In step

In Step was a wearable artwork consisting of a pair of embroidered foot bandages and an actuator ‘cushion’ embedded with 15 electromechanical actuator pistons. The bandage was embedded with woven, soft and flexible fabric sensors - interconnected with metallic connecting threads, fasteners and a wireless interface (in a final form). When wrapped around a foot and lower leg the sensors sat on the ball of the toes and heel. This ‘wearable interface’ was then connected wirelessly to a soft sculptural form, which employed actuators to tap gently in response to the qualities of the walk detected by the soft sensors. In this way the ‘tread qualities’ of the walker could then be felt by someone else holding this device against their stomach – thereby allowing pairs of participants to ‘feel’ the tactile qualities of the other's walk. The work was presented both as a working object and via a short videorecorded performance.----- In Step generated innovative new approaches to interface and sensor embedded clothing/footware whilst also creating an evocative vehicle to comment upon contemporary Post Colonial theories of weight and groundedness – particularly the psycho-geographical ‘separation’ from the landscape that inspired Paul Carter’s “environmentally grounded poetics”. The work’s final form also suggested critical new directions for responsive clothing and footwear for the emerging genre of smart textiles.

John Frazer

John Frazer, Professor, trained at the Architectural Association, taught first at Cambridge University and then the AA in the 1970s and again in the '90s. He was Head of School of Design Research History and Criticism at the University of Ulster in the 1980s, he also ran a systems and design consultancy with his wife Julia (including projects for Cedric Price and Walter Segal) and was founder and chairman of Autographics software. He is currently Swire Chair Professor and Head of School of Design in Hong Kong.----- This is a very personal perspective on a concept of universal and future significance. It is personal, both is the sense that it is an unashamedly biased view of both the significance of the project, and the nature of that significance and because the author was personally involved as one of the consultants on GENERATOR and subsequently involved Cedric Price in its educational application at the Architectural Association. GENERATOR is still very much alive and was still developing whilst this chapter was being written.

Interactive architecture

This chapter explores the development of concepts of interactive environments by comparing two major projects that frame the period of this book. The Fun Palace of 1960 and the Generator of 1980 both proposed interactive environments responsive to the needs and behaviour of their users, but the contrast in terms of the available technology and what it enabled could not be more marked. The Fun Palace broke new architectural, organizational and social ground and was arguably the first proposition for cybernetic architecture; the Generator demonstrated how it could be achieved. Both projects are now acknowledged as seminal architectural propositions of the twentieth century, and both were designed by Cedric Price.

A large-scale computing infrastructure for design education

Most departmental computing infrastructure reflects the state of networking technology and available funds at the time of construction, which converge in a preconceived notion of homogeneity of network architecture and usage patterns. The DMAN (Digital Media Access Network) project, a large-scale server and network foundation for the Hong Kong Polytechnic University's School of Design was created as a platform that would support a highly complex academic environment while giving maximum freedom to students, faculty and researchers through simplicity and ease of use. As a centralized multi-user computation backbone, DMAN faces an extremely hetrogeneous user and application profile, exceeding implementation and maintenance challenges of typical enterprise, and even most academic server set-ups. This paper sumarizes the specification, implementation and application of the system while describing its significance for design education in a computational context.

A generative design system based on evolutionary and mathematical functions

Previous work by Professor John Frazer on Evolutionary Architecture provides a basis for the development of a system evolving architectural envelopes in a generic and abstract manner. Recent research by the authors has focused on the implementation of a virtual environment for the automatic generation and exploration of complex forms and architectural envelopes based on solid modelling techniques and the integration of evolutionary algorithms, enhanced computational and mathematical models. Abstract data types are introduced for genotypes in a genetic algorithm order to develop complex models using generative and evolutionary computing techniques. Multi-objective optimisation techniques are employed for defining the fitness function in the evaluation process.

An evolutionary framework for enhancing design

A computational framework for enhancing design in an evolutionary approach with a dynamic hierarchical structure is presented in this paper. This framework can be used as an evolutionary kernel for building computer-supported design systems. It provides computational components for generating, adapting and exploring alternative design solutions at multiple levels of abstraction with hierarchically structured design representations. In this paper, preliminary experimental results of using this framework in several design applications are presented.

A natural model for architecture : the nature of the evolutionary model 1995

John Frazer's architectural work is inspired by living and generative processes. Both evolutionary and revolutionary, it explores informatin ecologies and the dynamics of the spaces between objects. Fuelled by an interest in the cybernetic work of Gordon Pask and Norbert Wiener, and the possibilities of the computer and the "new science" it has facilitated, Frazer and his team of collaborators have conducted a series of experiments that utilize genetic algorithms, cellular automata, emergent behaviour, complexity and feedback loops to create a truly dynamic architecture. Frazer studied at the Architectural Association (AA) in London from 1963 to 1969, and later became unit master of Diploma Unit 11 there. He was subsequently Director of Computer-Aided Design at the University of Ulter - a post he held while writing An Evolutionary Architecture in 1995 - and a lecturer at the University of Cambridge. In 1983 he co-founded Autographics Software Ltd, which pioneered microprocessor graphics. Frazer was awarded a person chair at the University of Ulster in 1984. In Frazer's hands, architecture becomes machine-readable, formally open-ended and responsive. His work as computer consultant to Cedric Price's Generator Project of 1976 (see P84)led to the development of a series of tools and processes; these have resulted in projects such as the Calbuild Kit (1985) and the Universal Constructor (1990). These subsequent computer-orientated architectural machines are makers of architectural form beyond the full control of the architect-programmer. Frazer makes much reference to the multi-celled relationships found in nature, and their ongoing morphosis in response to continually changing contextual criteria. He defines the elements that describe his evolutionary architectural model thus: "A genetic code script, rules for the development of the code, mapping of the code to a virtual model, the nature of the environment for the development of the model and, most importantly, the criteria for selection. In setting out these parameters for designing evolutionary architectures, Frazer goes beyond the usual notions of architectural beauty and aesthetics. Nevertheless his work is not without an aesthetic: some pieces are a frenzy of mad wire, while others have a modularity that is reminiscent of biological form. Algorithms form the basis of Frazer's designs. These algorithms determine a variety of formal results dependent on the nature of the information they are given. His work, therefore, is always dynamic, always evolving and always different. Designing with algorithms is also critical to other architects featured in this book, such as Marcos Novak (see p150). Frazer has made an unparalleled contribution to defining architectural possibilities for the twenty-first century, and remains an inspiration to architects seeking to create responsive environments. Architects were initially slow to pick up on the opportunities that the computer provides. These opportunities are both representational and spatial: computers can help architects draw buildings and, more importantly, they can help architects create varied spaces, both virtual and actual. Frazer's work was groundbreaking in this respect, and well before its time.

