15.01.20131

(1)

Experiences on converting interpretative regulations into computable rules

Paper presented at CIB W078 Conference Beirut, Lebanon 2012-10-19

Eilif Hjelseth Ph.D. student

Modified version with information about the RASE methodology Presented at TKS 2013-01-15

The Faculty of Law, UiO, Oslo

NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES

Outline

Background – motivation

Case: ISO 21542:2011 Building construction -- Accessibility and usability of the built environment”

standard

Methodology

– Tx3-methodology for classification of types of rules and how they can be implemented

– RASE-methodology, semantic mark-up based on four operators – TIO-methodology, Test Indicator Objectives; for transforming

qualitative goals in the regulations into quantitative metric in the computable rule

Results

Questions

Experiences on converting interpretative regulations into computable rules

(2)

AN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES

www.umb.no

Questions for TKS - to be answered?

Automated rule checking - general practice or only in special cases?

Can compliance with (all) regulations (law, act, codes, directives, standards)

become checked manually by a building authority officer - or

must one dependent on BIM based model checkers?

(digital code checking software)

TKS -UiOOslo 2012-01-15

3

www.umb.no

Background for development

Automatic BIM based model checking require computable rules.

Regulations; law, act, code, directives, standards contain both function based and prescriptive based statements

Function based statements can not directly be implemented into rules in BIM based software

The AEC industry have a large number of regulations, so the method has to be time and cost efficient

How to develop a methodology to increase the number of computable rules applicable for automatic BIM-based model checking?

4

(3)

www.umb.no

The standard has a volume of

152 pages; 42 clauses and 5 annexes 680 rules was identified

5

Case: ISO 21542:2011 Building construction -- Accessibility and usability of the built environment

NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES Experiences on converting interpretative regulations into computable rules

(4)

www.umb.no

ISO 21542:2011 - 26.18 Bathrooms, Figure 46 — Examples of a bathroom with bathtub and shower for independent use with a corner WC

periences on converting interpretative regulations into able rules

7

The «classic» turning circle for wheel-chairs

www.umb.no

Intention with the standard

8

4 General design considerations

4.1 General

The requirements in this International Standard relate to the principal human abilities that should be considered when designing, constructing and managing the built environment.

=> solutions shall focus on human abilities

(5)

www.umb.no

4.2 Design requirements according to human abilities

9

When fully implemented, this International Standard is expected to be of benefit to all people, including:

– people with hearingimpairments, – people with visionimpairments, – people with mobilityimpairments, – people with cognitiveimpairments,

– people with hidden impairments (such as strength, stamina, dexterity and allergy), and

– people with diversities in age and stature (including frail persons).

Note: People are not only wheel-chair users!

Metric is not a constant – Depend on

ISO 21542:2011 - Annex B (informative), B.6.2 Space allowance for wheelchair users, Figure B.2 — Examples of simplified 180°space requirements of persons in different types of wheelchairs

(6)

www.umb.no

Methodology

 The study has explored following methods:

Tx3-methodology

– The classification of types of rules is based on following categories; Transcribe–Transform – Transfer

– Determine how they shall be interpreted and implemented

TIO-methodology

– Test Indicator Objectives; for transforming qualitative goals in the regulations into quantitative metric in the computable rule

periences on converting interpretative regulations into computable rules

11

www.umb.no

The two types of regulations

Performance based specifications are expressed as purpose (function/goal) without discrete metrics;

– Not possible to test direct in BIM based model checking software

– Motivating for new and innovating solutions – and flexible use or existing solutions

Prescriptive specifications are expressed with

discrete metrics (more than 900 mm, 2100 mm, 4 m, 12 ݉^ଶ, 32 kN and so on)

– Very easy to test by BIM based model checking software – No motivation for new and innovating solutions – but easy to

content

12

(7)

www.umb.no

Conceptual framework - taxonomy

Translate –> direct…

Transcribe –> indirect…

Transfer –> missing

13

connection between

the objectives in performance based statements and

the metrics required in computable rules

The traffic light metaphor can be get an idea of the concept:

Transcribe–Transform – Transfer

Taxonomy of type of rules:

Regulatory statement

“Rule”

Type of rule

OK, can be checked automatic

“Transcribe”

Not possible to checked automatic Must be interpreted by professional

“Transfer”

Clear , but not

quantitative – need to be assessed further

“Transform”

(8)

www.umb.no

Flow chart of the Tx3-methodology for converting of regulations into computable rules

periences on converting interpretative regulations into computable rulesNORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES

www.umb.no

Regulations level

Regulations includes all normative text as laws, building codes, guidelines, calculation / assessment methods, standards and similar

16

(9)

www.umb.no

Preparation level

Preparation from free text to normative structure in tables by use of the RASE methodology

Presented in previous papers by Hjelseth and Nisbet (2010, 2011)

Terminology must be a uniform (ontology, classification)

17

RASE

The RASE mark-up language uses the following four RASE operators: ‘requirement’ ‘applies’, ‘select’, and ‘exception’.

Applied on a text, the user highlights any clause or phrase that means:

– ‘shall’/’must’ as a requirement, (including alternative requirements)

– ‘less scope’ as an applies’

– ‘more scope’ as a select’

– ‘unless’ as an exception’, (including composite exceptions).

– The relation between the operators and the original building codes in text is made apparent by a colour system according to the mark-up language. The colours were chosen for acceptability for those with visual impairments.

