Jul 18, 2004 - Universidade Estadual de Campinos, Brazil. Theme III: New Design Paradigms: Models and Tools. 12. Nexus 2004. Hernan Dias Alonso and ...
WORKSHOP 6 COGNITION AND COMPUTATION IN DIGITAL DESIGN Chair Rivka Oxman Technion, Israel Yu-Tung Liu National Chiao-Tung University
Committee Branko Kolarevic University of Pennsylvania Thomas Kvan University of Hong Kong
18 July 2004
2
CONTENTS/PROGRAM Introduction 1
Understanding Digital Design Thinking Rivka Oxman Faculty of Architecture and T.P., Technion, Israel
Keynote Presentation 2
Design Latency: Evolution and Impurity in Digital Design Mark Goulthorpe Department of Architecture, MIT, USA
Theme I: Digital Design-Theory, Methodology and Techniques 3
Digital enhanced cognitive digital design methodology in non-standard architectures Kent Neo University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
4
Design unfolding Hung-Ming Cheng Chung Kuo Institute of Technology, Taiwan
5
Towards non-linearity and indeterminacy in design Branko Kolarevic University of Pennsylvania, USA
6
Graphic space: particle streaming techniques in generating virtual geometries Johan Bettum ArchiGlobe, Oslo, Norway
7
Digital thinking as an author of cross-stylistic Architectural discourse Emmanouil Vermisso Syracuse University, USA
Theme II: Representational issues in Digital Design 8
Why is formal notation helpful in design cognition research Omer Akin and Hoda Moustapha School of Architecture, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
9
Efficiency of sketches Sebastian Schneider and Udo Lindeman Department for Product Development, TU Munich, Germany
3 10
Order and diversity Jose Pinto Duarte Instituto Superior Técnico, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
11
Notes on the educational use of shape grammars Gabriela Celani Universidade Estadual de Campinos, Brazil
Theme III: New Design Paradigms: Models and Tools 12
Nexus 2004 Hernan Dias Alonso and Florencia Pita
Xefirotarch, Los Angeles, USA 13
Responsive architecture Tristan d’Estrée Sterk Emerging Technologies, Art Institute, Chicago, USA
14
Digital design fabrication Larry Sass Department of Architecture, MIT, USA
15
Mediaor: a cognitive model for integrating physical and digital design Yu-Pin Ma and Taysheng Jeng Department of Architecture, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan
4
UNDERSTANDING DIGITAL DESIGN THINKING RIVKA OXMAN Technion, Israel
Abstract. Introduction to the first international workshop on digital design thinking
Introduction Over the past decade the design research community has been strengthening an understanding of design by studying the cognitive processes of the designer and by developing cognitive and computational models of design. Digital design is now recognized as an emerging field. Today we are witnessing a fundamental change in the appearance of a new body of theory, and the development of new design paradigms. Design paradigms are being formulated in response to philosophical, cultural and theoretical developments that are contributing to a paradigm shift in the way designers understand and employ computational technologies and digital media. Innovative and experimental precedents are now emerging from design practice and academic design experimentation. In recognition of the growing importance of new design phenomena, new design institutions are emerging such as the series of FEIDAD competitions, in order to characterize, define, document and analyze these developments. However, given the growing impact of digital design on design practice, we currently lack a well-defined agenda for research in digital design that might elucidate digital design thinking just as cognitive and computational modeling has done for traditional paper-based design. Understanding digital design thinking refers to the need to understand the new symbiosis between the product of design and the way it is now conceived and generated in digital media. The objective of the workshop is to take the first steps through a process of defining digital design, formulating its research agenda in relation to cognition and computation, and establishing a potential research network of interested participants. There is a need to rethink many of the root assumptions of current cognitive and computational research and to determine their relevance for conceptualizing design paradigms and the cognitive content of digital design. There is a need to study and reformulate
5
concepts such as generative models, representation, emergence and situatedness and to reconsider their application in this emerging field. As a first step, Design Cognition and Computation can provide research methods, tools and models that can be applied in order to understand and reformulate this new field.
6
DIGITAL LATENCY: EVOLUTION AND IMPURITY IN THE DIGITAL DESIGN WORK OF DECOI ARCHITECTS KEYNOTE PRESENTATION PROF. MARK GOULTHORPE DECOI Department of Architecture, MIT
Abstract. The paper will explore the notion of latency in the digital design work of dECOi architects, a psychoanalytic term describing an inarticulate potential that partially yet powerfully inscribes itself in imagination. It will speculate that the potential of digital methodologies to offer new formal, technical and organizational principles for architectural praxis are best pursued through the exploration of latency rather than via processes of technical assimilation that implicitly limit such research to a techno-rational circuit inherited from a mechanical/industrial paradigm. A wide range of digital design methodologies will be discussed (algorithmic, parametric, scriptual, sculptural) and consideration will be given to comparisons of such digital methodology with processes of Natural Evolution. The idea of impurity within digital design processes will also be examined in relation to inherited notions of hygiene, purity and singularity within the standardizing canon of modernist/industrial hegemony.
7
DIGITALLY ENHANCED - COGNITIVE DIGITAL DESIGN METHODOLOGY IN NON - STANDARD ARCHITECTURES AARI-Analysis-abstraction-reinvention-integration KENT K W NEO University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
Abstract. This paper proposes a systematic and cognitive approach towards design in the field of Non Standard Architectures, namely in a linear process of analysis, abstraction, reinvention and integration. This linear process encapsulates key conceptual processes of designing within a digital environment as opposed to the traditional 2D-to-3D CAD modeling approach. Thinking and designing within a digital environment has been made possible with the proliferation of user-friendly design software. This paper suggests a theoretical method which combines design thinking with investigative digital parametric inputs to create designs that expound on a progressive linear phenomenon of thought and product. This method will be illustrated with an ongoing project that has utilized this approach since its inception.
1. Introduction There has been a worldwide excitement since the exhibition of ‘Non Standard Architectures’ at the Pompidou Centre in Paris (see figure 1.1 & 1.2). This excitement was perhaps felt at a pace unconceivable just a few years back. The exhibition was available to a worldwide audience who were able to enjoy the online exhibition almost instantaneously as they were logged on to their cable modems. Design ideas do not merely appear in magazines or art galleries, they are hitting designers worldwide with increasing data bytes. Having recognized this phenomenon, how are designers going to respond to this brave new digitized world of exploding design data bits? Originality of design comes into doubt when buildings of similar grammars start appearing in different parts of the world. This phenomenon of ubiquitous cityscapes has been attributed to the rules of Modernity and the nations that were propounding it. The digital revolution, on the other hand, allows for freedom of thought and expression over a virtual space that we call the Internet. The prophet of the digital revolution,
8
Marshall McLuhan, succinctly puts it - ‘the medium is the message’ (Federman 2003). What is the message from the digital medium to the design world then? As mentioned, ideas in this new millenium can now be freely expressed, publicized, searched and evaluated by a worldwide audience almost as instantaneously as they get uploaded into a webspace. If freedom of speech and information is an underlying aspect of the digital environment, should it not be a salient aspect of all digital design as well? Hence, we could establish that concept of ‘free-expression’ is a rule that all digital design conceptualizations should hold.
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.1 Resi-Rise Skyscraper by Kol-Mac Studi online Exhibition poster at Centre Pompidou website – ‘Non Standard Architectures’ ; Figure 1.2. HydraPier, Haarlemmermeer Pavilion, Floriade Exhibition by Asymptot , built digital design by Asympote (click on the images to go to source websites)
2. Free-expression vs. Standard Design If we observe carefully the exhibits of the ‘Non Standard Architectures’ exhibition, we would notice that most of the designs were generated by CAD software such as 3Dmax or Maya while a rare few like Frank Gehry use CATIA. Although not featured at the exhibition, Gehry’s buildings incorporate the latest technology in terms of computer modeling, detailing and engineering (see figure 2). It is interesting that the issue of cognitive design within a digital environment really shows its divide when we look at the fundamental difference in approach between non-standard architects and Gehry. It is well-known that Gehry is more of a sculptor than a digital
9
designer – he is the master architect who designs while a team of designers and engineers model his designs in CATIA. Gehry’s designs are only digitally-driven at a later design stage where the main body of the design has already been conceptualized before it gets digitized for documentation and visualization. The non-standard designers or CG (computer graphics) architects, on the other hand, design from a pure digital realm. They explore and exploit the parametric possibilities of various 3D software such as 3D Max or Maya in early stages of design. It is interesting to note that the notion of gravity always seemed curiously lacking in many of the nonstandard architectural works. Due to the futuristically-driven enthusiasm of the non-standard designers, very few works have actually been built. One may notice that the approach of using digital parametrics as documentation lacks a negotiation point with digital design thinking while the approach of exploiting digital parametrics leads to an uncertain yet fascinating end. At a cross-road of time where environmentalists hark for more sustainable buildings and whilst developers look for simpler standard buildings, it is not unimaginable why only a handful of digitally-driven designs have been built. Hence, one may conclude that innovation, futurism and unlimited imagination is not enough to liberate digital design thinking into the real world. If we intend to harness the potential of digital design thinking, the most pertinent issues that digital design cognition must address are – (1) Value of free-expression in digital design; (2) Approach in digital design thinking; (3) Translating digital designs into real products.
Figure 2. Bent steel structures in the recently completed Performing Arts Centre in, Los Angeles Precision software making free-expression a possibility (click on the images to go to source website)
10
3. Value of Free-expression in Digital Design Digital design environments are highly versatile; we can create an object in it and morph it into forms otherwise inconceivable from pure imagination or free-hand sketches (see fig. 3.1). The versatility of 3D software allows for strange and interesting forms to be designed. However, we do not create strangeness for strangeness’ sake, or the unusual for the purpose of attentionseeking. The fact that the digital realm allows for freedom of expression and imagination through its versatility has a high urban implication. As witnessed in the exhibition of ‘Non Standard Architectures’ at Pompidou Centre, architects are turning towards digitally generated designs. Cities in the world may benefit from the array of forms that digital designs may generate. Instead of the analogous cityscape that one may experience from one global city to another, the future cities of tomorrow can be highly distinct because of plurality of design grammars that could be generated from the digital environment. On the other hand, the digital platform may also lead to cloning of familiar cityscapes worldwide in the future due to the use of a common design tool. Imagine an entire breed of designers who will be looking through the same looking glass. There is no certain answer at this juncture but at least the notion of free-expression allows designers now to look forward to a physical world that is distinct from one which has been created largely with the help of a drafting ruler. The appearance of distinctness may come from free-expressive designers who are able to form their own design grammars based on their own experiences and influences in life - from a toy to a plant - grammars that can be systematically analyzed, abstracted and re-invented using digital tools and software programs within a computer environment. The value of free-expression in digital design lies in that it allows ideas to be generated freely without the restrictions imposed by cultural conditioning (no one has hitherto considered me as subversive for reinterpreting the rules of Chinese calligraphy digitally), although paradoxically we can never escape from the political construct of our societies. The digital medium, when perceived as design tool that facilitate design conception and construction, can bring us closer towards a freelyexpressive design product. The next section of the paper will explore the proposed methodology and approach that employs digital media as a tool for design conception. Illustrations used are taken from my current research on digital design methodology.
11
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.1 Basic stroke patterns shown in classic instructional calligraphic manuals depicting the relation between stroke and movement path; Figure 3.2. Reinterpretive rule formulation as free-expression. Using a rule of stroke and path, the basic strokes are translated into CV curve profiles in 3D Viz and morphed along their respective movement paths rotated 90 degrees
4. AARI – An Alternative Approach in Digital Design Cognition As the title of this paper suggests, AARI is a method of digital design approach that attempts to address the shortcomings in standard 2D-3D thinking. It is a product-driven method that is interested in negotiating design cognition with the digital medium from the onset of a design process till its finalization. Benjamin Loomis’ paper on ‘Non-deterministic Shape Grammars’ and Terry Knight/George Stiny’s paper on ‘Classical and Nonclassical Computation’ now serve as the main foundation for my work on developing a cognitive methodology in design approach for digital environments. AARI stands for a linear design process of analysis_abstraction_re-invention_integration within a digital environment. Analysis is the starting point of digital thinking in this formulation. Traditional analysis in architectural schools most often starts with in-depth examination of works of master architects in terms of space and form. However, analysis in the AARI formulation goes beyond form and space, it is more interested in a physical phenomenon; for instance – a rock
12
formation, a snow flake or even Pollock’s brush strokes. Essentially, analysis in AARI process closely examines the grammatical rules of a physical phenomenon found in art and nature, of which architecture is a small fraction in the entire picture. One may immediately question what can or cannot be quantified as a physical phenomenon to be analysed. To provide a seemingly arbitrary answer, all works of art and nature are physical phenomena. However, people respond to the tactile and visual realm differently due to collective consciousness and memories. For pedagogic purposes, the student should be exposed to different physical entities for analysis for the purpose of understanding shape grammars and rules. For the mature designer however, it is of utmost importance that he should reflect on a physical phenomenon that had so often haunted his inner psyche – a heuristic wonder. The "way" to wisdom, knowledge and understanding, to paraphrase Socrates, "begins in wonder" (Manen 2002). All design endeavors ultimately leads to self-awareness and realization be it digital or non-digital.
