unsw | built environment | computational design …...code2110 | computational design theory iii...

UNSW | Built Environment | Computational Design Program

YEAR 2 | SEMESTER 1 | 2015

Computational Design Theory III – Calibrating

CODE2110

Scan this QR code to be taken to the course

UNSW Handbook site:

© Digital workflows in Architecture / Scott Marble

Lectures: 2pm – 3pm, Mondays, Old Main Building G32 Tutorials: 3pm – 6pm, Mondays, Red Centre West 6001 / 6002 / 6003



Table of Contents

1. Course Description 3

2. Course Staff and Contributors 3

3. Course Communication 4

4. Course Websites 4

5. Lectures 5

6. Online Teaching 11

7. Assessment 12

8. Assessment Criteria and Standards 15

9. Course Assessment Feedback Strategy 22

10. Resources 22

11. Class Requirements 26

12. Expectations 26

13. Learning Experience and Teaching Strategies 27

14. Course Aims 27

15. Learning Outcomes 27

16. Parity Session 28

17. Course Graduate Attribute 29

18. Built Environment and UNSW Academic Policies 29

CODE2110 | Computational Design Theory III

of 29

1. Course Description

This course is part of the second year, first semester practice orientated teaching trajectory ‘Calibrating’ in the Stream 1: Computational Design Theory. The course is situated in the ‘Beginner Level’ in the student specialisation journey.

In the early nineties, the concept of the paperless studio and the integration of digital media into design practice; the ‘digital turn’, were considered to be merely experiments undertaken by the avant-garde. Today, computation is embedded in all aspects of design practice from conception to construction. New digital design techniques have been joined by new methodologies and formal outcomes. The representation of design has greater sophistication and we understand more about the effects of digital imagery. Computation has also infiltrated the construction of our built environment, from materiality to management. Highly complex information systems process, analyse and integrate components in 3D virtual spaces.

Computation is ubiquitous in our built environment, and its integration has had significant effect on the culture of the design and built environment. The interest we have in technology has moved beyond merely the creation of blob architecture into the new possibilities and challenges it offers to parametrics, sustainability and fabrication. This course will explore the elaborate relationship between computer, the designer and the design and construction of our built environment. The semester’s lectures will help in better understanding the relationships and effect of the continual change and evolution on the social and cultural aspects of our design practices. A range of bridging theories essential to the ‘digital turn’ in building information management, information modelling, as well as the agency for simulation and optimization will be introduced. For example, pre-BIM design concepts; agency in architecture; visualization; materiality and material practice; robotics and making, BIM in practice and so on.

Students will have an opportunity to develop their understanding of ideas and issues through their participation in a critical discussion group. Theoretical understanding will be expanded and formalised through online activities and through illustrated writing exercises, which will be presented in class.

2. Course Staff and Contributors

Course Convenor : Dr Sarah Gilder

Room: 2002

Phone: N/A

Email : [email protected]

Consultat ion t imes :

By Appointment

Other Teaching Staff : Nicole Gardner

Room: 2007

Phone: N/A



By Appointment

Other Teaching Staff : Shaowen Wang

Room: 2002

Phone: N/A



By Appointment



3. Course Communication

Most course related announcements are made in the lectures. It is essential that you attend the lectures to receive these announcements. In addition to these formal communication paths, online discussion forums will be available that will allow everyone to post questions and respond to other people’s questions. All students will be expected to participate in the online discussions. Individual student related communication, including the issue of assessment grades and feedback, will be via the course website. Student email (using the UNSW student account) will be used to communicate changes that occur with short notice. All students are assigned an e‐mail account on the University's e‐mail server, so that email address will be used as the primary means by which important correspondence are made. You must, therefore, get into the habit of checking your email regularly. Details on setting up your university email are provided at: https://www.it.unsw.edu.au/students/index.html To manage your UNSW accounts and passwords, use the IDM site: https://idm.unsw.edu.au/idm/user/login.jsp

Questions that cannot wait until the next allocated class are best handled by posting a message on the online forums. If there are important or urgent matters that require a personal meeting, you are able make an appointment with your Dr M. Hank Haeusler via the Discipline Director Unit on Level 4 talking to Misha Pavelkova. I will not respond to emails and answer questions per emails. See 3. Course Staff and Contributors for more information of how and when to communicate with course coordinator and tutors.

4. Course Websites

Moodle – this is the UNSW wide online teaching platform and has many capabilities. You can access Moodle via: https://moodle.telt.unsw.edu.au/login/index.php

Use https://teaching.unsw.edu.au/moodle-orientation to familiarise yourself with Moodle. Please see section 7.1 Online Teaching for more information.

Note: There is the potential that your lectures will be automatically recorded under the echo 360 platform:

https://teaching.unsw.edu.au/unsw-lecture-recordings-process

All OH&S and workshop training courses are as well located on Moodle. Please follow the Moodle instructions to complete UNSW’s OH&S requirements.


of 29

5. Lectures

Week 1 Topic Introduction to Course What is Theory - Guest Lecture – Nicole Gardner The first week’s lecture will review the course; the content to be covered during semester and the assessments. A brief introductory lecture into the history of the ‘Digital Turn’ will be presented through a series of significant projects. Following this lecture, our guest lecture will discuss ‘what is theory’ with reference to what concepts and types theory may take.

Readings: Readings listed are expected to be completed for discussion at the same lecture, The first lecture has no scheduled readings as they will be completed in class.

