Downloads
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7480/jfde.2021.1.5423Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Federico Bertagna, Pierluigi D'Acunto, Patrick Ole Ohlbrock, Vahid Moosavi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors or their institutions retain copyright to their publications without restrictions.
How to Cite
Keywords:
holistic design approach, building envelopes, graphic statics, conceptual structural design, machine learning, simplicity and performanceAbstract
The design of building envelopes requires a negotiation between qualitative and quantitative aspects belonging to different disciplines, such as architecture, structural design, and building physics. In contrast to hierarchical linear approaches in which various design aspects are considered and conceived sequentially, holistic frameworks allow such aspects to be taken into consideration simultaneously. However, these multi-disciplinary approaches often lead to the formulation of complex high-dimensional design spaces of solutions that are generally not easy to handle manually. Computational optimisation techniques may offer a solution to this problem; however, they mainly focus on quantitative aspects, not always guaranteeing the flexibility and interactive responsiveness designers need in the early design stage. The use of intuitive geometry-based generative tools, in combination with machine learning algorithms, is a way to overcome the issues that arise when dealing with multi-dimensional design spaces without necessarily replacing the designer with the machine. The presented research follows a human-centred design framework in which the machine assists the human designer in generating, evaluating, and clustering large sets of design options. Through a case study, this paper suggests ways of making use of interactive tools that do not overlook the performance criteria or personal preferences.
References
Beghini, L.L., Carrion, J., Beghini, A., Mazurek, A., & Baker, W.F. (2014). Structural optimisation using graphic statics. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 49(3): pp.351–366.
Brown, N., & Mueller, C. (2017). Designing with data: Moving beyond the design space catalog. In T. Nagakura, S. Tibbits, & C. Mueller (Eds.). ACADIA 2017 Disciplines and Disruption: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference for the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture pp. 154–163.
Brown, N., Jusiega, V., & Mueller, C. (2020). Implementing data-driven parametric building design with a flexible toolbox. Automation in Construction, 118: pp.1-16.
Codina, L. (2013). La estructura como instrumento de una idea [The structure as a tool for an idea]. Buenos Aires: 1:100 Ediciones Cremona, L. (1872). Le figure reciproche nella statica grafica [Reciprocal figures in graphic statics]. Milano: Tipografia Bernardoni.
Culmann, C. (1866). Die Graphische Statik [Graphic statics]. Zurich: Von Meyer & Zeller.
D’Acunto, P., Jasienski, J. P., Ohlbrock, P. O., Fivet, C., Schwartz, J., & Zastavni, D. (2019). Vector-based 3D graphic statics. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 167, 58–70.
Farid, H. (2002). Detecting hidden messages using higher-order statistical models. In Proceedings of the international conference on image processing, Rochester, NY, 22–25 September 2002
Fuhrimann, L., Moosavi, V., Ohlbrock, P. O., & D’Acunto, P. (2018). Data-Driven Design: Exploring new Structural Forms using Machine Learning and Graphic Statics. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1809.08660
Harding, J. (2016). Dimensionality reduction for parametric design exploration. In S. Adriaenssens, F. Gramazio, M. Kohler, A. Menges, & M. Pauly (Eds.), AAG 2016, pp.274–287.
Harding, J., & Brandt-Olsen, C. (2018). Biomorpher: Interactive evolution for parametric design. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 16(2), pp.144–163.
Kohonen, T. (1982). Self-organised formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biological Cybernetics; 43(1): pp.59–69
Konstantatou, M., D’Acunto, P., & McRobie, A. (2018). Polarities in structural analysis and design: n-dimensional graphic statics and structural transformations, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 152–153, pp. 272-293.
Kotnik, T. & D’Acunto, P. (2013). Operative Diagramatology: Structural Folding for Architectural Design, in C. Gengnagel, A. Kilian, J. Nembrini, F. Scheurer (Eds.). Rethinking Prototyping: Proceedings of Design Modelling Symposium 2013, Universität der Künste Berlin, pp. 193–203.
Lang, W. (2013). Is it all “just” a façade? Detail - Building Skins, 29–45.
Lechner, N. (2014). Heating, Cooling, Lighting: Sustainable Design Methods for Architects. New Jersey: Wiley.
Maxwell, J.C. (1864). On reciprocal figures, frames and diagrams of forces. Philosophical Magazine 27, 250–261.
Moosavi, V. (2014). Computing With Contextual Numbers. Journal of Machine Learning Research. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/ abs/1408.0889
Nervi, P. L. (1956). Structures. New York: F. W. Dodge Corp.
Ohlbrock, P. O., & D’Acunto, P. (2020). A Computer-Aided Approach to Equilibrium Design Based on Graphic Statics and Combinatorial Variations. CAD Computer Aided Design, 121.
Olgyay, A., & Olgyay, V. (1957). Solar Control & Shading Devices. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Oxman, R. (2006). Theory and design in the first digital age. Design Studies; 27(3): 229–265.
Preisinger C. (2013). Linking Structure and Parametric Geometry. Architectural Design; 83(2): 110–113.
Rippmann, M., Lachauer, L., & Block, P. (2012). Interactive vault design. International Journal of Space Structures; 27(4), 219–230.
Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences; 4: 155–169.
Ritter, F., Schubert, G., Geyer, P., Borrmann, A., & Petzold, F. (2014). Design decision support - Real-time energy simulation in the early design stages. Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, USA, 2023–2031.
Roudsari, M.S., Pak, M., & Smith, A. (2013). Ladybug: a parametric environmental plugin for grasshopper to help designers create an environmentally-conscious design. Proceedings of the 13th international IBPSA Conference, Chambéry, France, 3128–3135.
Rush, R. D. (1986). The building systems integration handbook. New Jersey: Wiley.
Saint, A. (2007). Architect and Engineer. A Study in Sibling and Rivalry. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Saldana Ochoa, K., Ohlbrock, P. O., D’Acunto, P., & Moosavi, V. (2020). Beyond Typologies, Beyond Optimization. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 1-25.
Schwartz, J. (2012). Structural Theory and Structural Design. In Flury, A. (Ed.) Cooperation. Basel: Birkhäuser.
Turrin, M., Von Buelow, P., & Stouffs, R. (2011). Design explorations of performance driven geometry in architectural design using parametric modeling and genetic algorithms. Advanced Engineering Informatics. 25(4), 656-675.
Van Mele T, Rippmann M, Lachauer L, & Block P. (2012). Geometry-based understanding of structures. Journal of the International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures; 53(2): 285–95.
Wortmann, T. (2018). Efficient, Visual , and Interactive Architectural Design Optimization with Model-based Methods (Doctoral Dissertation). Singapore University of Technology and Design.
Wortmann, T., & Schroepfer, T. (2019). From optimisation to performance-informed design. Simulation Series, 51(8).
Wortmann, T., Costa, A., Nannicini, G., & Schroepfer, T. (2015). Advantages of surrogate models for architectural design optimisation. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, 29(4), 471–481.
Yang, D., Ren, S., Turrin, M., Sariyildiz, S., & Sun, Y. (2018). Multi-disciplinary and multi-objective optimisation problem re-formulation in computational design exploration. Automation in Construction, 92, 242–269.
