|
AECbytes Viewpoint #32 (May 16,
2007)
Parametric Modeling in AutoCAD
Neil C. Katz
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, LLP
Many people are surprised by some of the work
that I do at SOM. But while we have created a
number of sophisticated tools for building modeling
and analysis, it is not the work itself that provokes
this reaction. Instead, it is the fact that much
of the work has been done in AutoCAD. With this
program, we have created tools for studying geometric
building forms at the very earliest phases of
a design project, allowing us to analyze and even
adjust these forms to address environmental conditions
such as sun and shadows, and other issues such
as zoning, views, and size (floor areas and program
verification, façade surface areas, and
volume). I believe that the approach one takes
in solving a problemby thinking creatively
and not being constrained by one's own thinking
or by a limiting set of toolsis the key
to innovative designs and design processes. Often
a simple and flexible tool like AutoCAD can be
more helpful than a very sophisticated tool designed
to solve a problem in a particular way.
Two hot themes in computational design for architecture
currently are "building information modeling
(BIM)" and "parametric modeling."
Many people associate BIM with particular software
tools, as is also the case with parametric modeling.
I propose that these concepts are less related
to the tools one uses, and more to the approach
architects take in their design process. This
Viewpoint article focuses on parametric modeling
as a design approach, and AutoCADwhich is
not typically considered a parametric modeling
toolas a perfectly acceptable tool for applying
this approach.
What is Parametric Modeling?
Building models are representations of buildings.
Architects are experts at modeling buildings.
They can conceptualize a building in their minds
and often they must document the building to record
these concepts and ideas and share them with others.
These documents are building models. Plans, elevations,
and sections are also building models, as are
renderings, physical scale models and virtual
representations in a computer.
Building models can be explicit, where every
aspect of the model is well-defined and can be
described, typically without referring to other
parts of the model. A computer model in which
a building is represented explicitly allows us,
for example, to get the coordinates of any point
in the building. This information can be used
to create various representations (plans and sections,
renderings, and physical models) and even to create
a real building. During the design process, decisions
about the building are being made as the model
is being built. At the same time, aspects of the
model are being analyzed, tested and modified.
Parametric building models are a bit different.
Aspects of the model depend upon relationships
between parts of the building. Creating and modifying
these relationships is an important part of the
design process. A parametric model is often defined
by rules and constraints, which define aspects
of the building and their relationships to each
other. Changing a rule or constraint, or modifying
a part of the model itself, almost always has
implications on the entire model.
Another way to distinguish between the two models
is that in the first type of model, the geometry
is explicit and the rules are implicitthere
are always rules and constraints in an architectural
model, but the modeling tool will not keep track
of them so we have to. In contrast, in parametric
models, the rules are explicit and the geometry
is implicit. Several tools have been developed
in the past decade for creating parametric architectural
models. These include Digital Project, an application
based on Catia by Dassault Systems and developed
for architects by Gehry Technologies; and Generative
Components by Bentley Systems, which runs within
MicroStation.
Parametric tools allow relationships among components
in the model to be defined, and parameters that
control aspects of the building to be defined
and changedfrom physical characteristics
to environmental parameters, and even aspects
such as projected occupancy. For example, a building
can be described as an extruded rectangular form
with a pitched roof. As the dimensions or shape
of the rectangle or the height of the extrusion
is changed, the roof will automatically be modified
in order to still fit perfectly. Height constraints
can also be specified and warnings will be issued
if certain conditions cannot be satisfied. In
essence, the building is being modeled by describing
the rules the building must follow. At SOM, we
are exploring and implementing parametric tools
and their use in a variety of design applications,
from complex stairs that respond to a building
occupancy parameter, implemented for one of our
projects using Digital Project, to buildings whose
form responds to environmental conditions such
as sunlight. Work in this area has already been
done (in AutoCAD!), and we're exploring sharing
data and allowing two-way interaction between
design/modeling applications and analysis applications.
In conventional modeling where we explicitly
describe the building, when we change one aspect
of the model, often we must make several changes
to satisfy our design intent-in other words, the
implicit rules of the design. This is because
the software does not keep track of the rules
and we must decide whether and when they are broken.
In AutoCAD, models can be created in a conventional
way. AutoCAD, however, comes with more than one
programming environment for creating a set of
instructions, including the rules and constraints
of the design as well as parameters defining certain
aspects of the design, which can be used to build
the model. We can use these instructions to build
a model from scratch, each time using the same
parameters, or experimenting with different ones.
The parameters can be numeric values (e.g., FootprintWidth
= 120'-6", FootprintDepth = 84'-0",
MaxBuildingHeight = 78'-0"), relationships
(e.g., FootprintDepth = FootprintWidth*0.6666),
and can even include graphic parameters already
existing in the model (e.g., a building lot, context
buildings, a zoning envelope, etc.). The programming
environment makes it possible to define variables,
to allow conditional branching to different sets
of instructions in the program, to repeat instructions
until a condition in the program or model is met,
and to interact with the model for the transfer
of information.
The next section describes and illustrates some
examples of parametric modeling done with AutoCAD
for exploring specific aspects of design projects
at SOM.
Note: All images in this article are provided
courtesy of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP,
and may not be used without permission.
Parametric Modeling Examples
Figures 1 and 2 show views of a cylindrical diagrid
generated by a lisp program, which is used to
explore different options for modeling a building's
structure. Close to a hundred variations were
modeled, of which two are illustrated here. In
each case, a single diagrid member, which spirals
from the base of the building to the top, is created
by the program and repeated by rotation and reflection
to create the entire structure. In the second
example shown in Figure 2, as in most of the models,
the member varies from bottom to top, in this
case by splitting (one member at the base splits
into four members) and by tapering.