Figure 4.1 Extruded calligraphic stroke of ‘tao’
Figure 4.2 Application of sub-rule u1 to stroke and path
Figure 4.3 Application of sub-rule u2 to stroke and path
Figure 4.4 Application of sub-rule u3 to stroke and path
Figure 4.1 Manipulation of shape grammars in digital space, application of varying sub rules for generative exploration and comparison
Having established the physical entity for analysis, one must input and translate the form into virtual space for further manipulation (see Figure 4.1 - 4.4). The act of inputting the form of a physical entity into virtual space is the first step towards cognitive digital design because the mind shifts its attention from the real tangible object to the digitally replicated form. Whereas it is almost impossible to deconstruct a physical entity at will, the virtual model can be stretched, scaled, deformed and transformed in endless
13
ways in 3D software. Ambiguous forms may result from initial experiments with transforming input forms with parametric modification functions available in 3D software. The AARI method suggests that an abstraction of the original shape grammars and rules of the physical phenomenon as a basis of the transformed virtual entity. Abstraction simplifies the shape rules of the original physical entity but captures the most prominent aspect of the artifact. To put it simply, abstraction is like digital distillation. In my own work, for instance, the rule of the calligraphic stroke is abstracted as path and stroke (see fig. 4.1). With the notion of path and stroke, new rules are formed around these two fundamental rules in relation to architectural design. Several sub-rules were generated initially for comparative purposes. The application of differing sub-rules of path and stroke generated different forms. Each form is studied and evaluated in terms of its suitability as a product or building. Within this process of abstraction and application of sub rules, a series of digital art objects emerge. Some may survive (see figure 4.5) and become realizable physical products through re-invention; others remain as digital experiments that did not survive the digital evolutionary processes of AARI. However, one may realize that hitherto, all design creations and thoughts are produced within the digital environment. For the selected sub-rules that are deemed viable to be used with a product, the next step in the AARI process involves re-invention. Real objects and buildings with functional and spatial requirements are used as target form-function objectives. The abstracted grammars and rules are applied on these objectives to generate new formal inventions – a synthesis of target objectives and abstracted grammars (see figure 4.6). If the original physical entity is an invention, the resultant synthesis of abstracted grammars and the target objectives must be a re-invention.
Figure 4.5 Survival of the fittest, mutated grammatical abstraction of calligraphic rules
14
Fig. 4.. Re-invention - rule formulation for the emergent form through synthesis of architectural, structural (form-function objectives) and abstracted calligraphic rules. Further abstraction takes place during this stage to map the rules of the reinvented form with actual structural demands and material behaviors. Level x denotes a flattened stroke with differentiated profiles (like a brush-stroke) that responds to basic design requirements. Levels 0 – 2 denotes derivative possibilities that can be generated from a rule-based equation that is not shown on this paper.
5. Translating Digital Designs into Real Products The three fundamental steps within the AARI method have been contrived for the purpose of reaping the generative potential of digital
15
design. Comparative studies and evaluation can easily be made throughout the design process as images can be captured easily for references and reflections. Experimentation and formulation of shape rules in tandem with forms generated are much clearer in a digital medium as compared to a traditional pen-and-paper sketch. A point to note, however, although the AARI method has been emphasized as a linear process, one should always reflect on the starting point to check if the progression is in the right direction. Also, the AARI is a time-based approach - more time spent on digital analysis, abstraction and re-invention will generate more probabilities for comparison and elimination.
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Fig. 5.1 Emergent material technologies, Light transmitting concrete ‘Litracon’ invented by Losonczi; Figure 5.2. Winner of designboom's 2002 international conceptual design competition on the rocking theme- cheap synthetic materials used by interior designers on non-standard designs (click on the images to go to source websites)
The final step in the linear AARI formulation relates to the integration of re-invented form with the physical realm. The final step although seemingly unrelated to digital design thinking or even irrelevant to the CG architect, is perhaps the most crucial aspect in the entire AARI methodology. On analysis level, one’s cognition of the physical entity enters into a digital realm; at integration level, one’s cognitive space begins to re-emerge into the physical world again. However, how integration manifests itself eventually depends on the virtual environment again. Building technology and material
16
science are two sciences that are re-inventing themselves at a speed that most architects and designers have a hard time getting a grip on (see figure 5.1 & 5.2). Already, one witnesses a rift between interior designers and architects in terms of material selection. The traditional material palette of brick and concrete is positively inadequate for non-standard architectures. While a myriad of materials are readily available for the interior designers, architects suffer in the sense that material specifications for envelopes often appear technical and dull. However, if we were to input a keyword search on hi-tech materials using a search-engine (see fig. 5.1); we would realize that there is actually a rich palette of interesting new materials ready to be integrated with non-standard architectural designs. Although many of these new materials are still at evaluation stages, it is the responsibility of the manufacturers and the designers to evaluate specific product performances based on joint efforts in research and development; joint efforts in research is crucial as manufacturers will never know what the actual needs of the designers are while designers, on the other hand, can comprehend the limitations of technology from the manufacturers. Such efforts in joint research may generate a new breed of techno-architects whose sole expertise is in the specifications of hi-tech materials. The opportunity facing the digital designer now, however, is that he or she should be able to search for the latest innovation in material science over the internet. Product demonstration can easily be arranged through the links provided by the internet. When in doubt, innovative new materials can be sent to the relevant authorizing institutes for scientific evaluation. The main point is, digitally conceptualized designs should be integrated with compatible material specifications so that there is no dichotomy between the product and the thought – and this innovative material palette already exists readily within the digital realm of the World Wide Web. With an integration of digitally available material information with re-inventive thinking, the eventual emergent product that has travelled along the trajectory of AARI will certainly be a digitally enhanced design. ________________________________________________________
References Federman, Mark. 2003. What is the Meaning of the Medium is the Message? Reference source>http://www.mcluhan.utoronto.ca/article_mediumisthemessage.htm Loomis, Benjamin. SGGA: Shape Grammar Genetic Algorithm. Working paper. Reference source > http://architecture.mit.edu/descomp/works.htm Stiny, George & Knight, Terry. 2001. Classical and Non-classical Computation. Reference source >http://architecture.mit.edu/descomp/works.htm
17
Manan, Max. 2002. Inquiry: the heuristic reduction: wonder Reference source> http://www.phenomenologyonline.com/inquiry/11.html Lise Anne Couture & Hani Rashid Asymptote Architecture. Reference source > http://www.asymptote.net/
2004.
Digital Images Figure 1.1. Resi-Rise Skyscraper by Kol-Mac Studio. Centre Pompidou. 2004. Archived online exhibition on Non Standard Architectures. Image source>http://www.centrepompidou.fr/Pompidou/Manifs.nsf/AllExpositions/ 7DA19D2CC76BE776C1256D0100510408?OpenDocument&sessionM=2.2.2&L=2 Figure 1.2. Hydra-Pier. Lise Anne Couture & Hani Rashid Asymptote Architecture. 2002. Hydra-Pier, Haarlemmermeer Pavilion, Floriade Exhibition. Image source >http://www.dupontbenedictus.com/hydra.html Figure 2. Gehry, Frank. 2004 Performing Arts Centre. Image source > http://www.musiccenter.org/wdch/g_const_01.html Figue 5.1. Litracon. Optics.org. 2004. Concrete casts new light in dull rooms. Image source > http://www.optics.org/articles/news/10/3/10/1 - concrete2 Figure 5.2. Rookie. Designboom. 2002. Rocking chairs international design competition 2002. results ! Image source > http://www.designboom.com/rocking/winners.html
18
DESIGN UNFOLDING Digital architecture representing in the electronic media HUNG-MING CHENG Chung Kuo Institute of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan
Abstract. This study is exploring through several architectural cases to explore design thinking in digital architecture. Many experimental projects of digital architecture focus on design thinking that induce an architectural design theory of electronic age. The discoveries from surveying related reference reveal CAD software oriented in digital tools are already become limitation of concept development. The perspective from the design media represents digital characteristics which evolve from design theory such as Deleuze’s philosophy, topology and diagram, and hypersurface. These theories lead the design concept leaping and unfolding a new style in the digital age.
1. introduction Digital architecture is the new term for a computer generation of spatial experience. It not only affiliates with some digital phenomena such as virtual reality, cyberspace, hypersurface, and web technologies, but also presents important characteristics of digital design theory and thinking. The definition of ‘digital’, which is stored or transmitted as a sequence of discrete symbols from a finite set, most commonly this means binary data represented using electronic signals. By exploring new meaning of digital architecture, we realize the characteristics of digital architecture which are no longer on the mimic shape of deformation with dazzling light, but on innovation of digital design thinking. This study is exploring through several architectural cases to explore design thinking in digital architecture. Many experimental projects of digital architecture focus on design thinking that induce an architectural design theory of electronic age. The discoveries from surveying related reference reveal CAD software oriented in digital tools are already become limitation of concept development. The perspective from the design media represents digital characteristics which evolve from design theory “affiliation”, “folding”, “topology” and “hypersurface”. These theories lead the design
19
concept leaping and unfolding a new style in the digital age. It will also help to reconstruct the cultural environment that preceded and prompted the mass diffusion of digital technologies in architectural design, which eventually shaped and inspired the rise of computational design and digital manufacturing. 2. Paradigm shift The electronic paradigm explicit a critical challenge to architecture because it represents reality in terms of digital media and simulation, it exploits virtual form over exist object. Not the seen as we previously knew it, but rather a seeing that can no longer interpret.(Eisenman 1992) On the other hands, digital media is not only mediated shape and object but also communicating the information of design. Because a medium shapes as the way a tool conducts a designer’s concept, it provides a graphic for expression, and becomes subject to interpretation. In this way, a medium communicates between author and audience. The tacit expression, subtle interpretation, or latent content a medium is capable of communicating ( McCullough 1996) Thus, architecture assumes digital media to be able to represent themselves, as well as natural characters of their own. The paradigm shift in the electronic era provides these opportunities to examine experiments which are beyond tradition concept and present the new way of computer-mediated generation and design thinking. The designers manipulate projects with the electronic technology, who are already familiar with digital tools to make their concept representing reality. With this trend of design process, contemporary designers have to choose the digital tools and electronic media which extremely impact our perspective for design. Unfolding design is going to investigate three aspects to induce the phenomena of digital architecture which are design theory from Deleuze’s philosophy, topology and diagram, and hypersurface 3. Deleuze’s Philosophy From the books of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, these writings bring us design revelations on concepts with non-linear, discrete/ analogy, and continuous/folding/fluidity, as well as into recent developments in geometry and science. These interpretations for the philosophy provide a profound perspective to observer the virtual world through digital media. In moving between philosophy and architecture they remain apart and as a part of the complex work of repetition. The concepts from Deleuze focus on smooth spaces, serially, and dynamic process seems to have found its perfect position in these programs. For the appearance of surface, spatiality will be unfolded in the fold structure and processed infinite development.
20
The process of the conceptual manipulation may be a metaphor or a shape emergent for design. For the discrete approach of this electronic era, which are the different from scanning the objects of reality to digital model and developing an algorithm to reveal the information of design thinking. The characteristics of digital design represent the dynamic force on the space and time. The forms of a dynamically conceived architecture are shaped in association with virtual motion and force. The manipulation in the actual design move often involves a mechanical paradigm of multiple discrete positions, whereas virtual movement allows form to occupy a multiplicity of possible positions continuously with the same form. Thus, architectural design virtually lives in the cyberspace with animated form. That will fulfill the active response for infinite change in the real world. 4. Topology and Diagram Topology is the study of the behavior of a relationship structure under induction logic. The geometry of possible topology represents the change of the differential space and time changes in a continuous deformation. This has other potentials for architectural form which surface can lead to the intersection of interior and exterior planes in a continuous morphological change. Such as the concepts of continuous and infinity are not only used in architecture in a mathematical geometry way, but also are abstract diagrams, three-dimensional models that allow designers to makeup the ideas of differential space and time into architecture. Diagram represents the topological concept to visualize the process of logic operation. The practice example of the diagram manipulation for the architectural design is exploited the möbius strip and Klein bottle, which conveys the continuous concept. On the one hand, the möbius strip is a topological surface that twisted through itself is both continuous surface to delineate an inside and an outside, which impacts the virtuality and reality. On the other hand, we may treat our environment as topological relationships to form data field that are dynamic process of design. The interactions among objects become a kind of evolving life form. . 5. Hypersurface Hypersurfaces carries with it the idea of “hyper” as a conceptual bridge between the physical architecture of reality and the image architecture of the virtual. Designer observes continuously unfolding conceptual spaces created computationally in the space of the computer, giving rise not to a static condition, but to architecture of becoming. By the definition of mathematics, a hypersurface is the projection in three spatial dimensions of the hyperspace
21
of four spatial dimensions. In this concept, we don’t have direct contact with higher spatial dimensions except through screen or sections. The computer screen claries and reduces complex spatial information which is conceivable and presentable. Seeing through the screen, we are no longer to touch the object in physical way but to enable augmented reality in digital way. Architecture is redefined by drawing from the legacy of media technology and its abundance of figures. Their evocation of information space challenges capitalistic representation systems, and incorporates interactive information play within real and virtual surfaces of architecture. The visual layers of programmed and technological effects refer back to the concepts of information and knowledge which contribute the possibility of digital design. Hypersurfaces combine various superimpositions of electronic imagery on complex topological surface, allowing the surface to become a portal linking to another reality world. Some digital design approaches the manipulation of traditional architectural design within the pure formal emphasis. The deformation of digital architecture dislocates the visual points and distorts the perspective which is no longer simulation from physical environment we know. No matter how hypersurfaces need to overcome the phenomena of deformation, digital design thinking are still based on architecture’s interiority, separated from symbol and meaning. 5. Conclusions Traditionally, the process of design is often characterized by its exploratory nature. Given a set of design requirements and constraints, the designer searches through a number of possibilities, seeking for the final solutions. In many design tasks, architectural project, it is also known may consider some solution is rather subjective. Of course in reality, the designer may consider some objective measurement, such as construction cost or energy efficiency. But within such a reasonably bounded space of design, designers are free to choose and to explore in the direction that their perceptual and aesthetic judgment may lead to a paradigm or a new style. Digital architecture or architecture in digital media already presented on many projects. No matter what they were seen or represented, they influenced real world and conveyed more revelations. The juxtaposition of real and virtual as a presupposed dichotomy subtlety provides our profound knowledge base. This debased condition, constituted through the forceful metaphor of design thinking can either empty or enrich being beyond its merely technological mechanism. The paradigm of the digital design think follows the dynamics of contemporary spirit. Through the design unfolding among the Deleuze’s philosophy, topology and
22
diagram, and hypersurface, the paradigm shift enriches the digital architecture. References Bernard, C: 1995, Earth Moves: The Furnishing of Territories, Cambridge: MIT Press. Deleuze, G: 1993. The Fold: Leibnitz and the Baroque. Trans. T. Conley, Continuum International Publishing Group. Eisenman, P: 1992, visions unfolding: architecture in the age of electronic media, Domus, No.734, pp. 17-21. Eisenman, P: 1999, Diagram Diaries, London: Thames & Hudson. Imperiale, A: 2000, New Flatness: Surface Tension in Digital Architecture, Birkhauser (Architectural). Kuo, JH: 2003, A Diagram-based Computer-aided Design Interface in Conceptual Design, the Proceedings of CAADRIA 2003 Conference,Thailand. Lynn, G: 1999, Animate Form, Princeton Architectural Press. McCullough, M: 1996, Abstracting Craft: The Practiced Digital Hand, The MIT Press. Mitchell, W.J.: 1995, City of Bits,: Space, Places and the Infobahn, MIT Press, Cambridge,Mass.
