Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • br Interactions between contextual elements and operational

    2018-10-29


    Interactions between contextual elements and operational mode; the ICFs as an analytical framework
    Between architectural and architecture – engineering firms: similarities and differences
    Conclusion
    Introduction Mediating devices are essential tools to describe architectural designs and traditionally these have been physically based, for example scale drawings and physical models. Such devices have been extended through the digital realm with the widespread adoption of computer aided drafting and design. Beyond their use as tools for architects to construct graphic and textual descriptions of schemes that are yet to be built, digital representation techniques have been exploited to visualise damaged, destroyed and unbuilt works of architecture (Forte and Siliotti, 1997; Novitski, 1998). Such investigations have become significant in producing enhanced understanding of what these buildings and designs would have looked like. However, debate continues into the use of digital tools to preserve architectural and cultural heritage, as it pdgfr is potentially biased on the interpretation of the creator of the digital representation (Kalay, 2007). More recently, such research has begun to focus on the capabilities that digital techniques can provide as analysis tools, rather than focusing primarily on the representations created (Brown and Webb, 2010; Mark, 2011). The research presented here extends these previous studies as it specifically looks at the process of digitally creating an architectural design and the re-analysis this can provide. Also, it exploits the possibilities that become available by utilising digital software to analyse the resulting representations. Many architectural designs are not built. Also, works of architecture may have been constructed and subsequently damaged or destroyed. In these cases, representation documents may still remain, offering an insight into what could have been or once was. Such unbuilt works are increasingly acknowledged for their contribution to cultural heritage; Wilson, for instance, suggests that ‘the built environment we inhabit is just the residue of a much greater imaginative world that never saw the light of day, evoking what might have been or still could be – the unbuilt, the lost’ (Wilson, 2004). This paper focuses on Lutyens׳ unbuilt design for the Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral, and the possibilities that digital techniques can bring in enhancing our understanding of it. The methodology proposed can also be utilised for existing, damaged and destroyed works of architecture; however, the case study discussed here is an unbuilt design.
    Methodology The nature of unbuilt, damaged or destroyed works of architecture results in the information available for investigation almost always being incomplete. This can be seen in digital reconstructions such as the destroyed synagogues of Vienna project (Martens and Peter, 2002). Therefore interpretation of material requires parallel study into the architect or designer, their influences and the contemporary context they operated within. This research can then be used to make inferences in order to fill gaps in an informed way. It is therefore crucial to make clear the interpretive nature of such decisions, as any representations created have the potential to mislead the viewer. It is important then to re-iterate that the resulting representations are secondary in terms of the research goals. Consequently, the focus of this study firstly places emphasis on the reading of source data and how eras can be utilised to pose specific questions about architectural designs in which knowledge can be enhanced using digital techniques that would not have been available for the designers to make use of at the time and secondly, emphasis is placed on the process of constructing the digital representations and what can be learned from this. The methodology displayed in Fig. 1 represents the process of selecting a case study, researching it, generating lines of enquiry, creating appropriate digital representations, investigating the lines of enquiry using the representations created, and finally analysing and reviewing them against identified gaps in knowledge and questions posed in the lines of enquiry. This methodology is demonstrated in the following sections.