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?
Not all buildings should be first modeled using conceptual masses. It is most appropriate to model buildings that having large programming requirements, are designed to be unique architecturally, or buildings that are complex in the requirements. This allows designers to nail down the overall shape and feel of a building before sinking in lots of time pinpointing details. It's not appropriate in small projects like a small house, or standardized or simpler buildings, like most low-rise developments, or buildings with little aesthetic purpose, like warehouses. This is because the simple design of such buildings means that using a mass doesn't save you much time, it's much easier just to put walls in the model to begin with.
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.
STH BNK by Beulah
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