Daylighting design in the architectural design studio

This paper discusses two different approaches to teaching design and their modes of delivery and reflects upon their successes and failures. Two small groups of third year design students have been given projects focussing on incorporation of daylighting to architectural design in studios having different design themes. In association with the curriculum, the themes were Digital Tools and Sustainability. Although both studios had the topic of daylighting, the aim and methodology used were different. Digital Tool studio’s aim was to teach how to design daylighting by using a digital tool, where as, Sustainability studio aimed at using scale modelling as a tool to learn about daylighting and integrating it into design. Positive results for providing student learning success within the University context were the students’ chance to learn and practice some new skills –using a new tool for designing; integration of the tutors’ extensive research expertise to their teaching practice; and the students’ construction of their own understanding of knowledge in a student-centred educational environment. This environment created a very positive attitude in the form of exchanging ideas and collaboration among the students of Digital Tools students at the discussion forum. Sustainability group students were enthusiastic about designing and testing various proposals. Problems that both studios experienced were mainly related to timing. Synchronizing with other groups of their studios and learning of a new skill on top of an already complicated process of design learning were the setbacks.

Modelling sustainable and optimal solutions for building services integration in early architectural design : confronting the software and professional interoperability deficit

Decisions made in the earliest stage of architectural design have the greatest impact on the construction, lifecycle cost and environmental footprint of buildings. Yet the building services, one of the largest contributors to cost, complexity, and environmental impact, are rarely considered as an influence on the design at this crucial stage. In order for efficient and environmentally sensitive built environment outcomes to be achieved, a closer collaboration between architects and services engineers is required at the outset of projects. However, in practice, there are a variety of obstacles impeding this transition towards an integrated design approach. This paper firstly presents a critical review of the existing barriers to multidisciplinary design. It then examines current examples of best practice in the building industry to highlight the collaborative strategies being employed and their benefits to the design process. Finally, it discusses a case study project to identify directions for further research.

Patterns, heuristics for architectural design support: making use of evolutionary modelling in design

Software used by architectural and industrial designers – has moved from becoming a tool for drafting, towards use in verification, simulation, project management and project sharing remotely. In more advanced models, parameters for the designed object can be adjusted so a family of variations can be produced rapidly. With advances in computer aided design technology, numerous design options can now be generated and analyzed in real time. However the use of digital tools to support design as an activity is still at an early stage and has largely been limited in functionality with regard to the design process. To date, major CAD vendors have not developed an integrated tool that is able to both leverage specialized design knowledge from various discipline domains (known as expert knowledge systems) and support the creation of design alternatives that satisfy different forms of constraints. We propose that evolutionary computing and machine learning be linked with parametric design techniques to record and respond to a designer’s own way of working and design history. It is expected that this will lead to results that impact on future work on design support systems-(ergonomics and interface) as well as implicit constraint and problem definition for problems that are difficult to quantify.

Assessing architectural design processes of diverse learners

Given that what students learn is so strongly related to how they learn, the modes of delivery and assessment that we as teachers provide them with have a major impact on their ability to learn. As this paper shows, good learning environments are constructed from a range of modes that respond to student learning styles and seek to align activities and learning outcomes with assessment tasks, to better accommodate a diversity of student learning styles and backgrounds. This paper uses a number of models of learning to critique and analyse the traditional practices of assessment in an architectural design class, and then proposes and reports on an alternative pattern of assessment. It discusses the issues of accommodating a group of first-year architecture students at Queensland University of Technology in 2009. These students arrived with diverse prior learning backgrounds, the group being evenly split between those with drawing capabilities and those without. They also had a variety of learning style preferences. The experiment in alternative assessment patterns presented here shows that what has traditionally been considered a diverse and difficult cohort of students can benefit from the assessment of a range of task types at different stages in the learning cycle.

Spatial stimulus : Model making in the architectural design studio

This action research examines the enhancement of visual communication within the architectural design studio through physical model making. „It is through physical model making that designers explore their conceptual ideas and develop the creation and understanding of space,‟ (Salama & Wilkinson 2007:126). This research supplements Crowther‟s findings extending the understanding of visual dialogue to include physical models. „Architecture Design 8‟ is the final core design unit at QUT in the fourth year of the Bachelor of Design Architecture. At this stage it is essential that students have the ability to communicate their ideas in a comprehensive manner, relying on a combination of skill sets including drawing, physical model making, and computer modeling. Observations within this research indicates that students did not integrate the combination of the skill sets in the design process through the first half of the semester by focusing primarily on drawing and computer modeling. The challenge was to promote deeper learning through physical model making. This research addresses one of the primary reasons for the lack of physical model making, which was the limited assessment emphasis on the physical models. The unit was modified midway through the semester to better correlate the lecture theory with studio activities by incorporating a series of model making exercises conducted during the studio time. The outcome of each exercise was assessed. Tutors were surveyed regarding the model making activities and a focus group was conducted to obtain formal feedback from students. Students and tutors recognised the added value in communicating design ideas through physical forms and model making. The studio environment was invigorated by the enhanced learning outcomes of the students who participated in the model making exercises. The conclusions of this research will guide the structure of the upcoming iteration of the fourth year design unit.

