Process based design - Dissertation by Nilofer Tajuddin

PROCESS BASED DESIGN A DISSERTATION Submitted by

NILOFER AFZA 2011701015

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF ARCHITECTURE under FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING in

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

ANNA UNIVERSITY CHENNAI 600 025 APRIL 2015

PROCESS BASED DESIGN A DISSERTATION Submitted by

NILOFER AFZA 2011701015

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF ARCHITECTURE under FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING in

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

ANNA UNIVERSITY CHENNAI 600 025 APRIL 2015

DECLARATION I declare that this dissertation titled â&#x20AC;&#x153;Process based designâ&#x20AC;? is the result of my work and prepared by me under the guidance of Ar.Deepa Mandrekar Rao and Ar.Dinesh Rao and that work reported herein does not form part of any other dissertation of this or any other University. Due acknowledgement have been made wherever anything has been borrowed from other sources.

Date: 06.04.2015 Name : Nilofer Afza Roll Number: 2011701015

Signature of the Candidate Nilofer Afza

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this Dissertation forming part of Course work AD 9452, Dissertation, VIII semester , B.Arch, entitled â&#x20AC;&#x153;PROCESS BASED DESIGNâ&#x20AC;? Submitted by NILOFER AFZA Roll No. 2011701015 to the Department of architecture, School of Architecture and Planning , Anna University, Chennai, 600 025 in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Bachelor Degree in Architecture is a bonafide record of work carried by her under my supervision. Certified further that to the best of my knowledge the work reported herein does not form part of any other dissertation.

Date:

Signature of the Supervisor

Name :

Designation :

External Examiner 1

External Examiner 2

Date :

Professor and Head

Dean

Department of Architecture

SAP

Date :

Date:

ABSTRACT Design in today’s world has multiple approaches and several possibilities. Among the various approaches to problem solving, process based design has been considered one of the most appropriate methods to break down a design brief.

Process based design consists of a rational method of approaching design in which the designer uses the existing information related to the brief in question and arrives at a solution unique to that brief by ‘’processing’’ and synthesizing the information in an organized and step-wise manner. The designer considers all the possible factors that influence the working and performance of a building and that are unique to that brief and solves it without any predetermined baggage of style or a narrow minded approach. By making intelligent decisions on what to integrate and what to eliminate, he creates an end product that is solely intended for that scenario.

Process based design makes design iterative in which the process is repeated a multiple times and in multiple ways until an appropriate design solution is born. Research, experimentation and invention can be a brief description of process based design. The brief plays an important role in the process of design. The more apt the brief in identifying the requirements, the better will be the approach to the end product. In this approach, the final output is mainly dependent on the trail of the process. The process itself is equally important as the end design product. Process based design helps one justify and defend the idea and answer questions that may arise during the design process.

This dissertation seeks to study the method of process based design and question its validity in architectural practice. Case studies of architectural practices such as OMA and projects like House VI by Peter Einsenman have

been analysed in order to derive inferences and conclusions.

Process based design has aimed at a formal and structured approach to solving a design problem and intends to generate objective responses. In recent times with the growing competition, architects all over the world are looking to enhance their design approaches. Process design when interpreted in different ways, gives a diversity of ideas and by analyzing the same, the most appropriate solution can be given.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT At the outset I would like to thank our dean, Dr. Ranee Vedamuthu and Head of Department Dr. P. Meenakumari for giving us the opportunity to work on this dissertation.

I would also like to thank Prof. Jeyaradha Jayaram who was always available to lend full support as faculty in-charge during the course of the semester.

I would like to thank Ar.Deepa Mandrekar Rao, Ar.Dinesh Rao of Monsoon Design, Bangalore for guiding me throughout the period of the dissertation. I would also like to thank the architects at Monsoon Design for valuable support for the study.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude and admiration towards Ar.Pradeep Alva of CnT architects, Bangalore whose mentoring was of great value and was the pillar of support during the entire course of the dissertation. I would also like to thank Ar.Praveen Alva of CnT Architects, Bangalore for the support without which the conception of the idea for this dissertation would not have been possible. I would like express my gratitude towards Ar.Sujay Thomas of CnT Architects, Bangalore for his valuable thoughts and literary support for the study.

I would like to thank my mother who has always supported me on different levels and inspired me to always be emotionally strong despite all obstacles.

Finally, I would like to thank my classmates and friends Sanjana Maria John and Smritika Srinivasan for always supporting me to overcome all obstacles during the study.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter No.

Title

Page No.

Abstract………………………………………………………........i Acknowledgment…………………………………………...........iii Table of Contents…………………………………………..........iv List of Figures………………………………………………........vi 1. Introduction 1.1. Dilemma of the different ways to approach design…………...2 1.2. Introduction to process based design……………………….....2 1.3. Intent of the study………………………………………………...2 1.4. Possible questions that may be raised……………………...…3 2. Inquiry 2.1. The design process…………………………………..……….…4 2.2. What is good design?..............................................................5 2.3. What is process based design?...............................................5 3. History 3.1. Earliest attempts at systems for deciphering design………...9 4. Potential parameters of process based design 4.1. Potential factors that may be considered for design………...10 4.2. Design methodology vs. Process based design……………..11 4.3. Different interpretations of Process based design………..…12 4.4. Strategies that may be used while approaching design…….12 5. Case studies 5.1.

Rem Koolhaas, OMA………………………………………....15

5.2.

Brief look at selected Projects of OMA…………………….29

5.3.

Peter Eisenmann – House VI…………………………........39

6. Other examples of process based design 6.1. IDEO……………………………………………………………42 6.2. Shopping Cart Project………………………………………...44 7. Tranformation and adaptation over time 7.1. Process generated architecture……………………………..49 7.2. Parametricism, Biomimicry and other forms……………….49 7.3. Sagrada Familia – Antonio Gaudi…………………………....50 8. Inference……………………………………………………….....55 9. Conclusion………………………………………………………..56

10. Bibliography……………………………………………………...57

List of figures: Page no. Fig. 1 - Process of planning of a spa based on the organisation of the functional requirements……………….........…………………..8 Fig. 2 – Process of divisions……………………………………………………13 Fig. 3 – Centralized Process…………………………………………………...13 Fig. 4 – Cyclic Process………………………………………………………….14 Fig. 5 – Investigative Process………………………………………………….14 Fig. 6 – Investigative Process………………………………………………….15 Fig. 7 – OMA Idea Machine…………………………………………………….17 Fig. 8 – OMA Idea Machine…………………………………………………….18 Fig. 9 – Models made round after round………………………………………20 Fig. 10 - Figures showing the flow of ideas……………………………………21 Fig. 11 – Archives…………………………………………………………………22 Fig. 12 – OMA Book machine…………………………………………………...23 Fig. 13 – Graphic showing the sprawl at LACMA……………………………..29 Fig. 14 – LACMA – Multiple options, multiple times, multiple ways………...30 Fig. 15 – LACMA – Multiple options, multiple times, multiple ways………...30 Fig. 16 – LACMA – Final proposal………………………………………………31 Fig. 17 – Schemes classifying the programs at MoCA……………………….32 Fig. 18 – CCTV and TVCC building…………………………………………….34 Fig. 19 – Process models of the CCTV building………………………………34 Fig. 20 – Process models of the TVCC building………………………………35 Fig. 21 – Process models of the TVCC building………………………………36 Fig. 22 – Model of the CCTV and TVCC building……………………………..37 Fig. 23 – House VI……………………………………………………………….40 Fig. 24 – House VI – Process images………………………………………….41 Fig. 25 – House VI – Process images………………………………………….41 Fig. 26 – IDEO design process…………………………………………………43

Fig. 27 – Shopping Cart project………………………………………………..47 Fig. 28 – Design steps for generation column of four at Sagrada Familia…51 Fig. 29 – Lateral nave column and its components………………………….52 Fig. 30 – Generation process of the rectangular knot……………………….52 Fig. 31 – Initial shapes for generating the rectangular knot………………...53 Fig. 32 – Topological and geometrical transformation in parametric design procedure…………………………………………………….54

vii

“The key is looking…looking, observing, seeing, imagining, inventing, and creating.” - Le Corbusier - 1965

1. Introduction: 1.1: Dilemma of the different ways to approach design: Architectural design in today’s practice has become a trans-disciplinary issue and the “design” should satisfy many requirements. The present day problems have necessitated an exploration of new processes and media to provide appropriate solutions.

