Step 1 - Generative Design Framework
A very brief description of the design decisions from Step 1 following the Generative Design Framework.
- Design Decision 1 - Structural Elements: mass vs cost
- Design Variables
- building height
- building width
- building length
- material type
- material thickness
- Evaluators
- total mass of structural elements
- material weight-bearing capacity
- total cost of material
- Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
- typically, the lighter the material, the more of it you need to support the same load. However, there are special materials, such as carbon fiber, that are manufactured to be incredibly strong and very lightweight, but they are much more expensive to manufacture and thus more expensive to the buyer. Conversely, heavier materials are typically cheaper but are much bulkier, so there are tradeoffs for both.
- Design Decision 2 - Envelope: passive lighting vs. passive heating
- Design Variables
- what % of surface area of envelope are windows
- thickness of window panels
- orientation of panels to sun
- Evaluators
- HVAC load
- direct sunlight hours
- daylight factor - ratio of the light level inside a structure to the light level outside the structure
- G-value - fraction of heat from the sun that enters through the window
- Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
- the more windows, the more natural daylight which means less artificial light needed, but, for example, like in Dubai, with its very hot climate, the more windows means a ton of heat coming into the building, and this increases the energy needed to power the HVAC system to regulate the temperature, especially for the upper floors as this is a high rise building and heat rises.
- Design Decision 3 - Material Cost vs. Appearance Quality
- Design Variables
- material types
- finishes and treatments
- decorative elements
- installation techniques
- detailing and joinery
- Evaluators
- visual appeal
- perceived value
- durability and wear
- cost
- Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
- higher-end materials = better aesthetics but higher price (cost vs aesthetics), and though some budget materials may be able to get a similar look, they lack the same longevity and sophistication (cost vs aesthetics vs. longevity)
Step 2 - Generative Design Study
More detailed breakdown of the design decision: Material Cost vs. Quality
- Design Variables
- price of materials (high-end, mid-range, budget)
- weather protection treatments
- decorative elements (moldings, inlays, patterns)
- installation techniques (manual craftsmanship, prefab systems)
- detailing and joinery (seamless joints, visible joints)
- Evaluators
- Quantifying visual appeal - aesthetic coherence (overall design harmony, alignment with design intent) + color consistency (uniformity and matching of colors and patterns)
- Quantifying perceived value - luxury vs. standard look (quality perception by users and stakeholders)
- Durability and wear - how the material ages over time (resistance to wear, weathering, and impact)
- initial material cost (price per square foot/meter)
- installation cost (labor, complexity of installation)
- maintenance cost (cleaning, repairs, replacements)
- Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
- Cost vs. visual appeal, higher-end materials offer better aesthetics, but come with a higher price, and though some budget materials may be able to get a similar look, they lack the same longevity and sophistication
- Initial cost vs. long-term aesthetic value, investing in high-quality materials that age well can maintain aesthetic appeal over time and don’t need frequent updates or replacements, while lower upfront costs from cheaper materials may result in materials that quickly degrade in appearance, needing more frequent renovations to maintain the desired look.
- Aesthetic quality vs. budget constraints, prioritizing aesthetic quality might limit the overall budget available for other design elements or project features, while focusing on budget constraints may require compromises in the visual quality and perceived value of the project.
Simplified for Generative Design study, 2 units
For this, I simplified the variables to a range from 1-100 in the quality of the materials and a range from 1-100 of the surface finish quality, as these are the two main factors that influence the cost and the aesthetic quality of the design, with constants for simplification and clarity of concepts.
- Constants
- building height
- building volume
- base cost (for simplification purposes)
- represents the initial estimated cost of the project before factoring in any design decisions or material selections
- Two design variables (study inputs)
- material type index (range: 1-100)
- an index representing the type or quality of materials used in the construction of the building, allowing the user to select from different material options, ranging from budget-friendly to high-end materials
- surface finish quality index (range 1-100)
- an index representing the quality or level of surface finishes applied to the building's interior or exterior, enabling the user to specify the desired finish quality, ranging from basic to premium finishes for increased durability and longevity
- Two evaluators (study outputs)
- total material cost
- the calculated cost of materials based on the selected material type and surface finish quality, quantifying the expenses associated with procuring materials for the construction project
- aesthetic quality score
- a numerical score representing the overall aesthetic appeal and perceived quality of the building design, providing a measure of the design's visual attractiveness, considering factors such as material type and surface finish quality
Step 3 - Generative Design Study Results
Material Cost vs. Aesthetic Quality Scatterplot
This scatterplot shows the tradeoff between material cost and quality of material. This is done with the calculated measure of material cost on the x-axis and the calculated aesthetic quality score on the y-axis. The size of each design option is proportional to their material index (bigger = more costly but better quality), and the color indicates the level of quality of the surface finish applied to these materials for durability and longevity. This scatterplot shows how there can be a lot of variation depending on if you invest more into the materials and less into the surface finish, and that effect on the cost and the aesthetic quality, as well as many other combinations of these variables.
With this information on balancing quality and price of materials to maximize aesthetic quality, which includes durability and longevity in its calculation, with the material cost, I would be able to do more targeted research of materials after, say, ruling out ones that would be too expensive or not durable enough. This would drastically increase the work flow because even though the model is simple, you can constrain your budget and then see what materials would be available for the surface area that you need to cover, and the same with the surface finish. Overall, it is just a very effective yet simple way to streamline the weighing of materiality pros and cons process
Dynamo Study Graph
