|
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.
|