1. In Kilian’s Conceptual Fallacy he eludes to the idea that a design is portrayed more powerfully if abstract more so than that of a design that is realistic in its approach. With the same approach, how could we as designers use realistic ideals and techniques in order to give off the same effect as an abstract design would?
2. Organisms in nature tend to develop their own unique pattern in terms of its different textures and color schemes that they can illustrate to an observer as written in Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence by Weinstock. In yesterday’s pinup we presented section cuts of a completely boolean differenced massing and by nature of the process of the tool, the result was unique and has never been seen before. We were asked to comment as a class on each project and almost every response to the work on the wall were in comparison to an aspect of nature. Since organisms are simply bundles of relationships that survive by adjusting its behavior by the activity around them, What can we take away from nature and its relationships to its surrounding that could be integrated into a architect’s thought process when it comes to building and site? Is there a deeper connection to be perceived between humans and nature?
3. Parametricism relies on programs, algorithms, and computers to manipulate equations for design purposes and we as a society are constantly moving toward more complex technology that gradually attempting to make life less labor intensive for humans. If parametric architecture has the ability to transform a simple building into a living organism, could we say that at a certain point there would be no need for architects if the idea of parametric architecture continues to expand?
How does the use of abstraction help give power to our models and drawings we create as architects, for example how do architectural models and drawings read compared to photographs and doll houses?
Simplifying Organisms down to general masses that are covered in geometric patterns and textures, they have to adapt when inflicted by outside forces, and in doing so they transform to embrace nature, how can we study this process and implicate this behavior in architecture’s relationship with site and its surrounding?
Landscape and site is such an important part of design in architecture, but with the rise of interest in parametric design do you think the era of architecture’s adaptation to its surroundings will be abandoned?
1) Based off of the previous readings, where does parametricism stand when considering architecture to be either “lazy” or “too complex”?
2) The concept of repetition in architecture has been a constant theme in all the readings thus far. Based on these readings and Kilian’s discussion of “authorship”, what conclusion can we come to about architecture constantly being repeated over and over again?
3) Is technology ridding the need for architects or is it actually allowing architecture itself to evolve and become more efficient?
What I found interesting about the presentation is the description of what parametric design is. Parametric design was defined as a single form that is repeated in various times and methods to produce a new form. If we relate this to previous lectures in which architecture is defined as being the same designs in repetition, would parametric disprove this theory? In the same sense as parametricism, architecture could actually be a single element that is merely repeated to create something completely new. I find it very interesting how so far, a lot of these lectures either disprove or agree with theories presented in previously presented lectures.
Kilian suggests that to the architect, parametric design is a matter of “contextualizing the outcome and interpreting it in its use.”
Architects will frequently turn to technology as a method of designing form and function of a building. In this regard, do we find mounting
pressure on modern architects to focus on the more mechanical aspects of designing as technology evolves?
Schumacher marks the five agendas as a path to attaining a variant on parametric paradigm. Does a good design require these agendas be met
or can a design be pulled off with only some attendance of the paradigm?
Allen discusses the idea that field conditions are built from individual objects and that the product carefully demonstrates the will of
individual and community. Yet at the same time, it is difficult to separate an individual amidst a sea of others. How are we able to
discern the value of the individual compared to the entire design? Is the value similar?
In order to successfully identify the characteristic of parametric design, those who observe must fall in line with the idea that there is a semi perfect quality to it. There is a notion that parametric designs must fall under a circumstance in which buildings must fit within certain boundaries of structure. Simply by advancing the concept of field conditions as a primary organizational method, modern architects are able to free up some of the control they have during the process of design. The use of field conditions is the ability for it to aid the architect in their design combating local conditions, allowing the metro area to evolve around the site. As the field expands, the little pieces build upon each other, fueling the project. The greatest value belongs not to the design, but to how buildings in part combine with other parts to form a greater piece. With this in mind, the image of how individual commitment contributes to the overall fabric of the design becomes much clearer.
