Form, culture, and scientific diversity

Today’s technology is rooted in the work of Sir Isaac Newton. Contemporary physics’ paradox in resolving the difference between magnetism and electricity implies multiple truths and we wonder what drove Newton’s work and what drove Einstein’s? Einstein’s theory of relativity works for a bomb or nuclear energy, but it has yet to be proven per Newton. Newton’s calculus, which was developed under patronage, changed with our cultural paradigm as our buildings and music took us from the Renaissance to the Baroque, peaking in Austria with Bach and Roman inspired pluralistic Architecture.

Il Gesu delivers its message from its two dimensional forms and proportions, three dimensional forms and proportions, its shadows, and the juxtaposition of all elements, asking, were the Italians particularly self-conscious of their role in culture, religion, and empire?

Modern physics tells us that all we understand of the atom, the body, the cell might be the product of our culture finding the right frame for the right picture, the clock, the microscope, the voltmeter; these symbols are arbitrary and this is a language. The specific physics of Einstein’s theories, statistically drawn apart from Newton’s mechanics, may have been driven by the necessities of World War II. Newton’s choice of bodies may be driven by forces culturally significant and powerful in his era and geographic region. These bodies may still be present in some or all their form today. We can ask, what is Einstein’s theory specifically, what is Newton’s, with their physics drawn in relation to other physics; what alternate physics could we have developed in our world history and who would have a voice today? Are our physics culturally and technologically restrictive and what can we achieve with scientific diversity?

Following the form of Rem Koolhaas’ CCTV Building, we struggle to identify historical origin and cultural ownership.

Tesla believed our present cultural paradigm, seeing space travel as the future, our organism stemming from the radiation of the sun, limits our options in use of energy, a juxtaposition inducing limitless options from a change of perspective. A similar phenomenon can exist with architectural form; Sullivan wrote that “form ever follows function” which we can interpret as form should stem from the function of its materials, form should reflect its message and its use, and form, as culture, follows function, its use and message. Is the evolution of our form similarly restrictive? Culture as form is perceived individually and collectively, it is used, interpreted, and it works on and for its users and owners. Per Tesla’s difficulties with energy, we can begin thinking about our difficulties with human form and culture. Do we have culturally pluralistic forms, as possibly existed during the Baroque, today? Do we have diversity of form and culture? Do we have the physics to support these cultural paradigms per form follows the function of its materials, the correct laws explaining the correct lighting to match the correct building, the correct culture behind the correct physics to explain the correct ethos of the correct cultural mission for the correct building? Do we have diversity in form, culture, and science?

Finally, we can begin to think about our technology that we buy and use, our refrigerators, microwaves, televisions, and computers, which change our eyes and needs and reflect back to our architecture. Are we preparing ourselves for an exponentially complex future and its benefits to our individual and collective expression and understanding?

Incomplete documentation

Conduit duct banks, engineered for transmission of high voltage power, installed by contractors with resultant subtle engineering decisions, often left off of scope and spec.

Architectural projects in a design build environment are the hard work of people across trades and disciplines. The exact electrical light switch location may be the work of a 1 year apprentice electrician, measured precisely with tools and use in mind. Ultimately, we want the architect and owner to agree with every design decision. Yesterday, architects had much more control over materials used and means and methods. Today, we have design build firms like McCarthy and Clark Builders known for their talents in choice and application of materials.

Applying BIM on a design build project, we are ultimately looking at increasing accuracy of desired results, increasing communication, increasing knowledge of tools and materials required, and reducing the job schedule time. We are saving money on labor, materials, and equipment and using visual media to communicate across disciplines—builders, managers, clerks, designers, tradesmen, drafters, and administrators. Ultimately we are looking at saved money which may be used for higher priced materials, expanding the footprint or height of the building, more modern digital/electrical technology within the building, or cash profit, usually contradictory to long lasting design/build relationships and resultant capital.

When considering details, we need to be wary of turning the tradesman into a hired assembly man employed by Ikea. Certain decisions, the overall form and use of the building, needs to be signed off by architect and owner, the inner, outer and structural workings signed off by the engineers. Design decisions are made only when necessary; with use of modern BIM tools, take off schedules from design models align with day to day schedules align with financing, insured with collective sign off to ensure construction is on time, the design intention and engineering mission are reflected, and the client is happy that this building will suit their personal needs and decides to invest in the engineers’ and architects’ take on the future or present.

The steel union is trained in the particularities of welding and can be consultant to the structural engineer, signing off on individual details and having an allowed list of situations to leave to the field. The same goes for wiring methods for the electricians and  installation methods for the fitters. At the end of the day, more voices are heard and more work is accomplished. The apprentice owns a piece of the intellectual property, he is a manager of his own take on the project, and the overall building is uncompromised per traditional specs and present requirements of meeting expectations of BIM prepared projects.

Ultimately, looking at a design build project where the design of the façade itself can be delayed until the end of construction or just before installation of windows, you have much more talent assigned to your project, much more intelligence for the architect and builder to use, the construction manager and owner to sign off on, and each individual contractor to take home and continue to develop throughout their careers.

While certain aspects of the documentation we leave incomplete, we need to continue developing modern documentation formats, modern drafting standards for time frame schedules and supplementing drawings, financial charts and supplementing drawings. Similarly, field details bridging to approved BIM coordinated drawings bridging to approved design drawings, supplemental drawings to take off tables for material order or fabrication, produced by architects, engineers, builders, contract management or labor, digitized or not. We need cohesion and immediacy which is presently counterintuitive in multi production(digital, traditional) and multi platform(Excel, Word, Revit) working environments.