This article was downloaded by: [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] On: 11 September 2013, At: 21:26 Publisher: Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Batiment International, Building Research and Practice

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbri19

Computer-Aided Architectural Design

Oleg Rybnikar Published online: 06 May 2008.

To cite this article: Oleg Rybnikar (1985) Computer-Aided Architectural Design, Batiment International, Building Research and Practice, 13:1, 31-36 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613218508551239

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

CI/SfB (A3) (Agn)

UDC 721.01

COMPUTER-AIDED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

Some conceptual problems
Downloaded by [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] at 21:26 11 September 2013

However, the input equipment of computers is unable to handle graphic data as such, but it can transform it into sequential formulations. In comparison with the speed of the subsequent data processing, this transformation is very difficult and slow. This is because to obtain a definition of a perspective of a certain three-dimensional object, we must digitalise each vertex, ie a cube has 8 vertexes, a dog kennel {ie a cube with a roof) has 10 vertexes. If we want to state the thickness of the roof material it will be 16 vertexes; if the roof is set forward, the number of vertexes increases to 22, and so on. The manual input of vast sets of data (so-called data collection), and the necessity of its repetition for each automated activity, is one of the most difficult barriers to the wider use of computer technology in architectural design.

AVOIDING MANUAL INPUT

One of the ways to expand automated design is the reduction or elimination of this barrier, in other words a decrease in the volume of these data sheets, or avoiding the manual input of data altogether. This is the very idea of the complex design program. A substantial property of such a program should be the ability to absorb all intermediate data and the results of partial design activities; to correlate them in such a way that they form a structure, or rather a set of data with a certain inner structure, the individual parts of which can function as input data sets for further partial design activities. These partial design activities can be automated or remain in their traditional form according to the nature of the activity. However, it is important that their definition is a part of the intermediate data of the design program, and that all the results of the preceding stages are included in it. It is equally important that the result is returned as a specifying or complementary result back to the complex design program, so that further design activities within the whole automated design process can remain consistent. There are programming systems in Czechoslovakia which were

Oleg Rybnikar

Mk problem with the use of computers for graphic output Mjk in architectural design is the data collection needed ^ ^ * for the input, the author suggests. Here, he discusses trays of treating the problem; he then describes the approach adopted by IVI'A, the Research Institute for Building and Architecture, ofCzechoslovakia, to the use of computer technology in the conceptual stages of determining standard housing design-types. The parameters of relations between operational spaces are expressed in a series ofalgebraic or logic equations.

'auteur estime (pie, lors de I'emploi de I'ordinateur en supposed to make use of this idea {eg SAPRO). In the majority of cases, however, their construction was never completed, and rue d'une sortiegraphique d'unplan d'architccle, le therefore their practical use has been negligible. probleme est la collecte des donnees d'entree necessaires. II examine les moyens de le resoudre et decrit la It is no problem to create a program which, on the basis of plans of methode adoptee par le 1'LJl'A (le Research Institutefor all floors of the object (or the elevation), will visualise also its Building and Architecture tchecoslovaque) afin d'utiliser perspective view without further definition, including small details I'ordinateur an slade de la determination de types such as fittings, type of window frame, etc. A well-drawn and normalises de maisons. Les paratnetrcs de relation entre les dimensioned floor plan includes also ground-plan co-ordinates of divers espaces operalionnels sont exprimes dans une serie all points in the graphic form, and the height co-ordinates of every d'equalions algebriques on logiques. point in the numeric form.

