The Military Engineer l November-December l 200992 instead of blank paper. Debate in the early days of CADD revolved around terms like productiv- ity and payback. Early marketing hype went something like this: At the XYZ ?rm, we now produce our working drawings on CADD. Using the speed of computers, we can shorten produc- tion time and spend more time on the creative, decision-intensive part of the job. Seminars focused on whether CADD could pay for itself and how to charge the client extra for CADD-pro- duced working drawings. This was a painful time for many CADD pioneers. Today A breakthrough is occurring with CADD in leading A/E of?ces. We are hired to seek and solve problems, to de- sign buildings or highways or whatever. But the greatest cost of our services is not designing, it is documenting our design. In word processing, the cost of documentation has disappeared, it has become automated. Whether the same thing can or should happen to the same in CADD design is debatable; however, we are clearly moving in that direction. The designer can now consider more options in greater detail at the ear- lier stages of design than any manual method would allow. Rather than start- ing each design phase on blank paper or screens, each phase forms a founda- tion for the next. Signi?cant portions of the initial drawings are made with the same precision as the ?nal ones. Modi- ?cations are easily made without com- plete restarts. CADD has given us a competitive edge for now, but the A/E world does not sleep for long. Four factors will in- ?uence the speed with which CADD will transform the design process on a profession-wide basis: technology, cost, people, and quality. Technology.—Competition in the CADD marketplace is causing the tech- nology to advance in quantum leaps, but the state-of-the-art continues to frus- trate CADD users. First, computers are more effective at manipulating numbers and letters than graphic data. As a result, programs written for CADD use com- puter power to translate graphic infor- mation into digital data and back again. This takes time and often leaves a user hanging on a thought while the com- puter catches up. This problem will dis- solve as microprocessors become faster. Second, CRTs or other forms of view- ing screens are not very portable. There- fore, we still rely on a plotted hard copy for presentations and documentation. Todays plotters continue to be a weak link in the system. Electrostatic plotters which are 60 times as fast as pen plot- ters may be the beginning of a break- through in this area. Third, with CADD, project data can be electronically transmitted to deci- sion makers miles apart who can look at and react to the same graphic infor- mation simultaneously. The technology to transmit the enormous quantities or data associated with a CADD-produced drawing, however, leaves much to be desired. It can take all day to transmit a complicated drawing on standard tele- phone lines and the cost can be prohibi- tive. Microwave and satellite transmis- sions should provide relief in this arena in years to come. Cost.—Plans to invest $1 million in CADD equipment make most A/E com- pany executives wince. News of hiring eight new people seems far less painful. But, the two costs are equal. The aver- age per employee salary in a typical A/E ?rm is about $16.00/hour (total payroll divided by number of employees). A top-of-the-line mainframe CADD sta- tion used for an eight-hour shift, ?ve days a week, costs about the same. For companies that cannot afford a mainframe CADD system, there is an alternative. Micro CADD systems are emerging rapidly as a legitimate supple- mental tool for the A/E. Although they cannot yet compete with a mainframe CADD in resolution, speed, versatility, three dimensions, or color graphics, their cost is only $1.22/hour. People.—For a time, creative people, who had grown up with the tools of drawing, appeared reluctant to adopt computer technology in their work. Some even seemed offended by it. We all assumed that the widespread use of CADD as a legitimate, creative design tool would be delayed until these peo- ple could be won over or replaced. This is proving to be a passing prob- lem. Computer hardware and software ?rms recognize that their futures de- pend on the term user friendly. They are moving rapidly to eliminate techni- cal obstacles to the widespread accep- tance of CADD. Quality.—While the initial loading of project information in the CADD sys- tem can be just as laborious as tradi- tional processes, CADD earns its keep on coordinating various disciplines work an on every change that occurs. Discrepancies between A/E disci- plines often cause project delays when professionals work on outdated back- grounds. CADD allows the backgrounds for all disciplines to be automatically updated, even when the work proceeds concurrently. If the architect moves a wall, the modi?cation is immediately transmitted through the computer to the engineer for referencing. Delays and claims often result from design con?icts in building systems. Color overlay techniques allow for sim- pli?ed crosschecking of interference among building systems. The possibil- ity of a structural beam, mechanical duct, and electrical conduit occupying the same physical space is reduced. Tomorrow CADD has the potential for breaking away even greater boundaries to our creativity by allowing A/Es to work with all three dimensions simultaneously. In- stead of relying on the painstaking and time-consuming process of translat- ing two-dimensional plans and eleva- tions into models and perspectives for three-dimensional study, one architect is looking toward the day when CADD will allow the designer to draw in three dimensions from the start. The question is no longer whether, but when, to adopt CADD. It has evolved into an important design tool with in- herent economies and quality improve- ments. Now, more alternatives can be considered in greater detail. We reduce errors caused by a lack of co-ordination and multiple hand-offs. We accommo- date changes with far less pain and far better results. Creative thinking is sup- ported by rigorous analysis. The result is better projects and the ultimate win- ner is the client.