Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

An Industrialized Ecosystem : (Re)claiming Design Integrity Hall, Joshua Alexander 2020-12-23

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
42591-Hall_Joshua_ARCH_Industrialized_ecosystem.pdf [ 19.43MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 42591-1.0395441.json
JSON-LD: 42591-1.0395441-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 42591-1.0395441-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 42591-1.0395441-rdf.json
Turtle: 42591-1.0395441-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 42591-1.0395441-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 42591-1.0395441-source.json
Full Text
42591-1.0395441-fulltext.txt
Citation
42591-1.0395441.ris

Full Text

An Industrialized Ecosystem:  (Re)claiming Design IntegrityJoshua Alexander HallBachelor of Architectural Science - HonoursBritish Columbia Institute of Technology, 2018Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture in The Faculty of Graduate Studies, School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Architecture ProgramCommitteeBlair Satterfield (Chair)  I  Associate Professor & Chair, SALADr. Adam Rysanek  I  Assistant Professor, SALAZachary Moreland  I  Director, Shigeru Ban Architects AmericaThe University of British ColumbiaVancouver, BCc  Joshua Alexander Hall, December 20202 3[Abstract]This graduate project proposes that industrialized construction processes can enable the practice of architecture to elevate its agency in construction. As systemic inefficiencies within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry are disrupted by transformational advancements in digital technology, material innovation, and methods of project delivery—a convergence of technology positioned to shift the paradigm of traditional construction—the role of the architect is in question. While the current restructuring of the AEC industry will reflect the ways in which digital processes are adopted in practice, architecture is temporarily at a crossroads—a pivotal moment framing the future of practice. Highlighting the siloes of traditional construction and challenging the status quo of industry, this report suggests how digital fabrication might ultimately become an extension of the architectural design process.II III4 5[Table of Contents]AbstractList of FiguresPrefaceAcknowledgmentsPart 1: IntroductionChapter I: Lost ControlChapter II: Technology and ArchitectureChapter III: Compromised WorkflowsChapter IV: Industry DisruptionPart 2: ProposalProject IntroductionProject StatementProject StructureProject LensChapter I: BIM and InterpretationChapter II: Roulette and Value EngineeringChapter III: Hierarchy and Re-DesignGlossaryBibliographyIIIVIXIXIII15294149536874767880100128138CXLIV V6 7Cross Laminated Timber Panels. Photograph. Nelson, BC, 2020. Spearhead.Ewing, Will. Cast-in-Place Concrete Construction. January 4, 2012. Joint Base San Antonio. https://www.jbsa.mil/News/Photos/igphoto/2000191656/.Katerra’s Prefabrication Factory. April 18, 2008. The Architect’s Newspaper. https://archpaper.com/2018/04/katerras-craig-curtis-pushes-standardization-customization/.Global GHG Emissions Tied to the AEC Indistry. Illustration by author, 2020.Peter, Ema. GNW Pavilion. Photograph. Vancouver, BC, 2019. SpearheadMoran, Michael. Aspen Art Museum. Photograph. Aspen, CO, 2013. SpearheadDiamond, Nick. Temple of Light. Photograph. Nelson, 2018. SpearheadSwatch Omega HQ. November 2019. Photograph.The Aspect Ratio of Our Industry (1). Illustration by author, 2020.The Aspect Ratio of Our Industry (2). Illustration by author, 2020.Project Structure. Illustration by author, 2020.Project Lens. Illustration by author, 2020.Chapter One Structure. Illustration by author, 2020.Interpretive Barrier. Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Construction. Illustration by author, 2020.BIM is a Dead End. Illustration by author, 2020.Outliers of High Complexity. Illustration by author, adapted from Reinventing Construction: A Route to Higher Productivity, (New York, McKinsey & Company, 2017).Spectrum of Industrialization. Illustration by author, 2020.Swatch Omega Facade Overview. Illustration by author, 2020Brunelleschi’s Dome. Illustration by author, 2020Agency in Conventional Construction. Illustration by author, 2020.Reclaimed Agency in Conventional Construction. Illustration by author, 2020. Buckminster Fuller with His Dymaxion Dwelling Machine, 1930. July 8, 2019. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/R-Buckminster-Fuller.Ray and Charles Eames Stand on the Steel Frame of Their Home-in-Progress in 1949. August 2, 2019. National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2019/08/02/738083070/charles-and-ray-eames-made-life-better-by-design-their-home-was-no-exception.Software in Architecture. Illustration by author, adapted from “A Brief History of Computation,” Parametric Monkey (June 2016).Diamond, Nick. Temple of Light Fabrication 1. Photograph. Nelson, n.d. SpearheadDiamond, Nick. Temple of Light Fabrication 1. Photograph. Nelson, n.d. SpearheadMIT’s Original 1952 Numerically Controlled Mill. April 12, 2019. Medium. https://medium.com/cnc-life/history-of-cnc-machining-part-1-2a4b290d994d.Aectual Robot Arm. October 10, 2017. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/90147503/3d-printed-floors-are-surprisingly-awesome?utm_source=postup&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Co.Design Daily&position=4&partner=newsletter&campaign_date=10202017&utm_medium=email.MacLeamy Curve - Traditional Project Effort. Illustration by author, adapted from “A Review of the Energy Performane Gap and its Underlying Causes in Non-Domestic Buildings,” Frontier in Mechanical Engineering 2 (January 2016).MacLeamy Curve - Front Loaded Project Effort. Illustration by author, adapted from “A Review of the Energy Performane Gap and its Underlying Causes in Non-Domestic Buildings,” Frontier in Mechanical Engineering 2 (January 2016).Global Labour Productivity. Illustration by author, adapted from Reinventing Construction: A Route to Higher Productivity, (New York, McKinsey & Company, 2017).Performance Gap in Construction. Illustration by author, 2020. 4.014.024.034.045.015.025.035.045.055.065.075.086.016.026.036.046.056.066.071.011.021.031.041.052.012.022.032.042.053.013.023.033.04VI VII[List of Figures][List of Figures]8 9[List of Figures][List of Figures]5-Axis Milling. Photograph. 2011. Shigeru Ban Architects.3-Axis Milling. Photograph. Nelson, BC, 2012. Spearhead.Panel Nesting. Photograph. Nelson, BC, 2012. Spearhead.Web Assembly / Finishing. Photograph. Nelson, BC, 2012. Spearhead.Web Installation. Photograph. Aspen, CO, 2012. Spearhead.Chapter Three Structure. Illustration by author, 2020.Hierarchical Authorship. Illustration by author, 2020.(Re)Claimed Project Integrity. Illustration by author, 2020.Industry Stewardship. Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Ecosystem. Illustration by author, 2020.Digital Mock-Up. Illustration by author, 2020.Multi-Scope Node Exploded. Illustration by author, 2020.Multi-Scope Node Assembled. Illustration by author, 2020.Node Typologies (Systemization). Design to Production, n.d. Accessed December 12, 2020.Building Axis. Design to Production, n.d. Accessed December 12, 2020.Building Volumes. Design to Production, n.d. Accessed December 12, 2020.Carrier Axles. Design to Production, n.d. Accessed December 12, 2020.Chapter Two Structure. Illustration by author, 2020.Reactive Pricing Model (1). Illustration by author, 2020.Reactive Pricing Model (2). Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Framework (Design Model). Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Framework (DfMA Methodology Model). Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Framework (Early Engagement). Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Framework (Digital Clone). Illustration by author, 2020.Industrialized Framework (Fabrication Output). Illustration by author, 2020.Designing to Capability (1). Illustration by author, 2020.Designing to Capability (2). Illustration by author, 2020.Aspen Art Museum Overview. Illustration by author, 2020.Initial Design Concept. Illustration by author, 2020.Final Fabrication Concept. Illustration by author, 2020.Vacuum Forming. Photograph. 2011. Shigeru Ban Architects.7.157.167.177.187.198.018.028.038.048.056.086.096.106.116.126.136.147.017.027.037.047.057.067.077.087.097.107.117.127.137.14VIII IX10 11[Preface]Prior to commencing my undergraduate degree of Architectural Science at the British Columbia Institute of Technology, I was fortunate to gain several years of industry experience within polarized sides of the construction industry: conventional glazing with a subcontractor in Vancouver, BC and advanced digital fabrication with Spearhead in Nelson, BC. While my work at Spearhead has presented amazing opportunities for me to collaborate directly with industry-leading firms including Patkau Architects, Heatherwick Studio, and Shigeru Ban Architects, I believe that the twelve months I spent glazing were equally valuable as they opened my eyes to the siloed nature of conventional construction. Experiencing the juxtaposition between conventional construction and industry-leading digital fabrication has been tremendously influential to my academic pursuit in architecture as it has helped frame my perspective of the built environment.Highlighting the disjointed nature of conventional construction—where the extrapolation of 2-dimentional drawings orchestrate 3-dimentional work—glazing illustrated how large scopes of a project can typically fall outside of the architect’s control. As the contractual engagements defining fixed scopes of subcontracted work often quantify productivity as a measure of profit, it was standard for job sites to prioritize speed of construction so long as the minimal quality expectations of the project were met. Mistakes that occurred during the construction process however, if missed during the inspection phase, were unknowingly concealed, ultimately jeopardizing the longevity of the project and the integrity of the architecture.As I approach the conclusion of my academic studies at UBC, I have been reflecting on my experiences in the commercial glazing industry seven years ago. With the completion of each course, the fragmented nature of the AEC industry is further illuminated and reminds me of the disconnects I experienced working on site. Targeting the disjointed nature of the AEC industry, this project seeks to address how industrialized processes might ultimately become part of a larger culture in our industry, expanding our reach as architects and designers to strengthen the integrity of our work.X XI12 13XII XIII[Acknowledgments]I would like to recognize and thank Blair, Adam, and Zack. Your encouragements, your perspectives, and your expertise have been invaluable this semester and I am grateful to have had the opportunity to work with each of you.Thank you to my family for your unwavering support, positivity and love. You are all a constant source of inspiration and I could not have done this without you.My highest appreciation goes to Maddie. Thank you for always standing by my side and for supporting me through this endeavour.14 15PART 1    Introduction16 17[Chapter I: Lost Control]PreambleThe Architect as the Master BuilderThe Architect as the Design FacilitatorCase Studies of Reclaimed Control - Dymaxion HouseCase Studies of Reclaimed Control - Eames House1214162022Part 1  I  Introduction18 19PreambleThe following chapter reflects history, highlighting how the architect was once considered to be the master of all construction. Discussing how external pressures influenced the adaptation of industry, this chapter questions how traditional construction methodologies have limited the architect’s agency in contemporary practice.Two case studies—Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion House and Charles and Ray Eames’s Eames House—have been chosen to highlight how early examples of prefabrication were an effort to reclaim control in architecture.