A design brief may be approached in a number of ways. Regardless of the type of object or building to be designed, a set of universal rules or methods may be adopted. In order to understand and break down the brief completely, one needs to understand the product to be designed, it’s background, impact on human and natural environment, social responsibility, cultural role.

1.2: Introduction to process based design:

Process based design has been considered as the creative and rational solution to design. Formulating the solution based on a process enables us to break down and design almost anything. Design based on a process enables one to track the progress of the design in a step-by-step manner. It attempts a rational approach to design in which all requirements are met and at the same time, creating new ideas is also considered as a prime priority. Based on these requirements, the idea is formulated such that one of the best and unique solutions may be given for the design problem.

1.3: Intent of the study:

This dissertation seeks to study the method of process based design and its significance in terms of design. This study aims to question the importance of

process based design as an appropriate approach to design any product or building and also question if process based design is valid in architectural practice. Also, the study will consist of the transformation and adaptation of process based design into various forms over the years and how it has given rise to different methods to solving a brief.

1.4: Possible questions that may be raised One may pose the following questions during the course of the study.

Is this process based design valid in architectural practice? Can this be applied universally as a guide to approach design?

What is a good design?

Is design iterative? (Iteration is the act of repeating a process with the aim of approaching a desired goal, target or result. Each repetition of the process is also called an "iteration", and the results of one iteration are used as the starting point for the next iteration.)

Is process based design different from design methodology?

Is the design process a lateral or linear based approch? (Lateral thinking is solving problems through an indirect and creative approach, using reasoning that is not immediately obvious and involving ideas that may not be obtainable by using only traditional step-by-step logic.

Linear thinking is a process of thought following known step by step progression where a response to a step must be elicited before another step is taken.)

2. Inquiry: 2.1: The design process:

Just do it. The design ‘’process’’ can be as simple as that. But, this may be purely based on instinct and tacit knowledge. Although one claims to call an idea of the design ''random'', this random idea may always be based on this tacit knowledge or the process that the mind automatically goes through in order to solve an issue.

Once you try to contain this instinctive knowledge by forming certain rules towards the approach to design by incorporating what is required and eliminating the unwanted, you can arrive at possibly, the best solution to the brief.

Any initial design idea is most likely based on inherent knowlegde or a reference from the past. This needs to be moulded from a premature idea into a unique and detailed concept by use of approches such as process based design.

''The act of designing in architecture is a complex process. Many designers, when probed for reasons to explain their actions, are either unable to answer questions, or provide explanations that are not true descriptions of their

actions. Frequently the designer will answer that his or her reason for making a particular design decision is based on 'feeling' or 'intuition. Under this model the design process assumes a 'mystical' aura. Architectural designers can create, yet are unable to say how they do so. Often that which can be explicitly discussed by the designer is the least significant part of his or her design process. It is unlikely that designers are 'channeling' information from cosmic sources. Rather, they are working with knowledge that is largely tacit'' Methodology in architectural design, Wiggins Glenn E.

2.2: What is good design?

How could one break down a design brief? What are the different ways to approach design? A ''good'' design should satisfy many requirements. It should avoid any compromise in terms of requirements, functions and the building’s relationship with all the components associated with it.

Is aesthetics the primary intent of the design? Should functionality and working of the building be considered above the building's visual impact? Those who hold aesthetics over other aspects create an end product which simply looks appealing. However, could that be considered good design? Should good design be considered a conscious and balanced blend of all the aspects such as aesthetics, functionality, contextual value and other factors?

2.3: What is Process based design?

Process based design consists of a method of approaching design in which the designer uses the existing information related to the brief in question and arrives at a solution unique to that brief by ‘’processing’’ and synthesizing the information in step wise manner. The designer considers all the possible factors that influence the working and performance of a building and that are unique to that brief. By making intelligent decisions on

what to integrate and what to eliminate, he creates an end product that is solely intended for that scenario.

The primary intent of process based design is to produce new ideas. This invention of new ideas may occur when existing information and facts are analysed and the designer is pushed to acquire new perspective on the given facts. Process based design hence makes design iterative in which the process is repeated a multiple times and in multiple ways until an appropriate design solution is born. Research, experimentation and invention can be a brief description of process based design.

The brief plays an important role in the process of design. The more apt the brief, the better will be the approach to problem solving and in turn, the quality of the end product is enhanced. Hence, based on how suitably the brief addresses the requirements, the design also gets directed into the right direction.

Process based design is often based on understanding of the product and the brief. The process may lead to innovation and give rise to new models that synchronize with the wants and needs of the project. Apart from the understanding of the product or the building, it takes into account, all the possible factors that affect that buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s performance. The usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; preference and interests are considered in the process of design. In this process, the final output is mainly dependent on the trail of the process and not based on predetermined form and factors or a narrow minded approach. This may lead to new ideas, new innovations and several new possibilities. Considering all the possible tangents that the brief can take, a variety of ideas may be developed and in turn the fusion of all these into the end product strengthens the value of the design. In case of architectural design, this approach consists of designing a building with no burden whatsoever in terms of predetermined style or form. The outcome is purely based on the

process and the elements used in the design, enhance the output. These elements can also be further improvised to give rise to new elements or unique forms provided they are integrated with a purpose and not as an accessory.

The design process gives one the freedom to design absolutely anything in terms of art, but once it is approched rationally, it incorporates science, hence making architectural design a combination of art and science. While some decisions are made based on instinct and tacit knowledge, process based design may be able to help a person justify each and every component or idea behind the design. Process design thus gives the designer the power to defend the idea and answer the questions that may arise during the progress of the design process as well as questions that may be raised as criticism to the design. In this approach the process itself is equally important as the end design product.

The design process is best described metaphorically as a system of spaces rather than a predefined series of orderly steps. The spaces demarcate different sorts of related activities that together form the continuum of innovation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Design Thinking, Tim Brown -Harvard Business Review, June 2008

Process based design maybe adapted on different levels. In terms of practise, it maybe adapted in terms of the flow of the project and the functioning of the firm. For example, in the case of Rem Koolhaasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; practice OMA, the firm itself has its own process of functioning such that it creates a system that constantly produces innovative ideas. The trail of the project maybe based on initial research, a rational interpretation of the brief, careful consideration of all factors and then processing everything repeatedly to innovate.The conception of the idea may be based on the response to the site, wants and needs of the client, social role, aesthetics, impact on environment and soceity, ideologies of the designer and all factors that influence the built form. But in turn, the conception

of the idea also depends on what the process eliminates from the influences on the building.

Process based design hence can be considered as a system that consists of the process governing the design and not the design governing the process. A system which could give solutions to any problem and convert an idea into a built form. A system which is based on a process but which cannot give mechanised solutions as far as a human mind is involved in the process. Different architects have their own interpretation of this ‘’process’’. However not every approach can be called a process. A fine line differentiates a methodology from a process. While any approach to design may be that designer’s methodology, only those who have undertaken the processing and synthesizing of information in an organized manner to give an innovative solution can be called a practitioner of process based design.

