Facade automations generate a pattern across a whole building in seconds.
◦ What does the automation know, and what does it not know?
◦ Where did the generated pattern need overriding, and why?
◦ If the automation produces something that analyses well but looks wrong, which wins?
What drives a project team's decision about floor to floor height?
◦ From a developer's perspective?
Developer’s are considering height limits and zoning, thus floor to floor height is important in determining how many floors can be accommodated in the building.
◦ From a designer's perspective?
Designer’s consider ceiling height, daylight, and interior design when making decisions about floor to floor height. A taller space allows for more daylight and a more grandiose feeling.
◦ From an engineer's perspective?
Engineer’s care about floor to floor height in regards to structural loads and calculations. As well, it is important that there is sufficient spacing for MEP.
◦ From a builder's perspective?
Builder’s consider the cost related to floor to floor height. Standard heights are likely preferred because materials are more widely available.
Last week we chose a massing option based on site evidence. This week you had to fit a program inside it.
◦ Where did the program and the massing disagree, and which one gave way?
◦ What would have had to be true for you to change the massing instead of the program?
◦ Which of this week's program decisions will the structural engineer and the mechanical engineer assume you got right?
Total carbon can now be estimated before materials are specified.
◦ How much confidence should a team place in that number at this stage?
The team should place low confidence in the absolute carbon values. Because the carbon value is only based on structural elements, it leaves out carbon associated with MEP, which can play a significant role in total carbon.
◦ Which decision made this week has the largest effect on it?
The window-to-wall ratio has made the largest impact on total carbon this week. If the ratio is high, and therefore there is less concrete being used in the building, then the total carbon will be lower.
◦ How would you present it to a client without overstating its precision?
I would present the total carbon as a range, rather than an absolute value. I would also include the scope of the project thus far, alongside relevant assumptions. I would also find a baseline to compare it with.
At some point a conceptual model has to stop being conceptual.
◦ How do you know when a proposal is resolved enough to move into Revit?
The proposal needs to have well defined massing, floor levels, floor to floor heights, and a facade strategy. All decisions have been tested against alternatives, and thus the design is one that you are confident in.
◦ What is the cost of moving too early? Of moving too late?
If you move too early, it could result in changes needing to be made in Revit, which can be time consuming and difficult. If you move too late, there may be not enough time for others to review the design and move forward with their section of the work. As such, it could push the project back, and cause it to fall behind schedule which could result in costs.
◦ Which parts of your Forma model do you expect to survive the handoff?
I expect the massing envelope, levels, and floor to floor heights to survive. As well, the results from the various analyses performed should also survive.