“Although architects have continually given up control of elements of building design and construction, we have fought to hold onto form as our last stronghold”Dan Willis - Fabricating ArchitectureDan Willis, Fabricating Architecture, (New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 2010)1.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction20 21The Architect as the Master Builder“He had nearly total personal control and responsibility for the making of the dome of S. Maria del Fiore in Florence. He was the architect, builder, engineer, and scientist.”1Prior to the organizational structures of contemporary practice that we are familiar with today, architects such as Filippo Brunelleschi and Michelangelo Buonarroti sought to integrate architectural design, engineering, material sciences, and construction processes within their work. Originating during the early 14th-century, a time of economic revival following the Middle Ages and the birth point of many of the world’s most iconic structures, the term “master builder” was used to exemplify the likes of Brunelleschi and Michelangelo—architects whom controlled every aspect of authorship within their buildings, many of which are still standing today.The relative simplicity of technology and building materials available during the 14th – 16th centuries ultimately enabled Brunelleschi and Michelangelo to become master builders of their time.2  Following the Renaissance however, as the complexity of projects increased and new disciplines emerged from the practice of architecture, the concept of the master builder was overrun by the complications of a fragmented industry.3 Brunelleschi’s dome atop the S. Maria del Fiore Cathedral in Florence is one of the most iconic testaments of design authorship in architecture. The work of Brunelleschi and his role of master builder has continued to inspire contemporary practice to this day. Questioning how a reinterpreted “master builder” might ultimately re-emerge within 21st-century architecture, KieranTimberlake and SHoP Architects—industry-leading firms attempting to bridge the gap between design and construction—continue to test the hypothesis of the master builder first introduced over 600 years ago.1.01Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture, (New York, McGraw-Hill, 2004), 27.Kieran and Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture, 27.Dan Willis, Fabricating Architecture, (New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 2010)1.2.3.Brunelleschi’s Dome, 1436Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction22 23The Architect as the Design Facilitator“Projects are now invariably treated as a series of sequential and predominantly separate operations where the individual players have very little stake in (or commitment to) the long-term success of the resulting building.”1The role of the architect in contemporary practice has changed significantly and has largely characterized the master builder as a foreign concept rooted to an era of romanticized craftsmanship. “No architects today think of themselves as master builders. The disjunction of the various elements of master building has been institutionalized over the past few centuries by means of separate educational programs, separate licensing and insurance requirements, and separate professional organizations.”2 While the contractual structures of design-build relationships may integrate multiple project services within a single project entity and are therefore often self-proclaimed to be parallel with the theoretical approach of the master builder, they do not aspire to master architecture as they simply design and then build, rarely incorporating the professional services of a registered architect.3  As project complexity has increased in parallel to the external forces of industry and society, the architect has continued to lose control over construction. Material advancements, emerging technologies, code changes, and targeted building performances are just a few of the convolutions rapidly transforming the AEC industry. “This expansion of design choices has added up to infinitely more complex and specialized buildings that require expertise in more subjects than one architect can master. The architect now coordinates the many diverse consultants who are able to master their own specialties.”4 Resulting from the architect’s subdivided responsibilities and their facilitation of siloed scopes of work within a project, the disjointed nature of a project’s organizational structure is reflected in the making of the building. “The single most devastating consequence of modernism has been the embrace of a process that segregates designers from makers: the architect has been separated from the contractor, and the materials scientist has been isolated from the product engineer.”1In contemporary practice, the making of construction documents signals the Andrew Fearne, “Efficiency Versus Effectiveness”, Supply Chain Management, no.4 (July 2006): 283Kieran and Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture, 29.Ibid., 27.Ibid., 28.1.2.3.4. 1.02 Lost AgencyPredesignDesign DevelopmentSchematic DesignConstruction DocumentationConstruction AdministrationTenderDeparture from digital modelReinterpretation of 2D drawingsEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyAgencyEngagement2D Drawings3D ModelDesignConstructionSite WorksPrimary Structure FoundationEnclosureFinishingHandoverMEP3D BuildingLow HighPart 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction24 25PredesignSite WorksDesign DevelopmentPrimary Structure Schematic DesignFoundationConstruction DocumentationEnclosureConstruction AdministrationFinishingHandoverTenderMEPDeparture from digital modelReinterpretation of 2D drawingsEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyEngagementAgencyEngagementAgency2D Drawings3D Building3D ModelDesignConstructionAgencyEngagementLow Higharchitect’s departure from the project and their ultimate demise of agency in construction. Contending this inevitable loss of control which stems from the rasterization of digital design information, the architect invests vast amounts of time into the documentation of their work—an effort to orchestrate the realization of their vision by eliminating any opportunities for interpretation during the construction of the project. However, as highlighted in Refabricating Architecture, the builder whom is awarded the construction contract following the tendering phase of the project will ultimately interpret the architect’s work and prescribe their own means, methods, and sequences for construction as they assume control over the project.2While inevitable circumstances have presented themselves throughout history and have alienated the architect from the title of master builder, the industry technology of today presents an opportunity for the architects of tomorrow to reclaim their agency in the construction of our built environment. This project is positioned to question how digital fabrication might ultimately become an extension of the architectural design process and a surrogate for the rasterization of digital project information.1.03Kieran and Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture, 13. Ibid., 31.1.2. Reclaimed AgencyPart 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction26 27Case Studies of Reclaimed Control - Dymaxion House“We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims.”1Prefabricated housing typologies have been tested by several architects throughout history including Buckminster Fuller, Le Corbusier, Walter Gropius, and Charles and Ray Eames as a method of decreasing the cost of construction while elevating the architectural potential within a project. However, early efforts of prefabrication were challenged by the limitations of industry technology at the time, often leading to the failure of their proposals—and sometimes for good reason.In 1920, following the end of World War One, Buckminster Fuller designed what he believed would be an autonomous machine of the future.2 Designed as a prefabricated assembly, Fuller envisioned the Dymaxion House(s) to arrive on site as a premeditated kit-of-parts—a direct extension of his architectural design process. While the project was never realized, it illustrated his desire to eliminate the redundancies of construction by orchestrating exactly how the project was to be assembled.1.04R. Buckminster Fuller quoted in William Becker, “Vision Needs a Seat at the Negotiation Table”, UN Chronicle, no.2 (2012)Katarina Mrkonjic, “Dymaxion House Case Study”, Journal of Green Building, no.2 (January 2007):1301.2.This figure has been removed due to copyright restrictions. It was a photograph of Buckminster Fuller in front of a scale model of the Dymaxion House (1920).Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction28 29Case Studies of Reclaimed Control - Case Study House 8“It is to be clearly understood that every consideration will be given to new materials and new techniques in house construction”1Charles and Ray Eames’s Case Study House 8 was the result of their participation in a collaborative design program run by the Arts and Architecture magazine in 1945. Constructed in 1949, the Eames’s design embodied a modular approach to prefabricated construction—an emerging typology of the time. The materiality and tectonic expression of their project responded to the design prompt outlined by the magazine which stated that “the house(s) will be conceived within the spirit of our times, using as far as is practicable, many war-born techniques and materials best suited to the expression of man’s life in the modern world.”2In response to the second World War, the case study program sought to identify construction techniques and material innovations capable of duplication in subsequent work. “Each house must be capable of duplication and in no sense be an individual ‘performance’… It is important that the best material available be used in the best possible way in order to arrive at a ‘good’ solution of each problem, which in the overall program will be general enough to be of practical assistance to the average American in search of a home in which he can afford to live.”3 As a counterpoint to traditional construction typologies of the time, the Eames’s house embodied their vision of the future.1.05Case Study House Program.” Arts & Architecture Magazine, 1945.Ibid.Ibid.1.2.3.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  IntroductionThis figure has been removed due to copyright restrictions. It was a photograph of Charles and Ray Eames standing on the steel frame of the Eames House during construction (1949).30 31[Chapter II: Technology and Architecture]PreambleSoftware & WorkflowManufacturing262832Part 1  I  Introduction32 33PreambleThe following chapter addresses how emerging technologies (both digital and material) have been influential in shaping the relationship between architecture, manufacturing, and construction. Arranged in two sections, it will first illustrate how the practice of architecture has been influenced by—and has also been instrumental in influencing—new software, and second, it will provide an overview of the manufacturing technologies which have aided in the development of material innovations and digital fabrication strategies seen in recent years.