Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116243
Junhao Li, Huzefa Jawadwala, Annika Pan, Jungho Jeon, Y. Lin, Meghdad Hasheminasab, Hongxi Yin, A. Habib, Hubo Cai, Ming Qu
Samara House, built in 1956 with its surrounding landscape, is one of the National Historic Landmarks for its unique Usonian architectural heritage. The house shows signs of aging and significant structural damage. This article presents a case study of the preservation of Samara House through a highly digitized reconstruction framework. The study presents an innovative digital reconstruction and restoration of the historic built heritage using advanced Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS) and Ground Penetration Radar (GPR) technologies to achieve accurate and fast documentation, modeling, and digital reconstruction. The research outputs build the basis of the restoration of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Samara house and the effects of structural degradation. The study creates a better understanding of structural degradation in historic architecture and changes how we approach landmark preservation and conservation. Finally, the project exposes architecture and engineering students at different levels to multidisciplinary learning through pragmatic and productive research to produce a new education model that prioritizes interdisciplinary collaboration with an attentive eye to the future of digital research in historic preservation and restoration design.
{"title":"Digital Reconstruction and Restoration of Architectural Heritage: Samara House","authors":"Junhao Li, Huzefa Jawadwala, Annika Pan, Jungho Jeon, Y. Lin, Meghdad Hasheminasab, Hongxi Yin, A. Habib, Hubo Cai, Ming Qu","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116243","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116243","url":null,"abstract":"Samara House, built in 1956 with its surrounding landscape, is one of the National Historic Landmarks for its unique Usonian architectural heritage. The house shows signs of aging and significant structural damage. This article presents a case study of the preservation of Samara House through a highly digitized reconstruction framework. The study presents an innovative digital reconstruction and restoration of the historic built heritage using advanced Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS) and Ground Penetration Radar (GPR) technologies to achieve accurate and fast documentation, modeling, and digital reconstruction. The research outputs build the basis of the restoration of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Samara house and the effects of structural degradation. The study creates a better understanding of structural degradation in historic architecture and changes how we approach landmark preservation and conservation. Finally, the project exposes architecture and engineering students at different levels to multidisciplinary learning through pragmatic and productive research to produce a new education model that prioritizes interdisciplinary collaboration with an attentive eye to the future of digital research in historic preservation and restoration design.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87911556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116244
Connie Svabo
to inquire into complex environmental issues. Author Mark Kanazawa asserts there has been a growing interest in environmental studies across colleges in the US, with many new programs focusing on environmental studies. This book is a resource well-suited for introductory educational purposes. It provides coherent and easily accessible accounts of research history and paradigms. It provides accessible examples of research questions and research projects from environmental studies. The author draws on his experience as an economist working in interdisciplinary research teams to highlight and provide examples of environmental research problems explored in disciplinary collaboration. The book consists of 19 chapters with content that roughly falls into three categories: quantitative research, methods for qualitative research, and themes that crosscut the qualitative/quantitative divide. The book includes basic methodological approaches of ethnography, spatial analysis, and GIS and approaches to data collection such as sampling, interviewing, and surveying. The book provides chapters on ethics and on writing a research proposal. The strength of the book is its accessibility, tone, and breadth. It provides a relevant historical framing of research methods and history of knowledge, describes a range of research methods, makes them accessible for student projects in environmental studies, and supports educators and students with suggestions for exercises and discussion points. The book has a friendly and easy-going tone and includes helpful boxes that frame essential learning points, including summaries of key points. For example, on page 3: “Bottom line: It took a series of scientists, doing painstaking research and building on previous scientific findings, to give us the knowledge of global warming that we have today.” The topics mentioned as potential research foci are “ongoing climate change, air, and water pollution, increasingly scarce freshwater resources, production of hazardous wastes, depleted natural resources, destruction of rain forests, habitat destruction, [and] growing lists of endangered species.”1 These are complex and