Inside the Factory

Factory Lecture Series: Shape Grammars and Mass Customization

We continued our lecture series here at the factory last week with a visit from José Duarte, Associate Professor at the Technical University of Lisbon Faculty of Architecture. He is currently conducting research at MIT on applying design patterns and shape grammars to create computational systems for urban planning. The stated goal is to use rule-based computer-aided design and manufacturing processes to re-think the uniform housing and rigid plans. He presented work that he did 10 years ago with Alvaro Siza's Malagueira housing project outside of Lisbon.

In an attempt to recreate the variation inherent in organic urban plans and provide clients with a individualized result, Durate create what he calls a "discursive" shape grammar. This system encodes Siza's preferred proportions and design rationale into a language which can be applied in a seemingly endless number of ways (over 67 million possible combinations, actually.)  What was interesting about this system was it's seeming simplicity and practicality. It builds on the work presented to us last month from Kostas Terzidis - but applies a similar computational concept in a tangible way. The web-based prototype he built, albeit almost a decade ago, accepted input parameters, such as client preferences and local zoning rules, generated solutions based on the grammar and pumped out drawings, 3D models and cost lists for each variation. This talk predictably generated the same debate as with the last lecture: who is the author of the resulting design? The architect of the design language? The designer of the system that generates the alternatives? Or, the system itself?  This is not a new debate and predates the use of computers in architecture. However, based on the type of work we see being attempted by students and our customers alike, this is going to be the central debate concerning the use of computation and design in the coming years. It is an exciting time. Erik summed it up well: "I went to architecture school 15 years too early!"

_tom

Planting Pattern-based Modeling Seeds

My co-worker Greg (Frame) Demchak and I just wrapped up a new advanced Revit class (VS631) at the Boston Architectural College.  This class covered advanced topics such as project management and design options. It was also the first covering the new conceptual model tools.  These were covered in two classes: a guest lecture by Zach from Buildz and a follow-up class on how to make a point-based curtain panel rig.  Below are the results after seven hours of instruction.

 

The class illuminated strengths in the underlying tool concepts as well as areas that could be enhanced or altered to eliminate stumbling points.  The students caught on quick and pushed the tool hard.

Thanks to Aristide Little-Lex, Bram Koss, Junald Severo, Justin Whiteside, Liane Silevitch, and Spencer Culhane.

_erik

Ending the quarter on an up-note

Much has been written about how Autodesk ate it's own dogfood (man, I hate that saying, but it works) with the use of BIM and IPD for our new AEC HQ here in Waltham. But I thought it was worth pointing out the recent article in  Metropolis, particularly the breakdown of upgrades that were made possible by savings realized by IPD (such as nicer finishes, custom lighting and exposed mechanicals - which are helpful when scratching our heads over certain MEP workflows!) Also, the BIM(x) blog just posted Tocci's take on the process, which includes a summary of LEED credits and the complete Platinum score card. See if you can spot a certain co-blogger in one of the photos...

And speaking of facilities, all of Autodesk is shutting down for the week of the Thanksgiving holiday here in the States. So, blogging may dip in our post-feast stupors. See you in December!  _tom

Photo: Jeff Goldberg/Esto

Factory Lecture Series: Algorithmic Architecture

Lira Nikolovska, a fellow Interaction Designer on BIM Platform Team, has been organizing a sort of informal lecture series here at the factory. Yesterday, we were pleased to host Kostas Terzidis, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture at Harvard Graduate School of Design. Professor Terzidis has a background in computer science (he was one of the original developers of form-Z) and architecture. His focus is on how architecture can be generated and influenced by computation, which he distinguishes from computerization - using the computer to simply facilitate the study formal compositions. He is strongly critical of the decade-plus trend in computer-generated blobitecture (In the introduction to his book Expressive Form, he describes this trend using words like "arbitrary," "vague," and "caricature.") Terzidis instead proposes using rule-based algorithmic computation to generate and evaluate a multitude of options. The key to this approach is the use of rules - which can take the form of pragmatic building codes, geometric patterns, or formal design patterns - to present to the architect combinations they may not have arrived at themselves. These options are then culled and selected based on specific criteria. This generated debate amongst the architects in the room. What about the ideal of the architect as individual genius? Is this simply the computer replacing the architect? My personal take: it all depends on how far you want to take this concept. The key is in the selection criteria. Taken to a logical extreme, one could attempt to boil every single design decision in a building down to rules to be generated and analyzed solely by the machine. This idea is not entirely new. Nicholas Negroponte explored "architecture without architects" in the 1973 Soft Architecture Machines. I do not think this is plausible or preferable. Instead, I see these algorithms as simply another tool, the selection criteria is still dependent on the aesthetic sensibility of the architect. An algorithm may provide all n possible fenestration combinations for a facade - the architect still chooses.