Fig. 1: The image showing the process of planning of a spa based on the organisation of the functional requirements

3. History: 3.1: Earliest attempts at systems for deciphering design:

The plethora of literature concerned with the ‘design process’ or ‘design methodology’ is a fairly recent phenomenon which gained momentum during the late 1950s. In these early explorations design was promulgated as a straightforward linear process from analysis via synthesis to evaluation as if conforming to some universal sequence of decision making. – Architecture Design Notebook, A. Peter Fawcett. The oldest known written source on architecture is Vitruvius’ Ten Books on Architecture dated back to the first century B.C. Ever since then, architects have been documenting their ideas about architecture. Such documents often record a normative stance, indicating what architects should do rather than what they are actually doing. Rigorous scientific investigations in design theory are much more recent, having their origin in the 1950s. They are based on systems theory which evolved out of a need to deal with novel complex problems for which tried and tested existing methods were inadequate. In general, the field was called design methodology. Throughout its years of development, the understanding of design problems and design process has been revised considerably.

It is fair to claim that our current understanding of design is still incomplete. Researchers are struggling between two quite different paradigms of design: design as rational problem solving versus design as reflective practice. Put very concisely, design as rational problem solving poses problem decomposition, design as search, solving (sub) problems, and integrating partial solutions to whole solutions. So, if possible, quantifiable methods are preferred compared to qualitative methods. Design as reflective practice on the

other hand, proposes that the architect continuously decomposes the problem, but each time different as the need occurs (naming), on this basis sets up a (sub)-design problem (framing), creates a partial solution (moving), and checks whether the result is moving in the right direction (evaluating). Rational problem solving has a sound theoretical background, but does not sound familiar to an architect; whereas reflective practice has a weak theoretical background, but sounds much more true to an architect.

4. Potential parameters of process based design: As we enter the twenty-first century, it has become fashionable to consider architecture through a veil of literature. Even the most basic theoretical stance must be supported in turn by a few fundamental maxims which can point the inexperienced designer in the right direction towards prosecuting an acceptable architectural solution.- Architecture Design Notebook, A. Peter Fawcett. A ‘’good design’’ has to function well, but anything that works or functions well may not necessarily be considered good, simply because it has to cater to and satisfy the various requirements and factors of a successful design. Mentioned earlier, process based design takes into account, all potential factors influencing the design. These are however subjected to change based on the given background and based on the approach of the individual. Few are listed below.

4.1: Potential factors that may be considered or design:

1. Context for Design

2. Arriving at the diagram  Responding to the site, analysis and survey

 Choosing an appropriate model  Organizing the plan

3. Choosing appropriate technologies  Structure  Services  Sustainability  Climate and Energy  Building Material  Circulation

4. Appearance  Expression vs. Suppression  Elements of the building  Roof, openings, wall membranes, etc

5. Spaces around the building Landscape Objects complementing the building (sculptures, paintings, water body)

4.2: Design methodology vs. Process based design:

How is process based design different from any design methodology? Design methodology is the way in which one approaches design. It need not necessarily be dependent on a systematic process as each designer’s has his signature method of deconstructing the design problem. Hence, not everything is process based. Everything may be considered a process as nothing is considered random but however, this process need not be considered process based design. Process based design consists of synthesizing all existing data to create a fresh solution without any predetermined baggage of style or

preferences. The trail of the process and the synthesis of the influencing factors is the sole contributor to the design ideas. These design ideas may however be unique to that person as the human mind undergoes its own course in thought development.

4.3: Different interpretations of Process based design:

Process based design may be interpreted at various levels and in various ways and can be applied at different stages. Also, it links various stages of design in order to structure and organize it. The area of application may vary from the conception of an idea and may even extend up to the working of a firm itself.

Process based design may also further extend into the field of generative forms of architecture in which architectural algorithms drive the design process and generate the forms. These algorithms are formulated based on the requirements and parameters considered for the successful functioning of the building.

4.4: Strategies that may be used while approaching design:

Although process based design cannot be generalized to follow a fixed approach system, there are few strategies that designers may use to structure the process. These strategies consist of organization of the trail of the design process into various categories and this organization can be done at different levels and in different ways. What remains common between these several strategies is that the brief eventually leads to a logical design solution. Bearing in mind that there may be no one solution to design, multiple potentials of the end product gives the designer the preference of selecting the best among the given options to arrive at possibly, one of the best solutions to the design.

Linear: ‘’Design process is a continuous B.A.S.I.C. linear steps. Briefing Analysis – Synthesis – Implementation - Communication ’’ – Reekie R. Fraser (1972) Design in built environment, First edition, Edward A. Publication, London. Divisions: ‘’Design process is choosing the best solutions out of several divisions of design solutions’’ – J. Christopher Jones (1970) Design Methods : Seeds of Human Futures. London: Wiley-interscience, 1970.

Fig. 2: Process of divisions

Centralized : ‘’There are no steps in design process. Everything is happening at the same time!’’ – Prof. Bryan Lawson (1997), How designers think: the design process demystified 1st Edition. Sheffield, Architectural press.

Fig. 3: Centralized Process

Cyclic: Design process is an endless repetitive cycle.’’ James C. Snyder (1970), Introduction to architecture, McGraw-Hill Publication, New York.

Fig. 4: Cyclic process

Investigative process: Each step in the design process is based on a selective investigation process on options of idea and solutions’’ – Yehuda E. Kalay (1985), Redefining the role of computers in architecture : from drafting/ modeling tools to knowledge – based design assistants, Vol.17 num 7 Sept 1985, Butterworth & Co publishers Ltd.

Fig. 5: Investigative Process

Fig. 6: Investigative process

5. Case studies: 5.1: Rem Koolhaas and OMA – Office of Metropolitan Architecture:

Design action is distributed differently in the OMA in comparison to the practices of Hadid or Gehry. Thus, it is quite expected that an architect would not be on his own in the creative process; there is a variety of other actors, both human and non-human, who participate in design and make it a heterogeneous and genuinely co-operative venture. As Rem himself states, ‘it’s not me, it’s made by OMA’. A building or an urban concept that holds the stamp of OMA emerges as a relational effect of a whole network rather than as a sketch that travels and is collectively transformed, modified and translated on the way toward the final building.

The theatrical treatment of his models and his relationship with the market, it is impossible to understand Koolhaas’ work without considering his design practice. Although Koolhaas’ buildings are found all over the world, it is difficult to identify and categorize his buildings into a definite style or classify them generally on visual appearance. To define Koolhaas you have to move to his realm, leave the world of bricks and steel, and enter the world of images,

models and processes, a world of ideas. Not what is, but what could be. After four decades in the field, he continues to be one of the world’s most influential architects due to his distinctive approach to design. ‘’ To keep thinking of what architecture could be. What I could be.’’ - Rem Koolhaas, Index Magazine, 2000

His buildings and his books do, however, have something that makes them recognisable as a product from OMA. A product, that is very much influenced by the process of creation, a bottom up, labour-intensive, research-lead way of questioning everything. The counterpart of OMA’s architectural practice is AMO, a research institute. While OMA remains dedicated to the realization of building and master plans, AMO operates in areas beyond the traditional boundaries of architecture including media, politics, sociology, renewable energy, technology, fashion, curating, publishing and graphic design. AMO often works in parallel with OMA’s clients to fertilize architecture with intelligence from this array of disciplines. OMA’s parallel research branch AMO, provides support as an integral research institute and plays a major role in the firm’s design approach. Having played the roles of a scriptwriter and author long before practicing architecture itself, his attitude towards the importance of research in design, sets his apart from his peers. Long before Koolhaas the builder arrives, Koolhaas the writer was already there. In his role as professor at Harvard he explored the Pearl Delta before being asked to build for CCTV. Before proposing an infrastructure plan in Dubai, the manual was already published. Before working with Prada his research on shopping was already available in book form.

