Effects of Hand–Drawing and CAD Techniques on Design Development: A Comparison of Design Merit Ratings

Abstract

This exploratory study examined interior design projects developed using traditional hand‐drawing and computer‐aided design (CAD) techniques to determine if differences exist on seven aspects of design merit in the resulting design solutions. Junior‐level, interior design students (N=40) were matched into two groups based on their preference for hand‐drawing or CAD design technique and a baseline creativity rating taken on a previous project. Groups completed the same project with one group using hand‐drawing and the second group using CAD. Interior design educators used a previously developed instrument to rate each project on seven aspects of design merit: appropriateness, complexity, creativity, liking, novelty, originality, and thematic expression. Univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) tested each of the seven design merits to determine if significant differences in design merits existed for projects generated by the two groups. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) determined if differences existed between the hand‐drawing and CAD groups when the seven design merits were analyzed simultaneously. The univariate and multivariate analyses revealed no significant differences between the two design techniques on the seven aspects of design merit when they were used in developing an interior solution. Both hand‐drawn and CAD techniques were used effectively to generate viable design solutions. However, additional research examining the effects of these techniques is necessary before assumptions can be completely formulated regarding their impact on the design process.

A Comparison of Learning Experience, Workload, and Outcomes in Interior Design Education Using a Hand or Hybrid Approach

“…Hand techniques such as freehand sketches and physical study mockups are commonly used for discovering new ideas in conceptual design phase. When speed matters the most, such techniques enable ideas to be quickly recorded, evaluated, and revised (Brandon & McLain‐Kark, 2001). The freedom of ambiguous, abstract, and intuitive visual communication also opens up possibilities for future exploration and identification (Okeil, 2010).…”

“…Today, interior designers rely on computer technology as a means of design implementation, resource generation, and data collection (Lyon et al., 2008). Traditional CAD program configuration is often logical, sequential, and demands precise and set ideas from designers; all of these hinder the designer’s creativity (Brandon & McLain‐Kark, 2001; Dorta, 2005). Now the latest CAD systems have been improved in their capability for facilitating idea generation and decision making at various stages in the design process (Reffat, 2006).…”

Comparison of Conventional and Computer-aided Drafting Methods from the View of Time and Drafting Quality

“…There have been many studies on the effects of conventional and CAD techniques in the design process (Brandon & McLain-Kark, 2001;Case & Matthews, 1999). There are also studies on the strategic uses of conventional and CAD systems to increase the efficiency of drafting methods (Bhavnani & John, 1996;Flemming, Bhavnani & John, 1997;Magi, 2009), as well as the effects of Computer-aided drawing in the engineering field (Beitz et al, 1990;Majchrzak, 1990;Rafi et al, 2006).…”

“…In their study, Brandon and McLain-Kark (2001) compared the use of conventional and CAD techniques in the developmental design process on the ratings of aspects of design merits present in the final design solutions. They concluded that there was no significant differences in the design merit ratings of the conventional and CAD techniques.…”

“…CAD software supports sketching, drafting and rendering, photo-altering and three dimensional capabilities. CAD software, such as AutoCAD, has been incorporated often into later design process stages where drafting revisions and producing construction drawings and specification documentation are typically performed (Brandon & McLain-Kark, 2001). The use of 2D programs can increase the speed of repetitive tasks dramatically when making changes to drawings (Downey, 1992).…”