Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Techniques and Technology



With the advent of new technologies there comes a change in the culture that uses those technologies. No singular culture can be described or even classified as a culture without use and analysis of the particular technologies that are prevalent at that time. It would be impossible to classify Greek culture without studying the building technologies that created the monuments and building that are Greek “culture”. On the flip side of the coin, technology becomes obsolete if there is no culture to support it. One such example is obvious in the medieval dark ages. The culture of Western Europe did not allow for new advances in technology and thusly the culture went on a hiatus.

Author Ali Rahim communicates these principles in more modern terms and in relation to the field of architecture. Rahim also takes it one step further. Rather than just insisting that these two spheres of influences are solely interdependent on one another, he coins the term “feedback loop”, insisting that there is a never ending cycle of cultural influence on technology and technological development of culture. “Advances in technology have accelerated the pace of innovations in architecture, the arts, sciences, and media: these cultural developments have led, in turn, to new technological discoveries.”(10) Rahim also insists that architects need to take a more involved role in realizing the potential of cultural maturity through the use of technological innovation.

Rahim’s first chapter of his published work is spent entirely explaining the “feedback” loop in terms of the technology, the technique, and the technical. Terms which on the surface appear to be almost identical, once one peels back the outer layer become fundamentally different and three separate bases for the definition and realization of the “feedback” loop.

In the second half of the work, Rahim focuses exclusively on the theories of temporality and time. He illustrates the definition of time not in the rational, conventional sense of the word but rather through “two models of time from the sciences.”(22) He bases his first model of time on physics and classical mechanics and the second on the study and theory of thermodynamics. Or, in laymen’s terms the static never changing “reversible” verses the fundamental asymmetrical, “irreversible” past and future, respectively.

To more clearly illustrate the “feedback loop” Rahim starts by explaining the relationships within the technological side of the premise. A technology advancement can be defined quite simply “the application of a purely technical or scientific advance to a culture context.”(11) New technologies are constantly emerging in day to day life. But for these new technologies to be considered an advancement in the eyes of Rahim, they can’t simply be an improvement on a previous idea. Merely making a seat in a car larger and more comfortable does not make it a technical advancement because it does not “produce in users new patterns of behavior and levels of performance” it simply makes their particular car ride a bit more relaxed.

The next logical step from developing a true technological advancement is to create a technique for the use of that advancement. Before we could even begin to use the new and innovative technological advancement of the automobile we as humans had to develop the techniques for operating said automobile. “Techniques are behaviors and procedures that are systematic, repeatable, and communicable.”(12) Technique development can also carry over to architecture, the overriding emphasis of Rahim’s publication. There are two ways in which Rahim elaborates for architects to develop techniques to further the culture of architecture. There is the option within architecture to “rework existing methods” such as CAD programs in “experimental ways, or even by rewriting parts of the software and adapting it to entirely new functions.”(13) Secondly architects have the option to research other fields of professional study and use those tools to further the advancement of our own field of architecture. Aerospace, automotive, and film industries are just a few of the proverbial goldmines that architects can mine for useful tools. This has already started to happen with the uses of maya and CATIA.

In order to advance culture and innovation technology and technique must be simultaneously integrated. “Technical advances (such as the networking of computers) give rise to new uses or technologies ( such as the internet), leading users to create techniques ( designing interactive Web sites) that, in turn, demand technical advances (faster internet connections), which spawn new technologies (real-time three dimensional online communities)”(12). There is a never ending cycle of innovation that needs to be tapped by the architectural community.

Architects on a whole have an obligation to society to advance the human culture in a positive and innovative way. The only way for the field on a whole to do this is to accept, develop, and further explore those technologies that are already out there in existing fields as well as increasing our own technologies to further the design process on a whole. There is no scale too small to be using ground-breaking technology coupled with the design through fabrication process.

Contex Effect

Monday, February 2, 2009

Digital Morphogenesis



In a recent article by Branko Kolarevic titled “Digital Morphogenesis”, Kolarevic attempts to explain the reasoning behind the strange amorphous shapes often found throughout modern architecture and the methods and tools used to create this new “blobby” architecture.

