{"id":26015,"date":"2024-05-29T15:05:04","date_gmt":"2024-05-29T22:05:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/essential.construction\/news\/from-cad-to-machines-as-co-designers\/"},"modified":"2024-05-29T15:05:06","modified_gmt":"2024-05-29T22:05:06","slug":"from-cad-to-machines-as-co-designers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/essential.construction\/news\/from-cad-to-machines-as-co-designers\/","title":{"rendered":"From CAD to Machines as Co-Designers"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"-\"<\/a>
\n<\/p>\n

\n

Finnish
\neconomics professor Osmo A. Wiio claimed that we typically overestimate the
\nnear future and underestimate the distant future. His thoughts resonate well
\nwith today\u2019s perception of design automation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Back in the 1980s, I took part in the first-ever Finnish \u201cintegrated CAD\u201d projects, in which the architect, the structural, HVAC, and electrical engineers exchanged CAD files instead of blueprints. We used minicomputers, which had about as much computing power as today\u2019s laser printer. Still, we were able to automate design tasks.<\/p>\n

Our flagship project was the biggest office building in the Nordics. The design consisted of repetitive floor units and, thus, was ideal for primitive design automation. We could, for example, make changes to a few base units and propagate the updates throughout the floors and blocks of the building. It was a huge time saver if you compare it to manually doing the same operation a number of times to dozens of drawings.<\/p>\n

Today\u2019s designers
\nhave tools that can do much more and much faster. New technologies don\u2019t just
\nspeed up design tasks, they can also create completely new value to clients,
\ndesigners, contractors, and manufacturers.<\/p>\n

Parametric Design<\/h2>\n

Our 80\u2019s automation could be called scripting \u2013 routines that use a series of commands to execute a task. Today, we have a plethora of concepts that relate to design automation. They include parametric, associative, algorithmic, computational, generative design, and others.<\/p>\n

The common thread among the new concepts is the use of parameters to define the features of a design object. Parameters are typically dimensions, quantities, and other physical attributes. Parameters could
\nalso be related to costs, time, and material qualities. Parameters can have
\nconstraints and associations with each other.<\/p>\n

The power
\nof parametric design becomes obvious with the use of digital tools that allow
\nus to explore geometries using algorithms. Repeatable, fairly simple rules that
\nuse parameter values for input to modify the geometry of a structure can create
\nunforeseen forms. Algorithmic design has other uses in designing floor layouts,
\nfacades, and even city plans.<\/p>\n

\"-\"
Parametric design, Zaha Hadid Architects<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Shajay Bhooshan<\/strong>, Senior Associate at Zaha Hadid Architects, told me in an interview<\/a> that computational design is not just about architectural forms: \u201cWe believe that modern, intricate life requires more complex design. Our environments need to adapt to fast-paced change, and parametric design makes it possible. We want the built environment to mirror the natural environment.\u201d<\/p>\n

Parametric
\ndesign goes hand in hand with digital fabrication. Computational design and
\nrobotics make mass customization feasible. A robot will make one or one hundred
\ncopies of the same object without additional costs.<\/p>\n

Generative Design<\/h2>\n

What
\nhappens if you let the computer change the values of parameters of the
\nalgorithmic model by itself? It can test out thousands of parameter
\ncombinations in a very short time.<\/p>\n

The generative
\ndesign approach creates a set of alternatives that you can evaluate in terms of
\ntonnage, piece counts, areas, costs, heat conservation, and so on.<\/p>\n

Joel
\nSimon\u2019s<\/strong> experimental research project, called Evolving Floor Plans<\/a>, explored speculative, optimized
\nfloor plan layouts. He used the space layout of an elementary school as a
\nstarting point. He ran it through his generative design software that aimed to,
\nfor example, minimize the traffic flow between classes or minimize the fire
\nescape paths.<\/p>\n

The result
\nwas a layout that looks \u201corganic\u201d \u2013 totally different than the original
\nrectangular design. According to Dezeen.com, Simon claims that his tool could
\nbe used to \u201cbreed\u201d buildings, with the use of digital technologies,
\nsuch as\u00a03D printing.<\/p>\n

Adding Machine Learning<\/h2>\n

Artificial
\nintelligence and machine learning have been in the headlines, but, so far,
\nwe\u2019ve not seen commercial breakthroughs in the construction industry. Coupled
\nwith parametric and generative design, they will, ultimately, create a totally
\nnew playground for built environment designers, builders, and owners.<\/p>\n

Machines
\ncan use data from existing designs, live data from buildings and environments,
\nand biometrical and behavioral data from people in the built environment.<\/p>\n

\n
\"-\"\"-\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Artificial intelligence will help with optimization, but also in automating rote work. In 2018, I interviewed<\/a> Sweco\u2019s Mauri Laasonen and Ricardo Farinha<\/strong>. They experimented with machine learning in the design of a small power plant. After the learning process, the machine was capable of automatically designing the joints of the plant\u2019s structural model. It designed 77% of the connections successfully without human intervention.<\/p>\n

Can bots
\nreplace a human designer? I\u2019m confident that it will happen in some specific
\nareas of design and construction.<\/p>\n

More Choice<\/h2>\n

In the 1980s, one of my older colleagues taught that to please the client, the architect should present three alternative initial designs. One of them should be flawed, one should be OK, and one should be magnificent. The architect should then play their cards so that the client chooses the last one. Unfortunately, that did not always happen.<\/p>\n

Computational
\ndesign can offer infinite alternatives at the same cost as traditional,
\nstandardized production. The design team can use a large number of factors to
\nevaluate the lifecycle performance of the alternatives. Feedback data can
\nfurther improve the design.<\/p>\n

In the
\n1980s, many architects feared that the use of CAD would lead to unimaginative,
\nmechanical architecture. Looking back, our tools back then did not lead to a
\ncertain kind of architecture. It was the other way around. The architecture
\nallowed us to use technology efficiently. Today\u2019s computational design, however,
\nradically changes architectural expression.<\/p>\n

The Future<\/h2>\n

If used wisely, design automation and AI should lead to better buildings and environments. Designers can better take into account the increasing number of factors that impact the investment cost and the life cycle value of their design.<\/p>\n

Machine learning from human behavioral and sensor data will provide designers with feedback that improves future designs. Clients can make informed decisions based on a rich set of data.<\/p>\n

I think that computational design will ultimately change the professions. Design disciplines will amalgamate, and design and manufacturing will be tightly connected. Designers will have to consider and understand manufacturing better than they do today.<\/p>\n

\"A\"A
Ains Group: A FEM model<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Computational design will spread out to areas beyond special structures and unique buildings. High-volume housing is especially ripe for design and construction automation.<\/p>\n

My prediction is that we\u2019re going to see \u201cmeta-designers\u201d. They are teams of architects, engineers, programmers, economists, behavioral specialists and other professionals who develop the design process and automation of a specific project or building type. AI-driven algorithmic systems take care of much of the traditional designer\u2019s work.<\/p>\n

I concur with Shajay Bhooshan\u2019s thoughts: \u201cArchitecture does not exist in a bubble. Robotics, 3D printing, AI, big data, and so on will have an impact on the industry. Design cannot be simply a matter of intuition when you\u2019re solving complex problems.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n