Fig. 7: OMA Idea Machine

Fig. 8: OMA Idea Machine

''Koolhaas’ greatest achievement is therefore, not a building or book, but a system that is capable of harvesting, questioning and producing ideas.'' - Rem Koolhaas – Designing the design process – Sjors Timmer ‘’ Shortly after I started working at the OMA, I met Markus who was the head of AMO at the time. He took a pencil and drew a diagram of the process. This was one of those step-by-step gradual rational design-process schemes that you often find in many books on design.

The research stage – at the end of this stage the content is defined; The concept design – the idea is defined and the building is beautiful; The schematic design – the building is defined. The presentational books very often exhibit the schematic design and design development; or conceptual and schematic design; The design development – the building is feasible. In design development, the building is becoming ugly and uglier, is dismembered into different schemes and files, and then becomes beautiful again at the end; The construction documents – the building is executable; The construction, administration and planning – the building is built; Lectures, publications, exhibitions – once the building is built.’’ Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design - Albena Yaneva

However, the design process at the OMA has its own internal rhythm and tempo, that models and plans have unpredictable trajectories, that the concept of the building is questioned whatever the stage of design may be, that there are many rhythmic conduits through which the building develops and they would not necessarily correspond to one particular stage in the process diagram drawn by Markus. As other architects at OMA put it: ‘’When you look at the process from a distance it is a linear process, but during the design it is really hard to say where exactly we are going.’’ Moving according to different trajectories of space and time, designers perform series of steps with various intensities and speeds. This requires taking into account the rhythms and the minute material operations of design, the materiality, the equipment and the variable ontology of the actors involved.

The common feature of all experiments is that they all account for the nature of design invention; the latter is not reduced to an abstract concept of creation or construction. Instead, it is something that resolves into concrete actions and practices: in collective rituals, techniques, habits and skills ingrained by training and daily repetition, in reuse of materials and recycling of historical knowledge and foam chunks. It is also a very fragile

process – when a building is in the making and as long as it exists as a scale model, its existence is very tentative, very frail. At any moment in design process it can live or it can die, it can merge into something else, it can be reused, recollected. That is, a view of design as constituted from the inside; it stems from the experience of making.

The studio practice:

Another way in which Koolhaas differs from his competitors is in how his studio is run. Koolhaas doesn’t come up with the masterplan that is then refined by his architects. On the contrary, his practice defines itself by an enormous freedom, in materials, in methods and in working hours. One might say that at OMA it’s avoided at all cost that answers are given based on no other ground than authority. What Koolhaas provides therefore are questions rather than the answers. The attitude to question everything helps generate groundbreaking ideas and concepts. As Koolhaas puts it: “What the OMA process focuses on is not the creator but the critic. In our way of working, the important person is the one who is shown various options and then makes a critical decision. The result is better architecture.”

This practice of avoiding ready-made answers runs deep at OMA, it can be found in the way they source their materials. Kunlé Adeyemi states: “Of course it’s easier to use materials from the shelf, from the catalogue, but we can’t be on the cutting edge if we do that. So, we develop our own materials, we develop new structures.”

In order for Koolhaas to have the greatest chance of uncovering new ideas, OMA is created around renewal and regeneration. Although Koolhaas himself, with his 30 years’ service, is a constant factor, it is his continuous work of

critiquing himself and the outside world, whilst at the same time also creating both of them, that becomes the key to the design process.

Models:

Models play a crucial role at the OMA design process; produced in large quantities, they function as a container for ideas and constrains. Because of their shape they create an immediate impact, there is no need to go through long documents, a model is an entity to makes experiments easy.

Fig. 9: Models made round after round

Dozens or even hundreds of ideas are turned into presentations, diagrams and models which through a process of constant critique, slowly turn into a final plan. One of OMAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accomplishments is therefore also that they manage to run a profitable business whilst allowing for an enormous amount of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;wasteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; to be created. This way of working also allows to blur the distinction between the research, concept and design phases. In these worlds the information that came from outside slowly grows into a plan that could transform the future. The playground of ideas is constructed through mixing client demands, the environment, laws and budgets, but also opportunities, ideas, and dreams. In an endless circulation, ideas turn into shapes and shapes into ideas.

The practice of making a large selection of detailed models allows OMA to keep more complexity in the design process. The longer they can push final decisions forward, the more chance there is that a great new idea might emerge. And so each model reflects the studio as a whole, a collection of changing artefacts always in flux towards becoming more refined, intelligent ideas of how the world could be.

Fig. 10: Figures showing the flow of ideas

Archives and Books:

One of the reasons that OMA can afford their process is their ability to recycle themselves. By using their large archive of models and books they manage to use time more efficiently and to store a larger amount of complexity. Archiving the models allows architects to keep the traces of creativity for a longer period of time and de-archiving them means they can rediscover those traces of design invention that time had left intact.

Working with their vast archive allows OMA to work with a large volume of ideas and a higher internal complexity, thereby enabling them to pick a good idea from a much larger pool than would otherwise be possible.

Fig. 11: Archives

Besides the archived models, OMA uses another method to carry information and ideas through time. OMA is also a massive book production machine, where they use books in all stages of the design process, such as documenting research, saving projectsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; stages or capturing outcomes.

These books help to get a grip on time, and allow for a large quantity of information to stay within reach. In the research phase they contain the photos, diagrams, texts and schemes. And later on the books function like their archives as a way to store and shelf design ideas. Like the tables of models, the books are summaries of the design steps that make the material trajectory of a project traceable. They keep some traces of exploration, and present the results of design experimentation. Like the tables they allow the designers to go back and rethink the design moves previously made.

Books play an interesting double role at OMA, they are both used to start building processes and to summarise them. Although other architecture firms have combined building and writing, no firm has managed to operate a book and build business on the scale of OMA.

Fig. 12: OMA Book Machine

The process that Koolhaas uses to uncover the future before anyone else, is through the ability to bring in new ideas faster and to maintain a higher degree of complexity within the studio and in each project. It is therefore not the buildings, models, books, exhibitions or magazines that are Koolhaas’ biggest achievement, but the creation of a structure that is capable of producing a constant stream of ideas. As Koolhaas states, ‘’The biggest part of our work for competitions and bid invitations disappears automatically. No other profession would accept such conditions. But you can’t look at these designs as waste. They’re ideas; they will survive in books.’’

If a project covers the process of step-by-step realization of an idea, a trajectory accounts for the explorations, the discoveries, the numerous detours and unpredictable surprises that might occur. It stands for the entire experiential dimension of the process of making of a design. It is at the same time the activation and the result of many accidental encounters. Arguing against the preconception of design as project-making and project realization, the stories that follow will account for the trajectorial nature of design. To understand the meaning of OMA buildings and Koolhaasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; architecture, we need to forget the architect and his building for a moment, and turn away from the official interpretations on the pages of the architectural journals or the theoretical interpretations inspired by the critical approach. We ought to ignore references to architectural theory, to society or culture as prevailing forces of explanation. We rather need to look at the ordinary forces and conditions of experience, to follow the designers in the office and the paths their work has traced. We must track the way their actions spread and the way architects make sense of their world-building activities, the routines, mistakes, and workaday choices usually considered of lesser importance for judging the meaning of a building. In so doing, we can arrive at a better understanding of OMAs design by the means of a detour to design experience. The purpose is to avoid the passage through the vague notions of society, culture, imagination, creativity, which do not explain anything but need explanation.

Exploding in the world of architectural history in the 1990s, critical theory embedded itself in the discipline in a myriad of different shapes and means grounded. Critical theory postulated that in order to see the logical patterns of an architectural process or product, the latter should be extracted from the rather messy and irregular process of a production method full of insignificant details; one should rather go upwards until embracing higher-level theoretical frameworks outside architecture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; social factors, cultures, politics. Architectural

theorists pursued a wider conceptual framework for architecture, which, as many thinkers denoted, was missing: a framework that could embrace activities from patronage through to construction and use.