VISUALISING PROCESS
Let us consider, for example, the initial stage of a line sketch of a floor plan and a cross section, including also the general idea of the shape-composition of a family house (fig 1). This rough line sketch can be defined quite exhaustively with the use of a relatively small amount of data. General data: the basic shape of the floor plan (a square), length of its edge (10), number of floors (3), type of roof (saddle roof), orientation in relation to cardinal points, category of climate. Data concerning individual floors: the basic structure of each floor, the character and identifiers of individual spaces {ie introduction of the wall). The exact number and form of these data are dependent on the structure of the input data set in a specific program.
31

Computer-aided design is an aspect of computer use with very special qualities. It ranges from numerate activities such as calculations to activities which are more or less imaginative, eg composition of shapes. The results of these activities can have either a sequential form, ie an arithmetic progression (results of calculations) or the form of words (auxiliary progression), or their form can be a graphic one, ie drawings, quite often in a three-dimensional form. The graphic expression is the obvious priority.

Basement Sous-sol

Ground floor Bez-de-chaussee

Upper floor 1er Stage Utility room Piece de service Bedroom Chambre & coucher 1 ^' C

Fig1.

Communication Communication

Living room Salle de sejour

Communication Bedroom sanitary equipm. C n a m b r e Communication acoucher uipt sanitaire

>

X
Floor height = 2,8 m Hauteur de plafond = 2,8 m

Entrance communication^ A^ sanitary equipm. ^" Entree, communication Plan : approximately a square Squipt sanitaire of 10x 10m Plan : appr. un carr6 de 10 x 10 m

Downloaded by [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] at 21:26 11 September 2013

Basement Sous-sol

Ground floor Rez-de-chauss4e

Upper floor 1erStage

Section A-A' Coupe A-A'

23,5 *

4
s

!l

26,7 K*

|
11

, I sea *

II Fig 2.

[
r
Fig 3. Stages in the visualising process by computer. Figure 1 is the original rough sketch. Figure 2 shows one variant of those possible from the input definitions based on the original sketch. Figure 3 shows the processed layout from the use of an interactive program and visual display facility

32

On the basis of the set of enumerated input data, the particular program must not only visualise the sketch from fig 1, but carry out automatically many other procedures. 1. According to the orientation of the object, the climate of the given locality, the respective standard requirements and the thermo-technical properties of the material, the program must state the minimum thickness of the walls (according to the material used and, if the material is not defined, then for several standard variants, such as wood, brick, lightweight concrete or blocks); at the same time it must calculate the limits for the size of window orifices and give variants of usable types for every room.

the level illustrated in fig 3, without having to digitalise the co-ordinates of each point. It is an important aspect of this procedure that at no point is there a necessity for data collection, ie manual input of vast amounts of data into the memory of the computer. One slight exception is at the beginning of the whole process, but even this initial data set is relatively small. The fact that the procedure is no miracle is evidenced by computer-designed airplanes. These airplanes have been flying above our heads for several years now, yet an airplane is a much more complex object than a house.

Downloaded by [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] at 21:26 11 September 2013

2. For each co-ordinate of the door it must state usable variants, with their working position on the axis of the respective wall. 3. According to the character of individual spaces and the standards of the assumed load, it must state the standard variants of usable roof and ceiling constructions. 4. It must digitalise the quantities and plot them in a table (changed after each subsequent step), for example the areas of individual rooms, the overall area, the directly ventilated and directly-lit areas, the overall consumption of construction materials (for each of the above mentioned variants), including the price and energy consumption for each variant. 5. It must present the views from all sides complemented by perspective views from several standard viewpoints. In conclusion to the first step the designer will select one of the variants offered, and this will be his first resultbut even that can only be a variant. One of the variants of such a result can look like fig 2 but only on the basis of a definition (specified later) given in fig 1. In the following stages the designer places the vertical connections on all floors, ie especially the staircase and the drainage as a continuation of WC, bathrooms and kitchen equipment. He will also finalise the shape-composition by moving the partitions, windows and doors so that the result corresponds with his ideas.