How does this apply to Revit, or BIM in general? I am not sure yet. Revit's strength in the face of many generalized tools has been it's specificity. When you click Wall, you know what you will get. But when you break it down, its all geometry, parameters, and rules. So one could imagine using parameters to drive the creation of a multitude of design "branches" that can be deterministically pruned and combined as designs progress. It is surely a fascinating topic that really cuts to the core of most contemporary design disciplines.

(BTW, I just found the full text of Prof. Terzidis's latest two books on Scribd: Algorithmic Architecture and Algorithms for Visual Design.)

_tom

Powered by the Sun...and Revit

Today I attended a ribbon cutting ceremony in Somerville.  MA to glimpse the future in the form of a new energy efficient house.  One of our designers Greg Demchak has volunteered his time over the last two years as a principal investigator at the Boston Architectural College.  In this role he assisted a team of students from the school who collaborated with other students from Tufts University to enter the U.S. Department of energy's Solar Decathlon.  It was moving to see these students tackling energy and climate issues head on as opposed to the last century where the worlds natural resources were systematically exhausted.  The team is still taking donations to support the effort, and  you can get more information or view additional images from their website http://www.livecurio.us/

The Curio is a solar powered, 800 sq. ft house that will be installed with 19 other houses on the Washington mall in October.  If you’re in the DC area mid October, you should drop in and have a look.

And of course the house was designed in Revit!

_erik

Adding to the Revit Masses

Over the past few years I've followed the growth of Revit via the Boston Architectural College where my co-worker Greg Demchak and I have taught an intro class for several years.  Over time the class size has grown as well as the number of students who mentioned their firms are switching over.  The college now offers 3 segments a week and this year we added a fourth advanced class.  Over 40 students per semester now!  Some images of recent student work was included in Greg's Introducing Revit Architecture 2010: BIM for Beginners.  I'll share three more below from a 8 week summer offering I just concluded.  Whittling the 16 week course down to 8 was tricky but I was amazed at how quickly the students picked up the concepts with only 24 hours instruction.  The renderings were done after only 20 minutes of demonstration from me which I think speaks a bit to the current ease of use of that feature.

Any other training/teaching stories?  How many instructors do we have out there?  I know of a few.

_erik

Richard Meier: Rachofsky House (Modeled by Luis Riobueno)


WPa: Villa Lucy (Modeled by Pei-Chi Liao)

 
Wheeler-Kearns: Bohan-Kemp Residence (Modeled by Liane Silevitch)

Software Designers

So you may be asking: what does design have to do with creating a piece of software? When I tell customers that our team designs the Revit user experience, the most common response is "so you are a software engineer, right?" This is a common misconception about software; that it is created solely by software engineers. While this has been largely true for the past few decades, the way software is designed is changing in a big way. In many forward thinking companies like Autodesk, the concept of a holistic user experience - the way the user perceives and uses the product, including everything from the first experience with download site to the user interface to the accompanying documentation - is designed by user experience specialists. Additionally, usability practitioners evaluate the learnability, effectiveness, and efficiency of our product designs with users.

To sharpen the point, I often provide the following analogy to our customers, particularly architects: Think of Revit as a building. You sit in front of the computer and "inhabit" the application for hours at a stretch. To that end, it is critical that this experience be designed to ensure that you can accomplish your tasks in an efficient, accurate, and enjoyable manner. Similarly, when you ensure that your buildings truly fit your clients' needs and delights the inhabitants, you strive to achieve good design. We strive for the same exact thing. Unfortunately, I cannot take credit for this apt analogy. Almost twenty years ago, Mitchell Kapor made a similar comparison in A Software Design Manifesto, his appeal for the establishment of a professional discipline of software design:

The Roman architecture critic Vitruvius advanced the notion that well-designed buildings were those which exhibited firmness, commodity, and delight. The same might be said of good software. Firmness: A program should not have any bugs that inhibit its function. Commodity: A program should be suitable for the purposes for which it was intended. Delight: The experience of using the program should be pleasurable one. Here we have the beginnings of a theory of design for software.

So remember, as you work tirelessly to bring delight to your clients through your designs, we endeavor towards the same goal!