Modeling Approach & Design Description
For Part 1, I adhered closely with the instructions to set up the building model, including using the default template, setting the project location to Dubai, and creating the new levels using the array function up to the site’s height limitation of 755 feet. Thereafter, I imported a conceptual mass (Twisting Rectangular Mass) and created the Mass Floors. Given the site of the given site, I adjusted the width and depth (both top and base) to 225 feet, so that the building footprint can take up a more significant portion of the given site area of 984 feet by 328 feet, while maintaining its original square-ish footprint. The width and depth will be kept constant in all the cases tested.
I then set up the Dynamo Graph Logic to enable the flexing of one of the form’s input parameters, which I have selected to be the height. Specifically the logic, I have set up nodes that allow the tested height ranges to be populated in the Excel file (with the help of Jayant). This will allow the Excel file to be updated accordingly, whenever the user changes the input parameters for the height of the building. Given that the code uses zero-based indexing, a “-1” had to be applied on the row and column that we want the first generated output to be populated.
I varied the input parameters, and eventually landed on using heights of 660 – 744 feet with 12 feet intervals (equivalent to 1 level). This would allow me to generate GFAs of within 2.5 – 3 million sqft, as specified in the design brief. With the given range, there will be a total of 8 runs, with 8 sets of GFA, GSA and Volume figures generated.
List of parameters that can be adjusted:
- Height (within Dynamo, automatically within a input range and interval, which determines the number of runs)
- Top & Base – Width & Depth (within Revit, but is kept constant in this case)
The parameters will change the building form, as well as GFA, GSA and Volume outputs generated for each run.
The fixed input (grayed), varied heights and generated outputs for Part 1 can be found in the table below:
For Part 2, I had faced issues with using the Twisting Tower 3 Profiles template provided on my personal laptop and on the computer in the lab. Even after re-downloading the required packages that was instructed in Module 1, the same problem persisted. I eventually had to borrow someone else’s computer to import the template into a Revit file and sent it to myself, before it could work on my laptop.
For the 3 profiles, while I had wanted to use 2 rounded triangles for the bottom two layers and a simple triangle at the top to give the top a more edgy feel, I struggled with finding the right parameters (radius and rotation at each layer) that would work. The error message of “Failed to create a Mass Floor” kept popping up. I eventually had to use rounded triangles for all 3, and played around with the radius and rotation for each layer to create a twisted and varied building profile. The base layer has a radius of 160 feet, which aims to maximize the site use (max of 328 feet deep).
Before linking and running the Dynamo code, I had tried to make sure that the building I have would have a GFA of close to 3 million sqft at height of 744 sqft (multiple of 12 feet), so that when the code runs with different height numbers, I can be confident that the max height would give me a value close to 3 million, within the design specifications. This required numerous iterations and extensive testing. Interestingly, besides increasing the radius of the layers, increasing the rotation of the layers also helps to increase the GFA when I tested.
List of parameters that can be adjusted:
- Height (within Dynamo, automatically within a input range and interval, which determines the number of runs)
- Top/Mid/Base Radius, Top/Mid/Base Rotation and Mid Height (within Revit, but they are kept constant in this case)
The parameters will change the building form, as well as GFA, GSA and Volume outputs generated for each run.
The fixed inputs (grayed), varied heights and generated outputs for Part 2 can be found in the table below:
Point to Ponder
The exporting of values to Excel is useful for us to have a good overview on how the generated values for each run changes with a change in input parameter (height in this case). Putting them together can allow us to easily compare the magnitude of changes as a result of a change in input parameter and identify the design that works best to meet our design brief (e.g., the GFA specification).
Module 4 ACC Link
https://acc.autodesk.com/docs/files/projects/6db2c3ca-7a2c-4f34-96a1-8a8189c7754d?folderUrn=urn%3Aadsk.wipprod%3Afs.folder%3Aco.RUMkoLZ8QPWNjeo1J7buyQ&viewModel=detail&moduleId=folders