Keywords Abstract
de Jong, M.. "A Spatial Relational Reference Model (3RM)." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 85-91. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. In this chapter we hope to provide the reader with an impression of the objective, framework and possibilities of 3RM in the construction industry. In Dutch, 3RM stands for'Ruimtelijk Relationeel Referentie Model'(Spatial Relational Reference Model). The model could begin to be used as an information-bearer in the building industry within which the specific trade information for each of the building participants could be interrelated, including drafting symbolism, building costs, physical qualities and building regulations. In this way, the model can be used as a means to a more efficient running of the building process and enabling the integration of information, at project level, provided by various building participants. The project should be defined in the same way as is a typical architectural project, whereby the actual development as well as the project management is carried out by architects. For the time being, development is limited to integral use at the design stage, but it also offers sufficient expansion possibilities to be able to function as a new communications model throughout the complete building process. We shall first provide information as to the origin, the objective and the execution of the project. Thereafter, we shall attempt to state the theoretical information problem within the building industry and the solution to this offered through 3RM. Finally, we shall report upon the results of the first phase of the 3RM project.
Wheeler, B.J.Q. "A Unified Model for Building." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 200-231. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. It is commonly recognized that the time-honoured procedure for preparing an architectural design for building on site is inefficient. Each member of a team of consultant professionals makes an independently documented contribution. For a typical project involving an architect and structural, electrical, mechanical and public services engineers there will be at least five separate sets of general- arrangement drawings, each forming a model of the building, primarily illustrating one discipline but often having to include elements of others in order to make the drawing readable. For example, an air-conditioning duct-work layout is more easily understood when superimposed on the room layout it serves which the engineer is not responsible for but has to understand. Both during their parallel evolution and later, when changes have to be made during the detailed design and production drawing stages, it is difficult and time consuming to keep all versions coordinated. Complete coordination is rarely achieved in time, and conflicts between one discipline and another have to be rectified when encountered on site with resulting contractual implications. Add the interior designer, the landscape architect and other specialized consultants at one end of the list and contractors'shop drawings relating to the work of all the consultants at the other, and the number of different versions of the same thing grows, escalating the concomitant task of coordination. The potential for disputes over what is the current status of the design is enormous, first, amongst the consultants and second, between the consultants and the contractor. When amendments are made by one party, delay and confusion tend to follow during the period it takes the other parties to update their versions to include them. The idea of solving this problem by using a common computer-based model which all members of the project team can directly contribute to is surely a universally assumed goal amongst all those involved in computer-aided building production. The architect produces a root drawing or model, the'Architect's base plan', to which the other consultants have read-only access and on top of which they can add their own write-protected files. Every time they access the model to write in the outcome of their work on the project they see the current version of the'Architect's base plan'and can thus respond immediately to recent changes and avoid wasting time on redundant work. The architect meanwhile adds uniquely architectural material in his own overlaid files and maintains the root model as everybody's work requires. The traditional working pattern is maintained while all the participants have the ability to see their colleagues, work but only make changes to those parts for which they are responsible.
Gero, John S.. "An Overview of Knowledge Engineering and its Relevance to CAAD." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 107-119. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. Computer-aided architectural design (CAAD) has come to mean a number of often disparate activities. These can be placed into one of two categories: using the computer as a drafting and, to a lesser extent, modelling system, and using it as a design medium. The distinction between the two categories is often blurred. Using the computer as a drafting and modelling tool relies on computing notions concerned with representing objects and structures numerically and with ideas of computer programs as procedural algorithms. Similar notions underly the use of computers as a design medium. We shall return to these later. Clearly, all computer programs contain knowledge, whether methodological knowledge about processes or knowledge about structural relationships in models or databases. However, this knowledge is so intertwined with the procedural representation within the program that it can no longer be seen or found. Architecture is concerned with much more than numerical descriptions of buildings. It is concerned with concepts, ideas, judgement and experience. All these appear to be outside the realm of traditional computing. Yet architects discoursing use models of buildings largely unrelated to either numerical descriptions or procedural representations. They make use of knowledge - about objects, events and processes - and make nonprocedural (declarative) statements that can only be described symbolically. The limits of traditional computing are the limits of traditional computer-aided design systems, namely, that it is unable directly to represent and manipulate declarative, nonalgorithmic, knowledge or to perform symbolic reasoning. Developments in artificial intelligence have opened up ways of increasing the applicability of computers by acquiring and representing knowledge in computable forms. These approaches supplement rather than supplant existing uses of computers. They begin to allow the explicit representations of human knowledge. The remainder of this chapter provides a brief introduction to this field and describes, through applications, its relevance to computer- aided architectural design.