Start making sense: Applying a salutogenic model to architectural design for psychiatric care

Purpose This paper aims to look into the significance of architectural design in psychiatric care facilities. There is a strong correlation between perceptual dysfunction and psychiatric illness, and also between the patient and his environment. As such, even minor design choices can be of great consequence in a psychiatric facility. It is of critical importance, therefore, that a psychiatric milieu is sympathetic and does not exacerbate the psychosis. Design/methodology/approach This paper analyses the architectural elements that may influence mental health, using an architectural extrapolation of Antonovsky’s salutogenic theory, which states that better health results from a state of mind which has a fortified sense of coherence. According to the theory, a sense of coherence is fostered by a patient’s ability to comprehend the environment (comprehensibility), to be effective in his actions (manageability) and to find meaning (meaningfullness). Findings Salutogenic theory can be extrapolated in an architectural context to inform design choices when designing for a stress-sensitive client base. Research limitations/implications In the paper an architectural extrapolation of salutogenic theory is presented as a practical method for making design decisions (in praxis) when evidence is not available. As demonstrated, the results appear to reflect what evidence is available, but real evidence is always desirable over rationalist speculation. The method suggested here cannot prove the efficacy or appropriateness of design decisions and is not intended to do so. Practical implications The design of mental health facilities has long been dominated by unsubstantiated policy and normative opinions that do not always serve the client population. This method establishes a practical theoretical model for generating architectural design guidelines for mental health facilities. Originality/value The paper will prove to be helpful in several ways. First, salutogenic theory is a useful framework for improving health outcomes, but in the past the theory has never been applied in a methodological way. Second, there have been few insights into how the architecture itself can improve the functionality of a mental health facility other than improve the secondary functions of hospital services.

Enriching architectural design education through interactive displays and local community engagement

Designers have a social responsibility to deal with the needs, issues, and problems that their clients and communities are confronted with. Students of design require opportunities to reflect on their role as social facilitators to develop an attitude towards community engagement through different phases and aspects of their careers. However, current design courses are challenged by compressed timeframes and fragmented scenarios of different academic requirements that do not actively teach community engagement. This paper outlines a participatory and technological approach that was employed to address these issues within the teaching of Architecture and Urban Design at the Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. A multi-phase community based research project with actual stakeholders was implemented over a two-year period. Approximately 150 students in the final year of the Bachelor of Design-Architecture; 10 students in the Master of Architecture and 15 students in the Master of Design-Urban Design have informed and influenced each others’ learning through the teaching and research nexus facilitated by this project. The technical approach was implemented in form of a bespoke digital platform that supported the display and discussion of digital media on a series of interactive touch walls. The platform allowed students to easily upload their final designs onto large interactive surfaces, where visitors could explore the media and provide comments. Through the use of this technical platform and the introduction of neogeography, students have been able to broaden their level of interaction and support their learning experience through external structured and unstructured feedback from the local community. Students have not only been exposed to community representatives, but they also have been working in parallel on a specific case study providing each other, across different years and courses, material for reflection and data to structure their design activities.

The InstaBooth: Making common ground for media architectural design

Media architecture has emerged from and relies upon a range of different disciplinary traditions and areas of expertise. As this field develops, it is timely to reflect upon the ways in which designers of different disciplinary stripes can be brought together to collaborate in a design process. What are the means by which design teams can establish a ‘common ground’ where design work can take place while recognizing the diversity of ways of working those different disciplines bring to the process? A co-design approach has been the fundamental backbone of the InstaBooth project, which has brought together a multidisciplinary design team of academics and practitioners. The intention of this project has been to explore the combination of digital and physical interactions within a small media architecture installation to intervene with urban environments and public places for the purposes of community engagement. It is by exploring the design process of the InstaBooth project that we highlight the value of multi-disciplinary collaborations, the lessons that can be learned, and the struggles and hurdles along the way. This paper highlights the iterative process of design, the materials and physical prototypes that were employed to ultimately create a working version of the InstaBooth, a media architecture that evolves as users push its boundaries and take ownership of the installation. The concept of the InstaBooth continues to develop not only as more data are collected on its mechanics and potentials through observations, interviews and workshops, but also as more and more users engage with the installation in their individual ways.