1) Schumacher categorizes the parametric style into five agendas: inter-articulation of subsystems, accentuation, figuration, responsiveness, and urbanism. How might these agendas extend their ambitions to more substantially integrate ecological information directly to the parametric design process in order to advance urban sustainability?
2) Kwinter defends the mechanical, material world as being integral to its electric, computational counterpart. “The computer, in the Nature-Mind-Computer triad, must play only the intermediary role of interface between mind and nature,” he declares, admonishing the belief that an “emerging, electronic world is poised to liberate us from a mechanical one.” Where do we frequently see examples of this belief, and what are its contemporaneous impacts?
3) How can designers more effectively mirror nature’s emergent-morphogenesis to improve general building performance (or reduce that building’s environmental impact?)
1. The following references in Weinstock’s paper refer to previous classes on the discussion of new creations. “Recombination is more popular than mutation because it produces considerable diversity in each generation.” Based on this statement, it can be considered that collecting and grafting ideas from past designs is more favored than completely changing new designs from old designs. . With the development of the building sector, there are more ideas to choose from and add to the next generation. Do you agree with this statement, please explain why?
2. Schumacher described parametricism as “elegant or orderly complexity and seamless flow”, especially in large-scale urbanization. However, does this size prevent architects from considering individuals in their designs? How do we, as architects, incorporate parametric design into small-scale projects or projects that focus on individual size?
3. In parameterization, Schumacher explained that parametric modeling has presented a new architectural style, but this style takes into account the background, he said: “However, we are facing a new style, and not only It’s just a new set of technologies.” A particular style is not suitable for all climates. Does parametric modeling provide us with the ability to create architectures for specific climates and contexts, or is it limited to deriving interesting geometry?
Architects can begin to release some of the controls they display on a city scale by introducing the concept of field conditions as a new organizational approach, architects can begin to release some of the controls they display on a city scale. Parameterization allows for greater uniformity on a large scale, which is clearly seen when comparing large-scale site plans with and without parametric design. Parametric and electronic work are similar, but with important key differences. The difference is that the focus is no longer on matter itself, but on the connection between matter. The role of technology in parametric design also raises questions about the role of architects and the various themes of technology’s impact on population and architecture. Parametric design can take two different paths, one to provide most of the design ideas and constraints, and the other to be controlled by the user and follow the instruction set.
1.) In the reading “Parametricism” by Schumacher, the evolution of parametric design techniques has contributed vastly to the new contemporary avant-garde style of urbanism but, does the necessity of structure implement a restriction in the potential of parametric design?
2.) In Kilian’s “The question of the underlying model and its impact on design”, the relationship of using scientific thinking and metaphors to make models is discussed. It is mentioned that the use of metaphors provides a more fluid and flexible model representation than the scientific. Is it possible through the use of metaphors that scientific thinking can be implemented to achieve the same standard of fluidity in metaphorical models?
3.) Speaking from Weinstock’s “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence”, the Relationships and theories provided by Mathematics, science, and technology form the geometry we see in morphogenesis. How is the geometry we observe from these theories translated into the architecture we see today? does it impose a limitation to the freedom of the designer?
1.) When establishing the rules and guidelines for parametric design, It is necessary to consider if the geometry will provide an internal structural system or if a new language must be implemented to the design to provide the structure .
2.) Once a metaphorical relationship is established, it is possible to represent this relationship through a scientific approach to provide the geometry we observe. It is based on how the use of scientific techniques displays the model to evaluate its level of flexibility and fluidity.
3.) The geometry that is observed from these conditions and relationships can be whatever the designer makes of their observation. How directly or loosely translated the geometry is will define the potential of the architectural scheme. I don’t believe it is a limitation but rather a design parameter to decide how the geometry should be translated.
1. Based off of the readings and Kilian’s synopsis of “authorship,” I have noticed a continuity in the general scheme of architecture. What would the resultant be if architecture and its continuity never change and remain constant?
2. From reading Schumacher’s piece of literature, he dug deep into the relationship about parametricism and the overall climate we tend to build on. Would the idea of parametricism help us with developing structures on any climate or is it restricted to creating new and improved geometries?
