t/Co.or

iOMAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPORT

MBS PROJECT September 1, 1965 N3S REPORT

4002415 8587

A Study of the Feasibility of Development of

Computer Based Systems for .Semi—Automated

Comparisons of Building Designs and

Regulatory Code .Criteria

(A Computer-based Code checking system)

Prepared for

United States Public Health Service

Department of Health; Education & Welfare

IMPORTANT NOTICE NATIONAL BUREAU OP STA

for use within the Government. P and review. For inis reasor, the whole or in part, is not autfnriz Bureau of Standards, VVasmostOii

the Report has been spec.ficaiiy p

Approved for public release by the

Director of the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST)

on October 9, 2015.

s accounting documents intended

:ubjcct:d to additional evaluation

listing of this Report, either in Office of the Director, National

the Gcvennent agency for which

piss for its own use.

0 O firsWiT' ft*

. <>. ikr.'iutMtni hr

Mf. .*>*>«» f

-3 *- *- k'd i • <« Ut ^crj t « i i .‘u ^ V I iM * ^ k#i U>V' e
A STUDY OF THE FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPMENT OF

COMPUTER BASED SYSTEMS FOR SEMI-AUTOMATED

COMPARISONS OF BUILDING DESIGNS AND

REGULATORY CODE CRITERIA

(A Computer-based code checking system)

Prepared for:

Mr. August F. Hoenack, Chief

Architectural and Engineering Branch

Division of Hospital- and Medical Facilities

United States Public Health Service

Department of Health, Education & Welfare

Prepared by:

The Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

United States Department of Commerce

September 1, 1965
Credits

Project Supervision &

Reporting

•Gary K. Stonebraker

Administrative Officer

Technical Analysis Division

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Project Staff & Consultants

Douglas Y. Cornog (staff consultant)

Engineering Psychologist

Information Technology Division

National Bureau of Standards

Thomas N. Trump (summer staff)

Mathematician

Technical Analysis Division

National Bureau of Standards

Welden E. Clark, Senior Consultant

Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.

8221 Meltrose Avenue

Los Angeles, California

Earl Isaac

Fair, Isaac & Co., Inc.

1200 Lincoln Avenue

San Rafael, California

Pat Coyle

Computer Applications Consultant

1005 24th Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C.
INDEX

1 SUMMARY ••••«aece«ceoec«e

2 Introduction ......

3 Some General Comments

About Code Systems . . • 4 STATEMENTS OF FEASIBILITY ........

APPENDIX I

Support of Statement 4: DEFINITION OF THE

. PROCESS . . e . * c 36

Support of Statements 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10:. . APPLICATIONS OF COMPUTER SYSTEMS TO CODE

REVIEWS * . . . . • 49

Support of Statement 14: POTENTIAL SYSTEMS BENEFITS C . . • * . . . 102

Support of Statement 15: ESTIMATES OF SYSTEMS

COSTS • . . . e . . . 108

Support of Statement 16: OPERATIONAL * CHANGES . 120

Note to the Reader:

The content cf this report is summarized in

Section 1 , Summary . Section 4, STATEMENT OF FEASIBILITY, discusses

the broad aspects of the system problems in 19

questions and answers concerning feasibility.

Each of these questions and answers is explored

in detail in the 'Appendix.

Page

1

3

7

13
SUMMARY

This report will state that it appears to be technologically and economically feasible to- develop a computer-based

system for the comparison of building designs with criteria

set forth by regulatory codes.

Such a system can be developed and applied specifically

to the problem of comparing hospital designs with requirements set forth in Part 53, Public Health Service Regulations,

-which criteria apply to the. construction of hospitals built

with federal support funds provided under the Hill-Burton

ACte

A system can be designed to accept a description of a

building design and to automatically compare that data to any

precisely defined criteria. A full review of the comparison

-can then be given back to the professional architect employed

I by the code system, who would examine any exceptions found,

> and only those exceptions. Thus the professional will be

-

I relieved of much of the duty of routine checking of documents.

1 The extent of this relief can be estimated at 50% of the

r&mount of such work that he now does. The remaining 50% of

the work involves operations calling for general professional

' .

1 judgments and Interpretation, and this remains the responsi-

* bility of the code professional.

The svstem can also act to improve the services of the

1

* system by allowing the addition of capability now not possible.

i i

3 -
In addition, it will provide detailed files and descriptions

of all buildings processed, which should prove useful in

program analysis.

The system can be. developed through (a) the preparation

of a specification for the system and a Request for Proposal

directed to industry (b) the acceptance, review and evaluation of bids, and subsequent awarding of contracts (c) the

development and installation of the system (d) prototype

operational testing and training, and finally (e) acceptance

of the system for operational use. The time required could

range from 1% to 3 years, depending upon system complexity.

The exact cost of the system will not be known until

bids are received, but estimates of potential systems costs

shows them to be commensurate with the cost-value of benefits

• « derived.
INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this feasibility study has been to

explore the use of man-machine systems (computer-based) as

tools for comparing buildings design with regulatory code

criteria, specifically for the Hill-Burton program administered by the United States Public Health Service. The

project has been undertaken under the joint sponsorship of

this organization and the National Bureau of Standards.

Presently, the Hill-Burton program utilizes a professional staff of about' 39 architects and engineers located In

7 regional offices to review proposed designs for hospitals

to be constructed using Hill-Burton funds. The purpose of

this activity is to assure a minimum standard of planning

and construction quality, and to provide continual upgrading

of hospital and medical facilities planning.

The criteria for design are set forth in Public Health

Service Regulations. Part 53 . This document is a combination of minimum property standards, minimum design and

facilities standards, and some broad specifications of

materials and constructions techniques.- Also included are

some regulations concerning procedures to be followed in

contracting and other aspects of project administration.

Under the load of processing 500 project applications

and some 1400 design submissions per year, the professional

— J ~~
staff has found it increasingly difficult to spend time in

the field in the critical capacity of consulting. The work

load is expected to continue growing, and as it is increasingly difficult to obtain qualified personnel and train

them, the program in the future may face some losses of

effectiveness insofar as its ability to exert a positive

influence on the design of medical facilities.

The problem is further complicated by the fact that

each project design must be reviewed up to three times

during its development. Since in fact the PHS regulations

do not have the legal authority of comparable state regulations, there are inevitably compromises which must be

worked out between client, local, state and Public Health

Service interests, which activities involve much field

liaison. The three-phase submission program is designed

to resolve the major questions which may arise at the

earliest possible times, as well as to provide the opportunity for positive guidance in program development for

the facility.

In order to relieve the professional staff for fuller

participation in these key decision areas, and in order to

assure that program growth may continue without diminished

effectiveness, some solution must be soucht to relieve the

professionals from the routine chores which are normally

associated with, code inspection activities . The feasibility

4
TV* *•. Kl : ft * ' IMM! : tr • i

t - " . :

• *"1

* study was undertaken in order to examine the possible use

s of computer systems to perform these inspection chores, thus

i accomplishing this objective. The study has been performed

* by the staff of the Institute for Applied Technology of the

National Bureau of Standards, with consultation by Bolt,

* Beranek and Newman, Inc., Los Angeles, -Calif.; Fair Issaac

and Co., San Rafael, California, R. J. Coyle, Computer

Applications Consultant, Washington, D.C., and members of

the Technical Analysis Division and Information Technology

Division of the National Bureau of Standards. The consulting

firms involved were asked to examine the problems associated

with the development of such systems. Since there is in

fact a very large spectrum of possibilities, the consultants

were asked to examine the ends of ‘this spectrum, hoping

thereby that the feasibility of the system would be bracketed.

Bolt, Beranek and Newman explored the use of "interaction

system", i.e., those kinds of computer systems which communicate with and enhance the judgment and action of man* More

specifically, this involves the use of on-line processing,

exotic peripheral input-output equipment, and generally, the

extremes in sophistication of equipment and ‘ programming

techniques. On the other hand, Fair, Isaac & Associates

{concentrated on the examination of minimal hardware usage,

iwith straight-forward use of tested computer techniques $ more specifically, the use of standard key-punch input, batch

0

• \ U’;' v : i' 5

Ml'-'M' i« I .

’ '

• > <

' »rj.i N li*»- ;. x

- I
processing, and conventional output* Mr* R* J* Coyle

assisted in assessing potential systems costs and in eval

uating the feasibility and need for various forms and

concepts of programming*
SOME COMMENTS ABOUT CODE SYSTEMS IN GENERAL

In almost every aspect of the design of buildings,

there is a need to have criteria against which designs are

compared in order to determine the effectiveness and suita4 bility of the design. Sets of criteria affect the designs

of buildings in many ways. There are building codes, property codes, zoning laws, standards of production, design,

and practice, professional recommendations, public laws, • and many others. The successful resolution of design depends

upon the satisfaction of all of the applicable sets of criteria.

Every architect and engineer knows the penalty of not

satisfying the criteria of codes. Thousands of man-hours

are spent each year, throughout the building design professions, revising endless series. of drawings or physically

changing construction because one aspect or another of the

design did not meet the criteria set by codes.

Failure to satisfy code criteria -can be partially

attributed to the code itself in that the statements in the

code can be ambiguous, meaningless or obsolete. Perhaps

equally important is the fact that there are frequently too

many criteria for the designer to consider, and he will omit

consideration of some inadvertently. Still some other cases

of failure occur because the responsible parties, the

7
designer or the reviewer, did not know how to make a decision

about the acceptability of a solution, or did not care to

try. It is useless to speculate about the motives or intentions of any person or element involved in this activity, a$

in fact the difficulty axe symptoms of problems of systemic

origin. Simply stated, the objectives of code systems are

often fax in advance of the capability of the operational

systems to fulfill those objectives.

If we say that codes are obsolete, and then we attempt

to revise them, this does little good if the code will

shortly fall into obsolescence again. If we resolve code

difficulties on one project after failure to design properly,

this is not a significant gain if we are going to encounter

the very same difficulties again on the next project. And

if we make a decision to accept' an innovation on a project,

it does little good unless continuity of that decision is

assured.

The problem of the generation and use of building code

criteria must be attacked as a systems problem, and further,

It must-be viewed for what it really is: a subsystem of the

design process which assures consideration of broader social

objectives in the design of individual buildings. Viewed

as any other function, especially viewed as a police action,

the objectives of code systems become badly distorted; for

instance, we find -that many code-checking activities concentrate more on control . during the construction process (which

8
results in costly changes) rather than support, of the design

activity (which would result in the specification of satisfactory solutions and their subsequent embodiment as conditions of contract).

Speaking in broad terms, .a code system involves the

following elements:

1. A method of writing (and updating) the code;

2. A method of communicating the code . requirements

to those who must implement them in buildings,

i.e., the designer and builder.

3* A method of testing design and construction against

the coda criteria to assure compliance.

4. A method of assessing the needs of the users both

in particular and general, feeding information back

into the system for improvements of codes or for

granting exceptions to the general case of the code

We may refer to these sub-functions as the functions of:

CRITERIA GENERATION

COMMUNICATIONS

TESTING

EVALUATION & IMPROVEMENTS

We also must bear In mind that the code system is a two-way

system; while it has as its major objective the promotion of

increased quality in buildings, it must also have as its

objective continuous improvement of itself to match the

9
needs and opportunities of changing times.

As has been noted, the testing activity runs parallel

to the activities of design and- construction. The timing

of the interaction of testing with these parallel systems

is extremely important to the maximum effectiveness of either

of the activities. Poor timing of interaction can completely

deter reaching the objectives ' of either.

When the architect writes a program of criteria expressing the client’s needs, he is continuously testing his

designs against those criteria as he proceeds through the

design process; at important decision points in the development, he calls the client to make his own (the client’s)

tests of criteria against design. This is particularly useful in the events of criteria that are difficult to express,

such as those normally involving aesthetic judgment.

Consider, however, the use of codes. While the designer

may have a written statement of criteria, (the code itself)

and while he may consider them as he forms design decisions,

he does not submit his design to any authoritative test

system (and in many cases cannot do this) until the design

decisions have been substantially completed. Thus properly

timed evaluations in the many important design decisions

are lacking when they are most needed.

Thus the two most critical systems characteristics in

the code system are the proper structuring of the internal

10
communications for self improvement, and the proper structuring

and timing • of external communications which implement the

system and bring back new information to it.

With respect to the design system using the code system, the most important characteristics of the code system

are (a) its availability for interaction at the time of

decision-making 5 (b) its consistency and accuracy in rendering

judgments; (c) its ability to accept the widest possible

variety of solutions which truly satisfy the criteria; (d)

its ability to update criteria to new objectives, changing

technology and changing performance needs.

Finally, a word should be said about the form of code

statements. We must be able to relate a code statement to

a proposed solution. We axe far more able to make sophisticated criteria statements than we are to use them or test

solutions against them. The critical need for improvement

of codes is the development of logical structure and methodology which firmly relates criteria characteristics and solution characteristics. Examples of this kind of logical

structure are engineering equations which allow precise

comparisons of a particular structure and what- we think is

a -"safe" structure. As these methodologies become more

precise, they also have tendencies to become more sophisticated and expensive, and thus less "practical" to use. New

methodologies such as those allowed by computers, which

11
Increase the ease of use of more sophisticated criteria and

test systems, are a necessary component of an improved code

system. The longer-term objective must be to create a

system of codes which satisfies all of these needs and has

these requisite systems characteristics . The shorter-term

objective, that of creating a test vehicle, can and should

be so oriented as to contribute a sound base for this longterm objective.

12
STATEMENTS OF FEASIBILITY

This section will attempt to answer 19 basic questions

which affect the feasibility of developing computer systems

for comparing hospital designs and code criteria. While

% this section of the report is somewhat lengthy, the determination of the feasibility of a. complex system is not a simple f

j task. The results cannot be presented simply if full underj standing is to be achieved. However, the results of the study

are summarized as answers to the "questions" in order to

.make this section as short as possible.

For those persons who wish to explore any particular*

point in detail, Appendix I, Support of Statements on

Feasibility, is provided. Sections of this Appendix are

referenced to the question numbers. The Appendix is designed

to provide detailed information for those' who are interested,

but it is hoped that the basic feasibility of such systems •

is accurately and fully represented in the following questions and answers

13
!• What is the purpose of this report?

(a) This report is intended to discuss the applications

of computer systems to the problem of comparing

building designs to criteria set forth in regulatory

codes.

2. For whom is the report intended?

Ca) Specifically, this report is directed to the Architectural and Engineering Branch, Division of Hospital

and Medical Facilities, U. S. Public Health Service,

who are responsible for enforcing minimum design

standards in hospitals and medical facilities constructed under grants-in-aid provided by the HillBurton Act of Congress. This agency has contributed

in part to support of this study.

(b) Generally, the report is directed to any agency,

}.ocal, state, or federal, responsible for the conduct

of regulatory code systems, and to the building design

professions in general.

3. Why should the use .of computers be important to anv of

these persons ?