Thus, in order to be understood, buildings have to be located within the entire spectrum of economics, politics, social practices and architectural theory. The same spectra can also be considered to explain the design process, the success or failure of architectural projects, and to elucidate why a particular style emerges or vanishes at a particular moment.

The main assumption of critical theory is that architecture is something capable of being inserted and understood in wider comprehensions of cultural production. Therefore, to put across the meaning and the relevance of architecture, critical studies find it necessary to position it as a historical subject within various contexts in order to be able to outline its economic, social and political dimensions, and to show that it is always directly tied to these conditions given both its scale of production and public use. The ‘broader and more inclusive’ types of readings generally address matters of race, sexuality, class, psychoanalysis, social space, the way in which meanings are created and transferred by means of experience, political action, gender and so on’. For the critical authors, ‘dealing with these kinds of things in both architectural production specifically and cultural production in general maximizes the opportunity to learn all that architecture is and might be capable of’. In addition, they consider that ‘to speak about architectural history without reference to these things, to other disciplines, to theory, is not only to dismiss architecture’s relevance to the world in general, but also to trivialize current conditions and preoccupations’. To avoid trivialization, critical theorists engage in an exploration of architecture’s hidden meanings and practices, advocating what they believe to be a ‘richer and more significant’ understanding of architecture. Having the ambitious task of providing a space of imaginative

abstraction beyond of the immediate remits and dictates of architectural practice, the critical method consists of displacing the conventional objects of study and challenging them by referring to abstract ideas from outside architecture to explain design process, creative thinking and practices. ‘’I think that there is always a way of describing a project that is completely rational, even if the project itself may look not so rational. Generally they are really rational. Because you go through a period of research, we get back and everything is done. You have to do so much research before you get your point. Sometimes research may come out after the fact, because you do something, you like it, but you want to justify it or verify that what you are doing is correct. So you make a backup and make sure that your back-up information supports the idea. So a lot of it is just a rational way of explaining something. This does not necessarily mean that someone likes this project, but it’s actually incredibly reasonable in terms of what they had given us to work with. It’s like ‘Oh, perfect, it makes perfect sense’. But I think you need all that background information to understand why it makes so much sense. And it should always be as clear as possible, as understandable as possible in a very short way, rather than needing many explanations. If you look at the CCTV building, there were some models that were very abstract in a way and they were meant to be very beautiful. And they were beautiful. Even right at the beginning the intention was to follow the technical requirements of the competition, which meant a large scale and a small-scale model. And they re-inversed the thing and they made the large scale model very abstract and the small-scale model very detailed. Even though the judges knew that it was probably the winning scheme, the abstract was just too abstract and they didn’t even understand the beauty in there. Perhaps it was China and all these politicians, but in the making of the final model they were realistic. And again that’s another way of seducing clients with models. So, who can you seduce with this? You can only seduce with an abstract model. If you get through the details you start thinking about too many angles of the thing, and that produces many details.

But to a lot of our clients, ‘realistic’ is the way they can imagine something. So we need to have a balance of how you can make something beautiful and seductive, and at the same time imaginable, feasible.’’ – Interview with Carol, April 2002, OMA - Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design - Albena Yaneva

In OMA, architects and their models are free and active anthropological projects, full of life, and ready to take part in an intriguing story; the design process is a reflexive and responsive event. ‘’Generally speaking, the more things we do, the better it is. Of course at the same time this means more resources and time consumption. I believe that, at this level of practice, this is a sort of extravagance we have right now. Otherwise we cannot move towards perfection. Because design is not exactly linear. And we have to do something new, it requires much more time. There \totally different objectives in the local options. Some options are so stupid and standard, but occasionally in the routine you think ‘Oh, there is something interesting’. It can be applied to many things we do here, models and drawings. And we start to analyse these options and evaluate them, and come to a final result. The more you can realize, the better it is. Nothing should be wasted.’’ – Kunle Adeyemi , OMA ‘’At one point there is a stop in the process, and you collect the materials. Again you evaluate the project, and you try to sort it in a different way. And it just makes the project and your argument shorter. So, it’s important, because in a way it forces you to stop, look at the project in a different manner, and evaluate it again. Even after the deadline, when you look at the project book it’s different.’’ - Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design - Albena Yaneva

Listening to these inputs from their architects, we can outline two distinctive features of the process at the OMA. First, invention happens in the process of taking models seriously, experimenting and expressing by means of models, and using a variety of other tools in original ways. The work with models is at the basis of novelty and innovation. New insights and building shapes emerge from a charade of visuals and the environment in the office. It is a foam – rather than a computer – office. Second, the office ‘liberates’ architects from any kind of formal and media language; there are no conventions that would restrict invention. ‘’In design process we also need the previous things to arrive at this stage. You cannot just create an intelligent scheme out of the blue. When you do design, even the schemes that are abandoned, hundreds of models, can be recognized within the process.’’ - Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design - Albena Yaneva. They are just the different steps in the process. Design does not start from scratch. The models at OMA are not only kept because they can be recycled in design– and for that they are deliberately maintained to create a prolific ontological milieu for design invention also enable different forms of reuse.

To design is to recycle: Rather than being a simple projection of bright ideas and daring leaps of the designer’s imagination, or of social and cultural contexts, the new shape emanates as an original and locally perceived form of attachment, connecting and interrelating designers, gestures, objects, bodies and materials in the tentative process of design. There is nothing novel and radical in the acts of design invention that were witnessed in the office. To generate a new design concept or building does not imply an ex nihilo creation. Instead, the stories of reuse tell us, design means to redesign. Imitation and reiteration constitute the matrix of invention. Design is a process of continuous redoing. It is impossible to describe the process of invention as being separate from

the course of design. To understand a building we need to reconnect visions and design routines, imagination and mistakes.

5.2: Brief look at selected Projects of OMA LACMA – Los Angeles County Museum of Art , a brief look at the visualizations at OMA:

Once, all continents formed a single whole. Then they drifted apart. We propose to undo LACMA’s 'continental' separation. Imagine an almost Utopian condition where the history of the arts can be told as a single and simultaneous narrative showing moments of chronological coincidence, autonomy, influence and convergence. After decades where accommodating the 'modern' lead to a situation of glut and fatigue, the idea of the all-embracing has a new appeal. LACMA’s current proliferation across the site is a microcosm of Los Angeles: distributed rather than focused, it inhibits the full unfolding of its potential, both as a museum and as a site.

Fig. 13: Graphic showing the sprawl at Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA)

Fig. 14: LACMA - Multiple options, multiple times, multiple ways.

Fig. 15: LACMA - Multiple options, multiple times, multiple ways.

Fig. 16: LACMA – Final proposal

This configuration resists critical mass and inhibits the clarity of its collections. Our proposal consolidates the collections into a whole, instead of a series of pavilions. It focuses spending on the reinvention of LACMA’s image rather than renovation of uninspired buildings. It creates the opportunity for multiple paths, manifold interpretations and cross-curatorial exhibits within a single entity. We discovered that a consolidated LACMA could perform more efficiently, expend less money on renovation, open up more of the park to the city and create a sense of coherence and the much-needed presence that this museum has lacked for decades.- El Croquis : OMA Rem Koolhaas I – 131/132. MoCA – Museum of Contemporary Arts, Rome, Italy:

The site is divided into two parts, separated by a wall that creates a public and private zones. The following image shows the classification of programs at the MoCA. Systematic classification of the requirements and programs as shown below plays an important role in process based design.