3. When developing new interpretations of architecture, today’s architects take heavily into account the landscape and climate. With new parametric designs taking shape, will the idea of keeping landscape and climate in our mind when creating new structures or will the overall concept be left behind?
1. In a world where technology has become our central focus point, how can we make sure that our awareness is not dulled by what we think can be modified by technology?
2. Matter in our world has come to be described by intelligence depending on its elements. What specific elements would be needed to determine the degree of intelligence in that matter?
3. There has been conflict in the idea of 3D models and their accuracy. What techniques could be implemented to successfully portray a more detailed idea or computer models?
The idea of Parametric Architecture deals with the idea of implementing new technological and modern techniques to that that already exists. There is a difference between using technology to develop faster and more efficient designs, and just completely forgetting what really matters because of that same exact technology. It creates a conflict in deciding whether it is even beneficial to experiment in parametric architecture. It makes you wonder if this idea for design could even be successful, in the sense that it would work while keeping in the mind the relationship it has with the people that experience it. I think it has to do a lot with finding a balance between these new technologies and how we as humans can implement them without being forgotten or replaced by them. We can let technology just simply dull our awareness and lessen the importance of going back the basics of design.
Modern architecture has attempted to impose its own order over the chaos of cities and buildings that have developed complexity over time. It prefers classical geometry to the “pack-donkey’s path” of meandering streets and the most efficient solution. Parametric architecture allows architects to easily create designs that deviate from this rigid approach.
Instead of designing the entire object at once, architects create conditions for how pieces of their design and environment relate to each other and to the environment and see what patterns emerge.
I thought it was interesting how the panelists described how biomimicry does not always translate to architecture, because the parameters whereby animals and cities develop are so different. When using parametric design, architects must be careful when deciding how to create units and rules; the assumptions that a model is based on greatly influences its output. Additionally, architects must be careful that their parametric models do not replace attention to the design and how it interacts with its environment.
Simply put, parametric design is defined by an algorithmic process that produces an output that is defined by rules and parameters along with their respective variables. Parametric design is a great application for nonlinear solutions, system optimization, and massive data calculations because it enables the computer to carry the heavy weight for the designer. Algorithmic transformations work beautifully when applied to modular networks that change according to forces or aesthetic reasoning. Parametrics are not only bound to computational design, but are found regularly within the natural world. Natural order and optimization can be found within bird flock murmurations, bone structure, plant growth, and much more. These natural parameters can be mimicked in architectural design as a strategy of biomimicry. Parametric design offers the potential for great speed in iterations and superior control of complex systems. Contrary, this process of design also presents the possibilities of removing authorship of the designer almost entirely if they were to loosen control and allow the algorithms to create something unexpected and new.
Parametricism is the idea of creating new and improved technology, as well as, new advancements in architectural techniques that we use today. As we develop this new technology and advancements we need to keep our focus on what matters most in our everyday life, and what matters most is keeping ourselves safe from the elements of the world that threaten us every day. This idea of keeping ourselves safe conflicts with the idea of parametric architecture. Parametric Architecture is a questionable stem of architecture that we might be using in the coming years. In my opinion, we need to find a balance of equilibrium between the landscape and the architectural design. We cannot let these advancements in technology blindfold us from seeing what matters most. Today’s architects cannot let their parametric models define how architecture should be when we are unsure how it can affect us in the coming future.
Recently, the availability of automated design and production techniques is actively changing the development of the details of a building can exude. With parametric and algorithmic design methods along with the use of digital fabrication, new abilities are required from architects for the designing of details, at the same time as new designers are beginning to take part in their development. Architectural details are of extreme importance for many aspects of a building in spite of it not getting the amount of credibility it deserves. They are able to define its theoretical expression and technical character, and impact its production process, its assembly method and even its ecological footprint. Contemporary architecture shows a new interest in detailing but not to be confused with that of artisanal work. This new interest is related to the recent re-involvement of the architect as the pilot in the physical making of buildings, as a result of the use of digital technologies. But with these new heights of technological advances that are constantly being surpassed on a daily basis. These technological advances are gradually giving the building a “mind of its own” or in other words, the building is now a living organism that can adapt to its surrounding and change its appearance or functions whenever it chooses. If this new movement toward giving buildings this kind of character and programming, I fear that the world would, one day, have no more need for architects anymore, or at least in the making of buildings.