(a*) As we upgrade the quality of criteria toward perfor-*

mance standards, increasing demands will be made on

the code system and its professionals for sophisti—

•cated consulting and interpretation services. The

profes-sionals must be freed of "routine” duties in

14
• I 1

order to provide this important service. Further,

interpretation of more sophisticated performance

criteria will demand the development of more exacting

analytic methods to test building designs. The use

of the computer will allow the use of more sophisticated analytic methods which would not otherwise be

practical.

•4* What kind cf tasks are Involved in comparing desicns and

criteria?

Very basically., the following . operations must be performed:

• (a) The criterion must be examined

(b) Data needed about the design must be listed

(c) A search is performed

(d) If found, the data is acquired

(e) Design data -and criteria are compared

(f) A conclusion is reached and a report issued.

Hov; can the computer be applied to this process ?

Combinations of the computer and peripheral input-output

equipment can do, or aid in doing, the following things:

(a) It can store lists which specify what data is needed

to answer questions about criteria,

(b) It can help guide the operator .in collecting data,

(c) It can automatically measure and/or compute certain

data from graphically presented solutions,

15

I

*

• "

r *T 'XT'-TM'#*'- “W.’l
*n i

•*' ;.i \ s • '•7

-

(d) It can store complete and detailed descriptions of

buildings,

(e) For all precisely defined criteria, it can retrieve

all appropriate data, compare it to the criteria, and

issue a report listing all exceptions to criteria.

5. What are the basic requirements for accomplishing this?

(a) First, all the criteria to be considered by the

system must be logically precise statements, free

of relative terms, such as "aaeguate , " "near," or

/• cT

• "safe." y « -7- l ' T; • >1 j d

'y (b) Second, a way of stating the criteria to the computer

in "understandable" form must be developed.

(c) Third, a way of describing the content and geometry

of the building to the computer must be developed.

(d) Fourth, a method of processing must be developed;

7.

(e) Finally, a mode of reporting the exceptions must be

developed.

Are the criteria of Part 53, Public Health Service . Regulations, adequate, in form to meet these requirements?

(a) About 80% of the number of statements in the HillBurton code are statements such as,

"General storage (required is) 20

square feet per bed, concentrated

in one area...."

which are logically precise statements. Such statements can be introduced as equations which the

16
T V M : ; II - i i( t (! I f»> .

:>

computer can solve, e.g.

5 • Area of storage = number of beds x 20

(true or false?)

(b) About 20% of the statements are logically ambiguous f such as

*?Scrub sinks strategically located

in corridor (of contagious disease

nursing unit) (are required)”

and cannot be considered without added definition

(in this case, what constitutes strategic location?)

8* Can a description of a building be stored in the computer?

(a) Descriptions of spaces can be stored as a set of X-Y

coordinates describing the extreme points (e.g.,

corners) of a space. From these sets of coordinates,

distance, area, volume and location, can be computed. Names and descriptions of material's and equipment can. also be entered and stored, in the same

manner as conventional computerized information*

The locations of elements or equipment can be described using the coordinates system used to describe

the space boundaries*

tb)

(c)

All of this data can be entered into organized

"lists” which can be systematically searched, using

any of several existing list-search and list-processing

techniques

Techniques for description of mechanical, structural, &

electrical networks may require substantial research.

I . ••*F ro\: V i

• ' •

\ i* . "P Sr.v v < Mi— |-.i; I. v *. • 17
Components of such networks may be described as

equipment or materials and examined, but the behavior

. of the total system will be difficult and perhaps

not practical to consider . in detail * (d) Similarly, the introduction of entire sets of specifications into the computer would require storage,

of impractical size; and by the time specific information is located and extracted from specifications

,

e

' it may be more practical to complete consideration

of such data external to the machine system.

Can a practical system of processing be developed?

(a) At least two have been identified. One alternative

is to design a "query language" which asks questions

about the data file: it asks for example, "list any

bedrooms that have four beds". The data file lists

the location of all beds. These are compared, and 1 the number in any location given. As an alternative,

f

*

. a list of all beds is printed out in order of location. This list is scanned visually for exceptions

(b) An alternative method is that each criteria is stated

.

» as an equation or as a symbolic equation to be solved

by the machine and tested for its mathematical truth

or falsity. For instance, the criteria requiring

20 square feet of general storage per pationt bed

can be restated as an equation: .

! (area, general storage) £ (no. of beds) x 20

18
This equation is solved by searching the data file

for the value associated with each data name * That

value is substituted for the name in the equation*

(2000 s.f.) 2 (no beds) x (21 s.f./bed)

This is solved by the computer a

2000 - 2200

• and tested by comparing both sides of the equation

for equality. The conclusion in this case would be

that the statement is false.

10* How are the results of this comparison communicated to

the operator?

(a) When a false statement is found, the computer can

refer to and print out a standard English sentence

stored in its memory, such as,

"inadequate general storage provided;

2000 s.f. vs. required 2200 based on

110 beds x 20 s.f./bed."*1 The underlined items pertain to the case at hand,

being instance values inserted in the standard sentence. As an option, the computer could drive a

plotter, reproducing the hospital plan and positioning

its error reports at the point in plan where the

exception occurred.

11. What major operational considerations must be made in

the use of such a svstem?

19
r !

' I- *

(a) First, consideration must be given to the skills

required to operate it. Present GS—13 (average)

skills can probably be replaced with GS—7 technical

skills more readily available. Higher professional

skills would still be utilized to ••examine exceptions

reported by the system and to examine criteria which

cannot be considered by the system.

(b) Second, special consideration must be given to the

operation of transferring data from plans and specifications into the computer. The basic alternatives

are two^ First, data needed can be transferred to

forms, then punched onto standard punch card, paper

tape or mark-sense cards. This alternative requires

that all data be acquired in a "batch," introduced

into the computer, and processed. This is known

as batch processing. The major disadvantage is that

errors in data may not be discovered, and if discovered, necessitate partial or complete resubmissions.

The kind of data handled in this case suggests high

probability of this kind of error, and hence a high

resubmission rate.

(b) The second of the Alternatives involve special online equipment which transmits data directly into

the machine without key punch or other intermediate

translation. Graphic data can be directly traced

20
T \ * *

• ;

! • .t • »• ::

the use of graphic input devices. Using such devices,

the operator can trace the outline of plans and

equipment. The computer will automatically assign

coordinate values to the critical points of the plan,

thus automatically translating and graphic data into

computer readable format. Names and other attributes

of entities can be entered on on-line typewriters as

the input proceeds. Using combinations of these

techniques, all data can be- entered directly into

the machine without the useof punch cards or paper

tape. Such an on line system can process data as it

receives it, ask for more data and guide the operator

in the acquisition of data. This communication, or

conversation, between man and machine takes place

through the typewriter hooked to the computer or

through a Cathode ray tube screen (like a TV screen)

which can display words and pictures.

The use of the computer in conversational mode

with the operator provides important capability.

The computer can organize and guide work (which

can reduce the skills required to operate the

system) and can redisplay (on the oscilloscope)

graphic and text input for an accuracy check

• VitfflATl • r I Mi m .vns 21
by the operator. This minimizes the -chances of ; erroneous or incomplete input. Figure B gives an

illustration of these pieces on input-output equipt ment in a hypothetical configuration. The computer

i itself is not illustrated.

<a 12. Are there more alternatives to be considered?

(a) In fact, many more; however, the best judgment is

that these alternatives of (1) batch processing with

minimal "hardware", i.e.* computer equipment, and

(2) on-line processing with maximum use of exotic

hardware, represent the extreme of application.

Most other technologically feasible systems represent some combination or modification of these

alternatives.

(b) One major alternative to be considered is the use of

remote "time-sharing." input-output stations, hooked

by long-distance communications lines to a- central

computer. This would allow use of the system by

many separate regional offices. At present, long

distance data transmission may be prohibitive in

' cost.

1 3 . How can the best system be selected from these alternatives?

(a) The evaluation should be made on the basis of the

costs of each alternative compared to the benefits

derived. The major costs - of the system would be:

li^ 22
I©

4-» O

5* O

5*8

go.

ig3*h

PU.H

o. HS3 *< o o

*-l V.

4->

tt) c

.C O

O -P P.C5

A

O

S)

e

c

o

V

V

oA

H

P«

(0 (3 «H O Q r-t O

© Q

O. C

O O

o uQ

O r-»8

O G » O

o o

(4 ©

© o

t o

£ n

o

sH Pi

G

O M

«H

fi O

O «H k,G

4* Pi

O Cj

O (4

• • • •

r-4 CVJKVd-

?.»

I

--o;

«.

i

t

s

»

c

/

nhuhoh 'm i. :i\n j,oin h«iax

23

aing

Syotom
; - * i i *•’

f * •. * . i> iiOI’D '/i

(1) Coats of purchased equipment (or)

Costs of rented equipment and processing

time

; j (2) Costs of programming the equipment;

(3) Cost of administering the development of

the system;

(4) Annual costs of operating personnel;

. (5) Overhead on equipment and personnel.

Costs 1 ,2, and 3 should be discounted over the

life of the system, which is assumed to be five

years. Cost 4 includes the services of a programmer

operating continously to up-date and modify programs.

. tc) The benefits derived are harder to measure in units

of cost. They should include:

(1) Value of time of professional architects

and engineers relieved by the system,

(2) The value of any capability added by the

system,

(3) The costs of expected expansion without i the system as opposed to the costs of

i expansion with it.

14. What is the expected value of the benefits of a computer

system? . (a) Detailed examination of the form of criteria, the

24
•I • .

;/

(b)

» \ , ? (*

sources of data in plans, and the nature of the

comparisons formed have been undertaken and contrasted

to reports of time spent in various activities by

the professionals in the program. The staff is currently processing 500 projects with some 1200-1400

estimated design submissions per year. The current

estimated annual cost of reviewing drawings and contract documents is estimated at 1350,000. This study

indicates that approximately 50% of these man-hours

could be replaced by the machine system; therefore

the major benefit would be the relief of skilled manpower-valued at $‘175,000 per year.

Some of the immediate added capability of the system would include:

(1) The provision of detailed data files on each

design submitted at each phase of submission,

in form suitable for statistical analysis

by computer (analytic programs would be a

separate cost). This would allow analysis

of space usage, regional and building type

costs, etc., on a detailed current basis,

and other options.

(2) Assurance that all criteria in the computer system were applied to every project,

and applied uniformily and objectively

25
(3) Ability to expand program capability

more readily through decreased dependence upon scarce skills.

(4) The ability to use existing professional

skills in more critical (and more

challenging and attractive) roles.

No attempt has been made to assign a dollar value to

this added capability. The discussion of potential

future capability is postponed until a later section.

15. What would be the expected costs of a computer system?

(a) This is highly dependent upon the particular configuration and operation selected. For the two extremes

examined, the cost of the batch-processing system

• was estimated to be about $410,000 per year, all

costs considered; likewise, full on-line processing

systems estimated out at about $300,000 per year. A

third alternative examined involved the use of a

"small” computer to operate input-output equipment

with all the "on-line” features, but which relegated

the main processing to a rented time on a larger

computer. This kind of system estimated out at

about $175,000 per year, which appears to be a

feasible cost compared to the value of professional

skills relieved. Thus it appears that some configurations are feasible on a benefit-cost basis, v/ithout

26
considering the value of added capability* These

cost estimates are the best available without full

systems design, but are still approximations*

16* Would the installation of a computer system recuire

changes in the internal operating procedures?

(a) Quite likely. You could not- expect to hire 300 new

personnel with specialized skills and put them to

work without changes in procedures. Similarly, the

capability of a computer system v/ill demand some

changes and allow others*

(b) It is very likely that processing would be done at

one location if maximum cost—benefit is to be

derived. This would be a major change over the

current practice of regional processing of applications and submissions. High-speed communications

systems (not necessarily computer—operated ) can still

link the processing facility and the regional office,

and the net effect would be the same as if the

regional operative sent a talented clerk into the

next room with the plans.

(c) Freeing the professionals for more 'Consulting and

liaison work is also likely to induce change in the

form of more information and ideas gathered from

the field.

! I* • 27
There must he a major drawback

(a) While on the la3t subject — that of change - one

• "drawback 0 did emerge. The computer is a robot. It

has no self-contained intelligence or judgment. It'

does only - and precisely - what it is told to do.

• O'- Therefore, if the criteria entered into it, says

that a single-bed patient room should have 100 sq.

ft. area minimum, it will reject a room with

99.99996 sq. ft., whereas the human would have

accepted that. Thus every exception reported - but

only the exceptions — needs review by someone capable of judgment, i.e., a professional.

Of course, an alternative is to build tolerance

into tho machine. We might in fact accept a toler4. ance of -5 sq*ft., or 95 sq*ft., and accordingly we

program th& machine. Is the problem solved? Not

necessarily, because now the question is simply

moved to whether or not we accept the room of

94.999998 sq. ft. as being within the tolerance

limits. This could go on forever. The system would

also pass a patient bed room 50* long a 2

f wide.

The computer is too precise.

Or is it? Did we mean what we said when we said

100 sq. ft.? If so, why were wa willing to accept

99 or 97? or 95? cr 94.99S9&? We did so becaitna

28
• • * . I we recognized that the plan configuration fulfilled ! the functional need of getting stretchers in and out

of the roorru providing access on both sides of the

patient and providina space for medical eauipment —;

, that might be needed in the room... and these were !

'

‘ . . . 0

i the real criteria we haa m mind. !

9 (b) In its own seeming inability to do what we ask it

to do, the computer will point out these fallacies

in our own thought processes. It will force discipline and rigor in thought such that criteria will

have to say what they mean, instead of providing the

approximate values of the past solutions.- Eventually

the statements of criteria must be based on concepts

of how we wish the building to perform . These will

be complex and difficult statements, such as:

”the patient bedroom must provide

adequate manuevering space for the

entry and exit of equipment for •

transporting non-ambulatory patients.”

(c) Having contributed to the forcing of this rigor,

the computer also works to allow it, in that it

allows us to develop techniques to ”simulate” the

actual movement of stretchers in and out of rooms,

and even complex things., such as the traffic loads

on .facilities , the evacuation of buildings in

- i

i
I ’. a: - i

emergencies, and the effectiveness of communications

systems. Without a computer, these things axe not

possible.

(d) It is Important that code systems have such capabilities, to allow the imaginative designer to seek

new solutions which can place patients comfortably , in 70 square feet, but which also constrain the

irresponsible designer from solutions which do not

• * work.

17. Is this part of the future capability mentioned earlier?

(a) Yes. As experience is acquired through use of the

system, there is potential that many capabilities

can be added.

. (b) Some of these capabilities will be in support of

more sophisticated criteria statements such as

those mentioned above.

(c) But some of the capabilities which could be added

would support the Hill-Burton program in one of its

other purposes, which is to act as consultants on

hospital design in order to maximize the quality

of these facilities nationwide. It is technically

and theoretically feasible (although the costs are

not estimable) to add programs which would allow

simulations of traffic flow, which could test

facility capacity, the positioning of stairs and

‘

' T

' 30\

:
elevators, the location of exits, and so forth.