23
TOWARDS NON-LINEARITY AND INDETERMINACY IN DESIGN BRANKO KOLAREVIC University of Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract. This short position paper focuses on two important characteristics of emerging digital design processes: non-linearity and indeterminacy.
1. Towards non-linearity and in deterministic in design In contemporary architectural design, digital media is increasingly being used not as a representational tool for visualization but as a generative tool for the derivation of form and its transformation – the digital morphogenesis. In a radical departure from centuries old traditions and norms of architectural design, digitally-generated forms are not designed or drawn as the conventional understanding of these terms would have it, but they are calculated by the chosen generative computational method. Instead of modeling an external form, designers articulate an internal generative logic, which then produces, in an automatic fashion, a range of possibilities from which the designer could choose an appropriate formal proposition for further development. The emphasis shifts away from particular forms of expression (geometry) to relations (topology) that exist between and within the proposed program and an existing site. These interdependences then become the structuring, organizing principle for the generation and transformation of form. The emerging digital generative processes are opening-up new territories for conceptual, formal and tectonic exploration, articulating an architectural morphology focused on the emergent and adaptive properties of form. Complex curvilinear forms are produced with the same ease as planar shapes and cylindrical, spherical or conical forms. Models of design capable of consistent, continual and dynamic transformation are replacing the static norms of conventional processes. The predictable relationships between design and representations are abandoned in favor of computationallygenerated complexities. The plan no longer “generates” the design; sections attain a purely analytical role. Grids, repetitions and symmetries lose their
24
past raison d’être, as infinite variability becomes as feasible as modularity, and as mass-customization presents alternatives to mass-production. In the realm of form, the stable is replaced by the variable, singularity by multiplicity. The emphasis shifts from the “making of form” to the “finding of form,” which various digitally-based generative techniques seem to bring about intentionally. The determinism of traditional design practices is abandoned for the directed, precise indeterminacy of new digital processes of conception. Instead of working on a parti, the designer constructs a generative system of formal production, controls its behavior over time, and selects forms that emerge from its operation. In this model of design, a system of influences, relations, constrains or rules is defined first through the processes of in-formation, and its temporal behavior specified; the resulting structure of interdependences is often given some generic form (formation), which is then subjected to the processes of de-formation or trans-formation, driven by those very same relations, influences or rules imbedded within the system itself. The new approaches to design open up a formal universe in which essentially curvilinear forms are not stable but may undergo variations, giving rise to new possibilities, i.e. the emergent form. The formal complexity is often intentionally sought out, and this morphological intentionality is what motivates the processes of construction, operation and selection. The designer essentially becomes an “editor” of the morphogenetic potentiality of the designed system, where the choice of emergent forms is driven largely by the designer’s aesthetic and plastic sensibilities. The capacity of digital, computational architectures to generate “new” designs is, therefore, highly dependent on the designer’s perceptual and cognitive abilities, as continuous, dynamic processes ground the emergent form, i.e. its discovery, in qualitative cognition. Even though the technological context of design is thoroughly externalized, its arresting capacity remains internalized. The generative role of new digital techniques is accomplished through the designer’s simultaneous interpretation and manipulation of a computational construct (topological surface, isomorphic field, kinetic skeleton, field of forces, parametric model, genetic algorithm, etc.) in a complex discourse that is continuously reconstituting itself – a “self-reflexive” discourse in which graphics actively shape the designer’s thinking process. For instance, designers can see forms as a result of reactions to a context of “forces” or actions, as demonstrated by Greg Lynn’s work. There is, however, nothing automatic or deterministic in the definition of actions and reactions; they implicitly create “fields of
25
indetermination” from which unexpected and genuinely new forms might emerge; unpredictable variations are generated from the built multiplicities. It is precisely the ability of “finding a form” through dynamic, highly non-linear, indeterministic systems of organization that gives digital media a critical, generative capacity in design. Non-linear systems change indeterminately, continually producing new, unexpected outcomes. Their behavior over time cannot be explained through an understanding of their constituent parts, because it is the complex web of interdependencies and interactions that define their operation. In addition, in non-linear systems, it is often the addition or subtraction of a particular kind of information that can dramatically affect its behavior – in other words, a small quantitative change can produce a disproportionally large qualitative effect. It is this inherent capacity for “threshold” behavior that assigns to non-linearity the qualities of emergent behavior and infinite potential for change. By openly embracing non-linearity, indeterminacy and emergence, the new digital design techniques challenge conventions such as stable design conceptualization, monotonic reasoning and first order logic that were (and still are) the underlying foundation for the design of mainstream computational tools for architectural production. In contemporary computational approaches to design, there is an explicit recognition that admittance of the unpredictable and unexpected is what often paves the way to poetic invention and creative transformation. The non-linearity, indeterminacy and emergence are intentionally sought out.
26
PRE-FIGURING THE ARCHITECTURAL OBJECT Swarms of Geometry in the Virtual Realm JOHAN BETTUM ArchiGlobe, Norway
Abstract. The paper presents the results of ongoing work in advanced computer modelling in architectural design where time-based particle streaming is used to organize the general space of the project and prefigure the architectural object. This technique is presented as more inclusive of various architectural variables than the dominant type of modelling, which is referred to as discrete modelling, in the field. The latter type of modelling produces generally variations on shell typologies and offers limited access to the virtual realm. The exploration of the virtual realm is seen as a precondition for architecture and an integral part of the design process.
1. Discrete Modelling Since the general introduction of computers in architecture in the early 1990s, the focus of architectural design has been largely on the issue of form – that is, the global form of the architectural object.1 From mainstream offices, where computers have merely supplanted previous drafting and modelling techniques, to experimental settings, where the powers of the digitised processes have been employed to explore new frontiers in the design process, the un-built and built results tell of an on-going development in which the architectural object gradually is becoming untied from the regime of working exclusively with Euclidean geometry. The experimental efforts have frequently relied upon standard software packages for 3D modelling in time-based environments, but various types of scripted processes have also been used. The modelling has generally produced a wide range of different types of forms that can be characterised by the tendency to treat the surface as a 2D extension in space that sooner rather than later in the process is reified and assigned architectural definition.
1 Other tasks have also been addressed, for instance the configuration of urban space, as exemplified in the work of Bill Hillier and colleagues at the Bartlett School of Architecture in London.
27
The computerised modelling processes, whose singular objective is to define an architectural but immaterial ‘shell’, can be termed discrete. While successful in fulfilling their task, a series of problems can be raised in connection with these processes. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Example of discrete modelling. Soft body (blob) animation by the author and Birger Sevaldson for OCEAN’s entry, Adrift, to the New York Times Capsule competition (1999).
First, digital processes are supreme in their capacity to stage and give access to the virtual realm where this can be defined as ‘a potential awaiting
28
its full actualization’2 while being characterized by the multiplicity and relational qualities of the topological.3 In this respect, discrete modelling processes will – at best – be highly sophisticated and efficient in engendering forms, but more often than not exclude other architectural variables and in the course shed the profound and powerful aspect of interrelational constructs that the virtual realm offers. Second, the singular function of discrete modelling raises questions about how the architect can access and partake in the unfolding of events in the modelling process. The absence of an architectural imagination can sometimes be witnessed in the architecturally naïve results that these processes can produce where the forms appear wholly unqualified in their architectural effects. Generally, though, the virtual must be imagined; it ‘requires a multiplication of images’ and only becomes accessible through the specific event of our relating to it, through our conjuring up ‘imagistic content and structure.’4 One could venture so far as to say that the computer does not present the virtual at all; this machine merely facilitates it. The beauty, manifold and creative possibilities given by the virtual is embedded in the architect’s powers of imagination and her or his ability to partake in and imbue the machinic processes with an architectural intelligence. Third, as already suggested above, discrete modelling processes tend to produce forms defined by surfaces with no thickness and that define space by merely constituting variations on ‘shell’ typologies. This has direct implications for the further development of a project in architectural terms; for instance, the definition and status of the computer generated surface as the ‘master’ geometry imposes problems in terms of structural design and the geometry must be added to and devolved in order to accommodate the structure. Ironically, the goals for and possible optimisation of the structural design must be determined relative to variables that frequently are
2
Picon, A. (2003). Architecture, Science, Technology and the Virtual Realm. Architecture and the Sciences. A. Picon and A. Ponte. New York, Princeton Architectural Press. 4: 292-313. p.295. 3 For an excellent discussion of the virtual, see also Massumi, B. (1998). Line Parable for the Virtual. The Virtual Dimension: Architecture, Representation, and Crash Culture. J. Beckmann. New York, Princeton Architectural Press. One: 359. 4 Ibid. p.305. Massumi states that ‘the crucial point is that the digital is virtualized and potentialized only in its integrative circuiting with the analogue, in the way in which it is integrated into the analogue or integrates the analogue into itself.’ (p.311) It is worth noting how this partly underscores the importance of the visual and the interface in working with a computer. The role of the architect as a qualified imaginer becomes central, something indirectly noted by, for instance, Greg Lynn in commenting on the question of choosing a single form among a series in an animation sequence. Further to Massumi, see in the same volume: De Landa, M. (1998). Meshworks, Hierarchies and Interfaces. The Virtual Dimension: Architecture, Representation, and Crash Culture. J. Beckman. New York, Princeton Architectural Press: 275-285. De Landa writes: ‘The degree of hierarchical and homogenizing components in a given interface is a question that affects more than just events taking place on the computer’s screen. In particular, the very structure of the workplace and the relative status of humans and machines are at stake.’ (p.284)
29
introduced in an extrinsic manner since they are not present and developed as an integral part of the initial geometry.5 2. Non-discrete Modelling Given these limitations of discrete modelling, a continued investigation into alternative and more inclusive techniques has been undertaken over several years in various collaborative settings, most recently in ArchiGlobe,6. The approach can be referred to as non-discrete modelling, and its principle aim in various projects has been to address and tap into the virtual realm as a precondition for architecture and an integrated part of the design process. On the assumption that the virtual is not an exclusive prerogative of computerised processes, the work has also included physical models that address relational constructs within the given space of the respective projects. The results of these models have then been used to set up the initial conditions for the project in the digital realm.7 The digital modelling technique has relied on the streaming of particles through a digitised model of the site and the processing of the time-based and dynamic geometric swarms of points that result from this.8 The technique is also referred to as the meshfree method and originated in astrophysics in 1977.9 Of recently, particle streaming has been used to model and simulate complex dynamic systems, flow conditions and failure analyses in a range of different fields of engineering.10 (Figure 2)
5
Kloft, H. (forthcoming). Non-Standard Structural Design for Non-Standard Architecture. Performative Architectures. B. Kolarevic and A. Malkawi, Spon Press. 6 ArchiGlobe is an experimental and research oriented design initiative recently founded by the author. Prior to this, the work has first and foremost been undertaken within Oslo School of Architecture and, before 2000, in the context of the OCEAN group in Oslo. From the founding of OCEAN in 1995/96 till 2000, OCEAN Oslo basically executed all the digitally based design research within OCEAN at large. 7 This scanning and transposition of geometric data from analogue to digital form has been done using a microscribe. 8 The particle streaming has been performed using various animation software packages with the appropriate plug-ins. This has included Cinema 4D, 3DS Max and Maya. 9 Liu, W. K. and T. Belytschko (1998). Multiple Scale Meshfree Particle Methods, Army High Performance Computing Research Center Bulletin. 2004. 10 Particle streaming should not be confused with the inverse engineering technique of scanning physical models to generate point clouds from which surfaces are derived. This technique is used in the automobile industry as well as in the studio of Frank Gehry and Associates.
30
Figure 2. Example of particle streaming. Single frame in an animated sequence where a particle field is deformed in the context staged forces on site. The project is for a summerhouse on the Norwegian coast (2002).