During the first week of this class, we discussed if there is a way to create “new” architecture. This week’s readings are saying that is definitely possible. The only way that people are going to be able to create new architecture is if there is an advancement in technology that they can design for it. If you think about it, people could not design garages before there were cars. Advancements in technology will provide more programs for architects to design for. Parametricism is in my opinion a new type of architecture because it brings bad modern architecture but combines it with a new futuristic kind of look. Parametricism could be the architecture of the future if technology keeps increasing at an exponential rate it is. There is always the chance that many people might go in the other direction though and begin to completely ignore the growth of technology, but that seems highly unlikely with our countries reliability on technology.
1. The part is defined by the intention in the design; it is not something that must be bound or contained in physicality but rather within the use and function of the piece.
2. Models serve to prove there is always more to architecture to understand and explore, using models near the end of the project serves to remind us that there is no true end to a work of architecture.
3. There is no way to fully understand an environment. This being said, as architects we are required to put research and no little thought into that which we design. Architecture must adapt to the landscape it is built within, whether that means changing the landscape or becoming part of it. To design without understanding context is to fail as a designer.
The presenter’s perspective on Kwinter’s “Computational Fallacy” was enlightening and engaging. The mechanical is often viewed as primitive until intelligence is introduced to the system which results in an electronic. On discussing the mechanical vs. electronic in architecture and modern society as a whole, some speculate that the mechanical is less valuable or even stupid for its simplicity, but in reality, its own order needs intelligence to exist. The analogy about the mathematician used to reveal this misconception was astute and very supportive – once they create the algorithms for coding no one needs their work any longer once it’s been programmed, however without their efforts you can’t go back to rework things or apply the programming elsewhere. With this widespread public ignorance, there is a grave threat to the evolution of society and the best way to evade that is to resist and be cognizant.
A new strategy of constructing architecture is to not repeat the same oversights that modernism has previously made. Although modernism is a unique form of expression and technique and breaks through traditional elements, it also suffers from the lack of traditional art forms that help push an idea forward. Modernism’s negative is in neglecting the connection to people and place. The “function of a building in a setting, culture, and time” is key to it being initially constructed. During the presentation, they gave the example of Grotto Project by Aranda/Lasch as a poor execution of modernism. Not only does it disregard the setting and contextual space, but the cultural implications as well. In order for a modernist structure to succeed it needs to incorporate the history involved, both present elements and deteriorated.
Using parametric design to create buildings in urban areas seems like chaos being unloaded onto more chaos. While it may seem this way, as discussed, architects can determine what parameters in the code for parametric design will dictate the limitations of the result. When we think of parametricism we think of algorithms ran through a computer, when in reality parametricism is all around us in nature. It is important to implement some sort of natural order in parametric design instead of fighting against the natural order. I think this will help architects make parametricism in the city a more viable option that does not just create more chaos. Algorithms make context and culture easy to ignore, which normally an architect would pay attention to in the process of designing a building manually. Present day, we see many failed examples of parametric design that ignore the cultural and contextual impact on an area. This obtrusive architecture may be solved by following a route of design that follow natural parametricism instead of trying to create something totally new.
Parametricism may seem to be chaotic and irregular in architecture world, but it consists a special pattern and as we enter 21st century, parametricism is widely applied in different fields of work. Architecture starts to transit into the parametric realm too. Its unique quality is appreciated because of the infinite possibilities from simple sequences, but also, it could help architects to smartly design spaces and landscapes for more efficient uses. As human, we recognize patterns, and parametric architecture is the most natural to us.
Contemporary Design Approaches 
1. In Kilian’s Conceptual Fallacy he eludes to the idea that a design is portrayed more powerfully if abstract more so than that of a design that is realistic in its approach. With the same approach, how could we as designers use realistic ideals and techniques in order to give off the same effect as an abstract design would?
