (or estimated) performance, e.g., actual buttons = 30

– MACDADI goodness summary

• See http://www.stanford.edu/class/cee111/Labs/POPLab.htm

POP model – for your new cell phone project

Function Form Behavior

Product

Organization

Process


Function: intent, e.g., energy, connect to cell system, microphone

Form: design choice in response to functional objectives, e.g., battery, antenna,

Behavior: Results of analysis prediction, observation or assessment, e.g., $, …


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3Conformance to product objectives

Rentable area (ft2)

Product Cost (K$)

Energy (KBTU/sq-ft/year)

Conformance (Actor assignment toOrganization Function) (%)

Organization Cost (K$) Actor Backlog/ Latency (days)

Safety: near-risk incidents / week

Rework volume - construction phase(%)

Schedule Conformance (Actual 1-dayschedule to look-ahead plan) (%)

Cost conformance to weekly budget (%)

MACDADI Evaluation of Relative Design Option Goodness (+ is good)

Option 1: POP V1

Option 2: POP V2

Meets all objectives

ICE to apply POP/MACDADI in an hour

• Stations and Deliverables:

– POP model

– Product sketch

– Organization model

– Process model … Gantt chart that you draw with your

favorite tool

– Owner: resolve issues; Build presentation of models for

group; show MACDADI analyses chart

– Facilitator: seek POP and VDC model consistency and

quality

• Budget

– Groups of ~6

– 40 minutes for ICE interaction

– 20 minutes for presentations, discussion



POP Lab and Submission-1: Build POP model of a new cell phone

Assume that your physical product has functions and forms inspired by our class exercise for a cell phone

Assume functions and designs for Organization and Process to build and sell your new version


Use of the iRoom

• Lab etiquette

• Computer cables

• Computer use

• Cluster computer

problems

• Project your desktop or

laptop to the main

iRoom screen

• Room layout

• See Lab use guidelines


POP model content

• Columns:

– Functions

• Program Function, Schedule, Cost, Sustainability, ….

– Scope (Forms) (design choices)

• L-B: x10

• Product forms = content of a “BIM”

– Behaviors (predicted, observed)

• Functional performance

• Cost

• Value

• Schedule

• …

• Rows

– Product

– Organization

– Process (design +

construction)

Template


Business uses of POP models

• At a glance, identify: – Most important (e.g., top-10) Functions and Scope (Forms)

of the Product, Organization, Process?

– Metrics to measure; current predicted behaviors?

• Identify product, organization and process elements with greatest risk. For the most important or highest risks, check that: – Product forms have associated actors and tasks with risks

that compound or mitigate the product element risk;

– Organization actors have associated forms and tasks with risks that compound or mitigate the actor risk;

– Process tasks have associated actors and product forms that mitigate the product element risk, not compound it.

• Evaluate goodness of design re objectives, alternatives


Class overview: http://www.stanford.edu/~kunz/Chalmers/


Course Objectives

Through class lecture, discussion, laboratory exercises, reading

and a class project,

• Use Integrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE) for very rapid and

effective project design;

• Build and interpret simple descriptive models of new Product -

Organization - Process (POP) projects using the Excel-based

POP/MACDADI tool;

• Build, interpret and optimize organization and process models

using the SimVision tool;

• Create checklists for process reliability

• Create a business plan to obtain significant funding


Course Non-objectives

• Study every system ever built

• Study every visualization/AI/design/planning

technology

• Development expertise

• Preparation for technology research

• Survey understanding only

• Excessive work


Agenda (Approximate)

Course organization

• Instructors:

– John Kunz ([email protected])

• Office Hours: after class, and anytime my office door is

open

– Ray Levitt ([email protected])

• Office Hours: after class

• Class Schedule: 10:00 - 12:00 and 1:00 to 3:00 on Monday,

Tuesdays and Thursday

• Classes will meet in the CIFE lab, Room 292, Y2E2, Please

work in groups of about three for ICE sessions and to prepare

submissions. Please read and take assessments on your own.

• Web site: http://www.stanford.edu/~kunz/Chalmers


http://www.stanford.edu/~kunz/

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.stanford.edu/~rel

mailto:[email protected]

http://campus-map.stanford.edu/index.cfm?ID=04-070

Grading

• Course requires thorough preparation of discussion based on class

interactions, homework and readings.

• Each point in every class assignment has same value: one point.

• Normally,

– "A" for 90% or more of the maximum total points received by any

student.