The streaming process relies on a set of pre-conditions being established as the equivalent of architectural variables, defining the domain of interest in the project and its preliminary boundary conditions.11 The particle streaming yields clouds of geometry flowing through the space of the project, engendering different flow phenomena, among them shifting directionalities and clustering. Using the differentiated field of the particle streams and the geometric events that are produced, the virtual geometry of the project is unfolded through a series of selective processes. In the most recent project for a summerhouse on the Norwegian coast, the selective steps have been made using the CATIA software. These steps are half-automated and serve to reduce the data to a manageable and appropriate amount given the architectural project. The geometry that emerges from this process retains the principle characteristics of the dynamic particle streams while resisting the immediate resolution in surfaces. Developing a series of still subsets of the virtual geometry retains a trace of the time-based differentiation in the initial particle flows; the complete set of virtual models can be used to inform the design of various architectural subsystems on different scales, including the development of interior surfaces. The data also enables a 3D development of the surfaces. Lastly, the aesthetics appearance of the particle streams can 11 For instance, this can be a vista, the surrounding street network, a physical datum or the north-south axis. By weighting these variables in the specific software environment in question, the particle streams exhibit differentiated behaviour that is evaluated in relation to, for instance, architectural scale and geometric events. When the animation sequence exhibits behaviour that is deemed appropriate or desirable, the particle streaming sequence is run within a chosen time interval.
31
inform the specific development of the aesthetics of the project while the directionality and geometric events of the various flows can depart the initial orientation of its material variables.12 (Figure 3)
Figure 3. Example of geometry given by particle streaming processed in CATIA. The three images show subsequent frames processed for their high degree of articulation around the location of the planned building (2003).
Generally, the particle streaming techniques offers models that to a high degree appear to retain the qualities of the virtual realm while qualifying the architectural project in a more inclusive and parametrically open manner than discrete modelling does.
12 The initial idea to use particle streaming was motivated by concurrent work on fibre reinforced polymer composite systems. The characteristics and behaviour of these material systems are highly dependent on the 2D and 3D orientation of the fibres. The status of current material technology and know-how for architecture in general point to the importance of optimising material directional variables for performative ends. The general research described herein aims to arrive at the stage where these kinds of considerations can be incorporated in the virtual modelling and be addressed by the various participants in the design process, including material specialists, structural engineers and architects.
32
Acknowledgements The use of the CATIA software was sponsored by IBM in Norway. CATIA modelling was executed by Heidi Ekstrøm. Jørgen Leirdal executed the particle animation using MAYA software.
References De Landa, M. (1998). Meshworks, Hierarchies and Interfaces. The Virtual Dimension: Architecture, Representation, and Crash Culture. J. Beckman. New York, Princeton Architectural Press: 275-285. Kloft, H. (forthcoming). Non-Standard Structural Design for Non-Standard Architecture. Performative Architectures. B. Kolarevic and A. Malkawi, Spon Press. Liu, W. K. and T. Belytschko (1998). Multiple Scale Meshfree Particle Methods, Army High Performance Computing Research Center Bulletin. 2004. Massumi, B. (1998). Line Parable for the Virtual. The Virtual Dimension: Architecture, Representation, and Crash Culture. J. Beckmann. New York, Princeton Architectural Press. One: 359. Picon, A. (2003). Architecture, Science, Technology and the Virtual Realm. Architecture and the Sciences. A. Picon and A. Ponte. New York, Princeton Architectural Press. 4: 292313.
33
DIGITAL THINKING AS AN AUTHOR OF CROSS-STYLISTIC ARCHITECTURAL DISCOURSE The Meta-Classical Moulding
EMMANOUIL VERMISSO Syracuse University
Abstract. Within today’s Information Technology environment, innovative methodologies of formal exploration vary extensively; algorithms used as form generators may be among the more predictable solutions. Another, possibly more critical method–due to the inherent historical associations is the dialogue digital thinking can promote with existing traditional forms of architectural expression.
1. introduction The last century has witnessed an abandonment of a systematic study of classical language within the educational realm that may lie in the very perception of this language. Alberto Pérez-Gómez (1983) described how architecture, has assumed a different role, since what he calls ‘the functionalization of architectural theory’ that began with the epistemological revolution of the 17th century and the Enlightenment. Furthermore, George Hersey (1988) wrote about the symbolic and, ultimately, religious connotation of Classical architecture at the time of its conception in ancient Greece, and the forgotten rhetoric of ornament that once referred to sacrificial ritual. The importance of the above observations is obvious when one considers the weakening of religion’s role in contemporary life. Within this reformed society, architects ought to re-consider established doctrines in relation to the temporal framework13. 13 In his ‘American Architecture’ of 1843, Horatio Greenough described the monuments of Greece as ‘expressions of power’ and regarded their imitation as display of wealth. The religious moment of Classicism can therefore no longer be traced in 19th c. United States.
34
My research explores a way digital media could help re-instate traditional forms of architecture that seem to have lost their mythical- philosophical connotations due to the paradigm shifts, within future society. Classical moldings –like, for instance, an Ionic cornice- are examined through digital software (Rhino 3D). In a way, the research deals with both surface and curve as a component and the potential performative qualities curves acquire when translated into ‘Nurbs’14 language, as opposed to being conventionally represented as segments of conical sections. By rendering these curves ‘parametric’, simple experiments are performed about shadow and light that will hopefully lead to the digital fabrication of some of the new ‘morphed’ moldings15. Digital technology has unveiled a great opportunity for aesthetic fusion, and posed some important questions about the nature of the end product. Do these new moldings constitute a product of what I call ‘digital Organicism’, or an updated face of Classicism? In any case, a bridge is being laid between two schools of thought which have until now remained indifferent to each other. Norbert Wiener (1948) believed that “The most fruitful areas for the growth of the sciences were those which had been neglected as no-man’s lands between the various established fields”. Let us open this door, create ArCAADia16.
14 Non Uniform Rational B-Spline: a curve of this kind is formed between two end points, and an unlimited number of Control Vertices can be used to define the curve. 15 One goal of these experiments is to re-create the ‘ideal’ visual effect of the original moulding even when this is located in a different place, by moving control points on the curved profiles to maintain the shadow. 16 In Antiquity, Arcadia was an area known for its simple, pastoral life and the term was later used to describe any idyllic location or paradise; accordingly, Ar-CAAD-ia (CAAD: Computer Aided Architectural Design) stands for an ideal synthesis of historical knowledge and digital thinking, a promising future state of architecture.
35
Figure 1. A profile of a molding drawn conventionally and with Nurbs.
Figure 2. Detail of original and re=shaped molding from an Ionic Entablature.
36
References Hersey, GL: 1988, The Lost Meaning of Classical architecture: Speculations on Ornament from Vitruvius to Venturi, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1-10. Greenough, O: 1966, American Architecture, reprinted in The Literature of Architecture, E.P.Dutton, NY, pp. 141-151. Lynn, G: 1999, Animate Form, Princeton Architectural Press, NY, pp. 8-41. Pérez-Gómez, A: 1983, Architecture and the crisis of modern science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 3-14. Porphyrios, D: 1993, Demetri Porphyrios: Selected Buildings and Writings, Academy Editions, London pp. 123-127. Porphyrios, D: 1998, Classical Architecture (1st paperback ed.), A. Papadakis Publisher, Windsor, Berks., pp. 7-9, 144-147. Stuart, J and Revett, N: 1980 (first published 1789), The antiquities of Athens, measured and delineated / by James Stuart and Nicholas Revett, Arno Press, NY. Vince, JA: 2000, Essential computer animation fast: how to understand the techniques and potential of computer animation, Springer-Verlag, London-NY, pp. 25-30. Wiener, N: 1985, Cybernetics, Scientific American 179 (1948), Reprinted in Wiener, Collected Works, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 784-789. Wiener, N: 1951, Homeostasis in the individual and society, Journal of the Franklin Institute 251, Reprinted in Wiener, Collected Works, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 380-383. JS and Chase, MA: 1990, Decision making in a networked environment, in H Eschenauer, J Koski and A Osyczka (eds), Technology and Communication, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 376–396. Minsk, ML: 1990, Process models for cultural integration, Journal of Culture 11(4): 49–58. Smythe, JS (ed.): 1990, Applications of Artificial Intelligence to Communication, CMP and Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
37
WHY IS FORMAL NOTATION HELPFUL IN DESIGN-COGNITION REASEARCH? ÖMER AKIN AND HODA MOUSTAPHA Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Abstract. This paper examines the ways in which formal notation of design activity can be helpful in researching issues of design cognition. It relies on a notation we developed, called ICE (Moustapha, 2004). The questions we explore are: what are the potential benefits of having multiple design representations; how can these descriptions help in prescriptive design; and should these best be used in post facto or generative descriptions of design?
1. Motivation Scientific exploration of design cognition remains a difficult challenge. While scientific exploration requires controlled experimentation and quantifiable measurements, design (both as a verb and noun) defies containment by experimental controls and objective measurement. Cognitive effects can be measured through voluntary, motor behaviors (sketching, talking, and gesturing) as well as involuntary behavioral functions (eye fixations, Electroencephalogram readings, and even psycho-analytical findings). The difficulty lies in connecting these measurements to meaningful conclusions that can impact design. From the standpoint of understanding design, important measurements of such behavioral activity have been made. We know, for example that parietal regions of the brain are more active in experts as opposed to novices (Goker and Birkhofer, 1996), that design activity types are clustered in predictive patterns in protocol data (Purcell, et.al., 1994), and that, on the average, designers execute a primitive information processing function every 4 seconds (Akın, 1989). While these findings may provide significant pieces of the larger puzzle, they help precious little in constructing theories of design behavior that can impact design directly. In the natural sciences, objective descriptions of phenomenon are constructed. These become models of the phenomenon that are being described, explained, predicted or controlled (Figure 1). Descriptions are
38
matched against real phenomenon. Explanations are verified through prediction, and prediction in turn leads to control. If the descriptive model turns out to be robust, its results can be used to foretell events yet to take place. Once the model is verified under varying conditions -- that is conditions that do not necessarily resemble the ones used to build the model in the first place -- it then becomes a useful abstraction of the phenomenon through which the desired effects can first be honed on the model and then transferred to the real world.
Describe
Explain
Predict
Control
Figure 1: Key stages of the scientific process
Consider an information model that precisely and succinctly describes the universe of all shapes and forms that can be used in the course of design. Also consider that the effects that are realized in the real world of design, adding, subtracting, morphing, transforming of shapes, can be just as easily realized in the model. Furthermore, it would be possible to construct in this model alternative design actions to test what-if scenarios. For instance, could the design have been arrived at more efficiently? What other design possibilities were by-passed? Even more interestingly, what systematic faults are manifested in certain design behaviors and how can these be avoided, modified or improved upon? Design cognition research can become an established branch of cognitive science if models that are accurate and measurable are available for researchers to test and verify against real design data. Eventually, the models that become useful surrogates for design phenomenon can be used to predict and control its results. Towards this end we propose a notation that can be used to describe designs, accurately and formally. We demonstrate that this description can be used to explain design actions and their consequences, formally. At the moment, this is how far we can bring our claims of scientific exploration of design cognition. The next steps that must be taken to complete this research effort are to build strategies for predicting and controlling design actions. This will, no doubt, require both the forward progress of the current work to more
39
advances stages of the scientific process (Figure 1) and to iterate through the earlier steps to refine and improve upon our current results. 2. Overall Features of the ICE Notation We have developed a notation for the purposes of universally representing shape information generated during design (Akın and Moustapha, 2004). While it is envisioned as a system for design generation ICE (Moustapha, 2004), as far as our present discussion is concerned, should be regarded as a formal notation for representing complex design configurations based on their underlying generative and relational structures. The formal notation summarizes any configuration into the set of minimal steps required for its generation. These generative steps represent the basic structure of a physical configuration through the relationships of its primitive units. These relationships are referred to as “regulators” implying the “control” function we attribute to them in structuring physical configurations. Regulators can represent the diverse types of structures observed in architectural configurations, for instance symmetry, proportion, rhythm, and gradation among many others. In the ICE notation, regulators are handles to manipulate the design. A regulator encapsulates a formula, by which it computes the positional (or other) attribute of the elements it regulates. A regulator can be a transformation, a constraint, an operation, or a variation. For instance: translations, rotations, reflections, are transformation regulators. These, along with the scale, and the curve transformations, constitute the primary regulators used for generating shapes and complex configurations. Alignments and containments are constraint regulators. These, among many others, constitute the relational regulators that further control the configuration elements. 3. The Syntax of the ICE Notation A full description of the ICE notation is provided in the paper entitled “Formal Representation for Generation and Transformation in Design” by Moustapha (2004). Below we include a brief description in order to provide sufficient background for the discussion that will follow. The basic elements of the ICE notation are (1) the point, denoted by a lowercase letter, for instance p, and (2) the regulator, denoted by a bold uppercase letter, for instance T. Shapes are composite objects defined by points and regulators and are denoted as lowercase words. A prefix for the regulator, a Greek letter, indicates the type of regulator: ∆ transformations, Φ constraints, Ξ variations, and Ω operations. p h Superscripts indicate the subtype for the regulator: for example ∆C , ∆C ,
40
indicates two types of curve regulators (i.e. two distinct formulae). Subscripts (for regulators, shapes, and points) are used for indexing to differentiate elements of the same type for instance ∆T1 , shape3. We developed two forms for the ICE notation, a short form, which captures the regulator and the regulated object/s, for instance ∆T(shape) and the expanded form, which also shows the parameters of the regulator enclosed in curly brackets with vectors depicted with an overline: ∆T 1 [ { p, t , d , n} (shape) ] . These include translation vectors and distances,
rotation points and degrees, reflection and glide axes, etc. The long form is essential for system implementation. However, for the purpose of simplicity, we use the short form for all our examples in this paper. The conjunction ∧ (and) is used to join two related clauses which share regulated objects. For instance: ∆T(shape) ∧ ∆A(shape) . ICE notation has the following distributive property: ∆T(shape1 , shape 2 ) = ∆T(shape1 ) ∧ ∆T(shape 2 ) . Table 1 shows the use of the ICE in describing a set of simple shapes.