2. Organisms in nature tend to develop their own unique pattern in terms of its different textures and color schemes that they can illustrate to an observer as written in Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence by Weinstock. In yesterday’s pinup we presented section cuts of a completely boolean differenced massing and by nature of the process of the tool, the result was unique and has never been seen before. We were asked to comment as a class on each project and almost every response to the work on the wall were in comparison to an aspect of nature. Since organisms are simply bundles of relationships that survive by adjusting its behavior by the activity around them, What can we take away from nature and its relationships to its surrounding that could be integrated into a architect’s thought process when it comes to building and site? Is there a deeper connection to be perceived between humans and nature?
3. Parametricism relies on programs, algorithms, and computers to manipulate equations for design purposes and we as a society are constantly moving toward more complex technology that gradually attempting to make life less labor intensive for humans. If parametric architecture has the ability to transform a simple building into a living organism, could we say that at a certain point there would be no need for architects if the idea of parametric architecture continues to expand?
LikeLike
How does the use of abstraction help give power to our models and drawings we create as architects, for example how do architectural models and drawings read compared to photographs and doll houses?
Simplifying Organisms down to general masses that are covered in geometric patterns and textures, they have to adapt when inflicted by outside forces, and in doing so they transform to embrace nature, how can we study this process and implicate this behavior in architecture’s relationship with site and its surrounding?
Landscape and site is such an important part of design in architecture, but with the rise of interest in parametric design do you think the era of architecture’s adaptation to its surroundings will be abandoned?
LikeLike
1) Based off of the previous readings, where does parametricism stand when considering architecture to be either “lazy” or “too complex”?
2) The concept of repetition in architecture has been a constant theme in all the readings thus far. Based on these readings and Kilian’s discussion of “authorship”, what conclusion can we come to about architecture constantly being repeated over and over again?
3) Is technology ridding the need for architects or is it actually allowing architecture itself to evolve and become more efficient?
LikeLike
What I found interesting about the presentation is the description of what parametric design is. Parametric design was defined as a single form that is repeated in various times and methods to produce a new form. If we relate this to previous lectures in which architecture is defined as being the same designs in repetition, would parametric disprove this theory? In the same sense as parametricism, architecture could actually be a single element that is merely repeated to create something completely new. I find it very interesting how so far, a lot of these lectures either disprove or agree with theories presented in previously presented lectures.
LikeLike
Kilian suggests that to the architect, parametric design is a matter of “contextualizing the outcome and interpreting it in its use.”
Architects will frequently turn to technology as a method of designing form and function of a building. In this regard, do we find mounting
pressure on modern architects to focus on the more mechanical aspects of designing as technology evolves?
Schumacher marks the five agendas as a path to attaining a variant on parametric paradigm. Does a good design require these agendas be met
or can a design be pulled off with only some attendance of the paradigm?
Allen discusses the idea that field conditions are built from individual objects and that the product carefully demonstrates the will of
individual and community. Yet at the same time, it is difficult to separate an individual amidst a sea of others. How are we able to
discern the value of the individual compared to the entire design? Is the value similar?
LikeLike
In order to successfully identify the characteristic of parametric design, those who observe must fall in line with the idea that there is a semi perfect quality to it. There is a notion that parametric designs must fall under a circumstance in which buildings must fit within certain boundaries of structure. Simply by advancing the concept of field conditions as a primary organizational method, modern architects are able to free up some of the control they have during the process of design. The use of field conditions is the ability for it to aid the architect in their design combating local conditions, allowing the metro area to evolve around the site. As the field expands, the little pieces build upon each other, fueling the project. The greatest value belongs not to the design, but to how buildings in part combine with other parts to form a greater piece. With this in mind, the image of how individual commitment contributes to the overall fabric of the design becomes much clearer.
LikeLike
1) Schumacher categorizes the parametric style into five agendas: inter-articulation of subsystems, accentuation, figuration, responsiveness, and urbanism. How might these agendas extend their ambitions to more substantially integrate ecological information directly to the parametric design process in order to advance urban sustainability?
