Autodesk teams up with David Kirsh and the Design Lab on Dreamcatcher, a Next-Generation Design Tool

Autodesk teams up with David Kirsh and the Design Lab on Dreamcatcher, a Next-Generation Design Tool

Autodesk teams up with David Kirsh and the Design Lab on Dreamcatcher, a Next-Generation Design Tool

The Design Lab recently teamed up with Autodesk, a California-based corporation that makes software for the architecture, engineering, construction, manufacturing, media, and entertainment industries. The first step in the partnership includes work by Dr. David Kirsch and his team on an experimental design tool for Autodesk called Dreamcatcher. Many leaders in the design world consider Project Dreamcatcher to be the next generation of computer-aided design or CAD. Dreamcatcher works on the principles of generative design, which enables designers to craft a definition of their design problem through goals and constraints.

What is generative design? According to Autodesk, generative design mimics nature’s evolutionary approach to design. Designers or engineers input design goals into generative design software, along with parameters such as materials, manufacturing methods and cost constraints. Then, using cloud computing, the software explores all the possible permutations of a solution, quickly generating design alternatives. It tests and learns from each iteration what works and what doesn’t. With generative design, there is no single solution; instead, there are potentially thousands of great solutions. You choose the design that best fits your needs.

Kirsh’s team is exploring the way designers think as they begin to solve design problems with Dreamcatcher. This is part of a larger Design Lab project on how tools reshape the way we think. A first experiment will be undertaken in London at the Bartlett School of Architecture, University London, comparing the performance of 15 Masters of Architecture students on a design task. In one condition they will use Dreamcatcher and in another condition they will use Fusion, another new Autodesk design tool that is closer to a 3D modeling tool. Participants will be recorded, eye tracked and interviewed. Their outputs will be judged by a panel of distinguished architects. Following this pilot experiment, Kirsh and his team expect to increase the number of participants on similar problems and later explore and compare Fusion and Dreamcatcher as tools that support collaborative design.

Some major questions his team will research are:

  1. Are there different sorts of exploring and thinking taking place with the different tools, or at different phases?
  2. How does each tool affect the intention of people working with the tools? Intentionality in design is closely related to the understanding a designer has of the design problem he or she faces. As one works with a tool this understanding deepens. Accordingly, after working on a problem a designer should understand that problem in a deeper way, knowing more about the constraints, dangers, challenges of the problem, than just thinking about the problem without a tool at all.
  3. What are the differences in participant understanding that are the result of the two tools – both during the design phase – in terms of what they learn and understand – and also after, once they have consolidated their knowledge?

The Design Lab recently teamed up with Autodesk, a California-based corporation that makes software for the architecture, engineering, construction, manufacturing, media, and entertainment industries. The first step in the partnership includes work by Dr. David Kirsch and his team on an experimental design tool for Autodesk called Dreamcatcher. Many leaders in the design world consider Project Dreamcatcher to be the next generation of computer-aided design or CAD. Dreamcatcher works on the principles of generative design, which enables designers to craft a definition of their design problem through goals and constraints.

What is generative design? According to Autodesk, generative design mimics nature’s evolutionary approach to design. Designers or engineers input design goals into generative design software, along with parameters such as materials, manufacturing methods and cost constraints. Then, using cloud computing, the software explores all the possible permutations of a solution, quickly generating design alternatives. It tests and learns from each iteration what works and what doesn’t. With generative design, there is no single solution; instead, there are potentially thousands of great solutions. You choose the design that best fits your needs.

Kirsh’s team is exploring the way designers think as they begin to solve design problems with Dreamcatcher. This is part of a larger Design Lab project on how tools reshape the way we think. A first experiment will be undertaken in London at the Bartlett School of Architecture, University London, comparing the performance of 15 Masters of Architecture students on a design task. In one condition they will use Dreamcatcher and in another condition they will use Fusion, another new Autodesk design tool that is closer to a 3D modeling tool. Participants will be recorded, eye tracked and interviewed. Their outputs will be judged by a panel of distinguished architects. Following this pilot experiment, Kirsh and his team expect to increase the number of participants on similar problems and later explore and compare Fusion and Dreamcatcher as tools that support collaborative design.

Some major questions his team will research are:

  1. Are there different sorts of exploring and thinking taking place with the different tools, or at different phases?
  2. How does each tool affect the intention of people working with the tools? Intentionality in design is closely related to the understanding a designer has of the design problem he or she faces. As one works with a tool this understanding deepens. Accordingly, after working on a problem a designer should understand that problem in a deeper way, knowing more about the constraints, dangers, challenges of the problem, than just thinking about the problem without a tool at all.
  3. What are the differences in participant understanding that are the result of the two tools – both during the design phase – in terms of what they learn and understand – and also after, once they have consolidated their knowledge?