“The logics of digital workflows in architecture have begun to structure the way that architects design, the way that builders build, and the way that industry is reorganizing”1Scott Marble - Digital Workflows in ArchitecureScott Marble, Digital Workflows in Architecure, (Berlin, Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2012): 81.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction34 35Software & Workflow“All tools modify the gestures of their users, and in the design professions this feedback often leaves a visible trace: when these traces become consistent and pervasive across objects, technologies, cultures, people, and places, they coalesce into the style of an age and express the spirit of a time.”1 As the AEC industry grapples to harness the inherent potentials of modern technology, architecture has begun to adapt new methods of project delivery as it strives to harness the full potential of digitized construction. Wide-spread adoption of technology within the AEC industry however has historically been met with resistance, illustrating the fragmented nature of architecture, engineering, and construction.2  Framing the context within which contemporary practice operates, the following paragraphs outline the origins of established software and digital workflows. The advent of software over the past forty years has characterized five predominant digital eras in architecture.3 Reflecting the release of AutoCAD in 1982—the first digital drafting tool widely adopted within the practice of architecture—a two-dimensional drafting era initiated the digitization of manual drawing. Following the relative success of AutoCAD, 3D Studio Max, Rhino, and Alias Maya enabled the widespread adoption of three-dimensional modelling techniques and the beginning of a new era in design. While the Building Information Modelling (BIM) era extends back to the release of Dassault Catia in 1981—the predominant modelling software utilized by Frank Gehry—BIM did not gain significant traction within industry until the release of Revit in 1997. More recently, algorithmic computation has influenced a new era of design and is often characterized by scripting software such as Grasshopper and Dynamo. Machine learning, the most recent era in contemporary practice, is framed by the generative principles of artificial intelligence and signifies a transformational shift in the generation of design which ultimately questions the authorship of architecture.4While digital software has increased dramatically in both variation and popularity since the debut of AutoCAD in 1982, “the underlying conception and logic of established processes more often than not has remained largely unchallenged during this adoption of new technologies, rendering them a 2D Drafting Era3D Modelling EraBuilding Information Modelling EraDesign Computation EraMachine Learning EraDreamcatcherGenerative ComponentsAutodesk white paper3D Studio MaxRhinoAlias MayaSketchUpRevit‘BIM’ coined‘building model’ coinedArchiCADDassult CatiaDigital Project GrasshopperProject FractalProject VisualDynamo‘BIM data’ coined‘perametricism’ coinedAutoCADBentley Microstation2020201020001980199019402.01Mario Carpo, The Second Digital Turn, (Cambridge, The MIT Press, 2017): 55Fearne, “Efficiency Versus Effectiveness,” 283Paul Wintour, “A Brief History of Cumputation” Parametric Monkey (June 2016)Carpo, The Second Digital Turn, 7.1.2.3.4. Digital Eras in ArchitecturePart 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction36 37mere computerised extension of the well known.”1 The willingness to adopt software without question in an effort to enhance the practice of architecture has ultimately furthered the fragmentation of industry. Processes and workflows—the connective intelligence between design and construction—are now preventing architects from harnessing the full potential of their digitized practices. Responding to issues of process, three divergent workflows have emerged at the forefront of contemporary practice: Designing Design, Designing Assembly, and Designing Industry.2 While Designing Design and Designing Industry consider “how professionally divided design processes are being redefined as integrated design systems”3 as well as how “inputs across multiple disciplines can be collected, modelled, and efficiently managed”4, this project is concerned primarily with Designing Assembly—an issue of making where “the logics of assembling building parts are foregrounded as criteria during design”5My experience working at Spearhead introduced me to the concept of Designing Assembly. Through early engagement in design assist—a value added approach to the realization of architecture where early fabricator engagement allows the architectural design processes to benefit from fabrication-specific knowledge—Spearhead is able to bridge the gap between design and construction, ensuring that material properties and fabrication strategies are active drivers in design. Spearhead’s roles in design assist and fabrication for Patkau Architects’ Temple of Light were a testament to the processes of Designing Assembly. Inverting the traditional relationship between the architect and fabricator, file-to-factory becomes factory-to-file, “creating a reciprocal relationship between design concepts, material properties, methods of production, and assembly sequences.”6Achim Menges, “Computational Material Cultures”, Architectural Design 86, no.2 (March 2016): 78Marble, Digital Workflows in Architecure, 8.Ibid.Ibid.Ibid., 7.Ibid.1.2.3.4.5.6.2.032.02 Temple of Light PrefabricationTemple of Light PrefabricationPart 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction38 39Manufacturing“While the ideology of automated construction has been a goal for architects since computer numerically controlled machines were first conceptualized in the 1960’s, it has not been until recent developments in software interfaces that this dream has been made a possible reality.”1Computerized Numerical Control (CNC) technology dates to the 1940’s during the peak of World War Two. Pioneered by the US Air Force and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as a method for accurately fabricating light-weight aircraft componentry,2 CNC machinery has adapted to revolutionize manufacturing around the world. While CNC technology is the backbone of production line manufacturing and has been largely credited for the efficiency and quality realized in both the aerospace and automotive industries, CNC technology remains at the fringe of traditional construction practices.While production line manufacturing has had a pervasive influence in construction and has ultimately led to the off-the-shelf nature of mass-produced building componentry, visions of mass production first introduced by Le Corbusier were never realized. “Touted as a cross between art and science, architecture can never satisfactorily be mass produced, as each instance of building requires a unique approach based on far too many variables; context, client, geography, economy, politics, time, and taste to name a few.”3 The sophisticated nature of today’s CNC processes, however, allow the contemporary architect to depart from the banality of mass production while still harnessing the efficiencies of production dreamed of by Corbusier.While the practice of architecture has spent the past forty years experimenting with the latest advancements in digital technology, contemporary manufacturing tools—specifically CNC machines—“now have the ability to integrate data into various forms of automated construction.”4 Technology-driven manufacturing processes are presenting architects with an opportunity to increase their control in the construction process, as “the assimilation and synthesis of digital communications among architects, engineers, fabricators and builders is dramatically altering how we work and our relationship to the tools we use.”12.04Kevin Sweet, “Resurrecting the Master Builder”, Automation in Construction 72, (December, 2016): 33.Philip Scranton, “The Shows and the Flows: Materials, Markets, and Innovation in the US Machine Tool Industry”, History and Technology 86, no.3 (2009).Sweet, “Resurrecting the Master Builder”, 33.Ibid.1.2.3.4.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  IntroductionThis figure has been removed due to copyright restrictions. It was a photograph of MIT’s original numerically controlled mill (1952).40 41While manufacturing technologies hold the potential to bring wide-spread sophistication into the construction industry, state-of-the-art CNC machinery at the cutting edge of manufacturing today still responds to the actuation of an operator. Therefore, present-day digital fabrication processes remain at the mercy of human error. As the bridge between the computer and the machine, the operator holds an important role in the realization of architecture. One of the most recent advancements in digitized construction is the use of Single Task Construction Robots (STCRs).2 Stemming from Japan, STCRs have begun to gain traction in Europe as manufacturers expand their research and development in digitized construction. Designed specifically for single-task use, STCRs “do not try to automate or robotize major sections of the construction site, and thereby avoid large-scale investments and alterations.”32.05Marble, Digital Workflows in Architecure.Thomas Linner, “A Technology Management System for the Development of Single-Task Construction Robots”, Construction Innovation 20, no.01 (January 2020).Ibid.1.2.3.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  IntroductionThis figure has been removed due to copyright restrictions. It was a photograph of a single-task construction robot (STCR).42 43[Chapter III: Compromised Workflows]PreambleDuplications of workLabour ProductivityBuilding Performance38404446Part 1  I  Introduction44 45PreambleThe following chapter outlines how a lack of integration within the AEC industry has frozen the potential for future growth and industry progression. Arranged in three sections, it first elaborates upon how duplicated project efforts are the result of siloed divisions of work; second, how poor labour productivity in the construction industry reflects a lack of automation and digital fabrication; and third, how the performance gap in architecture is directly linked to the disjunction of design and construction.“The single most devastating consequence of modernism has been the embrace of a process that segregates designers from makers: The architect has been separated from the contractor, and the materials scientist has been isolated from the product engineer.”1Stephen Kieran & James Timberlake - Refabricating ArchitectureKieran and Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture, 13. 1.