dynamic phenomena of intraand intersystemic characters. They are wicked problems—problems with no easy solutions and problems typically characterized by disagreement among stakeholders about what has caused them, how they should be perceived and how we might handle them.2 The wicked nature of environmental problems forms the basis of a book critique. The presented methods aim at academic discussion and policy more than actual change-making for real-world impact. The book does not engage with designerly ways of producing knowledge through making, prototyping, or other cyclical, constructive, and generative processes. Nor with process-oriented design approaches such as participatory design. Students of technology, architecture, design, and engineering most likely will want to supplement the book with designand practice-orie
{"title":"Research Methods for Environmental Studies: A Social Science Approach","authors":"Connie Svabo","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116244","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116244","url":null,"abstract":"to inquire into complex environmental issues. Author Mark Kanazawa asserts there has been a growing interest in environmental studies across colleges in the US, with many new programs focusing on environmental studies. This book is a resource well-suited for introductory educational purposes. It provides coherent and easily accessible accounts of research history and paradigms. It provides accessible examples of research questions and research projects from environmental studies. The author draws on his experience as an economist working in interdisciplinary research teams to highlight and provide examples of environmental research problems explored in disciplinary collaboration. The book consists of 19 chapters with content that roughly falls into three categories: quantitative research, methods for qualitative research, and themes that crosscut the qualitative/quantitative divide. The book includes basic methodological approaches of ethnography, spatial analysis, and GIS and approaches to data collection such as sampling, interviewing, and surveying. The book provides chapters on ethics and on writing a research proposal. The strength of the book is its accessibility, tone, and breadth. It provides a relevant historical framing of research methods and history of knowledge, describes a range of research methods, makes them accessible for student projects in environmental studies, and supports educators and students with suggestions for exercises and discussion points. The book has a friendly and easy-going tone and includes helpful boxes that frame essential learning points, including summaries of key points. For example, on page 3: “Bottom line: It took a series of scientists, doing painstaking research and building on previous scientific findings, to give us the knowledge of global warming that we have today.” The topics mentioned as potential research foci are “ongoing climate change, air, and water pollution, increasingly scarce freshwater resources, production of hazardous wastes, depleted natural resources, destruction of rain forests, habitat destruction, [and] growing lists of endangered species.”1 These are complex and dynamic phenomena of intraand intersystemic characters. They are wicked problems—problems with no easy solutions and problems typically characterized by disagreement among stakeholders about what has caused them, how they should be perceived and how we might handle them.2 The wicked nature of environmental problems forms the basis of a book critique. The presented methods aim at academic discussion and policy more than actual change-making for real-world impact. The book does not engage with designerly ways of producing knowledge through making, prototyping, or other cyclical, constructive, and generative processes. Nor with process-oriented design approaches such as participatory design. Students of technology, architecture, design, and engineering most likely will want to supplement the book with designand practice-orie","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74578130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116242
Rob Whitehead
The experimental structural qualities of the Munich Olympic Stadium roof compelled formative innovations in modeling techniques responsive to those conditions. The novel use of large-scale physical models allowed the team to navigate the complicated nature of generative form-finding for lightweight structures by balancing the various parameters of forms and forces. Although physical modeling was initially beneficial, it became obsolete as refinement and confirmation became requisite. The cable-net structure exceeded conventional capacity for analysis, which drove the engineers to evolve their confirmative modeling methods. Instead of abandoning the parametric logic of these physical models, the design team embraced this approach and applied their complementary interdisciplinary expertise to create two groundbreaking computational modeling techniques that are still in use today. Their modeling techniques exceeded their mandate for simple confirmation and evolved into the first generative and optimizing parametric modeling options for lightweight structures. The findings will show how the evolving use of these models and the collaborative complications that ensued situate contemporary challenges of experimental design, technology, and practice.
