What are the principal advantages of creating a conceptual design model using masses before diving into the detailed design and building element modeling?
Starting with a conceptual massing model allows designers to focus on the fundamental ideas behind a project such as form, proportion, and spatial organization without being constrained by the complexity of construction details. This approach supports creative exploration, letting you test how different volumes respond to environmental factors like sunlight, prevailing winds, and site topography before any walls or roofs are drawn. It also provides a platform for quantitative analysis early in the process, such as solar gain, daylight access, and energy performance, ensuring sustainability is integrated from the start rather than added later.
For a designer, especially in a research-driven academic environment like Stanford, massing models bridge the gap between conceptual thinking and performance-driven design. They make it easier to iterate quickly, evaluate multiple design directions, and visualize how architectural intent translates into physical experience. Once the massing is refined and validated through analysis, transitioning into detailed modeling becomes more efficient and intentional, producing a design that is both aesthetically coherent and environmentally responsive.
Should all buildings be modeled first using conceptual masses?
I believe not all buildings need to start with conceptual masses. It depends on the scale, complexity, and design intent of the project. Conceptual massing is most useful for large or complex projects like university buildings, offices, or mixed-use developments, where understanding the overall form, volume, and environmental response is critical. In these cases, using masses allows designers to study how the structure interacts with sunlight, wind, topography, and surrounding context before diving into detailed modeling. It’s also helpful when comparing multiple design options or testing different spatial organizations.
However, for smaller or straightforward projects, like a single-family house or small addition, creating a mass model first may not be necessary. These projects often have simpler forms and can move directly into detailed modeling without losing design efficiency or clarity. In those cases, conceptual massing could even slow the process down unnecessarily. So while mass modeling is a powerful tool for visualizing and analyzing design intent in complex projects, it’s best applied selectively when the scale or form of the building truly benefits from early-stage spatial exploration.
Can you think of any examples of a real building around the world that most likely was created by exploring the form using conceptual mass models?
Please post and share images of these examples to this Notion page.
How would you abstract the essential form of these famous buildings using conceptual mass elements that you can create in Revit?
- One World Trade Center: https://www.archdaily.com/795277/one-world-trade-center-som
- CMG Headquarters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMG_Headquarters#/media/File:China_Central_Television_Headquarters_2.jpg
- Twisting torso: https://www.archdaily.com/771471/santiago-calatravas-turning-torso-wins-ctbuhs-10-year-award
- Apple campus: https://www.archdaily.com/804970/apple-campus-2-held-to-fantastical-standard-of-detail-new-report-reveals
- Salesforce tower: https://www.archdaily.com/889519/salesforce-tower-pelli-clarke-pelli-architects