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction46 47PredesignHighLowSchematic DesignDesignDevelopmentConstructionDocumentationTender ConstructionAdministrationDuplications of Work“The construction industry is arguably the least integrated of all the major industrial sectors, characterized by adversarial practices, disjointed supply relationships and a lack of trust between clients, main contractors and subcontractors”1The fragmentation of industry that is prevalent today—largely caused by the partitioned nature of design and construction—has devastated the way we deliver architecture.2  If the AEC industry were to move towards a future of digitized construction—where off-site robotic component manufacturing were to offset the inefficiencies and duplications of work commonly associated within traditional construction processes, current methods of project delivery and scope definition must be re-evaluated to harness the full potential of digital manufacturing and Integrated Project Delivery practices.3 Mentioned in Chapter 2, Designing Assembly is envisioned to do just that. “If architects have no concept of what is possible in the production process, then they can create inefficiencies or devise assemblies which increase the cost or reduce the quality of the finished building.”4Briefly discussed in Chapter 1, the lack of digital continuity between design and construction has attributed to the disconnected nature of industry that we are familiar with today. The architect’s investment in three-dimensional modelling has limited control over the resulting architecture as their digital efforts are unable to actuate construction processes. “All the BIM systems currently on the market were never designed to drive a digital fabrication process or to actually generate the GCODE that runs CNC machines. They have predominantly been written to address the current workflows based around documentation.”5Unable to mine the architect’s three-dimensional digital model—typically produced and refined during the early stages of Schematic Design and Design Development—traditional construction processes have been forced to reconstruct the architect’s vision from two-dimensional representations of their work. While digital fabrication has recently gained traction within the construction industry and ultimately brings the act of making one step closer to the architect, fabricators are forced to produce parallel models of the architect’s existing work. Not only does this duplicate project effort, digital discrepancies MacLeamy Curve - Typical EffortCost of Design ChangesAbility to Impact ProjectTypicalEffort3.01Andrew Fearne, “Efficiency Versus Effectiveness”, Supply Chain Management, no.4 (July 2006): 283Kieran and Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture.Ted Hall, Advanced Timber Manufacturing, (Vancouver, BC Wood, 2019).Martyn Day, “Embracing Digital Fabrication”, AEC Magazine, (May 2019): 19.Ibid.1.2.3.4.5.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction48 49may arise between the independent models produced for seemingly isolated scopes of work.The disconnects between architectural software and construction processes have ultimately affected the relationship between the cost of design changes and the ability for those changes to occur as seen in illustration 3.01. While traditional project delivery processes position most of a project’s “effort” late in the design process, industry-leading processes such as Designing Assembly, Integrated Project Delivery, and Design Assist, front-load effort to positively impact the project.13.02PredesignHighLowSchematic DesignDesignDevelopmentConstructionDocumentationTender ConstructionAdministrationMacLeamy Curve - Front Loaded EffortCost of Design ChangesAbility to Impact ProjectFront LoadedEffortLu Weisheng, et al., “Demystifying the Time-Effort Distribution Curves in Construction Projects”, Construction Research Congress, (2014): 3301.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction50 51Labour Productivity“In the United States since 1945, productivity in manufacturing, retail, and agriculture has grown by as much as 1,500 percent; productivity in construction has barely increased at all.”1Defined by the McKinsey Global Institute as the “real gross value added per hour worked by persons engaged,”2 labour productivity can be seen as a measure of efficiency and effectiveness—a frame of reference for progression within the construction industry. Over the past 25 years, the AEC industry has seen very little progression in productivity and efficiency—generally speaking, the development of an architectural project today mirrors the development of an architectural project in 1995.3 Comparatively, the manufacturing sector has seen a nearly two-fold increase in labour productivity, highlighted by the fact that vehicular production is twice as fast as it was thirty years ago.Principally responsible for the wide-spread stagnation of industry productivity, the non-digital nature of conventional construction reflects the materials and methods of past decades. Cast-in-place concrete—a highly problematic construction typology effecting the efficiency, quality, and environmental footprint of new construction—has remained a predominant material choice in North America due to its familiarity, durability, and relative cost effectiveness. As new materials and methods begin to challenge the status quo of construction however—specifically the use of mass timber as a primary structural material—new processes and methods of production will ultimately bring increased efficiency and cost effectiveness to construction.While form and function in contemporary practice typically outweigh efficiency and economy, “an architect who ignores efficiency designs wasteful buildings,” and, “an architect who slavishly serves efficiency produces affordable but uninspired buildings.”4 Challenging the notion that efficiency is analogous to banal architecture, this report questions how the use of advanced technologies, materials, and digital processes can enable the architect to efficiently realize inspired architecture. 1990110%120%130%140%150%160%170%180%190%200%100%200020102020AECManufacturing(does not include AEC)Total EconomyGlobal Labour Productivity relative to 19903.03Filipe Barbosa, et al., Reinventing Construction: A Route to Higher Productivity, (New York, McKinsey & Company, 2017)Ibid., 2.Ibid., 22.Dan Willis, Fabricating Architecture, (New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 2010)1.2.3.4.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction52 53Building Performance“The performance gap erodes the credibility of the design and engineering sectors of the building industry and leads to general public scepticism of new High-Performance Building concepts.”1Responding to the environmental footprint of traditional construction, architects have collectively sought to design more environmentally conscious, energy efficiently buildings. Modelling software such as Sefaira—specifically designed for the analysis of a building’s energy performance—has become common in contemporary practice. The measured performance in new construction, however, often strays from the theoretical output of modelling software—a phenomenon commonly known as the performance gap. “There often is a significant difference between predicted (computed) energy performance of buildings and actual measured energy use once buildings are operational.”2Parallel to the duplications of work and lack of efficiency discussed in the previous two sections, the performance gap in architecture is also linked to the disjunction of design and construction. While the gap varies from project to project, research has shown that energy usage in new construction can reach a magnitude of up to 2.5 times greater than the theoretical use modelled during the design phase.3 Addressing this discrepancy is paramount to future construction if we wish to design buildings with a reduced environmental impact.While there are many factors which influence the performance gap—including discrepancies of inter-model software used during design, poor operation of the completed project, and occupant behaviour that deviates from the expectations of the architect—traditional construction practices also contribute significantly (Figure 3.04). “The quality of buildings is often not in accordance with the specification, with insufficient attention paid to both insulation and airtightness.”4 Many of the issues stemming from the construction of a building may evade detection during architectural field reviews as I can personally attest to from my experience working as a glazier.Pieter Wilde, “The Gap Between Predicted and Measured Energy Performance of Buildings”, Automation in Construction 41 (May 2014): 40.Ibid.Ibid.Ibid.1.2.3.4.Typical Path of the Performance Gap3.04BetterWorseDesignCompliancemodellingPerformance TargetOn-site workmanshipDesign changesPoor operationMalfunctioning equipmentOccupant behaviorInter-model variabilityPerformance modellingCalibrationPerformanceConstruction UsePart 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction54 55[Chapter IV: Industry Disruption]PreambleConvergent TechnologyDemographicsSustainability50525456Part 1  I  Introduction56 57PreambleFraught with labour inefficiency, material waste, and environmental impacts, the construction industry is on the cusp of significant change which will forever alter the way buildings are constructed. Organized into three sections, this chapter will first discuss how a convergence of industry technology is positioned to shift the paradigm of traditional construction; second, how a transition of labour is likely to occur following the rise of off-site prefabrication strategies; and third, how material advancements and digitally driven construction processes could ultimately reduce the environmental impact of new construction.“We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Don’t let yourself be lulled into inaction”Bill GatesBill Gates quoted in “How to Prepare Your Company For the Internet of Things” Forbes Magazine (Febrauary 2017)1.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction58 59Convergent Technology“What are the potentials for architects to reposition themselves by taking a more influential role within the current restructuring of industry? Does the fact that digital technology will play a central role in this restructuring give an advantage to architects?”1During the twentieth century, as Buckminster Fuller and Charles and Ray Eames explored how early concepts of prefabrication could positively influence their work, a lack of technological sophistication prohibited any large-scale advancements in the construction industry. However, as described by Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake in Refabricating Architecture, that sophistication is present today and can “allow connections among research, design, depiction, and making that have not existed since specialization began during the Renaissance.”2While contemporary construction processes continue to be plagued with the inefficiencies stemming from a disconnected industry, recent advancements in material innovation, manufacturing technology, and design software have opened a new chapter of efficiency and architectural possibility within the AEC industry. Although a longstanding history of prefabrication exists within architecture, very few projects have been able to benefit from the true potential of digital fabrication. As is common in conventional construction, the architect’s design database has been unable to feed directly into the manufacturing process. “Connecting building design to digital fabrication has the potential to change the game, with automated cutting and configuration systems to enable customers’ the choices to be fed directly into the production system.”3Enabling the growth of CNC processes in construction, mass timber has begun to showcase how precision manufacturing and off-site component assembly can benefit schedule, quality, and performance. First introduced in Austria by Gerhard Schickhofer in 1994, cross laminated timber (CLT) represents architectural milestones in both sustainability and construction efficiency. While this proposal does not aspire to become a mass timber-centric thesis in GP2, the inherent material characteristics of both CLT and glulam, paired with their relative ease of manufacturing, are analogous with a digitized industry and will ultimately aid in the pursuit of architectural agency.Marble, Digital Workflows in Architecure, 10.Kieran and Timberlake, Refabricating Architecture, 23.Martyn Day, “Embracing Digital Fabrication”, 14.1.2.3.4.01 Cross Laminated Timber Panels (CLT)Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction60 61Demographics“We will see factories of robots producing buildings, factories with humans producing buildings, and mixtures thereof, but the trend has to be towards full automaton at some point”1A widespread implementation of mass timber in new construction will likely automate labour-intensive processes by decreasing the volume of traditional construction occurring on site.  