Fig. 17: Schemes classifying the programs at Museum of Contemporary Arts, Rome, Italy

CCTV and TVCC – CCTV Television station and headquarters and TVCC Television Cultural Centre, Beijing, China: China Central Television (CCTV), the country’s state broadcaster, plans to expand from 18 to 200 channels and compete globally in the coming years. To accommodate this expansion, they organized an international design competition early in 2002 to design a new headquarters building. This was won by OMA and Arup, which subsequently allied with the East China Design Institute (ECADI) to act as the essential local design institute (LDI) for both architecture and engineering. The unusual brief, in television terms, was that all the functions for production, management, and administration would be contained on the chosen site in the new Beijing Central Business District (CBD), but not necessarily in one building. In their architectural response, however, OMA decided that by doing just this, it should be possible to break down the ‘ghettoes’ that tend to form in a complex and compartmentalized process like making TV programmes, and create a building whose layout in three dimensions would force all those involved to mix and produce a better end-product more efficiently.

The winning design for the 473,000m², 234m tall, CCTV building thus combines administration and offices, news and broadcasting, programme production and services – the entire TV-making process– in a single loop of interconnected activities around the four elements of the building: the nine-storey ‘Base’, the two leaning Towers that slope at 6° in each direction, and the nine to 13-storey ‘Overhang’, suspended 36 storeys in the air.

Two structures rise from a common production platform that is partly underground. Each has a different character; one is dedicated to broadcasting, the second to services, research and education; they join at the top to create a cantilevered penthouse for the management. A new icon is formed, not a

predictable 2-dimensional tower ‘soaring’ skyward, but a truly, 3 dimensional experience, a canopy that symbolically embraces the entire population. The public facilities are in a second building, the Television Cultural Centre (TVCC), and both are serviced from a third Service Building that houses major plant as well as security. The whole development will provide 599,000m² gross floor area and covers 187,000m², including a landscaped media park with external features. The building unifies the many functions within a single built form and provides coherence to the organization.

The TVCC- Television cultural centre is an open, inviting structure. In the ground floor, a continuous lobby provides access to a 1500 seat theater, a large ballroom, digital cinemas, recording studios and exhibition facilities. The tower also accommodates a five star hotel. The hotel rooms occupy both sides of the tower, hence forming a spectacular atrium above the landscape of public facilities.

Fig. 18: CCTV and TVCC Building

Fig. 19: Process models of the CCTV building

Fig. 20: Process models of the TVCC building

Fig. 21: Process models of the TVCC building

Fig. 22: Model of the CCTV and TVCC building

Two of the most striking aspects of Rem Koolhaas and OMA have been the attention they pay to resolving complex programs and the virtuosity that they display in doing so. Their work does not just consist of providing a practical solution to certain programmatic requirements. They also develop an architectural concept for the project. Instead of the expected functionalist immediacy between the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s functional program and its form, Koolhaas emphasizes the design of a concept that mediates between program and form.

These concepts usually visualized as diagrams, take the form of design strategies, acting as open mechanisms that generate the project and enable work to proceed in a constantly changing environment. In contrast to the negation by many current architects of the aspects regarded traditionally as permanent attributes of architecture – Space, weight, integrity and scale – and their consequential search for architecture without space, without weight, without unity and without scale, ‘’Rem Koolhaas OMA do not subscribe unconditionally to these ‘permanent’ qualities nor do they reject or ignore them. What they do is to tackle them from a new angle, in accordance with the ever- changing situation, transforming them into design strategies- void, gravity, Montage, size and leaps in scale.

The works of Rem Koolhaas OMA is primarily on account of two inherent aspects : their critical approach to some of the most relevant problems of the contemporary city and culture, and the fact that they do so precisely by focusing on the issues that are most genuinely architectural. What their projects embody is this two way tension – out from and in towards our discipline, expanding our field of focus beyond it, while at the same time, centering on its most substantial aspects- a tension that ensures the very survival of architecture.’’ - El Croquis : OMA Rem Koolhaas I – 131/132.

5.3: Peter Eisenman – House VI:

In the earlier stage of his career he designed a series of houses, named as house I to house X. His House II, VI and X are most famous projects of his initial ones. Eisenman, one of the New York Five, designed the house for Mr. and Mrs. Richard Frank between 1972-1975 who found great admiration for the architect’s work despite previously being known as a “paper architect” and theorist. By giving Eisenman a chance to put his theories to practice, one of the most famous, and difficult, houses emerged in the United States.

Situated on a flat site in Cornwall, House VI stands its own ground as a sculpture in its surroundings. The design emerged from a conceptual process that began with a grid. Eisenman manipulated the grid in a way so that the house was divided into four sections and when completed the building itself could be a “record of the design process’’. He manipulated structures again and again until coherent spaces began to emerge. Starting from basic geometric figures, such as a cube, he divided, extruded and rotated plans creating a perceptible notion of movement within the house. Therefore structural elements, were revealed so that the construction process was evident, but not always understood. Thus, the house became a study between the actual structure and architectural theory. The house was effeciently constructed using a simple post and beam system. However some columns or beams play no structural role and are incorporated to enhance the conceptual design. For example one column in the kitchen hovers over the kitchen table, not even touching the ground! In other spaces, beams meet but do not intersect, creating a cluster of supports. Robert Gutman wrote on the house saying, “most of these columns have no role in supporting the building planes, but are there, like the planes and the slits in the walls and ceilings that represent planes, to mark the geometry and rhythm of Eisenman’s notational system.” The structure was incorporated into Eisenman’s grid to convey the module that created the interior spaces with a series of planes that slipped

through each other. Purposely ignoring the idea of form following function, Eisenman created spaces that were quirky and well-lit, but rather unconventional to live with. He made it difficult for the users so that they would have to grow accustom to the architecture and constantly be aware of it. For instance, in the bedroom there is a glass slot in the center of the wall continuing through the floor that divides the room in half, forcing there to be separate beds on either side of the room. Another curious aspect is an upside down staircase, the element which portrays the axis of the house and is painted red to draw attention. There are also many other difficult aspects that disrupt conventional living, such as the column hanging over the dinner table that separates diners and the single bathroom that is only accessible through a bedroom. Eisenman was able to constantly remind the users of the architecture around them and how it affects their lives. He succeeded in building a structure that functioned both as a house and a work of art, but changing the priority of both so that function followed the art. He built a home where man was forced to live in a work of art, a sculpture, and according to the clients who enjoyed inhabiting Eisenmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s artwork and poetry, the house was very successful.

Fig. 23 : House VI

Fig. 24 : House VI – Process images

Fig. 25 : House VI – Process images

6. Other Examples of process based design: 6.1: IDEO :

IDEO is an award-winning global Industrial product design firm, that takes a human-centered, design-based approach to helping organizations in the public and private sectors innovate and grow. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.â&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201D;Tim Brown, president and CEO

The process they follow is explained below: Process based or human centric design is a creative approach to problem solving. It is a process that consists of three phases namely, Inspiration, Ideation and Implementation.

The inspiration process consists of studying the product or building in question from its background, history etc. and opening up to creative possibilities provided you remain grounded to the desires of the people you are designing for. In the ideation phase, you come up with multiple ideas, some feasible, some eccentric. These ideas are then refined, by eliminating the negatives and accumulating the positives. Formulating a simple prototype from this process makes the idea tangible. This is followed by experimenting, testing and integrating the feedback from the user population until you develop the right model. Implementation process consists building your final model, building partnership and executing the output.

This results in a conscious implementation of all the criteria to be

harmonized to make the product functional while being true to the brief. Process based design is the solution to all the questions that may arise from the brief, and the systematic deconstruction of the same gives rise to an efficient and responsive outcome.

Under this system, IDEO uses both analytical tools and generative techniques to help clients see how their new or existing operations could look in the future and build road maps for getting there.