Tutorial activities: Introduce Assignment 1 Digital Turn exercise: locate online and read Carpo, M. (2013). Introduction: Twenty Years of Digital Design. AD reader: The digital turn in architecture 1992-2012. Chichester, Wiley: 8-14. (Accessible Online UNSW Library) Gather ideas, text, imagery and video regarding the digital turn, create a 1 minute presentation for sharing at the end of tutorial that depicts an aspect of the digital turn. The presentation can make whichever statement you feel is important, for example, you could focus on the change in building form, changes in technology, change in culture. It can be whatever form (movie, digital imagery, etc)

Week 2 Topic Analogue to Digital The lecture will include a review of analogue methods used in design – eg: hand drawing, perspective, diagramming, physical models, and collage. This review will be provided to demonstrate how analogue methods are continuing to be used in everyday practice integrating with digital methods.

Readings: Read minimum of three of the readings below: Kolarevic, B. (2003). Information Master Builders. Architecture in the digital age : design and manufacturing. B. Kolarevic. New York, NY, Spon Press: 55-62. Mitchell, W. (2003). Design Worlds and Fabrication Machines. Architecture in the digital age : design and manufacturing. B. Kolarevic. New York, NY, Spon Press: 73-80. Frascari, M. (2007). A reflection on paper and its virtues within the material and invisible factures of architecture. From models to drawings : imagination and representation in architecture. M. Frascari, J. Hale and B.Starkey. London ; New York, Routledge: 23-33. Sheil, B. (2005). "Transgression from drawing to making." Arq : Architectural Research Quarterly 9(1): 20-32. Starkey, B. (2005). "Architectural models: material, intellectual, spiritual." Arq : Architectural Research Quarterly 9(3-4): 265-272.

Tutorial activities: DISCUSSION : What is the role and worth of historical/analogue techniques in today’s digitally supported practice, discuss how analogue techniques inform our designs today, discuss similarities/ differences between digital and analogue techniques? PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions. READING gather and share with tutorial group additional articles to support your research to date, upload references to course website



Week 3 Topic Design to Production Design to Production will discuss the reconnection and streamlining of the design to construction of the built environment. The lecture will review the positives and challenges of the process through successfully completed design to production projects.

Readings: Read minimum of three of the readings below: Beson, R. (2010). "Relational Geometries: Custom Fabrication and Assembly of Digital Architecture." Scheurer, F. (2014). Materialising Complexity. Theories of the digital in architecture. R. Oxman and R. Oxman: 283-291. Kolarevic, B. (2003). Information Master Builders. Architecture in the digital age : design and manufacturing. B. Kolarevic. New York, NY, Spon Press: 55-62 Klinger, K. (2008). Relations: Information Exchange in Designing and Making Architecture. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 26-36.

Tutorial activities: DISCUSSION: What are the greatest benefits and limitations of streamlining a creative process? PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions. WRITING: aphorisms to assist in the clarification of your OP-ED submission, prepare a concise summation of your point of view through a short aphorism, share and discuss with tutorial group (work in pairs)

Week 4 Topic Digital Agency The computer has allowed us to generate almost anything we can imagine, but it doesn’t mean we should. This lecture will discuss the issues to develop critical abilities to constructively question the design of our built environment.

Readings: Towards a Humanism through Machines. Negroponte, N. in Menges, A., & Ahlquist, S. (2011). Computational design thinking. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Cybernetics. Pask, P. in Menges, A., & Ahlquist, S. (2011). Computational design thinking. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Pask, G. (2011). The Architectural Relevance of Cybernetics. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 68-77.

Tutorial activities: Tutorial discussion: what are appropriate applications of technologies in our built environment, how can designers judge the quality of computationally derived designs? PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions. MAPPING/ mood board exercise


of 29

Week 5 Topic Guest Lecture – Shaowen Wang Computational Design Theory is a link that connects all three practice orientated teaching trajectories. To link them together through a theoretical and conceptionel understanding the course will invite course coordinator from CODE1110 and CODE1210 for guest lectures to give a preview on topics to come or reflect on previous discussions.

Readings: TBC

Tutorial activities: Present Assignment 1 OP-ED Poster Competition Hang Posters in Studio, time will be given for students to read and assess all posters. Students will vote for the best posters (via red dot stickers), the posters voted the most popular will be presented to the year, those students will be asked to give a 5 minute discussion on the thoughts behind their OP-ED

Mid Semester Break

Week 6 BE Non teaching Week

Week 7 Topic BIM in Practice Through building information technology we see a major shift in the way buildings are conceived and delivered. The technology can offer a single platform for developing most design ideas into construction digital models. This lecture will discuss the cultural impacts of this technology in design practice.

Readings: Holzer, D. (2011). "BIM's Seven Deadly Sins." International Journal of Architectural Computing 9(4): 463-480. Benjamin, D. (2012). Beyond Efficiency. Digital workflows in architecture : designing design -- designing assembly -- designing industry. S. Marble. Basel, Birkhäuser: 14-25. Marble, S. (2012). BIM 2.0. Digital workflows in architecture: designing design -- designing assembly -- designing industry. S. Marble. Basel, Birkhäuser: 72-73.

Tutorial activities: Discuss the conflicts that arise in integrating BIM into the design process and the potential futures of the technology? PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions. Introduce Final Assignment, begin research on nominated/agreed practice



Week 8 Topic Visualisation and the Image Digital renderings have become a common tool in everyday practice for the presentation of design. 3D models developed in the computer also provide the ability to view, explore and critique formal propositions from the conceptualisation stages. Designers employ these types of images everyday and they can have significant influence on the way design is developed and how we perceive the unbuilt. Walter Benjamin explored these visual implications and the changing meaning of the reproduction. Through the works of Benjamin and others, we can develop our appreciation of the power of the image.

