IT in Architectural Competition - Article Example

IT in Architectural Competition 5. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) IN ARCHITECTURAL COMPETITIONS In this section I’m presenting the information technology (IT) as a possible tool that could be used in analysing and judging entries in architectural competitions. This will cover the reasons for such a move, its limitations, a SWOT analysis and the role of IT in comparing different competition formats. Before quick conclusions are made, there is a caveat. IT can be used only as a tool and nothing more in the context of architectural competitions. One is not suggesting that sophisticated computers and software programmes can replace the invaluable experience, intuition and feel of experienced professionals. Professional experience when combined with the amazing computing power and versatile graphic imagery that IT enables, can bring the process of evaluation to a higher level. Qualitative aspects of the architectural parameters pose tough challenges and to the best of my knowledge, there are no programmes that can fully replace human judgment. Competition works are evaluated from aesthetic and functional angles, such as spatial composition, cityscape values, and sensation. Judges are using words like spatial cognition, texture vividness, light, shadow, sensation, habitability, and pleasantness. The element of personal feel as an aspect of the quality of a work is evident from these descriptions. IT enables enhancement of a judge’s feel for a work and hence it is reasonable to propose that IT be used as a tool for the judgment process and as a return medium for a competition. Objectivity aspects of presentations are important and discussed separately. On the other hand, quantitative aspects, by definition, are quantifiable and IT can be a good tool here too. Buildings can be evaluated in terms of codes, energy performance, sustainability etc. Once mandatory codes have been met, evaluating for sustainability essentially looks at a building holistically in terms of energy and resource use. These aspects are quantifiable easily and objectivity of judgment is retained while evaluating them. These qualitative and quantitative aspects are further discussed in the chapter 5.2.1. 5.1.1 Information objectivity A judgment is supposed to be based on the information made available. However, it has been the experience for a very long time that the information provided to facilitate judgment lacks objectivity and this has resulted in restrictions being imposed on the kind of information that should accompany an entry. For example, perspective drawings were forbidden at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts as they were considered falsifying and unessential representations of the architectural concept131. One can only imagine what the judges at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts would have said about today’s perspective visualizations that are returned to competitions, as in many cases the intention of those images is not to depict the reality but rather to visually abstract the judgment process, in the guise of visions of an architectural concept. There is an element of sensationalism here and sadly enough, IT can also permit such trends if used wrongly. In the judgment process, objective presentations should be evaluated and marketing imagery should be discarded. Another element of objectivity is the composition of the judging team members and their ability to assimilate information presented during competitions. SAFA appoints one or two judges to an architectural competition, and the organisers appoint the rest who form the majority. This majority group does not necessarily comprise architects or even other professionals in the construction domain. They can be anybody e.g., teachers, politicians, doctors etc. They are a crucial factor when the competition works are evaluated and assorted. Language that architects and the rest of the AEC industry are using has changed dramatically in past few decades and common people have difficulty to understand the standardized 2D abstractions of a building like plans, sections, elevations, and isometric projections in different standardized scales as well as perspective drawings. Hence, information given to judges should not be deceptive or contain disinformation - not even in the name of architectural and artistic freedom. IT can be harnessed suitably to reduce the information gap in the judgment team members by a structured process of familiarisation (training) of the currently used terms, differentiating between genuine information and hype, etc. In all competitions, there will be some common and some specific parameters for different projects. It is here that IT can be a very useful tool to the non-professional judges in disseminating the specifics of a particular competition. 5.1.2 IT in architectural competition – SWOT SWOT analysis is the well-known management tool applied to formulate specific course of action in a given situation. The analysis identifies weaknesses and threats to be overcome by using either the existing strengths or exploiting the new opportunities. Usage of IT process in architectural competitions can be analysed as below: Strengths: As noted earlier, IT can enhance the knowledge base of the judging team as a whole. Once this is achieved, it would lead to a better appraisal of the information submitted; in other words improved objectivity. Secondly, IT has become so pervasive in all walks of life that it cannot be kept out of the architectural profession, of which competitions are an integral part. IT enables evaluation of quantitative and qualitative aspects and aids the decision making by professional judges. Finally, IT is such a tool that once accepted, the contribution to develop and fine tune the processes would come from all over the world in stages, with each stage improving upon the previous versions. Thus the knowledge base would build up rapidly and in the process would also reduce fragmentation that characterises the present situation. Weaknesses: Use of IT in architectural competitions is still in initial stages. As with all new proposals there