The Design Lab recently teamed up with Autodesk, a California-based corporation that makes software for the architecture, engineering, construction, manufacturing, media, and entertainment industries. The first step in the partnership includes work by Dr. David Kirsch and his team on an experimental design tool for Autodesk called Dreamcatcher. Many leaders in the design world consider Project Dreamcatcher to be the next generation of computer-aided design or CAD. Dreamcatcher works on the principles of generative design, which enables designers to craft a definition of their design problem through goals and constraints.

What is generative design? According to Autodesk, generative design mimics nature’s evolutionary approach to design. Designers or engineers input design goals into generative design software, along with parameters such as materials, manufacturing methods and cost constraints. Then, using cloud computing, the software explores all the possible permutations of a solution, quickly generating design alternatives. It tests and learns from each iteration what works and what doesn’t. With generative design, there is no single solution; instead, there are potentially thousands of great solutions. You choose the design that best fits your needs.

Kirsh’s team is exploring the way designers think as they begin to solve design problems with Dreamcatcher. This is part of a larger Design Lab project on how tools reshape the way we think. A first experiment will be undertaken in London at the Bartlett School of Architecture, University London, comparing the performance of 15 Masters of Architecture students on a design task. In one condition they will use Dreamcatcher and in another condition they will use Fusion, another new Autodesk design tool that is closer to a 3D modeling tool. Participants will be recorded, eye tracked and interviewed. Their outputs will be judged by a panel of distinguished architects. Following this pilot experiment, Kirsh and his team expect to increase the number of participants on similar problems and later explore and compare Fusion and Dreamcatcher as tools that support collaborative design.

Some major questions his team will research are:

  1. Are there different sorts of exploring and thinking taking place with the different tools, or at different phases?
  2. How does each tool affect the intention of people working with the tools? Intentionality in design is closely related to the understanding a designer has of the design problem he or she faces. As one works with a tool this understanding deepens. Accordingly, after working on a problem a designer should understand that problem in a deeper way, knowing more about the constraints, dangers, challenges of the problem, than just thinking about the problem without a tool at all.
  3. What are the differences in participant understanding that are the result of the two tools – both during the design phase – in terms of what they learn and understand – and also after, once they have consolidated their knowledge?

Read Next

Design Lab Heads Downtown to Present New Strategies and Program to Take on Society’s Most Daunting Challenges

Last week, UC San Diego Design Lab Assistant Professor of Cognitive Science Steven Dow and…

Surveillance Technology San Diego

San Diego council committee unanimously approves ordinances targeting surveillance technology

Photo courtesy of John Gibbins/The San Diego Union-Tribune

A City Council committee on Wednesday unanimously approved two proposed ordinances geared at governing surveillance technologies in the city, an action sparked by sustained pushback from activists and others who were surprised and upset last year when it was revealed that San Diego had quietly installed cameras on streetlights throughout the city.

Lilly Irani, an associate professor at UC San Diego (and Design Lab faculty) who specializes in the ethics of technology, called the vote “a win for better governance in the long term.”

Irani helped draft the ordinances and assisted the organized opposition dubbed the TRUST San Diego coalition, which focuses on responsible surveillance in the region. The coalition was born out of concerns about one specific technology — so-called smart streetlights — and ultimately landed a seat at the table to draft the proposals.

“Without Councilmember Monica Montgomery championing this... there would be no table,” Irani said.
Design Lab Eric Hekler Public Health Technology

Eric Hekler Joins Design Lab Team

UC San Diego Design Lab is excited to welcome Eric Hekler, an Associate Professor in…

Smart Streetlights

Community members call for end to ‘Smart Streetlights’ in San Diego

KUSI NEWS Interviews Design Lab Faculty Lilly Irani

More than a dozen community groups are calling on the City of San Diego to turn off thousands of cameras positioned on streetlights around San Diego.

The “Smart Streetlights” were approved by the San Diego City Council in December 2016, and there are currently 4,700 installed according to the city’s website.

The cameras collect real-time data including video and audio, which the city says helps save money and increase public safety. However, activists called the technology a major privacy and civil rights concern.

City officials have said that these streetlights are not being used for spying.
Design Education Don Norman

The Future of Design Education

Don Norman, Design Lab Director, reports on "The Future of Design Education"

Many of you know that for a long time I have been partnering with IBM Design and The World Design Organization to rethink the curriculum for design.  This is a progress report.

The History

It all started in March 2014 when Scott Klemmer and I wrote a paper called "State of Design: How Design Education Must Change" published in LinkedIn. (Why LinkedIn? Because of the wide, diverse readership: This paper has been read by 50,167 people, with 93 comments.) https://bit.ly/31Qqv1W

Design Lab

When Scott, Jim Hollan, and I started the Design Lab, we knew what we did NOT wish to do: build a traditional design education. Our training was rich and varied, and we wanted our students to have a similarly broad education. We wanted to do things that made a real difference in the world. After all, our origin was from Cognitive Science and computers -- Human Behavior and Technology, Design is an applied field that requires multi-disciplinary approaches to important, difficult issues.
Design Lab Ibm

IBM Design Thinking Workshop at The Design Lab

IBM believes in design thinking. And design doing. So much so that throughout the company,…

Back To Top