41
TABLE 1. ICE notation describing basic shape generation Straight line: ∆T(p) The translation regulator ∆T sweeps the starting point p. Curved line: ∆C(p) The curve regulator ∆C sweeps p to create a curved line. Plane: ∆T2 ( ∆T1 (p)) A plane is generated by the application of successive regulators. The second regulator takes as input all the generated points of the previous regulator Polyline: ∆C(∆T1 (∆T1 (p) #n ) #n ) Application of successive regulators generates a polyline, each one taking, as its input, the previous generated point.
T
p
C
p
T1
p
T2
T1
p
T2 C
Prism: ∆T3 ( base) ∧ base = ∆T2 (∆T1 (p)) A prism is generated by sweeping a square base along the translation regulator ∆T .
T
Pyramid: ∆TD(base) A pyramid is generated by sweeping a square base along a straight line while incorporating a dilation regulator D. A frustum is produced with a decreased scale factor. ∆TD denotes simultaneous application of two regulators.
T
Sphere: ∆R 2 (circle) ∧ circle = ∆R 1 (∆T (p)) A sphere is generated by sweep-rotating a circle using ∆R Cylinder: ∆T(circle) A cylinder is generated by sweeping a circular base along the translation regulator ∆T . Cone: ∆TD(circle) A cone is generated by sweeping a circular base along the translation regulator ∆T composed with dilation ∆D .
R
T
T
42
4. A Sample Application of ICE to Design Data In this section, we demonstrate how this notation is capable of depicting design data. To prove the flexibility and range of the notation we selected the design work produced by a 5th year architectural student throughout the course of a design studio taught during the summer of 2002. The sequence of drawings presented here starts about a quarter of the way into the studio and runs through midpoint, highlighting several major formal solutions produced. The data consists of annotations for each day and the ICE notation for each graphic display depicted in sequence of four tables starting with Table 2. We also run through a hypothetical scenario demonstrating generative codes of design in the following section. 4.1. CODIFYING DESIGN DATA
We first begin with an overall layout produced by Subject W. The first panel of Table 2 shows the formal definition of the dorm units. These rectilinear units are clustered along a central axis to facilitate ease of circulation and social interaction. TABLE 2 (Tuesday, June 4, 2002) Subject-W is presenting a rectilinear scheme in which the modular bays of the dormitory scheme are being clustered to create a large and integrated form on the site which faces a long public edge of the campus proper as well as the service façade of the student activities building. This creates a “beads-on-a-string” type scheme. dormCluster1 = ∆M 1 (dormUnit 1 ) building = ∆M 2 (∆T(dormCluster1 ), ∆R (dormCluster2 )) ∧ ΦA (dormCluster1-dormCluster4 ) Entrance = ∆M 2 (∆C(p) )
The building is defined by (1) reflecting the dorm unit to form the dorm cluster, (2) translating and rotating the dorm cluster (3) reflecting the results of the previous generations and (4) aligning (regulator A) the dorm clusters (1 to 4). The entrance is defined by sweeping points along a curve then reflecting the curved lines.
The next configuration goes back to a curvilinear theme (Table 3). The main reflection axis ∆M 2 is maintained. To obtain the curved axis from the
43
previous ∆M 2 (∆T(), ∆R ()) regulator sequence, ∆T is deleted and ∆R ’s rotation degree is adjusted leading to ∆M 2 (∆R ()) . The horizontal alignment is replaced by a curvilinear alignment. Within the dorm cluster, the dorm units are repositioned and reoriented. Their reflection ∆M 1 axis is rotated better defining the common spaces. TABLE 3 (Thursday, June 6, 2002) dormCluster1 = ∆M 1 (dormUnit 1 ) building = ∆M 2 ( ∆R (dormCluster1 )) ∧ ∆R (commonSpace) The building is generated rotating the dorm unit then reflecting it, and by rotating the trapezoidal common spaces.
In the next configuration the curve is broken into segments, Reflection is the dominant relationship (Table 4). The central axis is maintained and slightly rotated. The ∆M 2 ( ∆ R ()) sequence of regulators is replaced by ∆M 2 (∆M 3 ())
TABLE 4 (Wednesday, June 12, 2002) The next formal overhaul involves one end of the “serpentine” form into two wings, allowing the development of a “commons” area and lobby from one of the major access edges of the site. This remains the principal parti for SubjectW’s solution.
44
3-D description dormCluster1 = ∆M 1 ( ∆TD(dormUnit 1 ) building = ∆M 2 ( ∆M 3 (dormCluster1 ) #1 ) ∧ ∆M 4 (dormUnit 4 ) ∧ ∆M 5 (dormUnit 5 ) ∧ ∆TD(commonSpace)
The building is generated by reflecting the dorm cluster twice, then reflecting the individual dormUnits to achieve the bifurcations. The 3D configuration is an extrusion of the 2D configuration with a small scaling factor. The ∆TD regulator copies the floor slab vertically and scales them. The subscript indicates that the reflection ∆M 2 only reflects the last element of ∆M 3 not all the dorm units.
The two configurations shown in Table 5 are the variations suggested during the midterm review. Variation A is achieved by rotating the dorm cluster, proposed by Subject-W, 180 degrees and converting ∆M 6 and ∆M 5 into rotations, Variation B is achieved by inserting another dorm cluster in the configuration, which is carried out in the notation by making ∆M 2 mirror both dorm units generated by ∆M 3 . TABLE 5. Midterm evaluation (Monday, June 17, 2002) During midterm review, Subject-W’s work shows little development over the previous critic. The most significant development is the cross axis that marks the secondary entrance, along the long side of the building.
Subject-W’s proposal
dormUnit 1 = ΦH (∆T(∆M (room )), kitchen, bathroom, balcony)
The containment regulator, ΦH , indicates that the dorm unit consists of (a translation and a reflection of the room) as well as a bathroom, a kitchen and a balcony. A containment relation imposes restrictions on constituents, such as a transformation of the container will propagate the constituents, etc.
A Proposals by the instructor
3-D description (of variation A)
45
dormCluster1 = ∆M 1 (∆TD(dormUnit 1 ) building = ∆M 2 ( ∆M 3 (dormCluster1 ) #1 ) ∧ ∆R 4 (dormUnit 4 ) ∧ ∆R 5 (dormUnit 5 ) ∧ commonSpace
3-D description (of variation B ) dormCluster1 = ∆M 1 ( ∆TD(dormUnit 1 ) building = ∆M 2 (∆M 3 (dormCluster1 ) ) ∧ ∆M 4 (dormUnit 4 ) ∧ ∆M 5 (dormUnit 5 ) ∧ commonSpace
For a complete description of Subject-W’s work refer to Akin and Moustapha (2004). 4.2 DEPICTING GENERATIVE CODES FOR DESIGN
In this section, we show how generative sequences using ICE can produce identical results using alternative operational sequences (regulator applications). To demonstrate this capability we selected a point in subject W’s design at the time of the midterm submission (Table 5). We illustrate the effect of two separate generative paths (columns A and B in Table 6) In Steps 1 and 2, a dorm unit is created then reflected about M1. In Step 3, the same arrangement is obtained (Step 3A) by a reflection about M2, and in (Step 3B) a rotation about R1. The generation sequence continues in distinct paths though Steps 4 and 5, yielding different arrangements. In Step 6 however, two different actions, reflecting about M5 and reflecting about M6, bring the arrangement back to equivalence. At this point the two shapes are identical, but their notations are not since they also capture the way in which each shape is derived. TABLE 6. Generative sequence for subject W’s midterm submission A 1
2
3
B
46
4
5
6
∆M 3 (∆M 2 ( ∆M 1 (dormUnit1 )))
∆R 1 (∆M 1 (dormUnit1 ))
∆M 4 (dormUnit 4 )
∆M 6 (∆M 4 ( ∆R 2 (dormUnit1 )))
∆M 5 (dormUnit 5 )
7
Move mirror ∆M 1 upward
Move mirror ∆M 1 upward
9
Rotate mirror ∆M 1 counterclockwise Rotate mirror ∆M 1 counterclockwise
47
Rotate mirror ∆M 3 counterclockwise Move rotation point
∆R to the right
The notation produced, in Table 6, then can be seen as a tool to formally express the differences between multiple generative series in a given design, whether real or hypothetical. Table 7 shows a detailed breakdown of how the two notations diverge and converge throughout this generative series. TABLE 7. Comparison of sequences depicted in Table 6 Steps
Graphics Information Generative Information
1
Equivalent
equivalent
2
Equivalent
equivalent
3
Equivalent
NOT equivalent
4
NOT equivalent
NOT equivalent
5
NOT equivalent
NOT equivalent
6
Equivalent
NOT equivalent
7
NOT equivalent
NOT equivalent
equivalent
8
NOT equivalent
NOT equivalent
equivalent
9
NOT equivalent
NOT equivalent
NOT equivalent
5.
Manipulation information
Implications for Design Cognition: Describing Design
Let us first consider some of the general properties of the representational tool, ICE that we have been using in our depiction of design data. ICE is a formal tool that can unambiguously describe entities as well as design actions. Compared to other codification approaches, ICE has the advantage of being developed independently of the data against which it is tested. This enables its objective verification as a tool for encoding designs.
48 5.1
CODIFYING AND MANIPULATING DESIGN SPACES
In the area of cognitive models of the design process one of the difficult challenges is to formally measure and compare intermediary states in a design state space and draw generalizations about human design behavior (Akın, 1996). Purcell, et.al. (1994) have made progress in this direction. They have devised ways of unambiguously codifying and characterizing individual design activities throughout design protocols. Their codification relies on interpretations by human coders of the data and like most qualitative analysis methods on entities that emerge from the data. In the case of the ICE notation, we can formally and quantitatively measure the information content of each state in the state space of design. We can go beyond surface similarities of graphically equivalent entities and objectively measure the steps that go into creating each one. This can be used to quantify the information content of any given graphic design state. Another purpose of using ICE, which is orthogonal to the one above, is to be able to embed handles (or structure) into shapes for further manipulation. For example, the resulting form in Sequence B (Step 6, Table 6) has different handles than the same one in Sequence A. This has two significant implications, which are illustrated in Steps 7-9: (1) identical manipulationactions (for instance moving shared regulators) would result in totally different graphic configurations (Step 7 and 8); (2) the different handles (non-shared regulators) allow for a different set of manipulations per graphic configuration (Step 9), by moving the rotation point R1 or rotating the mirror line M3. There are numerous possible manipulations for each sequence; those shown were just a few. Additionally, redefining the notation string by insertion, deletion, or replacement would expand the manipulation possibilities even further and redirect the exploration paths. Furthermore, we can codify all graphic entities by surface structure as well as generative structure. We believe that this has important implications for accurately representing and analyzing cognitive representations of designs. 5.2
MULTIPLE NOTATION CAPABILITIES
Formality of the ICE notation enables us to show quantifiable differences in the information content of both the design state representations and their transformations. The ICE notation’s representation is not unique: i.e. the same configuration can be described in several ways. Each of these strings captures a distinct process for generation, and accounts for a distinct set of applicable transformations, and consequently, a distinct set of manipulation handles (Table 6).
49
The fact that ICE specifies multiple ways of creating identical graphic entities affords us many distinct representations for each entity. Multiple representations enable us to be able to capture precisely the manner in which an entity is created as well as what it is. This leads to interesting design application opportunities Can we capture different ways of making shapes that are preferred by different users? Do these correspond to performance measures such as: faster, easier, and more consistent with the geometry of the form? While, currently, we do not have sufficient data to answer these questions, they present interesting future research avenues. One goal for doing this would be to determine more parsimonious ways of producing forms. Such investigations may lead to generic and customizable approaches to design. 5.3
REPLAYING DESIGNS
ICE notation allows us to not only encode graphic and generative design sequences but also to “replay” them in the way the graphic entities were generated in the first place. Due to this capability, the ICE notation can become the basis of a tool to capture design history. As in most complex design environments the history of designs (i.e., why some things are configured the way they are) is the most difficult requirement to satisfy with available systems. Drawings capture the “what,” and the specifications capture the “how” of building designs. There are no representation systems that deal with the why.” We believe ICE is a natural to fill this gap. With ICE one can play back the sequence of entities created, down to the last line or point regardless of how complex these entities may be. We believe this will become the armature, much more effectively than any static design representation, to capture the history of design entities; to provide information about the formal genesis of each design component; to enable the modification of the design without losing information about its history; and to augment this history while preserving the design. 5.4
DESIGN INTENT CAPTURE
A significance of this capacity to represent design histories is that they can become repositories of design intent and allow their management through the manipulation their content. This can assist designers in visualizing the genesis of a form and help in encoding the design intent. The subcomponents that make up a graphic element can also help retrieve the functional requirements that go into the final form. Our future research will address among others, the issue of design intent.
