4.5.1 Analytical methodsAnalytical

4.5.1 Analytical methods
Analytical design methods are primarily concerned with analysis and systematic definition of the problem. As already stated, the early 1960s saw the beginning of a strong movement in favour of a more analytical and systematic approach to design. Features common to the methods of the time were a broad detailed exploration and analysis of the problem, division of the task into sub-tasks, charting relevant factors and their possible interrelationships, and the synthesis of partial solutions into a whole. Almost all these methods combined systematic logical analysis with intuition and creativity.
The three-step method
In A method of systematic design, based on the three phases analysis, synthesis and evaluation, Jones (1963) presented a method involving the following steps:
1. With the help of consultants and others involved, draw up a list of factors that might possibly be relevant, initially without limitation of any sort. Make a separate list of requirements with which the design must satisfy, and a list of suggestions and ideas for solutions. Look for sources of information. Classify the factors, check priorities, analyse interrelationships and develop the most complete sets possible of mutually consistent performance specifications. Ensure sufficient support. 2. Look for as many total or partial solutions as possible to all performance specifications. Take into account any preconditions or restrictions. Combine partial solutions into a total design that satisfies as many of the requirements as possible. 3. Before choosing the final design solution, judge each solution variant on the extent to which it satisfies the requirements, making use of earlier experiences with comparable solutions, simulations, logical forecasts of what is likely to happen to the design product during its lifetime and the testing of prototypes.
Hierarchical decomposition
In the same period Christopher Alexander presented his ‘hierarchical decomposition’ method, based on a design for a village in India (Alexander, 1963). The method is described at length in his book Notes on the synthesis of form (1964). Briefly, the method involves dissecting the design task into as many components as possible. First a list is prepared of all possible requirements to be satisfied by the design. These requirements are then analysed in sets of two at a time to determine mutual dependencies. A dependency is defined here as the extent to which the satisfaction of one requirement makes it easier or harder to satisfy another requirement. Once these dependencies have been determined, a computer and graph theory are used to formulate subsets of independent requirements. The task of the designer is to develop draft solutions satisfying these subsets and then to produce a total design based on the partial solutions.
Function analysis
Function analysis is the analysis, development and description of a functional structure. A functional structure is an abstract model of the product to be designed, ignoring physical characteristics such as dimensions, shape, colour and material usage. In a function analysis the product is viewed primarily as a technical and physical system. The first step in such an analysis is to describe the product’s primary function. The second step is to develop a simple functional structure, including the most important technical processes, as a consistent set of sub-functions. The third step involves devising variants on the functional structure, e.g. by separating or combining sub-functions or changing their order. This method is in frequent use, particularly in mechanical engineering applications. In architecture, people more often speak of functional analysis. The methodical approach starts with a thorough analysis of activities and relationships between activities. The Delft lecturers De Bruijn and Korfker (1969) and Polak (1981) were important founders of this approach, later adopted by Van Duin et al. (1989). For further details the reader is referred to Chapter 3 on programming and programmes of requirements.


Analysis of interconnected decision areas (AIDA)
This method, developed by Luckman (1967), starts by identifying ‘decision areas’, factors about which decisions must be made during the design process. In an architectural design problem these factors might include the height of the building, the direction of the span and the selection of building components, e.g. windows, doors and door handles. Next, a chart is prepared showing the range within which partial solutions to sub-problems could be varied while still satisfying the requirements laid down (the extent to which it is possible to choose between different solutions) and the extent to which decisions relating to individual parts of the picture are mutually consistent. Finally, decision areas, options and relationships between options are represented in an ‘option diagram’, making it possible to make decisions in parallel rather than sequentially and giving a general overview of possible solutions, partial and total. This method has some affinity with the morphological method, a method which is mainly concerned with generating solutions. Here the first step is to search for all theoretically conceivable solutions to the problem. The next step is to determine which elements are ‘significant’ to the solutions found. Finally, an inventory is prepared of the ways it is theoretically possible to realise each element. This kind of analytical method often makes use of decision trees,a method of structuring a number of possibilities by determining what choices are possible at each level.

Результаты (русский) 3:

4.5.1 аналитических методов
аналитических методов проектирования, в основном касается анализа и систематическое определение проблемы.как уже отмечалось, в начале 60 - х годов начала сильное движение в пользу более аналитический и систематического подхода к дизайну.общие черты, присущие методам время были широкие детальное изучение и анализ проблемы,отдел задачи на подзадачи, наметить соответствующие факторы, и их возможных взаимосвязей и обобщение частичные решения в целом.почти все эти методы в сочетании с систематической логическим анализом интуицию и творчество.

трехэтапный метод в метод системный подход, основанный на три этапа, анализа, обобщения и оценки,джонс (1963) представил метод с следующие шаги:
1.с помощью консультантов и других участников, составить перечень факторов, которые могут быть актуальными, первоначально без ограничений любого рода.сделать отдельный список требований, с которыми конструкции должны отвечать, и список предложений и идей для решения.искать источники информации.классификация факторов,проверьте приоритеты, анализ взаимосвязей и разработки наиболее полные комплекты можно взаимно согласованными рабочие характеристики.обеспечить достаточную поддержку.2.посмотри, как много полного или частичного решения, насколько это возможно, все рабочие характеристики.принять во внимание любые условия или ограничения.объединить частичные решения в общий дизайн, который удовлетворяет как многие потребности, как это возможно.3.до окончательного отбора дизайнерское решение, судья каждое решение вариант о том, в какой степени он удовлетворяет требованиям, используя предыдущий опыт с сопоставимыми решений, моделирование,логично, прогнозы, что могло бы произойти, к разработке продукта за время его существования и испытания прототипов.

иерархической разложения в тот же период кристофер александр представил свой "иерархических разложения" метод, основанный на дизайн для деревни в индии (александр, 1963).этот метод был подробно описан в книге отмечает на обобщение формы (1964).вкратце,этот метод предполагает или дизайн задачу на многие компоненты, как это возможно.первый список готов все возможные требования, предъявляемые к проектированию.эти требования, затем анализируются в наборы вместе определить, взаимной зависимости.