2) Kwinter defends the mechanical, material world as being integral to its electric, computational counterpart. “The computer, in the Nature-Mind-Computer triad, must play only the intermediary role of interface between mind and nature,” he declares, admonishing the belief that an “emerging, electronic world is poised to liberate us from a mechanical one.” Where do we frequently see examples of this belief, and what are its contemporaneous impacts?
3) How can designers more effectively mirror nature’s emergent-morphogenesis to improve general building performance (or reduce that building’s environmental impact?)
LikeLike
1. The following references in Weinstock’s paper refer to previous classes on the discussion of new creations. “Recombination is more popular than mutation because it produces considerable diversity in each generation.” Based on this statement, it can be considered that collecting and grafting ideas from past designs is more favored than completely changing new designs from old designs. . With the development of the building sector, there are more ideas to choose from and add to the next generation. Do you agree with this statement, please explain why?
2. Schumacher described parametricism as “elegant or orderly complexity and seamless flow”, especially in large-scale urbanization. However, does this size prevent architects from considering individuals in their designs? How do we, as architects, incorporate parametric design into small-scale projects or projects that focus on individual size?
3. In parameterization, Schumacher explained that parametric modeling has presented a new architectural style, but this style takes into account the background, he said: “However, we are facing a new style, and not only It’s just a new set of technologies.” A particular style is not suitable for all climates. Does parametric modeling provide us with the ability to create architectures for specific climates and contexts, or is it limited to deriving interesting geometry?
LikeLike
Architects can begin to release some of the controls they display on a city scale by introducing the concept of field conditions as a new organizational approach, architects can begin to release some of the controls they display on a city scale. Parameterization allows for greater uniformity on a large scale, which is clearly seen when comparing large-scale site plans with and without parametric design. Parametric and electronic work are similar, but with important key differences. The difference is that the focus is no longer on matter itself, but on the connection between matter. The role of technology in parametric design also raises questions about the role of architects and the various themes of technology’s impact on population and architecture. Parametric design can take two different paths, one to provide most of the design ideas and constraints, and the other to be controlled by the user and follow the instruction set.
LikeLike
1.) In the reading “Parametricism” by Schumacher, the evolution of parametric design techniques has contributed vastly to the new contemporary avant-garde style of urbanism but, does the necessity of structure implement a restriction in the potential of parametric design?
2.) In Kilian’s “The question of the underlying model and its impact on design”, the relationship of using scientific thinking and metaphors to make models is discussed. It is mentioned that the use of metaphors provides a more fluid and flexible model representation than the scientific. Is it possible through the use of metaphors that scientific thinking can be implemented to achieve the same standard of fluidity in metaphorical models?
3.) Speaking from Weinstock’s “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence”, the Relationships and theories provided by Mathematics, science, and technology form the geometry we see in morphogenesis. How is the geometry we observe from these theories translated into the architecture we see today? does it impose a limitation to the freedom of the designer?
LikeLike
1.) When establishing the rules and guidelines for parametric design, It is necessary to consider if the geometry will provide an internal structural system or if a new language must be implemented to the design to provide the structure .
2.) Once a metaphorical relationship is established, it is possible to represent this relationship through a scientific approach to provide the geometry we observe. It is based on how the use of scientific techniques displays the model to evaluate its level of flexibility and fluidity.
3.) The geometry that is observed from these conditions and relationships can be whatever the designer makes of their observation. How directly or loosely translated the geometry is will define the potential of the architectural scheme. I don’t believe it is a limitation but rather a design parameter to decide how the geometry should be translated.
LikeLike
1. Based off of the readings and Kilian’s synopsis of “authorship,” I have noticed a continuity in the general scheme of architecture. What would the resultant be if architecture and its continuity never change and remain constant?
2. From reading Schumacher’s piece of literature, he dug deep into the relationship about parametricism and the overall climate we tend to build on. Would the idea of parametricism help us with developing structures on any climate or is it restricted to creating new and improved geometries?