50 5.5
SEMANTICS OF DESIGN NOTATION
It is also worthwhile to consider a semantic role for the regulators of ICE. Regulators are high level entities that “regulate” the behavior of lower level design elements. In another paper Moustapha and I examined the role of regulators in structuring and controlling design behavior. After analyzing a set of design protocols we found that architects use regulating lines as strategies to carry out their design actions, in particular, developing massing ideas for their designs. These strategies included scaffolding the behavior of a set of consistent design elements, restructuring the parameters of the design formulation, organizing design hierarchies within which to navigate the current design space, and controlling desired topological and geometric relationships (Akin and Moustapha, 2002). In order to do these, subjects used regulating elements such as axes of symmetry, centers of rotation, alignment axes, diagonal proportion lines, points of intersection, and bounding lines. 5.1.5 Part-Whole Regulators During the design sessions we studied here, subjects used regulating elements of massing to organize their work. A popular regulating element was the symmetry line that aligns individual design elements (whether they are rooms, windows, columns or stairs). Aside from the compositional orders that result from such use, symmetry axes represent meta-elements that control the spatial organization of other, lower level elements. The relationship between the latter to the former is one of part-to-whole. For example, a room arranged with respect to an axis is a mere component of a larger composition defined by the axis and the colony of rooms. 5.1.2 Scaffolding with Regulators Scaffold creation seems to be based on the extension of alignments in the current design. For instance, Subject-P4 extends a line from the boundary of an existing building on the given site, and uses it to align massing elements in order to preserve a setback. She says “I definitely want to maintain the line with the Margaret Morrison building”. The existing alignment serves as a scaffold for additional massing elements in the composition. We observed that Subject-P4 accomplished similar ends using a slightly different strategy. She extends two lines from an existing building’s external protrusion and uses them as guides to create a protrusion onto the proposed building. She then discovers a novel relation between these lines and her own buildings sub-structure. She says “Ahaaa … I found a very interesting relationship”. This causes an adjustment to the proposed massing configuration (Figure 1).
51
Figure 1: Subject-P4 extending a subdivision line (M4_2.4.5)
5.1.3 Topology Regulation The topological structure of a massing configuration can be defined in several ways. We found in our data that these styles are not mutually exclusive, they occur in hybrid combinations. A primary strategy is the creation of topological relationships from contextual information provided by axes. For instance, Subject-P2 starts her design by deriving the geometric structure from the site (Table 8). She then picks up the axis of the streets and the setbacks from a neighboring building. Table 8: Regulating the topological structure of a problem Episode 7: Deriving topology from context 1.2.5 1.2.6 1.2.7 1.3.1 1.3.2 1.3.3 1.3.4 1.5
Subject-P2 draws the central axis of the street “Assume to build right up to the street” “We have an axis through Resnick hall” “Buildings in vicinity: MMCH” “Assume that front line of building will not cross the reference line from MMCH” “Assume that setback is maintained on other side” She sketches the buildable area She then proceeds by developing a concept
5.1.4 Problem Structuring with Regulators Subject-P4 restructures the left wing of her design while designing the roof configuration. For this activity she leaves the computing medium to work on paper. She begins by drawing the right wing (Figure 2a), and then she proceeds by drawing the left wing, while trying to create a similarity with the adjacent building’s roof structure (Figure 2b). After completing the roof she gets another idea (at this point she asks for tracing paper) and then redraws over the left wing. She rotates the axis of the central gable roof by 90-degrees, and adds two symmetrical shed roofs on both sides. One of these
52
is continuing from the right wing, and both are parallel to the new axis. In this way, she has restructures the roof configuration (Figure 2c).
a
b
c
Figure 2: Subject-P4 changing the geometric structure of the roof configuration.
6.
Future Work
Our future work, in this area will be to codify protocol (not ethnographic) data to exploit the various possibilities that lie with formal encoding of designs. We will verify that what the notation demonstrates in terms of alternative design paths, greater efficiency in producing designs and more productive directions of design are in fact valid. We will also compare our approach to others in the field such as those of Purcell, et.al, (1994) and Suwa, et.al. (1998). Before we conclude, it is important to recognize two categories of potential work that we have been considering: potential to facilitate case representation and creating an experimental environment for answering what-if questions. 6.1
DESIGN PRESCRIPTION
An important goal of this approach is to develop tools that go beyond the descriptive accounts of design processes and assist in prescriptive design strategies. One of the ways this can be accomplished is through design libraries. A collection of ICE notations can constitute a library of design elements that can be used to create new design assemblies. As with casebases, this library can be used to adapt past designs and design elements to new problems. The difficulty with most case- or library-based system is the excessive overhead of populating the library or the case-base with design instances. The effort needed to build libraries is so large that most of them have impoverished instance sets. One way of overcoming this problem is to capture cases during design. ICE is perfectly suitable for this approach. Its
53
process capture functionality can be adapted to an interactive format for the designer to store away, on the fly, instances as they design them. 6.2
WHAT-IF WITH ICE
These types of interactions with ICE suggest debatable questions regarding cognition. Suppose a designer had a system such as ICE, would she follow the same exploration paths as they would if they were working without ICE? Would she have explored other paths and came up with different configurations? Would she have completed the exploration faster, thus giving her more time to develop details further, or would she have done many more explorations, thus sidetracking from developing the focused completed design? The more general question is whether such capabilities offer a relief from cognitive overloads, or place an additional burden on the designer of understanding the structure handles and their manipulations. The discussion provided in the above section explored the various possibilities that ICE can afford more or less independent of the specific design applications or even specific design problems. Yet, there remain questions about how these functionalities could impact the world of computational applications. What are the potential benefits of having multiple representations of the genesis of designs? How can these descriptive techniques be helpful in prescriptive strategies of design? Are these capabilities best used in post facto or generative descriptions of designs? 7.
References
Akın, Ö and H Moustapha: 2004, “Formalizing Generation and Transformation in Design” in proceedings of the DCC’04 Conference to be held at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, July 19-21. Akın, Ö and H Moustapha: 2004, “Formalizing Generation and Transformation in Design” in proceedings of the DCC’04 Conference to be held at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, July 19-21. Akın, Ö: 2002, Design: the Art and Science of Synthesis©, unpublished manuscript, School of Architecture, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15123, USA. Akın , Ö and C T Lin: 1996 “Design protocol data and novel design decisions” in Analysing Design Activity, edited by N. Cross and K. Dorst, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, West Sussex, 1996, pp. 35-64. Akın, Ö: 1989, Psychology of Architectural Design Pion LTD., London. Cha, M and Gero, J: 2004, Shape Pattern Representation for Design Computation (http://www.arch.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejohn/publications/progress.html). Goker, M and Birkhofer, H: 1996, “The Influence of Experience on Human Problem Solving,” in Omer Akin (ed.) Descriptive Models of Design Conference proceedings, Istanbul Technical University, Taskisla, Istanbul, 1-5 July 1996. Leyton, M: 2001, A Generative Theory of Shape. Springer Verlag, New York.
54 Moustapha, H: 2004, “A Formal Representation for Generation and Transformation in Design” in proceedings of G-CADS’04 symposium to be held at Carnegie Mellon University, Boston, MA, July 12-16. Moustapha, H and R Krishnamurti: 2001, Arabic Calligraphy: A Computational Exploration, Mathematics and Design 2001, Third International Conference, Deakin University, Geelong. Purcell T, J. Gero, H. Edwards, and T. McNeill: 1994, “The data in design protocols: the issue of data coding, data analysis in the development of models of the design process,” in J. S. Gero and F. Sudweeks (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Design’94, Kluwer, pp. 225-252. Suwa, M, T. Purcell, and J. S. Gero: 1998 “Macroscopic analysis of design process based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions,” Design Studies 19 (4): 455-483.
Acknowledgements The heading for acknowledgements is the style of a first order heading but is unnumbered. The acknowledgements are in 10 pt, 11 pt leading.
References References are in 9 pt, 10 pt leading, unnumbered and in alphabetical order. Please conform to the following style, note no stops after initials: Bernus, JS and Chase, MA: 1990, Decision making in a networked environment, in H Eschenauer, J Koski and A Osyczka (eds), Technology and Communication, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, pp. 376–396. Minsk, ML: 1990, Process models for cultural integration, Journal of Culture 11(4): 49–58. Smythe, JS (ed.): 1990, Applications of Artificial Intelligence to Communication, CMP and Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
55
EFFICIENCY OF SKETCHES Comparison of a hand sketch, a CAD-sketch and the 3D-sketcher SEBASTIAN SCHNEIDER, UDO LINDEMANN Department for Product development (TU Munich), Germany
Abstract. At the moment different types of sketches are used during the product development process. Usually CAD-sketches are needed at the end of the end of the design process. Nevertheless, as CADprograms don not support the creative process for the search for solutions, hand sketches are used before and parallel to the creation of CAD-sketches. For supporting hand sketches with computer tools the 3D-sketcher was developed at the Department for Product Development. To compare all these possibilities for creating sketches experiments were carried out and a questionnaire was designed. The results of this survey will be presented.
1. Introduction At the end of an usual product development process CAD-sketches of the created product should be generated. As CAD-programs require exact geometries they are not used during the creative process of the search for solutions. Therefore the designers use hand sketches, which was observed in different studies [PACHE et al 1999]. Hand sketches allow the designers to create vague geometry, symbols, text, describe contradictions or change parts of the sketch. To close this gap a 3D-sketcher was developed [MÜLLER et al. 2003]. To get more knowledge on the requirements for an ideal sketch tool experiments with students of mechanical engineering were carried out. Parallel to experiments a questionnaire was developed to better interpret the results of the experiments. 2. Experiments The experiments were carried out to compare the different types of creating sketches. The test persons had to sketch the parts shown in Figure 1. The first part is a crank arm, the second one a turning work piece.
56
Part 1
Part 2
Figure 1. Test objects: Part 1 (crank arm), part 2 (turning work piece)
For interpreting the experiments the sketching processes were divided in characteristic part processes. For the hand sketch these were the following part processes: • Zero hour (time which the test person needs to reflect about how to proceed with the sketch) • Pre-drawing (thin sketching to appreciate dimensions or rough structures) • Tracing (real creating of the sketch) • Correct (time for corrections) In CAD-sketches the process for the creation of sketches is much more complex. The following steps could be determined: • Loading of the CAD-program • Number of changes between sketch mode and ISO-view • Time in the isometric view • Time in the sketch mode • Time for corrections • Zero hour • Turn/Zoom (time in which the test person arranges the assembly or uses the function zoom) • Dimension • Sketching For the 3D-Sketcher the following classification was chosen: • Turn/thinking (the test person moves the sketch in the room for a better view on the sketch and to derive further steps which should be done) • Sketch (active sketching)
57
• Erase (of created parts) • Menu (the test person uses the menu)
3. Questionnaire Experiments are only one part of the survey. To enhance the understanding on the results it is senseful to ask the test persons about their experiences with the different kind of sketches. With their comments it is easier to interpret the observations in the experiments. The questions concern the (dis) advantages of the different input devices , the knowledge and abilities with different types of sketches, the intuitivity and the quickness of the creation of the sketches, problems, and the different process steps. The results from the questionnaire were compared with the results of the experiments. Out of all the final conclusions were derived. 4. Results 4.1 RESULTS OF THE EXPERIMENTS
As noted above the experiments were analyzed by the times of the different process steps. Further on the average times are listed. The procentual allocation of the different steps is equal. No test person made a pre-drawing. An analysis of the procedure showed that the zero time is at the beginning and the end, in between there is nearly no zero time. All persons displayed the parts in different views but not in an isometric view. The test persons had free choice of view. Correct 3%
Correct 6% Zero time 32%
Zero time 44%
Tracing 62%
Pre Drawing 0%
Tracing 53%
Pre Drawing 0%
Figure 2. Hand sketch: Average times of the different steps (left side: part 1, right side: part 2)
CAD-Skteches
58
Before starting with the creation of the sketch the respective program must be loaded. This takes about 60-90s, depending on the capability of the computer. During sketching mostly the sketch view was chosen. The creation of part 1 took a little bit more time than part 2. This is due to the more complex geometry and the positioning, which enlarges the time in the sketch view. The test persons changed about 10-12 times the different views. Mostly the changes were to finish a geometry element or to position it. The second part of the evaluation acquires the times of the process steps. The more complicated a part is the higher is the zero time. ISO view 25% ISO view 39%
Sketch view 61% Sketch view 75%
Figure 3. CAD-Sketch: Time in the different views Zero time 21% Sketch 35% Corrections 6%
Zero time 13%
Sketch 39%
Corrections 4% Turn/Zoom 7%
Turn/Zoom 8%
Dimension 30%
Dimension 37%
Figure 4. CAD-Sketch: Average time of the different process steps
3D-Sketcher No test persons had worked before with the 3D-Sketcher. Out of this reason they had time to test the 3D-sketcher. Most test persons need more time to aim the sketch and think about how to sketch. This might be due to the unknown device. Another reason is that no test person had experience with sketching in the 3-dimensional room.