Bridges, Alan. "Any Progress in Systematic Design?" In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 15-May. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. In order to discuss this question it is necessary to reflect awhile on design methods in general. The usual categorization discusses'generations'of design methods, but Levy (1981) proposes an alternative approach. He identifies five paradigm shifts during the course of the twentieth century which have influenced design methods debate. The first paradigm shift was achieved by 1920, when concern with industrial arts could be seen to have replaced concern with craftsmanship. The second shift, occurring in the early 1930s, resulted in the conception of a design profession. The third happened in the 1950s, when the design methods debate emerged, the fourth took place around 1970 and saw the establishment of'design research'. Now, in the 1980s, we are going through the fifth paradigm shift, associated with the adoption of a holistic approach to design theory and with the emergence of the concept of design ideology. A major point in Levy's paper was the observation that most of these paradigm shifts were associated with radical social reforms or political upheavals. For instance, we may associate concern about public participation with the 1970s shift and the possible use (or misuse) of knowledge, information and power with the 1980s shift. What has emerged, however, from the work of colleagues engaged since the 1970s in attempting to underpin the practice of design with a coherent body of design theory is increasing evidence of the fundamental nature of a person's engagement with the design activity. This includes evidence of the existence of two distinctive modes of thought, one of which can be described as cognitive modelling and the other which can be described as rational thinking. Cognitive modelling is imagining, seeing in the mind's eye. Rational thinking is linguistic thinking, engaging in a form of internal debate. Cognitive modelling is externalized through action, and through the construction of external representations, especially drawings. Rational thinking is externalized through verbal language and, more formally, through mathematical and scientific notations. Cognitive modelling is analogic, presentational, holistic, integrative and based upon pattern recognition and pattern manipulation. Rational thinking is digital, sequential, analytical, explicatory and based upon categorization and logical inference. There is some relationship between the evidence for two distinctive modes of thought and the evidence of specialization in cerebral hemispheres (Cross, 1984). Design methods have tended to focus upon the rational aspects of design and have, therefore, neglected the cognitive aspects. By recognizing that there are peculiar'designerly'ways of thinking combining both types of thought process used to perceive, construct and comprehend design representations mentally and then transform them into an external manifestation current work in design theory is promising at last to have some relevance to design practice.
Walters, Roger. "CAAD: Shorter-term Gains, Longerterm Costs?" In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 185-196. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. Assessment of CAAD systems in use is complex: it needs careful qualifications and is often contradictory. It is suggested that little progress has been made in making sense of the impacts of computing on design and design organizations. Impacts are more diverse and complicated than has been assumed. Assessments tend to be either overtly optimistic or pessimistic, yet the need is to be realistic. Moreover, impacts have been the subject of speculation and marketing rather than systematic study. Carefully documented case studies of projects or longitudinal studies of organizational impacts remain the exception. This chapter draws upon recorded user experience reported elsewhere (Walters, 1983)'and presents an assessment of the performance in use of current production systems. It presents an end-user view and also identifies a number of outstanding design research topics It is suggested that different systems in different organizations in different settings will give rise to new impacts. A wide variety of outcomes is possible. It seems unlikely that any simple set of relationships can account for all the data that inquiry reveals. The task becomes one of identifying variables that lead to differential outcomes, as the same cause may lead to different effects (Attewell and Rule, 1984). This becomes a long-term task. Each optimistic impact may be countered by some other more pessimistic impact. Moreover, the changes brought about on design by computing are significant because both beneficial and non- beneficial impacts are present together. Impacts are held in a dynamic balance that is subject to constant evolution. This viewpoint accounts for otherwise conflicting conclusions. It is unlikely that the full range of impacts is yet known, and a wide range of impacts and outcomes already need to be taken into account. It seems that CAD alone cannot either guarantee improved design or that it inevitably leads to some diminished role for the designer. CAD can lead to either possible outcome, depending upon the particular combination of impacts present. Careful matching of systems to design organization and work environment is therefore needed. The design management role becomes crucial.