Demographic studies to help select proper hospital

• sites could be performed. Other services to the

architect, such as full dimensional checking,

checking for conflicts of .subsystems, and the like,

can be visualized.

18 . Would these chances, like the initial installation , cause chances in future procedures ?

(a) They certainly permit speculation about the future

organization and operation of code systems. First,

we can visualize extension of the system to the

point where a limited number of input-output stations could be made available to architects to

assist them with the actual design problems. As,

and if, this proves feasible, we can begin to think

of the architect designing hospital on such inputoutput stations in his offices, connected by remote

lines to the code-system computer-processor . As

he designed on-line with the code system, he would

receive immediate interpretation of his decisions

as being acceptable to or not acceptable to the code

criteria. Thus many costly errors and changes in

the design phase could be avoided. Such a system,

of course, avoids translating the data from plans

and specifications into the computer, and in fact

31
T Vfl I'M.. •<}.. v .n.i unit! *»•:*.

19 ,

the computer can be used to produce such plans and

i

I specifications. Presumably the architect would

i observe the comments of the machine system, and the

j need of checking finalized designs could be reduced I to a minimum, if not altogether eliminated. : (b) Further, if code criteria can be introduced in such'

a manner, many other client criteria, program criteria, professional practice criteria and the like

can be introduced into the machine to interact with

• i

i the designer. We begin to be well on our way to

the development of more sophisticated, accurate and

i consistent designs. j (c) All of these things are possible; it is essentially

a question of whether they are feasible- on a costbenefit basis. As computer technology and the demands for better design continue to grow, it is

almost surely only a question of time. ; How could such a system be developed for PHS use? •

l (a) The next step would be to create a performance

specification for such a system which would request 1 proposals from industry for the design, programming,

development, and installation of the system as a

package. There are several industry firms which ard

interested in and capable of developing such prp-

,posals.

v * • i 32
(b) The performance specification itself would require

firm identification of the needs of the program,

examination of alternatives, and the creation of

a Request for Proposal” document to be used as a

basis for bidding by industry. This document can

be prepared by the National Bureau of Standards, It

is estimated that this work, combined with receiving

and evaluating subsequent proposals, would require • from six to nine months.

(c) Pending the receipt of a satisfactory proposal, a

contract for development of the system would be

awarded to the successful bidder(s). The system

would probably have limited prototype operational

capability within a year after that time; it could

be fully operational and assuming a full work load "7

in about two years.

(d) During the development phase, many other task's,

such as changeover plans, training, hiring, and

reorganization must be undertaken as parallel activities v/ithin the Kill-Burton program.

(e) This work should be administered by a Joint Project

Development Team composed of Hill-Burton Program

personnel and staff from appropriate divisions of

the National Bureau of Standards.

33
(f) A separate detailed proposal for this work is being

developed by NES and will be submitted separately.

34
t f

* » ! ! r i v -t' <-i ur:,{ •

APPENDIX- I

DETAILED ANALYSIS IN

SUPPORT OF FEASIBILITY STATEMENTS

! \ * * • 35
!» •'

' : l SUPPORT OF STATEMENT 4: DEFINITION CF THE PROCESS '

i It is generally accepted that the process of design cab

be represented by descriptions • of three distinct activities;

analysis, synthesis and evaluation. In analysis, the problem is identified, the relevant variables are determined

- (as well as their interrelationships) and the criteria for

the judgment of a solution are fixed or defined. The act

of synthesis is the act of forming physical entities which . perform the functions in question, assembling these entities,

and specifying the solution with words or pictures.

In evaluation, we somehow attempt to simulate the resulting performance of the solution. we have listed; this

simulation yields answers in the form of qualitative or

quantitative values, which are then compared to values

c expressed in the design criteria. Errors in the design are

determined through observation of disparities between the i simulated solution values and the design criteria values.

When disparities are observed and judged to be unacceptable!

the process cycles back to either synthesis' or analysis and

the process is repeated until a satisfactory solution is

reached.

This of course is a highly simplified and idealized

description, but it is adequate to handle the general discussion of the case. It also represents accurately major

N|,n 36
tn w n i.-«T i,'\i i ii. ••• 'f'lii'K.v

characteristics of the process,, namely, that the design

process can be described as an iterative (recycling) feed-

.• i back system, "Feedback 0 in this case represents information

generated as a result of some previous activities which is

used to guic^ or control subsequent repetitions of that ac-

! tivity.

A simple illustration of feedback in' design may be

gained by examining the selection of a steel column. Given

the load, we may select a column thought to be about the

right size (synthesis), submit it to engineering equation

checks (evaluation), and find it "too big". We then select

a smaller column, and going through the same process, find

it "too small". On the next try, the information generated

in the past two tries will tell us to select a 'column between

the two sizes tried; in this case, the range of options is

*

. £ becoming successively narrowed as a result of the information generated on previous tries. ' The previous results are

"feeding back" information to the .new activity.

i Building code inspections are in fact evaluations of

decisions made by the Architect or Engineer. They will

provide feedback information to the architect or engineer

whenever a solution is found to be unsatisfactory, and will

require him to re-enter the stages of analysis or synthesis

as surely as evaluations performed d urin g the design process

would have. The principal differences between the two kinds

•

. \t ' • i 37
of evaluation are in timing and purpose.

In the sense of purpose - in building code evaluations,

it may be construed as two possibilities: (a) to assure the

consideration of broader social objectives, such as overall

quality and land use in the community, or (b) to assure that . the best experience is used in reaching responsible design

decisions. To the immediate purpc^se at hand, it makes no

/ difference which of these motives is used or whether either

are correct motives.

On the other hand, the problem of timing does make as

substantial a difference as one could imagine. Given client

criteria, or personal criteria, or professional criteria, the

designer usually has authority to make decisions about the

results of evaluation . He can decide v/hether or not a solution is acceptable, or can call a meeting at any point in

the design process to determine the acceptability of any

solution in question. Thus decisions of evaluation are

closely timed with activities of analysis and synthesis.

With a code system, however, the evaluations are made

essentially after the total design is completed. The design,

of course, is a series of dependent decisions, in which

mistakes in early decisions affect all subsequent and dependent decisions. An incorrect assumption about floor loads,

for instance, affects all subsequent engineering calculations,

and hence perhaps the bay spacing and the total functional

38
solution of plan. When the designer is forced to proceed

through a complex series of decisions without any authoritative evaluation and then submit the results for this

evaluation, it can precipitate disastrous (for the designer)

results necessitating the re-examination and correction of

hundreds of decisions.

This is a serious functional defect 1 in the design

evaluation system, which deserves a great deal of attention

and analysis concerning its actual cost in efficiency and

man-hours , lost . It is a defect to which a least part of

this study can be directed. The timing of the code evaluation decision has more immediate ramifications to the

design of this system, however, which are quite important

as constraints to the system.

The fact that the code evaluation follows the completion of an entire design, or at least a major portion of it

(some codes, such as the Kill-Burton, review design decisions

at two or three points in the process), forces the creation

of a rather elaborate system of communications. The designer

must record all of his decisions formally, as if they were

final, for communication to the code people. The final

design document is so elaborate and detailed that it is not

economically possible to produce several different forms of

document suited to different purposes; convention dictates

that this information is given to the code people in a form,

39
! A i-*l ii.' I iii»ni> •:»

namely plans and specifications, which is primarily intended

to guide the construction process . What is presented is a ;

i

! set of names, graphic symbols, and descriptive phrases which

is rarely directly useful in the evaluation process, and may

not even indicate the information necessary for the evaluation in the design of the system: the information for evaluation is presented in the ' form of plans and specifications,

which may or may not be the correct, i # e„, most efficient,

form for evaluation purposes. .

.

This' first constraint immediately imposes a second

constraint on the process of code evaluation. The information presented in plans and specifications not. only may be

in the wrong form, but there is always a great deal of

extraneous information which is not required. Thus the

first activity in which the code evaluator becomes immersed

is the separation of relevant data from irrelevant, and its

translation to proper form for usage. Thus there ’is a sub-'

stantial added burden on the code evaluator in the performance

of complex information search aid retrieval. This is an

operational requirement, but it will act as a major constraint . on how well the code inspection is conformed or can be

performed . .

# The presentation of information in the form of plans

and specifications also contributes to another major constraint in determination of exactly how design evaluation

v .. 40
. I ! t i ;

• t »'

i can be done. The information given on plans and specifications concerns itself only with physical entities, descriptions 'of their characteristics or attributes , or descriptions

; of the processes used to assemble them during construction.

. The function of the code system evaluator, then, is to

construct comparisons between this information and the concepts stated in the code criteria.

The code criteria themselves are variable in form. They

can be either materials specification statements * or performance specification statements . The former concern them-

. selves with the specification of required physical entities

or the specification of required attributes of those entities

(such as material, dimension, etc.). The latter specify

only the required functional performance of the building or

some aspect of it, and never concern themselves with any

physical characteristic of the solution. Many criteria do

not clearly fall into either category, but occupy some middle

ground*.

If the criteria are stated purely in terms of materials

•An example of a materials specification criteria: "Ceilings

shall be acoustical tile". A performance specification for

the same function might read: "Acoustic suppression shall be

provided as required to maintain maximum noise level of 15

db within the space." A criteria such as "Acoustical tile

shall be provided as required to maintain maximum noise level

of 15 db." is neither purely materials, since it does not

specify all the material characteristics, nor performance,

since it dees not provide for other means of acoustical

control

41 •
. I' !‘l * «?» !« » » *1 I'*#-' f

specifications or the attributes of physical entities, the i problems of forming a comparison are quite different, and

much simpler, that if the criteria are performance- oriented

I The criteria of materials specifications can be compared ( directly, in many cases, with the information on the plans.

The process of comparison is limited to establishing a \ correlation or identity between two pieces of information.

For instance, if the specification called for acoustic

tile ceilings, the location of that same phrase "acoustic

tile" .with reference to. ceilings specified in the plans is

adequate to complete the check.

On the other hand, if the criteria specifies performance, their is no direct relation between the listing of

materials entities and the performance concept. The code

evaluator is now faced with the problem of determining what

elements within the space contribute to acoustic suppression;

he will then require some sort of a model, i.e., set of rules

or relations, which predict the performance of that configura

tion. The model must be capable of translating the given

set of physical attributes into terms of level of functional',

performance. An excellent example of such a model is a

set of engineering equations which allow us to determine if

a beam called 1SV7F35 possesses a "safe" performance level in

supporting a given load. The ability to use performance

criteria by and large rests on whether or not such predictive

models exist, and on. what level of sophistication.

42
I* .2

Even if the criteria in question are totally materials

specification criteria, some translations of the data as

described above are still necessary. For instance, if the

criteria specifies that any room could be within a certain

distance of an exit, this exit dimension is almost never

given on the plans. Execution of the evaluation depends upon

the ability of the operator, to extract that data from the

given information; if he cannot read it directly, he must

execute a series of procedures involving compilation,

measurement, computation, and/or judgment of the required

values. (Compilation consists of reading several values from

different sources; measurement the use of standard instruments, such as a ruler, for the derivation of values; computation of course, is the execution of mathematical procedures such as addition, multiplication and the iike).

In either of the above cases, the function of procedures used has been to accomplish the translation of data

into terms comparable to those of the criteria, allowing

comparisons through the matching of identitical values. In

some areas, the procedures are rigorously defined (even though

they may not be particularly accurate). For instance, one

aspect of the safety of a steel beam is defined as the condition that tensile stresses should not exceed x thousand

pounds per square inch. There are procedures to predict

the real stress in a given beam configuration, which also

• it. \ 43
results in a calculated stress of x thousand pounds per . square inch. -The two numbers are directly comparable.

Most factors to be judged do not benefit from such ( rigorously defined procedures. There is in the Hill-Burton

Code a criterion which stipulates ."adequate 1

* hand washing

facilities, with no further definition of the term "adequate" provided. In the plans, there are a number of sinks

located at the position in question. The process of comparison obviously depends upon some judgments on the part of

the evaluator. He must form some kind of informal model in

his mind, bridging the gap between the two concepts "x

number of sinks" and "adequate handwashing facilities". The

particular answer he may form is not of particular interest

to this discussion; rather it is the ‘fact that 'his "model

is based on his experience and his "intuition" and is highly

informal in most cases, defying quantification and precise

description. These same kinds of models are used in many

areas of design: aesthetic quality, functional adequacy,

and so forth. Perhaps ' they can be formalized and quantified,

and perhaps not; the important thing is that they are used

in many evaluations, and at the present time they are not

defined. Thus the success of the system depends in large

part on processes which we know little or nothing about.

Because these informal, intuitive, judgmental models

are formed on the basis of personalized experience and

44
'it tlH , It

capability, they are not always extremely consistent or

reliable. But most code systems require consistency and

impartiality in rendering judgments. In areas of concern

where models capable of predicting performance are lacking

or not agreed upon, the requirement for consistency forces

• a the system to rely upon detailed materials specifications

which can allow evaluations of unquestionable veracity.

The previous discussion suggests that an important

characteristic of criteria is the level of definition . At

least three important levels can be -defined:

1. Full definition .: the specification concepts are

measurable in defined units, and logical procedures exist to relate the physical attributes of

an entity to the specification concepts.

2. Partial Definition : the specification concepts are

defined and measurable, but formal or rational

procedures do not exist to relate physical attributes to the concepts.

3. Undefined : the specification concepts are logically

ambiguous or imprecise.

These descriptions apply equally to materials specification

or performance criteria. Since we have already discovered

that the precision of evaluations depend upon the establishment of logical identities which are unambiguous, it is

now possible to observe that the level of performance of an

•

i . • j 45
evaluation system will depend ' more upon the level of definition of the criteria than upon the form (i.e., materials

or performance) of the criteria. It is also possible to

observe on this basis that a well-defined system of evaluation should be able to handle either form of criteria - equally

well; the system will depend principally on how well the

system of measurement and translation • performs .

• The importance of the human in the system is also clear

at this point. If a system is fully defined, it can be

expressed in terms of logical and/or mathematical equations,

and a machine such as a computer could make the evaluations

as well as - and probably more reliably than - the human

being. gut as the system becomes more and more undefined,

we become more and more dependent upon the human ability to

form the necessary intuitive models through his sense of

rightness, or through his understanding of the values of

society as he has informally, but adequately, come to

understand them.

Summary

Thus far, we have identified the following parts of the

process, some of which will be controllable variables in

the design of a new system, and some of which will act as

constraints:

1« The code evaluation' system is a subsystem in the

larger design system, acting .as an evaluation

‘iO
mechanism subsequent to analytic and. synthetic

decisions by the designing architect or engineer*

2c The timing of the code system evaluation forces

the designer to summarize all of his decisions in

a formal set of plans and specifications*

3c The description of the design solution is therefore presented to the code system as plans and

specifications, which may not contain the information in the precise form needed for evaluation, and

always contain much more information than 'is needed;

4. This forces the code system evaluator (inspector)

to first search through the documents for information he needs , and then

5« Translate that information -into the form required

through the use of formal or informal procedures,

6c In order that the final evaluation be made, whereever possible, in logically equivalent terms forming

identities

7c The results of this evaluation are then returned

to the designer, who must re-cycle through his

analytic and synthetic phases to correct any errors

observed during the evaluation.