Readings: Benjamin, W. (1936). "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." from http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm. Eisenman, P. (2013). Architecture After the Age of Printing. AD reader: The digital turn in architecture 1992-2012. M. Carpo. Chichester, Wiley: 15-22. Perez-Gomez, A. (2007). Questions of representation: the poetic origin of architecture. From models to drawings : imagination and representation in architecture. M. Frascari, J. Hale and B. Starkey. London ; New York, Routledge: 11-22.

Tutorial activities: DISCUSSION: what are the benefits and limitations of rendering techniques and how might they be explored as a generative design tool? PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions. Research methodologies: framing the subject / developing the position / Scholarly practices / tone / referencing

Week 9 Topic Material ity A new group of designers are extending our understanding of materiality and material practice. Their experiments question the processes and use of materials in order to form new methods of space making and construction.

Readings: Menges, A. (2011). Intergral Formation and Materialisation: Computational Form and Material Gesault. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 198-210. Trummer, P. (2011). Associative Design: From Type to Population. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 179-197. Kolarevic, B. and K. R. Klinger (2008). Manufacturing/ Material/ Effects. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 5-24. Bernstein, P. G., A. Inc and Y. University (2008). Thinking versus Making: Remediating Design Practice in the Age of Digital Representation. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 61-66.

Tutorial activities: Tutorial discussion: discuss our relationship with materiality and the opportunities new methods offer to designing PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions. Final Assignment Development, gather research on nominated/agreed practice Final Assignment Development, gather research on technology options and relevant theories


of 29

Week 10 Topic Digital fabrication, Robotics & Prosthetics Digital fabrication technologies have revived the link between architect and builder. Through robotics, highly complex and large scale designs are being created. This lecture will discuss the reconnection of design and construction and the roles of making

Readings: Bernstein, P. G., A. Inc and Y. University (2008). Thinking versus Making: Remediating Design Practice in the Age of Digital Representation. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 61-66. Kolarevic, B. and K. R. Klinger (2008). Manufacturing/ Material/ Effects. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 5-24. Wigley, M. (2010). "The Architecture of the Mouse." Architectural Design: EcoRedux: Design Remedies for an Ailing Planet 80(6): 50-57.

Tutorial activities: • Tutorial Discussion: Discuss the shifts in practice resulting from fabrication and robotic technology, what are the impacts on the role of the architect and builder as a result of these technologies?

• PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the class, followed by discussion and questions.

• Final Assignment Development, gather research on technology options and relevant theories

Week 11 Topic Advancing Design techniques Algorithms and Parametric Modelling made significant shifts in the way we conceive and produce design. New technologies for design such as scripting are continuously evolving and advancing. This lecture will discuss these shifts and the way we think about design.

Readings: Burry, M. (2011). Architecture and Practical Design Computing. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 102-119.

Terdizis, K. (2011). Algorithmic Form. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 96-101.

Tutorial activities: • Final Assignment Development, discuss arguments and positioning • PRESENTATION: A pair of students to present a short talk to the

class, followed by discussion and questions. • Final Assignment Development, discuss annotated bibliography

Week 12 Topic Implementation Strategy Review

Readings: N/A

Tutorial activities: Please complete the CATEI feedback evaluations in your tutorial class. Upload images of your Learning Stage 3 project on to Moodle. Deadline for the upload is Week 12 day of normal class 5pm.. • Discuss Implementation Strategy with tutor



Week 13 Topic Implementation Strategy Final Review

Readings: N/A

Tutorial activities: Present Implementation Studies in class

Week 15 PARITY SESSION of al l courses in the semester Presentation of all work of all courses THIS IS COMPULSORY FOR CODE STUDENTS (CODE2110) via a selection of the five best images presented one poster for each course on Wednesday in Week 15 with deadlines below. See Chapter 9 Parity Session for detailed information.

Online Learning: N/A

Tutorial activities: Parity session set up for students from 10 – 2pm; Parity session for tutors between 2 – 6pm; Take down of work and drinks to celebrate semester 6 – 8 pm.


of 29

6. Online Teaching

The 1:1 tutorial time is considered a precious resource for students to participate in face to face constructive conversation and debate and gain feedback on specific issues rather than general overviews.

Thus the online component of this class will be reserved for students to develop their awareness and understanding of the topics brought forward in the weekly lectures.

While this course will be delivered through one-hour lectures and one to one tutorials, the newly formed CoDe program aims to also integrate online teaching strategies for information mining and content building through the use of blogs, social networking and the sustained upkeep of a personal research website. Data collation will include surveying the many forms of online open access information from text, audio-video, websites, blogs, other university sites, and archives and consideration of the various digital movements including operative ideologies and strategic practices.

The aim of this teaching method is for students to develop their own capacities in online searching and collation toward opinion formation and clarification.

The online component of this class consists of the following two learning steps:

Learning Step 1: Idea Collation

Following the weekly lectures and required readings, students will be expected to begin their blog post on the weekly discussion, in the format suggested in the weekly sessions (reading, writing, mapping, technology research: practice based, technology based, theoretical based, annotated bibliography).

In the online posts students should gather unheard of names, philosophical ideas, arguments, discourses, visualisations, animations, programs, schools of thoughts, key figures, out dated and emerging technologies etc.

By collating these sources under the context of the topics and questions raised in class, you will be expected to form answers and reflexive opinions. Through this exercise students can observe the formation and contextualisation of their opinions and the exploration, both the benefits and limitations, of digital engagement.

Learning Step 2: Idea Clarification

The journey through research is always filled with issues or points of confusion and new skills and awareness will hit barriers at some stage. Whereas traditionally these barriers could have been overcome by forming study groups amoungst students situated in the same place at the same time, online platforms liberate us from the need for travel and face to face interaction. Each student will have access to an online platform in which issues and problems can be discussed. Moodle will provide the platform or students to upload questions and answers questions posted by other students. The participation in this activity from each student in the discussion and debate will form the assessment for part two of the online assignment.