3. When developing new interpretations of architecture, today’s architects take heavily into account the landscape and climate. With new parametric designs taking shape, will the idea of keeping landscape and climate in our mind when creating new structures or will the overall concept be left behind?
LikeLike
1. In a world where technology has become our central focus point, how can we make sure that our awareness is not dulled by what we think can be modified by technology?
2. Matter in our world has come to be described by intelligence depending on its elements. What specific elements would be needed to determine the degree of intelligence in that matter?
3. There has been conflict in the idea of 3D models and their accuracy. What techniques could be implemented to successfully portray a more detailed idea or computer models?
LikeLike
The idea of Parametric Architecture deals with the idea of implementing new technological and modern techniques to that that already exists. There is a difference between using technology to develop faster and more efficient designs, and just completely forgetting what really matters because of that same exact technology. It creates a conflict in deciding whether it is even beneficial to experiment in parametric architecture. It makes you wonder if this idea for design could even be successful, in the sense that it would work while keeping in the mind the relationship it has with the people that experience it. I think it has to do a lot with finding a balance between these new technologies and how we as humans can implement them without being forgotten or replaced by them. We can let technology just simply dull our awareness and lessen the importance of going back the basics of design.
LikeLike
Modern architecture has attempted to impose its own order over the chaos of cities and buildings that have developed complexity over time. It prefers classical geometry to the “pack-donkey’s path” of meandering streets and the most efficient solution. Parametric architecture allows architects to easily create designs that deviate from this rigid approach.
Instead of designing the entire object at once, architects create conditions for how pieces of their design and environment relate to each other and to the environment and see what patterns emerge.
I thought it was interesting how the panelists described how biomimicry does not always translate to architecture, because the parameters whereby animals and cities develop are so different. When using parametric design, architects must be careful when deciding how to create units and rules; the assumptions that a model is based on greatly influences its output. Additionally, architects must be careful that their parametric models do not replace attention to the design and how it interacts with its environment.
LikeLike
Simply put, parametric design is defined by an algorithmic process that produces an output that is defined by rules and parameters along with their respective variables. Parametric design is a great application for nonlinear solutions, system optimization, and massive data calculations because it enables the computer to carry the heavy weight for the designer. Algorithmic transformations work beautifully when applied to modular networks that change according to forces or aesthetic reasoning. Parametrics are not only bound to computational design, but are found regularly within the natural world. Natural order and optimization can be found within bird flock murmurations, bone structure, plant growth, and much more. These natural parameters can be mimicked in architectural design as a strategy of biomimicry. Parametric design offers the potential for great speed in iterations and superior control of complex systems. Contrary, this process of design also presents the possibilities of removing authorship of the designer almost entirely if they were to loosen control and allow the algorithms to create something unexpected and new.
LikeLike
Parametricism is the idea of creating new and improved technology, as well as, new advancements in architectural techniques that we use today. As we develop this new technology and advancements we need to keep our focus on what matters most in our everyday life, and what matters most is keeping ourselves safe from the elements of the world that threaten us every day. This idea of keeping ourselves safe conflicts with the idea of parametric architecture. Parametric Architecture is a questionable stem of architecture that we might be using in the coming years. In my opinion, we need to find a balance of equilibrium between the landscape and the architectural design. We cannot let these advancements in technology blindfold us from seeing what matters most. Today’s architects cannot let their parametric models define how architecture should be when we are unsure how it can affect us in the coming future.
LikeLike
Recently, the availability of automated design and production techniques is actively changing the development of the details of a building can exude. With parametric and algorithmic design methods along with the use of digital fabrication, new abilities are required from architects for the designing of details, at the same time as new designers are beginning to take part in their development. Architectural details are of extreme importance for many aspects of a building in spite of it not getting the amount of credibility it deserves. They are able to define its theoretical expression and technical character, and impact its production process, its assembly method and even its ecological footprint. Contemporary architecture shows a new interest in detailing but not to be confused with that of artisanal work. This new interest is related to the recent re-involvement of the architect as the pilot in the physical making of buildings, as a result of the use of digital technologies. But with these new heights of technological advances that are constantly being surpassed on a daily basis. These technological advances are gradually giving the building a “mind of its own” or in other words, the building is now a living organism that can adapt to its surrounding and change its appearance or functions whenever it chooses. If this new movement toward giving buildings this kind of character and programming, I fear that the world would, one day, have no more need for architects anymore, or at least in the making of buildings.
