A design review session protocol for the implementation of immersive virtual reality in usability-focused analysis

Abstract

Research and applications related to Virtual Reality (VR) in the Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Facility Management (AEC/FM) industry are steadily increasing, being considered as one of the current trends in digital innovation. A convergence is currently on-going between Building Information Modelling (BIM), VR implementation and the soft landings principles, which highlight the need for a smooth transition from design to operation through the early involvement of clients and end-users. In particular, immersive virtual environments could allow stakeholders to experience the full-scale representation of a virtual facility prototype in an intuitive and engaging manner through immersion and sense of presence, promoting feedback collection during usability-focused design review meetings. On the other hand, despite the renewed interest in immersive VR, both technological and procedural challenges to its effective implementation still exist. The latter are within the scope of this study, which aims to address them in a systematic way as a comprehensive guideline for clients and design teams. This study describes the development of a VR-aided usability-focused design review session protocol for implementing immersive VR when clients and end-users are involved in design review meetings. It is the result of an inductive approach associated with qualitative research methods for data collection and data analysis. A case study has been selected as a main research method for facing the first step into the research problem. A further iteration of data collection and analysis was adopted to guarantee the validity of the research, including talks with experts and literature comparison. Finally, the session protocol has been developed in the form of a process map representing all the necessary phases and activities to consider for the effective adoption of immersive VR to evaluate design intents with clients and end-users. As a comprehensive summary, the session protocol fills a gap in the research on the adoption of virtual reality in the AEC industry, which was lacking a prescriptive and structured process to drive the effective use of this technology in collaborative meetings and decision-making processes.

Visualizing a New Sustainable World: Toward the Next Generation of Virtual Reality in the Built Environment

“…Vergara et al [27] considered realism and interaction as key considerations for developing VR experiences in engineering education, but driven by the specific objectives as the first step to determine the usefulness of VR before proceeding with the technical design and user evaluation. Mastrolembo Ventura et al [28] looked more broadly at both technological and procedural challenges when implementing VR in design reviews.…”

“…While recent studies have begun to address the need for VR implementation protocols for design reviews [28], crafting the narrative structure of the VR experience itself requires an understanding of user tasks, behavior, and perception in order to determine which elements are critical to include in models to maintain control.…”

Realizing the Need for Digital Transformation of Stakeholder Management: A Systematic Review in the Construction Industry

“…Project communication was enhanced by Dinis et al's [74] new workflow, which coupled laser scanning and virtual reality (VR) within building information modelling (BIM) and brought an alternative approach regarding the definition of expected requirements, qualities, and specifications valued by stakeholders (i.e., project owners). Similarly, Ventura et al [75] formed a process map representing all the necessary phases and activities to consider for the effective adoption of immersive VR to evaluate design intents with clients and end-users. The investigation of Abbas et al [76] showed no large statistical difference in IVR-based and face-to-face (FtF) communication in terms of discussion quality, communication richness, and openness, but FtF did show slightly better results, and this led to the conclusion that immersive reality needs improvement to better represent realistic interactions.…”

“…The usage of virtual reality and similar technologies (e.g., AR and MR) has risen in recent years, but it is still relatively new ICT in the AEC industry, and at this stage of development, technology is quite expensive [40,76]. Zaker and Coloma [71] highlighted that further research and development should deal with making these technologies more affordable, while Ventura et al [75] call for an appropriate framework for measuring the actual added value of VR systems implementation. There is room for various improvements to make VR/AR more adjusted to the communication needs of AEC industry stakeholders [71], and one research stream should deal with improving the accuracy of the data collected and analyzed in such environments so that they represent physical environments more realistically [69,101].…”

Surprise: challenging design perceptions in immersive virtual reality environments? The case of designing a hospital project using a CAVE (Cave Automatic Virtual Environment)

“…The themes addressed in this literature range from immersiveness, experience, complexity, spatial perception and cognition, problem solving, decision-making, collaboration, user engagement, to value and cost or time. Overall, these studies suggest the potential of visualisation and collaboration environments to support the creation, communication, development and understanding of design through supporting and extending other design procedures (Whyte and Nikolic, 2018; Ventura et al, 2020;Goulding and Rahimian, 2015). However, much of the literature focusses on developing/ testing technology in experimental studies, or examining the practical use of immersive technology using standard metrics.…”