7. Assessment

Assessment task Weight Learning outcomes assessed

Graduate attr ibutes assessed

Due date

1. Assignment (Tutorial Participation and CoDe Blogging)

20% 1, 2, 4 A,K W 1-13

2. Assignment (OP-ED: opinion piece) 35% 1, 4 A, I W 7

3. Assignment (Technology Statement / Implementation Strategy)

35% 1, 2, 3, 4 A, I, O W 13

4. Assignment Online Quiz 10% 1, 4 A W 15

5. Assignment “Best of Semester” Parity and Moodle Submission

*) 1,2,3,4 A, K, I, O W15

*) No weight but overall mark will be reduced by 10% if not handed in on time

Assignment 1

Name: Tutorial Part ic ipation and CoDe Blogging

Descript ion : Each weekly 3-hour Tutorial Participation will include three tasks; student talks, blog posts and assignment development.

Task 1 : Student Talks ( 1 hour) : Following the weekly lectures, a pair of students will conduct a short talk to the tutorial class on the weekly topic. The talk should be maximum three (3) minutes, relate to the weekly lecture title and refer to the recommended readings. The talk will be the students own view of the topic and can be approached from whatever direction they choose. The presentation should engage the students and result in raising questions, conflicts and opportunities for discussion with the tutorial group. Following the talk, each student will be expected to share their view on the subject with the class. Task 2 : Blog Posts (30-45mins) : Following the tutorial presentations, students will be expected to begin their blog post on the weekly discussion (approximately 300 words and can include images, and other references) The CoDe Theory III blog is an interactive interface intended to provide a platform for individual students to constructively reflect on weekly tutorial workshops and discussions through text and imagery. Writing is an active learning mode – concepts become clearer and more comprehensible through discussion and writing. The CoDe Blog will help students refine their written communication skills, as well as levels of comprehension throughout the semester. The blog also acts as a medium to provide constructive peer-to-peer feedback, and allows tutors to track student progress and provide brief comments.


of 29

Task 3 : Assignment Development ( 1-1 .5 hours) The remainder of the tutorial session will be dedicated to collating information and developing the major assignment submissions. Students will be expected to develop resources as suggested under the weekly lecture sessions (mood board, reading, writing, technology research: practice based, technology based, theoretical based, annotated bibliography). Each week should be presented via an online blog post. These posts should include various information including unheard of names, philosophical ideas, arguments, discourses, visualisations, animations, programs, schools of thoughts, key figures, out dated and emerging technologies etc. By collating these sources under the context of the topics and questions raised in class, students will be expected to form answers and reflexive opinions. Individual and Work in pairs assessment

Assignment 2

Name: OP-ED: opinion piece (- is a short essay, or special feature (normally in a newspaper or magazine) that gives the opinion of the writer)

Descript ion : Designers often prepare short explanations of their work to present to clients or regulatory bodies. These texts need to present the opinion of the designer by capturing the essence of the project and be carefully supported by established examples and conventions. This opinion piece provides students the opportunity to develop their skill in this task. Select a topic from the first 4 lectures of the semester (Analogue-Digital, Design to Production, Digital Agency, or Typology). Compare the arguments and contentions presented in two different readings from that week. Reflect on how this topic is made manifest in a proposed or constructed architectural building. Consider the discussion held in class. Reflect on your own opinions on the topic. The OP-ED will be presented in two formats:

1. Upload an extended 500 word illustrated opinion piece to your website, this edition should include images, text and highlighted captions

2. Prepare a poster which summarises your editorial through images and 100 words for presentation to the class.

The OP-ED should be presented in poster format in a manner that captures attention and expresses graphically your point of view. For examples refer to http://www.domusweb.it/en/op-ed.html Opinion piece may include: • a short description of a project or architects • description and comparison of methods, approaches and tools • description of the output of the different methods and approaches • discuss the advantages and disadvantages • thoughts on the importance and role of the tools in the process of a project

Individual Assessment Upload to an online format + a selection to be presented in class



Assignment 3

Name: Technology Posit ion Statement / Implementation Strategy

Descript ion : Upon most office websites and within most office manuals, is a description of technology use for daily operations and project delivery. These statements are becoming more important for internal quality assurance and as external marketing devices. The statements can include existing and intended practices; outlining how the practice may go about technology uptake.

For example:

www.batessmart.com/bates-smart/studio/how-we-work/technology/

Prepare a 10 page, double spaced, illustrated statement and strategy for technologies in a practice.

Research a practice: gather information on their design characteristics (theoretical, aesthetic and pragmatic styles), office locations, project locations, artistic and architectural design influences (other practices, natural/manmade influences) any information on their current digital situation. Selection of practice to be agreed with tutor.

Gather supporting and contradictory descriptions within the readings of the semester. Extend this bibliography by sourcing your own readings (minimum six additional). (Prepare annotated bibliography of your readings for presentation in tutorial) To assist you in your search – read footnotes and reference list at end of your selected readings.

Prepare an extended technology position statement and technology implementation strategy. The statement should integrate statements from the readings to reinforce key items in your statement.

Group Assessment (work in 2-3)

Upload to an online format + a selection to be presented in class

Assignment 4

Name: Online Quiz

Descript ion : Complete online quiz based on the content of the weekly lectures 8 questions will be developed from each weekly lecture series i.e 96 questions in total – students will have until week 14 to complete the quiz via Moodle.

