What are the principal advantages of creating a conceptual design model using masses before diving into the detailed design and building element modeling?
Designing a conceptual model based on the primary shapes composing it’s figure is much more effective than designing a model with ample intricate detail, especially for large spaces such as this one. This method provides the designer and client with much more flexibility during the design process, making it far less complicated to make changes. At any point in the creative process, one could easily remove or add a level, or even expand the size of the structure without causing much damage to the internal aspects. Also, it ensures all elements remain consistent at each level, which makes designing a large space much more feasible, efficient, and simple.
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?
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?
Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Bilbao is a prime example of a structure that was most likely designed through the use of conceptual masses due to it’s organic shape.
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