(10)

www.umb.no

NS-11001-1

10.2011

, Sted, tema19

www.umb.no

Fra linje til kolonner

10.10.2011

, Sted, tema20

(11)

www.umb.no

RASE - Demo case: Norwegian accessibility standard, Clause 5.2 from “NS 11001-1.E:2009 Universal design of building constructions - Part 1: Work buildings and buildings open to the public”

5.2 Dimensioning an access route to a building

The access route for pedestrians/wheelchair users shall not be steeper than 1:20. For distances of less than 3 metres, it may be steeper, but not more than 1:12.

The access route shall have clear width of a minimum of 1,8 m and obstacles shall be placed so that they do not reduce that width. Maximum cross fall shall be 2 %.

The access route shall have a horizontal landing at the start and end of the incline, plus a horizontal landing for every 0,6 m of incline. The landing shall be a minimum of 1,6 m deep.

Minimum clear height shall be 2,25 m for the full width of the defined walking zone of the entire access route including crossing points.

21

In the original text, it may not be obvious that the overall applicability expressed in the title carries down into following sentences. The second sentence is actually an exception to the first.

(12)

www.umb.no

<R>Standard NS 11001-1, Clause: 5.2 Dimensioning an <a>access route</a> to a building

<R> The <a>access route</a> for <s>pedestrians</s><s>wheelchair users</s> shall <r>not be steeper than 1:20</r>. <E>For <a>distances of less than 3 metres</a>, it may be steeper, but <r>not more than 1:12</r>.</E> </R>

<R>The <a>access route</a> shall have <r>clear width of a minimum of 1,8 m</r> and <r>obstacles shall be placed so that they do not reduce that width </r>.<r>Maximum cross fall shall be 2 %.</r></R>

<R>The <a>access route</a> shall have <r>a horizontal landing at the start and end of the incline<r>, plus <r>a horizontal landing for every 0,6 m of incline</r>. <r>The landing shall be a minimum of 1,6 m deep.</r></R>

<R><r>Minimum clear height shall be 2,25 m </r>for the full width of the defined walking zone of the entire <a>access route</a> including crossing points. </R></R>

23

www.umb.no

24

(13)

www.umb.no

Meta-data

RASE is a methods for “normative-isation” of text

 RASE is

 turning text into tables

 adding meta-data

 enabling automatic interpretation

The RASE concept is optimized for interpretation of normative text into rules.

 This makes this concept different for NLP (natural language processing) approach.

25

Converting level

Statements who must be interpreted by skilled professional

– Complexity of statement – Varying context – large

variant of situations (models) where the statements is being used

Statements with discrete metric – just transcribe (“translate“) into computable rules

See next slide

(14)

www.umb.no

Association level

Mapping methodology - Supported by TIO support

«Association methodology, #2-A by mapping qualitative goals to quantitative metric

It is expected that most regulations with indirect association “goal <-> metric” can be solved bye use of the TIO mapping mechanism

27

www.umb.no

28

(15)

www.umb.no

Pattern level –use of Expert systems

Used on very complicated statements with high importance and complex content

-> Expert systems

Not included in this study

Will increase degree of automatic model checking

29

Test Indicator Objective (TIO)

mapping methodology at association level

Test Indicator Objective (TIO)

Relation between qualitative and quantitative approach -> Association level

The metric can be identified / specified from an top-down or an bottom-up approach

Examples of TIOs are illustrated in following list:

 We use the => mark for “transformed to”.

– Well illuminated => more than 350 lux *) – Close to parking => less than 30 m – Close to toilet => less than 10 m

– Door sill must not be too high => less than 10 mm – Large enough sleeping rooms => more than 12 m2

– Well-arranged => visible from starting point (e.g. parking slot/entrance)

(16)

www.umb.no

Test Indicator Objective (TIO)

Relation between qualitative goals and quantitative metric

31

www.umb.no

Examples of transformations: Minimum dimension

32

(17)

www.umb.no

Examples of transformations: Maximum dimension

33

Examples of transformations: Product property

(18)

www.umb.no

Examples of transformations:Pre-accepted solutions

35

www.umb.no

Results from the case study

ISO 21542:2011 - 13 Stairs, 13.4 Head clearance Figure 18 — Clear height under stairs

36

(19)

www.umb.no

37

Distribution of Tx3 type of rules

Figure 4: Overview of type of rules in the ISO 21543:2011 standard

(20)

www.umb.no

Use of TIO-method to increase degree of

automatic model checking of ISO 21542:2011 rules

39

Effects by the TIO-methodology on model checking

www.umb.no

Impact for the:

Public authority:

– Performance based regulations can be used as foundation for model checking.

AEC industry:

– Number of regulatory statements applicable for BIM- based model checking can be increased

Research:

– Foundation for further research and development / production of BIM based model checking systems / software.

40

(21)

www.umb.no

Summary

Development of computable rules can be done in a predictable way

Tx3-methodolgy determine degree of automatic model checking

in advance of detailed development

TIO-methodology increase number of statements which can be implemented as

computable rules in BIM-based model-checking software

41

Questions!

 Thank you for your attention!

ISO 21542:2011 – 41 Graphical symbols, Figure 72 — Accessible emergency exit route

(22)

www.umb.no

Questions for TKS - possible answer?!

Automated rule checking - general practice or only in special cases?

Can compliance with (all) regulations (law, act, codes, directives, standards)

become checked manually by a building authority officer - or

must one dependent on BIM based model checkers?

(digital code checking software)

TKS -UiOOslo 2012-01-15

43