You moved a design from Forma into Revit this week.
◦ What survived intact, and what did you rebuild?
The walls, facades and general layout survived the handoff. Each unit needed to be labelled, since the labels were not passed along. The stairs needed to be rebuilt and windows needed to be moved once the terrace/green roof was placed on a portion of the second floor. I needed to redefine the windows and doors, as well as design the walls in detail. I also needed to redo the curtain walls in Revit because they did not transfer properly. Forma was very helpful in creating the floorplan because it was easier to move walls and it provided metrics on quantity and percentage of each unit type.
◦ What does that tell you about what each tool is for?
It showed Forma is good for setting the massing, floorplan and facade of the building. Revit takes that layout and adds specific details, like window types and wall/floor/roof systems.
◦ Knowing where the handoff lands, what would you do differently in Forma next time?
I would have made less curtain walls in Forma, since those did not transfer well into Revit and required a lot of remodeling be done on the ground floor.
The core is located early and moved rarely.
◦ Why does it get fixed before most of the building?
The core is essential for the safety and daily operation of the building. It should be easily accessible from all units both for daily convenience and in case of an emergency. By first fixing the core, and ensuring it is consistent throughout all levels, the rest of the building can then be designed around it.
◦ What are the consequences of a core that does not stack vertically?
When the core does not stack vertically, the means of egress for residents is interupted and can add significant travel time if they need to exit quickly due to an emergency. For example is the core for levels 1-3 differs from levels 3-7, residents would have to exit the stairwell or elevator at level 3 to then switch to a different elevator or stairwell.
◦ What did locating the core force you to change about your Week 3 layout?
I had already designed a good core during week three so I did not need to make any changes. If the distance from the furthest unit to the stairs was longer than 250ft then I would have had to move the stairs to better serve all units.
Your Insight result did not match your Forma result.
◦ What accounts for the difference?
The large difference in carbon insights between the Revit model and Forma model comes from the modeling differences in the two programs. Revit was used to provide more in depth details about the materials used for the project, including detailed facades, wall assemblies, floor assemblies and roofs. Having more material data resulted in results far higher than the generalized assumptions produced by the Forma analysis.
◦ Which number would you show a client, and how would you explain the gap?
I would show both numbers and explain how different materials carry different embodied carbon values. That way the client and I could work together to determine what changes should be made if lowering the total carbon is important to them.
◦ Does a more detailed model automatically produce a more trustworthy prediction?
A more detailed model does not automatically produce a more trustworthy prediction because it still comes with a lot of assumptions. It provides a bit more context than the generic Forma results, but it still has generalizations and unknowns built in.