will be resistance to change. The architects themselves may be in the forefront of such resistance if they are not comfortable with the learning and application of technology. This was witnessed in other engineering fields such as design & manufacturing but was quickly overcome by the massive research and development that took place subsequently. Finally, while the fruits of IT application may be sweet, the expenses in development are high. Opportunities: For architectural companies, use of IT can economise costs of participation in competitions. This would mean greater participation and hence a higher possibility of securing assignments. For prestigious firms, the opportunity to be trendsetters in exploiting IT and maintain / enhance their reputation can be irresistible. Reduced controversies on the evaluation process because of the supplemental use of IT are good for organisers and clients. Threats: Good intentions are not enough all the time and practical appraisal of consequences is very important. The threat here is the possibility that IT, which is proposed as supplementary to professional judgment, may in course of time dominate and vitiate the process itself. The art of creativity may pass from the hands of architects to the IT professionals, whose perspectives are completely different and eventually this dominance will seep into the design, competition and judgment processes. If the high expenses in IT development as noted earlier are added to this angle, there is a threat of decline in organising a competition itself. 5.1.3 Comparison of different competitions and IT role SAFA competition rules specify the format and character of architectural competitions. Different formats are one-stage open or invitation, and two-stage open or invitation types. Within the two stage open competitions, while the first stage is open to all, the second stage may be open to all or only to a select group from the first stage. Competition by invitation is for all invitees irrespective of the number of stages. Planning / design and ideas define the character of competitions. If we add to these options of format and character, the other variables like participants, judges, regions, proficiency, costs and controversies, we are looking at a myriad of data that sum up the competitions. Application of IT in these competitions would enable collection and analysis of current and historical data in practically all areas of the competition e.g., number of competitions in each format or character, region-wise statistics, composition and character of the jury, and competitors and their credentials (winners and losers). This would be primary data. In addition and over a period of time, a series of secondary data of significance can be generated using the primary data. Such data can be on the use of IT by different firms in their presentations, cost aspects of various design / ideas, foreign participation and their influence on local profession, controversies on competition results and the source of such controversies etc. If viewed in isolation or event by event, data presents no exciting insight. But the same data when collected over a period of time and analysed will lead to informed judgments on a number of issues of relevance to competitions. Application of IT will enable such data collection and analysis in a very significant way and would promote the respectability of the entire competition process. 5.2. Workflow for competition In the next few pages I’m drawing up a scheme how IT could be implemented in architectural competitions. The most important aspect is that when implemented, it should assist rather than influence the judges and the judgment method. Technology should give additional value to the process of reaching the right decisions. IT would not change the customary procedure of judging competitions; only the medium that the judges are using to evaluate the competition entries. Digitalo construction project is an excellent example that utilised the latest technologies. Those technologies can be applied very well in judging architectural competitions. 5.2.1. Displaying and evaluating the competition entries The implementation of different IT tools creates different technical demands on the organisers. For example if a competition works are to be evaluated and judged on an augmented reality basis, it creates a need for augmented reality system (e.g. VTT’s ARScaleModel) and specific file types to included when competition work is returned. Tables 5 & 6 present some of the technical demands and requirements that follow with the technologies. Visual appreciation and analysis are important in judging competitions. Today competition works are returned as 2D drawings and scale models as has been done for centuries. It is always not possible to draw a complex 3D object into multiple 2D representations that can be easily understood or appreciated. Even perspective drawings are only projections on a 2D surface; they can project only a fraction of the intended design. And the rest is left to viewer’s imagination. The challenge that judges are facing when evaluating competitions is that they are evaluating the design – the idea – possibilities that the idea gives for further development, not the outcome to be. This handicap can be overcome with the help of IT. Virtual technologies present a vision of an intended design at a more realistic level to enable correct evaluation. IT offers a way for more impartial judgment – designs can be observed beyond poster gimmicks and hidden deficiencies. Tools also offer possibilities on quantitative values. As the AEC industry is changing, so is the role of an architect. Architect in not anymore just the form giver – function is to be taken more seriously. By using BIM technologies different kinds of analyses – acoustic, lightning, HVAC – are at hand and exploitable to architectural competitions. One unique advantage that IT brings along is lighting analysis. Evaluation of competition works in different lightning was not possible in the past due to fact that architect alone decided on which conditions he will present his design on different perspective illustrations. This has lead to a situation where some contestants have reached the limits of architectural misrepresentation and disinformation. When return medium of a competition is a computer file that can be visualised by the means of virtual reality, such misleading incidents do occur. 6. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION The main objective for this thesis was to act as a technology review for determining the status of current virtual technologies for use as tools in architectural competition and to draw up a scheme for implementing these tools in practice. After scrutinizing the technologies and the tools presented in this thesis, I can answer the question presented by the title of this thesis – INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES IN ARCHITECTURAL COMPETITION – IS THERE ROOM FOR IT? I’ve come to the conclusion that IT could indeed be used as a return media on an architectural competition, and that significant additional value can be achieved from for the architecture profession itself. There is not only room but also a demand for IT usage. To fully understand the possible effects that new technologies could have on an ancient institution like architectural competitions, one must explore the very origins of that institution. Therefore, the secondary object of this thesis was to discern architectural competitions – origins, evolution, methods, usage, etc. – so that a proper understanding of the practices is achieved. Architectural competition on construction and on land development projects is a method for picking up a designer and a tool for optimum result. Competitions have been in use all over the world for hundreds of years for promoting reforms and innovations of the built environment and in the process, for promotion of architecture. This has produced a tradition for competing and a constantly evolving manner for architectural competitions, brought new stars to architecture scene and became an important educational method. At the same time, it is noted that the number of competitions held per year is on the decline as alternative forms of competition have challenged pure architectural competition. Architectural competitions should be regenerated in view of their contribution to the profession and to achieve this IT use for competitions as a whole should be promoted more aggressively. The AEC industry has undergone a sea change in recent decades and IT is the driving force behind the transition towards a more innovative industry. Thus, the present time is also more opportune for introducing IT in the competitions sphere. 6.1.1. IT in architectural curriculum Almost every essay, report, book, conference paper and doctoral thesis that I read in the course of preparation of this thesis, confirmed the importance of architectural education. So I feel obliged to extend this tradition and to share some thoughts with the audience. As Building Information Modeling is becoming the new standard for the AEC Industry132, the training of young professionals to work in this environment becomes a critical issue. BIM emphasizes collaborative aspects and accumulation of information throughout the building lifecycle. These are in contrast with the current tendencies in architectural education, and hence are inappropriate. An entirely new approach to architectural education is needed – a curriculum that exposes students to the principles of BIM, how it can be implemented in projects and (especially important for architecture students) how it affects the design process. In other words, students need to understand that BIM is not about the technology (which will undoubtedly change dramatically during their professional lives) but about the changes it will bring about how architects work.133 Of the many challenges BIM creates for education, perhaps the greatest stems from the fact that BIM facilitates intensive collaboration among the many participants in a construction project. Architecture has always been a collaborative undertaking, but our current teaching methods downplay this fact. Our design curricula have changed very little in 200 years. We still use an approach where each student usually works alone. Design training still emphasizes form over every other aspect of building. Architectural education is based on a strict separation between design (the traditional province of the architect) and the other phases of the project bidding, construction, commissioning and occupancy. These tendencies are clearly unsuited to BIM. The image of the architect that underlies most architectural education is that of the creative individual. Originality and expressiveness are the qualities most rewarded in architecture school. These are in fact important qualities in an architect. One can argue that architects' unique role among building professionals is to explore new possibilities of form and material and to interpret aspects of the social ethos in building. However one understands the social role of architecture, architects cannot accomplish their goals without a full understanding of the medium in which they work. That medium is becoming increasingly collaborative and BIM is serving to intensify this trend. The traditional image of the architect as an individual creator is no longer compatible with the reality of the building industry. Architects must redefine themselves so that collaboration becomes fundamental to their self-image. The same is true of the other participants in the building industry. To achieve this transformation in architects' self-image, collaboration must be actively taught. Practicing architects know that negotiation and consensus-building skills are needed to be effective, that they have to be strategic in defending certain features of a design and learn where compromises can be made without sacrificing the design's basic intent. Students are not taught the value of these skills, however, let alone the skills themselves. The value shift is subtle. Students must still learn what to value in a design before they learn to evolve a strategy for promoting the design in collaboration. They need to learn to speak about their values in a language that can be understood by different kinds of people. Read More