This process is described as a flow diagram in Figure

4.1i A more detailed and elaborate model of this process

was prepared in the course of this study, but is not here

47
TV IK MUST’ i.i i UKf.i.V TINS HOKITRR

i presented due to its complexity and difficulty of presenta-

, tion*. It is hoped that this model will be available as a

, separate paper in the future.

•The model, in the form of a flow diagram, was prepare

•jointly by Weldon E, Clark of Bolt, Beranek and Newman,

and Gary K. Stonebraker of the Institute. It covers in

detail most of the aspect of evaluation discussed in the

25 -Hater sections of this report.

! ?* '

' »

' r v •: r

i •tii s |5«.. | *.»;

I'- rn\( \j : l.-

ii S’ \M>« : i> '.m . i- 1 .

> - r• i

F. 48
TYI’K FIRST LINK HKl.tu; l IU> Itol'DKU

SUPPORT OF STATEMENTS 5 THROUGH 10: The Application of

Computer Technology to Code Evaluation Processes

In the main body of the report, statement 5 states in

5- a rather unqualified way that an electronic computer is

capable of accepting a description of a set of criteria and

a description of the complete geometry and contents of a

building, extracting the relevant data from the description

of the building, and comparing it to any precisely defined

criteria* Taken in the unqulified way, the statements are

true, but they deserve modification and qualification.

The principle qualification in the statement of feasibility is that the system can automatically process any

precisely defined criterion. (i.e., "fully defined" by

the definition in the previous section)* The simple fact

is that many of the Hill-Burton criteria are not fully

defined (about 20% of the number of statements, in fact).

Thus the design of a fully automatic system which handles

all inspection work is,, for this reason if none other, not

i * . feasible. The criteria requiring judgmental consideration

must be left to the human in the system. Thus we are concerned with the design of a man-machine system , not just

a computer system.

This is true for many other reasons as well. First

~ of all, the data is presented to the system as a set of

' "'ll' ! <>! ro.\i vriif |;

'» i . •• - . \ \r>M :i.< *» l*-'* \ i. t5 i'ii, 49 f- ! \ I

*
f

• » .«<

plans and specifications. While it might be desirable to

consider revising the form in which the data is presented,

it is not now considered practical to consider such alternatives. The reasons for this are presented later in this

appendix. For the time being, it will suffibe to say that

this form cf presentation must be accepted as a constraint

on the system design. This means that the data must be

translated from its combined graphic and alpha-numeric form

into "machine-readable" form. This translation^while it

might be automated fully in the future, for the present will

depend greatly upon a human being.

Finally, the ultimate constraint of any computer system

is that the machine possesses only the talent, intelligence

and capability with which 'it is .programmed. The rightness’

of its performance and its answers depends upon the rightness of the questions asked of it, and the human must always

be available to judge the quality cf the results of a

computer operation.

Thus we are clearly concerned with the problem of

interaction between man and machine, and the problem will

be to intelligently divide the responsibility and the

work to optimize the results, that is, to make the best

results possible at the least possible costs. (Costs

should. not be construed in this case as dollars, but 'rather

effort expended, in terms of humans, resources and other considerations.

50
! : . ' I II i \ ' y y> v .! \ •> Mi!-. I -I

••

The problem of designing a man-machine interaction

system is signif icantly different than the problem of simply

replacing human functions with a machine. The entry of the

machine inevitably causes redesign in the role of man; likewise, the capability of the man to perform tasks must be

examined carefully and contrasted to the machine capability

available before intelligent decisions to use machine

capability can be made.

Functional Problems Requiring Examination

The use of the computer in any evaluation role presupposes

•that a series of conditions are met:

1. First, that the machine possesses a complete file

of all information it requires concerning the

building design under consideration;

2. Second, that the machines "understands" how

evaluations are made and to what information they

are made

3. Third, that it is capable of executing the evaluation;

4. Fourth, that it can give meaningful and reliable

reports of the evaluation.

The first problem is usually described as the problem of

data input ; the second and third problems are those of

processing , and the fourth that of output . Each of these

problem areas is discussed in order in the following sections.

•

'! r • IV • • • » •- - .

'

. :* it «

i 51
' I

Methods of Processing for Code Evaluations

It will be useful to discuss the aspects of automatic

evaluation by computer prior to discussing the problems of

input and output, since the design of input and output subsystems is in many ways dependent upon the mode of processing

selected.

Let us presume for the moment that the necessary data

about the building, including descriptions of its contents

and geometry, has been stored in the computer memory. (The

accomplishment of this will be discussed in the later section

on Input). We are now concerned with providing instructions

to the computer as to how to retrieve and process this information such that the required evaluations will have been

performed.

In their consulting reports, both Fair, Isaac Associates

and Bolt, Beranek and Newman suggest that the data file, i.e.,

the description of the building stored in the computer, be

viewed as a body of information about which questions are to

be asked. Thus a criterion, such as ”Every patient bed room

shall contain a lavatory,” can also be viewed as a question

which may be asked about the data file: ’’Does every entity

named patient bed room contain within its limits an entity

named lavatory?” The question is answered by examining the

data file, and a yes or no answer indicates whether or not

the criterion is satisfied.

52
There is a rather large number of options as to

exactly hew this operation may be performed by the computer.

The intention of this study has not been to identify the

.best way to do it, but rather to demonstrate that it can

be done. Two different methods have been suggested by the

two consul ring firms in cooperation with the staff, and a

hearing presented only as demonstrations of possible solutions, not as implied solutions. Each method has enjoyed

limited operational demonstration on a computer.

Fair, Isaac and Associates selected what can be described

as a "query” technique to perform the necessary processing,

on the grounds that most criteria question the existence of

an entity or an attribute which is specified in the data

file. The mode of operation consists of' stipulating a

question representing a criterion; the computer responds by

returning a list of all entities or attributes thereof

meeting the condition of the question. Lists can be scanned

visually for exceptions to the criterion, or in some cases

automatically processed against master lists to determine

the exception. For instance, to determine if all bedrooms

contained a lavatory, the list of all bedrooms would be--

compared against a list of rooms in which the lavatory

appeared. The techniques employed allow considerable freedom

in the questions asked, and the list of questions need not

be fixed. This feature is provided through complex list*

53
manipulation techniques ,. which allov; c

structuring cf the data in the file at

expense to processing efficiency. The

used in the demonstration was LISP.

The • techniques suggested. by Eolt,

in contrast to the above is presented

rear freedom in the

some considerable

programming language

Beranek and Newman

in the following

excerpt from their report:

"If the requirement statements are viewed

as questions to be asked of a body of data

then we need to establish some form in which

• such questions are written. . In the suggested

system the requirement statements are considered

to be in the form of logical expressions anaiyogous

to those that would be written in a comouter

programming language- In natural language a

requirement statement might be as .follows:

"If the space is a patient room and

1) the number of beds is 1 and the area is greater

than or equal to ICO sq. ft., or

2) the number of beds is gr eaten than 1 but less

than or equal to 4 and the area in sq. ft. is

greater than or equal to 60 times the number

of beds

then the statement is true; otherwi

is not met and this fact should be

e, the requirement

eperted.

The use of conventional logical -and algebraic symbols

serves to rake s qch a statement much mere concise and

to standardize its form. The above example can. be

restated as;

If (space = pat rem)—>( (beds = 1 A. area*- 100 ) V

(l c/ beds f: 4 /\ area E? SO x beds ) ) ) then statement rip true else go to rep er

Where the symbols have the following approximate

definitions

C A

w> *“X
= means is envoi valen 4b ! Oj

/\ means and

V means or

s • < means less than

means less than or eaual to

means greater than or ecual to

means is ass i cried the value

* "The parentheses imply .that the statement is to be

evaluated in parts, starting v/ith the innermost parenthetical expressions.

A comparable statement for materials or equipment might

be stated in natural language as:

All patient rooms shall have lavatories

with faucets having goose neck spouts

opening above the rim of the fixutre

and with wrist action handle.

This might be restated as:

If (space -- pat} A(lavatory - type A) then

statement true else go to report * Acceptable lavatory and faucet combinations would be

listed in a table labelled as Type A. If no lavatory

were found referenced for a patient room or the referenced lavatory and faucet were not listed on the approved

table a non-compliance report would be indicated.

.n such form are essentially por tions of . the collection of statements

Statements

computer program. mus

,

is equivalent to a program which is intended to operate a file of data which are the stored items of information from the design solution. The imp li cat inn of

viewing the set of statements as a program is that a

collection of statements relevant to one code can be

gathered together in one program and those relevant to

another code in another program. Either of these

programs might then be run for the same set of design

data. Further, modifications to the set of requirement

statements is analogous to modification of the logic of

a computer program, which is a common and easily

described orocess." • 55
The actual prcces -ing of criteria written in the equa-

*; -n'icra’ sugges ted ab is accomplished by examining the

s !:« turner} t; serially or in parts as suggested by the parentheses in the statement. The names printed in the statement

are names of entities or the attributes of entities; the

symbols are operators, or instructions to. the computer as to

•v.ich action it is to perform next. The information in the

data file is organized tc form, a list of names and properries (i.e., values) of the names. For instance, the name of

an entity might be ’’patient bed room"; its specific value,

used to distinguish it from like entities, might be "room

154"; -similarly, the name of an attribute of the patient

bed room might be "area"; its value might be "225 s.f."

In processing, the computer will encounter a name; it would

search through the file until it found a like name. It

would then acquire* the value of the name, e.g., "room 154"

« and would substitute it in the equation. Similarly, it

mignt acquire the area value and all other values named in’

the equation. When all values had been acquired, the equation can be solved. If the resulting answer is true, the

entity examined complied with the requirements; if not, it

is tagged as an exception. The exact mode of reporting

In order to organize the information properly for such

kind of processing, it: as necessary to arrive at seme
conventions i . e i

,

systems

information will be seated

manner it will be stored.

of notation, specifying how the

to. the computer and in wiiat

Bolt, Beranek and Newman suggest:

"An attempt to automate the process of checking the

design of a building against code regulations must

depend on some organized and logical description of

the building. Thus, an important problem to be face d

is deve 1 opment of

Sueh n o

4*

V- Q

4~ ion m1 1 w t

of he e 1 d men t 3 c mak u p Cl modern

be equ 1 y us eful

ticn o f aIT oup of

par u ia 1

-ti vel opmen

pre S en t e in this

a rational scheme of notation.

provide means for describing all

d networks of services which together

uiiding. The notation scheme should

at a more general level for descrip—

buildings in urban developments. 'A

t of such a system of notation is

Section.

A. Entities and Nested Sets of Entities

A physical complex of space

networks of services, etc.,

a collection of entities,

complex being described is

major entity of concern is

set of entities which that

is- comprised of buildings,

circulation networks.

s', enclosing elements

can be aescr ibe d as

For

example

,

"if the

r* r\ liege campus the

the entire si te. . The

site includes or owns

util ity networks , and

Each of this

subset of en

be corner is ed

set of entities may in turn own - a

tities* For example; a building may

of a ccl lection of entities which

are the major wings or floor

each another collection that

the building. Each room may

levels

,

are the

further

set of entities which includes items

etc.

and within

rooms of

have a subof equipment

B. Kinca of Entities

A number of

be defined

features of

en t kinas o

to describe

different varieties of entities can

that together comprise the important

a given physical complex. Five tiifferr entitle^ are defined here as sufficient

buildings and the hr environment

Sosces * Networks

Enclosure elements

Eou ip.v.ent

I t o. r r a 1 s 57
tf " -N of

entity

another

kin

Pr*.v

a building may own an

which in turn owns ai.

ner.t. and diffusers,

particular space enti

entities — the walls

d may subsume or own entities

example, a space entity that is

airconditioning network entity

rhandling equipment, cooling equip — all equipment. entities. A

ty may include enclosure element

, floor 'and ceiling of the room.

The distinction between the five kinds of entities are

not always precise and clar-cut. As an example, the

collection of corridors, stairways and elevators,

sidewalks, driveways, .parking lots, and so forth

which comprise the circulation elements of a medical

center complex may be considered as a collection of

interconnected space entities. These may alternatively

be considered as a circulation network.

C. Attributes of Entities

The five different kinds of entities which we have

defined can each be described in terms of a list of

attributes. These attributes are' the main factors

which can be measured to distinguish one entity from

another of the same kind. A partial list of attributes for each of the . five kinds is presented below

with some explanatory comments. A definition of some

important properties' of the attributes is also

presented. •

•

1. Lis ts of Attributes . The attributes which are

defined for eacn of the kinds of entities are

stated in Table 1. Table 1(a) applies to

spaces as' entities, Table 1(b) to networks, etc

Unique entities must each be fully described in

computer storage. Many times, however, repetitive instances cf an entity exist that need

not be separately described. In these cases

an instance form is used in which only the

few atcr routes- necessary to define the existence and the location -of the particular instance are necessary. Table 2 illustrates the

instance forms.

D. Properties of the Attributes

There are several

tgur for each of

principal or oner

the valve that rh

2 ar rr. s'U: . If

might be 100 sq.

items of -information that are impor—

t he attributes listed in Table 1. The

y of each attribute is, of course,

at attribute takes on for a particut he at tribute were a res the value

f t • for ins t ance

58 -
TABLE X

ATTRIBUTES OF DESIGN DATA ENTITIES

AftT-lbn *• r. , Descriotior.

la Attributes of Space Entities

Ident if lor Code for kind . of entity

Name Label for particular entity

Location (x, y, z) Coordinates of reference

point (e.g., corner of

space

)

• Shape Code for basic geometric form

class (e.g., rectangular)

• Plan coordinates

x

l> Vi

X

2

’ ^2

Location coordinates (e.g.,

for corners ) *

Height

Area . . Volume

Vertical dimension of space

Reference to enclosure

element entity

In same order as lines described by plan coordinates;

then floor, ceiling

Reference to materials

entity

References to surface finishes

in same order as enclosure

element reference above

Reference to owned .entity Reference to equipment, doors,

subunits of space (e.g.,

toilet enclosures, closets)

etc

For other geometric forms

dimentsionq might be used

shape )

other coordinates or

(e.g., radius for circular
Attribute Name Description

lb Attributes of Network Entities

Identifier

Name

location (x,y,z)

Configuration type

Junction node label One subset of attributes for

Junction node location .each node joining branches

(x,y,z)

• Reference to connecting

branch

6

Terminal node label

Terminal node location

vx.y.z)

Reference to connecting

branch

Reference to owned network or equipment entity

One subset of attributes for

each node terminating the

network

Branch label

Reference to owned space,

material or enclosure

entity

Size or capacity

attribute

One subset of attributes for

each branch

0

60
4- Attribu Narre DescriDtion i 1c Attributes of Enclosure Element Entities : Identifier

Name

Format code Reference to list of characteristics pertinent to a category of enclosure elements

Description attributes for

a category of enclosure elements

Reference to material

entity

(Characteristic

)

Id.

le Attributes of Materials and Equipment Entities

Identifier

Name Reference to list of characteristics pertinent to a category of materials or equip-

. ment

(Characteristic) Descriptive attributes for

• a category of materials or

• equipment

TABLE 2

ATTRIBUTES OF REPLICATED INSTANCES OF

DESIGN DATA ENTITIES

Identifier

Name • location (x,y,z) (Only for space and network

entities — must be for

the same relative location

as in- the original entity)

Reference to original

entJ ty •
TYl'F FU.ST l.! v ! • !<•.! Ito K PE It

"Further, if the entity was a unit of space such as

a courtyard we might describe an attribute called

shape for which the value might be rectancle , circle

or octagon . Another property of the attributes that is important

in a descriptive process we can label as mode of

determination of the value# This property does, not

percain to the current value of the attribute in question but rather indicates how one evaluates the attribute. We define a scale for this mode of determination

as follows

Scale for Mode of Determination

1. Observe

2. Compile

3. . Measure

4. Compute

5*0 Judge

(Check whether in existence)

(Derive information from several

sources)

(Compare with some standard unit —a yard stick

)

(Derive a value by some arithmetic operation

)

(Assess the value by taking account of* intangible factors, etc.)