One of the first points Kolarevic makes is to simply state that the sometimes highly criticized “blobby” architecture may be new and strange looking to the inexperienced eye but it is not without precedent. Kolarevic gives concrete examples of, in the more abstract terms, previous philosophers and scholarly writings that have had major influences on architects and have presented certain questions that have allowed this new style and form of architecture to advance. From the more conceptual writings of German philosopher, mathematician, and logician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and one of the most influential French thinkers of the twentieth century, Gilles Deleuze to the more concrete physical representations found in the Baroque, Neo-Baroque, and Art Nuevo styles of architecture. This new digital age has a plethora of precedent raging from the 17th century all the way up and into the 1960’s and 1970’s.

From here Kolarevic moves to the physical tools of the digital age and how they are being used in professions across the boards. Architecture is not the only profession being affected from the emergence of new technologies and new ways of challenging traditional thinking. The truth is actually far from it. These technologies and new tools have been in use for many years in almost every industrial designer for the better part of a decade. To the trained eye the somewhat strange designs of “blobby” architecture have seen a surge of popularity in other industrial design situations. Almost everything we use from our toothbrushes to our toasters, even extending into the cars we drive, has been influenced by the new emergence of digital design tools. All of these products incorporate what many refer to as “blobby” architecture but would be better suited as smooth architecture.

What is so unique about this new push to the digital design is the emergence of a digital continuum. This process incorporates everything from the very earliest conceptual design to the rigorous construction drawings all into one simple to use and understand four dimensional model. This can be most clearly seen in the model for the Boeing 737 and for numerous large scale shipping models used throughout the shipping industry. The shipping model presents an interesting example due to the historical reliance of architects on the ship building industry. A past and present link, which should undoubtedly be examined more closely to further advance both professions.

The only way for this digital continuum to exist is through the use of a highly sophisticated set of tools that Kolarevic attempts to explain throughout the remainder of his study. The four examples of tools and methods of a new era of digital design that Kolarevic mentions that are the most interesting and somewhat easier to understand are parametrics, dynamics and fields of force, and performative architecture.

The first new tool that has already had a very scrupulous and practical application is that of parametrics. Parametrics is the establishment of formulas that allow a designer to create dimensionally different yet identically configured design elements. This has been put to use throughout many design proposals and consequent physical buildings. The most striking example can be found in the International Terminal, Waterloo Station located in London, UK and designed by architect Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners. For this project Grimshaw was presented with unique and challenging site considerations of the maze of tube rails and how to effectively cover all of them keeping the same typology. To solve this problem Grimshaw used a parametric equation to create “36 dimensionally different, yet typologically identical, bowstring trusses.” Through the use of parametrics we are allowed an explanation for the strange curvilinear shapes as well as a solution for many difficult design applications.

Another tool that is making its way into the design tool shed of the digital era is that of dynamics and fields of force. The study of dynamics is not as simple as one could be led to believe. It is not merely the design of a building and then the application of fields of force to that building. But rather a more complex design process that involves creating and designing while these forces are present. This is made possible through the materialization of new digital technology. To be put in a simple analogy, designing in the traditional sense of the word would be like building a sand castle and anticipating the rise of the tide (fields of force.) Where dynamics comes into play would be like building this same sand castle but rather than anticipating when and where the tide would come in one would actually build the castle while the tide was physically affecting the construction process. This has been made possible through digital applications and partly explains once again the strange shaped architecture pervasive in modern design.

One of the last relatively new digital applications being used in modern design is that of performative architecture. This is the knowledge and digital capabilities of creating an ideal response to all of the various site considerations and then inputting ones own design and watching it physically take on the form of the ideal structure. The capabilities to do this are at our finger tips and just need to be tapped in order to bring about and era of extreme sustainability and “ideal” architecture.

The last point Kolarevic makes is that these new digital tools should be used to aid in the creation of ideal architecture not replace the profession of architecture. They are means to an end. An end that has already been realized in numerous other professions and should be implemented in our own profession of architecture. Through the use of digital advancements we can explain and then in turn create our own ideal “blobby” architecture.