Methodology for Product Development in Architecture

Methodology for Product Development in Architecture Mick Eekhout

© 2008 IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior permission from the publisher. Published and distributed by IOS Press under the imprint Delft University Press

Publisher & Distributor IOS Press Nieuwe Hemweg 6b 1013 BG Amsterdam Netherlands fax: +31-20-687 0019 email: [email protected] www.iospress.nl www.dupress.nl ISBN 978-1-58603-965-3 Author Mick Eekhout Layout Manuela Schilberg Legal Notice The publisher is not responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

2

1.

PREFACE

One of the objectives of publications concerning the scientific field of ‘Product Development’ in architecture, is to “make the invisible visible” in the immaterial field, as I have voiced in my oration “Architecture between tradition and experiment, or Zappi and the challenging product mystery” [22]. The literal meaning of this is to make the invisible preparation process, which precedes the production of new building products and components, visible and understandable by a textual and visual description. But figuratively it also means to partly unravel the mysterious, the unknown and the unsaid and pass it on to architects, building technologists and students as a new knowledge and insight. The mysterious brings along some uncertainty about objectives. Mysteries are challenging, they are a motivation to go and do research and therefore, as far as I am concerned, they never need to be solved completely. When one mystery is solved, new mysteries will have to appear, new challenges, ever further on the way to the future. Yet, in the meantime knowledge grows, the skill, the insight and hopefully also the vision on the specialism of product development in architecture. Dutch architecture is internationally appreciated for its powerful value-for-money quality and its surprises within the set limitations of the challenges. Dutch architects often have to dance on the rope. Solid design approximations have contributed to this Dutch quality of architecture. This monograph Methodology for Product Development in Architecture is dedicated to the methodology and processes of designing, developments and research of standard building products, building product systems and special building components, as well as to their applications in buildings. Therefore, it is of importance to product designers and product developers, who are mainly concerned with developing products and components at the side of producers, as well as to materializing architects and component designers. They, at the architect’s office, are concerned with the materializing of the functional and spatial building concept as a whole and in parts. The monograph is first and foremost meant for professionals and students in the professional field of Building Technology, but will hopefully also appeal to professionals and students of Architecture and Building Management. Professionals and students of related design sciences are invited to benefit from the contents of this monograph. Next to all this there is a lot of talk on designing in the architectural world, but there seems to be little openness and uniformity when it comes to the process of designing and what design methods are being used. This situation is completely different from the far more methodical design approach of one generation ago in the 1970s, when it was realised that, to work with the then recently introduced computer, for instance to analyse the floor-plans of a complex hospital, a systematic approach was an absolute necessity. The intuitive, but also the customary routinely approach did not offer a firm enough grip on the complex functional analysis to obtain an optimum design. At the time, computer programmes were as always systematically designed and could not cope with intuitive leaps. Therefore, working systematically and methodically

3

was a logical necessity. One generation on, the computer has become an accustomed medium in every design office and even conceptual design possibilities are being carefully explored. But the systematics and methodology of design have to go through a renaissance before the full fruits of the computer in the conceptual designing process can be gathered. In my observation design methodologies in architectonical designing are only reluctantly used and there is hardly any systematical and methodical account for the originating process of the design. Indeed, the bridge between the non-cognitive intuitive design process and the ultra-systematic computer as a potential design medium, is missing. So then the computer cannot be used other than a current medium for the final development of the design. It facilitates the drawing, but not the thinking. And, therefore, it cannot be inserted as a full valued reciprocal design medium which is stimulating from self-esteem. To make considerations explicit, as is done with methodical designing, does not just advance insight and clarity in one’s own activities. In practice it stimulates the communication between the ever growing group of professionals which has to co-operate in a building team, aimed at realizing a specific building (complex). Methodologists speak of a first phase of conceptual design because of the 3-D concept with its degree of abstraction, leaving many liberties to choose materials and sub-systems the architect has at his disposal. Compared to designers in related technical specialisms (like ship- and aeroplane designers) the architect has an enormous freedom, through the given freedom of choosing structural systems, constructions, building components with their specific shapes and production techniques, the topological placing of components and geometrical freedom, and with all that to attain a purposeful sculptural quality of the building. Seldom we realize how jealous other designers could be of him in this respect. In order to make a whole new design concept of his building, the architect has (almost too) many possibilities at his disposal. The second phase of the process is the materialization design: choice of materials, structural schemes and structural composition up to details. The second phase is as important as the first conceptual phase. As compared with this luxurious situation, the aircraft designer knows only one or a few degrees of liberty of designing every part of the aeroplane because of the highly functional and safety demands. We call this parameter designing: the degree of freedom is only one variation on one single parameter. The leap from the conceptual design to the materialized design mainly takes place in the mind of the designer: sometimes it will be intuitive, often routinely and sometimes methodical. The execution of an intuitive and nonargumented choice and its perfection can, nevertheless, very well be done methodically. This goes for the three design levels in building: those of the townplanner, the architect and the component designer. The building level of the technical design in particular is the topic of this monograph: the designing of the separate building parts and their building components and elements, ranging from special to standard. After the functional and spatial building concept, a purposeful and efficient design process and the development of materialized and technical building components has become of fundamental importance for the design process of

4

the building. Like the product designer, who usually operates at the side of the producer, a good project architect also knows how far he can go as a consumer of building products in the market and how far he can develop new one-off components to be specially ordered. He should have insight in the iterative development processes for building products, systems and components. The interchangeable relation between technical components and architecture is indispensable for the materialization of the architectonic conceptual design in an inspiring manner. This book has been written from the practice of designing and developing architectural components and, within the design and build practice of the author, to take full responsibility for the result. The theory within this consideration is heavily influenced by my experiences with building component systems and special components: space frames, glass, cardboard structures and composite structures for free form architecture. My acknowledgements go to Ronald Visser and Manuela Schilberg who patiently assisted in the layout and figures, but also to my friend professor Alan Brookes, who advised me after study and thorough reading to shorten the text and make the entire consideration much more versatile.

Prof.dr. Mick Eekhout

5

6

CONTENTS 1.

Preface

3

2.

Introduction

9

3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9

Product development Building products Conceptions Production environment Product type The hierarchical range of industrial building products Product frequency New, renewed or imitation product Newness directedness of architects Risks of failure with product development

21 21 26 28 40 47 53 56 62 67

4. 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Design organisation The horizontal department model The vertical project leaders model Lean design & production: matrix organisation Concurrent Engineering

73 73 74 75 76

5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

About the benefits of methodical designing Intuitive design approach Methodical design approach When is the methodical approach inevitable? Logic & intuition

83 84 85 86 88

6. 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8

Designing, developing and researching Designing Conceptual designing Integral designing Developing Integral designing & developing Research Design supporting research Design, development, research in the laboratory of product development

91 91 91 92 94 97 99 100 101

7. 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5

Technical designer From the design faculties The designer in the building industry The town-planning designer The architect The component designer

106 106 109 110 112 114

7

7.6 7.7

From master builder to conceptual designer Qualities of the component designer

116 118

8. 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5

Partial design methods Back to basics Morphological chart Concept matrix Desirable, probable & possible Visualisation

125 125 127 128 131 131

9. 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6

Design methodology Organogram standard products First phase: design concept Second phase: temporary marketing Third phase: prototype development Fourth phase: definite marketing Fifth phase: product manufacturing

133 134 135 142 146 155 158

10. 10.1 10.2 10.3

Case system products: Quattro SR First phase: Product concept Second phase: Preliminary marketing analysis Third phase: Technical development

161 167 175 175

11. 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4

Case Special Products: Train Taxi Shelter Pillar Competition concept Concept phase Prototype development Production phase

187 187 190 195 203

12.

Towards a new balance between architecture and building technology Inspired by history From today’s architecture Through building technology and product development Via idea and methodology To the future architecture

206 206 209 215 222 225

References

229

12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5

8

2.

INTRODUCTION

I have often been told that although being an architect I design as an engineer, analysing and reasoning: cognitively. Yet, very often my reactions are emotional as an artistic designer in the process of designing, to use the other extreme: intuitive. Purposefully I use a methodical manner of approach to restrain my intuition. The design skills of the architect are somewhere between the extremes of the technical scientist and that of the emotionally designing artist. The rational scientist and the sensitive artist, or technique and art, determine both ends of the ruler on which the architect looks for his place. The one architect a little more towards technique, the other a little more towards art. For that matter, the two extremes do not exist without each other’s influence. A sculpture will not remain standing without knowledge of materials and construction techniques, even when this is obvious, traditional and customary. In the scientific world designers are being involved in the development of spacecrafts to give, among other things, the collective techniques and systems a recognizable touch of styling design, although squeezed in between functional requirements. The design influence can be little in a process like this, but it is unmistakably there. In styling of automobiles the degree of freedom is much higher. Designing buildings knows a high degree of freedom.

Fig. 1: The different positions of the architect and engineer.