Creative design and the generative evolutionary paradigm

Design as seen from the designer's perspective is a series of amazing imaginative jumps or creative leaps. But design as seen by the design historian is a smooth progression or evolution of ideas that they seem self-evident and inevitable after the event. But the next step is anything but obvious for the artist/creator/inventor/designer stuck at that point just before the creative leap. They know where they have come from and have a general sense of where they are going, but often do not have a precise target or goal. This is why it is misleading to talk of design as a problem-solving activity - it is better defined as a problem-finding activity. This has been very frustrating for those trying to assist the design process with computer-based, problem-solving techniques. By the time the problem has been defined, it has been solved. Indeed the solution is often the very definition of the problem. Design must be creative-or it is mere imitation. But since this crucial creative leap seem inevitable after the event, the question must arise, can we find some way of searching the space ahead? Of course there are serious problems of knowing what we are looking for and the vastness of the search space. It may be better to discard altogether the term "searching" in the context of the design process: Conceptual analogies such as search, search spaces and fitness landscapes aim to elucidate the design process. However, the vastness of the multidimensional spaces involved make these analogies misguided and they thereby actually result in further confounding the issue. The term search becomes a misnomer since it has connotations that imply that it is possible to find what you are looking for. In such vast spaces the term search must be discarded. Thus, any attempt at searching for the highest peak in the fitness landscape as an optimal solution is also meaningless. Futhermore, even the very existence of a fitness landscape is fallacious. Although alternatives in the same region of the vast space can be compared to one another, distant alternatives will stem from radically different roots and will therefore not be comparable in any straightforward manner (Janssen 2000). Nevertheless we still have this tantalizing possibility that if a creative idea seems inevitable after the event, then somehow might the process be rserved? This may be as improbable as attempting to reverse time. A more helpful analogy is from nature, where it is generally assumed that the process of evolution is not long-term goal directed or teleological. Dennett points out a common minsunderstanding of Darwinism: the idea that evolution by natural selection is a procedure for producing human beings. Evolution can have produced humankind by an algorithmic process, without its being true that evolution is an algorithm for producing us. If we were to wind the tape of life back and run this algorithm again, the likelihood of "us" being created again is infinitesimally small (Gould 1989; Dennett 1995). But nevertheless Mother Nature has proved a remarkably successful, resourceful, and imaginative inventor generating a constant flow of incredible new design ideas to fire our imagination. Hence the current interest in the potential of the evolutionary paradigm in design. These evolutionary methods are frequently based on techniques such as the application of evolutionary algorithms that are usually thought of as search algorithms. It is necessary to abandon such connections with searching and see the evolutionary algorithm as a direct analogy with the evolutionary processes of nature. The process of natural selection can generate a wealth of alternative experiements, and the better ones survive. There is no one solution, there is no optimal solution, but there is continuous experiment. Nature is profligate with her prototyping and ruthless in her elimination of less successful experiments. Most importantly, nature has all the time in the world. As designers we cannot afford prototyping and ruthless experiment, nor can we operate on the time scale of the natural design process. Instead we can use the computer to compress space and time and to perform virtual prototyping and evaluation before committing ourselves to actual prototypes. This is the hypothesis underlying the evolutionary paradigm in design (1992, 1995).

The way forward : report on the preparatory phase of prefabricated building design and construction methodology: identifying critical issues and recommending the way forward

This is an initial report of the PolyU SD part of the team to study Pre-fabricated Building Design and Construction Methodology and marks the completion of Phase 1. It follows our first notes prepared for the meeting on 2 February that identified some critical issues including future lifestyles, life expectancy of buildings, sustainability, size, flexibility and planning considerations. It is also an expansion of our presentation in Dongguan on 23 February. It is not a comprehensive survey of existing approaches or possible ways forward, but it has homed in on certain specific issues and does give specific examples to make the suggestions concrete. It is recommended that more comprehensive research be done to establish previous work and experience internationally. It is also recommended that more research be done on lifestyles as a preliminary to developing at least three concepts for evaluation before proceeding to the detailed design of one concept for full prototyping and market testing. The goal at this point is not to define a single direction but to suggest several future trajectories for further consideration. By the same token, this report is not intended as an exhaustive description of the considerable base of knowledge and ideas brought by the PolyU team to this exciting task. Before taking on an issue of this magnitude and importance in the definition of Hong Kong's future, one must carry out a thoughtful analysis of the issues at hand and an informed definition of paradigms, directions, goals and methods whereby our energies can be best used in the next steps. This report is the result of this analysis