Fig. 26: IDEO design process

6.2: IDEO Shopping Cart Project

This case concerns IDEO presented with a challenge by ABC News to redesign the common shopping trolley in only five days. While not the only criteria involved in determining the new design, theft was an issue the team quickly identified and determined to address in the creation of their prototype. The model they unveiled at the end of the five-day period was radically different from the traditional shopping trolley. The central basket, coveted by thieves, was replaced by five removable baskets whose portability not only reduced the attractiveness of a shopping trolley to would-be thieves, but also served to make grocery shopping a more efficient and enjoyable process for shoppers.

Background to IDEO Shopping Trolley

Shopping trolley theft is a fairly common occurrence in the United States. Insight for the People, a U.S. government publication, reports that over 1.8 million trolleys are stolen in the U.S. every year. With prices running from $100 to $300 per trolley, the cost to stores, and ultimately to consumers, runs to $175,000,000 annually. Thus, theft has become more than just a mere nuisance to many businesses. Byerly's, the Twin Cities grocery chain, has elected to prevent trolleys from being taken outside. When a customer checks out at a Byerly's grocery store, the ‘bag boys’ load all scanned items into paper bags and then load these paper bags into large plastic bins. Each bin has a number prominently displayed on its side. Every time a plastic bin is filled, the customer is given a sheet of plastic, about the size and thickness of the cover of a typical hard-back book, with a number on it that corresponds to the one on the plastic bin. These bins are then taken by the ‘bag boys’ and loaded onto a ramp comprised of a series of rollers and sent outside. The customer simply walks out to his or her car and then drives to a covered loading area next to the building where other ‘bag boys’ wait with the grocery bins. Upon presentation of the plastic sheets, the ‘bag boys’ identify the appropriate bins

and then take the groceries from these bins and load them into the customer's car.

Design Process Research The design team approached the project by first observing grocery trolleys in use, as well as watching, meeting and speaking with those who use, buy, and repair shopping trolleys.

According to David Kelley: "The trick is to find these real experts. The people who are really getting the info are out in the field meeting with people." (David Kelley).

This identified categories of problems associated with the traditional designs:

Safety - over 22,000 individuals a year, predominantly children, are involved in shopping trolley related accidents that are serious enough to require hospital attention.

Shopping practices - rather than pushing the trolley up and down narrow crowded isles, some consumers elect to leave their trolley at the end of an isle, select an item, return to their trolley and then move on to the end of the next isle.

Paying for purchases at the checkout - standing in line consumes a lot of time. Searching for products â&#x20AC;&#x201C; customers spend a lot of time searching for particular products, making it necessary for shoppers to communicate with store personnel to find out if items are in stock, on sale, or where they are located.

Another issue, though not a primary problem identified by the design team, was

that of shopping trolleys going missing. The IDEO design team identified two primary reasons for theft. Firstly, homeless people frequently use trolleys as rolling closets. The deep basket and the mobility of the shopping trolley make it an attractive and affordable way for homeless people to transport their worldly goods. Secondly, the metal grating in the basket of the trolley make for a convenient barbecue grill. The challenge thus became how to eliminate this unintended functionality without rendering the shopping trolley less effective for its intended users, namely store customers. The anti-theft issues had to be integrated, however, with the other major design criteria. David Kelley said that designers were looking for an idea that was "wild and buildable". Any new design that reduced a trolleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mobility would negatively impact on the potential solution to one of the other issues. Thus, rather than focusing on how to keep the trolley from physically being able to be stolen, the design team determined to reduce the appeal of the new trolley to would-be thieves. The solution the team came up with was to make the basket of the trolley separable from its frame. That was surmised as: "There's no value in this cart without the basket because you can't carry anything in it." (Peter Skillman, designer).

Concept

Rather than the single large metal or plastic basket found on virtually all shopping trolleys in use today, the team developed a trolley that comprised a series of plastic baskets with handles. These baskets were similar in size to the smaller hand-held baskets shoppers use at grocery stores when picking up just a couple of items. These new baskets were designed to fit into the frame of the trolley. The prototype design featured a trolley whose sides were constructed of heavy-duty steel tubing and whose open interior provided space for five shopping baskets. The baskets were designed to be of a uniform and stackable size and shape, and the shopping trolley was designed to accept two baskets on a top level and three more on a second level. Beneath the second level of

baskets, steel tubing in the shape of a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Wâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; connected the two sides of the trolley together. This space was available for storing bulky items such as large packages of toilet paper.

Fig.27 : Shopping Cart project

Impact

The trolley is currently at the prototype stage and plans for full-scale commercialisation have not yet been released. Part of the beauty of this design is that it satisfied multiple design concerns simultaneously. For example, the removable baskets allowed shoppers to leave their trolley at the end of an isle, select several items, place these items in the basket, and then return to their trolleys and reattach the basket. This design also helped to take away the functionality desired by would-be thieves. At checkout, the baskets were

unloaded as the groceries were scanned. The empty baskets were then set aside and stacked together. This created a new problem though, in that customers still had to get the bagged groceries out to their cars. The solution to this problem was to design a series of 12 hangers on the inside of the trolley frame. Groceries bagged in plastic bags were subsequently hung over these hooks through the opening in the plastic bag that served as its handle. Shoppers now had no need to take anything but the frame of the trolley outside. In its reduced state, the newly designed shopping trolley would neither serve as a good storage device nor a good barbecue grill.

This case demonstrates that innovative solutions to problems of theft and shopping can be developed relatively quickly. Being based on an analysis of the problems, the process appeared fairly clinical and rational. However, David Kelley argues that: "It’s not organised, it’s focused chaos". It is also about a willingness to take risks or, in his words "Trying stuff and asking for forgiveness". When evaluating new designs, the designer has to keep asking himself/herself: "What needs should they optimise their solutions to?" This means trailing new ideas in collaboration with colleagues. In Peter Skillman’s opinion: "Enlightened trial and error succeeds over the planning of the lone genius” (designer).

7. Transformation and adaptation over time: The works of Rem Koolhaas and his firm OMA cannot be concluded to follow a specific style as they follow a set of processes which result in end products different from project to project, place to place and so on. With processism being the most prevalent approach to breaking down the brief in recent times, each individual adapts his own interpretation of the process from which he derives his design and form.

7.1: Process generated architecture:

With the introduction of technology and software into architecture, new forms such as generative design have been on the rise. Generative forms of architecture could be considered a process based design strategy which is technology dependent. Parametric design is a process based on algorithmic thinking that enables the expression of parameters and rules that, together, define, encode and clarify the relationship between design intent and design response. In the digital age computer simulation of evolutionary processes has been integrated into architectural design in order to generate, manipulate and visualize non-standard and complex forms.

7.2: Parametricism, Biomimicry and other forms:

In the age of digital and non-started architecture, parametric design has become an essence and determination of the architectural design process. It has a major role including the initial stages of form exploration and generation; it also allows design, analyses and simulation of complex architectural forms. Through the use of parametric design geometry can be interactively adjusted according to a set of pre-defined instructions. A design begins with defining an element, class or family with constraints and parameters attributes which can be controlled via a set of rules and relations so that a large number of design instances can be generated with every single change in values. However, there are still a few unsolved limitations existing in parametric design such as topological and geometrical restrictions. Parametric design has major role in the process of form exploration and generation of design instances within its family via altering values of the parameterized schema.This technology can be used to enhance design or help in the 3d modeling of the same. Architects such as Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry, Herzog de Meuron and many other have used the method of parametric design in their projects. One of the first architects and

theorists that used computers to generate architecture was Greg Lynn. His blob and fold architecture is some of the early examples of computer generated architecture. Approaches such as parametric design and biomimicry could be considered a technology based interpretation of process based design. 7.3: Sagrada Familia â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Antonio Gaudi:

Antonio Gaudi designed and worked on expiatory church of the Sagrada Familia in 1883-1926 and it is located in Barcelona, Spain. He spent almost 43 years of his life working on this project before his death in 1926 at the age of 74. He did not see the completed project due to finishing only 1 of the 18 towers and less than 10% finished of the entire project. Despite of Gaudiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s death, working on the project has continued according to his proposals due to his efforts to invent a unique language for generating forms and providing a novel methodology for future works. Gaudi developed a neo-gothic style to a radical shift with no precedents in architecture utilizing plaster models for design explorations. The building is still decades away to be finished and still %50 of works has been completed.