– "B" for 90% < maximum class score <= 80%.

– "C" for 80% < maximum class score <= 70%.

• Instructor discretion: ~10% of class grade

• Grading: we will check carefully for precise, succinct response to query

questions. – You can easily get a "B" simply by answering all the questions

– Answer each subquestion.

• Teams about 3-4 in size

• Assessment (on-line) is individual

• Please send all submissions to [email protected]


Details

• Lab login id:

• Password:

• Break at 1:30 today

• Dinner in Palo Alto: Monday

or Thursday next week?

• Field trip to San Jose?

• SimVision app for your

laptop



(“R Drive”)

• Create your own subdirectory under

Classes\Chalmers directory of the R drive

• Use for your lab, homework, project

– Backed up regularly


Generic Project POP model:

Learn the meanings of all these terms

• POP lab:

• http://www.stanford.edu/

class/cee111/Labs/POP

Lab.htm

• Function

• Scope, or Form

• Behavior

• Product

• Organization

• Process

• Project

• Objective Weight

• Qualitative Threshold values

• Assessed Behavior value

• Weighted Assessment

• MACDADI Analyses

http://www.stanford.edu/class/cee111/Labs/POPLab.htm

ORID +/∆ Analysis


Level of Questions

Purpose Questions to Answer

O Objective

Level

To examine the data

To identify factual information

What do you see?

What factual statements can you make based on the data?

R Reflective

Level

To encourage connections

To encourage free flow of ideas and imagination

What surprised you?

What encouraged you?

What discouraged you?

How does this make you feel?

I Interpretive

Level

To identify patterns and determine their significance or meaning

To articulate underlying insights

What does the data tell us? What are insights for you?

What is the good news?

What are limits? What else is there to learn?

D Decisional

Level

To propose next steps

To develop an action plan

To make decisions

To experience “coming together”

What are next steps?

What decisions can we make?

What is our action plan for moving forward?

ORID +/∆: Focused Conversation and Analysis

Objective

What do you

recall seeing?

Reflective

Positive

What do you

feel positive

about?

Reflective

Negative

What do you

find negative?

Interpretive

What sense do

you make of it?

Decisional

What

agreements

can be made

now?

(c) 2010 43


Product design forms: 3D drawing


Product design forms: Object-Oriented 3D BIM

Modeled objects:

• Walls

• Floors

• Windows

• Doors

• Columns

Content of POP form

model


Organization, Process Models

Model (SV)

• Organization

• (Design) work process

Simulation behavior

predictions:

• Gantt chart

• Risks

*05-07-01

Finish

Final Program

Confirmation with

Pharmacology

Final Program


KPFF




SRG

TechnicalKPFF

AEI Core

and TechHDCCO Core

Code Rev


H Block Crew

& Tech

SRG

Landscape

Tele Data

DesignCode Rev

Furniture

37.

*Reprogram

B#15 Shafts

34. *Finalize

Pharmacology

Program

33. *Finalize

LAR Program

32. *Finalize

Bio-Organic

Chemistry

Program

35. *Finalize

Protein Chemistry



changes

45. *Complete all


41. *Reprogram

bookends B#13 and

B#15

36. *Analyze

structural impacts

12. *Complete UG

utiliites


design changes


utilities




B#15


occupancy concept

*Lab and

vivarium

Programming

Complete

27. *Finalize B#13,

15 Shaft Size &

MEP Room

Locations

31.* AEI &

SRG

Determine

Design $/Time

Impact of

Change

23. *Reprogram

B#13 and B#15


Bookend

Programming



structural changes

Architect

program/MEP

oncepts

Established

By Design

Team

29. *Document

lab plan




Genentech PM

SRG Lab Plan

Ken Mouchka

Task 27Task 38

Organization


plans

Task 29

Task 28

30. *Approve

Change to

Design

Contract



39. *Finalize MEP

distribution and

section

Task4 Task22

Review 80%

documents


plan

49. Develop

reflected ceiling

plan

Turnover

reflected

ceiling plan to

AEI


Complete


42. *Develop

Execution

Strategy

44. *Complete

B#14 Officing

Planning

18. *Detailed Lab

Program

Documentation

47. *Develop lab

DD plan

28. *Determine

segregation of lab

and tech space

G accept lab

equipment matrix





city Presentation


of Program



Meetings with

Pharmacology


Chemistry


(Weekly)