DECISION-MAKING STAGE
When using the computer in architectural design in the way described, it is introduced relatively late, when all the principal decisions have already been made (fig 1), such as the location of the construction site, the size, type and shape-composition of the house as well as the basic concept of the layout. It would be logical to introduce the computer in some of the earlier stages ie where the future of the designed object is decided. The starting point is, generaly speaking, the occurrence of a need for the object and its operational functions in a certain place. This means that the analysis of these functions is the first activity. To convert some of these steps in the form of algorithms, the form needed for the computer, we must solve first of all: the analysis of operational functions taking place in the object, and the modelling of their structure; spatial structure of this model. These are analagous to the activity of the designer who, on the basis of a construction program, prepares a 'bubble diagram1. This bubble diagram is often called a dual graph; it expresses the required relations between the functions (rooms). Relations expressed by dual graphs can be in sequential form; for the computer we must use a matrix, creating thus a mathematical expression of a model of a certain layout solution.

FACILITY TO CHANGE
In this first stage of the work it is sufficient (in the sense of communication between the designer and the computer) for the equipment to consist of an input with a keyboard and an operator (using punch-cards and tapes elc.) and an output with a co-ordinate-printer and a line-printer. From the conclusion of the first step it would seem useful and probably necessary to have interactive input-output peripheral equipment available, namely an optical (graphic) display with a light pen and a conversational program. With the help of this light pen the designer can adjust the processed floor plan on a TV screen. He can change partitions, introduce new ones, shift the windows, doors, and try new variants, with the computer providing in real time, ie immediately, all quantifiable quantities (areas, space, costs, energy consumption) for each variant. For interactive communication with the computer the designer does not have to learn the programming. It is sufficient for him to learn how to work a keyboard. The communication is made even easier by the fact that, on the display, the designer sees direct instructions concerning the dialogue itself. After this stage the layout will be processed to

FUNCTIONS AND 'SPATIAL STRUCTURE'

The 'spatial structure of this model' is a process whereby we assign a three-dimensional structure of the rooms of a certain size to the system of unspecified relations of non-dimensional operational functions. The location of these spaces must provide a non-collision placement of operational functions taking place in the object. The usual method is the planary layout. But this means that we are trying to carry out sub-optimum procedures, transforming non-planary dual graphs into planary ones and then seeking ways to transform a planary dual graph into a layout in one level (floor). We have completed several procedures, but all of them have limiting conditions, hardly acceptable for the project eg perpendicularity of rooms, a certain proportionality of their dimensions etc. We still lack a perfect or at least an acceptable algorithm. It is basically a problem of topology, with the following definition. We have a number N of fields, each having the size Sj (usually known beforehand). The shapes of some of them have to meet certain requirements (centrality, longitudinally, orthogonality, etc.). Then there is a matrix M, where the relations of
33

combinations of these N fields are expressed. Our task is to find the configuration of all N fields with the required properties in one plane, in such a way that the relations expressed in matrix M are adhered to, if only to a sub-optimum extent. At the same time the planary result must have several required properties, such as continuity, homogeneity, etc. Finding an algorithm for the spatial structuring of sequential models is of a typological or design nature in other words transforming a mathematical model of a layout to a planary solution and it is crucial to the wider use of the computer architectural design. To solve problems concerning mathematical models of layouts we must see mathematical means; but the problem itself is in essence typological, Ie architectural. The typology (or designing) of buildings concerns the operational requirements of individual types of buildings. It provides basic classification of buildings (housing, civil buildings, factory buildings) and deals also with the layout or composition of these objects. By a more detailed classification of these classes (eg family houses, flats, theatres, museums, libraries, etc.) we obtain the individual typological kinds which we may call 'standard typological kinds'.