Assignment 5

Name: Parity / Moodle Submission

Descript ion : For Moodle Submission: Please refer to 18. Parity Session for information about what to hand in and 4. Course Website for how to upload. For Parity Submission: Please refer to 18. Parity Session for information on what to present and to 5. Lecture when to present in Week 15.


of 29

8. Assessment Criteria and Standards

Assignment 1 Tutorial Submission Assessment Marking Sheet (20% of total mark)

CODE2110 Computational Design Theory I I I

Tutorial Participation and CoDe Blogging

STUDENT NAME:

STUDENT #

# Assessment Criteria % US S G VG O /100

1 Attendance / Absent

2 Participation

3 Content Online

OVERALL MARK out of 100

FEEDBACK:



Assignment 1 : Assessment Criter ia

Unsatisfactory Fail 0-49

• Rarely attends lectures and tutorials • Minimal participation • Infrequent online activity

Satisfactory Pass 50-64

• Present • Responds if called upon • Demonstrates infrequent involvement in discussion

Good Credit 65-74

• Adequate preparation, • Knows basic readings but no evidence of trying to interpret or analyse them, • Offers straightforward information direct from readings only, • Does not offer to contribute to discussion but will if called upon, • Sporadic involvement

Very Good Distinction

75-84

• Good preparation, • Knows the readings well and thought through implications, • Offers interpretations and analysis of material to class, • Contributes to discussion in a constructive way and offers suggestions that

may counter opinions, • On going consistent involvement

Outstanding High Distinction

85-100

• Demonstrates excellent preparation, • Analysed readings exceptionally well, • Offers analysis and evaluation of material to develop new approaches that take

the class further, • Contributes in a significant way to discussion, • Keeps analysis focused and responds in thoughtful way to the cooperative

argument-building, • Demonstrates ongoing very active involvement


of 29


CODE2110 Computational Design Theory I I I OP-ED: opinion piece

Student Name

Student #


1 Depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrated

2 Quality of thinking in evidence

3 Quality of communication

4 Graphic Quality

5 Conformance to formatting guidelines and referencing standards


FEEDBACK:





• Minimal depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrated • Lack of relevant ideas, • Rarely apply theory to address issue • Lack in use of examples • Illogical structure and organisation • Unclear writing • Crude graphic quality • No use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


• Basic depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrated • Simple use of relevant ideas, • Minimal attempts to apply theory to address issue • Rarely use examples • Basic structure and organisation • Basic writing style • Low quality graphics • Basic and sometimes misunderstood use of formatting guidelines and

referencing standards

Good Credit 65-74

• Depth and breadth of knowledge makes connections but does not create an overall scope or argument

• Some use of relevant ideas, • Some attempts to apply theory to address issue • Some use of examples • Structure and organisation is somewhat held together • Writing style is somewhat sophisticated • Graphic quality shows an attempt to achieve effective visual presentation • Good use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


75-84

• Depth and breadth of knowledge shows understanding • Appropriate and substantiated use of relevant ideas, • Coherent and relevant attempts to apply theory to address issue • Coherent use of examples • Structure and organisation is synthesised and sophisticated • Writing style is sophisticated • Demonstrates an effective method for graphic communication of ideas • Good use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


85-100

• Thorough and concise depth and breadth of knowledge • Highly appropriate and substantiated use of relevant ideas, • Highly coherent and relevant attempts to apply theory to address issue • Highly coherent use of examples • Structure and organisation is clearly synthesised and very sophisticated • Writing style is highly sophisticated • Highest quality and highly effective graphic communication of ideas • Excellent use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


of 29


CODE2110 Computational Design Theory I I I

OP-ED: opinion piece

Student Name

Student #


1 Depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrated

2 Quality of thinking in evidence

3 Quality of communication

4 Graphic Quality and Verbal Presentation Quality

5 Conformance to formatting guidelines and referencing standards


FEEDBACK:





• Minimal depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrated • Lack of relevant ideas, • Rarely apply theory to address issue • Lack in use of examples • Illogical structure and organisation • Unclear writing • Crude graphic quality • No use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


• Basic depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrated • Simple use of relevant ideas, • Minimal attempts to apply theory to address issue • Rarely use examples • Basic structure and organisation • Basic writing style • Low quality graphics • Basic and sometimes misunderstood use of formatting guidelines and

referencing standards

Good Credit 65-74

• Depth and breadth of knowledge makes connections but does not create an overall scope or argument

• Some use of relevant ideas, • Some attempts to apply theory to address issue • Some use of examples • Structure and organisation is somewhat held together • Writing style is somewhat sophisticated • Graphic quality shows an attempt to achieve effective visual presentation • Good use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


75-84

• Depth and breadth of knowledge shows understanding • Appropriate and substantiated use of relevant ideas, • Coherent and relevant attempts to apply theory to address issue • Coherent use of examples • Structure and organisation is synthesised and sophisticated • Writing style is sophisticated • Demonstrates an effective method for graphic communication of ideas • Good use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


85-100

• Thorough and concise depth and breadth of knowledge • Highly appropriate and substantiated use of relevant ideas, • Highly coherent and relevant attempts to apply theory to address issue • Highly coherent use of examples • Structure and organisation is clearly synthesised and very sophisticated • Writing style is highly sophisticated • Highest quality and highly effective graphic communication of ideas • Excellent use of formatting guidelines and referencing standards


of 29

Assignment 3 (Online Quiz / Exam) TOTAL 10%

Name: Online Quiz (opens up in Week 13 and closes Week 15) 10%

Course assessment cr iter ia and standards

Answering more than 80% of the questions in the online exam correctly.

Assignment 5

Name: Parity / Moodle Submission

Descript ion : For Moodle Submission: Please refer to 18. Parity Session for information about what to hand in and 4. Course Website for how to upload. For Parity Submission: Please refer to 18. Parity Session for information on what to present and to 5. Lecture when to present in Week 15.



