Sheridan, who in the field of fine arts experimented with photocopiers and fax machines during the 1970s (Kirkpatrick et al. 2009). The digital tools we use today are certainly much more sophisticated. As far as parametric modelling is concerned, the most remarkable feature is that at any time the whole process from the initial assumptions to the ultimate fabrication data can be reviewed and controlled interactively.
Bridging the Gap had the aim to create a pedestrian bridge. This is a task typically carried out by civil engineers alone. We wanted to question and overcome this by linking radical structural and formal thinking. During the first semester we had two invited talks contributing to this topic. The first was by Lorenz Lachauer, who introduced his form-finding tool for curved bridges (Lachauer; Kotnik 2011). The second talk was by Prof. Mike Schlaich, who reported about his essentials and about exemplary projects from his long practice in designing footbridges (Baus; Schlaich 2013).
Fig. 9 Three selected projects from the first semester of Bridging the Gap.
At the beginning of the second semester we selected three objects that had to be developed further by three groups of students (Fig. 9). The aim was to explore the bridges in terms of their potential for actually getting manufactured and to inspect their inherent structural behaviour (Fig. 10). Finally, one design was rated to be most promising and selected for in-depth examination. Now the students collaboratively edited the details and created parts with the milling machine. Three significant units of larger joints were assembled. The units were then stress tested in collaboration with the department of Prof. Mike Schlaich (Fig. 11.).
Fig. 10 Studies accompanying the selection process.
Fig. 11 Component, stress test of a standard unit, assembled elements.
The communication about the progress during the course was a main issue. However, the traditional repertoire of floor plans, elevations and sections once claimed by Leon Battista Alberti (1404-1472) did only partly apply to the rather complex shapes and the dynamically changing designs. For this reason we supported additional methods of visual representations to broaden the graphical repertoire. The students explored flow charts, screen shots of the visual programming software on the fly, sequences, and design space diagrams (Fig. 12).
Fig. 12 Flow chart documenting the process of a student’s project.
5 Outcome
In a research-by-design mode, the course Bridging the Gap explored the potentials of parametric modelling for a small project. At the same time it was a case study for the question how the method of generative design can be taught. This was answered with a process driven approach. The students were engaged with inspiration from biology, created their own personal genotypes in Grasshopper and in the end, nature is still present in the designs, not in form of mimicry but as a principle. They learned to generate forms according to their principles that they could not have imagined in the beginning.
Although they were freshmen, all students in Bridging the Gap really got involved with parametric modelling and pursued it to the final presentation. We were able to observe that they valued the new capabilities and entered regions that would have been unachievable without parametric tools (Fig. 13). The evident outcome is a number of models that are both, mysterious and inspiring (Fig. 14.).
Furthermore, the students contributed convincing examples to an evolving language of parametric design by exploiting and combining diagrammatic forms of representation. The depiction of sequences, design spaces and flow charts corresponded to the process of design decisions (Fig. 15). In fact, the design teams realized that for their ability to cooperate, it is indispensable to continuously broaden the visual vocabulary (cf. Lordick 2013)]
Parametric modelling has the potential to integrate substantial simulations of loading conditions and can hence foster the collaboration of civil engineers and architects. One of the participants will further elaborate this aspect in the course of his bachelor’s thesis.
Fig. 13 Joint work in the second semester of Bridging the Gap (Anastasia Vitusevych, Tobias Kuhlmann, Georgios Chousen et al., rendering: Benjamin Weichert).
6 Conclusion
The major advantages of parametric models are flexibility and adaptability. In order to harvest those benefits to their full extents, a parametric model has to be set up consistently from the very beginning up to the ultimate assembling of the project. It is not sufficient to retrieve a design that looks as if it could have been done by generative methods. Instead, the code must have the potential to spread a certain range of different designs. This means that the supervisors need to in-depth review the students’ approach to avoid later frustration. We are not aiming at the creation of specific shapes but at the awareness of the potential of thinking in structures and correlations.
During the course we learned that we lost a lot of precious time for technical instructions. As an answer to this educational question, we created a basic course on parametric modelling for the first-year students. The objective of this new module is to provide the essentials of the tools and let the students experience a typical workflow from the definition of a simple model to its production with a laser cutter. This shall be the first seed for the integration of parametric modelling knowledge into design thinking.
We do not believe that every design task should be carried out by the means of parametric modelling, but we want to equip the students with the knowledge needed to exploit the benefits of parametric modelling whenever useful. Parametric modelling is more than the integration of just another tool. It affects the designing culture and the way we communicate about our projects.
Fig. 15 Example for a presentation that is emphasising the design process.
References
Adenauer, J.; Petruschat, J., 2012: Prototype! Physical, Virtual, Hybrid, Smart. Tackling New Challenges in Design and Engineering. Berlin: form + zweck.
Baus U.; Schlaich M., 2013: Footbridges: Construction, Design, History. Basel: Birkhäuser.
Bonacker, H.; Groß, B.; Laub, J., Lazzeroni, C., 2010: Generative Gestaltung. Entwerfen, Programmieren, Visualisieren. Mainz: Herrmann Schmidt.
Burry, M., 2011: Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Architectural Design Primer). New York, NY: Wiley.
Carpo, M. (ed.), 2012: The Digital Turn in Architecture 1992-2012. New York, NY: Wiley.
Grasshopper 2013: Website of the Plug-In Grasshopper for the CAD Software Rhinoceros: http://www.grasshopper3d.com [05.05.2013].
Haeckel, E., 1998: Kunstformen der Natur. München; New York: Prestel.
Hensel, M.; Menges, A. (eds.), 2008: Designing Morpho-Ecologies: Versatility and Vicissitude of Heterogeneous Space, Architectural Design. New York, NY: Wiley.
Hupasch,