Architecture education is wide. It offers many possibilities for alumni: from architecture to town planning, from technology to organisation and management. The positions of the project architect, the product developer and the component designer, which are important for this essay, are different on the ruler. The product developer and component designer, being knowledgeable designers of

9

new building products and special components, will tend more to the intellectual engineering approach, but with an architectonic level of aspiration. Whereas the project architect is less tied to existing techniques and products. The architect is creator in the field of Architecture and consumer in the field of Building Technology. He has the privilege of choice from many possibilities, likewise from eventual possibilities which are hardly ever used or even have to be imported into the branch. As a consumer he is not tied to certain manners of production or manners of execution. He will try to actualise his own ideas about building components. If this would prove to be too expensive or otherwise impossible, he may search for a higher degree of self and recognition by a deviant arrangement in space of standard products and system components (topology). He becomes a composer in space. He has more affinity with the aesthetic composition approach. Standard products can also be used improperly. The conceitedness of the project architect may lead to a self-willed building, yet it may be realized on a small budget and relatively economical means. The project architect designs an entire building as being a special artefact, composed from subsystems, special components, standard elements and local building-site material processing. The course from a building via building parts to components, elements and materials, makes it logical to score on a gliding scale, going from special, via system to standard. The power of the conscious combination of the approaches of the engineer and the artistic designer, lies in reliable and unpredictable, together with a combination of analysis and synthesis. The typical TU Delft ‘building engineer’ has an engineering mantle with an artistic core. The approach of the engineer in relation to the topic of this monograph, the methodology and the process organisation of product and component design and development, will pretty often result in a straight-forward technical and functional account. The artistic design approach on the other hand results in an exclusive creative and aesthetical account. The building engineer knows both worlds. Many design processes are to be described. Personally, I am very satisfied with the integration of the approach of the periodical description of reasoning and results, because it is a solid reflection of the designing process. The ease with which accurately kept design processes give insight to outsiders is, at the same time, a good lead up to convincing the principal. I also like to be able to check my own reasoning and especially in cases of feedback and evaluations afterwards, I like to weigh again the impact and validity of my own arguments. Working systematically and writing it down, often leads to a bettercontrolled design process with better results. Especially when more processes have to be kept going in one mind simultaneously, a chronological report and account is an excellent means of acquiring or re-acquiring insight in the process. As chief designer I am too often involved in tens of projects at the same time at my office, they all require an adequate arrangement: decathlon chess is quite a knack. The illustrations with this introduction give an idea of the scale of the various designs which are daily being worked at in my office. ‘Simultaneous designing’ is a notion many professional architects will recognize.

10

Fig. 2: Court of Justice, Maastricht, NL. Architect: Gerard Passchier.

Fig. 3: The 52m high glass façade of the atrium of the OZ Building, Tel Aviv, Israel. Architect: Avram Yaski.

11

Fig. 4: Extension to the Prinsenhof museum, Delft, NL. Architect: Mick Eekhout.

The fear of many designers that their creativity will run dry with a methodical or systematic design approach, is unfounded. It is a matter of discipline to follow the whole process on the one hand and to take enough distance to be able to undisturbed experience the creative moments in greater ecstasy. Designers who know that they are good in designing will keep their designing ideas to themselves until it becomes totally clear from analyses for what purpose these ideas are necessary. It would be a waste to spill energy to just the wrong, or a wrongly interpreted design, however splendid and exciting these ‘wrong’ results as such, may be. I, indeed, experience it like many colleague designers: very soon after a commission I have an intuitive image in my mind of the possible solution. I have to consciously suppress this, however, in order to find out, by analytical and methodical work, if this image is the best one. Nevertheless, the idea or the image stays wandering in my mind all that time as being a certainty. Each designer will develop his own method of designing. But for a methodical approach goes: never be afraid of the brilliant idea or image not showing up! Methodical designing can lead to a design which is better than the first intuitive idea.

12

Many building designers, especially architects, could and would rightly fear that an accurately kept design and development process is in flat contradiction with the mysterious business they call “their design process”, which mostly leaves the presented curious mixture of analytical and creative fragments hidden in a black box, as it were. That black box is often a convenient cover to mask a hasty, incomplete design process. Designers often hastily come to their final objective and develop their designs dead straight from a main idea to a complete solution. It is like firing a shot at random; the effect of which will be covered with a mystified woolliness of language when there is some opposition, serving only one purpose: to distract attention and leave the audience behind being exhausted in helplessness and self-doubt. The honour of the concerned designer may be saved for that moment, but it is to be questioned whether in general the best design is being represented. There are many deceptive moves being performed which sometimes serve to hide ignorance, sometimes a lack of knowledge, often a lack of insight and vision and sometimes imperfect performances. Simplicity is often a powerful argument, provided that this is correctly directed, but simplicity may also be the result of a complicated process as opposed to the artless simplicity of the first shot. Mystification is probably not always to be avoided but in general it does not help along the appreciation for the design. It proves to exercise, eventually, a bewildering influence in the founding of the designer’s ego.

Fig. 5: Glass canopy for the ‘Evoluon’, Eindhoven, NL. Architect: Gert Grosfeld.

13

Fig. 6: Chrysler Building, Brussels, Belgium. Architect: De Wachtelaere.

Fig. 7: Shopping Center Overvecht, Utrecht, NL. Architect: ONB Architects.

14

There is a chance that he will start to believe in their own mystifications. With that the circle of reasoning is full, but the quality of the design will not improve by it and again a chance to improve the quality of the overall spatial design is lost. In the design process the linear line may often be the shortest, but not necessarily the most optimum or the best way to go from A to B. On the way many alternatives deserve attention and ever so often the optimum design is a combination of a main idea with all sorts of side-leaps, logical and (at first sight) less logical, even unexpected impulses. In short, designing is to building designers partly an analytical, but mainly a creative activity. Whereby analysis and creation or synthesis have to be in proportion, they have to chase each other for the great quest to the best design. There must be no mutual frustration. Only the best is good enough. Buildings have to stay in use far too long to routine-rush the design phase, only to beget a low or medium quality as a result, looking like the greatest performance when it comes to the budget. With the presentation of designs and the design processes, certainly by students this fault comes forward in full intensity. Insecurity, faulty reasoning, ignorance and a lack of knowledge are often the ingredients of a show which would not necessarily be weak if it had an analytical foundation. Especially for beginners in the trade it is worth their while to acquire their own discipline, in order to research more possibilities during the process and to compose the design with the best combination of these. The building engineer differs from the average TU Delft engineer in his stroke of originality and creativity. The Delft building engineer works systematically and strategically, but originally and creatively when a problem has to be solved, after which he will look for the underlying rules that enable him to find an even better or more optimum solution. Undeniably a systematic approach and one which requires accurate working. His design has flashes of the artistic designer who thinks of a number of solutions more often and faster, in order to compare these until one solution is found which will solve most, or all the problems or does so in the most satisfying way. The component designer takes position compared to the building engineer and the architect. For all three counts: designing is deciding in compromises. A juicy approach to the great stroke and the grand dream thinking. The usual TU Delft engineer solves his problems by analysing more, the artistic designer by synthesizing more. The engineer analyses and decomposes. The component designer rather amalgamates, capable of both analysing and amalgamating. The engineer uses a strategy which is problemdirected, where the component designer follows a solution-directed strategy. Usually the search starts with unravelling a Gordian knot of demands and wishes which are partly opposite one another and partly sometimes badly, partly also wrongly described. Problems in a design process are usually not clearly enough described to come to a solution solely by an analysis. That is why often a reversed order is used: suggest a solution and then check if this meets the required demands, or if it needs additions. Solution and problem thus run parallel with each other in their development. This interaction can lead to designs which are a mixture of both approaches, but can also lead, via sudden ideas and brain flashes, to totally unexpected solutions. The power of the

15

building engineer (‘Bouwkundig Ingenieur’, being the official title after graduation from the faculty of Architecture TU Delft) lies in his interchanging analyses with syntheses. For he is, as a designer, engineer as well as artist. He is at the crossing of two worlds. He can impregnate a scientific approach with spontaneous and creative solutions. He can also clarify a messy process of associative solutions by introducing divisional analytical approaches. In extreme it can be stated that in the whole process of product development there must absolutely be an anarchical activity which will provide a very refreshing, free, new and loose view on the process or on the product or component in the making. This surely happens in a building team, by having an artist play the part of the ‘louse in the fur’ or the ‘horse-fly’, the anarchist en persona. But few are given the chance to make this their profession. Although this will not diminish the love-hate relation between discipline and anarchy. Both approaches can only be managed by the best designer as a truly autonomous thinker. The three ‘Organograms’ being the complete process methods as presented in this book, are an attempt to describe a development process of respectively a standard product, a system product and a special component product for the building trade. Of course, these Organograms have, as overall methods to steer a design and development process, a personal touch: they are ‘Eekhout Organograms’. The basis for these Organograms were already set down at the graduation work in 1973. Therefore, the reader should not look upon them as a case of sacred must, a too tight straitjacket. They had better be looked upon as an example for a scheme of activities to be carried out logically next to or after each other, leading from objective to objective fulfilment. For the author they are a well workable average, explained by an experienced designer. In fact all processes are elaborations and variations on the generalized Organograms. The user of this monograph, wanting to systematically develop a new or renewed building product, building system or building component, will be advised to note down a strategic scheme like the Organograms for his topic, in all its distinguished activities parallel and serial with feedbacks. Students would do good to follow such a scheme a couple of times until they have formed their own variant of this development method. While doing so, during the process corrections will be sensible and sound deliberation is recommended. Afterwards a logical explanation can be given to outsiders who were not involved in the design process from nearby, on the demand side (i.e. principals, building managers) or the supply side (i.e. co-makers, draughtsmen, contractors, subcontractors, producers). The understanding of and the identification with the end result of the process increases for all and the information may cause a stronger motivation for all those involved in the development process and the production and realization process afterwards. The first and didactical objective of working with an average Organogram is to hand the user of this monograph a discipline according to which a design and development process can be organized. Because every Organogram is the result of very complex and specific headwork of which the ideas and feedbacks often come so fast that they are hardly describable, the