what may be called 'the economy and structure of the layout'. It can be measured, for example, by the proportionate relation between the area of the flat and the size-category. The influence of this factor on the mutual relations of the operational spaces is also quite obvious, and it is therefore appropriate to define it as another parameter. An example of another factor which may have an influence on the layout is the position of the flat in relation to the terrain. On the other hand a factor which does not have any influence on the layout is the position of a flat on the second or any higher storey. The determination of a set of parameters belonging to a certain 'typological kind' will require a thorough analysis, but it will not require further research. As far as the amount of information is concerned, the textbooks should be sufficient. The situation will be different when it comes to determining the importance of individual parameters and their mutual relations. We can say a priori that the value of some relations will be inversely proportional to others; in some cases the relations will be more complex. But the determining of coefficients and other important quantities (eg exponents, bases of logarithmic and exponential curves etc.) will often require further research. Many of them will have to be determined empirically, ie by statistical analysis of a chosen sample. An important requirement of the selected parameters is their interaction. For example, of the three factors (size-category of the flat, area, and economy versus comfort of the layout) any one of these could be selected as a parameter, but it is always more or less dependent on the remaining two. This means that not all three of them can be parameters. The definition of parameters involves determining the range of values of each parameter and the progressive nature of its development. For example, with the 'size-category of the flat' both these tasks are simple. The parameter is linear in the value range of (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). Generally we can suppose that the parameter will develop according to a general mathematical function, the best known examples of which are: power of the n-th degree, logarithmic or exponential functions etc. The value range can be expected to be symmetrical around zero, mostly integers with relatively low absolute values. The sets of parameters can be more or less complex. But even if they are excessively complex, this can only show effect at the stage when the parametric model is being created. The user the designer who encounters the parameters right after starting his co-operation with the computer will have to feed in the actual values of these parameters. This is done simply by answering a number of questions which the computer, in a conversational communication system, usually presents with prepared variants of answers. The designer will not use the numeric values of parameters, as these might seem strange to him. He will use expressions which are quite naturally used by architects. Apart from parameters denoted by logic-algebraic general expressions of relation values, there will also be constants. As long as they are not mathematical-physical constants, expressing some general laws (eg Young's modulus of elasticity, gravitational constant, base of natural logarithms, etc.) they will either be orientational limits (8 m2 minimum area of a room, 12 m2 minimum area of a bedroom for two people, 2,3 maximum depth of a room with one-sided lighting in relation to its height,

Downloaded by [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] at 21:26 11 September 2013

PARAMETRIC EXPRESSION OF RELATIONS

It is of crucial importance that the proposed modelling of typological standards uses the parametric expression of relations between operational spaces. This means that each relation is expressed by an algebraic or logic equation, the value of which is dependent on the values of the parameters; in other words the value of the relations is (generally) a function of the parameters. (For example, in a typological 'flat' we can have the following parameters: category of size, structure of the layout etc.). It is a property of the parametric expression that there can exist one general form of expression not only for several examples of the same type (eg several flats of the same category, differing only in position), but also for several types of the same class (eg one general expression of a dwelling unit, independent of its size-category and type). The expression or 'individualisation' of specific features of one particular type (eg flat of the fourth size category, cross-ventilated, oriented from south to north, opening on to a staircase in a block of flats) will be carried out by determining the specific values of the parameters. Thus, a set of parameters will be a substantial part of every parametric model of a 'standard typological kind'. These parameters must be determined on the basis of thorough analysis of differences in various types of one 'standard typological kind'. These differences must be analysed from the point of view of the influences of these differences on the values of the relations between operational spaces.

'STANDARD TYPOLOGICAL KINDS'

For example, in the case of a 'standard typological kind: dwelling unit' one of the most important differences is the sizecategory. The influence of this difference on the layout is quite obvious. There is no doubt that the 'size-category of the flat' must be one of the parameters. Another significant difference is
34

etc.), or quantities determining the importance, relevance and mutual relations of individual parameters, as has been mentioned earlier.

Orientation area: 6 + K3r (m2). 3. Food processing Rough and clean food preparation, food storage in various stages of processing, storing dishes and other kitchen utensils, dish-washing.