Parameterization of the column and generation procedure

Following the unique language exploration for columns generation, Gaudi developed a strategic methodology after two years of continuously working. He found unprecedented language to generate a complex forms via a simple geometrical rule taking benefit from nature and most specifically organic growth of plants. His novel solution to compose columns was using two opposite rotations of the same initial shapes one clockwise and another counterclockwise, thus both rotations will be able to cancel each other to prevent the weak appearance of only one single rotated column.

Using the order steps of the parametric design procedure, a square shape was taken as an initial shape then as extrusion axis with a required length of extrusion and rotating the result form with an angle of 22. So as to produce a twisted column. Another twisted column with an opposite rotation side integrated with the first one then a common parts of them were taken, this process was the same as a Boolean operation which is well known in a modern computing . The figure shows the procedures of generation the final form of the column which is called column of four.

Fig.28: Design steps for generation column of four at Sagrada Familia

In general, the same methodology and procedure were used to generate all columns of the church with changing shapes and sizes due to taking into account a hierarchical order and locations inside the building. The smaller columns are located on the lateral nave and top parts to support the vaulted ceiling, while the larger columns with having a bigger initial shapes and diameter are on the crossing and central nave.

Parametric design procedure for generating the rectangular knot.

The design procedure started with working on column knots generation of the lateral nave in the temple of Sagrada Familia .the column knots are known as a rectangular knot due to using rectangles as initial shapes in process of parametric model exploration. The rectangular knot works as a transitional part between columns at the lower part and the branching elements at the top, thus it is a capital for the column of six at lower part and as a base for the branching

columns at above . Unlike the opposite rotation method of one initial shape which is used to generate the column of four, parametric design procedure was used as a methodology due to a powerful capability of this procedure to generate all kinds of columns in the Sagrada Familia utilizing topological and geometrical transformations of the initial shapes.

Fig. 29: Lateral nave column and its components

Basically, bottom shapes were decided to be initial shapes while top shapes were a final and surface fitting function was used to fill the space between them, thus the form of the knot can be composed.

Fig.30: Generation process of the rectangular knot

The design procedure started with locating initial shapes at top and bottom in a wireframe model, which is called the parametric skeleton and four rectangular shapes were used as the initial shapes, the bottom rectangles were oriented 90° perpendicular to each other, while the top rectangles located on each other parallel to the bottom shapes with 45 ° twisted. Then a surface fitting operation was needed to fill the in between part, the Boolean instruction was next to compose the form of the rectangular knot .

Fig.31: Initial shapes for generating the rectangular knot

Consequently, the parametric design procedure is much powerful than Gaudi’s methodology because four initial shapes can be used instead of only one and none of them are parameterized, however the parameterization can be done for the axis of the column, the top and bottom shapes and the Boolean instruction to compose the design. Furthermore, only locations of the initial shapes are constrained, conversely the four initial shapes are free to take any shapes this allows transformations at the level of geometrical and topological. This shows the capability of parametric design procedure comparing to Gaudi’s methodology and parametric variations, for instance if two squares are used as the initial shapes with 22.5 ° double opposite rotations the column of four will

be generated, while using two rectangles with 45 째double opposite rotations the result will be the rectangular knot.

Transformations of the parametric model (column) to generate an infinite number of design instances: Using parametric design procedures a parametric model which is the column in this case can be able to generate unlimited new forms of design instances via topological altering of the parametric model. The transformations can be done for initial shapes as parameters such as changing the proportion of the bottom rectangles, modifying the rotation angle and using the initial shape for the top rectangles, though the height of the column and other operations will be keep the same. Furthermore, through the topological changes of the initial shapes an infinite number of transformations can be done to generate new design instances without making any geometrical issues for the parametric model as well as the procedure will update the filling operations between top and bottom parts simultaneously with each modification. The figure shows a number of design instances that have been composed using topological and geometrical transformation in parametric design procedure.

Fig.32: Topological and geometrical transformation in parametric design procedure

8. Inference: Although it is not possible to rationalize design into a fixed systematic approach, it is possible to create strategies and methods that may be the guide to tackling the design problem. Process based design remains one of the most effective ways of innovating new design ideas and solutions but however is not very widely and popularly practiced. Process design, hence may be propagated and promoted as an appropriate solution to design. Also, as there is no one way to approach even process based design, as an individual’s perception and interpretation of it sets him apart from another designer’s view, hence ensuring that design does not become monotonous. With the rising competition in the field of architecture, designers have been pushed to explore newer and more contemporary approaches to design. Process based design celebrates the process leading to the design as much as the final design itself. It gives the designer the power to justify every move, answer questions that arise, solve the problems and in turn give an appropriate solution to the brief. It also brings about organization into the design process and eliminates irrelevant influences and factors affecting the design. ‘’Process isn’t just the part of a design, it is the design and what leads to the design. Process itself is the design’’ – Pradeep Alva, CnT Architects

Process based design questions the very being of a standard design strategy. The reality of designing does not conform to a predetermined sequence at all but demands that the designer should skip between various aspects of the problem in any order or at any time, should consider several aspects simultaneously or, indeed, should revisit some aspects in a cyclical process as the problem became more clearly defined. Design is hence a completely lateral based approach, with all aspects being considered simultaneously and being processed in a creative and logical manner.

The act of designing clearly embraces at its extremes logical analysis on the one hand and profound creative thought on the other, both of which contribute crucially to that central ground of ‘form-making’. It is axiomatic that all good buildings depend upon sound and imaginative decisions on the part of the designer at these early stages and how such decision-making informs that creative ‘leap’ towards establishing an appropriate three dimensional outcome.

Architecture has an intent and that intent is corrupted when it is given an identity. Hence process based design ensures that nothing influences architecture into getting a standard identity. When influenced by irrelevant factors, the design is mislead and standardizing using a specific style may create monotony.

9. Conclusion: There are no pre-given explanations of design, no established scales, no recognized-by-all conceptual frames; instead, we need to devote ethnographic attention to what it means to design, to the many local arrangements from which creativity springs. These initial forays into ‘form-making’ remain the most problematic for the novice and the experienced architect alike; what follows are a few signposts towards easing a fledgling designer’s passage through these potentially rough pastures. Process based design hence can be considered a rational guide to innovatively solving a design brief.

10. Bibliography: Books & Articles:

 Architecture Design Notebook, A. Peter Fawcett  El Croquis : OMA Rem Koolhaas I – 131/132  5 types of architectural design process – Wan Muhammad, 2009  Methodology in architectural design, Wiggins, Glenn E, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Date issued: 1989

 Design methods and design theory for architectural design management - Dr.ir. Henri Achten

 Rem Koolhaas – Designing the design process – Sjors Timmer  Rem Koolhaas’ architecture defies all logic: SICA mag editie Internationaal (Engelstalig), 2008

 Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design - Albena Yaneva

 Design Thinking – Tim Brown, Harvard Business Review, June 2008  Inside OMA – Icon Magazine  The shopping cart project – IDEO  Parametric design procedure : an approach to ‘Generative Form’ and exploring the design instances in architecture - Hardi K. Abdullah

 Case Study: CCTV Building - Headquarters & Cultural Center - Arup Websites:

 www.ideo.com  www.archdaily.com  https://en.wikipedia.org/  www.slideshare.net

Others:

ď&#x201A;ˇ Logo of Nike, Inc.