Parker, G.M.

2003, Wiley & Sons, San Francisco USA 2003

Quote: ?The numerous individuals with specific expertise in discrete areas of knowledge have led to an unprecedented fragmentation of the building design/construction industry?

• accurate modelling of a design using the least common denominator of individual components. (as seen in aircraft-, power-plant design) Component based modelling paradigm. Fragmentation of building related disciplines in discrete areas that explain different interpretations of the same design. Components: geometrically accurate modelled solids This method helps uncovering errors and physical impossibilities, A division in sub-groups allows to reflect inquiries including construction sequence, structural behaviour and others. CBM deals with a single model allowing for incomplete data while design is fluid, filters are installed to derive data for individual use. External reasoning: variables in databases connect to components which allows to analyse performative aspects. This information could directly be linked to product manufacturers. The architect is seen as choreographer ? transition to model-centric strategy. Problems: - ownership question is difficult to answer - resource required for 3D environment - fee structure not transparent (who did what) - parsing external tools - difficulty in communicating design components

Sabbagh, K. 1996. 21st Century Jet:, Pan Books/Macmillan Publishers Ltd 25 Eccleston Place, London SW1W 9NF, p.56

First approach to prototype, engineer and build an airplane based on data gained out of digital pre-processing. Until that day, airplane have been designed by remote, not integrally coordinated design teams that sometimes did have not been able to test the compatibility of their design before assembly of the first prototypes in physical mock-ups. Airplanes were built in the hope to find buyers once finished. The mentality has changed, asking for far more attention regarding information from engineers, marketing people and customers (airlines) around the world. A component based design approach was inevitable, each parametrically built in an 3D environment (CATIA) an virtually assembled (EPIC) to test all kinds of potential collision and installation scenarios. It allowed to iteratively version and modify all parts to derive optimised performance criteria. Trans-disciplinary design-teams were installed (partly physically dislocated) with specific tasks and challenges. Team-meetings took place twice a week to discuss problems during ?design freeze? periods. Complex meetings with major parties involved every second month. Enormous gain of knowledge and saving of time through digital pre-assembly process. Physical testing of prototypes under extreme conditions ? reassuring data from digital process was correct.

Quote: ?When it comes to the point of ?This drawing is due for release and we know there are errors in it?, what do you do? Do you release it and change it, or do you delay the release and make pick-ups now ? ? in the end correct engineering is much better than manufacturing heading off and then having to make a change.

Tombesi, P.

2002, Gehry?s use of ?Request for Proposals? packages, arq Architectural Research Quarterly, Vol 6 No.1 2002, p86

Request for proposal: New way of organising tenders for subcontractors, a 3D information package is distributed amongst competing subcontractors at a stage where no contract is signed yet, no detail drawings are made available to them, but accurate design intent ? flexible about engineering strategies.  more geometrical than architectural description. Responsibility for correct detailing is passed on to the subcontractor, 6-7 packages p.project (Gehry), for example primary structure, secondary structure and exterior enclosure.  interacting before completion of contract  forces subcontractor to become proactive  architect in control, but no detail work  framework for cumulative, reusable increase of know-how  complex geometry dissected into elementary components

Quote: ? Line that divides design and production is dissolving?

Production chain: form follows force, master geometry ?sacrosanct?, everything has to follow. Inventing new production methods, working closely with production specialists . 3D geometric data-model as centre-point. Interfaces instead of programs  not one mandatory software package defined, but interface format. i.e. protocol CAD handbook as binding data nomenclature, parts with defined references to ensure reliability  Boeing model, all connected through a server, where most recent files get automatically updated = ? design space?

Checks on site not through orthogonal reference points, but laser surveying device driven by 3D data. For constructors immaterial work is increasing  the 3D data record is highly important.

Burry, M. Maher, M. (SIAL)

A report on the development of a collaborative parametric model for the Selfridges pedestrian bridge

Quote ?designing the design?

testing fabrication constraints to match pre-given geometry, engineering analysis using a single design model to optimise the form iteratively. 4 main objectives:

1) Versioning of parametric variable tray by connecting ruled surfaces and cylindrical tubes under various conditions to find out the optimum shape for manufacturing. 2) Optimising shape and position of hoops for canopy in a manner that creates minimum wastage when cutting flanges of hoops which had to be parallel to the cladding-surface 3) Search for tools in CATIA that allow to directly optimise geometric form through declared design parameters, testing compatibility of similar approaches of CATIA structural analysis package and the engineer?s software. 2D-3D teste were run in particular looking for results of displacement mapping 4) Optimisation of the bridge through ?Product Engineering Optimiser? Tool allows optimisation to a target value. Variables in CATIA were related to tube sizes, guiding curve for the main tube defined by combined curve (vertical/horizontal)

Outcome is no optimised solution but product of optimised constraint solving. ?????