Figure 1. Example of a cylindrical diagrid
on which a building's structure could be based.
(Courtesy of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP)

Figure 2. Other
variations of a cylindrical diagrid generated
using lisp. (Courtesy of Skidmore, Owings &
Merrill LLP)
Figures 3 and 4 illustrate another example of
a lisp-based model, in which a frit pattern for
glass is generated based on simple graphics that
control the parameters for generating the pattern.
In each case, the red line is the centerline of
the pattern, the blue line determines the spacing
of the dots, and the green line determines the
size of the dots. We have used these lisp routines
to generate frit patterns for a variety of design
projects, where we can control the area/percentage
of opacity of the glass, and vary this in a controlled
and interesting way over the panel.

Figure 3. Several
examples of frit patterns created using lisp for
use in glazing design. (Courtesy of Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill LLP)

Figure 4. Another
example showing a more complex frit pattern. (Courtesy
of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP)
Many of the processes described here were used
in the design, analysis, and documentation of
the building project shown in Figure 5, which
is the Lotte Tower in Seoul, Korea. The building
model is created both as a 3D model and as an
unfolded model for laser-cutting, as well as for
representation (see Figure 6). The lisp program
generates one-quarter of the structure, and uses
symmetry to complete the models. Parameters in
the program control the diagridthe parameters
are refined after many iterations to optimize
structural performance, program area contained
within the building, and aesthetic judgments.
The form of the 550+ meter tall tower transforms
from a square at the base to a circle at the top.

Figure 5. SOM's
Lotte Tower project in Seoul, Korea, on which
many parametric modeling processes have been used.
(Courtesy of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP)

Figure 6. The basic
structure of the Lotte Tower project, derived
using parametric modeling in AutoCAD. Both the
3D model and the unfolded model are shown. (Courtesy
of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP)
We also used AutoCAD-based parametric modeling
to develop a tool for analyzing solar incidence
angles for the project, as shown in Figures 7
and 8.

Figure 7. Examples
of solar incidence angle analysis for the Lotte
Tower project. The top image shows analysis results
for mornings during spring, while the lower image
shows the analysis for afternoons during autumn.
(Courtesy of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP)

Figure 8. The complete
set of solar incidence angle analysis for the
same project, allowing solar penetration to be
studied for the entire year. (Courtesy of Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill LLP)
The summary image shown in Figure 9 was part
of our competition entry package for this project
(which we were awarded), and represents a solar
incidence angle analysis of the tower. An analysis
was performed for each facet of the tower model.
At each hour from morning to evening for one day
of each month, the normal vector of each facet
was compared to the direction to the sun. If this
angle is small, the facet is getting direct sunlight,
causing poor energy performance and decreasing
occupant comfort. Small angles are indicated in
red and as the angles growand energy performance
improvesthe color changes to orange, yellow,
green, and blue respectively. While the analysis
was done on a three-dimensional model, the results
are shown on an unfolded model, allowing us to
see a "report" of the analysis for the
entire building in a single image.

Figure 9. The solar
incidence angle analysis summary image for the
Lotte Tower project. (Courtesy of Skidmore, Owings
& Merrill LLP)
While most of the programs that we create at
SOM are to address a problem raised on a particular
project, we always try to generalize a solution
so that we can re-use it when a similar problem
comes up again on other projects. A good example
of this is the frit program, which has been through
an extensive generalization process and has been
used across many projects to design fritted glass.
In contrast, the solar incidence angle analysis
tool was recently developed and the Lotte Tower
project was the second one in which it was being
used. It did, however, have to undergo several
modifications to satisfy the needs of this project.
Often, the tools that we develop can be used very
effectively in relationship to one another. For
example, the summary solar incidence angle report
shown in Figure 9 was used to determine on which
panels of the Lotte Tower more frit had to be
applied. This was important to protect those parts
of the building from the greater amount of direct
sun they will be subjected to. Similarly, less
frit can be applied to the glazing on those areas
of the building where there will be less direct
sun.
Conclusions
At SOM, our building information models are the
result of a very rigorous process of design. While
we are using such tools as Revit, Digital Project,
Generative Components, Ecotect, and others, our
process not only takes advantage of the strengths
of these tools, but is additionally enhanced by
complimenting features with our own customizations.
In many cases, we do this by exploiting the simplicity
and universal, all-purpose environment of an application
such as AutoCAD.
About the Author
Neil Katz is an architect, and has been with
SOM for over twenty years. He has been involved
in the "computational design" aspects
of many projects, often suggesting solutions to
geometrically complex issues that arise in the
design process, and typically creating computational
tools to address these.
Note: The views expressed in Viewpoint articles
are those of the individual authors and do not
necessarily reflect those of AECbytes.
All images in this article are provided courtesy
of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, and may
not be used without permission.
Have comments or feedback on this article?
Visit its AECbytes
blog posting to share them with other readers
or see what others have to say.
Viewpoints
> Issue #32 > Printer-friendly
format
|