{"title":"Evolution of Modeling for Lightweight Structures: Creating the Munich Olympic Stadium Roof (1967–72)","authors":"Rob Whitehead","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116242","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116242","url":null,"abstract":"The experimental structural qualities of the Munich Olympic Stadium roof compelled formative innovations in modeling techniques responsive to those conditions. The novel use of large-scale physical models allowed the team to navigate the complicated nature of generative form-finding for lightweight structures by balancing the various parameters of forms and forces. Although physical modeling was initially beneficial, it became obsolete as refinement and confirmation became requisite. The cable-net structure exceeded conventional capacity for analysis, which drove the engineers to evolve their confirmative modeling methods. Instead of abandoning the parametric logic of these physical models, the design team embraced this approach and applied their complementary interdisciplinary expertise to create two groundbreaking computational modeling techniques that are still in use today. Their modeling techniques exceeded their mandate for simple confirmation and evolved into the first generative and optimizing parametric modeling options for lightweight structures. The findings will show how the evolving use of these models and the collaborative complications that ensued situate contemporary challenges of experimental design, technology, and practice.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82639051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116241
Zaida Garcia-Requejo, K. Jones
The Convention Hall in Chicago was the largest structure ever proposed by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and demonstrated what he meant by structure as an architectural factor. This paper traces a path between the unbuilt Convention Hall proposal developed by Mies and the McCormick Place Convention Center constructed in Chicago, designed by his graduate student, Gene Summers, at C.F. Murphy. Making connections to students’ work—two master’s theses and one built work—illustrates how fundamental structure and structural engineering were in the architectural pedagogy at Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) and how tightly research, pedagogy, and practice were integrated. It compares these projects graphically and quantitatively and fills in critical gaps on the influences leading up to the building of McCormick Place.
{"title":"Mies’s Teaching Laboratory: From Convention Hall to McCormick Place","authors":"Zaida Garcia-Requejo, K. Jones","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116241","url":null,"abstract":"The Convention Hall in Chicago was the largest structure ever proposed by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and demonstrated what he meant by structure as an architectural factor. This paper traces a path between the unbuilt Convention Hall proposal developed by Mies and the McCormick Place Convention Center constructed in Chicago, designed by his graduate student, Gene Summers, at C.F. Murphy. Making connections to students’ work—two master’s theses and one built work—illustrates how fundamental structure and structural engineering were in the architectural pedagogy at Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) and how tightly research, pedagogy, and practice were integrated. It compares these projects graphically and quantitatively and fills in critical gaps on the influences leading up to the building of McCormick Place.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89055660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116233
C. Ford
Just as developing an ability to design is not exclusive to designers, neither is the ability to engineer within the exclusive purview of engineers. AEC is a common acronym for signaling the three professional disciplines historically responsible for shaping the built environment. Such nomenclature may imply a systemic culture of siloed decision-making, however, decisions shaping the built environment do not originate and reside wholly within discipline-specific boundaries. Today, whether focused on a discrete intervention or a grand challenge, an effective agency within the built environment requires the cross-disciplining of skillsets for use across the phases of project conception, development, and execution.
{"title":"ENGINEERING: Call for Papers","authors":"C. Ford","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116233","url":null,"abstract":"Just as developing an ability to design is not exclusive to designers, neither is the ability to engineer within the exclusive purview of engineers. AEC is a common acronym for signaling the three professional disciplines historically responsible for shaping the built environment. Such nomenclature may imply a systemic culture of siloed decision-making, however, decisions shaping the built environment do not originate and reside wholly within discipline-specific boundaries. Today, whether focused on a discrete intervention or a grand challenge, an effective agency within the built environment requires the cross-disciplining of skillsets for use across the phases of project conception, development, and execution.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90570293","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper presents a design-to-fabrication workflow to customize multimaterial CNC knitted textiles to form nonstandardized and nondeveloped curved surfaces for façade cladding skins. These are bespoke membrane panels knitted with heterogenous elasticity and shaped out-of-plane by bendable rods to form pre-tensioned 3D freeform surfaces without needing conventional cut-and-join processes. This research culminates in the Knit Patterned Flow pavilion. The workflow is implemented across 35 uniquely shaped scalloped panels assembled as a modular paneling system to create a visually continuous spatial envelope.
