ARC3016Y S
Instructor: Brady Peters
Meeting Section: L0112
Tuesday, 2:00pm - 6:00pm; Friday, 2:00pm - 6:00pm

Cedric Price’s famously asked “If technology is the answer, what is the question?” A question that suggests if we don’t have an appropriate question, then maybe we really don’t need technology. So what about robots? If robots are the answer, if they will fit into our future as architects and city-builders, what are the appropriate questions to ask? It is an oft-quoted explanation and/or excuse for the adoption of robotics is that they will do tasks that are “dull, dirty, and dangerous”. Robots can replace human workers in jobs that could be harmful to our health, thereby moving human jobs to safer, cleaner, and more interesting work. Robots have been classified as what Clayton Christensen calls a “disruptive technology” and have certainly impacted many different industries, in particular the repetitive tasks involved with the automotive assembly line, and we are seeing this across most industries. Worldwide, the cost of robots is going down and the number of robots is increasing, and with $26.9 billion in global shipments of robots in 2015, this is expected to increase to $67.9 billion by 2025. So what about the building industry? Where are the robots? It is certainly not for lack of dull, dirty, and dangerous jobs.

Architects are captivated by robots, Daas and Wit’s recent book is honestly titled “Even when they do nothing, robots are evocative”. I believe that this newfound interest by architects in robots lies more interesting narratives – narratives that relate to the changing nature of architectural practice. The definition of what it means to be an architect is linked to our design tools. It was the invention of drawing that enabled the creation of the architect – defined by the ability to conceive of, draw, and communicate the plans for a building at a remove (both spatially and temporally) from the construction site. And so, it is no small matter that the design tools of the architect have changed. When the computer was introduced into architectural practice it was (and really still is) largely used as a replacement for 2D drafting. However, as was so clearly outlined by Ivan Sutherland all those years ago, the computer offers considerable potentials that are different and greater than the drafting board – what he famously called “dirty marks on paper”.

I suggest that we are not yet any where near realizing the potentials of the computer for architectural design. We have only just scratched the surface. There is still too much inertia to clearly see the potentials of computation and design and how much this will entirely differ from the abilities of previous generations of architects. Parametric design has demonstrated its potential for design exploration. Authors and researchers proclaim its benefits to better explore design space, and my experience in practice has certainly demonstrated the potentials of parametric design in this manner. However, parametric design (and its related cousin computer programming) also enable the rapid generation of vast numbers of elements, and the creation of different data representations of buildings and products. Parametric designs bring disciplines together, it synthesizes collections of ideas, concepts, calculations, data, into a single entity. It links the conceptual, programmatic, and performative. The most powerful aspect of today’s software is its customizability. But how to build? Are these algorithmically generated structures unbuildable? While countless architects have demonstrated the potentials of 3d printers and laser cutters to make scale models, the next challenge is to build at 1:1. Enter digital fabrication, and perhaps the next wave of developments to impact architectural practice – robots.

Too often technology is used without enough consideration for its consequences. And while these advanced technologies can be used to design spectacular buildings for the 1%, this studio will instead focus on how technology can advance a more humane, sustainable future. It seems, given current evidence, that a quest to maximise profit together with unhindered technological development has led us to the Anthropocene. Edward Burtynsky, in his show currently on at the AGO, paints a portrait of the world-as-it-is, a world that humans have made. The creators write that “humans now affect the Earth and its processes more than all other natural forces combined.” It is well known that human actions are changing our climate, and the construction, operation, maintenance and demolition of buildings has a huge impact on the environment and our shared resources. In 2015 and 2016 I researched and wrote Computing the Environment. For the book, we (Terri and I) interviewed leading architecture and engineering practices about their use of computational simulation. The general, and unanimous, conclusion, was that architects are moving beyond parametric design. Building designers are adopting new techniques for predicting people movement, solar performance, daylight and glare, acoustic performance, air flow, thermal comfort, and energy use. Not only this, but it was clear that architects saw these new technologies as a path to a brighter tomorrow, as Herbert Simon suggests, a way to “make existing situations into better ones.” This studio will reflect on how technology can instead design, predict, and build a better future.

The studio will have three themes:

1. Algorithms as a creative force
Palle Dahlstedt says that “algorithms are the trebuchet of creativity”, and Kostas Terzidis similarly notes that “algorithms can be regarded as extensions to human thinking and therefore may allow one to leap into areas of unpredictable, unimaginable, and often inconceivable potential. In this studio we will re-establish the vision of the original innovators that CAD is not just a better way to draw “but a deeper way to think.”

2. Simulation as a predictive mechanism
Designers are “moving away from employing computational design as a means to produce conventional architectural representations towards something more”, searching for ways to expand the scope of what may be represented computationally: material properties, energy flows, and other informational aspects. Kjell Anderson writes that “simulations provide immediate feedback about the consequences of design decisions, continued use of simulation software validates and hones an individual's intuition.” He explains that simulation itself can be a highly creative act, as it helps designers develop intuitions on performance as “play leads to understanding.”

3. Digital (Robotic) Fabrication
In contemporary practice, computer-controlled fabrication machines narrow the gap between representation and building as instructions can be sent directly from the design environment to machine, and in this way robots and computational methods will inevitably disrupt traditional roles. As architecture is a design process that extends from ideation through to realization, the introduction of robotic fabrication requires new innovations and a re-thinking of design process. In the building industry, design tool innovation has been hindered by a tendency to digitalize already existing processes instead of harnessing the inherent potentials of computational technology. Research has demonstrated industrial robots will impact architectural design and the building industry through: authored constructive processes, constructive adaptability, digital engagement with material properties, and engagement with the physical reality of performance and construction. The research developed by this studio will investigate new design roles and technological processes that will shift the building industry from prescriptive standardized production to performance-based mass customization.

In this studio, students will undertake individual research projects under the guidance of Dr. Brady Peters. Together, we will learn new research methods specifically relating to parametric design, building performance simulation, and digital fabrication. It is recommended that students have good 3D modelling skills and experience with parametric modelling. New skills will be taught in building performance simulation and robotic digital fabrication. Students will learn how to ask appropriate questions in order to develop new knowledge, how to communicate findings, and contextualize their work within a larger body of discourse. An optional group research trip will give students the chance to visit world-leading architectural research and prototyping facilities. This studio has a particular focus on digital craft, and the actions of creation and analysis. Through a methodology that takes projects from design probes, through prototypes, and finally to 1:1 built demonstrators, students will develop their own program of research, and critically reflect on their own work. The students win this studio will develop and investigate questions of how digital technology and robotic digital fabrication will create better architecture, and a better future.