Countering the decrease of site labour in conventional construction, factory jobs will increase as prefabricated building components are manufactured in controlled environments. According to a report from the McKinsey Global Institute, a 5-10 times productivity boost is possible for some parts of the AEC industry by moving to a manufacturing style production system.2While production line assembly may be analogous to the commoditization of architecture, this project is positioned to counter that projection, suggesting that emergent manufacturing technologies, paired with the redistribution of industry labour, might ultimately allow the architect to actuate construction once again. It aims to explore how an end-to-end solution for the digital connectivity of design and construction could increase productivity and material efficiency, while enabling the phenomenological nature of design to be realized through digitized construction practices.4.034.02Martyn Day, “Embracing Digital Fabrication”, 16.Filipe Barbosa, “Reinventing Construction”.1.2.Part 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  IntroductionThis figure has been removed due to copyright restrictions. It was a photograph of Katerra’s CLT factory in Spokane, WA.This figure has been removed due to copyright restrictions. It was a photograph of several construction workers preparing a CIP concrete pour.62 63Sustainability“Overwhelming evidence now confirms that humans are changing Earth in unprecedented ways”1It was first argued that human-caused emissions could damage our environment during the late 19th century. While initially met with skepticism and opposition—a viewpoint which still exists today—we are now undoubtedly living in the Anthropocene—an epoch of dramatic climate change and environmental instability directly correlated to human activity.2At the expense of our planet, the construction industry is responsible for 36% of global energy consumption and over 39% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere.3 We need construction to inhabit our environment, yet our current building practices drape an enormous carbon footprint over the AEC industry. As an actuator of industry disruption, environmentally responsible construction strategies will ultimately dictate the materials and methods of tomorrow.Based on comprehensive cradle-to-gate analyses—stemming from the origins of raw materials, through their transportation, manufacturing, and ultimate uses within construction—the embodied carbon of  mass timber construction is significantly less than the embodied carbon of structurally equivalent concrete and steel.4 As mass timber’s inherent material characteristics allow for off-site robotic fabrication, increased material availability will likely position mass timber as the material of the future, capable of elevating architecture agency while simultaneously reducing the environmental impact of new construction.39%4.04Erle Ellis, Anthropocene: A Short Introduction, (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018), 2.Ibid., 3.Martin Rock, et all., “Embodied GHG Emissions of Buildings,” Applied Energy 258 (January 2020): 2.Z Seitz and P Dusicka, “Comparing the Embodied Carbon and Energy of a Mass Timber Structure System to Typical Steel and Concrete Alternatives”, Energy and Buildings 199 (September 2019)1.2.3.4.Global GHG Emissions - ConstructionPart 1  I  IntroductionPart 1  I  Introduction64 65PART 2    Proposal66 67An Industrialized Ecosystem:  Re claiming Design IntegrityJosh Hall  I  2020.11.28UBC  I  M.Arch ThesisCommitteeBlair Satterfield  I  Associate Professor & Chair, SALADr. Adam Rysanek  I  Assistant Professor, SALAZachary Moreland  I  Director, Shigeru Ban Architects America68 69Project IntroductionAs I mentioned in the preface, my inspiration for this topic comes from polarized experiences that I have had working in the construction industry. Through my work in digital fabrication at Spearhead, I have had amazing opportunities to collaborate directly with industry-leading firms on a wide range of prefabricated work. The projects that I have been a part of not only illustrated the value of designing for manufacturing and assembly, they also highlighted the tremendous opportunity that technology is presenting to architecture, and they encouraged me to question the status quo of our industry. What if the AEC industry were more integrated, allowing architects and designers to engage the production of their work more actively? What if our profession designed to the capabilities of manufacturing technology instead of playing roulette with traditional modes of construction? What if an industrialized ecosystem could bridge the gap between design and construction to challenge the redundancies of traditional processes? This project questions how industrialized processes in digital fabrication might ultimately become part of a larger culture in the AEC industry, making industrialized construction more accessible to more architecture. This thesis uses the terminology of an “ecosystem” because the goal of the project is multifaceted: it suggests that we design for industrialized construction; it proposes a framework for industry collaboration; but most importantly, it illustrates how industrialized processes might expand our reach as architects and designers to strengthen the integrity of our work. Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalProject Introduction  I  Perceptions of IndustryThe contemporary use of the term “Industrialized Construction” is often misunderstood in practice. It carries a negative connotation as it conjures images of standardization, failed projects, modularity, and homogeneity in the built environment...This thesis seeks to change how we perceive this terminology, by illustrating how industrialized construction is actually a catalyst for digitally intelligent architecture.5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04GNW Pavilion Aspen Museum Temple of Light Swatch Omega70 71Project Introduction  I  The Aspect Ratio of Our Industry This thesis begins by illustrating how we design in an industry where Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is relatively distant terminology, where industrialized construction is perceived as an undesirable concept, and where the majority of our work is put together by hand and piece by piece on a construction site. While the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry has remained relatively static with regard to construction and project delivery processes, almost every other industrial sector has surged to mechanize and adopt technological advancements in their work. Construction processes today mirror the construction processes of thirty years ago.This thesis seeks to question how the practice of architecture might expand the aspect ratio of the AEC industry by stewarding advanced processes and workflows in both design and construction.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal5.05 The Aspect Ratio of Our Industry (1)72 73What if we could harness industrialized technologies to strengthen our design integrity...Affording us more iteration, more opportunities to refine, to prototype, and to impact our work...Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal5.06 The Aspect Ratio of Our Industry (2)74 75PredesignSchematic DesignProject StatementThe conventional expectation of architecture school is to celebrate and enforce traditional design processes that are prevalent in our industry. As students, we learn to prioritize early stages of Schematic Design, thus limiting the integrity of our work as we distance ourselves from subsequent stages of project development. We are taught to accept that the pervasive influences of the construction industry are outside of our control, and further, outside of our realm of expertise.This thesis challenges traditional design processes...Addressing the need for progressive change in our industry, this thesis argues that it is integral to bring the concept of designing for manufacturing and assembly (DfMA) into our professional discourse. Deconstructing the erosion of our design integrity from three traditionally undervalued phases of a project—Design Development, Construction Documentation, and Tendering—this thesis proposes that by collectively fostering an “Industrialized Ecosystem”, we can democratize industrialized processes to strengthen the integrity of our work.As a counterpoint to the conventional expectation of an architectural thesis, this project is expressed through diagrammatic illustrations of process and workflow...Design DevelopmentConstruction DocumentationTenderSite WorksPrimary Structure FoundationEnclosureConstruction AdministrationFinishingHandoverMEPConventional ExpectationProposalProposalProposalPart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal76 77Industry StewardshipOutliers of High ComplexityIndustrialized ConstructionInterpretive ConstructionBIM is a Dead EndCase Study: Swatch OmegaReactive Pricing Model  Industrialized FrameworkDesigning to CapabilityThe Industrial CurveCase Study: Aspen Art MuseumSiloed AuthorshipHighLowIndustrialized Design PhilosophyEmbracing CollaborationReclaiming Design IntegrityDesign DevelopmentConstruction DocumentationTenderPredesignSite WorksPrimary Structure Schematic DesignFoundationEnclosureConstruction AdministrationFinishingHandoverMEPOne  BIM and InterpretationTwo  Roulette and Value EngineeringThree  Hierarchy and Re-DesignProject StructureTo highlight the erosion of architectural design integrity, this thesis suggests where and how the profession of architecture could benefit, to the greatest extent, from industrialized processes. The three chapters of this proposal have been intentionally arranged in reverse order so that we address our construction processes before we discuss our design practices.This concept of “working backward” lead the research and the development of this thesis as a guiding principle for the project has been to pick up our conversation where it typically ends. Ultimately, these three chapters frame watershed moments in our existing workflow as they each propose an industrialized response to strengthen our voice as architects and designers.5.07 Project Structure Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal78 79Project LensIt is important to understand that this thesis project is not a design proposal. Instead, this project proposes how we can look at our work differently, to understand it through the lens of construction, but then ultimately, to extract how an industrialized approach to each of these primary scopes of work can support our dialog in the early stages of design.