16

Organogram can only be an abstraction and a simplification of reality. Besides, the three discussed main types of Organograms are framed in such a generalized way that many products can be designed and developed, using them. For a more lively imagination the system products and special products Organograms are illustrated with a case from practice. The benefit of the general validity of the average, however, is balanced by the missing power of the specific. This has to be brought in by the specific design of the user. From this follows that the first and foremost function of an Organogram is to give the user insight in the development discipline, in order to shape it into his or her own discipline with an individual tune. The second and functional objective of working with an Organogram is that already in an early stage of the process an overall picture is gained of the various activities, needed to get to the final objective so that, with regards to the dedication of persons, material and finances in the entire process can be taken into account. Of course the process is complicated. But describing the various stages from experiences does not make the designer frightened. After description he can go to work on the important issues. With an Organogram scheme the communication between the many involved parties in the product development process can take place in the light of clearly circumscribed and related process activities. An Organogram clarifies the process practice more for discussions which, especially in big and complex processes or hierarchical decision structures, can be of a great help in the transference of arguments and the foundation of decisions. The third and psychological objective of working with an Organogram is that the designer sees the modesty of his part in the process as a whole and therefore is able to appreciate his position in the entire development process. Do not underestimate the positive results of humility. It also shows the many necessary impulses by outsiders in the building team (that is to say outside the person of the designer) and with that the dependencies, the necessity for cooperation, collaboration even, for communication itself and for the means of communication. One of the problems of the earlier groups of Building Technology students, who worked for the first time under my supervision in 1992 with the standard Organogram, was that they interpreted the organisational scheme as a very strict order of activities. They were called ‘steps’ at the time: hence the association with a compulsive order; like obligatory figure skating. The students had more trouble with the supposed compulsory order in the stepsscheme than with the gained overall picture of the process and the greater freedom to analyse and synthesize alternatives during the process. Ever since that time I rather speak of activities than of steps, because with that a less strict order is being indicated and these activities become easier to be executed next to, after, and with each other. On the other hand, the reactions of students of a post-graduate Architectural Design Management Systems at TU Eindhoven) designers course some 5 years later was much more positive and interested. Perhaps one has to be purified as a designer in the personal failing of various designing processes in order to recognize methodology as a means to efficiency. Methodology, too early in time and without the artistic design core, could reduce the lust and pleasure in the design profession. Considering the

17

process of learning from others and afterwards standing on one’s own legs, my thoughts go back to an event in 1992, the first year of my professorship. During one of my journeys in the Far East, John Hui, one of my principals, with a doctorate in Philosophy at Vancouver, worked as a glass façade contractor in his father’s former glass façade business in Hong Kong at the time. While discussing the merits of De-constructivism I had to give a lecture on a few days later, he brought an appropriate thesis of Ludwig Wittgenstein to my attention. After a dive in his bookcase he read to me thesis 6.54 from the Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus, 1923 [23] (translation from German into English by Bertrand Russell): “My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way: anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical, when he has used them, as steps to climb up beyond them. (He must so to speak, throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it). He must transcend these propositions, and then he will see the world aright” This wisdom of Wittgenstein is a very general one and goes for many learning processes: one has to master the subject-matter first, before one can profile oneself as a master and manipulate the subject-matter. However, one should not be that proud to step from the ladder when being only halfway or to jump down to look for one’s own way, because one will fall down when doing so. Study in all quietness and when you have mastered the subject-matter and it is settled in your head, you may throw away the theory. Working with an Organogram is very well capable of helping along the communication in and around a product development process, but as a discipline of an individual designer it will be made redundant when the discipline has moved from the paper into the mind, and has formed a personal designing discipline there. When that moment of personal and autonomous insight has come, this monograph will be no longer needed. Rather sooner than later, as far as I am concerned. By the way, what lies before you is a subtle process and a lengthy learning time. Take your time for it and enjoy the sound acquiring of an overall picture of the essence of the developing process. It is clear that, parallel to the three Organograms, it must be possible to draw and describe similar Organograms for the designing of buildings or, in some cases, even for a work of art. Especially when the design process and materialising contain sufficient complexity, it has a high value. But also the development process of a car or an airplane will, in principle, offer the possibility to be described as a methodical process of similar activities. The specific topic can, of course, make the one Organogram far more complex, profound, or broader and more extended than the other. Also the writing of a book or a dissertation can be described as a process of identical activities, arranged in similar ways. It all comes down to clear thinking. In essence it is nothing more than a discipline made visual of serial and parallel activities to get from an initial objective to an final fulfilment of the objective.

18

The scientific domain of Product Development is based on two pillars, the one on an abstract and the other on a concrete level: • The abstract-theoretical contemplation and stimulation of the design process, developing, examining and realising of building products and components: the methodology of product development and component design for architecture; • The concrete-practice directed studies of existing and new products in particular via the relation of production techniques to elements and components up to prototype evaluations of new products like Zappi, the secret unbreakable structural glass material for architecture and free form 3D components for ‘Free Form Design’ or ‘Blob’ buildings with their complex geometries.

Fig.8: Relationship between building design and other engineering sciences.

This monograph is totally devoted to the first pillar of the abstract-theoretical contemplation of the designing methodology and the process organisation of product development, be it illustrated with examples from practice. This practical methodology is the result of my personal research into the theoretical tasks, illustrated with designs and developments from my design practice of Octatube

19

in Delft, drawn by my co-workers and myself and produced and realised all over the world by the same team. I hope this monograph may be the basis for more profound research by others. However, the subject-matter is important enough to be introduced, for the time being, in this form. One of the books of which the contents have an inspiring influence on working with process organisations for building technology students, is the work of Roozenburg and Eekels, titled ‘Product Designs, Structure and Methods’ [1]. Although it is directed to Industrial Design students, parts of it still show gratifying parallels with the development of building products. This book also gives, thanks to the years of experience on which it is founded, a very wide image of industrial design development. Therefore the book is highly recommended to professionals and students who are interested in a more methodological approach. Although it is clear that building products, by the static and grand nature of buildings and the peculiarities of the technical design and development process, are worth to be studied as separate scientific domains. Compare this with the process of moveable industrial products. The analytical design methods of Norbert Roozenburg cum suis, next to those of others, have confirmed me in the conviction that the building technology student and the architecture student, through all sorts of design methods, is capable of mastering a totally individual design discipline.

20

3.

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

The scientific field of Product Development comprises the entire process of the initiating, the developing, designing, research and engineering, manufacturing the prototype and testing its performance, making it ready for production and production in first series, the assembling of the material kernel of completely or partly new and renewed standard building products, building systems and special components, which can be manufactured and prefabricated industrially, and the immaterial layer of the surrounding scientific fields of Methodology, Computer Science, Product Economy, Industrial Economy, Marketing, Regulating and Quality Ensurance. 3.1

BUILDING PRODUCTS

In building jargon there are several interpretations of the phrase ‘building products’, just like there are for ‘products’. The number of interpretations is confusing. One cannot found a field of science upon a lack of unanimity. We will start afresh with a clean vocabulary and try to give better suiting descriptions for notions which are not only logical in theory, but also workable in practice and which will hopefully be handled in the practice of design, production and building. The meaning of the word product is derived from ‘to bring forth’ (Lat. ‘pro’ = forth, ‘ducere’= to lead, to bring). From that it is relevant to material as well as immaterial matters. Every action or process produces a result which is called a product. In general, products stand for results of breeds of spiritual or physical work as well as, in continuation of this, mechanical or automatized work. The contents of a book is the product of the author and the material book itself is the product of the printer. A building design is the product of an architect and his advisers. A building as the technical artefact is the product of the team of building contractors and producers of components, steered by the design of the architect. Since the domain of Product Development is concerned with material products, we will leave the spiritual products for what they are. The architect looks upon his building as a proof of his design thinking. The project developer looks upon the same building as his negotiable product in the market of real estate. The domain of Product Development is, however, not concerned with the designing of the whole building. Product Development concerns the designing, developing and examining of separate components of the building, be it standard components, system components or special components. The building as a complete product or technical artefact is built up from a great number of components, each being produced by specialized producers in their workshops and factories and installed at the building-site by specific assemblers. The coordination and integration of all components, elements and materials in the technical composition of the building is the domain of Architectural Engineering. To increase the confusion surrounding the notion ‘building products’, there is hardly any distinction between the finished levels of the components. In the average contemporary building process many different building products are

21

used with totally different levels of completeness. The one extreme is shapeless, fluid concrete without reinforcement which yet has to be poured. Fluid concrete is only material in pre-cast status. Bricks are elements yet to be laid by hand. Bricks are industrial products, but the bricklaying is handicraft. The other extreme are prefabricated multi-material components that only need bolting and sealing off at the building site: Completely pre-assembled glass façade modules, one story high. The different materials in linear or flat form are integrated into this super-component. All kind products between these extreme levels of completeness between material and super-component can be found at one building site.

Fig. 9: Exterior of the Glass Music Hall, Exchange of Berlage, Amsterdam. Architect: Pieter Zaanen.

What would happen if we would want to develop carbon fiber reinforced epoxy shells for roofs of ‘Free Form Design’ buildings? Would we start with the ‘snotty’ material epoxy to be fabricated on timber molds on situ, or would we reason from making large super-components of these types of roofs, the maximum size hardly transportable over the road, so that the components can be prefabricated and properly cured? So these considerations influence new components design and development. Insight is obtained from the differences in the levels of assembly, completeness, quality, production frequencies, producer- and consumer directedness etc.

22

Concerning the sizes the following observations can be made: • Mini-products are the smallest monomaterial components. For instance, bolts and nuts are the products of a bolts producer. Bolts are elements. A nongalvanized steel bolt is a subelement; a hot dip galvanized one is an element, ready to play its part in the assembly. A bolt, a nut and two washers, together with the two boltholes to be connected, form a functional entity: a super-element. Mini-products are produced outside the building industry or for more than only the building industry alone. They are usually mass produced industrial products. • Meso-products are building components. These components of buildings are usually produced outside the buildingsite and are transported, in a certain state of completion, to the building-site in order to become assembled, mounted or installed. • Maxi-products in architecture are buildings as complete products. Buildings as technical artefacts have a high degree of complexity. Every building consists of thousands of components, among which many different types of building products. One can also speak of buildings as real estate products, as main contractors and project developers usually do, indicating the building as merchandize. The architect sees the building as the materialized spatiality around the desired functionalities within his artistic view.

Fig. 10: Overview of maxi-, mini- & meso-products illustrated on the glass music hall.

It is a matter of defining the specialism of the domain of Product Development to determine if it is solely concerned with ‘off-site’ products, or if ‘on-site’ products can also be included in the specialism. In principle, the domain is capable of dealing with all building products, off-site as well as on-site up to the level of the building as the total technical conglomerate. Established materials and techniques are not part of the domain of Product Development, unless they need dramatic upgrading and innovating.

23

Fig. 11: Space frame for storage hangar, Dubai.

Fig. 12: Building products in various stages of completeness: steel space frame for Tanfield House, Edinburgh.