ANALYSING THE MODEL

A necessary stage of the mathematical modelling of typological standards is the analysis and the subsequent breakdown of the modelled 'typographical kind1. We analyse among other things the operational functions which actually occur in the building (and any particular part of it) and which arise essentially from the function of the building itself. These operational functions are classified by purpose and, according to their affinity, are divided into a final member of groups, considered as not further divisible. In this way we break down the analysed 'typological kind' to its elements, called 'layout elements'. Generally we assume the possibility of differing results from this analysis, especially in the case of more complex 'typological kinds'. Only practical experience can prove which one is suitable for particular conditions and, if needed, we can select one as a standard for uniform use. Apart from the relations between the individual operational spaces within the layout, the model must also express the relations of the object to its surroundings (entrance, natural lighting, ventilation etc.). These are so called 'virtual elements'. Transport communication plays a special role here. It is obviously an operational function, but in special cases it can be required in any event. It is therefore worth considering whether it should be regarded as a layout element or as a property which other elements must have or not. For various models (of the same or different typological kinds) we can adopt various solutions of this problem. On the basis of the above reasons for modelling 'typological kinds', and following the rules I have explained for constructing such models, we at the Institute are working on an example of such a parametric model of the 'typological kind', namely a 'dwelling unit'. Although this work has not yet been completed, it may be useful to present as an Appendix an example to illustrate the above-mentioned ideas.

Equipment objects: a cooking range, an oven with a grill, cooker hood, a sink, a dishwasher, containers for waste and scrapdisposal, a refrigerator, storage for food and dishes. Orientation area: 6 + K4r (m2). 4. Other home activities Material processing (wood, metal, photographic material, electronic components) sewing by machine, machine knitting. Equipment objects: the respective tools. Orientation area: 6 + K5t (m2). 5. Storage Storing special objects and objects for seasonal use. Equipment objects: a shelf. Orientation area: K6 (r+p) (m2). 6. Hygiene Hygiene of the body, bathing and showering. Equipment objects: a wash-basin, a bath, a bidet, a shower. Orientation area: 4 + K7r (m2). 7. Laundry operations Equipment objects: automatic washing machine, boxes for dirty linen. Orientation area: 1 + K8r (m2). 8. Sanitation Excretion, washing of hands. Equipment objects: WC, wash-basin. Orientation area: 2 m2 (m2). 9. Sleeping Sleep, personal activities (eg studying, physical exercise, etc.). Equipment objects: beds, areas for personal work, chairs, storage spaces. Orientation -area: 2 + 6p + K8r. (Note: the total number of these layout elements is dependent on the size-category of the flat). 10. External appearance A 'virtual' element. Parameters Size-category of flat p Economy and complexity of the layout r (the value is directly proportional to the amount of assumed costs over the costs adequate to the given size-category and type of flat) The rate of disturbance to other homework k (dependent on the type of flat, profession of the user and decision of the investor) Type of flat t 35

Downloaded by [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] at 21:26 11 September 2013

APPENDIX: 'STANDARD TYPOLOGICAL KIND: DWELLING UNIT

Layout elements 1. Social activities Accommodation of visitors, TV watching, listening to music, social games (chess, cards, etc.), child play, activities not demanding too much space (reading, writing, knitting, drawing, etc.). Equipment objects: furniture for sitting, a table, an area for setting aside objects momentarily not needed, a library, a shelf, audio-visual equipment, cupboards. Orientation area: 6 + K,p + K2r (m2). 2. Use of the table Food consumption, reading, writing, drawing, table games and other activities. Equipment objects: a table, chairs and benches, storage for dishes, books, games etc.