9. Course Assessment Feedback Strategy

Students will gain information about their process in class via 3 basic levels. Firstly, The goals of the class are clearly defined in the course outline and discussed at the beginning of each Assignment and the learning steps within the assignment in the weekly lecture. Here students will understand how their performance relates to the broad goals of the course. Secondly, students will get feedback in each class (during the three tutorial hours) upon their performance. Tutors will help students in one-to-one sessions to discuss and analyse how successful they have been at addressing the task and its criteria of each assignment and the learning steps within the assignment. Thirdly, students will get feedback in each class (during the three tutorial hours) in how their response to the assignment and the learning steps within the assignment could be improved. Tutors will help students in one-to-one sessions to discuss and analyse how improvements could be made and which resources students could consult for an improvement. Assessment feedback will be provided for each student via written comments and verbal comments. Verbal comments will be provided during seminar times.

Written feedback will be provided at the conclusion of Assessment 3 and 4 (Comparative Analysis and Implementation Study) based on the assessment criteria and standards

10. Resources

10.1 Readings, textbooks and UNSW Library resources Essential readings Kolarevic, B. (2003). Information Master Builders. Architecture in the digital age : design and manufacturing. B. Kolarevic. New York, NY, Spon Press: 55-62.

Mitchell, W. (2003). Design Worlds and Fabrication Machines. Architecture in the digital age : design and manufacturing. B. Kolarevic. New York, NY, Spon Press: 73-80.

Frascari, M. (2007). A reflection on paper and its virtues within the material and invisible factures of architecture. From models to drawings : imagination and representation in architecture. M. Frascari, J. Hale and B.Starkey. London ; New York, Routledge: 23-33.

Sheil, B. (2005). "Transgression from drawing to making." Arq : Architectural Research Quarterly 9(1): 20-32.

Starkey, B. (2005). "Architectural models: material, intellectual, spiritual." Arq : Architectural Research Quarterly 9(3-4): 265-272.

Scheurer, F. (2014). Materialising Complexity. Theories of the digital in architecture. R. Oxman and R. Oxman: 283-291.

Kolarevic, B. (2003). Information Master Builders. Architecture in the digital age : design and manufacturing. B. Kolarevic. New York, NY, Spon Press: 55-62

Klinger, K. (2008). Relations: Information Exchange in Designing and Making Architecture. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 26-36.

Negroponte, N. Towards a Humanism through Machines. in Menges, A., & Ahlquist, S. (2011). Computational design thinking. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons

Pask, P. Cybernetics. in Menges, A., & Ahlquist, S. (2011). Computational design thinking. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons

Pask, G. (2011). The Architectural Relevance of Cybernetics. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 68-77.


of 29

Benjamin, W. (1936). "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." from http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm.

Eisenman, P. (2013). Architecture After the Age of Printing. AD reader: The digital turn in architecture 1992-2012. M. Carpo. Chichester, Wiley: 15-22.

Perez-Gomez, A. (2007). Questions of representation: the poetic origin of architecture. From models to drawings : imagination and representation in architecture. M. Frascari, J. Hale and B. Starkey. London ; New York, Routledge: 11-22.

Menges, A. (2011). Intergral Formation and Materialisation: Computational Form and Material Gesault. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 198-210.

Trummer, P. (2011). Associative Design: From Type to Population. Computational design thinking AD reader. A. Menges and S. Ahlquist. Chichester, UK, John Wiley & Sons: 179-197.

Kolarevic, B. and K. R. Klinger (2008). Manufacturing/ Material/ Effects. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 5-24.

Bernstein, P. G., A. Inc and Y. University (2008). Thinking versus Making: Remediating Design Practice in the Age of Digital Representation. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 61-66.

Bernstein, P. G., A. Inc and Y. University (2008). Thinking versus Making: Remediating Design Practice in the Age of Digital Representation. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 61-66.

Kolarevic, B. and K. R. Klinger (2008). Manufacturing/ Material/ Effects. Manufacturing material effects : rethinking design and making in architecture. B. Kolarevic and K. R. Klinger. New York, Routledge: 5-24.

Wigley, M. (2010). "The Architecture of the Mouse." Architectural Design: EcoRedux: Design Remedies for an Ailing Planet 80(6): 50-57.

Holzer, D. (2011). "BIM's Seven Deadly Sins." International Journal of Architectural Computing 9(4): 463-480.

Benjamin, D. (2012). Beyond Efficiency. Digital workflows in architecture : designing design -- designing assembly -- designing industry. S. Marble. Basel, Birkhäuser: 14-25.

Marble, S. (2012). BIM 2.0. Digital workflows in architecture: designing design -- designing assembly -- designing industry. S. Marble. Basel, Birkhäuser: 72-73.11.2 Online resources

10. 2 Online resources Social network resources UNSW CoDe has a Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube account and all lecturerare using these accounts to share information with their students. Thus please join and follow us on @UNSWCoDe (for all above listed networks) we will use “UNSW” + “CODE” + the course number as a hash tag to help finding the relevant info (for this course #UNSWCODE2110). Feel also free to post images of your design on social media using the hash tag.

Video resources Most lectures given in this course have videos embedded as part to illustrate what projects are and look like as well as give background knowledge to fabrication methods. In general I found these videos on the internet by searching either in Google or Youtube via the use of a search term. Naturally the lecture shows only one video out of potentially dozen of video clips. Thus search the internet for good clips and share them using social networks and use “UNSW” + “CODE” + the course number as a hash tag to help finding the relevant info (for this course #UNSWCODE2110).