{"title":"Multimaterial Knit Skins: A Design-to-Fabrication Workflow for Mass Customized Freeform Membrane Panels","authors":"Yingmei Tan, Pei Zhi Chia, Yu Han Quek, Kenneth Tracy, Christine Yogiaman","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116239","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116239","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents a design-to-fabrication workflow to customize multimaterial CNC knitted textiles to form nonstandardized and nondeveloped curved surfaces for façade cladding skins. These are bespoke membrane panels knitted with heterogenous elasticity and shaped out-of-plane by bendable rods to form pre-tensioned 3D freeform surfaces without needing conventional cut-and-join processes. This research culminates in the Knit Patterned Flow pavilion. The workflow is implemented across 35 uniquely shaped scalloped panels assembled as a modular paneling system to create a visually continuous spatial envelope.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82580252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116230
J. Coleman, Nathan Barnes, Tim Wilson
Improvements in design and engineering software expand architectural possibilities, leading to increased complexity. Meanwhile, tools for physically constructing and delivering projects change slowly, outpaced by those developed by and for the design community. The result is an untenable pairing of innovative designs and conventional project delivery. We need new tools to execute ambitious and novel strategies to support project delivery successfully. Construction-centric tools offer an opportunity for increased participation in computational problem-solving and expand the diversity of expertise underlying AEC software. During the physical construction of any project, fabricated parts arrive on-site, where coordination problems surface, testing project assumptions where issues of fitment and trade (mis)coordination become apparent. At the construction site, costs are highest, while the work carries the most risk. This quantifiably riskiest time for any project is also when tradespeople have the least access to computational tools (Figure 1). Field personnel are under extreme pressure to make daily progress because of fieldwork’s high cost/risk. Collecting measurement data and making informed decisions quickly is transformative. In response, Zahner R&D, supported by Local 2 Field Superintendent expertise, built a software tool called SurveyLink, linking real-time survey data on-site to a collaborative 3D model, extending computational problem-solving to the field. Automation in the Field: SurveyLink
设计和工程软件的改进扩展了架构的可能性，从而增加了复杂性。与此同时，用于实际构建和交付项目的工具变化缓慢，被设计社区开发和为设计社区开发的工具超越。其结果是，创新设计和传统项目交付的结合是站不住脚的。我们需要新的工具来执行雄心勃勃的和新颖的战略，以支持项目的成功交付。以构建为中心的工具提供了更多参与计算问题解决的机会，并扩展了AEC软件底层专业知识的多样性。在任何项目的实际建设过程中，制造的部件到达现场，在那里协调问题浮出水面，测试项目假设，其中安装和贸易(错误)协调问题变得明显。在建筑工地，成本是最高的，同时工作的风险也是最大的。对于任何项目来说，这段可量化的风险最高的时间也是交易员使用计算工具最少的时间(图1)。由于现场工作的高成本/高风险，现场人员每天都面临着巨大的压力。收集测量数据并快速做出明智的决策是一种变革。为此，Zahner研发公司在Local 2 Field Superintendent专业知识的支持下，开发了一款名为SurveyLink的软件工具，将现场实时调查数据与协作3D模型连接起来，将计算问题解决扩展到现场。现场自动化:SurveyLink
{"title":"Automation in the Field: SurveyLink","authors":"J. Coleman, Nathan Barnes, Tim Wilson","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116230","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116230","url":null,"abstract":"Improvements in design and engineering software expand architectural possibilities, leading to increased complexity. Meanwhile, tools for physically constructing and delivering projects change slowly, outpaced by those developed by and for the design community. The result is an untenable pairing of innovative designs and conventional project delivery. We need new tools to execute ambitious and novel strategies to support project delivery successfully. Construction-centric tools offer an opportunity for increased participation in computational problem-solving and expand the diversity of expertise underlying AEC software. During the physical construction of any project, fabricated parts arrive on-site, where