The product stage during the transportation to the building-site is determining for the level of completeness of the product. Examples of building products in various stages of completeness by, for instance, their different sizes are: • A steel space frame. It is supplied on site in the form of prefabricated tubes and connectors (components) and bolts and nuts (elements). Because of the great volume of an assembled space frame the components are compactly stacked in breakdown position and transported in containers. The space frame has to be assembled safely on the ground floor, or any flat surface, into one integral spatial construction and will thereupon be hoisted and fitted on its anchors. At the building-site assembling is only done by bolting and tightening connections. Welding is absolutely not done on the site, as it is an assembly method preferably used in factories, before corrosion protection and coating is applied. • A complete glass and metal façade module. This super-component needs only to be assembled on the building’s skeleton by bolting and get a waterproof sealing around. Completely glazed façade super-component modules are fixed in ever larger sizes. In former days aluminium façades were often supplied at the building-site with separate mullions, transoms and glass panels and screwed together on the building envelope from suspended scaffoldings. Nowadays the levels of manufacturing, Fig. 13: Building products in various pre-assembly and assembly are higher stages of completeness: glass and and this degree of prefabrication leads to metal window frame. Author’s house. more complex super- components. • A central heating boiler. Needs only to be installed, hung and connected to the conduit pipes and electrical plugs. This device is completely assembled as standard product, tested in the factory and even provided with a factory certificate.

24

Fig. 14: Building products in various stages of completeness: central heating boiler.

Let us take the opposite position. From the traditional building practice one could state that bricks and concrete blocks are clearly recognizable building products. But they still have to undergo the essential process of assembly by bricklaying before we can speak of the building component of the brick wall. Bricks, to product developers, are in fact micro-products. In accordance with the increasing industrialisation we will be increasingly inclined to look upon elements like bricks, concrete blocks, gypsum blocks and glass building blocks as being unfinished products, only elements or micro-products, and the actual meso-product would be the brick wall. The bricklayer as a sub contractor is more and more paid for the ready to hand product of the complete finished vertical wall. He is less paid as the added labourer who erects walls from bricks and mortar between the frames of a carpenter, after which they are finished by a jointer or a plasterer. So, to think in a component manner, becomes also a part of the traditional building practice. The status of handicraft is most important for the renovation and restoration sector. One may also look upon ceramic roof tiles of the traditional building process as industrialized building products. They are being transported to the site in their recognizable shape and only have to be laid, respectively screwed tight at the roof surface on the building-site. There are more and more roof tiles suppliers who, instead of supplying roof tiles, rather initiated to supply complete roofs for house building. Therefore, all the more reason to also look upon the brick wall as a complete product, parallel to the tiles roof. This, by the way, does not mean that there would be nothing to develop in micro products! Product Development could contribute in proposing revolutionary new concepts as well as in incremental improvement of current products.

25

Fig. 15: Black ceramic tiles of the ‘Zwarte Madonna’ (‘Black Madonna’) in the Hague, NL. Architect: Carel Weeber.

3.2

Fig. 16: Ceramic Tiles, Cultural Center, Delft, NL. Architect: Vera Yanovshtchinsky.

CONCEPTIONS

Innovation boosted by industrialisation. In our society new ideas are constantly born and worked out. They are being introduced to replace existing matters. Even the building practice, which as an industry can be set in motion only with great difficulty, cannot escape from innovations. Surely not since the Dutch government made innovation a political priority. All sorts of tendencies become visible as the causes of those innovations. There are many aspects (social, political, financial, architectonical) we will not get into (although they are indirectly influential). One of the tendencies which is of our major interest, is the increasing degree of industrialisation in the building trade of which the following number of five cause and effect relations are known: • Much of the work at the open building-site is being removed to conditioned workplaces and factories where, with the help of machines and efficiency-advanced installations, producing can be done faster and more effective. • The quality of products can be checked, guaranteed and enhanced, which will be for the better of the total quality of buildings. • The price of the building products will drop by larger serial or mass manufacturing in stead of manual manufacturing, pieces-wise or in smaller series • An optimal use can be made of materials and commercial materials in order to minimize the waste during the industrial production. During the assembly and erection at the building-site only connecting elements and packings to protect components during transport are taken into account.

26

• The burden of building for the environment may in the future be lessened further when new building products are dismountable and capable of being re-used, if the designer is willing to take this into account. This leads preferably to complete, yet transportable supercomponents. The running down order of the hierarchical series means that, thinking about demounting buildings in components, elements and materials every step down involves a greater destruction of capital. In order to re-use components to the full, a second-hand market, as a virtual exchange has to be opened on the Internet. The actual materials can be stored all over the country, awaiting future transport.

Fig. 17: Process identification of successful possibilities for temporary sustainable housing. Scheme by graduation work Nicole Peters, TU Delft.

27

Instead of the confusion of descriptions used in practice, it would be good to promote a coherent linguistic usage concerning Product Development and the achieved degree of industrialisation of the building practice and to form a set of uniform descriptions or definitions. This can be used domestically in architectonical trainings without a confusion of tongues and could effect further the communication of the building practice home and abroad after adoption. These descriptions do not care much about current terminology. And we are not just concerned with theoretical descriptions, but also about the practical handling of conceptions, at least in the decade to come. These conceptions are given in four categories, or a cluster of characteristic notions, to be dealt with hereafter: • Production environment (building-site, pre-fabrication, industrialization) • Product type (standard-, system- and special product) • Product complexity (from material, element, component to building part) • Production frequency (from unique specimen to large quantity) Fig. 18: Characteristic notions concerning product development.

3.3

PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT

In the current trent towards customized industrialization we will shortly reflect on the triple origins of the current building industry: ‘traditional building’, ‘prefabrication’ and ‘industrialisation’. Central is the contemporary use of industrialization and prefabrication and how to deal with the greater influence of the consumer on the production of building products by means of flexible industrial prefabrication or customized industrialization. The developments towards industrialisation are rapid, but the diversities of demands increase as well, also because project architects design new components in their buildings all the time and want to have them developed in-house or in the engineering departments of co-makers. Building-site Production: 1 Traditional building is understood by a building process whereby production and execution take place, for the greatest part, at the building-site with mainly means of the handicrafts. In the renovation and restoration sector the modus operandus of handicraft techniques is the only one available, be it that more components are prefabricated and installed, but usually finished in the building by manual techniques as bricklaying and plastering. The approach and the entire administration of main contractors, even in large new projects, is still established on the basis of on-site production with ample means of visual inspection of the installed products and payment thereafter. The phenomenon of prefabrication throws this concept upside down.

28

Fig. 19: Crystal Palace, London, Architect: Joseph Paxton, 1851.

It is important to distinguish the industrialization level of the building process at hand versus the level of industrialization of the building products (i.e. standard, system or special products) involved. The entire process is developing over the decades from a typical on-site process via the current ‘half on-site/half off-site’ process to in future a process of site assembly of completely prefabricated, industrialized and mass-customized components. In the mean time building components were always designed and developed as highly industrialized components with all advantages from it. However, the growing tendency for individualization in designs and of realized buildings, reveals an opposite tendency: industrial production is reduced to machined handicraft in case the components have to be produced in ‘lots of one’ due to a ‘Free Form‘ geometry requirement for the total roof of a building, with similar consequences for the individual composing components. Rational efficiency in traditional building processes is still an issue of efficiency in current processes, that found its summit in the post-war rebuilding of Rotterdam after its 1940 bombings.

Fig. 20: From traditional construction to flexible industrial production.

29

Fig. 21: Building-site of the faculty of Technology, Policy & Management of the TU Delft.

30

Pre-fabrication: 2 Pre-fabrication is understood to be the manufacturing, of building components, building parts or even complete buildings consisting of various building components, specially engineered to fit the building. . Production takes place after a contract off-site. The results are being transported to the building-site to be assembled into a building. Sometimes the working method is still rather ‘traditional’ (here meaning a high-level craft, though low-level technology) but executed in a factory. But it may be further directed to industrial manufacturing. The total financial efficiency is generally of a decisive significance. The phrase ‘pre-fabrication’, is quite current in Dutch linguistic usage, it is a typically building industry phrase, only to be explained from a strong open building-site tradition and derived from the opinion of contractors on the open building-site. To any producer it is a absurd phrase. For to them there are no ‘pre-fabricators’. From the viewpoint of producers the activities at the buildingsite, on the contrary, can be looked upon as ‘post-manufacturing’ or ‘postfabrication’. So the gap in opinion between building site contractors and off-site manufacturers appears, is at the same time a gap in development between site contracting and industry. There is a subtle difference between fabricators, manufacturers and producers. Manufacturing means producing or making products. But fabrication also bears the somewhat denigrating association with handiwork, with having trouble to put things together. Producing means both manufacturing and fabrication, but without any negative associations. In practice producing/product is used for anybody who creates something and especially for producing in large quantities. Manufacturing is normally reserved for producers who produce larger or more complex components from small elements by assembling them. All these activities belong to the building industry. Mainly in consideration of efficiency, quality of the product and quality of labouring, the activities at the building-site are increasingly transferred to factories and workplaces. There the building’s elements and components in question are produced with the help of machines and automatons. They could be singles and multiples in small, medium, large series or in large quantities with a high quality level and under good climatological conditions. The produced elements are assembled into sub-components and components. Afterwards these are transported to the building-site. Possibly they are assembled either at a factory on site into larger components, or after that directly, with the help of a crane, mounted on the already present load-bearing main structure till a complete building part is finished. Prefabrication of these components takes place after the order is placed for the components of a specific building part and is so only executed after the rounding up of the building design/engineering and when all components are further specified. It then does not matter if the design of the component in principle was already finished and that only the dimensions must be adjusted, respectively some variables had to be determined (system component), or that the component in question had to be completely designed (special component).