Meetings


Review

Final Program


Weekly

Coordination

Meeting





54. KPFF design


Reprogram 13/14

interface, exiting,

stairs


Forwarded to Steel

Detailers

46. *RA Furnture

Concept Complete


*Design Budget &


Approved

*Notice to proceed



block occupancy

requirements on MEP

systems

17. *Risick

reprogram solvent


Issue 80%

MEP CDs

(20) Incorporate

80% MEP review

comments


80% drawings

53. Incorporate

comments, complete




G accept

13/14

Interface

*City Accept

exiting

*Package C

skin

modifications

55. KPFF design

stairs for 15/14

40. *SRG

Reprogram 15/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

B13 MEP HVAC,


completed

MEP 80% Review

comments

incorporated

Package D and UG

addendum issued:


vivarium catwalk



(3) *AEI design MEP

HVAC, Conduit &

piping mains B13


Schedule Impact

City Approval of

Alternate Means

for Program

8. Review Alternate


and LFFH



(8) *Revise

MEP loads, MEP

Equipment

schedules

finalized


control sequences

Work Process

Meetings

(6) Coord B13 MEP

floor section


*Cal OSHA Recommend




15/14

Interface

*Accept project

scope:budget

by Genentech

*City Approval of

H Concept

*Exterior

Programming


*Turnover lab and

vivarium DD plan

to AEI


Integrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE)

Given

• Objective = “extreme collaboration”

(1 week)

• Excellent POP software

• Collocated team

• iRoom

• Good generic POP model

• SD (DD) phase

Performance change

XC

Good

traditio

nal

Latency

(secs)0

20000

40000

60000

Latency (secs)

Duration (days)

XC

Good traditional

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Duration


Templates and checklists

Templates: standard

representations

• POP model: Function,

Form, Behavior of P, O, P

• Breakdown structures:

– Product

– Organization

– Process

• Task content: object,

action, resources (crew,

equipment)

Checklists: Tasks and OK

that was done well

• Run ICE sessions

• Create POP models

• Process to define project,

build BIM, exchange

data, do analyses (x5)


Example Checklist Step in detailed

schedule Checks to make

before start of step


How we spend time in meetings

DESCRIPTIVE (40%)

• When do we have access to

Area C?

• What wall sections do these

numbers refer to?

• Where are you placing the

crane?

EXPLANATIVE

(20%)

What drives the finish

times for the rides?

PREDICTIVE (10%)

Can we get access to the

lagoon a week earlier?

EVALUATIVE (30%)

Does this milestone

meet contract?

Submission-1: due midnight Tuesday

Task: describe and analyze your project and organization design

Submit a PowerPoint deck (group submission):

• Organization functional intent (POP function model

• Organization design (POP form and SimVision project baseline case

model); … annotated

• Predicted organization behavior .. SimVision predicted case

comparison charts

• Case comparison: Project Design Worksheet (page 3 lab)

• ORID analysis on what you learned this week


http://www.stanford.edu/~kunz/Chalmers/SVDBInstructions.pdf


Skills for success

• Good engineer: design, analyze, manage

• Research methods

• Communication

– Written/Oral

– Programming

– Colleagues, sponsors, stakeholders

• Integrated use of quick-response, careful

analysis, reflection


Speculations: VDC

Symbolic Model • Objectives • Testing • Representation • Reasoning • User Interfaces • Systems Interfaces

Pro

ject P

hase

Discipline

VDC will enable a small number of collaborating stakeholders

to do rapid Multidisciplinary Design and Analysis



Monday Learning goals

• Get basic familiarity with the POP project framework of

VDC

• Product – Organization – Process (POP)

• Function – Form – Behavior (FFB)

• Understand class organization, opportunities, methods

and expectations

• Motivate interest in Integrated Design enabled by

VDC:

• Opportunities in practice

• Fun, power and job opportunities of models, model-

based analyses


2011?, … 2015?

2011?, … 2015?

What do you have? … What do you want?


