by
Deborah Snoonian, P.E.
Two firms renowned for techno-prowess—Foster and Partners
and Gehry Partners— presented different ways of using
digital tools to achieve design goals. Hugh Whitehead, from
Foster and Partners’ Specialist Modeling Group, discussed
the design of the Greater London Authority Headquarters along
the Thames, whose energy-efficient form he likened to a “parametric
pebble.” A 3D digital model of the structure was created
in Bentley Systems’ MicroStation software, then rationalized
into panels to refine the glazing and structural-steel systems.
Fabricators and the construction contractor were required
to develop their own digital models based on the firm’s
data to ensure that components would be machined to required
tolerances and would be assembled correctly at the site. Instead
of a traditional grid-line offset survey, the 3D building
model was linked to known locations at the site. The builder
even attached holographic targets to connections in the structural-steel
system, which were laser-scanned on-site so that steel beams
were inserted in the correct position.
For Gehry Partners, the physical model precedes the virtual
one. When designing L.A.’s Disney Concert Hall, models
were built, laser-scanned, and brought into CATIA software
for analysis and refinement. “We don’t do rationalization,”
said principal James Glymph. “We produce shaped, sculptural
forms that stay as is.” The project, begun in 1989 and
halted in 1994 due to budget concerns, benefited from more
acceptance of computing in design when it was restarted, post-Bilbao,
in 1997.
Gehry’s swooping forms are notoriously challenging to
build. The concert hall, with its demanding seismic and acoustical
requirements, is so complex that a 4D CAD visualization tool
was developed by Disney and Stanford University (soon to be
licensed commercially) to show its erection sequence over
time. The team uses the 4D model to identify and correct construction
problems before they happen.
Toward a digital future
The projects were groundbreaking, but there’s no denying
a gulf exists between what these practitioners do and how
most architects work. Few firms design high-budget iconic
architecture, and many lack the resources to invest in or
even investigate the latest tools. So what will it take for
true digital-age design to enter the mainstream? What will
help architects return to their master-builder roots?
The answers, in short, were numerous: overcoming adversarial
relationships among designers, engineers, and contractors
(what Glymph calls, at least in the U.S., “the Wild West
atmosphere” of construction); a higher tolerance for
risk; educational changes that emphasize the wise use of digital
tools rather than mere facility with them. All agreed these
changes will take decades.
Technology for architects is in its adolescence. It’s
difficult to envision how exactly it will transform aesthetics
or architectural practice. But projects with roots in digital
innovation offer reason to be enthusiastic or at least curious
about its implications. The symposium was a call for action:
architects must embrace technology’s potential or run
the risk of being marginalized by those who do. What sounds
better to you?
|
Video