The simplest mode is to observe ' whether something

exists. Successively more difficult determinations

involve deriving a value. If an explicit derivation

is impossible only a human judgment can be used to

obtain a value."

By the use of such ownership, the total structure of

the data file is a structure of five data "trees", one tree

being used for each of the five classes of entities, described. The trees are connected at points .where the names

of the entities owned are common; for instance, the tree

of space entities may contain a room; on the ownership . list

, .of that room might be an equipment entity such as "air

diffuser", with coordinates describing its position. Simii-.., larly that same air diffuser will appear in some position

1 ' '

• • m •

1 1 i r k 62
on the "network-entity tree", This kind of structure is

useful in examining more complex relational problems, such

as whether or not rooms in a particular department are

serviced by an isolated zoned ^ir conditioning network. But

the principal organization of the entity trees serves to re- * late the entities in the building functionally, i.e., to

organize the parts of a system heirarchally • This kind of • organization allows maximum freedom in adjusting the level

of detail to which any system in the building is described,

and allows logical organization of entities into systems

and subsystems as they normally function. Thus as heating

systems are being discussed, the data is accordingly organized

and need not include, for instance, discussion of space

entitites unless required. ’

A word of caution is justified with regard to the

representation of entities as networks. Little or no experience has been gained in the field of describing elements

of buildings as networks, and substantial research may be

required in the organization of programming with regard to

the use of such networks. The tree structure, however,- is

a common technique in the organization of data, and several

tree searching algorithms have been developed and are in use.

Given this kind of a file structure, a complete building

or any portion of it, to any desired level of detail, can

be described; the structure of the lists provides access to
any of the data therein without necessarily searching the

entire list of entities. Such a list structure is not

actually required. Data could be introduced in non-related

packages, if the system designer were willing to accept the

necessity of searching all of the data every time he needed

a piece of information from the file. The list structure,

plus the conventions of the heirarchal organization of the

entities, serves much as an indexing system in a file drawer

in that it helps to isolate the location of information

desired without searching the entire, drawer.

There are some problems associated with, such a proposed

system of processing, however, which deserve attention.

First, the problem of synonyms is' encountered. If the

criteria statements specify that each patient room shall

contain a lavatory , and the data is inadvertently in the

file entered under the name sink , the computer has no way of

knowing that "sink” and a "lavatory” are identical. Similar

problems could be encountered with any group of commonly

interchangeable words, ’such as patient bed room, patient

room, patient care room; operating room or suite; corridor

or hallway, and so forth. One way of overcoming such a

problem is to program the machine with a dictionary of

synonyms. With such a dictionary, the machine would

automatically check for synonyms for names of data it could

not locate. Upon finding such a synonym, it would then
re-search the file for the data under the synonym name.

Without such capability, the machine will tolerate no deviation whatever from naming data exactly as it is called for

in the criteria statements . This, of course, imposes an

added burden of precision upon the operator, who must remember precisely what name must be attached to each piece of

data during the input procedures.

A second problem is related to the exact kind of data

required in the criteria as opposed to that given on the

plans. For instance, the criterion specifying the required

area in patient rooms refers to the area value. Such a

value may or may not be given on the plans. If it is not,

the operator would have to stop, compute the area, and enter

that information. Let us suppose that he did not compute

this precise piece of data, however, but rather entered the

length and the width of the room into the data file. During

processing, the computer would search for "area", but would

find no such data. In fact, the existence of the length and

the width in the file would allow the determination of the

area of the room with a simple computation. But the computer

would have no way of knowing this unless it were programmed

with derivation procedures * which allowed it to attempt to

compute needed values from data existing in the file. Without such procedures, the program would have no alternative

but to report the data missing and discontinue evaluation

65
of the criterion. Existence- of such derivation procedures

in the program can greatly simplify the problem of input

by reducing the number of manual translations of data necessary to get the proper information into the machine. This

point will be discussed again in the discussion of input.

The above problems and proposed solutions are in fact

discussions of how to add flexibility to the computer's

capability in handling and processing data. The need for

such flexibility is in fact dependent upon the ability of

the operator to match the machine's need for precision. If

there is a presumable correlation between the. demand for

precision and the level of skill required of the operator, it

is generally true that additions of flexibility in the machine

operations reduce the skill requirements of the operator.

The precise evaluation of the trade-offs between these

factors is extremely complex, and probably must finally be

determined by testing of a prototype operational system.

The Requirement for Precision in Criteria Definition '. In the opening paragraphs of this section of the report

a brief discussion of the level of definition was presented.

At this point, the full ramifications of the problem of

criteria definition should be discussed.

The logic of any evaluation must be expressable as a

series of mathematical or logical operations if it is to

be executed by the computer. The computer possesses certain

66
T\ I *

fundamental arithmetic-logic capability with which it can

frtahipulate data; e.g., it can add, subtract, multiply and

divide; its logical capabilities include establishing

§^uivalence of two numbers, or determining if one quanity

gmaller than or larger than another, among "other capabilities. A program is a set of instructions as to which

©f

^

ese capabilities is to be applied to what information , ih what precise order . The "evaluations" which will be . performed by the computer will in fact be sequences of these actions performed

on numbers or words (the identity. of words may constitute a

check). Thus each of the concepts in the code criteria must

be redefineable as a series of these actions. This is not

difficult where the concepts are precise; concepts such as

Mx shall be equal to y" or "at least equal to y" are obviously

and easily handled. Some concepts, such as "does every x

contain a y", are more difficult to define but still defineable

(in this case by establishing identity between the coordinates

describing a reference point on entity y and the coordinates

©f one of the set of points contained within entity s).

Wherever a criteria statement uses a relative term

its logical operator, it is not possible to define such

©Valuation processes. What is the comparison of "x shall

be adequate..." or "x shall be near to y?" . Both adequate

and near are undefined operators in the comparison of x

67
and y, dependent upon the existence of informal models of

these concepts in the mind of the human evaluator. But the

criteria do suggest that certain kinds of information are

relevant to the formation of such judgments, and the computer can at least locate and present what quantitative

data it does have concerning these evaluations. For

instance, given the criteria "handwashing facilities shall

be adequate...", there is a clear implication that the

number of lavatories is involved in the evaluation, perhaps

along with their location, and this information can be

retrieved and presented to the human for judgment.

In summary,, the computer can play two roles in the

act of processing evaluations:

a. Where criteria evaluations are logically defineable

procedures, and presuming the existence of necessary

data in the file, the computer can fully and automatically perform the required evaluations.

b. Where the concepts of evaluation are undefined,

the computer can act as a high speed information

retrieval device as well as an editing device,

presenting only information appropriate to the

evaluation.

68
Bateh Processing and On-Line Processing

The organization of processing in the computer, regardless of the particular processing logic selected, can be

done in several basic ways. First, all data can be acquired

prior to the start of processing, entered into the computer,

and processed continuously in a single run. This is called

batch processing . At the other end of the spectrum of

possibilities, the computer can accept the data one piece

at a time as the operator locates it in the plans and specifications. By continuously monitoring the file of data it

builds, the computer can decide when it has enough data to

do a particular job. It can then execute that particular job,

and return to monitoring the additional data as it comes in.

This procedure is continued until all the jobs specified in

the program have been completed, or until the operator

signals that no more data is forthcoming. This is one form

of a procedure called on-line processing . On the surface, batch processing appears to be more

efficient for most jobs, since the computer is actually

working all the time it is occupied with the task. With

on-line processing, there may be lengthy periods v/hen the

computer is idle, waiting for the ’’slower" human to provide

more data. If, however, several' operators are working on

similar jobs at the same time, techniques of time-sharing

allow all of them to feed problems to the computer simultaneously; any number of operators can theoretically be

69
VYJ’E HK-T f.!' « w Y II!.- |;Of«r>ICK

i . added until the machine capability is saturated.

The computer operating as a time-sharing machine

operates effectively by spending a short time (a small

fraction of a second) on each problem it is fed. It then

stores the work, goes to the next problem, works on it,

stores that one, goes to the next, and so on, until it comes

back to the first problem. The process is much analagous

to placing four sheets of paper on the table, and writing

a problem on the top of each sheet. You might spend thirty

seconds on that one and so forth, until all the problems

were solved. The computer, of course, does this so rapidly

that it appears to each of the user that he has the full

attention of the machine. As will be discussed later, this

technique may have applicability to the Hill-Burton system

problem dues to its work load requirements.

The reason that on-line processing systems are potentially of interest is that the computer capability is at hand

and available for other tasks related to the input of data.

This capability will prove to be important in the design of

the system; it is discussed* in detail in the section

discussing the problems of input. If such capability is

i desireable, then a third machine configuration should be

; mentioned. This is the possibility that a small computer

'can be used to assist in input and to do a limited amount

of 2E^ processing . Preprocessing describes a myriad of

nr\
TYPE FIRST r.lM’ WKlA'.W i Ml ’ U*»fiI>FK

r ~

.

•

i

! i

* Sfitel-1 but useful chores, such as the screening of data,

% aeeuracy checking, conversion of data from given to required

' forms (such as the conversion of linear dimensions to area),

prevision of synonym capability, and other tasks. These

specific tasks are also discussed in greater depth in the

‘.section on input of data. It might be useful to consider

the use of a small computer, interacting with the input

operator, to perform such tasks. The output of this small

computer system would be a complete ’data file ready for

' n~~ final processing. A larger machine would be used to batch

process the file of data prepared' by the smaller machine.

There are many other alternatives to be considered,

n *and the selection of processing schemes and machine configV* iurations is a decision requiring careful and detailed evalui ation. This discussion is intended to demonstrate that a

u large number of options is in fact available, and that there

* V :is no single system which can, at this point, be said to be

the only system for the job. Subsequent work on the actual

development of such systems must accomplish two things. First,

jit must clearly define criteria of cost, operating efficiency,

i and other factors by which an actual system selection can be

made. Second, it must not reach premature conclusions about

the Correct” configuration; it must allow for full exploration

of the many complex alternatives to assure that an optimum

design is reached.

**'

' N ? 'I 71
computer; such a machine is probably feasible only

on the rental basis • The main purpose of a central

facility would be the support of a large purchased

computer, plus whatever efficiencies in work

scheduleing could be accrued. The latter point is

not important in view of the fact that in the HillButon case each regional office would be able to

occupy at least one input operator full time with

no difficulty*

II. ON-LINE PROCESSING SYSTEMS ,’ GRAPHIC INPUT

Central Facility : In ibis instance, 'the probable

work loads could demand the use of a medium sized

computer from which (work loads demanding) several

10 stations could be timed shared* Submission

routines would be approximately the same as above

described for ' the centralized batch processing

facility. Processing, in this case, occurs

simultaneously with input and output.

Decentralized Facility : There is no technological

problem, once time-sharing is accomplished, in

the physical removal of IQ stations to remote

locations. Thus regional offices could be equipped

with 10 stations linked by long distance lines to

. a central computer which did- both processing and

10 control. Long distance lines add considerably

72
ty:t. nii* *’ ' 1

. » Data Input !

' The final specification (i.e., design) of a building is

a description of physical entities, descriptions of their

attributes, and descriptions of the position of those entities in space and relative to one another. The problem of

data input is one of providing a machine language description

of these physical entities, their attributes, and their

position in the total complex of the building. Input .is

essentially concerns itself with the selection of appropriate

data and its translation from words and/or pictures to machine

readable number

. Data is presented to the code system in the form of a

set of plans and specifications. It is possible to trace it

back to earlier forms, such as sketches, calculations, and

even thoughts in the designer’s mind. In one of these earlier

stages, the information may have existed in a more appropriate

. \ form for evaluation purposes ; ideally, it would be desirable

to reexamine all of these previous forms of the data, picking

the data up prior to its translation to less convenient forms.

To do this, however, implies the insertion of a monitoring

mechanism at some point in the design process, or even change

in the process itself through the Introduction of ’’design

machines” which might be capable of sending data directly

to the computer file. The constraints and enormous operational problems implied by such changes are almost immediately

. i

• ',> •PH 73
1

TYI’F. FIRST LINK IIFT.oW THIS luiRDEK

f

: “ ' _

overwhelming. Immediately, the problem of diverse, long

distance communications systems linking hundreds of design

establishments to the- code system computer is enough to

disqualify such prospects on the grounds of cost. In addition

there would be equipment installation costs, the costs of

; retraining the users, and the problems of resistance to

change in- "normal” procedures. It would appear that prac-

. tical solution of the immediate problem requires acceptance

of the data in the form of plans and specifications, so as

not to extend the boundaries of the system beyond the scope

of Hill -Burton (or any other code system) jurisdiction.

Plans and specifications are a collection of two distinct kinds of information:

1. Alpha-numeric data , which appears on the plans

as words, sentences, numbers or abbreviations,

and which composes the virtual entirety of

V . the specifications;

2. Graphic data , including plan diagrams, elevations, sections, details, site maps and symbols

(such as those used for electrical outlets,

columns, doors, windows, etc. or for the

indication of materials, such as concrete or

aluminum); graphic data uses pictures to name

entities or to delineate certain attributes,

such as shape' (rectangular) or dimension (in

the case of scaled drawings).
r—= TV I V. FIRST !.» K KF.T.OW THIS fiORDRIt

! *

’ Information relevant to the execution of evaluations is

j found in both forms. It is estimated that some 50% of the

i evaluations will be dependent upon information presented

i *

t essentially in graphic form. Evaluations dependent upon

relative position (is this near that?) upon dimension (200 -

I _ square feet in area?) and in many cases simple checks of

existence (is this provided?) will be answered by information from pictorial displays.

On the other hand, specification of materials, dimension, the' names of entities, or similar information will be

encountered in alpha-numeric form in notes, printed text, or

schedules, combined in many cases with graphic data.