31

Industrial Production: 3 Industrial production is understood by a production method for which the following aspects are characteristic: x presence of high-level technology; x optimal suitability for serial production; x optimal, on production attuned, process conditions; x completely planned and programmed process traject; x good marketing orientation; x directedness to product innovation; x optimum input of labour, materials, x machinery and automatons during production; x optimum price/quality ratio. The Dutch glasshouse industry is the only fully industrialized Dutch building segment. For various building-market segments the transference of that traditional building to a more industrial way of working has been set in motion at a different moment and pushed further. The extreme is formed by the Dutch glass-house building practice, which in principle came forth of the glass building of greenhouses of the last century with, as a notorious climax, the Crystal Palace in London (1851), stimulated by a contemporary urge for efficiency and cost reductions. It can be said that the current Dutch greenhouse building construction is almost completely industrialized, apart from the assembling. In proportion the square meter price is low: a complete greenhouse, including foundations and ventilation windows, supplied waterproof and built according to the operative norms, costs only approximately EUR 50,=/m², based on a size of 10,000m² or more.

Fig. 22: Prefabricated products are contracted before production.

32

Fig. 23: Industrial products are produced before sale.

Industrialization: 4 The topic of industrialization is taken on two levels: that of the building process and that of the components. Industrialization of the building process is a ‘fata morgana’ as the prototype character of each building project requires a high level of improvisations due to the usually inadequate information streams between the ad hoc chosen building team partners. Industrialization requires another set-up of the organization: labour division, each team member has specific tasks and has repeatedly shown reliability in performing his task. This will never be the case when working with ad hoc teams. The best result will be a process without major discussions or conflicting interests. Industrialization of components has always been developed mainly out of economical reasons. The industrialized production of standard products takes place before the purchase. So, before the design of the relevant building is ready, or rather completely independent of this. Essential, therefore, is the mechanical manufacturing in a factory and the manufacturing before the purchasing. Industrialization of system products is understood when building components, completely developed and all characteristics including dimensions, are fixed and in principle manufactured mechanically or manually via an industrial production method (that is to say, based upon mass production and labour division) in a conditioned environment. Special components can only be manufactured after complete design and engineering of the building and after complete engineering (including shop drawings) of the respective components have been executed. To the project architect assembling a building design from industrially manufactured elements, yet to be manufactured system and special components, means that choices have to be made from available standard building products in industrial catalogues (a limited choice from a product assortment) and the system components and special components have to be engineered completely. It means that all of these building products (elements and components) in relation to each other have to be defined in their spatial intentions. The standard elements themselves can only be minimally changed . To buildings this is only relevant if the standard products are produced and sold en masse, for instance: bricks, tiles, inner doorframes, doors, door metal works, kitchen elements, radiators and standard products of that kind. In general these are smaller building products. A completely ‘industrially manufactured’ building will be totally built up from already produced (catalogue) products. An often cited and well-known example of this is the home of Charles and Monica Eames in Santa Monica, California (1949), where it did not completely work out as well, in spite of the pretensions. In those days this design was propagated as being ‘component designed’, assembled from catalogue products, a confusing statement in the eyes of the author. But the spirit of industrialization still haunts us. Although the principle of industrialization in our interpretation is ‘industrial producing before purchasing‘, it may well be that certain products will yet have to be produced because they ran out of stock, or because a just-in-time production is being pursued whereby the costs of investment and interest are being minimalized. This makes no essential difference to the definition, provided that the purchaser has no influence on the execution of the individual components,

33

only on the placing (topology) and the assembly of the components into one integrated whole. As an example one may consider the choice of kitchen cupboards doors with a certain colour from a standard series which have to be produced after ordering: no deviation of the drawn principle of industrialization. At best one can say that the stock is insufficient to make direct sales from the showroom. The Ikea approach is the literal consequence of industrialization: all products are ready to be taken from the shelves. The only action expected of the customer is to choose and to assemble later. At best one can say that sometimes the stock is insufficient to make direct sales from the showroom. There is indeed a deviation of a usual degree of industrialization if a colour which is different from that of the catalogue would have to be applied. Then, again, we speak of ‘prefabrication’ with respect to the colour finishing on an otherwise industrially produced cupboard door. The kitchen worktop with its specific length and division is therefore prefabricated, while the cupboards and cupboards doors are manufactured industrially. The choice of components and their placing in the integrated whole of the building as a technical artefact can make the design, whether industrial, pre-fabricated or some mixed form (as is usual nowadays), interesting and exciting. The obstinate employing and placing of familiar building components (topology and geometry in interaction), is often the only liberty a project architect has nowadays, due to budget considerations.

Fig. 24: Assembly line of Ferrari.

Fig. 25: Eames House, 1945-1949, Pacific Palisades, U.S.A. Architects: Charles & Ray Eames.

Flexible Industrial Prefabrication: 5 The results of the turning over in the early Eighties from producer directed industrialization to consumer directed manufacturing of flexible industrial prefabrication or ‘mass-customization’ are becoming increasingly recognizable. The control of architects over the technical assembly of building elements and components of the building is increasing. Around 1980 there was an industrial depression in the building practice in the Netherlands with a logical transfer from demand to supply, by a surplus of capacity with producers (and contractors) versus sub-spendings via the line of the professional consumers: the project

34

architects. Around 1990 there was a second industrial depression with a strengthening effect in that respect. Ever since, especially the obvious image determining building components in a building have been determined increasingly by the project architect and decreasingly by the realizing parties, main contractor, sub-contractors and producers. Under the influence of Deconstructivism, particularly by its purposeful-nonchalant virtual explosions of non-orthogonal components, many architectonical designs have become more geometrically complex. In the last decade this customisation of components was further accelerated by the ascent of ‘Free Form Design’ Architecture, with its constituent highly individualized but necessarily industrialized components.

Fig. 26: Glass music dome in Haarlem, NL. Architect: Wiek Röling; Structural design: Mick Eekhout.

As far as assembling goes they are collages of building elements and components to be executed in a typical building and very specific manner, based upon all possible manners of production and the most obstinate interventions in and combinations of these. In order to make the in the aforementioned industrialization indicated transfer between prefabrication and industrialization more workable, as far as the voice of today’s consumer in choice of variables is

35

concerned, the notion ‘flexible industrial prefabrication’ came into being. Reasoning from prefabrication, ‘flexible’ means that anyhow the wishes of purchasers are being taken into account, marked by the filling in of open parameters (and nothing more). But ‘industrial’ also means that producing takes place by set routines with respect to semi-products in an industrial (production) manner. From the viewpoint of producers prefabrication means that, next to a flow of completely industrially manufactured products (standard products) which can be produced without a preceding selling-order, there will also be a second flow of flexible products of which production will only start after the selling orders in question are laid down with the filling in of the open parameters (system products). This number of parameters can be many times greater than the usual industrial producing. The restrictions are being indicated by the limitations of the programming space of the (automatized or automatic) fleet of machines. Reasoning from the industrialization idea, flexible production will be spoken of when this is only started after the selling-orders in question are laid down with the filling in of the open parameters. From the side of producers, flexible production is a helping hand to anyway be able to attend the building practice with high quality industrial processes, which are based upon greater numbers and which can stand only a maximum of restraining factors (to be determined by the consuming project architect).

Fig. 27: Drawing of the glass stairs in Jeddah, design Octatube, 1996

36

Fig. 28: Prefabricated glass stairs in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

37

It has to be noted that the building practice originally is a 100% demand product, completely applied to the wishes of the consumer (= client/architect). On the other hand, for an example, cars are being bought as a supply product where the position of the producer is more determining. In the 1900s T-Fords could only be delivered in black or green because the producer had more than enough troubles in the fine tuning and fitting of the elements and components of the car to worry his head about and wanted nothing else. In such a case the purchasers have, in principle, no influence whatsoever on the basic design, except nowadays for some laid down pre-programmed variables: these cars remain semi-supply products.

Fig. 29: Influences on industrial production.

However, typically enough cast iron in the English high-days of the Victorian cast iron production practice could be looked upon as a supply product. Cast iron building products could only be cast by definition, in view of the casting process, as ready to hand, completely produced elements in series. Since the introduction of more flexible production methods, based upon semi-products (for instance rolled tubes and thin plates) where more different processes are possible, the moment of choice has been shifted further along the production process. Because of that more production phases have been inserted. Metal casting is used scarcely nowadays in the building practice with its low m³ prices, leading to cheap linear and plane shaped elements and components. Castings will be used as spatial connecting elements in normally small, more complex, concentrated dimensions. The production of castings in singles, in multiples and in small series (like in the offshore industry, the Centre Pompidou, Paris or in the Western Morning News, Plymouth) comes forth from the possibility to compose the elements and components with complex functions, and is yet being made possible thanks to the flexible industrial producing techniques. These techniques can vary from suitability in small numbers to large series as well.

38

Fig. 30: Interior view of the rear façade of the Town Hall of Alphen aan den Rijn, NL, (during construction). Architect: Erick van Egeraat.

Fig. 31: Rear façade of the Town Hall with ‘spaghetti-lintels’ of cold twisted insulated and laminated 2 glass panels (0,9x2,0m ).

39

3.4

PRODUCT TYPE

Material building products are distinguished in the rich professional linguistic usage, in various terms of which the following descriptions are laid down. Building product: 6 Product development is concerned with material products. All the notions in which the word ‘product’ occurs, are being used to point at specific characteristics of a product. They should rather not be used in a hierarchical range of the building up from the smallest parts to a complete building. The notion ‘product’ is too generally applicable for that. It is sensible, though, to distinguish various types of products, due to their accessibility to wishes and requirements of consumers. Standard product: 7 A standard product is a building product with unalterable characteristics. It can be applied in the building practice in a great number of different situations, while the manufacturing of the product itself is not being influenced by the application environment or its final positioning. Its characteristics cannot be changed, it can only be differently positioned in space (topology). Cutting or sawing up during application is of no influence on the character of the standard product: these are fittings and adjustments in a building situation. Typical examples are tiles, bricks, bolts and nuts.

Fig. 32: Standard products – ‘bricks’.

System product: 8 A system product is developed as a integral system, and built up from various functional elements and components, of which the characteristics are not yet completely determined. The system is developed to be composed in all of its functional parts to act in the application situation as a coherent whole. The system knows one level of system design and another level of application design. The system product is suitable to be applied to divers situations in various compositions and/or executions. A system product needs amplifying engineering information for its components and composition to make its final engineering possible in view of the application and to be accurately manufactured for this application purpose. Amplification (or choice parameters) may be derived from dimensions, sometimes from colour finishing or, for instance, type preserving, but will never change the design of the system as such. The technical core of the system product remains unchanged.

