What are the principal advantages of creating a conceptual design model using masses before diving into the detailed design and building element modeling?
Should all buildings be modeled first using conceptual masses?
When is it needed/appropriate? And when not?
For example, should you create a conceptual mass model of a small house?
ANSWER: not all buildings need to be modeled first using conceptual masses since not all the shapes of buildings might be complex or need to take advantage of conceptual masses. This type of modeling is appropriate when there is a need to combine different shapes and a top-down approach might benefit the model, but in the case of a small house that requires only traditional elements (vertical walls, a shingle roof, etc.), it is better to go for the traditional model, and use other Revit elements that might help speed the design process.
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.
This time, I will share the image of one of my favorite buildings, the "Taipei 101". Source of the image: Wikipedia.
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