The input of alpha-numeric data, i.e., words and numbers, can be handled in a number of ways conventional to

0 computer systems. The translation of such data to computerreadable format can be accomplished through the use of

V

' machines with alphabetical keyboards, like a typewriter,'

which can produce punch cards or paper tape (which is then

read into the computer by mechanical reading devices; these

devices sense an aperture in the tape or the card to have a

standard alpha-numeric meaning* ) Devices such as electronic

typewriters bypass this intermediate processing (the preparation of cards and tapes ) and feed the computer directly

or through intermediate magnetic tapes..

See footnote bn next page
TV !'F VIRST T.i VK ?M r «.\V I Ills lin|<l>r:it

»

‘ i Any of these systems is well suited to the transmission of . alpha-numeric data to the machine.

Graphic data presents a somewhat different problem.

In order to make "pictures" readable to the machine, they

must be essentially redescribed as a series of words and/or

numbers, to be stored in the computer memory by the same

notation conventions as is the alpha-numeric data. It is

therefore necessary to invent a scheme of notation for trans

lating the graphic data into words or numbers.

Graphic data carries in it information regarding the

name of the configuration (in the case of a symbol, the

symbol is logically equivalent to a name, e.g*, "light

switch"), and information regarding position, dimension,

geometry and/or orientation. There are several ways, that

each of these kinds of information can be translated into

alpha-numeric form: • Names

Where the name of the graphic data is a symbol

representing a name, the english name can be substituted and

entered as conventional alpha-numeric information. For

•The computer does not actually store words or numbers

in the sense we know them. The computer "reads" only an

electronic pulse, or the absence of one; the presence or

absence of current stands symbolically for the number 1 or

0. A string of such numbers (or current and no current),

such as 1000100, stands bv convention for a standard alphabetic character or decimal numoer ; a word of information is

a string of such binary numbers. The apertures in a punch

card or tape allow the passage of a beam of licnt or the

closure of a pair of contacts on each side of the card,

which triggers a pulse representing a 1; the absence of

e pulse is construed as a zero.
TV I 1 1 instance, if the picture represented indicated "room" or

"corridor" or "column" or "light switch", and we wished

to convey that information to the computer, those precise

words could be used as a label for subsequent information.

Position

By and large, only rectangular spaces or

composites thereof will be encountered in a conventional

plan. It- is convenient to think in terms of describing any

point of space in the entire complex, including the site,

t as a set of cartesian coordinates' (x, y, and z values)

referenced to some convenient point, such as a corner of the

site or a bench mark. Thus the precise position of any point

can be determined. From such information, it is also possible to compute distances between points, thus deriving any

desired linear measure.

Geometry : All entities within the building are volumes,

and as such cannot be represented as a single point, obviously. Thus when the "distance between a and b" is discussed,

it usually implies the distance between some points of reference on the volumes a and b, or distances between the parallel planes a and b. Thus "the distance -between the room

and the exit" is perhaps measured from the center of the*

dcor to the room (a point in the room volume) to the center

of the exit door, or by other convention. Similar conventions may prove convenient in describing the geometry of

any plane or volume in the building complex. For instance,

IK-*- ' •;«

77
TV IT nii'T MM .U '"IS fWM * K K

a room might be described by selecting one corner as the

reference point, and describing successive points around

the room with reference to that point. This could be done

in. two manners. Fair, Isaac & Associates suggest that,

using the top pf the plan sheet as arbitrary north, one

could begin in the lower left corner of the room, giving

the reference coordinates of- that point. Successive points

would be described proceeding clockwise around the figure

as north 10 f , west 12'6 ,r

, south. ..and so forth, until the

figure closed. Circular figures or portions of circles

might similarly be described as a center of revolution, a

radius, and the coordinate points of start and finish. Due

to the fact that it might be more difficult to describe

non-rectangular figures, or portion of plans with directional

changes such that all parts of the building do not line up

on the same set of right axes, other alternatives may be

more practical. Bolt, Beranek and Newman suggest that all

"critical points" in the geometry of any shape be described

as sets of coordinates. For instance, the corners of a

rectangular space would be listed as a series of x-y coordinates referenced to a single point. Any convenient or

necessary number of reference points could be set up; for

instance, the rooms on a floor might be referenced to one

point on that floor; that point in turn referenced to the

main reference point on the site. This method can also be

78
used to describe virtually any shape of space encountered.

Irregular figures composed of straight lines can be described

by fixing the line intersections points of the space. Curvilinear figures can be approximated by giving successive

points along the curve. In the case of shapes for which

defined mathematical functions exist (such as a parabola)

the space can be generated by a special program, given the

critical variables. In the. case of describing a shape by

fixing critical points, e.g., corners or vertices, the

computer can be programmed to assume and generate straight

lines between the points described. • By either method, advantage can be taken of the fact * that many shapes, especially equipment such as beds and

sinks, are repetitive. The shape can be described to the

.machine once, along with a reference point (such as the

center of the head of the bed.). Repeat instances of the

shape can be entered into the machine by locating the new

reference point and asking the computer to regenerate the

shape described to it before.

Dimension : Entry of data on dimension would require

the description of both the origin and destination points,

plus the value of the dimension. The position of the origin

must be given by the methods describing position; the

remainder of the data can consist of either a length and

a direction (such as north) for the dimension, or else the

79
length and the coordinate values for the second point.' If

the entire building geometry has already been entered in

the computer as a coordinate system, substantial advantage

can be gained, as the computer can be programmed to automatically compute any dimension, between given points (or

between points that can be generated as functions of stored

points, such as the centroid of a planar figure or the center of a line). Thus, if the building geometry is stored

as a set of coordinates, computations of area, distances

between points, and checks of dimensions is greatly facilitated. Since in fact many criteria are concerned with such

attributes of space, this facility is important in the

selection of modes of geometric description.

Orientation : In some instances, changes in the direction

of plan, or angular offsets of the conventional right angled

grid used in planning, make it desirable to describe the

orientation of various parts relative to one another. This

can be accomplished by referencing subgrids to major grids

or reference grids; once again, such. data can be computed

automatically from sets of cartesian coordinates outlining

the parts in question, and determination of orientation

changes may not require the addition of special information.

The above summary lists a few of many alternative

schemes, but these are now in use. and being demonstrated in

several operative systems, and are known to be practical

SO
n ri: j

• *

the operational standpoint

81
Requirements for Selective Incut

Obviously, not all the information in a set of plans

and specifications will be relevant to the execution of

evaluations required by the code. For instance, much of

* the specifications is concerned with legalities controlling

the performance of the building contractors; a considerable

additional amount specifies particular construction procedures to be used. A large number of entities specified for

the building are of no concern at all to the code system.

It is therefore inefficient, and certainly impractical in

view of the limitations of computer storage capacity, to

think in terms of entering all the information found on a

set of plans and specifications. In order to limit the size

of the resulting computer file and to provide for the efficiency of processing, it will be necessary to restrict the

input of data to that which is actually useful and/or

required in the evaluation procedures.

As mentioned before, we shall by and large be concerned

with the entry of lists of selected entities along with

descriptions of certain attributes of those entities, such

as dimension, color, position, materials, relation to other

entities, and sc forth. In some cases, the code is only

concerned with the existence of an entity (is room x

provided? ) ,

’ in which case the existence of only the' name

of the entity in the file may be adequate for evaluation.

82
I »' *

: • * • i;

iDn ©thcr cases, the attributes of the entity are subject

it© evaluation (is x washable? does x contain y area?); in

still other cases, it is the relation of entities in question (is there an x in every room y? is x near y? ) • Thus

the amount and kind of information' which must be entered

about different entities is variable* The major question

which faces the person developing input for the computer is

therefore f, which entities must be described, and which

attribures of those entities must be included in the description?"

An indication of what information is required is contained in the criteria statements themselves. For instance,

if the criteria asks, "Is there a lavatory in every patient

bed room?", we can deduce that the information we will

require will be a list of all lavatories and their locations,

and a list of all patient bed rooms and their locations.

The processing could be accomplished for instance, by

assuring that each area representing a patient bed room

contained within it another area representing a lavatory.

Using similar procedures, the complete list of criteria can

examined to yield a list of all information required.

Such a list can be used by the operator as a check list for

the entry of data.

33
Options for the Organization of Input Procedures

In this discussion, let us assume that a system of

notation has been selected which is approximately like the

one described in the previous section, and that data shall

be entered from the plans and specifications selectively

as previously discusssed. In order to assure that the

proper amount of data is entered, and only that amount,

we will specify that some sort of check list will be provided to guide the operator in developing input. The check

list will consist of names of information required, for which

values of data are to. be supplied.

The check list itself can be organized in many ways;

the particular method used v/ill be dependent upon which

kind of mechanical device is to be used in transmitting the

data into the computer. Thus the organization of input

procedures is dependent upon the mechanical system selected

for data transmission, and vice versa.

Most data processing systems in use today depend upon

the punch card or paper tape as a data Input vehicle. Systems tend to employ these techniques for batch processing

of data, as the time necessary to punch cards or tapes, and

the probability of errors, makes card or tape systems impractical for on-line processing systems. (For on-line work,

other devices such as typewriters linked directly to the

computer are used). Therefore we tend to think of the use

84
©f cards or paper tapes in association with batch processing

It^cfcniques

Xn the event that a batch-processing system proved

desirable, the check list for the data could be provided

through coding forms , which specified the information desired

$ the exact format in which it is to be written. An operator would be equipped with a set of such forms at the start

of the evaluation process. -He would acquire the data from

the plans and enter it on these forms. The forms would then

fee -given to a keypunch operator, who would then transfer the'

data to punch cards or paper tapes. These would be ff verified ,f (checked) and then fed to the computer at any convenient time.

A major constraint of such a system is the way in -which

graphically presented information must be handled. Given

the fact that a great deal of information of position, dimension and relations of spaces (or groups of spaces) must

be provided to the data file, and given the fact that a

coordinate system appears to be the immediately practical

way to describe the geometry of a building, we are immediately

faced with the prospect of writing down at least two, and

perhaps three, numbers to describe every point in space

needed. Defining a rectangular space would require measuring

each corner with respect to a reference point, determination

of an x and y value for that point, and the manual entry of

that data on the form. This information would then be

85
n .

: I !

• • ' ... <" •tlil'SlKI;

j keypunched, checked, and read into the machine. Such a

process seems at best cumbersome and inefficient. (There

are techniques available to read data directly, or semidirectly, from forms, such as mark-sense readers, which read

sensitized marks made with special pencils in a particularposition of the form; this would at least eliminate the

keypunching aspect, but does not overcome the burdens placed

on the data gatherer).

Since in fact graphic representations are the source of

at least one-half of the data needed in the evaluations

performed in the Hill-Burton procedures, this particular

aspect of- input is quite important. Thus it was felt that

the study could profitably explore the- uses of more exotic

input equipment, and especially devices which were designed

to handle graphic data.

The most sophisticated of such devices is the optical

scanner. This device can "read" pictures recorded on microfilm, and could be programmed in this instance to automatically assign coordinate values to all the points picked up

on the scanner. The major problem in the use of scanners

relates to the state of the art in their development. At

the present time, it is extremely difficult to instruct a

scanner to discriminate information on the film (for instance,

differentiation of lines representing a sink and those

representing a room). Extraneous data on a plan would probably have to be screened prior to submission to the scanner.

!

•
It might be feasible to think in terms of such preprocessing of the plans before microfilming. For instance,

if it were desired to use a scanner to pick up the plan

configuration, the plan might be outline in red pencil,

•photographed through filters to pick up the portions outlined

in red, and then submitted to the scanner. These, however,

are hypothetical possibilities, and must be taken cautiously

in view of the high costs of such equipment and the limited

state of the art.

More suited to the specialized purposes at hand are other

kinds of "graphic input" devices. Two major categories of

devices' are now in use on limited prototype bases. The

first is an analog-digital conversion device consisting of

a pen attached to an arm, which is in turn attached to a

base .• Angular movement of the arm rotates a rotary potentiometer located in the base, and extension or retraction of the

arm operates a linear potentiometer located in the arm itself. Each different position of the pen produces a slightly

different pair of voltages through their potentiometers. If

t

*

.

I one of these voltage pairs is correlated with a coordinate

pair, and the scale of movement defined, the computer can

automatically compute the correct coordinates for all other

positions of the pen within the .limits of its movement.

tThus if a plan were presented to the device, the operator

could place the pen at one corner, assign a pair of

i 87
rvri: KIKST l.'V! Ml . . • i : i

- :# . I? •

»

| coordinates to that point, give the scale of the drawing,

and proceed to trace the rest of the plan. The device would

automatically compute proper coordinates for all other

required points in the plan.

The plan need not be traced in its entirety, depending • upon the mode of information storage. Most likely only

the corners or other critical points of space would be

located with the pen. . The device does not automatically . store all points traced, but only those for which a specific

signal is given. by the operator.

A similar device in purpose is the Rand tablet* which is

a flat surface 10" square. Imbedded in the surface is a

matrix of fine wires, located about 1/10 0£b of an inch apart,

so that there are approximately 1000 wires running horizontally across the face of the tablet and another 1000 or

so running vertically. ' These wires are linked to a special

device which transmits a coded pulse through each wire. The

pulse’ passing through each wire is different in character.

A special sensor pen held on the surface .of .the tablet at

the intersection of a horizontal and vertical wire will pick

up the codes passing through those wires. If a plan image

were projected on the face of the tablet, the sensor pen

could be placed. at the points desired, and the coordinate

values of that point would automatically be interpreted.

While the device may be somewhat limited, in size, it has

88
TYI’K KIKsT LINK HKI mis HfiUHF.R

» tw© distinct advantages over the previously described device.

f first, Its rate of data transmission is considerably faster,

4 thus allowing the operator to work faster; second, the

1 ©pirating pen is not attached to an arm (which might restrict

- thi operator somewhat).

These devices, if employed in the system, would be used

principally to automate the translation of graphic data to

e©d#d information required by the computer. They eliminate

thi niid completely for the manual interpretation and entry

Of geometric and dimensional data, by virtue of the fact that

auxiliary programs can compute such data from a set of coordi

nati descriptions . The ' following kinds of information can

ilther be entered directly, with no intermediate translation

©r processing, or computed from data entered:

location

boundary position

length)

width )of a space or piece of equipment

height)

area

volume

distance

The automation of the measurement function can mean substan-

’ ti©l differences in the time required to develop input

required, as will be discussed in the later section on syst: terns costs and benefits.