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal5.08 Project Lens80 81Outliers of High ComplexityIndustrialized ConstructionInterpretive ConstructionBIM is a Dead EndCase Study: Swatch OmegaConstruction DocumentationBIM and InterpretationChapter One6.01 Chapter One StructurePart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalChapter One begins with illustrating how the rasterization of our work during CD initiates the erosion of our design integrity during construction.82 83departure from digital BIM modelDocumentation Documentation Documentation Documentation Documentation Digital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputInterpretationInterpretationInterpretationInterpretationInterpretationInterpretive BarrierDigital InputInterpretive ConstructionIt is important to recognize the fairly obvious fact that we work in a digital space—a space where our design efforts are orchestrated in a digital model. As architects and designers, we spend months—sometimes even years—refining a design proposal in a digital model, only to flatten that digital information onto construction plans to inform how the proposal will be constructed. We are unable to leverage the data that we have in our models as traditional modes of construction do not speak a digital language.  This thesis suggests that by departing from the digital model, we are relinquishing our control of the project and limiting our agency in its construction—the integrity of the design becomes subject to how others interpret our drawings.The Interpretive Barrier...The point where the integrity of a design becomes subject to the interpretation of a drawing...Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal6.02 Interpretive Barrier84 85Digital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputIndustrialized ConstructionThis thesis suggests that adjusting how we design could transform how way we build. By designing for industrialized construction practices, architects and designers could, in theory, converse digitally with the manufacturing tools of the AEC industry to eliminate the interpretive nature of traditional construction.Industrialized construction isn’t a novel idea in architecture as various forms of digital fabrication and prefabrication have existed for decades.  However, digitally linking a complete architectural proposal to the manufacturing and assembly of multiple scopes of work is still a rarefied concept—a concept that this thesis seeks to democratize.From representation to simulation...This thesis suggests that a shift from representation to simulation lies in our ability to design for industrialized constructionPart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal6.03 Industrialized Construction86 87Digital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputWe have to think beyond BIM...BIM is a Dead EndA shift from representation to simulation would require architects and designers to think beyond BIM. Even though the concept of BIM was first introduced over twenty years ago with the introduction of Revit in 2000, it is still often regarded as a clear path forward for the AEC industry.This thesis states that BIM is a dead end—not only because the various BIM software in our industry are designed to produce drawings and not machine code, but more importantly, because the idea of BIM is centered around the idea of merely adding efficiency to traditional processes. BIM is about digitizing our existing workflows.“When you digitize a shitty process, what you get is a shitty digitized process”Thorsten Dirks, CEO Telefonica GermanyPart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal6.04 BIM is a Dead End88 891990190%180%170%160%150%140%130%120%110%100%200%200020102020ManufacturingTotal EconomyAECRevitGrasshopperDreamcatcherBuilding Information Modelling (BIM) Era3D Modelling EraDesign Computation EraMachine Learning EraAspen Art MuseumSwatch Omega HQPart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalGlobal Labour ProductivityTo support the claim that BIM is a dead end, one can look to the past 30 years of global labour productivity. While other industries have surged—lead by the manufacturing sector which has seen a nearly 200% increase in productivity— the AEC industry has remained stagnant. The productivity of construction today mirrors the productivity of construction 30 years ago.Overlaying the modelling eras in architecture, it is evident that the introduction of Revit at the turn-of-the-century had little to no effect on the productivity of the AEC industry as a whole. There are outliers however, especially projects that embody high levels of complexity or that have utilized timber as prefabricated scopes of work. This thesis looks to two of these projects—the Swatch Omega Headquarters in Biel, Switzerland and the Aspen Art Museum in Aspen, Colorado—as anecdotal evidence to support the goal of democratizing industrialized processes in design and construction.6.05 Outliers of High Complexity90 91net changeLevel of IndustrializationAspen Art MuseumBrock CommonsSwatch Omega HQBUGA Wood PavilionDFAB House Mulberry House Shigeru Ban ArchitectsActon Ostry ArchitectsShigeru Ban ArchitectsICD/ITKENCCRSHoP ArchitectsPedagogical Expectation“Traditional Typology”0% 100%net changenet changenet ch.net changenet ch.net changePart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalSpectrum of ComplexityThe Swatch Omega Headquarters and the Aspen Art Museum—precedent setting projects designed by Shigeru Ban Architects—were chosen for this thesis as they illustrate how complexity has become a proving ground for industrialized processes in architecture.It is important to note that this thesis does not suggest that we harness industrialized construction processes by simply increasing the level of complexity in our design work. Instead, it proposes that we look to these highly complex projects—and others like them—as evidence to support the claim that industrialized construction can become more accessible to more architecture.  These highly complex projects encourage us to think differently about how we design and build conventional architecture, regardless of materiality and form.6.06 Spectrum of Industrialization92 93Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalSwatch Omega HQCase Study6.07 Swatch Omega Facade Overview4 5Shigeru Ban ArchitectsBiel, Switzerland94 95Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputDigital InputA Digital LinkThe Swatch Omega Headquarters, designed by Shigeru Ban Architects, illustrates how a project can ultimately shift from representation to simulation. Lead by Design to Production—a Swiss DfMA consultant specializing in projects with high-complexity—the project team was able to establish a digital link between their design processes and the fabrication of over 75,000 individually prefabricated components.While 75,000 might sound like a relative number, this scale of prefabrication and digital coordination across multiple scopes of work is nearly unheard of in the AEC industry. When it is realized, it is typically only seen in projects of similar complexity. This case study illustrates two of the contributing factors which enabled the prefabrication of multiple scopes of work.A Digital Link...To over 75,000 prefabricated components across multiple scopes of work...6.08 Digital Mock-Up96 97Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalSystemization not StandardizationThe first point is that the project team was able to systematically resolve the facade’s complexity by employing the principles of DfMA. As a result, this highly-complex project was able to successfully shift from representation to simulation, increasing the digital intelligence of its components while establishing a systematic logic to the facade of the structure. Ultimately, this highly-complex project had fewer unique construction details to coordinate than a single-family house, yet it is approximately 100x the size and it is also arguably one of the most expressive timber projects in Europe.Systemization is not Standardization...Systemization can resolve project complexity by integrating traditionally isolated scopes of work...6.10 6.116.09Multi-Scope Node (Assembled) Node TypologiesMulti-Scope Node (Exploded)98 99Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalA Culture of DfMAThe second point is that the successful fabrication of this project came from the fact that the entire project team understood and appreciated the culture of designing for manufacturing and assembly. Various stages of “design freeze” were agreed upon early in the project’s development to enable design processes to “stay digital”—there was a mutual project understanding that at the end of these three stages, the project would be ready for deep-dives into the development of machine code.Traditional documentation ultimately became redundant through this process. It wasn’t required for fabrication, there was a model sign-off procedure with the AHJ, and there were a clear logic and organizational structure to the project’s DNA meaning that the skilled labour installing the components did not require what we might consider “traditional instruction”.6.146.136.12Carrier AxlesBuilding VolumesBuilding AxisA Culture of DfMA...Stages of “design freeze” allowed the project to stay digital...100 101Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalRoulette and Value EngineeringChapter TwoReactive Pricing Model  Industrialized FrameworkDesigning to CapabilityThe Industrial CurveCase Study: Aspen Art MuseumTender7.01 Chapter Two Structure2 103Chapter Two suggests that tendering work is the most devastating phase of a project as it often leads directly to value engineering—a pursuit for cost-efficiency which ultimately takes the value out of design. Highlighting two of the primary contributing factors that lead to this erosion of design integrity, this chapter proposes an industrialized framework that could bridge the gap between design and construction to help alleviate the friction of tendering work.102 103Reactive Pricing ModelThe first contributing factor is that we spend the majority of our design effort—and our allocated design time—constructing a virtual representation of what we intend to build, typically in the form of a BIM model. However, this modelling space becomes increasingly complex as we try to refine the design concept while at the same time add enough detail to inform traditional pricing efforts. The relatively high level of detail in this model—typically LOD 300-350—means that we could be spending more time facilitating the design process and less time actually “designing” the project.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalDesignIntegrityEngineerGeneral ContractorBIM ModelLOD 350SDPD DD CD TR CA7.02 Reactive Pricing Model 1104 105DesignIntegrityEngineerGeneral ContractorMEP Finishing/InteriorEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructureBIM ModelLOD 350Formwork/FoundationThe Reactive Pricing ModelThe second point is that we typically only engage the entities that will build our work at the 11th-hour of the project. Therefore, in most cases, design decisions are based on assumptions of cost and not actually on real data. We are playing roulette with our proposals. During the tendering stage, time is no longer in the favour of the architect or designer and any soft of mandated value engineering effort will ultimately begin to the erode the value of the design.This thesis does not suggest that we eliminate the idea of developing comprehensive project models. However, it proposes that we think critically about our modelling efforts.  As a counterpoint to the single point of coordination illustrated here, this thesis proposes three interconnected stages of design and digital development that can lead directly to manufacturing processes later in a project’s development.