Types of relations Relation S: space sharing Without stating intensity, it expresses the necessity of space sharing. It is enumerated with the given intensity if that intensity is higher than for another variant, or if other variants cannot be realised. With a zero intensity it expresses the possibility of space sharing with, at the same time, the necessity of at least having neighbours. Relation C: communication

Expresses a communicative relation of the storage element with all previous elements. v16 = K24tr; v26 = 0 ; v 36 = K25r; v46 = K26r; v56 = 0 The relations of the laundry washing element with the previous elements are dependent especially on the parameter of layout complexity, or on the type of layout. v17 = C: 0 ; v 27 = K 27 ; v 37 = C: 0; v47 = K2a; v 57 = 0 ; v67 = 0 The relation of the hygiene element with the kitchen and the living room (required through communicative elements) as well as with the dining room and the workshop. In the latter case there is the expression of a certain intensity. The relations with laundry washing and storing are equal to zero. v,8 = - ; v28 = - ; v 38 = -00 ; v48 = 0; v58 = 0; v63 = 0 ;
V78 = K29

Downloaded by [Universiti Teknologi Malaysia] at 21:26 11 September 2013

Without stating intensity, it means the necessity of having neighbours. For achieving the planarity of the whole graph it can be effected through another element if this element has an explicitly expressed communicative character. It is realised with the expression of intensity if the intensity is higher than for other variants, or if other variants cannot be realised. If it is a zero intensity relation, then it represents a requirement that both elements be separated only by elements of a communicative character. Simple relation (no identifier) Expresses only intensity of the requirement for mutual connection, carried out either by a simple, direct link to neighbours or through one or several communicative elements: it differs from the C: C relation by the hierarchic structure of the relations: zero value denotes no special requirement for connection, negative value denotes the necessity of separation. Parametric expression of layout element relations (symbol vfj is for the relation of i-th and j-th elements) v12 = S: K10t VC~: K^t"
1

The relation of the previous layout elements with the WC is expressed in accordance with general typological rules. v19 = C: 0 ; v29 = C: 0 ; v 39 = - 1 ; v 49 = - K 3 0 k ; v 59 = 0; v69 = - 1 ; v79 = K 31 tr; v 89 = - The relation of the bedrooms with the living room and the dining room is required through elements of a communicative nature. Relations with the kitchen, workshop and the room with a washing machine are also stated, but with the expression of the need for a certain separation; the relation with the larder is equal to zero; the relation with the bathroom is dependent on the complexity of the layout; WC must be separated by a communicative element. Vno = + v6io = 0 ; = C; v 310 = + ; v 4 ] 0 = K 32 t; v 510 = 0 = K33r; v8io
=

K34n V9io

+00

v23 = (V12) = S -> C (A) v 12 = C -+ S: K12r"1 V~C: K13r v13 = C These expressions concern the requirement that table-use is either independent of or in the same room as food processing. Social activities, depending on the type and complexity of the layout, can be separated from both these elements by a maximum of one more element. Food processing may either share with social activities or can be separated by one other element. v14 = S: K 1 4 r 1 k - 1 VC": K15r k v24 = S: K 1 6 r 1 k - 1 VC": K17r k v34 = (v,4) = S - C: C (A) v14 = C - S: K ^ t r V 1 K^r'rk VC:

Here, we have expressed the basic typological rules about the relations of dewelling rooms with the exterior, also the suitability of connection of the workshop, bathroom and WC depending on the type and complexity of the layout. In these expressions we have used quite common symbols of formal logic (conjunction, disjunction, implication). The quantities K| are constants, but determining their real values will have to be done by statistical analysis of empiric data, a subject which would require further discussion outside the scope of this article. When evaluating the validity of the above-mentioned model of a 'standard typological kind', accuracy of the original must be the primary criterion. Everything concerning the procedures and operations must be considered secondary. We can imagine the use of general logic algebraic models of typological kinds being much broader in the future than the purpose for which they have been constructed so far. The most natural future possibility would be the use of these models for objective evaluation of layout variants, by comparing functional criteria. We could assign specific values to these criteria and thus evaluate layout variants by comparison with the standard model.

These are expressions of the requirement for home activities to be either independent or in one of the preceding elements (depending on the type and complexity of the layout and the rate of disturbance caused by these activities) so that the previous requirements are adhered to. Vis = K 20 r; v25 = K21r; v 35 = K22r; v 45 = K23r

36