This week overview

Day Take-home

Monday Introduction:

Theory: integrated multi-disciplinary models and

analyses and multi-disciplinary Integrated Concurrent

Engineering;

Practice: lab; ICE session

Tuesday Theory: methods we now use to design organizations

as we design bridges;

Practice: lab

Thursday Theory: methods of integrated POP design and

analysis

Practice: initial presentations Object AttributeRequirement


Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope


Project Goals



Building


BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building


(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope


Organization Goals


Organization



Organization



Organization



Process

Process Goals


Process


(months) < - ?o








Organization


Integrated Product, Organization and Process

design

John Kunz

The big idea: Integrated Product, Organization and Process design can support, at least design, fabrication and assembly

Rate

Baseline

($K) Change

Year-1

(K$)

Revenue 100,000 2% 102,000

Cost of contracted work 85% 85,000 -2.0% 84,660

Cost of self-performed work 10% 10,000 2.0% 12,240

Gross Margin 5,000 5,100

Sales, G&A 2% 2,000 2,040

IT investment 70

Amortized costs of IT/yr 33% 23

Net income 3,000 3,037

Time to payback (years) 1.9

Net Income change (%) 1.2

*05-07-01

Finish

Final Program

Confirmation with

Pharmacology

Final Program


KPFF




SRG

TechnicalKPFF

AEI Core

and TechHDCCO Core

Code Rev


H Block Crew

& Tech

SRG

Landscape

Tele Data

DesignCode Rev

Furniture

37.

*Reprogram

B#15 Shafts

34. *Finalize

Pharmacology

Program

33. *Finalize

LAR Program

32. *Finalize

Bio-Organic

Chemistry

Program

35. *Finalize

Protein Chemistry



changes

45. *Complete all


41. *Reprogram

bookends B#13 and

B#15

36. *Analyze

structural impacts

12. *Complete UG

utiliites


design changes


utilities




B#15


occupancy concept

*Lab and

vivarium

Programming

Complete

27. *Finalize B#13,

15 Shaft Size &

MEP Room

Locations

31.* AEI &

SRG

Determine

Design $/Time

Impact of

Change

23. *Reprogram

B#13 and B#15


Bookend

Programming



structural changes

Architect

program/MEP

oncepts

Established

By Design

Team

29. *Document

lab plan




Genentech PM

SRG Lab Plan

Ken Mouchka

Task 27Task 38

Organization


plans

Task 29

Task 28

30. *Approve

Change to

Design

Contract



39. *Finalize MEP

distribution and

section

Task4 Task22

Review 80%

documents


plan

49. Develop

reflected ceiling

plan

Turnover

reflected

ceiling plan to

AEI


Complete


42. *Develop

Execution

Strategy

44. *Complete

B#14 Officing

Planning

18. *Detailed Lab

Program

Documentation

47. *Develop lab

DD plan

28. *Determine

segregation of lab

and tech space

G accept lab

equipment matrix





city Presentation


of Program



Meetings with

Pharmacology


Chemistry


(Weekly)




Meetings


Review

Final Program


Weekly

Coordination

Meeting





54. KPFF design


Reprogram 13/14

interface, exiting,

stairs


Forwarded to Steel

Detailers

46. *RA Furnture

Concept Complete


*Design Budget &


Approved

*Notice to proceed



block occupancy

requirements on MEP

systems

17. *Risick

reprogram solvent


Issue 80%

MEP CDs

(20) Incorporate

80% MEP review

comments


80% drawings

53. Incorporate

comments, complete




G accept

13/14

Interface

*City Accept

exiting

*Package C

skin

modifications

55. KPFF design

stairs for 15/14

40. *SRG

Reprogram 15/14

interface, exiting,

stairs

B13 MEP HVAC,


completed

MEP 80% Review

comments

incorporated

Package D and UG

addendum issued:


vivarium catwalk



(3) *AEI design MEP

HVAC, Conduit &

piping mains B13


Schedule Impact

City Approval of

Alternate Means

for Program

8. Review Alternate


and LFFH



(8) *Revise

MEP loads, MEP

Equipment

schedules

finalized


control sequences

Work Process

Meetings

(6) Coord B13 MEP

floor section


*Cal OSHA Recommend




15/14

Interface

*Accept project

scope:budget

by Genentech

*City Approval of

H Concept

*Exterior

Programming


*Turnover lab and

vivarium DD plan

to AEI



Predicte

d value

Observed

value -2 -1 0 1 2

Product

Product Scope


Project Goals



Building


BTU/ft2) <= 250 - ?o

Building


(%) >= 12 - ?o

Organization Scope


Organization Goals


Organization



Organization



Organization



Process

Process Goals


Process


(months) < - ?o








Organization



Organization Scope . Actors includes - - Integrated ...

Documents

Transcript of Organization Scope . Actors includes - - Integrated ...