10. 3. Case studies Analogue to Digital

Image 1: Protoarchitecture Cover of AD Magazine Guest edited by Prof. Bob Sheil / Bartlett (UCL) © http://image.issuu.com/120401212939-90d64e663abe439a93e19e382dd390e2/jpg/page_1.jpg

For more info and further projects see: Sheil, B. (2011). "Protoarchitecture: Between the Analogue and the Digital." Architectural Design 78(4)

The AD magazine is in general a good source for contemporary architecture debate. The magazine offers an annual student subscription for around A$ 120 which is worth considering see following link for more info: http://www.architectural-design-magazine.com/view/0/subscribeToAd.html

Design to Production

Image 2: Swissbau Pavilion, Libeskind's Futuropolis by design to production © http://newsarchive.world-architects.com/portal/pics/newsletter/magazin/2007/22_07/libesk-sk-web.jpg

For more info on Design to Production and their Swissbau Pavilion, Libeskind's Futuropolis please refer to: http://www.designtoproduction.ch/

Naturally there are more links to the project and the homepage of DesigntoProduction offer several other projects you should investigate.

AR_MA

Image 3: Trifolium by AR_MA, Sydney © http://sherman-scaf.org.au/wp content/uploads/2014/06/10.jpg

For more info on the Trifolium Pavilion and AR_MA please refer amongst other homepages to following: http://www.dezeen.com/2014/07/28/fugitive-structures-pavilion-trifolium-ar-ma-sherman-foundation/

Again you will find other project by AR_MA on the web and should have a close look at it as the company is based in Sydney and so are several of their projects.

Digital Agency

Image 3: Digital Agency as topic of the 2014 ACADIA conference in Los Angeles © http://www.bustler.net/images/news2/acadia-2014-cover_2.jpg

Projects for ACADIA 2014 are available on the conference homepage http://2014.acadia.org/ the papers discussed at the conference are available online through CUMINCAD as well as other papers at: http://cumincad.scix.net/cgi-bin/works/Home

The CUMINCAD homepage is a collection of all conference papers written in Computational Design’s field of interest, you will find as well papers by your lecturers and tutors on the site.


of 29

Mesne

Image 5: Kinetic Tensegrity Grids by Mesne © http://mesne.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/KineticGrids.jpg

For more info on the Kinetic Tensegrity Grids by Mesne please refer amongst other homepages to following: http://mesne.net/blog/?portfolio=kinetic-tensegrity-grids

The founders and partners of Mesne are all former PhD colleagues of your Course Coordinator in CODE2110 who has insides to their work as well as their blog http://mesne.net/blog

Achim Menges

Image 6: Morphogenetic Design Experiments by A. Menges and Institute for Computational Design (ICD) Stuttgart © http://www.achimmenges.net/icd-imagedb/icd_ent_evolvingsystems_project1_cover.jpg

For more info on the ICD and their work please refer amongst other homepages to following: http://www.achimmenges.net/?cat=279 as well as the university’s homepage http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?cat=6

See also work from Achim Menges and his research lab on materiality and materiality studies on the two links above.

Zaha Hadid

Image 7: Catalogue exhibition of Zaha Hadid paintings and projects Published by Guggenheim Museum 2006 © http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/53ee171cc07a80388e0002fd_drawings-from-famous-architects-formative-stages-to-be-exhibited-in-st-louis-_hadid_the-world.jpg

See the Catalogue exhibition of Zaha Hadid paintings and projects, published by Guggenheim Museum in 2006 for more information. There is plenty of images and books of Zaha Hadid on the web and in the library.

Gramazio & Kohler

Image 7: Digital Materiality Experiments by Gramazio and Kohler © http://www.scientifica.ch/assets/gallery/medien/GramazioKohlerLondon2011.jpg

See as Gramazio, F. and M. Kohler (2008). Digital Materiality in Architecture. Baden, Switzerland, Lars Muller Publishers.



11. Class Requirements

Studio class requirements It is expected that you will bring your laptop with the below mentioned software packages to each class. Not bringing a laptop means we cannot look, comment and help you with your work, as we do not run this class in a computer classroom. Using your friend’s laptop means that he or she cannot work in the time given in class and thus is not an option either.

Minimum Software and hardware requirements For the class you need the following software packages:

• Adobe Creative Suite • Endnote • Microsoft Office or similar • Powerpoint/Keynote/Prezi-

Presentation Software

12. Expectations

The lectures and the tutorials are an integrated part of this class. Missing out on lectures will have the consequence that your will miss out on seeing and hearing about projects that used digital fabrication and thus you will lack design input heavily needed in other classes such as ARCH1101 or CODE1110. Further the lectures will provide you with foundation knowledge for later classes such as CODE2121 up to your final year project. Topics and issues discussed in the class subject to an exam later in the semester and missing out on classes will consequently risk your ability to pass the exam and consequently the course.

Grasshopper scripting is like learning a new language (it is a computer language thus the comparison is quite correct). As you all have experienced in school learning a new language will take time to master it and tutorials at the beginning provide an important base on which all later knowledge is built upon. Thus the tutorials in this course are absolutely essential to learn a language you will deepen in the next semesters to come (CODE1231 / CODE2121 / CODE2250 / CODE2270 / CODE2230). Acknowledging that a new language is difficult to learn we proceed in very slow steps to assure you all can pick up Grasshopper. Never the less you only can do so when attending class and doing your assignments. An advice at this stage, things will take time and you will take longer in developing and writing a script as you might think. Thus plan in a lot of time to complete your tasks for the next class.

If you experience and difficulties please refer to Special Consideration, Late Work and other policies in the BE Policy Outline at: https://www.be.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/upload/pdf/currentstudents/LearningTeaching/BE_AcademicPolicyOutline2014.pdf


of 29

13. Learning Experience and Teaching Strategies

This course will be offered to Year 2 Semester 1 CoDe students as a part of the ‘Beginner Level’ in their student specialization journey.

