caadfutures 2015 - shape grammars for architectural design: the need for reframing
TRANSCRIPT
1
Shape Grammars for Architectural Design: The Need for Reframing
Pieter Pauwels, Ghent UniversityTiemen Strobbe, Ghent University
Sara Eloy, ISCTE - Lisbon University InstituteRonald De Meyer, Ghent University
2
SHAPE GRAMMARS
3
SHAPE GRAMMARSARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
4
The designer as a reflective practitioner – D. Schön, 1983
the architectural design process
5
information / experience
The designer as a reflective practitioner – D. Schön, 1983
the architectural design process
6
information / experience
The designer as a reflective practitioner – D. Schön, 1983
the architectural design process
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
7
information / experience
The designer as a reflective practitioner – D. Schön, 1983
the architectural design process
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
What if we put the patterns of this grammar in a database in a computer and let that computer use it?
8
ice ray lattice grammar Palladian grammar
Terry Knight grammar
Koch snowflake grammar
shape grammars – geometry/syntax
9
shape grammars – meaning/semantics
Malagueira house grammar FLW grammar
conceptual differencesgeometry meaning
• geometric rewrite rules
• ambiguous• emergence
• ‘easy’ to implement• little to no help for an
architectural designer
• semantic (graph) rewrite rules
IF{‘left’} THEN {…}IF{‘right’} THEN {…}IF{‘street side’} THEN {…}IF{‘ courtyard’} THEN {…}
• unambiguous• emergence?
• ‘harder’ to implement• does it help the
architect?10
11
So, how to use implemented shape grammar interpreters for
architectural design support?
the question for this presentation
In a broad sense.There are many flavours here.
12
the method
- literature study- What systems have been implemented- Which uses were targeted by those systems
- analysis of our own implemented shape grammar interpreter + our experiences in implementing and using it
==> qualitative evaluation by comparison
13
OUR IMPLEMENTATION
14
a computer-implemented shape grammar:design paths in a design space
Finite set of shape rules R
15
shape rules Rroot design state I
design paths
visual representationgraph
representation
16
shape rules R
graph rewrite rules:
IF { GRAPH } THEN { NEW GRAPH }
17
18
THE NEED FOR REFRAMING
19
information / experience
the presence of shape grammars in the architectural design process
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
20
information / experience
the presence of shape grammars in the architectural design process
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
shape rules R
design state
following a design path
21
traversal through design space
The design space is defined by the shape rules and the initial design state
22
information / experience
at computer run-time
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
shape rules R
following a design path
FIXEDdesign state
23
changing design space
=> PROBLEM: THERE IS NO WAY TO GO BEYOND / CHANGE THE INITIALLY DEFINED DESIGN SPACE
24
information / experience
at architectural designer run-time
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
shape rules R
following a design path
design state
25
information / experience
at architectural designer run-time
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
shape rules R
following a design path
design state
REFRAMING THROUGH
INTERPRETATION
internalised design state
26
reframing in every single design move
27
CONCLUSION: TWO IMPLEMENTATION AND USAGE APPROACHES
28
information / experience
option 1: implemented shape grammars to be used as ANALYTICAL grammars
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
shape rules R
following a design path
FIXEDdesign state
29
traversal through design space
The design space is defined by the shape rules and the initial design state
30
information / experience
option 2: implemented shape grammars to be used as ORIGINAL grammars
build up of design grammar (known / trusted patterns)
shape rules R
following a design path
FIXEDdesign state
31