Kociolek, A.. "CAD in Polish Building." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 235-245. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. There is little CAAD in Polish architectural design offices, and only recently have practising architects discovered the computer. On the other hand, CAAD has been used for some time in research and development based at universities or in large design organizations. This chapter gives a broad picture of the computerization of building design in Poland, a complex process which concerns planning and financing, hardware, software, CAD practice, standardization, training, education, etc. Here architectural applications are treated on an equal basis, together with other applications representing design disciplines involved in design, such as structural and mechanical engineering. The underlying philosophy of this chapter is a belief that proper and well-balanced computerization of design in building which leaves creative work to human beings should result in better design and eventually in improvements in the built environment. Therefore integration of the design process in building seems more important for design practice than attempts to replace an architect by a computer, although the intellectual attraction of this problem is recognized.
Schijf, Rik. "CAD in the Netherlands: Integrated CAD." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 176-184. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. One of the things in which a small country can excel is its number of architects'offices per inhabitant. In the Netherlands this is approximately one in 6500, or twice the UK density (CBS, 1984, CICA, 1982). Of the 2150 Dutch offices, 88 per cent employ less than 10 people, which compares rather well with the British Situation. For the Netherlands it is interesting that its boom in CAD, on average an annual doubling or tripling for the next few years, is likely to coincide with a revolution in CAD itself. There is no doubt that very soon the personal and larger CAD systems will clash at supermicro-level.
Greenberg, Donald. "Computer Graphics and Visualization." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 63-67. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. The field of computer graphics has made enormous progress during the past decade. It is rapidly approaching the time when we will be able to create images of such realism that it will be possible to'walk through'nonexistent spaces and to evaluate their aesthetic quality based on the simulations. In this chapter we wish to document the historical development of computer graphics image creation and describe some techniques which are currently being developed. We will try to explain some pilot projects that we are just beginning to undertake at the Program of Computer Graphics and the Center for Theory and Simulation in Science and Engineering at Cornell University.
Carrara, Gianfranco, and Gabriele Novembri. "Constraint-bounded design search." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 146-157. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. The design process requires continual checking of the consistency of design choices against given sets of goals that have been fulfilled. Such a check is generally performed by comparing abstract representations of design goals with these of the sought real building objects (RBO) resulting from complex intellectual activities closely related to the designer's culture and to the environment in which he operates. In this chapter we define a possible formalization of such representations concerning the goals and the RBO that are usually considered in the architectural design process by our culture in our environment. The representation of design goals is performed by expressing their objective aspects (requirements) and by defining their allowable values (performance specifications). The resulting system of requirements defines the set of allowable solutions and infers an abstract representation of the sought building objects (BO) that consists of the set of characteristics (attributes and relations) which are considered relevant to represent the particular kind of RBO with respect to the consistency check with design goals. The values related to such characteristics define the performances of the RBO while their set establishes its behaviour. Generally speaking, there is no single real object corresponding to an abstract representation but the whole class of the RBO that are equivalent with respect to the values assumed by the considered characteristics. The more we increase the number of these, as well as their specifications, the smaller the class becomes until it coincides with a single real object - given that the assessed specifications be fully consistent. On the other hand, the corresponding representation evolves to the total prefiguration of the RBO. It is not therefore possible to completely define a BO representation in advance since this is inferred by the considered goals and is itself a result of the design process. What can only be established in advance is that any set of characteristics assumed to represent any RBO consists of hierarchic, topological, geometrical and functional relations among the parts of the object at any level of aggregation (from components to space units, to building units, to the whole building) that we define representation structure (RS). Consequently the RS may be thought as the elementary structures that, by superposition and interaction, set up the abstract representation that best fit with design goals.
Gasparski, W.. "Design Methodology: How I Understand and Develop it." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 16-27. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. The term'methodology'is sometimes given two diametrically opposed meanings, well characterized by Mark Blaug in the preface of a very informative book devoted to the methodology of economics. This is also the case with the methodology of design. One can find studies in which'the methodology of design'is simply a method or methods of design, given a fancy name to make it or them appear more scientific. Authors of such studies should not confuse their readers by taking methodological studies to mean technicalities of design or demanding that their interpretation and assessment of so-called'practical applicability'should follow this criterion. The methodology of design - as we understand it has parallels in the methodology of Blaug's economics, the philosophy of practical science, the applied sciences or the sciences of artificial objects or artefacts. Understood this way, the methodology of design is neither the method of practising design nor an instruction for its use but a theoretical reflection - in the meaning given to methodology by the philosophy of science - of design. In this connection a study of the methodology of design should be provided with the subtitle,'How researchers of practical sciences and designers understand the concept of changes'.