coordination problems surface, testing project assumptions where issues of fitment and trade (mis)coordination become apparent. At the construction site, costs are highest, while the work carries the most risk. This quantifiably riskiest time for any project is also when tradespeople have the least access to computational tools (Figure 1). Field personnel are under extreme pressure to make daily progress because of fieldwork’s high cost/risk. Collecting measurement data and making informed decisions quickly is transformative. In response, Zahner R&D, supported by Local 2 Field Superintendent expertise, built a software tool called SurveyLink, linking real-time survey data on-site to a collaborative 3D model, extending computational problem-solving to the field. Automation in the Field: SurveyLink","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84815541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2114231
A. Schultz, Julian Wang
TA D 6 : 2 Nowadays, the design process for a building is increasingly difficult to define as it may involve innovative material integration, advanced design computation, and analytical decision-making, combined with various engineering and technical applications. Reflecting on this, the necessary and productive links between architectural design and engineering are undisputable. The peer-review papers in this issue demonstrate shifts in research perspectives not only closely linking engineering and design tools but also focusing on a critical analysis of the design and engineering process, including formats and voices frequently not considered in the past. The papers in Engineering confirm a rising recognition of collaborative authorship of many team members and continuing horizontal integration of disciplines observing the design phase, the outcome, and the lifecycle of structures. Three papers of the five in this issue address history and theoryrelated themes, adding further nuance to existing bodies of knowledge. In the twentieth century, numerous architects and engineers expressed the need to bridge design and engineering, advocating for integrated design methods and fabrication workflows. The Italian engineer Pier Luigi Nervi advocated for “architectural resilience,” an evolving relationship between architectural materiality, techniques, and forms. As laid out by Kristin Jones and Zaida Garcia-Requejo in their paper “Mies’ Teaching Laboratory: from Convention Hall to McCormick Place,” Mies van der Rohe predicted a type of “structural architecture,” fostering teamwork between structural engineers and architects in his classroom at IIT and practice. The authors expand the existing body of scholarly research around Mies van der Rohe by investigating the collaborative nature of the classroom, identifying influential teaching principles, thesis projects, and buildings acting as touchstones in the development of McCormick Place (Lakeside) Convention Center in Chicago. Students thesis projects, oral histories, and less frequently heard voices are part of the investigation, documenting a complex network of links between Mies' unbuilt proposal for a Convention Hall for Chicago and McCormick Place (Lakeside) Convention Center. In “The Evolution of Modeling for Lightweight Structures: Creating the Munich Olympic Roof (1967—72),” Robert Whitehead contextualizes the evolving modeling methods used during the conception of the Munich Olympic stadium roof by discussing the complexities of structural behavior found in lightweight cable nets. The paper also accounts for the innovative contributions of many more team members than are commonly acknowledged and illustrates the unique interdisciplinary roles of the architects and engineers involved in a dynamic, collaborative process. In the reconstruction and restoration research paper about the SAMARA House designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, Li et al. detail how a digital-centered multistage framework supports th