* i

• , An important aspect of graphic input operations is the

provision of feedback information on the accuracy of input,

which can be provided through electronic redisplay cn an

'

‘ *. * Mt s \ \ III *«'» S 1

1

•>» » : • • • *

1 f » 89

\

' \
TVi K KIUST I ' I . HI'*..*. I I! I- i'« »|t l »r l;

i oscilloscope screen driven by a computer. (An oscilloscope

screen is similar to a conventional television screen in

appearance). As the operator develops input, it can be

instantly redisplayed to him, thus providing him with a a

- visual check on the accuracy and completeness of the

information he is providing. Corrections can be made

instantly, and thus the possibility of bad data being used

in a run is considerably less than in the card systems

previously described. In order to provide this added capability, the devices are usually run on-line with the computer. With the addition of an electronic typewriter,

alpha-numeric data may also' be entered on-line. This, of

course, completely eliminates the need for intermediate

processing (card punching and related form-writing, as

suggested earlier). As will be shown later, this on-line

capability adds considerably to equipment and programming

costs, but drastically reduces the time necessary to develop

input

The addition of on-line capability also means that the

Computer is available for many other duties in the course

of the input routine. As an alternative to the use of a

written check-list for data required, the check list may be

stored in the computer. The list can be displayed on the

display screen mentioned above; as data is given to the

machine,* the computer can automatically edit the list, thus

• ’

. i •

1 • 1 1 .1 » 1 :?«'!• — i \ . 1
providing a positive guide to the operator in the acquisition

of data.

In addition, the machine can communicate with the operator in many other ways, even guiding the operator steo-bvstep through the entire input secuence . The computer and

its operator can actually hold a "conversation,” the computer asking for data, the .operator answering with appropriate

responses o A computer operating . in such a fashion is said

to be in conversational mode with the operator.

The addition of this capability can have a most

important effect on the total man-machine configuration, .for

as the machine acquires the capability to organize and assist

with the work, the skills required of the operator can be

sharply reduced. Virtually the only capability required of the

operator would be basic skill in reading blueprints and

specifications, plus a basic ability to operate the machine

console. The need for professional judgment or sophisticated

ability in interpretation of designs is nearly eliminated

from the input operation. Thus it is practical to think of

the entire input operation being conducted by a junior

draftsman at about the GS-7 grade level.

The addition of the conversational capability changes

the role of the machine from a passive role to an active

role of communication with the operator. In the batch

processing system, no such communication exists except in

91
a very indirect way. Effectively, the machine passively

waits for the operator to collect and input all data, and

then gives him a diagnosis of format and/or certain kinds

of keypunching errors. While such diagnostic programs are

useful in batch processing, they do not provide help to the

operator at the time he is acquiring data; rather, they

point out certain kinds of errors after he has made them.

The event of an error forces the cancellation of the run-,

and forces the operator to return to the data to recheck and

correct the error.

In contrast to this, the on-line system utilizes one

of the computers major capabilities - consistency and

accuracy - in a dialogue with the operator to assure the

quality of input data. In addition, it performs the translation of graphic data (with the help of graphic input

equipment) automatically eliminating the necessity for

tedious hand translation, and, as a final boost to system

operations, the on-line capability completely eliminates

the need for all intermediate processing.

92
tym* <•;; •

: »;

Systems of Output; The Communication of Results . Once the processing has been completed, the computer

must also be instructed as to how to communicate the results

back to the operator, in what order, and in what format.

This is a vital link in the total system, as the computer

is capable of producing literally reams of information. The

art of designing output concerns itself with knowing what

is needed a.nd to whom it must be communicated.

The usual practice in reporting the results of a code

evaluation is the reporting of exceptions to the requirements

this is probably an acceptable practice oriented toward the

minimization of communication required. In the computer

system, a similar practice can be followed to minimize the

output of the machine. As pointed out before, however, the

computer will probably produce some exceptions to the strict

rule which are in fact acceptable design solutions. These

exceptions should be reviewed in detail by the code professional

to assure the quality of the evaluation. Thus the output

of the computer system should not only report the fact of

the exception, but should provide relevant data in a wellorganized format which minimizes the need for referral to

the plans and specifications-. This can help save the

professional work in searching the plans and specifications

for data relevant to the exceptions, and can thus reduce the

time spent in this final evaluation.

93
Forms of Outnut Available

The computer can produce both words and pictures as

output. Words (and sentences) can be printed on paper

either on the on-line typewriter or on high speed printers

operating on or off-line. The format of the output is virtually limitless; it can appear as groups of sentences,

lists, tables, graphs, or .any other convenient form. Thus

each response can be tailored in format to the requirements

of the criteria. It might be convenient, for instance, to

present evaluations which are likely to involve a number of

exceptions as a list:

f, Following Patient Bed Rooms do not meet minimum

area requirements:

Room # Area Given No Beds Area Recrd

156 95 1 100

163 144 2 160

191 144 2 160

Other kinds of criteria may be best reported as a sentence:

"Incinerator proposed does not have sufficient

capacity to meet requirements proposed in section*

ff

• i These formats can be combined in any conventional way for

the production of diagnostic comments.

The diagnostic statements are referred to whenever an

exception is discovered during processing. They are stored

in the computers memory as standard senteces or formats,

and can be modified or changed without affecting major

reprogramming in most cases.

94
In the case of on-line processing, these responses

also appear on the display screen for action by the

ojD<fr.'a tor; they might also be printed out immediately upon

the completion of processing, assuming that processing is

occurring simultaneously v/ith input. This could be an

im^oortant factor in reducing the total workload. In the

eyelet that a major error was discovered, such as the absence

of; ato entire department or an inadequate, number of patient

it would probably not be useful to continue the examination, as correction of that error has major effect on the

total design. If the operator were made aware of that error

a£ the earliest possible time, he might elect not to process

further, thus saving much needless input and processing time.

If the computer has enough information in memory, it

can- also produce diagrams and drawings on a device known as

SftV *-*/ plotter. This device consists of a pen moving over

paper on a travelling arm; the pen moves to positions corresponding to x and y coordinate values given by the controlling

computer. Thus, if the coordinate composition of an entire

£l6c r Plan is stored, that floor plan can be reproduced using

*-y plotter. Since the position of most entities will

i- stored, that position could be used as a locator for

•{orrrv^ts concerning entities not meeting requirements. Thus

the * Drm of the output could assume that of a computer-produe’ ~ plan with diagnostic comments printed at the point of

95
the exception* The added cost of the plotter might be

offset by reducing the amount of time that the professional

would otherwise spend locating exceptions on the plans.

The form of output may therefore assume virtually any

combination of \ords and pictures desired and economically

feasible, and is not a severe constrain on systems design.

It is, however, the important link between man and machine

at the conclusion of processing, and therefore deserving

of careful evaluation. during the actual system design.

Another aspect of output deserving discussion is the

creation of permanent records of the data file and the

resultant diagnosis. For these purposes, the machine can

produce permanent magnetic tapes, paper tapes, or punched

cards , any of which can be rerun or reinterpreted at any

time in the future. If the data files can be used for other

kinds of statistical analysis, their permanent storage on

magnetic tapes may be desirable. This would leave the files

in a form most efficient for reintroduction to the computer

system, since the machine can "read" magnetic tapes many

times faster than cards or paper tapes. In the event that

a certain run was questioned, it would be a relatively

simple matter to put the tape on the machine and repeat the

total processing run.

If the probable future need was for referral to the

results of the run, card or paper tape storage might prove

96
I more convenient, since the results can be reprinted without

the use of a computer.

97
Systems Conf

G yrations

Prior to the advent of computer communications systems,

it was necessary to think of a computer installation as a

single entity, located in a single space in a single place.

Current technology has removed this constraint; input and

output devices can be any distance from the machine, in any

location or configuration; computers of many varied sizes

and purposes can now "talk” to each other ^ trade problems,

share storage, and do many other things at any distance and

in many combinations. The new technology of remote computer

communications opens the way to a virtually limitless number

of ways in which systems may be physically combined. This,

of course, is an important consideration to’ ay code system

(such as Hill-Burton) which has decentralized activity,

whether that decentralization involves installations across

a city or a. .nation. . The particular combination of machines, Input-Output

(10) stations, and communications systems is dictated principally by operational requirements and economics. Also involved

is time-sharing technology; single installations which could

not support a computer can be equipped with 10 stations

linked by long-distance lines to a central computer, the

cost of the computer then being shared by the several stations. (Such a system is the Project MAC system at MIT,

where some thirty stations across the campus are time-shared
from a central computer). The implications are that by,

such systems, computer capability is made available to persons Who could not otherwise afford it. This potential capability is a necessary part of any system that would eventv&lly link the designer in his office to a code system

computer capability; it may in fact be the key to the introduction of computer technology to the entire design and

engineering profession on an economically feasible basis.

While it is not possible to determine which configuration is economically feasible in the Hill-Burton case without detailed study, at least the following alternative

appear likely:

. I. BATCH PROCESSING SYSTEMS, Card Input

Central Facility : A central processing facility

might be established, with computer processing

time purchased or rented as economics dictated.

Plans could be submitted indirectly or through

regional offices, and results similarly returned

directly or through regional offices.

Local Facility : Since this kind of a system requires

little equipment investment, the input: could be

prepared locally and processed on a rented computer

in the locale. There is not any particular advantage in a central facility, since batch processing

systems would probably uso a more efficient large

99
f * li

to the cost, however, and are occupied the full

time any station is "on-line”, i,e., operating.

There are also problems of equipment utilization.

The batch processing system, using card input,

is slow enough to provide considerable work loads

for each regional office. The graphic-input systems are considerably faster; three of four stations would probably handle the entire work load.

Thus if each of the seven regional offices were

•equipped with an 10 station, many of them would

not be fully utilized, and the systems costs would

increase harshly.

III. Combination Systems : The cost of a medium-sized

computer which both processes and provide 10

control simultaneously appears. to be somewhat

prohibitive (see Systems Costs). This is principally because the equipment may be more than is

needed for 10 control, but something less than

desirable for optimum processing efficiency. An

alternative to a system which. links the processing

computer directly to the 10 station is a system

which employs a small intermediary, or satellite , computer. The function of the satellite computer

is to provide 10 control and perhaps some preprocessing

capability; its output is a well-organized data file

100
Which is then presented to a larger machine for • processing (probably on a rental-time basis); A

Single satellite computer could probably control up

to four 10 stations. (There are some problems

Which may be anticipated in such a system. While

it is technologically feasible, there are no systems in use today which drive multiple display

stations on a time-sharing basis; this programming

would constitute a major piece' of development).

These stations could be remote from the satellite

computer, as described above, economics permitting.

This latter kind of system appears, on the basis

of this study, to be configuration deserving careful

attention. It minimizes the investment in hardware

which is certain to be obsolete in the future,- but

it still provides the important machine-operator

communications of the on-line system. In addition,

the preliminary estimates of cost in the following

section indicate that such a system possesses inherent

economies relative to the problem at hand.

101
14: ESTIMATED SYSTEM BENEFITS

At the present time,, the Hill-Burton Program supports

f of 14 architects, 15 mechanical engineers, and 11

civil engineers. The annual cost of supporting these personnel in direct salary is $445,000. The overhead rate is

$380,000 per annum for a .total expenditure of $825,000 per

annum

A study conducted in 1959 by the Division of Hospital

and Medical Facilities indicated 47% of the total hours

spent by personnel were spent in review of drawings, specif

cations, and contract documents (Table 14-1). This would

place the salary and overhead value of such work, on a

pro-rated basis, $355,000 per year.

Effectiveness of a computer-based system : Detailed

analysis of the criteria inspected by architects, civil

engineers and mechanical engineers have been made. Each

of these subsets of the criteria have been broken apart

into those which could probably be profitably done by the

» computer, and those which could not. For each profession,

the number of hours spent in each kind of review work , wsb: listed and correlated with the criteria which would be

considered at that phase of submission. This procedure

allowed estimates of how much of the work load might he

transferred to the machine, at each pr inspection

102
tv if nit-'! i : ! nr* v i > • i :*ki»

for each of the professionals involved. The results are

tabulated in Table 14-2. The conclusions are, (a) the

architect will benefit more than the engineer in relief

of work loads (b). more of the -work of ' preliminary and

schematic inspections can be done by machine than for

working drawings • This is primarily due to the fact that

specifications and detailed mechanical drawings are not

included in earlier submissions, and as the breakdown indi

cates (for reasons already stated), it is expected that

it will be difficult to handle input of these kinds of

data.

It must be kept in mind that these are highly approximate breakdowns made on the basis of -the- best information

at hand.

If they are reasonably accurate,, however, we, can

expect that one half of the inspection work load can be

transferred to the machine system. This would relieve

professional time valued at one half of the total time

spent in reviewing drawings, i.e. % '-of $3 55,000, or

approximately $175,000. This is the value of the major

calcul able benefit of the svst.em
TABLE- 14-1

ESTIMATED MAN HOURS FER

PROJECT PER ACTIVITY, BY SKILLS

Source: Division of Hospital &

Medical Facilities, Public

Health Service

KIND OF WORK • .SKILLTOTAL HRS. ' IaRCH I -- ; KIND qf work

Review Schematics rO 2 • 8

Review Preliminar. 6 2 j 4

* 12

Rev. Working Dwgs 12 3 12 27

Review Contracts 5 8 8 21

Subtotal 29 13

' “1 68

All Other Work 18 33 2 5 76 •

Total Hrs/Proj • 47 46 51 144

% Total Spent in

Drawing Review 61 28

‘ 50 47

104 -

I . .
TABLE 14-2

ESTIMATES OF AMOUNT OF WORK

TRANSFERABLE TO MACHINE SYSTEM, BY ACTIVITY

prjrcrvT . MAN-MACHINE SYSTEM “• >-/ *-v f~~ Oib- i*i

WORK

done

Man-hours

invested

per project

Profess

man-hrs

rea f d

Equivalent man

hrs. transferred to

machine

% or work

trans. to

machine

REVIEW OF SCHEMATIC DWG3 •

• ARCH. 6 1 5

CE. 0 0 0

ME. 2 1 1

Subtotal 8 2 6 75%

REVIEW OF PPHLIMINARY DWGS • - ARCH. 6 1 5

CE. 2 1 1

ME. 4 2 2

Subtotal

• REVIEW OF WORKING

DRAWINGS

12 4 8 66%

ARCH. 12 2 10 - CE • 3 1 2

ME. 12 9 3

Subtotal

REVIEW OF CONTRACT

- DOCUMENT

27 12" 15 55%

ARCH. 5 3 2

CE. 8 6 2

ME. 8 7 1

Subtotal 21. 16 5 23%

TOTALS

• 68 34 34 50%

1 0 r
Many of the potential systems benefits are not measureable

in terms’ of dollars value received by the system. These bene

fits include:

1. Accuracy and Completeness : Whenever the system is

used, criteria are checked completely and in a consistent and accurate manner,

2. Improvement in Analytic Capability : More sophisticated analytic programs, such as traffic simulations,

are possible with the computer in the system. Further,

the use of performance-type criteria, which may require

the use of complex predictive models in evaluation, will

be facilitated by the computer’s ability to handle such

complex evaluations on a production basis.

3. Improvement in Records : Complete data files on every

hospital design submitted are accessible for. computerized

analysis; further, computerized storage systems can provide quick access’ to data on particular designs for use

in operational or consulting services.

4. F>elief in skill shortage: The system becomes less

dependent upon the availability and quality of professiona

persons as the limiting factor on growth and performance

of the system.