LikeLike
During the first week of this class, we discussed if there is a way to create “new” architecture. This week’s readings are saying that is definitely possible. The only way that people are going to be able to create new architecture is if there is an advancement in technology that they can design for it. If you think about it, people could not design garages before there were cars. Advancements in technology will provide more programs for architects to design for. Parametricism is in my opinion a new type of architecture because it brings bad modern architecture but combines it with a new futuristic kind of look. Parametricism could be the architecture of the future if technology keeps increasing at an exponential rate it is. There is always the chance that many people might go in the other direction though and begin to completely ignore the growth of technology, but that seems highly unlikely with our countries reliability on technology.
LikeLike
1. The part is defined by the intention in the design; it is not something that must be bound or contained in physicality but rather within the use and function of the piece.
2. Models serve to prove there is always more to architecture to understand and explore, using models near the end of the project serves to remind us that there is no true end to a work of architecture.
3. There is no way to fully understand an environment. This being said, as architects we are required to put research and no little thought into that which we design. Architecture must adapt to the landscape it is built within, whether that means changing the landscape or becoming part of it. To design without understanding context is to fail as a designer.
LikeLike
The presenter’s perspective on Kwinter’s “Computational Fallacy” was enlightening and engaging. The mechanical is often viewed as primitive until intelligence is introduced to the system which results in an electronic. On discussing the mechanical vs. electronic in architecture and modern society as a whole, some speculate that the mechanical is less valuable or even stupid for its simplicity, but in reality, its own order needs intelligence to exist. The analogy about the mathematician used to reveal this misconception was astute and very supportive – once they create the algorithms for coding no one needs their work any longer once it’s been programmed, however without their efforts you can’t go back to rework things or apply the programming elsewhere. With this widespread public ignorance, there is a grave threat to the evolution of society and the best way to evade that is to resist and be cognizant.
LikeLike
A new strategy of constructing architecture is to not repeat the same oversights that modernism has previously made. Although modernism is a unique form of expression and technique and breaks through traditional elements, it also suffers from the lack of traditional art forms that help push an idea forward. Modernism’s negative is in neglecting the connection to people and place. The “function of a building in a setting, culture, and time” is key to it being initially constructed. During the presentation, they gave the example of Grotto Project by Aranda/Lasch as a poor execution of modernism. Not only does it disregard the setting and contextual space, but the cultural implications as well. In order for a modernist structure to succeed it needs to incorporate the history involved, both present elements and deteriorated.
LikeLike
Using parametric design to create buildings in urban areas seems like chaos being unloaded onto more chaos. While it may seem this way, as discussed, architects can determine what parameters in the code for parametric design will dictate the limitations of the result. When we think of parametricism we think of algorithms ran through a computer, when in reality parametricism is all around us in nature. It is important to implement some sort of natural order in parametric design instead of fighting against the natural order. I think this will help architects make parametricism in the city a more viable option that does not just create more chaos. Algorithms make context and culture easy to ignore, which normally an architect would pay attention to in the process of designing a building manually. Present day, we see many failed examples of parametric design that ignore the cultural and contextual impact on an area. This obtrusive architecture may be solved by following a route of design that follow natural parametricism instead of trying to create something totally new.
LikeLike
Parametricism may seem to be chaotic and irregular in architecture world, but it consists a special pattern and as we enter 21st century, parametricism is widely applied in different fields of work. Architecture starts to transit into the parametric realm too. Its unique quality is appreciated because of the infinite possibilities from simple sequences, but also, it could help architects to smartly design spaces and landscapes for more efficient uses. As human, we recognize patterns, and parametric architecture is the most natural to us.
LikeLike