Bijl, Aart. "Designing with Words and Pictures in a Logic Modelling Environment." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 128-145. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. At EdCAAD we are interested in design as something people do. Designed artefacts, the products of designing, are interesting only in so far as they tell us something about design. An extreme expression of this position is to say that the world of design is the thoughts in the heads of designers, plus the skills of designers in externalizing their thoughts, design artifacts, once perceived and accepted in the worlds of other people, are no longer part of the world of design. We can describe design, briefly, as a process of synthesis. Design has to achieve a fusion between parts to create new parts, so that the products are recognized, as having a right and proper place in the world of people. Parts should be understood as referring to anything - physical objects, abstract ideas, aspirations. These parts occur in some design environment from which parts are extracted, designed upon and results replaced, in the example of buildings, the environment is people and results have to be judged by reference to that environment. It is characteristic of design that both the process and the product are not subject to explicit and complete criteria. This view of design differs sharply from the more orthodox understanding of scientific and technological endeavours which rely predominantly on a process of analysis. In the latter case, the approach is to decompose a problem into parts until individual parts are recognized as being amenable to known operations and results are reassembled into a solution. This process has a peripheral role in design when evaluating selected aspects of tentative design proposals, but the absence of well-defined and widely recognized criteria for design excludes it from the main stream of analytical developments.
Ruffle, Simon. "How Can CAD Provide for the Changing Role of the Architect?" In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 197-199. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. At the RIBA Conference of 1981 entitled'New Opportunities', and more recently at the 1984 ACA Annual Conference on'Architects in Competition'there has been talk of marketing, new areas of practice, recapturing areas of practice lost to other professions, more accountability to client and public'the decline of the mystique of the professional'. It is these issues, rather than technical advances in software and hardware, that will be the prime movers in getting computers into widespread practice in the future. In this chapter we will examine how changing attitudes in the profession might affect three practical issues in computing with which the author has been preoccupied in the past year. We will conclude by considering how, in future, early design stage computing may need to be linked to architectural theory, and, as this is a conference where we are encouraged to be outspoken, we will raise the issue of a computer-based theory of architecture.
Shaviv, Edna. "Layout Design Problems: Systematic Approaches." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 28-52. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. The complexity of the layout design problems known as the'spatial allocation problems'gave rise to several approaches, which can be generally classified into two main streams. The first attempts to use the computer to generate solutions of the building layout, while in the second, computers are used only to evaluate manually generated solutions. In both classes the generation or evaluation of the layout are performed systematically. Computer algorithms for'spatial allocation problems'first appeared more than twenty-five years ago (Koopmans, 1957). From 1957 to 1970 over thirty different programs were developed for generating the floor plan layout automatically, as is summarized in CAP-Computer Architecture Program, Vol. 2 (Stewart et al., 1970). It seems that any architect who entered the area of CAAD felt that it was his responsibility to find a solution to this prime architectural problem. Most of the programs were developed for batch processing, and were run on a mainframe without any sophisticated input/output devices. It is interesting to mention that, because of the lack of these sophisticated input/output devices, early researchers used the approach of automatic generation of optimal or quasioptimal layout solution under given constraints. Gradually, we find a recession and slowdown in the development of computer programs for generation of layout solutions. With the improvement of interactive input/output devices and user interfaces, the inclination today is to develop integrated systems in which the architectural solution is obtained manually by the architect and is introduced to the computer for the appraisal of the designer's layout solution (Maver, 1977). The manmachine integrative systems could work well, but it seems that in most of the integrated systems today, and in the commercial ones in particular, there is no route to any appraisal technique of the layout problem. Without any evaluation techniques in commercial integrated systems it seems that the geometrical database exists Just to create working drawings and sometimes also perspectives.
Straub, K.. "Problems in CAD Practice." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 232-234. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. CAD's greatest promise is as a creative, interactive tool, and planning and construction will be more complex as the need to expand information grows. Our tools not only shape our products, they shape our lives. Technology can influence everyday life and also affect the structure of our society. Architecture is an information-intensive profession, and throughout the world information-intensive activities are being changed by technology. The use of computer-aided information processing in planning and construction brings about a period of dramatic change, and the dimensions of technological change will be breathtaking. In the years to come, CAD will be an expanding field in the architectural office, but how long will it be before architecture is routinely produced on a CAD system? There appear to be three issues: (1) cost, (2) time, (3) quality.