These benefits, which are not measurable in terms of dollars,

provide insight into the trm benefits of any computer system.

206
The computer rarely saves money; it creates its place not by

direct economy but by changing the potential of any operation.

By opening new opportunities, the computer simply makes it

possible to do the job in a different way; frequently better

than it has ever been done before, not just more cheaply.

V.

107
SUPPORT OF STATEMENT 15: SYSTEMS COSTS — —

i——

mm——mmtm—

——m i n m w

It is extremely hard to develop reliable cost estimates

for computer systems, since (a) the cost of alternative hardware configurations is highly variable for comparable machine

systems, and (b) the cost of programming is difficult to

predict. This study nonetheless will attempt to develop 'the.

best possible estimates for the range of configurations which

might be proposed. This is done with the realization that

decisions to support the development of such systems must

be made with some idea of the potential costs and benefits.

While these estimates are provided to satisfy that need,

they cannot be in any way considered as actual costs or

proposed costs for the systems. Such costs can only be

determined in fact through the submission of development

proposals from industry in response to detailed system

specifications

The basis of the estimates herein provided are estimates

developed by the Institute staff and confirmed by Mr. Pat

Coyle, computer applications consultant, Washington, D. C.

These estimates were developed for two systems. The first

system is a batch processing system which minimizes the use

of computer equipment and its purchase. This sytem presumes

all input is developed on cards, through the use of languages

and format as described in the report of Fair, Isaac and

Associates, San Rafael, California*. The hypothetical system

* C L -M ?

' : Comouter La n qua ne for Archi t

r: ctural Snecifications , a

report to tnc iAi by fair, Isaac d Associates , 1400 Lincoln

Ave., San Rafael, California.

10S
rented processing on an IBM 7094 or equivalent machine

(The 7094 rates 'are herein used due to the fact that the FI

work is based on LISP, a processing language currently available only for the 7094 and a few other machines)*- Output

from the system is in simple printed form; no graphic input

equipment is used*

In contrast to this, estimates were developed for a

second system employing man-machine interaction* This second

hypothetical system employs graphic input-output stations

operating in conversational mode with the operator; these

station are time-shared off a small satellite computer, such

as the DEC PDP-8, CDC 1700, IBM 1800 or similar machines.

•Processing is done from both files prepared by the satellite'

computer on a medium or large rented computer facility* The

system presumes a* basic operating configuration such as that

suggested by Bolt, Beranek and Newman in their report to

the Institute •

Both systems represent basic machine configurations

capable of accomplishing the amount of work described in the

previous section. They dod not include consideration of remote

•Report #1260, Computer Aided Checking of Design Documents

for Compliance with Regulatory Codes, Bolt, Beranek and

Newman, Los Angleles, California

109
installations

The major costs of the systems were identified as:-

1* Program development , including changeover, training,

administration of development contracts, preparation

of proposals and so forth.

2 • Development of computer, programs.

110
tv i IHtl'HCK i nil - r r »

• mki. *'

3 • Acquisition of computer installation on a

purchase basis.

4 • Annual prorating costs

(a) rented processing

(b) operating staff

c (c) overhead.

1. Program development costs : A sophisticated system of

input-output hardware would be considerably more difficult

to secure than a system with conventional hardware. First

of all, the problem of v/riting system specifications is

considerably more difficult; second, there is no existing

system with the capabilities described operating on a production basis, and some additional development and design

will be required; third, the changeover and training require

'ments will be more difficult, due -to the need to train a

new kind of operative; fourth, because the system is more

complex, a somewhat, longer time may be required to achieve

full operational capabilities. Program development should

-range from a minimum of $40,000 to ar maximum of $60,000.

2. Development of Computer Programs :

' If the more

conventional batch processing approach with none of the

.on-line programming options discussed is selected, the

programming would consist of adapting one of many existing

list-processing languages to the problem at hand. On the

other hand, the development of on-line, time-sharing graphic

input-output systems has not yet been fully accomplished.

111
and a great deal of additional and new programming must be

done. The best expert opinion says that it can be dene,

however, and it is simply a matter of time and opportunity

to assemble the required pieces. The major concepts of the

approach have been demonstrated in single or combined appli-

<» cations; they have simply not been assembled into a single

operative system. Programming a standard list-processor

might be accomplished for as little as $10,000; programming

.an on-line time sharing system could run to $50,000 for

basic capabilities

.3. Acquisition of Hardware ; The batch-processing techniques with minimal equipment, i^e. ,- everything translated

to and -entered on punch cards or paper tape, would require only the acquisition of simple and inexpensive keypunch machines. The volume of processing is not such to

warrent the purchase of a computer. All processing would

probably be done on rented or shared equipment. On the

other hand, the more sophisticated system requires the

acquisition of from two to four input-output stations at substantial costs (these are estimated at about $26,000 per station) plus the acquisition of a small computer to perform online-input-output functions and some preprocessing* (such

* Such as conversion of coordinate point data to required

areas, construction of lists, etc. The main processing

in this system would also be accomplished on a rented-time

bas is

3 12
computers might cost about 60-80 thousand dollars). Thus

an investment of about $160,000 in hardware could be expected

for the second system, as contrasted to no investment in

the first system. The cost of this hardware should be

amortized over its expected life; we have chosen to estimate

this life span at five years, 'at- which time the equipment

may be expected to be obsolete and replaceable.

4. Operating Costs : It is here that major differences

in the systems appears, primarily due to handling of input

operations. The process of writing down series of numbers

to describe the name, location and sizes of rooms and/or

equipment, and then keypunching the .results does not, by

any stretch of the imagination, come close to the efficiency

of the on-line direct entry of graphic and textual information. Detailed estimates of the input times have been prepared by undertaking practice exercises on each type of

system, i.e., simulations of the input operations.

Fair, Isaac and Company report that data can be entered

on appropriate forms at a rate of entry of 30 items per

•man-hour; this would presume an ’’item” of information could

be located, read or measured, and written down in an average

time of about 90 seconds. Each item would represent one

punched card input. It is estimated that use of the proposed system would require 1100 punched cards to describe

the information on schematic drawings; 1500 cards for preliminary drawings, and /10C cards for working drawings
The current submission rate for drawings is 300 schematics, 400 preliminary, and 500 sets of working drawings

per year. We must presume the worst case, that is, that

each submission must be input as a completely ' separate item,

disregarding what came before in previous submissions

This is due to the fact that it is expected to be as difficult to update a file reflecting changes as it is to

completely resubmit the entire project.

From these estimates about rates and volumes, it was

estimated that the total man-hours required for writing up

the required forms would be:

schematics: ••••• 4.2 man-years /yr.

preliminaries: •••••••••••••••••••• 7.6 ft ,f ” working drawings: ......13.4 " ,f ” total 24.2 " " " This same volume would demand a card punching work load

of some 9.9 man-years /year , given the rather optimistic

keypunching rate of 100 cards per hour.

With regard to the skills required to operate the

system, it was estimated that a minimum GS-7 skill level

would be required to read and write the forms (the current

GS-7 rate is approximately $6000 per annum). This assessment was based on some detailed analysis of the skill

required to perform basic required functions, such as computations, and the skill level required to interpret

114
architectural drawings accurately, without making judgments

about them. The standard rate for keypunchers is approximately GS- 3 at $4000 per annum. The total labor costs in

this system for developing input appear, on this basis,

to be approximately $190,000 per year.

Contrasted to this, the on-line graphic input system

allows a substantially higher input rate. It is estimated,

based on experienced data transmission times, that the

total time spent by a single operator at a console to input

the data required would be:

schematics : . •••••• 8 hours

preliminary drawings: 12 hours

working drawings: .•••«••••• 16 hours

The resultant work load, based on an equal number of submissions, appears to be as follows:

schematics input: 1.2

preliminaries input: 2.5

working drawings input: •••••.••• 4.1

total .. 7.8

or approximately 8 man-years /year • This is- assuming the

same quantity of data transmitted, and all other factors

equal, except the mode of data transmission. It is interesting to note that, even given major errors in the estimates, there would still be substantial margins between

the two methods.

115
It is also evident that while not as much knowledge of

plans and specifications would be required by the on-line

system, due to its potential ability to instruct the operator, that some increased sophistication would be required

to operate the console and to know its capability. Therefore, it is assumed that a GS-7 skill level would also be

required to operate this system. Of course, additional

card punch operators are not required, since the data is

entered on-line. Thus the manpower costs of such a system

appear to be based on about 8 men at' $6000 per year, or

about $48,000.

From calculations of this input load, we can also estimate that if the above estimates are correct, a minimum of

4 input-output stations, operating two shifts, would be

required. This in turn would necessitate the addition of

"time-sharing" capability on the small computer operating

the stations; that is, the computer, by dividing its attention among the four stations, services them all at the cost

of a margin of speed at any cne of them. (This would be much

like a mathematician sitting in a room with four persons

who are each continuously feeding him problems; he works on

one for a short time, stores it, and goes to the next, and

so on, rotating through the problems at hand -in the order

that he receives them. ) This can be accomplished r/i a

computer with speeds such that it appears to the individual

116
'^fte^ator that he has the full attention of the machine.

this time-sharing capability constitutes one of the major

Potions of the programming to be done in developing such

% system.

Both systems will have operational problems which will

require changes, improvements and modifications in the programs in the course of the use of the system, and in order

to provide for such changes, the cost of a programmer has

been included in the costs of both systems. A. full time

programmer is allowed for the on-line system, since there

will be more opportunity for change and expansion in the

\

* * * system; a one-quarter time programmer has been provided

for the batch processing approach, which will perhaps require less service once fully operational. The total of

these estimates are summarized in Table 15-1. It should

be emphasized that these estimates are not firm, and have

been formulated on a very tentative basis in order to

attempt to fix some costs for the purposes of the feasi- • bility study. They should not be considered as having been

confirmed in any way.‘ The final figures of any bid proposal

may vary greatly from these figures, although they are

considered reasonable target costs.

Overhead is added at 50% of the items noted. This is

based on the assumption that the direct addition of overhead will not equal the average organizational rate, since

117
the equipment needed by the new workers is by and large

included in the basic costs.

The costs for rented processing are based on estimates

Qf volume, time and efficiency of various programs on what

was considered to be an optimum machine for each usage.

118
TABLE

15-1.

SUMMARY

AND

COMPARISON

OF

SYSTEM

COSTS

*! v i*r « » ; . - » :

119
SUPPORT OF STATEMENT 16: CHAN.GES IN OPERATIONS

The major implication of- change is that the processing

of plans could conceivably shift from a regional basis to

a centralized basis. The need for such change “is by and

large dependent upon the costs of long-distance data transmission, and the corresponding premium the program would

be- willing to pay to maintain regional processing and have

the use of computer systems. One feasible way of organising the system, however, is to consider the submission of

duplicate sets of plans to the regional office and to the

central processor. Processing completed, the diagnosis

could be transmitted through a teletype to the local office,

thus assuring the fastest possible reporting of results.

If it were desired that the plotter be used to print graphic

diagnoses as discussed in earlier sections, a plotter could

be located in the regional office, driven by the computer

over LDC lines, or else the plotted results could be

transmitted by facsimile device to the regional office.

A major constraint in operations will be the loss of

the professionals "direct contact" with the inspection

process. The effectiveness of the entire program will

depend upon his ability to trust the machine to perform

tin effective diagnosis. If he minimizes his activity -to
reported errors, the most effective relations will -be

maintained between man and machine. If however, he

intuitively distrusts .the machine, or resents the loss of

prerogative, or for any other reason decides to recheck

what the machine is supposed to have checked, the benefits

of the system can be lost entirely. Thus the effective

operation of the system is in large part dependent upon the

professionals understanding and acceptance of the machine

system. The professionals in the program .should be given

the opportunity to work with the computer system directly

in order to understand what it does and what it does not

do.4 and in order to build confidence in it and in the relation. This required development of attitude can be as

important to operations as any other operational change in

policy or program.

Some professionals will probably have to be assigned

to superintendence of the system on a full-time basis.

These persons will be required to augment the judgment of

the operators, to assist them with difficult problems, and

to assist in the operations of special cases. The machine

may encounter difficulties in examining some -plan configurations, such as free-form designs, or it may require the

insertion of a specially programmed criteria »for special

instances. The professional skills will be most critical

at this point. Further, if the system capability is to be

121
expanded and fully realized, a professional who understands

the intention of the organization must be called upon for

opinions and decisions as to which options should be taken

in which order of priority. Another important operational

relationship is that of the program to the state health

agencies and to the local architect and client. Expansion

of the system to its fullest - theoretical potential will

depend in large measure on the willingness of these two

other sets of persons to accept changes in procedure and

practice.

The operations and organization of this total system

(architect, state and Hill-Burton) were considered, at the

outset, to be the total system amenable to systems design.

In fact, the whole problem of data input, which looms so

large as a factor of feasibility in this study, could be

avoided if the system (i.e., the larger system just mentioned above) could be considered as open to redesign. The

proper design of such a total system would clearly consider

capturing the information at its point of origin and in its

original form, instead of involving itself with complex and

’wasteful translations of information at some intermediate

point. In this case, the point cf origin of information

is when the architect decides to record a decision which will

at some time interact with the criteria. If a total system

could be designed so that the computer system intercepted
f. J.

1 • .

thlfe information during the process of recording it, it

> be routed directly into the code system for consideration* The whole data translation problem simply would not

> t^ist.

This in effect requires "slipping the computer under

t

' th§ drafting table" on which designs are made, or, in back

‘ -• of the typewriter on which- specifications are written. No

immediate capability to do this in an economic way seems

to exist.

Even if architects could be induced to use peripheral

equipment in certain work, e.g., the writing of specifications or selection of equipment, we have not yet solved

enough problems of basic capability to allow the designer

• to do all the things he needs to do, and frequently the use

r of such equipment would be limited and inefficient. In other

\ areas, the process of design is simply not well enough de-

:• fined to use the major capabilities, e.g., simulation and

optimization routines , of the computer system. Even the

graphic capability of computer systems is not yet well

enough developed to afford capabilities to the architect

which pay for themselves.

Thus the insertion .of such equipment into the architects routine would by and large have to be subsidized by

’ the interested party until such time as it demonstrated a

Payoff to the architect. At that time, the architect might

123
be willing to purchase equipment cf his own which could be

connected to the code system.* But until then, the costs

of subsidy would be rather astronomical when considerations

cf training and logistics are included. Nonetheless, there

is a recommendation in the main body of the report that

experimentation could be promoted with the architect at

a later date. Such experimentation might make the code

system equipment available to him on a spare time basis to

explore its capability to help him with design work, and

this could in turn be useful in speeding the development of

general purpose design systems.

All of these problems of present and future operational patterns must be fully and carefully considered in

the preparation cf a specification- fcr a system. For this

reason, as well as for others, it is important that the

team actually in charge cf developing the project include,

key personnel from the Hill-Burden program who can advise

on the logistics and operations, and be prepared to

institute and justify' the changes in operations which will

be recruired.

user/"- - s-nr;