如今，建筑的设计过程越来越难以定义，因为它可能涉及创新的材料集成，先进的设计计算和分析决策，结合各种工程和技术应用。反思这一点，建筑设计和工程之间的必要和生产性联系是无可争议的。本期的同行评议论文展示了研究视角的转变，不仅将工程和设计工具紧密联系在一起，而且注重对设计和工程过程的批判性分析，包括过去经常不考虑的格式和声音。《工程》杂志上的论文证实了对许多团队成员的合作署名的不断提高的认识，以及对设计阶段、结果和结构生命周期的学科的持续水平集成。本期五篇论文中有三篇涉及历史和理论相关主题，为现有的知识体系增添了进一步的细微差别。在20世纪，许多建筑师和工程师表达了将设计和工程联系起来的需要，提倡综合设计方法和制造工作流程。意大利工程师Pier Luigi Nervi提倡“建筑弹性”，即建筑材料、技术和形式之间不断发展的关系。正如Kristin Jones和Zaida Garcia-Requejo在他们的论文《密斯的教学实验室:从会议大厅到麦考密克广场》中所阐述的那样，密斯·凡·德罗预测了一种“结构建筑”，在他在IIT的课堂和实践中培养结构工程师和建筑师之间的团队合作。作者通过调查课堂的合作性质、确定有影响力的教学原则、论文项目和作为芝加哥麦考密克广场(湖滨)会议中心发展试金石的建筑，扩展了围绕密斯·凡·德罗的现有学术研究。学生的论文项目、口述历史和较少听到的声音是调查的一部分，记录了密斯未建成的芝加哥会议大厅和麦考密克广场(湖边)会议中心之间复杂的联系网络。在“轻量化结构建模的演变:创建慕尼黑奥林匹克屋顶(1967-72)”中，Robert Whitehead通过讨论轻质索网结构行为的复杂性，将慕尼黑奥林匹克体育场屋顶概念中使用的不断发展的建模方法纳入背景。这篇论文还说明了团队成员的创新贡献，比通常公认的要多，并说明了架构师和工程师在动态协作过程中所扮演的独特的跨学科角色。在关于Frank Lloyd Wright设计的SAMARA住宅的重建和修复研究论文中，Li等人详细介绍了以数字为中心的多级框架如何支持跨学科团队(建筑、工程、施工管理、建筑工程)的任务，通过详细而全面的调查、文档和分析来规划遗产建筑的修复。数字工具和方法被纳入这项工作，以挖掘和理解结构变形和退化。同时，修复方案仍有效、高效地保留了原有设计的完整性。在本期的另外两篇论文中也体现了设计与工程的整合过程。在Ying Yi Tan, Pei Zhi Chia, Yu Han Quek, Kenneth Tracy和Christina Yogiaman的研究论文中，针对多材料针织图案纺织品开发了一种新的从设计到制造的工作流程，并将其用于案例研究的原型。工作流程的开发过程考虑了纺织材料的特性以及针织图案和力学的工程原理。立面面板的制作和几何设计也被考虑在内。费迪南·奥斯瓦尔德、约翰·查普曼和王群在他们的论文《多层建筑系统集成木材中心核心(ITCC)核心角节点测试导论》中设计并研究了高层木结构建筑中使用工程木材材料的ITCC的新结构形式。这项研究工作植根于木结构工程，而从根本上讲，是为了创造开放明亮的工作空间和灵活高效的交通路线。这期的同行评议论文反映了关于过程和重要性、合作和跨学科性的急需的论述。变化的视角:建筑研究中的设计与工程的桥梁
{"title":"Changing Perspectives: Bridging Design and Engineering in Architectural Research","authors":"A. Schultz, Julian Wang","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2114231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2114231","url":null,"abstract":"TA D 6 : 2 Nowadays, the design process for a building is increasingly difficult to define as it may involve innovative material integration, advanced design computation, and analytical decision-making, combined with various engineering and technical applications. Reflecting on this, the necessary and productive links between architectural design and engineering are undisputable. The peer-review papers in this issue demonstrate shifts in research perspectives not only closely linking engineering and design tools but also focusing on a critical analysis of the design and engineering process, including formats and voices frequently not considered in the past. The papers in Engineering confirm a rising recognition of collaborative authorship of many team members and continuing horizontal integration of disciplines observing the design phase, the outcome, and the lifecycle of structures. Three papers of the five in this issue address history and theoryrelated themes, adding further nuance to existing bodies of knowledge. In the twentieth century, numerous architects and engineers expressed the need to bridge design and engineering, advocating for integrated design methods and fabrication workflows. The Italian engineer Pier Luigi Nervi advocated for “architectural resilience,” an evolving relationship between architectural materiality, techniques, and forms. As laid out by Kristin Jones and Zaida Garcia-Requejo in their paper “Mies’ Teaching Laboratory: from Convention Hall to McCormick Place,” Mies van der Rohe predicted a type of “structural architecture,” fostering teamwork between structural engineers and architects in his classroom at IIT and practice. The authors expand the existing body of scholarly research around Mies van der Rohe by investigating the collaborative nature of the classroom, identifying influential teaching principles, thesis projects, and buildings acting as touchstones in the development of McCormick Place (Lakeside) Convention Center in Chicago. Students thesis projects, oral histories, and less frequently heard voices are part of the investigation, documenting a complex network of links between Mies' unbuilt proposal for a Convention Hall for Chicago and McCormick Place (Lakeside) Convention Center. In “The Evolution of Modeling for Lightweight Structures: Creating the Munich Olympic Roof (1967—72),” Robert Whitehead contextualizes the evolving modeling methods used during the conception of the Munich Olympic stadium roof by discussing the complexities of structural behavior found in lightweight cable nets. The paper also accounts for the innovative contributions of many more team members than are commonly acknowledged and illustrates the unique interdisciplinary roles of the architects and engineers involved in a dynamic, collaborative process. In the reconstruction and restoration research paper about the SAMARA House designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, Li et al. detail how a digital-centered multistage framework supports th","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84928136","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116240