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalSDPD DD CD TR CA7.03 Reactive Pricing Model 2106 107Design Model(s)Industrialized FrameworkThe first stage is about extracting a dedicated and uninterrupted space for design. This model(s) is envisioned to have a much lower level of detail—approximately LOD 100—allowing the architect or designer to fluidly iterate, refine, and test ideas as the project develops.A space for design...With a low level of detail allowing room to test, iterate, and refinePart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalLOD 100SDPD DD CD TR CA7.04 Industrialized Framework (Design Model)108 109ArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrity“LOD 200”EngineerGeneral ContractorDesign Model(s)DfMA Methodology ModelA space for collaboration...The nucleus of the project where innovation can occur as we harness the concepts of DfMAIndustrialized FrameworkThe second stage of modelling becomes the nucleus of the project—a collaborative design space where the DNA of manufacturing and assembly can guide and inform our design processes.One of the fundamental principles of DfMA is that there is a reiterative design methodology where downstream processes of production are considered during design. However, integrating that production knowledge into our design processes would not be feasible without the early engagement of the entities who will manufacture and fabricate the project.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalLOD 100SDPD DD CD TR CA7.05 Industrialized Framework (DfMA Methodology Model)110 111Formwork/FoundationDfMA Methodology ModelArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityOutOutOutOutOutInInInInInEngineerGeneral ContractorMEPFinishing/InteriorEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructureDesign Model(s)SDPD DD CD TR CAIndustrialized FrameworkThis thesis project recognizes that early engagement is not a new idea in architecture, especially in the context of Integrated Project Delivery. However, this framework does not suggest that we just engage our traditional trades and construction processes earlier. It suggests that we build on the momentum of Integrated Project Delivery, it suggests that we go a step further, and it suggests that we focus on engaging manufacturing entities that can contribute to the collective digital intelligence of a project.It is important to note that there is a level of speculation within this framework—many of these manufacturing entities have yet to adopt industrialized processes. However, this thesis suggests that it is only a matter of time before we begin to see digital fabrication in multiple scopes of work.The primary focus of this modelling stage is to refine a manufacturing logic where a systematic approach to multiple scopes of work can enable the manufacturing and assembly of prefabricated components. However, the DfMA Methodology Model does not have a level of detail or refinement that is capable of exporting machine code as it is proposed to operate at LOD 200.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalLOD 1007.06 Industrialized Framework (Early Engagement)“LOD 200”112 113Formwork/FoundationDfMA Methodology ModelArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityOutOutOutOutOutInInInInInEngineerGeneral ContractorMEPFinishing/InteriorEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructureDesign Model(s)Digital CloneIndustrialized FrameworkThe third stage of modelling proposes that the architect or designer can control fabrication.A space for digital control...A highly detailed source of machine code for multiple scopes of work...Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalLOD 100PD DD CD TR CASD7.07 Industrialized Framework (Digital Clone)“LOD 200”114 115Formwork/FoundationDfMA Methodology ModelArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityOutOutOutOutOutInInInInInEngineerGeneral ContractorMEPFinishing/InteriorEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructureDesign Model(s)LOD 100Digital CloneOutOutOutOutInInInInIn“LOD 400”Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalIndustrialized FrameworkReferencing the “digital link” introduced in the Chapter One, this modelling stage proposes that the Digital Clone can eliminate the interpretive barrier in construction.If we think about the tremendous effort that is required to document a traditional project in 2D, the value of this framework becomes apparent. This thesis suggests that adopting this approach in practice could alleviate the requirement for traditional documentation as this modelling stage is essentially an “as-built” representation of the project. There is a digital assurance that what you would see in this model would represent exactly what would show up on the project site.PD DD CD TR CASD7.08 Industrialized Framework (Fabrication Output)“LOD 200”116 117Digital ClonePrimaryStructureDfMA Methodology ModelArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityOut InInOutDesigning to CapabilityIllustrating the concept of a DfMA-centric design methodology, the following page expands on a specific relationship to highlight how the material and process parameters of a specific entity could allow the architect or designer to “design to capability” rather than “design to assumption”.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal7.09 Manufacturer Engagement“LOD 200”“LOD 400”118 119Digital Clone“LOD 400”DfMA Methodology ModelArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrity“LOD 200”Materials / SpeciesTooling Capacity (x,y,z)Lead TimesAssembly StrategiesMock-UpsMaterial ConstraintsConnection DetailingMaintenanceFinishingTransportationInstallationPrimaryStructureOutDesigning to CapabilityDesigning to capability allows the IP of a manufacturer to be embedded directly into an architectural proposal. What are the tooling parameters, the material species, the lead times, the shipping constraints? What are the installation strategies and maintenance suggestions? But most importantly, what is the machine data that enables an architect or designer to make informed design decisions early in the development of a design proposal?Assuming that an architectural model can export machine code for multiple scopes of work is an ambitious assumption within the context of our existing workflows. However, this thesis suggests that exporting machine code from an architectural model is a completely attainable idea, so long as our design concepts embody a logic of manufacturing and assembly.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal7.10 Designing to Capability120 121Aspen Art MuseumCase StudyPart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal7.11 Aspen Art Museum Space Frame OverviewShigeru Ban ArchitectsAspen, Colorado4 125122 123Early Manufacturer EngagementAs the second case study in this thesis, the Aspen Art Museum by Shigeru Ban Architects has been selected as anecdotal evidence to support the concept of democratizing industrialized processes. While this project was constructed in 2012, it stands as a testament to early manufacturer engagement, and specifically, how a collaborative approach to resolving complexity and finding cost efficiency can preserve and strengthen the integrity of a design concept. While many tremendous aspects of this project deserve attention, this thesis focuses on one: the prefabrication and assembly of the project’s space frame.At the time of the manufacturer’s (Spearhead) early engagement, the project was still malleable which allowed for deep-dives into the development of an alternative fabrication strategy. The alternative strategy not only reduced the number of components, but it also simplified the fabrication, reduced fabrication costs, reduced material waste, and reduced assembly time on site.  One can see that the final fabrication concept illustrated to the right is a much larger structural element, but what might not be immediately apparent, is that it also has a much lower level of fabrication complexity.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal7.12 7.13Initial Design Concept Final Fabrication Concept124 125FabricationWhile the initial concept was a brilliant solution in its own right, it required various stages of a lamella layup, a vacuum bag curing process, 5-axis milling, and significant handling. The scale of the project suggested that, rather than just fabricating the initial design proposal, Spearhead should investigate in an alternative approach that could capitalize on their material and process parameters. Ultimately, through a collaborative effort orchestrated between Shigeru Ban Architects, KL&A Engineers, and Spearhead, the project utilized Spearhead’s machine data to understand quality and cost. The run times of Spearhead’s CNC processes, in turn, helped inform the development of the final fabrication concept. The fundamental shift in concept was a transition from 5-axis milling to 3-axis milling. This transition simplified the project’s materials, its fabrication, and its assembly.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal7.167.147.177.153-Axis MillingVacuum FormingPanel Nesting5-Axis Milling126 127InstallationThe resulting web members were designed to be as large as possible—the only dimensional constraint to their length was the 64’ bed length of a commercial trailer. The installation of these larger members massively simplified the building’s assembly as each crane pick installed a web member that would have accounted for several components had the original concept been fabricated. Ultimately, by engaging the manufacturer early—before the project went to tender—the architecture realized a simplified assembly, increased quality, and a significant reduction in construction time and cost.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal7.197.18Web InstallationWeb Assembly / Finishing128 129Industry StewardshipSiloed AuthorshipIndustrialized Design PhilosophyEmbracing CollaborationReclaiming Design IntegrityDesign DevelopmentHierarchical Authorship and Re-DesignChapter ThreePart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal8.01 Chapter Three Structure32 33Chapter Three addresses how hierarchical authorship in the early stages of a project can lead to elements of re-design in our work.130 131Siloed AuthorshipThis thesis is framed by the notion that there is a level of detachment in the AEC industry. Our design decisions are being made at levels far removed from the places where they have impact and our early stages of design are often siloed from the practical critique of structure and constructibility. We are designing under an assumption, an assumption that the structure, the performance, and the constructibility of our work will eventually be shaped—in one way or another—to conform to the architectural concept.This thesis suggests that this disjuncture in the AEC industry ultimately compromises not only the integrity of our work but also the integrity of the architectural profession as it further divides the worlds of “design” and “construction”. Can an industrialized design philosophy, framed by the concept of a reiterative design methodology, preserve the authorship of the architect and unify industrialized processes in construction?Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalArchitect8.02 Hierarchical Authorship132 133DfMA Methodology ModelArchitectDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityFormwork/FoundationMEPFinishing/InteriorEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructureAn Industrialized Design PhilosophyReferencing some of the most iconic buildings in history—including the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence, Italy—one could argue that much of their success can be attributed to their harmony of design, engineering, and construction—a testament to the era of the “master builder”.This thesis does not suggest that we aspire to reclaim the title of “master builder”, it does not suggest that we strive to reclaim sole authorship in our projects, and it does not suggest that we strive to recreate the monumentality of these historic works. What this thesis proposes, is that an industrialized approach to architecture could give architects and designers an opportunity to realize a parallel unity in their work. An industrialized design philosophy could allow the DNA of our design processes to once again embody the logic of materials, systems, structure, and constructibility.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal8.03 (Re)Claimed Project IntegrityAn Industrialized Design Philosophy...Could allow the DNA of our design processes to once again embody the logic of materials, systems, structure, and constructibility...134 135DfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelArchitectArchitectArchitectArchitectArchitectDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrity“LOD 200”“LOD 200”“LOD 200”“LOD 200”“LOD 200”Formwork/FoundationFormwork/FoundationFormwork/FoundationEnclosure/FacadeMEPFinishing/InteriorPrimaryStructureEnclosure/FacadeFinishing/InteriorMEPEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructurePart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalIndustry StewardshipWhile the previous chapters have strived to highlight how designing for manufacturing and assembly could benefit our work at a project-scale, this thesis suggests that the real value of this approach lies at an industry-scale.  Zooming out to imaging a future built environment with multiple projects adopting industrialized processes, it is easy to speculate how increasing the demand for manufacturing and digital fabrication could initiate a cultural shift in the AEC industry. This cultural shift could ultimately lead to new manufacturers, new fabricators, and new consultants coming on-line to meet this digital demand—a demand created by the profession of architecture.8.04 Industry Stewardship136 137Formwork/FoundationFormwork/FoundationFormwork/FoundationEnclosure/FacadeDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelDfMA Methodology ModelArchitectArchitectArchitectArchitectArchitectDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDfMA ConsultantDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrityDesignIntegrity“LOD 200”“LOD 200”“LOD 200”“LOD 200”“LOD 200”OutOutOutOutOutOutOutOutOutOutOutOutInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInInMEPFinishing/InteriorPrimaryStructureEnclosure/FacadeFinishing/InteriorMEPEnclosure/FacadePrimaryStructurePart 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  ProposalAn Industrialized EcosystemThis thesis does not suggest that we strive to monopolize the AEC industry—it does not suggest the private ownership of vertically integrated entities. What this thesis proposes, is that by fostering an industrialized ecosystem between design and construction, we could collectively strengthen the voices of our profession as we begin to democratize, harness, and build the resources of our industry.An Industrialized Ecosystem...Where production is democratized to become part of design...8.05 Industrialized Ecosystem42 43138 139AEC – Architecture, Engineering, and ConstructionAgency – Complete control over one’s actions and consequences Agnostic Work – Scopes of work that are free from any ties to a specific architectural typologyBIM – Building Information ModellingCAD/CAM – Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided ManufacturingCNC – Computer Numerical ControlDesign Integrity – The integrity of an architectural proposal as it relates to its constructionDfMA – Design for Manufacturing and AssemblyFabrication – The act of bringing together and re-working manufactured goodsG-Code – A widely adopted CNC programming language used to control automated manufacturing and fabrication processesIndustrialized Construction – A convergence of automated processes and software solutions that enable mechanization, systemization, and prefabrication in the construction industryIndustrialized Framework – A digital framework that can link industrialized construction to architectural designIndustrialized Ecosystem – A global network of cross-platform collaboration where production is part of designInterpretive Barrier – A demarcation that separates the industries of design and construction, caused by the rasterization of digital informationLOD 100 – Concept Design modellingLOD 200 – Schematic Design modellingLOD 300 – Detailed Design modellingLOD 350 – Construction Documentation modellingLOD 400 – Fabrication and Assembly modellingManufacturing – The process of producing goods on a large-scale using machineryValue Engineering – A pursuit for cost-efficiency which ultimately takes the value out of design Watershed Moment – The exact moment that changes the direction of an activity or a situation. A dividing point from which things will never be the same.Part 2  I  ProposalPart 2  I  Proposal[Glossary of Terms] [Glossary of Terms]140 141[Bibliography] [Bibliography]Barbosa, Filipe, Jonathan Woetzel, Jan Mischke, Maria Ribeirinho, Matthew Parsons, Nick Bertram, and Stephanie Brown. Reinventing Construction: A Route to Higher Productivity. New York, NY: McKinsey & Company, 2017. Becker, William S. “Vision Needs a Seat at the Negotiating Table.” UN Chronicle 49, no. 2 (2012): 22–24. https://doi.org/10.18356/9e094893-en.Bock, Thomas, and Thomas Linner. Construction Robots: Elementary Technologies and Single-Task Construction Robots. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press, 2016.Case Study House Program.” Arts & Architecture Magazine, 1945. Carpo, Mario. The Second Digital Turn: Design beyond Intelligence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2017.“Council Post: How To Prepare Your Company For The Internet Of Things.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, February 14, 2017. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2017/02/14/how-to-prepare-your-company-for-the-internet-of-things/#25f2739967e8.Day, Martyn. “Embracing Digital Fabrication.” AEC Magazine - Building Information Modelling (BIM) Technology for Architecture, Engineering and Construction, May 20, 2019.Dronkelaar, Chris Van, Mark Dowson, E. Burman, Catalina Spataru, and Dejan Mumovic. “A Review of the Energy Performance Gap and Its Underlying Causes in Non-Domestic Buildings.” Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering 2 (January 2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fmech.2016.00010.Ellis, Erle C.. Anthropocene: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.Fearne, Andrew, and Nicholas Fowler. “Efficiency versus Effectiveness in Construction Supply Chains: the Dangers of ‘Lean’ Thinking in Isolation.” Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 11, no. 4 (July 1, 2006): 283–87.“Greenwave.” The Buckminster Fuller Institute, 2015. https://www.bfi.org/ideaindex/projects/2015/greenwave. Hall, Ted. “Advanced Timber Manufacturing.” Advanced Timber Manufacturing. Vancouver: BC Wood, 2019.Kieran, Stephen, and James Timberlake. Refabricating Architecture: How Manufacturing Methodologies Are Poised to Transform Building Construction. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004. Lam, Elsa. “Toronto and Vancouver Start-Ups Are Using High-Tech Prefabrication to Produce Infill Housing That’s Better Designed, Better for the Environment - and Costs Less than Standard Development.” Canadian Architect, April 1, 2020.Linner, Thomas, Wen Pan, Rongbo Hu, Charlie Zhao, Kepa Iturralde, Meysam Taghavi, Julian Trummer, Marcel Schlandt, and Thomas Bock. “A Technology Management System for the Development of Single-Task Construction Robots.” Construction Innovation 20, no. 01 (January 6, 2020): 96–111. Lu, Weisheng, Cong Liang, Ada Fung, and Steve Rowlinson. “Demystifying the Time-Effort Distribution Curves in Construction Projects: A BIM and Non-BIM Comparison.” Construction Research Congress 2014, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413517.034.Marble, Scott, ed. Digital Workflows in Architecture: Design - Assembly - Industry. Basel/Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2012. Accessed April 25, 2020. Marble, Scott, ed. Digital Workflows in Architecture: Design - Assembly - Industry. Basel/Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2012. Menges, Achim. “Computational Material Culture.” Architectural Design 86, no. 2 (March 2016): 76–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2027.Menezes, Anna Carolina, Andrew Cripps, and Richard Buswell. “Predicted vs. Actual Energy Performance of Non-Domestic Buildings: Using Post-Occupancy Evaluation Data to Reduce the Performance Gap.” Applied Energy 97 (September 2012): 355–64. https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/science/article/pii/S0306261911007811?via=ihub.Moselhi, Osama, and Zafar Khan. “Significance Ranking of Parameters Impacting Construction Labour Productivity.” Construction Innovation 12, no. 3 (July 6, 2012): 272–96.Mrkonjic, Katarina. “Environmental Aspects of Use of Aluminium for Prefabricated Lightweight Houses: Dymaxion House Case Study.” Journal of Green Building 2, no. 4 (January 2007): 130–36. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.2.4.130. Wilde, Pieter. “The Gap between Predicted and Measured Energy Performance of Buildings: A Framework for Investigation.” Automation in Construction 41 (May 2014): 40–49. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S092658051400034X.  Willis, Dan. “Digital Master Builders.” In Fabricating Architecture: Selected Readings in Digital Design and Manufacturing, 203–8. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press, 2010.CXL CXLI142 143Willis, Dan. “Difficulty as a Source of Architectural Value.” In Fabricating Architecture: Selected Readings in Digital Design and Manufacturing, 201–3. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press, 2010. Wintour, Paul. “A Brief History of Computation.” Parametric Monkey, June 8, 2016. https://parametricmonkey.com/2018/06/08/a-brief-history-of-computation/#comments.Röck, Martin, Marcella Ruschi Mendes Saade, Maria Balouktsi, Freja Nygaard Rasmussen, Harpa Birgisdottir, Rolf Frischknecht, Guillaume Habert, Thomas Lützkendorf, and Alexander Passer. “Embodied GHG Emissions of Buildings – The Hidden Challenge for Effective Climate Change Mitigation.” Applied Energy 258 (January 15, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114107.Sweet, Kevin. “Resurrecting the Master Builder: A Pedagogical Strategy for Robotic Construction.” Automation in Construction 72 (December 16, 2016): 33–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.07.001. Scranton, Philip. “The Shows and the Flows: Materials, Markets, and Innovation in the US Machine Tool Industry, 1945–1965.” History and Technology 25, no. 3 (2009): 257–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/07341510903083245. Zeitz, A., C.t. Griffin, and P. Dusicka. “Comparing the Embodied Carbon and Energy of a Mass Timber Structure System to Typical Steel and Concrete Alternatives for Parking Garages.” Energy and Buildings 199 (September 15, 2019): 126–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.06.047.CXLII CLI[Bibliography]

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.42591.1-0395441/manifest

Comment

Related Items