59
Erase 10%
Menu 5%
Sketch 29%
Turn/Think 56%
Figure 5. 3D-sketcher: Average time of the different process steps 4.2 RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
There are a lot of answers in the questionnaire. They won´t be listed here. The results are included in the overall results. 4.3 OVERALL RESULTS
From the above described investigations the following (dis-) advantages can be derived. The enumeration is arranged according to the relevancy. Advantages of a hand sketch: All-purpose, fast applicable, less material effort, less cost effort, fast, no further tools necessary, no extra precognitions necessary, less fixation of mental capacities, easy control of complexity, vague determination of form and position of the geometric elements possible, higher motivation to check and correct the sketched parts, demonstrative, concise Disadvantages of hand sketches Long-term saving of ideas not possible, potential loss of ideas, reuse in computer-supported tools not possible, inexact, changes extensive, sketches unclear → possible interpretation problems of the viewer, more spatial sense necessary, it must be sketched further on in CAD, with higher complexity loss of overview Advantages of a CAD-sketch Exact, changes easy, cleanness, reusability, hand sketch not necessary, exact dimensions are not necessary everywhere, 3-dimensionality, Mother-child-
60
relation in changes, direct derivation of production drawings, continuous process chain from search for solution to production drawings, visualisation of complex spatial illustrations and kinematic data possible, exact imagination of the assembly, easy data organisation and saving, easy cognition of geometry faults 8for example assembly collisions) Disadvantages of a CAD-sketch Slow, bounded to computers, exact working necessary, information translation and coding necessary → less intuitive, high fixation of mental capacity during the operation of the CAD-program, creativity hardly limited, hard constraint of the proceeding by the menu guiding Advantages of the 3D-sketcher After practice fast creation of spatial sketches, if a menu would be offered complex 3D-solutions can be reproduced Disadvantages of the 3D-Sketcher Unpleasant feeling when wearing the shutter glasses, only rough sketches possible, operation difficult, software improvable, hardware needs getting used to, work space limited, orientation in the room difficult, desirable geometry not easy to reach, imprecise, lines not straight 5. Conclusion The comparison of the different types of sketches has shown that hand sketches are the most efficient way to sketch. CAD-sketches are only a little bit less efficient. The 3D-sketcher is at the moment not competitive due to to an inadequate user interface. Nevertheless positive first signs were recognizable. As hand sketches are more efficient than CAD-sketches the 3D-sketcher with an optimized user interface could be an attractive alternative for hand sketches. Also out of the reason to avoid the media break between hand sketches and CAD-sketches. A lot of hints how to improve the 3D-sketcher were investigate: better menu for operation, bigger workspace, and more comfortable creation of 3-dimensionality. They will be introduced in the further improvements of the 3D-Sketcher. Acknowledgements The experiments were carried out by several students under the supervision of Bernd Petzold and Franz Müller: Stefanie Braun, Markus Klein, Sebastian Kleins, Katja Leuoth, Andreas Paffenholz. Philipp Riffelmacher, Andreas Strobl.
61
References Lindemann, U.; Müller, F.; Pache, M.; Diehl, H.; Schneider, S.: Optimierung des UserInterfaces beim VR-unterstützten 3D-Skizzieren. In: 2. Paderborner Workshop Augmented & Virtual Reality in der Produktentstehung, Paderborn, HNI, 2003 Hacker, W.; “Denken in der Produktentwicklung”, vdf, Hochschulverl. an der ETH Zürich, 2002 Pache, M.; Römer, A.; Lindemann, U.; Hacker, W.: Re-interpretation of Conceptual Design Sketches in Mechanical Engineering. In: Proceedings of DETC’01, ASME 2001 Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Pittsburgh (Pennsylvania, USA), 09.-12.09.2001, 7 Seiten. (CD-ROM Pache, M.; Lindemann, Sketching in 3D. Human Behaviour in Design , Springer Berlin 2003 Purcell, A.T. & Gero, J.S. (1998). Drawings and the design process. Design Studies, 19, 4, p. 389-430. Römer, A.; Pache, M.; Weißhahn, G.; Lindemann, U.; Hacker, W.: Effort-Saving Product Representations in Design - Results of a Questionnaire Survey. Design Studies 22 (2001) 6, S. 473-491.
62
ORDER AND DIVERSITY WITHIN A MODULAR SYSTEM FOR HOUSING A computational approach JOSÉ PINTO DUARTE Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA, now at Instituto Superior Técnico, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
Abstract. This study evolves within the larger context of developing a housing production process that uses new technologies in order to allow industrialization in an innovative way, and so avoiding traditional industrialized processes flaws, such as the lack of housing customization and neighborhood diversity. It introduces elements of a methodology to achieve order and diversity in the systematic design of street facades within a modular system for housing. In its context, both order and diversity refer to the spatial arrangement of architectural elements; order emphasizes repetition, whereas diversity emphasizes variation. The study presents a set of experiments designed with the goal of inquiring into the cognitive processes underlying designers’ perception of diversity and their limitations in its generation. These experiments use a computer program developed to trace the design process of the experimental subjects. Results suggest that limitations in diversity are due to designers’ psychological tendency towards order. Three different perceived manifestations of order are identified: logic order, orderliness, and balance. Orderliness is shown to be closely related to diversity through repetition, and as such are referred to as orderliness-diversity. Based on the experimental results three algorithms are then presented: one for orderliness-diversity, and two for balance. A shape grammar and a computer program for generating facades are then developed based on the rules of the modular system and the rules developed by one of the experimental subjects within the system. In order to guarantee order and diversity, the three developed algorithms are proposed as evaluative rules of the designs generated by the shape grammar. This framework is proposed as a computer-based design assistant.
63
NOTES ON THE EDUCATIONAL USE OF SHAPE GRAMMARS GABRIELA CELANI UNICAMP – Universidade Estadual de Campinas Cidade Universitária “Zeferino Vaz” – Distrito de Barão Geraldo Faculdade de Engeharia Civil Departamento de Arquitetura e Construção Campinas – SP- Brazil – CEP 13083-970
Abstract. The objective of the present work is to propose some guidelines for the use of shape grammars in architectural design education. The paper is based on the author's experience in the use of shape grammars both in architectural design studios and in theoretical and abstract composition courses, always with novice students. During such experiences, certain difficulties in the application of grammars in design were perceived. A hypothesis of why such difficulties happened is suggested and a way to avoid them is proposed.
1. Experiences In a workshop taught at the MIT School of Architecture and Planning in collaboration with Miranda McGill and professors Terry Knight and William Mitchell (CELANI, 2001a), we proposed that students developed housing designs with "set" grammars. Besides certain operational difficulties, one of the major problems identified in evaluation questionnaires was the difficulty in solving conflicts between the required programme and the forms developed with the shape grammars applications used. Instead of stretching the forms to adapt to the programme, keeping their topological relationships, which is the most important issue in shape grammars, students simply tried to "fit" the programme in what they saw as a rigid structure. In subsequent courses in which the initial focus was given to theoretical issues on the regularities of formal compositions, illustrated by both natural and architectural examples, and where the relationship between form and function was deeply discussed, students have not reported the same type of difficulties (e.g. CELANI, 2001b, CELANI, 2003). 2. Shape grammars and architectural theory Historically, theoretical knowledge in architectural education has been presented in the form of history, formal analysis, criticism and architectural theory. Although the later should be strictly concerned with the way
64
architecture ought to be, it has lately incorporated other theoretical disciplines, as if avoiding to seem advocative (HEARN, 2003). Nevertheless, Hearn (2003) reminds us of the importance of both the knowledge of theory and practice for successful architectural design. According to him, theory "provides the conceptual awareness needed to devise a design", a "prerequisite to creative freedom". Theory does not need to be prescriptive, though; on the contrary, "its purpose is to establish the range of liberty, even when that freedom is subordinated to a regulatory system" (p.xii). In this sense, Schön's view of the design process is very similar to Hearn's. According to him, "...designers construct and impose a coherence of their own. Subsequently they discover consequences and implications of their constructions - some unintended - which they appreciate and evaluate." (SCHÖN, 1987, p.42). Since "regulatory systems" and "a coherence of [the designer's] own" (it is the designer who creates the design rules in shape grammars) are fundamental issues in shape grammars, it is possible to envision its valuable contribution to the field of architectural theory. 3. Shape grammars as a way to deal with complexities In Schön's seminal analysis of the interaction between a studio instructor and a novice designer, the former suggests that the later "should begin with a discipline", a strategy for dealing with the contradictory requirements of the project. However, he emphasizes that she can always "break it open later" (SCHÖN, 1987, p.49), which is also the correct way to act when designing with shape rules. Another contribution of Schön's to the use of shape grammars in design is presented when he states the difference between his view of the design process and Simon's. According to Schön, Simon saw "designing as instrumental problem-solving", "a process of optimization", a view that "ignores the most important functions of designing in situations of uncertainty, uniqueness and conflict" (p.41). The fact that there are no unique answers in design can be stressed by the use of shape rules and its almost infinite possible combinations. Schön also stresses the scientific character of design. According to him, the act of designing involves exploratory experimentalism. Some actions are "undertaken only to see what follows" (p.70). But the reminds us that this is not only what a child or an artist does, but also what "a scientist often does when she first encounters and probes a substance to see how it will respond" (p.70). Only after this initial level of experimentation comes what he calls "move-testing", and finally "hypothesis testing" experiments. In this sense, shape grammars can be presented as a strategy for systematically developing
65
design hypotheses. Like in a scientific experiment, certain parameters, such as design rules or vocabularies can remain stable while others are changed. 4. Conclusions Instructors should deliberately "prepare" novice students for the use of grammars in design, in order to make a "profitable" use of its pedagogical potential. The six points below summarize the proposed guidelines for the use of shape grammars in design education: 1. Making students sensible for perceiving regularities in the natural world and in the work of other architects. 2. Encouraging them to establish relationships between both (e.g. to relate the subdivisions in a fern leaf with those in a gothic cathedral window). 3. Discussing the relationship between form and function. 4. Making students see how they themselves inherently search for internal logic and regularity in their designs as a strategy for dealing with complexity. 5. Showing how shape rules can be used as a way to formalize design experiments and develop a personal heuristics, avoiding the traditional "generate-and-test" based on guesses. 6. Finally, making students see how even nature sometimes skips regularity to adapt to site conditions, and how grammar-generated designs can be used as a starting point for site-adapted designs. 5. References HEARN, M. F.: 2003, Ideas that shaped buildings, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. CELANI, G.: 2000-2001, MIT-MIYAGI Workshop 2001: an educational experiment with shape grammars and computer applications, International Journal of Design Computing 3. CELANI, M. G. C.: 2001, Between analysis and Representation in CAD: a new computational approach to design education, Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. CELANI, G.: 2003, CAD Criativo, Campus-Elsevier, Rio de Janeiro. SCHÖN, D.: 1987, Educating the reflective practitioner, Jossey-Bass, London.
66
A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR DESIGNING RESPONSIVE ARCHITECTURAL TRISTAN D’ESTRÉE STERK Emerging Technologies, Art Institute, Chicago, USA
Abstract. Responsive architectures are those that have the ability to change shape and configuration in response to fluctuating patterns of use and environmental conditions. They result from a mix of advances within the fields of ubiquitous computing, robotics, engineering and architecture.
1. Introduction When talking about architecture we often discuss the physical 'finesse' of a building, its form, or the details of its material construction and the 'program' of a space and the way it relates to a perceived use. These two discussions, of program and finesse, often meet and relate to each other through broader sets of ideas that are loosely described as ‘theories’. Theories help architects interpret and construct relationships between programs, built forms and their spatial or material finesse. Theories also provide architects with frameworks that encourage particular design solutions and ethical positions. New theories and ethical positions tend to emerge when the relationships between finesse and program are altered or changed. The field of responsive architecture has stimulated just such a change. Responsive architectures are those that have the ability to change shape and configuration in response to fluctuating patterns of use and environmental conditions. They result from a mix of advances within the fields of ubiquitous computing, robotics, engineering and architecture. This presentation explores the theoretical roots of responsive architecture while establishing a framework that describes the relationships between the physical systems used within responsive buildings, their finesse, construction, and program led behaviors.
67
NEXUS 2004 HERNAN DIAZ ALONSO AND FLORENCIA PITA Xefirotarch, Los Angeles, USA
Abstract. It is impossible to think design and mathematics as separate terms after the advent of digital design into architecture; calculus is embedded in the operations that gave rise to a new way of performing in design. With a base of rules and algorithms the digital field allows its calculating power to engender an extensive array of formal manipulations, at the same time the digital environment transforms the manipulation of the object by collapsing the vertical and horizontal, via simultaneously rendering plan, section, elevation and perspective, the three-dimensional devise enables analysis and object to become congruent. The tool does not represent, it engenders17, it is a technical apparatus that inserts a generative mechanism, it is a technique. This approach to design through technique have transcended the problem of representation and proved to be effective design tools.
17 ‘One does not represent, one engenders and traverses. This science is characterized less by the absence of equations than by the very different role they play: instead of being good forms absolutely that organize matter, they are ‘generated’ as ‘forces of thrust’ (poussees) by the material, in a qualitative calculus of the optimum.’ Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987), p.364
68
DIGITAL DESIGN FABRICATION Creative design and physical representation LARRY SASS Massachusetts Institute or Technology
Abstract. This paper is a presentation of a few artifacts built as part of creative design processes and three issues related to the adaptation of rapid prototyping to a creative design process. Conclusions discuss methods to improve the use of rapid prototyping and digital design through the use of Generative Fabrication functions.
1.
Introduction
As automotive, aeronautical and architectural designers consider digital fabrication as the design representation of choice, problems arise in application to the design process, illuminating issues related cognitive processes in generating design artifacts (Kroes 2002). The advantage of physical representation in design verses virtual worlds or paper, is an increased product quality for better reflection and evaluation. The term Digital Fabrication (DF) as defined by Koleravic (2004) spans the uses of numerically controlled devices, from rapid prototyping (RP) machines such as 3D printers or laser cutters, to computer numerically controlled (NC) cutting and milling machines. This paper considers digital design and the creation of physical artifacts ascribed to the classic architectural studio. In order to advance digital design and the use of these devices, the goal of this paper is to discuss issues that can lead to more creative methodologies of design teaching and practice. The theoretical question is how will the cognitive approach to learning spatial, formal and functional aspects of architectural design be adapted to digital fabrication (Oxman 1999)? Building computer models for fabrication with a rapid prototyping device is a unique process requiring methods of computer modeling and evaluation beyond those used for computer visualization or line drawing. Models here are discussed and evaluated as physical products verses virtual or paper based products.
69
MEDIAOR: A COGNITIVE MODEL PHYSICAL AND DIGITAL DESIGN
FOR
INTEGRATING
YU-PIN MA AND TAYSHENG JENG Department of Architecture, National Cheng Kung University
Abstract. Today, computers invade all aspects of our lives. “Little is understood about how to usefully interact in three dimensions in ways that really help perform tasks” and “There has been a surprising lack of real-world applications in the virtual world.” That is because the primary difficulties for application developers are not technological, but conceptual. We observe that using tangible metaphor is a good way to associate the computing with the mental activities. In our new Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), “the purpose of computing should reflect the mental activities, not just a tool.” And we also believe that space has some metaphors that can help us to create a new experience. There exist Spatial Analogy、Environmental Analogy and Cultural Cue in our physical space. It is so called “Nature Mapping”.