F. Oswald, J. Chapman, Qun Wang
This research objective is to investigate the viability of timber high-rise buildings with an integrated central core by testing the core corner joints to provide a new opportunity for high-rise timber buildings. The Integrated Timber Central Core (ITCC) is composed of core columns and core beams made up of Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) panels fabricated using Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL). Current timber high-rise CLT buildings use ‘stacked’ panels, require multiple close-spaced internal walls, and are cost-effective to around ten levels. The ITCC system requires considerably less timber and can be built to at least 20 stories. Successful laboratory tests for the ‘castellated’ core corner joints for a 20-level building are presented in this paper.
{"title":"Introduction to the Multilevel Building System Integrated Timber Central Core","authors":"F. Oswald, J. Chapman, Qun Wang","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116240","url":null,"abstract":"This research objective is to investigate the viability of timber high-rise buildings with an integrated central core by testing the core corner joints to provide a new opportunity for high-rise timber buildings. The Integrated Timber Central Core (ITCC) is composed of core columns and core beams made up of Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) panels fabricated using Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL). Current timber high-rise CLT buildings use ‘stacked’ panels, require multiple close-spaced internal walls, and are cost-effective to around ten levels. The ITCC system requires considerably less timber and can be built to at least 20 stories. Successful laboratory tests for the ‘castellated’ core corner joints for a 20-level building are presented in this paper.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80681038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2022.2116228
Nick Förster, Ivan Bratoev
Leonhard Obermeyer Center Technical University of Munich Munich, Germany Established: 2014 Leadership: André Borrmann (Chair of Computational Modeling and Simulation) Frank Petzold (Chair of Architectural Informatics) Thomas H. Kolbe (Chair of Geoinformatics) Konrad Nübel (Chair of Construction Process Management) Uwe Stilla (Chair of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing) Current Center Structure: Participating Chairs: 5 Research Staff: 70-80 Postdoctoral Researchers: approximately 10
德国慕尼黑技术大学Leonhard Obermeyer中心成立:2014年领导:andr Borrmann(计算建模与仿真主席)Frank Petzold(建筑信息学主席)Thomas H. Kolbe(地理信息学主席)Konrad n bel(建筑过程管理主席)Uwe Stilla(摄影测量与遥感主席)目前中心结构:参与主席:5研究人员:70-80博士后研究人员:约10人
{"title":"Critical Modeling","authors":"Nick Förster, Ivan Bratoev","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2022.2116228","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2022.2116228","url":null,"abstract":"Leonhard Obermeyer Center Technical University of Munich Munich, Germany Established: 2014 Leadership: André Borrmann (Chair of Computational Modeling and Simulation) Frank Petzold (Chair of Architectural Informatics) Thomas H. Kolbe (Chair of Geoinformatics) Konrad Nübel (Chair of Construction Process Management) Uwe Stilla (Chair of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing) Current Center Structure: Participating Chairs: 5 Research Staff: 70-80 Postdoctoral Researchers: approximately 10","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79165171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：