Stage 1 - Part 1:
Screenshots:
Modeling Process:
To model this stage, I first set up the Revit model by linking the Burj Khalifa model and acquiring the coordinates. Then, I selected the Cog family as my conceptual mass element and constrained the Mid-Height parameter to be half of the Top-Height parameter. Once the Revit model was set up, I began the Dynamo file. First, I selected the building form and then set up the parameter that I wanted to adjust which was the Mid-Rotation. I also set up the three parameters I wanted to report: Gross Floor Area, Gross Surface Area, and Gross Volume. Then, I edited the Evaluate Single Input custom node to be able to report on 3 parameters and plugged all of the proper nodes in. From there, I tested each case and separately created a list for each of the three reported parameters. Lastly, I exported each of these lists to different columns in my excel sheet.
Stage 1 - Part 2:
Screenshots:
Modeling Process:
To start this part of Stage 1, I began by creating my own conceptual mass element. I did this by using the 3 Profile Twisting Tower Template. My goal was to create a semi-circle profile. To do this, I created model points and then connected them using model lines. Each point and line was connected somehow to a reference plane. Then I constrained the reference planes so that the geometry would remain proper. Then, I created instance parameters so that I could vary the radius of the semi-circle as well as the thickness of the semi-circle. I played around with the inputs to make sure that everything was working. The next step was to develop the Dynamo logic, and I used the same process as part 1.
Points to Ponder:
During this process, I found that it was very beneficial to export my results directly to Excel because it saved a lot of time and it reduced any human error in the data tracking process. Therefore, it allowed for a more efficient and accurate process.
Stage 1 - Part 2 - Creative Bonus:
Screenshots:
Explanation:
For my creative bonus, I decided to vary the color of my building by the Gross Floor Area values. To do this, I got the inverse of the Gross Floor Area and multiplied that by 10,000 to get a more reasonable number. Then I followed a similar process to Module 4 and set a color range between 0 and 1 that would vary the conceptual mass by how big each floor plate was. Red means that the Floor Area is larger and green means the Floor Area is smaller. The picture above shows the mid-rotation at 330 degrees which is one of the large floor areas.
Stage 2:
Screenshots:
Modeling Process:
For this stage, the first step was to create a custom node to help build my building. I chose to use an ellipse shape for my building profile. To do this, I first set up my base profile and then I translated it two times to get the middle and the top profiles. I made a few constraints to keep the geometry working and I also allowed the top two profiles to rotate. Using these three profiles, I then created a solid and a surface. Then, I computed the floor area using intersecting xy-planes. Finally, I complied each of the three reporting parameters and set each of them as an output value. Then, back in the Dynamo graph, created sliders for each of the inputs of the custom node. I chose to vary the Top X-Radius and Mid-Rotation, so I created the logic to vary each of those in combination. I then grouped the results into a data table and exported them to Excel. For some reason, I couldn’t get the geometry to be visible, so I created another Dynamo graph where I used the same logic in the custom node to get the geometry to be visible.
Points to Ponder:
Overall, the Top X-Radius had a much bigger impact on if the outcome was desirable or not rather than the middle rotation. This makes sense because it is directly impacting the size of the building which is what we are actively trying to reduce.
Stage 3:
Screenshots:
Modeling Approach:
For the last stage, I used the existing Dynamo model from Stage 2 and added the EvaluationResults.ComputeUsingResultsColumns custom node to evaluate the Gross Floor Area / Gross Surface Area for each data point. Then, I added evaluated the minimum and maximum case for the above calculation. Overall, my minimum case was when the Top X-Radius was 30 feet, and the Middle Rotation was 90 degrees. Furthermore, my maximum case was when the Top X-Radius was 50 feet, and the Middle Rotation was 90 degrees.
Points to Ponder:
Looking at the data, I want to minimize the Gross Floor Area and the Gross Surface Area per the project brief. With the parameters I chose to vary, I don’t think the ratio we used gives us very useful information to reach these goals. So, if I were to do this stage again, I would choose to vary different parameters that would be more indicative using this ratio. With that being said, I think that the most desirable building form, and ultimately the one that the owner should choose is the alternative with a Top X-Radius of 30 feet and a Middle Rotation of 30 degrees because this minimizes both Gross Floor Area which helps with cost and Gross Surface Area which helps with building performance.