1. Introduction Our research seeks to explore utility of cognitive psychology as the primary means for better support of integrated design of digital and physical interactions. Several researchers have recommended integrating physical and virtual worlds to provide a better support of digital design in future mixedreality environments. However, a large set of the research and practical work in digital design has focused exclusively on the generation of digital form – specifically buildings- in a variety of design projects. Likewise, virtual reality community has often used digital design media to contruct imaginary worlds that separate people from the real world, but rarely integrates physical interaction in our everyday lives. Some research work might have been undertaken to blur the physical and virtual boundaries to a certain extent, but none of them, to our best knowledge, explore the underlying cognitive psychology that provides a new way of design practice in combining digital and physical interactions.
70
In our previous research work, we have presented some implantation of interactive media in our information architecture laboratory – an ubiquitous smart space [Jeng, 2004][Lee, Ma, and Jeng, 2003]. Examples of interactive media are iNavigator [Ma, Lee and Jeng, 2003]、iPhicon and iChair. iNavigator is a spatially-aware tangible interface for interactive 3D visualization. iPhicon is a presentation toolkit for interactive exhibition. iChair is a computer-augmented load-sensitive chair that is able to trigger a video projection on the foreground when people’s sit down on the chair. The interactive components are shown in Figure 1.
i-Navigator
i-Phicon
i-Chair
Figure 1、The interactive components implemented in Infomration Architecture Laboratory
In this paper, we report some inherent advantages of using cognitive psychology with mix reality approach. Our purpose is to design so-called “what you see is what you feel” spatial devices using metaphoric interfaces. We show that space has some metaphors that can help users to create new human experience. New media can extend it physical or virtual boundaries in ways that really help perform real-world applications. 1.1 PROBLEMS
But the problem is how user can perceive the same interactive concept like the designer’s original intention through the device that the designer made. What we see is not what we actually get because of the difference between user and designer. (see figure2)
71
actually get because of the difference between user and designer (see figure2).
User
－＞ Product －＞Content
Intention－＞ Interface －＞Information
Figure 2. Conventional model of interaction
Here we must bring a greater degree of involvement of cognitive psychology and human-perception experts into those developing Tangible Interface technologies and applications. To achieve this goal, we must describe how and where humans operate cognitively, perceptually, and experientially. It is a black box of interaction between user and the user interface. We consider that the interaction of the black box should be transparent. Computer should be like a mediator in our HCI systems (see figure3) The Mediator system is developed as a set of distributed components that fall into the following three classes: -
The User-Intention Mediator The Product-Interface Mediator The Content-Information Mediator
The user-intention mediator is about human perception cognition experience and commonsense. The product-interface mediator is about metaphoric interface (visual or tangible)、direct manipulation and TUIs. The content-information mediator is about sensing technology、digital presentation and representation. Our goal is to close the gap between the computing representations and the mental activities.
72
User －＞ Product －＞ Content
Mediator System
Intention－＞ Interface－＞ Information
Figure 3. Cognitive Model
2. Requirements for Interactive Design “Little is understood about how to usefully interact in three dimensions in ways that really help perform tasks” and “There has been a surprising lack of real-world applications in the virtual world...We are unfamiliar with this new medium, unable to utilize its power and to compensate for its limitations”.
That is because the primary difficulties for application developers are not technological, but conceptual. We define the scope of the interactive design of our projects. There are five requirements to be describe as follows: Embodied Interaction Direct Manipulation/Engagement Theories of Perception Media for Computation Media for Human Experience Table 1. Requirements for Interaction
73 Projects i- Navigator Requirements Embodied Interaction “Cutting Plane in Hand” Metaphor Direct The vertical tablet, served as “a Manipulation/Engagement cutting plane”, which is corresponding to the position of the building plan
Phicon “Physical Icon” Metaphor Users can take the physical icon and the reader can read the unique ID as the physical icon near the reader.
“Sitting” Metaphor Users sit in the chair, and the sensor will trigger the projector to project the information on the ground .
Pressure Sensitive Director + Xtra
Theories of Perception
Camera Detective
RFID Sensor
Media for Computation
Director + Xtra 3D Max Exploration
Director C++ Presentation Exhibition
Media for Human Experience
i-Chair
Exploration Exhibition
2.1 EMBODIED INTERACTION
Don’t think of your device as a computer. Interaction has moved beyond the explicit nature of textual input (from keyboards) to a greater variety of data types. This is not only a greater variety of input technologies but also a shift from explicit mean of human input to more implicit or embedded form of input. 2.2 DIRECT MANIPULATION/ENGAGEMENT
Director manipulate on affords the user control and predictability in the interfaces (Ben Shneiderman). It must be simple, straightforward, easy-touse, and easy-to-remember. The abilities to push, take or move the devices is fundamental to the interfaces we design. 2.3 THEORIES OF PERCEPTION
It is important to know the users need、intension and expectation about the systems. Toward “Natural Mapping” between user intension and system representation is necessary. Mapping is a technical term meaning the
74
relationship between two things, in our cases the controls and user’s behaviors and the results in the world. Natural mapping takes advantage of physical analogies that leads to intuitive perception and immediate understanding. Making things visible for action and receiving continuous feedback of actions are important. 2.4 MEDIA FOR COMPUTATION
This paper has proposed the new technique of integrating physical displays and digital information. They are physical objects augmented with digital capabilities for representing execution commands. The problems we encountered here are about the unstable qualities of recognition results generally caused by the environments and the accuracy of executing recognized commands. 2.5 MEDIA FOR HUMAN EXPERIENCE
Those devices provide new experiences of navigating information space. Beside, the new concept of representing and exploring space would totally change the traditional pattern of visiting in exhibition spaces, presenting digital information. We believe that the development of tangible interfaces will gradually create a whole new type of new experiences in the future. 3. Metaphoric Interfaces We have three dimensions in our interactiv framework: systems、metaphoric interfaces and cognition science (see figure4). Our previous research works have some implantations of TUIs. We believe that space has some metaphors that can help us to create a new experience. In this paper, the system and technology is not the point. Here we emphasize on the second part：the metaphoric interface and there will be some cognitive science involving.
75
Media (The content-information mediator)
Interactive Design Systems Metaphoric Interface (The product-interface mediator)
Cognition Psychology / Technology (The user-intention mediator)
Figure4. Interactive System Framework
3.2 DESIGN METAPHOR
We believe that space has some metaphors that can help us to create a new experience. But it also have some constraints： - Physical Constraint：Size、Shape…. - Natural Mapping：Spatial Analogy、Environmental Analogy and Cultural Cue “Mapping” means the relationship between two objects or events. Nature mapping is well design of those relationships. The system must know the users intention、needs, and exportation then reflect on the representation of the interface. 3.2 METAPHOR IN INTERACTIVE DESIGN
Most user interaction tends to be based on metaphors for manipulating machines computer or devices. Metaphoric interfaces are based on intuiting how things work. They rely on intuitive connections that the user makes between the visual cues in an interface and its function. We grasp the meaning of the metaphoric controls in an interface because we mentally connect them with other things we have already learned.
76
First we must define our metaphor here. How do we know what devices can do for us? If you look at something and understand how to use, you comprehend its affordances. You must be using some method for making the mental connection. This is called “Mental Representation”. We see things that are finger-sized, placed within reach and we automatically push them because of our tool-manipulating nature. This is what Norman said “Affordance”. It is a cognitive process, referring to what we think the object can do rather than what it actually can do ( Donald Norman，1989). 3.3 FROM VISUAL METAPHOR TO TANGIBLE METAPHOR
Metaphoric interface rely on intuitive connections that the user makes between the visual cues in an interface (eg, window icon) and its function (eg, cut section). There is no need to make one more effort on understanding the machines. When we mention graphical user interface in desktop usually means visual metaphors：imagery pictures、toolbar and battens used to represent the purpose or attributes of a thing or a massage. Our definition of the word intuitive is used to mean easy-to-use or easyto-understand. It is obviously important, but most all the intuitive graphical interfaces are actually visual idioms. Imagery pictures、toolbars and battens are things we learn idiomatically rather than intuitive metaphorically. The virtual metaphors have to be replaced. We start to use day-to-day tangible object as new metaphors. Take our works for example, our tangible devices are clearly shaped to fit our hands, users recognize that they can directly manipulate the devices. The act of understanding how to use a device based on the relationship of its shape to our bodies is a “Cognitive Representation” or “Mental Representation”. We acquire the information through manipulate the devices is called “enactive representation” in psychology. For example, we understand the function of a chair through to sit. We understanding how to use an icon-like acrylic planes is called “Iconic Representation”. 3.4 INTERACTING WITH TANGIBLE METAPHOR IN UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING i-Navigator
Computer as “Cutting Plane in Hand” Metaphor: Our “cutting plane in hand” metaphor couple with table surface for interaction has been related individual work to the group as a whole. Hence, we have built a tool, the interactive tablet, served as “a cutting plane”, which is corresponding to the position of the tablet with reference to the building
77
plan geometry on the table surface. When interacting with physical artifacts, we use natural skills that we acquire in our everyday lives. We do not think about how we manipulate physical artifacts because the skills are embedded so deeply into our minds and bodies.
Figure 5. Computer as “Cutting Plane in Hand” Metaphor
RFID Phicon
Computer as “Physical Icon” Metaphor: We let the graphical user icon off the box to the real physical space. This is called “Visual Metaphor”. Physical acrylic planes are used as interface metaphors from traditional GUI（graphical user interface）.Users see the icon like physical acrylic planes then recognize the imagery of the metaphor and can understand the purpose of the thing with Commonsense . The system is capable of leading the users to comprehend the characteristics of digital information via “Seeing”. Users can take the physical icon and the reader can read the unique ID as the physical icon near the reader. The video of the project is projected on the wall-sized screen that allows user to enjoy the project movie.
78
GUIs TUIs Figure 6. Computer as “Phusical Icon Metaphor”
i-Chair Computer as “Sitting” Metaphor:
When we mentioned a chair, we think of the word “sitting”. The chair is an everyday object and its function is to be sat. There is a natural mapping between a chair and sitting. We put the i-Chair in a space and provide a spatial analogy to users. Users see the chair like object then recognize the purpose of the thing with experiences. Users can comprehend the characteristics of digital information via “Sitting” in a chair.
Figure 7. Computer as “Sitting” Metaphor
79
4. Discussions and Future Works Our tangible metaphor concepts will be applied into some other projects. There will occur new probabilities between more than two places. Next step we must find the method to evaluate those systems we have completed. Besides, there are still some extended works that we must achieve: - System evaluation: We will develop an experimental study of our works. First we have to exam the gap between the computing representations and the mental activities and reduce the workload between them. Our research problem is：What’s the different between traditional tool and our tools.? What the different of computing between then? Our computer-mediator actually is a WYSIWYS (what you see is what you get) interface. - Interfaces: The use of metaphor in HCI still has four propitiates： - Augmented Information - As an Interface Agent - Coupling Action and Perception - Extra Human Capabilities Sometimes such approaches like metaphors, ignoring how we subjectively experience being-in-the-world, limit the expressive potential of the medium. There are, however, alternatives. The body edits and prunes experience before sending it to the brain for contemplation or action. If computer as Human Brain, our challenge will be the technology must be able to interpret what we think before we act. We have traditionally treated input as explicit communication such as keyboard、mouse. However, the advances of sensing and recognition technologies provide us more humanlike communications capabilities just like motion、pressure、location and proximity sensors. Next step we will start to involve into the technology – the content-information mediator part. A better use of technology in the way people interact with devices is to supplement physical activities such as speak、gestures、body language and direct manipulation GUIs，rather then to support them. We regard the role of technology as enhancing “people to physical world” interaction, rather then the traditional view of “people to machine”. Devices that have perceptional capabilities will start the shift from explicit HCI toward a more implicit interaction with machines.
80
In the future, we attempt to develop the implantation of computermediator model and explain how we evaluated the system. This will be includes a description of the behavior we used in our prototype, and the design of our experiences. Our aim is to open a new discussion on innovative design research for Human-machine interaction. References Bellotti, V., M. Back, W. K. Edwards, R. E. Grinter, A. Henderson ¥ and C. Lopes. ”Making Sense of Sensing Systems: Questions for Designers and Researchers”. CHI 2002, April 20-25, 2002. Cooper, A and R. Reimann, About Face 2.0:The Essentials of Interaction Design, 2003, Wiley. Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson, Metaphors We Live By, 2003, The University of Chicago Press. Lee, C.H., Y.P. Ma and T. Jeng “A Spatially-Aware Tangible Interface for Computer Aided Design”, Proceedings of ACM Computer Human Interaction (CHI2003) (extended abstract). Jeng, T., “Designing a Ubiquitous Smart Space of the Future: The Principle of Mapping”, Proceedings of Design Computing and Cognition (DCC’04), MIT, July 19-21, 2004. Norman, D. A. The Design of Everyday Things, 1988, Basic Book Inc./ New York. Ma, Y. P., C.H. Lee, and T. Jeng “ iNavigator: A Spatially-Aware Tangible Interface for Interactive 3D visualization”, Proceedings of CAADRIA2003, May, 2003, Thailand. Shneiderman, B. and Maes, P., “Direct Manipulation v.s. Interface Agents”, Exc erps from debates at IUI 97 and CHI 97. Simon, H. A., Models of Through, 1979, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