40

An example is an aluminium glass façade system, designed and developed by a façade system house, described in catalogues, ready as information for architects. They make their choices in the system possibilities and have the engineering departments of the façade company to work the application out in a complete engineering for the particular building at hand. After the application design the façade manufacturer as a licensee will manufacture the façade from the elements supplied by the system house. Special product: 9 A special product, special component or just ‘special’ is a building component which is specifically designed and manufactured for an appointed building project. Sometimes it concerns revolutionary new special product designs. Most of the times it concerns new systems with a strong own character, which cannot be fulfilled by the normally available commercial systems. These components give away the signature of the project architect involved. At the material side, sometimes special products are built up from standard and system sub-products with very strong deviations or additions, sometimes only their functional scheme. After designing this is considered to be a suitable conceptual special system. It is used as a starting-point (for example the warm/cold glass façade). The newly designed components with a complete self-willed appearance is being created on the basis of the core of technical knowledge and working.

Fig. 33: System product – ‘window frame’.

Fig. 34: Special product – ‘aluminium casting for train-taxi pillar’

41

In handcraft times architects designed only project-connected for each building project at component levels. Architect Hendrik P.Berlage did so one century ago in the famous ‘Exchange of Berlage’ at the Damrak in Amsterdam. The building components were normally manufactured by the contractor, either at the building-site or in his workplace when that was more convenient. Materials and manufacturing methods were known and rather limited at the same time, so that products came into being with limited, different characteristics. Both architect and contractor shared the same knowledge, which was an advantage. After 100 years of industrial development, specialization and customisation, authority went initially to the building parties, but gradually architects are gaining ground again, are allowed more decisions with the assistance of specialist-contractors, like in Free Form architecture. During the last three decades of the 20th century a great number of specialist producers and manufacturers manifested themselves on the building market, all of them with specialized knowledge and special machinery, capable of producing very special and specific components for building projects. The exclusive designing of projects and the developing of products is nowadays only reserved to projects in which: • large series of these special products can be used; • there are strongly deviating demands from common building products; • a more than average budget is available. Especially in British high-tech architecture ‘specials’ are often designed by architects which are developed, manufactured and applied for one single application and afterwards never serve any other application purpose. We can then speak of a modern variant of the generally usual special products or special components. For that matter, these ‘one-off’ components are, because of their glossy presentations, by other architects unjustly mistaken for the results of that, which in general the product development has to offer in the future. There is a difference between general product development and special component design. This view is definitely too rosy to be realistic because they are mostly still manually or only serially manufactured special components with a more than average acceptable price. Reality, however, is very earthly. As a rule the product design and development budgets are much smaller and the architect has to busy himself with the improvement of existing products in a handy, yet prominent way. Choice of seven main types of products The involvement of the project architect is different in the above-mentioned main types of products in each case. He can choose standard products, or not. System products may be partly laid down in their application characteristics by him, because essentially the application design is settled in consultation with him. Special products are intensively designed and steered in their development mainly by him. The initiative for product development from the manufacturer is largest in standard product, whereas the initiative for special products is largest from the architect. With all transition phases of efficiency versus originality in

42

between. Summarizing there are 3 major types of products with 4 transition types of products. In total the seven main types of building products are: • • • • • • •

STANDARD products systematized standard products standardized system products SYSTEM products special system products systematized special products SPECIAL products

Building system: 10 A building system is an ordered set of building elements and building components with connection facilities which, according to certain rules or agreements, can be composed and applied differently each time, depending on the application environment. Dependent on the system of construction the system can be taken apart into spatial subsystems, which can function separately and also be purchased separately. The description of a ‘system’, however, differs in the eyes of an industrial designer: it is rather meant to be a functioning whole wherein components have their own specific sub-functions. Therefore, to the industrial designer an engine-block or a car is a system, necessary for the building up of specifically differently functioning elements. In the building practice the ever different character and positioning of components in each application project and final in each assembling is essential because of the various characters and scales of buildings. A building system allows an ever differing topology (the arrangement of components in respect of each other). In a building system, first and foremost the accent lies on the composition up of similar components, together forming a building part, like a system for a main load bearing structure or a façade. Apart from that each one of several systems and sub-systems must be able to be joined together. Which is the co-ordination and integration challenge.

Fig.35: 7 types of building products.

43

Two main groups of building systems can be distinguished, they may differ in openness: x Producer-directed building systems x Consumer-directed building systems. The first group tends more to standardizing, to a more closed character with a minimal variation, where the second group pursues an open character with a maximum variation and is being designed towards a higher quality for a specific building project or the architectonical application. The first category was highly advocated by Konrad Wachsmann in the 1950s and 1960s. Since then demand took over from supplies in the building market and the consumer-directed systems are more popular now. Standardized system 11: A standardized system in the building practice is designed, produced and presented on the market as a collection of components, each of which is unchangeable, but with arrangement freedom in their assembly as a whole. They give by their adaptability an adequate and specific answer to a building technical question. It is a system with an assembly of elements and components which are fitting together according to a scheme of standing well-considered and coherent regulations and agreements. Project system or special system: 12 A project system is a system for a building, a specifically designed, developed and produced scheme of elements and components according to certain agreements, having different mutual relations on different locations within that building. So, a project system as mentioned above, is always pre-fabricated and not industrially manufactured. Its contract always has to be settled before production. Specially designed bricks are therefore pre-fabricated, while normal bricks are industrially manufactured. A project system is a building system for a certain building only. There are reasons enough to dwell on this definition because there is a growing tendency, for an example in the utility building practice, to design for greater projects certain building elements specifically as systems with their own characters. They answer to a specific scheme of demands and wishes, characteristic for the building in question. Architects intervene deliberately with product development in the form of component design to give these parts of their building a specific character, fitting in the designed entity of the building as they want it to become built. Space frames as an image of industrialization have now been replaced by special spatial structural systems, characteristic for the image of one building.

44

Fig. 36: Special steel castings for the Centre Pompidou, Paris, France. Architect: Renzo Piano & Richard Rogers.

Fig. 37: Space frame system for a dome of the ING Bank, the Hague, NL. Architect: Rob Ligtvoet.

45

Fig. 38: Special system – Glazing of the Westelijk Handelsterrein, Rotterdam. Architect: Jan de Weerd. Structural Design: Mick Eekhout.

Fig. 39: Project system – Cardboard dome during construction in IJburg, Amsterdam. Architect: Shigeru Ban. Structural Design: Mick Eekhout.

46

3.5

THE HIERARCHICAL RANGE OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDING PRODUCTS

From here on the material products will also be considered in a range of increasing complexity and added value.

Hierarchical range of building products: 13

Fig. 40: Hierarchy of building products.

47

Raw material: 14 Raw material is the matter in unrefined condition or shape, not as such directly applicable to the building practice or industry. Examples are iron-ore, bauxite, clay, petroleum, cut down trees. Material: 15 Material is the purified and for a processing industry ready unshaped matter, like cement, sand, synthetic grains, or in some cases a solid shape like tree-trunks, steel coquilles and aluminium castings. The chemical industry knows many interphases between raw material and material which are, however, not very essential to architects. Composite material: 16 A non-homogeneous assembly of two or more materials of an essentially different nature, like concrete and steel fibre reinforcement for reinforced concrete, glass fibre as strengthening for polyester in check-in counters, coextruded PVC/ABS for car bumpers, laminated glass composed from glass plates and PVB foil as a structural/technical alternative for the homogeneous material. Glass fibre reinforced polyester and carbon fibre reinforced epoxy resins are other examples of composite materials or ‘composites’, although they do not exist as combined composites until the moment that the materials are brought together to fit in a form and to be cured. Commercial material: 17 Commercial material is a product of the building supplying industry, which cannot be used completely in its shape, because it has to undergo further shape processing or shape adjustments, for instance: metal plates or profiles, aluminium extrusion profiles, plywood

48

Fig. 41: Bauxite.

Fig. 42: Aluminium billets.

Fig. 43: Glare. Thin layers of aluminium and fibreglass.

plates, jumbo glass plates. In the hierarchical range of raw material, via material to commercial materials they are the product of a mass producing industry (with the exception of castings which are manufactured also as commercial elements in smaller series) but they are only seen as supply products by the companies in the building practice who will produce elements and components out of them. Commercial materials areproducts of factories usually based on mass production which are distributed via trading to manufacturers, who in mass or greater or smaller series manufacture their elements from them, by shape cultivations like sawing, drilling, milling etc. Examples of commercial materials are jumbo glass plates of annealed glass (6 x 3,21 metres), plywood panels (2,4 x 1,2 metres/3 x 1,2 metres), aluminium profiles (6 metres), steel profiles (12 metres). In the case of aluminium extrusion profiles and manually cold rolled (continuously glowed in interim phases) steel hollow profiles, the designer can have influence on the shape and quality of this half-product, despite the relatively small numbers in question. Nevertheless we still speak of commercial materials. Usually the commercial material is the greatest common divisor in the demand of possible customers. The choice of the commercial material in general, marks the entrance to the domain of the designer.

Fig. 44: . Aluminium extrusions.

Fig. 45: Jumbo glass panels.

Here starts the domain of the product developer and component designer!

49

Sub-element / Element / /Super-element: 18 An element is understood by the smallest part of a building, manufactured from one (= mono) material or composite material with its own characteristics, which will be assembled further in the factory or workplace into the greater whole of a sub-component or a component. An element is, therefore, an independent unit in character, for instance a window frame profile, a window rubber gasket or a glass plate. Elements are mostly manufactured from commercial Fig. 46: Jumbo glass panels. materials by rough or final shaping (shortening, fraising, boring, slotting and the likes). The element itself is made of one material only. In that sense this description follows that of the chemical technology. Elements can be used for their own, indivisible character, but also because elements, when put together, form a greater functional whole. The vocabulary of the component designer and that of the project architect is partly different, although they have to communicate and therefore have to use a common linguistic usage and grammar. The various to be assembled elements may have the same character and functions, but they may differ in dimensions or profiles (for instance the aluminium mullions and transoms in a façade window-frame), but they may also differ in character and functions (aluminium, rubber, glass and stainless steel for supporting profiles, waterproof locks, transparent separation planes and moveable fasteners). From the notion ‘element’ it will be possible, when considered in detail, to derive also the more refined notions ‘sub-element’ and ‘super-element’, in order to make the Fig. 47: From top to bottom: a profile, a shortened and cut profile, a notion range more workable when the shortened and cut profile with cap composed products know more plate and flange. complicated hierarchic functional levels.