Logan, Brian. "Representing the Structure of Design Problems." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 158-170. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. In recent years several experimental CAD systems have emerged which, focus specifically on the structure of design problems rather than on solution generation or appraisal (Sussman and Steele, 1980, McCallum, 1982). However, the development of these systems has been hampered by the lack of an adequate theoretical basis. There is little or no argument as to what the statements comprising these models actually mean, or on the types of operations that should be provided. This chapter describes an attempt to develop a semantically adequate basis for a model of the structure of design problems and presents a representation of this model in formal logic.
Lansdown, John. "Requirements for Knowledge-based Systems in Design." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 120-127. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. Even from the comparatively small amount of work that has been done in this area it is already clear that expert systems can be of value in many architectural applications. This is particularly so in those applications involving what broadly can be called,'classification'(such as fault diagnosis, testing for conformity with regulations and so on). What we want to look at in this chapter are some of the developments in knowledge-based systems (KBS) which will be needed in order to make them more useful in a broader application area and, especially, in creative design. At the heart of these developments will be two things: (1), more appropriate methods of representing knowledge which are as accessible to humans as they are to computers, and (2), better ways of ensuring that this knowledge can be brought to bear exactly where and when it is needed. Knowledge engineers usually call these elements, respectively,'knowledge representation'and'control'.
Wrona, Stefan. "The Profits of CAAD Can Be Increased by an Integrated Participatory Design Approach." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 53-57. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. Computer-aided Architectural Design is understood in Poland as comprising all computer applications in an architectural design office. In Polish architectural practice (with a few exceptions) it is still under theoretical consideration and in an experimental phase. Therefore if we are talking about the future of CAAD in Poland we are thinking about a much more long-term future than for Western countries. However, if new economic and organizational changes initiated in Poland in the early 1980s continue, future problems and solutions in CAAD will, for us, become similar to those in Western countries.
Aish, Robert. "Three-dimensional Input and Visualization." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 68-84. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. The aim of this chapter is to investigate techniques by which man-computer interaction could be improved, specifically in the context of architectural applications of CAD. In this application the object being designed is often an assembly of defined components. Even if the building is not actually fabricated from such components, it is usually conceptualized in these terms. In a conventional graphics - based CAD system these components are usually represented by graphical icons which are displayed on the graphics screen and arranged by the user. The system described here consists of three- dimensional modelling elements which the user physically assembles to form his design. Unlike conventional architectural models which are static (i.e. cannot be changed by the users) and passive (i.e. cannot be read by a CAD system), this model is both'user generated'and'machine readable'. The user can create, edit and view the model by simple, natural modelling activities and without the need to learn complex operating commands often associated with CAD systems. In particular, the user can view the model, altering his viewpoint and focus of attention in a completely natural way. Conventional computer graphics within an associated CAD system are used to represent the detailed geometry which the different three-dimensional icons may represent. In addition, computer graphics are also used to present the output of the performance attributes of the objects being modelled. In the architectural application described in this chapter an energy- balance evaluation is displayed for a building designed using the modelling device. While this system is not intended to offer a completely free-form input facility it can be considered to be a specialist man-machine interface of particular relevance to architects or engineers.
Vanier, D., and Jamie Worling. "Three-dimensional Visualization: a Case Study." In Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures: International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design, 92-102. CAAD Futures. London: Butterworths, 1986. Three-dimensional computer visualization has intrigued both building designers and computer scientists for decades. Research and conference papers present an extensive list of existing and potential uses for threedimensional geometric data for the building industry (Baer et al., 1979). Early studies on visualization include urban planning (Rogers, 1980), treeshading simulation (Schiler and Greenberg, 1980), sun studies (Anon, 1984), finite element analysis (Proulx, 1983), and facade texture rendering (Nizzolese, 1980). With the advent of better interfaces, faster computer processing speeds and better application packages, there had been interest on the part of both researchers and practitioners in three-dimensional -models for energy analysis (Pittman and Greenberg, 1980), modelling with transparencies (Hebert, 1982), super-realistic rendering (Greenberg, 1984), visual impact (Bridges, 1983), interference clash checking (Trickett, 1980), and complex object visualization (Haward, 1984). The Division of Building Research is currently investigating the application of geometric modelling in the building delivery process using sophisticated software (Evans, 1985). The first stage of the project (Vanier, 1985), a feasibility study, deals with the aesthetics of the mode. It identifies two significant requirements for geometric modelling systems: the need for a comprehensive data structure and the requirement for realistic accuracies and tolerances. This chapter presents the results of the second phase of this geometric modelling project, which is the construction of'working'and'presentation'models for a building.