Computational Design Theory is the overarching stream and links the learning trajectories of all other streams together. The core focus of the stream is the acknowledgement that without knowing, no doing exists. Consequently teaching in this stream will create a foundational knowledge that opens up processes for all other streams. This foundation is gained via an interdisciplinary framework by studying design thinking, computational thinking, design, architecture, and theories (cultural, critical and scientific) to examine problems by way of questioning whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single field.

The teaching strategy of the course positions students to the brief history, concept and theoretical formation of the digital design in broader fields of architecture and built environment. A range of bridging theories essential to the ‘digital turn’ in building information management, information modelling, as well as the agency for simulation and optimization will be introduced in lectures. For example, pre-BIM design concepts; agency in architecture; visualization; materiality and material practice; robotics and making, BIM in practice and so on.

Each lecture will be accompanied by the analysis of selected projects that are significant and groundbreaking. Their design paradigms formulated by theories, and new skills used in the design processes present an overview of opportunities for the emerging computational design discipline.

Students will be formed into tutorial groups. Each of the students must maintain a blog documenting the process of his/her independent research and reading notes. Cross posting and discussion are encouraged. Active participation in the tutorial sessions and regular production on the blog will be marked. The lecture series has 80% attendance requirement and will have a computer-generated test at the end of the semester. Two Illustrated writing assignments will enable students to clarify their opinions.

14. Course Aims

Course Aim 1:

The aim of this course is to expose students to current concepts and design theories through the analysis of digital design skills and techniques in order to enable students to generate their own critical design positions as well as navigate and expand their understanding of digital design media.

Course Aim 2:

This course enables students to act as decision makers, consultants or mediators in the design process, where their understanding is informed by recent developments in computation and their knowledge may further the study and research into progressive built environment system

15. Learning Outcomes

At the successful conclusion of this course the student will be able to:

1: generate their own critical design positions as well as navigate and expand the digital design media that explores new forms and relationships between the designer, environment, workflow, and information

2: construct his or her own ‘theoretical interval’ and formulate theoretical discourse for collaborative practice.

3: formulate his/her own design paradigm

4: analyse and re-construct significant projects by critiquing the theories of the expanding field of technologies



16. Parity Session

THIS ONLY APPLIED FOR CODE STUDENTS. As part of creating a community and culture of showcasing work, students will be required to submit a selection of their best images (plans, renderings, model pictures, screenshots, etc.) from their final presentation as well as work in the progress during semester. This will also help in marking and feedback. The online submission is an essential requirement. Failing to do so will give you a (-) 10% of your overall mark. The collection of student works will also be employed for marketing purposes. As you know, we are a very young discipline and we want to share what you have designed and produced during the semester. The submission platform will be within Moodle. The following defines the expectations of what to submit.

For Moodle Submission: • Five indicative images that best

represent your work / designs during the semester.

• For landscape image (approx. 2480 x 3508 pixels @ 300 dpi) for portrait image (approx. 3508 x 2480 pixels @ 300 dpi)

• For each of the five images please provide five keywords in order to find images later.

• Upload images as explained in 4. Course Website.

• Deadline is day before parity session 5pm. (Moodle page will close).

Images for the Week 15 parity session / Moodle submission can be uploaded to the Moodle Gallery by:

• From the course home page, click the media collection link.

• In the collection page, click the Edit icon for the gallery to which you want to begin adding items.

• On the gallery's home page, click Add an item.

• On the resulting page, click Expand all, then in the General section:

• Enter a Caption for the item. • Add any Description necessary. • Drag and drop a Content file, or

click Choose a file and browse for a file.

• In the Advanced section, complete all the relevant fields.

• Click Save changes. The item displays with its thumbnail and caption on the galleries page.

For the Week 15 parity session: • Create a poster with the five

images you have uploaded onto Moodle. The poster will use the layout (parity layout template that can be downloaded on the Moodle page for each course) and has to be printed on white 3mm core flute.

• Pin up of poster with dates is outlined in Week 15 lecture / tutorial activity.

• The layout has either a portrait or a landscape format and students can use either one or the other or a mix of both to represent the four courses they have done in each semester.

• The size of the template is the same size as the black exhibition boxes UNSW uses for their exhibitions and you showed fix the core flute poster to the black boxes using i.e. adhesive tape.

• Students have each six of these black boxes to use four of them to attach their core flute posters and the remaining two to showcase any models or other physical outcome of the semester.

• Again you have to curate your work and choose the best to re-present your work.


of 29

17. Course Graduate Attribute

18. Built Environment and UNSW Academic Policies

All students are required to understand the BE and UNSW academic policies. Make sure that you familiarise yourselves with this document.

This document governs all Faculty of Built Environment (FBE) programs and is available in all FBE course outlines and on Moodle, as well as on the UNSW BE student intranet: http://www.be.unsw.edu.au/student-intranet/academic-policies

It covers:

• Built Environment Student Attendance Requirements

• Units of Credit (UOC) and Student Workload

• Course and Teaching Evaluation and Improvement (CATEI)

• Academic Honesty and Plagiarism • Late Submissions Penalties • Special Consideration - Illness &

Misadventure • Extension of Deadlines • Learning Support Services • Occupational Health & Safety

CODE2110 course Graduate attr ibutes Learning outcome

Activ ity/Assessment

A / Scholars who are understanding of their discipline in its interdisciplinary context

1, 2, 4 1,2,3,4

K / Leaders who are collaborative and effective team workers

2, 4 1

I / Leaders who are enterprising, innovative and creative

1, 2, 3 3,4

O / Global citizens who are capable of applying their discipline in local, national, and international context.

1, 2, 4 4

unsw | built environment | computational design …...code2110 | computational design theory iii...

Documents