50

Sub-component: 19 A sub-component is understood by assembling different elements into one functional unity which, in its turn, will have to be assembled at the workshop or in the factory into a greater whole or component before transportation to the building-site can take place. Likewise the assembling of sub-components into components can take place at the workshop when the transportation would impose too much limitations on the maximum volume or dimensions. An example is a triangulated delta truss which is conveyed in parts of maximum 12 metres each (sub component) and is assembled on the site into a triangulated delta truss of, for instance, 36 metres. This is the component which can further be hoisted into a roof construction (building component). An example of a sub-component in the case of façades is a window which is assembled from various elements, but as such not independent enough to be transported and to be looked upon as a component. It has to be put into a window-frame or façade component first. After that it will be transported to the building-site.

Fig. 49: Alternative design by Octatube for the Deutsche Genossenschafts Bank in Berlin, Germany. Architect: Frank O. Gehry.

nd

Fig. 48: 2 glass façade proposal by the author for project in Berlin, 1990.

51

Component: 20 A component is an independently functioning building unit which is built up from a number of composing elements and sub-components. (Lat.: ‘cum’= with, together and ‘ponere’= placing, composing). These elements are assembled into a component off-site and transported to the site, to be hoisted and fitted up at the building. The dimensions of the component during the transport and its completeness are a determining factor in naming them sub-/super- or normal component. However, it is possible to imagine the assembly at a field factory for some building components because of their dimensions. This was organized for concrete components in the 1960s and is again a consideration when very large roof components have to be made for example for the carbon fibre Free Form Design roofs of the Médiateque in Pau, designed by Zaha Hadid, where the number of joints has to be minimal if at all visible. Super-component: 21 A super-component is a structure of more components for a greater whole, assembled at the building-site before it is fitted. An example is a big steel structure like a space frame which is supplied on the site in elements, subcomponents and components, assembled on ground level at the building-site and after complete tightening and post-stressing, is hoisted, positioned and fixed in one go. Building part: 22 A building part is a collection of components and super-components of a building with identical technical functions. Examples are the foundation, the main load bearing structure, the façade, the inner walls, the suspended ceilings, installations etc. The building part is the biggest possible sub-division of a building upon which any one component designer in dialogue with the project architect, invests his knowledge, skills and insight.

Fig. 50: Geometry of the glass roof for the Deutsche Genossenschafts Bank in Berlin, Germany. Architect: Frank O. Gehry. Alternative design by Octatube.

Building segment: 23 A building segment is an imaginary sub-division of a complete building (like a segment of a pie) assembled from heterogeneous components of different building parts. The building segment is important for designers and product developers, because the connections between heterogeneous components in building parts with different characteristics have to be solved.. In the imaginary building segment technical development finds its ultimate destination. Here, the different competencies of the various component designers meet in material contact, connections need to be designed, co-ordinated and integrated into one whole.

52

Here ends the domain of the product developer/component designer! Building: 24 In technological perspective the building as a technical artefact is the total of all building parts in the ultimate assembled state. Here ends the characteristically building technical difference at product level and we enter the terminology of architecture. The building is the solitary domain of the project architect. The building complex consists of more buildings. Perceptions used and not used The perceptions from the hierarchical range are now set, but working with them may prove to need some refinement. The more complex hierarchy in mechanical engineering proves this. Mechanical engineering is an example for product development in the building practice. See the refinements that are possible with the notions ‘sub’ and ‘super’, as smaller and greater levels of the hierarchic layer in perception. For instance, a sub-component, a component and a super-component. In the list of the above-mentioned perceptions of the hierarchical range some notions, concerned with a part of a whole because they occur in linguistic usage, or notions which are too much applicable at different levels and therefore confusing, are deliberately left out. They can, as it were, hover freely from the lowest to the highest level. In complex composed products they will automatically be inserted in order to precisely establish the level of the hierarchy. Between all levels there will be parts which will be composed to become wholes for lower levels, but that does not automatically give them an absolute position in the range, to help us further along in the linguistic usage. The notion ‘product’ in that sense, has amply been in discussion already. Other examples are all the notions which have something to do with the word ‘part’, ‘lower part’, ‘upper part’, ‘whole’, ‘entity’ and the likes. These will therefore no longer be handled as usable perceptions in the product development hierarchy. 3.6

Fig.51: Hierarchy in elements and components.

PRODUCT FREQUENCY

Next to the three main types of products standard, system and special, there is a number of other current notions in relation to products. This goes with regard to the numbers of manufactured identical products. As a distinction the following (subjectively put) numbers for material productions in the industry may be valid:

53

• • • • •

single multiples small series medium series great series/mass

1 2 - 100 100 - 1,000 1,000 - 10,000 10,000 to unlimited

Single and multiple products: 25 A single product is a product which is literally manufactured only as one single piece, or in a somewhat broader conception may be manufactured as a very small series as ‘multiples’. Typical is that, because of the small numbers, there are no investments made in production techniques. The composing parts are produced by trade or with the help of existing industrial techniques and assembly takes place manually and with standard mechanical tools. A work of art is consciously a single and unique product. Sometimes art is made in multiples, too. A good building is, as a complete design, also a single product. It does not matter if the elements and components themselves may be duplicates. But a unique overall design for a building with unique components tops everything. Serial product: 26 A serial product is a product which is manufactured in a smaller or greater series (repetition of equal products). The series is finite and meant for certain applications or for a limited stock. A series stands midway between a unique manufacture and a manufacture on a large scale. Between the categories ‘raw material’ and ‘building’ the produced amounts decrease, mass (raw material) changes into series (elements/components) and ends usually in a unique application (building). Serial housing can be considered as a serial product, built up from components which are usually built together or assembled as subsystems. The numbers of houses as products seen by contractors will be considerably less by a factor 10 than the industrial amounts. Each housing project has a characteristic radiance and is manufactured from a mixture of on the spot processed building materials in a rationalized manner, optimized and assembled on-site and prefabricated building system products and industrial products, all finally assembled together to function as the house the project architect composed. Mass product: 27 A mass product is a product that is usually manufactured industrially in greater amounts. In principle it is being produced continuously, independent of the orders of consumers, and delivered from stock. Building designers have, in general, little or no grip on mass products, but they have more grip on serial products. A mass product can occur at different levels: from building material, always as mass products and in some cases to buildings, like the post-war mass housing schemes we now detest.

54

Fig. 52: ’ Single product’ – Bekkers Villa in Bilthoven, NL. Architect: Mick Eekhout.

Fig. 53:’ Multiple products’ – Habitat in Montreal. Architect : Moshe Safdie.

55

Fig. 54: ‘Serial product’ – ‘De Strijp’, Rijswijk, NL.

Fig. 55: ‘Mass product’ – Pendrecht, Rotterdam.

3.7

NEW, RENEWED OR IMITATION PRODUCT

Although the scientists in the domain of Product Development are mesmerized by the designing and developing of completely new products and by the drastic renewing of existing products, over renewing on only one aspect, there is a positive awareness of the relativity of the notion ‘newness’. We must be realistic about this. When do we speak of a ‘new’ product after all? Does a cosmetic change or alteration of an aluminium façade system give it the right to the adjective ‘new’? When a turning/tilting window, developed in Germany and customary over there, is being added to a system of Dutch window-frames and windows which usually only turn and do not tilt, should we then speak of a new product on the Dutch market? Or must a product have a totally new concept

56

before it can be classified as a new product? Is new for us though known for them, good enough for labelling its newness? The notion innovation plays an important part in this. Innovation literally means ‘renewing’. Not clear is whether this is about a totally or partly new demand, or about a totally or partly new answer to that demand. Innovation is a marketing term rather than a technical one and it is used a only when newness has been introduced as a success. If an existing solution would be the answer, it is not the engineer’s answer to pose as a designer, at best as an applicant for a solution that others already found and executed before him. The real engineer designing work always has to do with ‘original & ingenious’, as a basis of the profession. Innovation is a magic word which implies, with the renewal of a single characteristic of a product, that more characteristics have been renewed. Or, when more than one characteristic has been renewed and improved, that this goes for the whole product. Pars pro totum. The marketing pretension of the word ‘innovation’ is of no use to a completely new product, because it is incomparable with a product that existed before that. We should name products which are completely new in an existing function new products, while new products for a new function should, in fact, be named ‘super new’ products. These supernew products can be distinguished in an absolute meaning (in the world) and a relative meaning to us as professionals in the building industry.

Fig. 56: Detail of twisted façade of the Town Hall of Alphen aan den Rijn, NL. Architect: Erick van Egeraat.

57

Fig. 57: Heavily loaded glass structure: glass water pond in the Municipal Floriade Pavilion, Hoofddorp, NL. Architect: Asymptote Architects.

Fig. 58: Exploformed aluminium roof panels on a fitting mould for the Pavilion.

Fig. 59: Cold deformed glass in the Town Hall of Alphen aan den Rijn.

58

An example of a supernew product is the ‘Segway’, a two cycle pedestrian vehicle. As a component designer and product developer , educated in the architectonical style of Functionalism, the author tends, in order to measure the degree of originality and ingenuity, to use as a starting point for the innovation degree or newness degree the basic classic criteria: • Function • Technique • Aesthetics • Economy An artist will choose a different order (aesthetics first), so will a contractor (economics first) or a principal, but to a functional architect this order fits. The Roman architect and author Vitruvius (85-20 bC) wrote, some 2000 years ago, of ‘Firmitas, Utilitas, Venustas’ (durability, usefulness and beauty), but also the efficiency and economy are, as underlying considerations consciously present in his ‘De Architectura’ or the Ten Books. In this respect nothing much has changed in two millenniums. When a new product scores on both the aspects Technique and Aesthetics as ‘new’, we consider this a new product. We usually design products for existing functions. Therefore we focus on new products, which will have to replace existing products. That is why function is only seldom a newness criterion. Next to that Economy is derived from Technique and Aesthetics (as well as from selling, applications and more such items) and therefore Economy as such does not play a part in the newness assessment. In all sincerity we could sum up four categories of products in a decreasing degree of newness: • super-new • new • renewed • imitation A further refinement would be to apply a grading to: • one characteristic • more characteristics • most characteristics • all characteristics Completely new products are real triggers in their newness and uniqueness. They should have to offer solutions for new problems which, till now, were not an issue. In industrial design the Façade robot comes near to a new product for a new function, although window washing always has been done by hand. For instance a new, light-weight and unbreakable glass-like building material which is load bearing, strong and rigid and chemically resistant: the new and yet secret unbreakable transparent construction material Zappi, Proposed as a research goal at TU Delft in 1992 by the author. Or a single-layered roofing that can be spread evenly on roofs in a liquid form, attaches to everything, even to damp surfaces, is not bothered by vapour tensions, is waterproof and is obtainable in several colours. Or a laminated fully-tempered cold-bent glass roof without metal frames or posts with proper solar transmission capacities, maintaining a high

59

light transmission. You name it! And everything which comes near to these fantastic ideas. Lengthy development work with much examination energy which demands a vast financial investment proves, however, hardly possible in the building practice in general and is certainly not common. But new products do have a renewing effect on thought and on the product assortments of the branch.

Fig. 60: Glass Extension to the Prinsenhof Museum in Delft. Architect: Mick Eekhout.

Fig. 61: Five star hotel in London, England, conceived as a 150m long luxury yacht. Design by Tim Saunders.

60

Fig. 62: Interior of the Glass Music Hall in the Exchange of Berlage, Amsterdam. Architect: Pieter Zaanen, Structural Design: Mick Eekhout.

Replacements of existing products by renewed products which show improvements on important points, often show this only in one or some aspects. For instance aluminium window-frames with single or double cold bridge barriers. Glass panels with a high thermal insulation value and an invisible coating, hardly transmitting any solar energy, but yet fully transparent. Imitation products will only be new or innovative to a certain company, or person , but they are not new on the market. One can find an attitude with a company which wants to get its share on the market like a ‘me too’ attitude usually after it has watched other companies with a more daring nature having done the dirty work. Each and every company has legion products which are inspired by a continuous following of the market development process, what the demands are and also what is supplied by the competition in the branch. Followers are never exceptionally original but, by jumping on the back of a riding bicycle, they avoid the initial expenses and especially the initial risks. Therefore they can be less expensive. That is often the reason of this attitude. To be successful there is a big parcel to be positively filled with ingredients: the ‘product mixture’. Imitation products with a carefully assembled ‘product mixture’ can, in principle, score higher than new products, sourly enough. It is therefore not illogical to assume that relations between marketing people and designers are often strained. It came as far that a Dutch member of the Pilkington glass concern spoke at a TU symposium, saying that renewing came into being by

61

‘logical thinking, clever pinching and creatively pushing on’. He wrote it twice in the proceedings of that symposium. Of course, after this a correspondence followed between the author and this speaker. Engineers are supposed to be original thinkers. Next to our own vision as product developers on supernew, new, renewed or imitation products, both the opinion of the producing company and the consuming project architects counts. When the architect looks upon a product with only one significant improved characteristic as being ‘completely renewed’, the producer will hurry to join in. On a mainly conservative product market, like for instance the German market, this will even be a pro, in order not to drown in the swamp of ‘Systemzulassungen’ and ‘Zulassungen' im Einzelfall’, system permits and special permits for building these product systems. It is then better that only detail improvement and partial innovations, or even cosmetic alterations are considered to keep the authorities from becoming frightened off. So, the notions ‘innovative’ and ‘new’ are often a give and take. ‘Imitation’ will naturally only be applied to the competition, rather not to ourselves! Only, they follow us; we, of course, are more original! An actual insight in the abovementioned could be obtained by analyzing, during a visit at any building exhibition in the world, for example one hundred recommended new or innovative products and see their actual degree of newness. My hypothesis would be that ‘new’ will only be limited to a few percentages, maybe renewed for a ten percent and the rest will be imitation. It will be interesting to work that out further and philosophise on its consequences for the future development of the building industry as a whole. But even more interesting is, of course, to drastically jack up the number of ‘new’ products and with that make our influence as building product developers felt by the quality in the building practice in a positive way. And would it not be stimulating when each architect would design and develop at least one new component product in each new building. That would lead to thousands of incremental innovations per year, only in the Netherlands! 3.8

NEWNESS DIRECTEDNESS OF ARCHITECTS

A furthermore interesting consideration is how new products would be received at the market by professional consumers. We assume that those consumers are project architects and contractors (usually one of the two has the authority of deciding the application of a building product). Some people will immediately use a renewal as soon as it is introduced on the market. Sometimes for opportunist reasons, where the danger that the first application will remain the only one, is always present. The ‘first on the block effect’ is an American illustration with this: the first tenant on the block buying a pink Cadillac will create a sensation, the second is only an imitation of the first. To get the second and third buyer on the same block to go that far is far more difficult than it is for the first buyer. Project architects can look forward to new products because a function will improve or a composition will become more beautiful. The Dutch architect Jo Coenen was in absolute exaltation for the frameless Quattro glazing system of the entrance hall of the Netherlands

62

Architecture Institute at Rotterdam, because with that the ‘membrane feeling’ between inside and outside could be expressed in a new and unique manner. Some high-tech architects (the author has particularly experienced that with Foster Associates and Richard Rogers Partnership, but with other London offices it is no different), fortunately are so dedicated to practice directed research and development in the field of building components, that they even continuously take the initiative for product development in the field of their building components as an office approach. They employ technical architects and component architects in their offices who, in their turn, try to challenge the industry and pull it forward.

Fig. 63: Horizontal section. Detail of the connection with the inner glass pane .

Others will want to wait and see, until the product has proved its value on the market. Especially architects who rather choose from a building catalogue of products with proven qualities, will not be stamping to be the first to integrate the new product into their building. The Dutch architects Jan Benthem and Mels Crouwel (among other things house-architects of Schiphol Airport) have made it known for several times that they want to belong to this categorie: an innovative application of an existing proven product, rather than an experimental application of a new product. Contractors will normally wait for the practical proof of reliable quality behaviour, so they will never want to build the firstling. Others again, architects and contractors alike, will never start something new. In analogy of known terms from the consumer market [25], we could distinguish five categories of consuming product appliers for our industrial building market, based on the point in time on which they apply a new product. As possible product appliers we see, again: project architects and contractors. Non-appliers are not admitted to the list.

63

Fig. 64: First application of structural double glazing with mechanical connection only to the inner glass panel in the Netherlands Architecture Institute, Rotterdam. Architect: Jo Coenen.

Fig. 65: Border Station Hazeldonk,NL. Architects: Benthem & Crouwel.

Fig. 66: Border Station

Pioneers Nieuweschans, NL.

Architects: Benthem & Crouwel.

64

Project architects are looked upon as pioneers, they themselves take initiatives to the developing of new components, usually in their own projects, but because of the sincerity and profoundness with which they do this, they will often be a few steps ahead of producers in developing. Often a producer, respectively a product designer, can rapidly answer their wishes by introducing a new component product, improving an existing product rigorously or introducing a method of manufacturing, respectively realization of the by these pioneers, or together with these pioneers, thought up renewed products. The pioneers are often ahead of the producers and therefore producers and their product designers have to do their utmost to take over the initiative and again enter a dialogue with the pioneers. The Danish architect Jørn Utzon was such a pioneer when he designed the Sydney Opera House in 1956, with its famous concrete shell roofs in days when nobody knew how such shell structures could be realized. The young Peter Rice had his hands full with this problem for years.

Fig. 67: Sydney Opera House, Australia. Architect Jørn Utzon.

Many British high-tech architects can be considered as pioneers, for instance Richard Rogers, who developed a new type of translucent glass for the Lloyds building in London. Norman Foster, who developed for the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank in Hong Kong a reflection mirror, automatized at the sun, to pull the outside light in the internal atrium. Renzo Piano who developed new scale components for light distributors above the roof of the Menhil Museum in Texas. Although Piano went further with this in the spirit of Louis Kahn and others, his shell roofs have their very own place in the building product development by their prefabrication assembly. The Delft architects office Cepezed (Jan Pesman and Michael Cohen) initiated new applications of metal sandwich panels in various projects in the Netherlands and Germany and won several Steel Awards with their portfolio. Moshe Safdi designed sculptural roofs for the Rabin Centre in Tel Aviv, which were redesigned, developed, produced and built by the author and Octatube as glass fibre reinforced structural sandwich shells, a world novelty.

65

Early appliers Early appliers are an innovative, spectacular and opinion leading group of professionals whom the entire market is watching and whose opinion is highly respected. Once they consider a product good enough to be applied, other categories will follow more rapidly. Yet they are a group which only accounts for a small percentage of the market, but which will quickly tend to apply an innovation. Compared to the later appliers they will be younger, technically more daring and often not dwell on the most small-minded or squeezed out projects. They have a good reputation which they like to keep up. They have a broader look on the development of the building technology, a worldly view on architecture and building technology. Often they have already checked and compared data and facts, through other sources. They tend to sooner take up an inspiring technical tale than a salesman tale through which they pierce easily with their expertise. Well grounded, but not gullible.

Fig. 68: Schematic of the reflection mirrors for light distribution in the inner atrium of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank in Hong Kong. Architect: Norman Foster.

Early majority This group accepts innovations just slightly sooner than the majority of the consuming architects. Convincing contacts are salesmen, advertisements and the early deciders. Late majority They really sit upon the fence, rather sceptical when it comes to innovation. Usually they look for innovations from economical motives or are pushed to that by their principals (‘show us something new’), because they do not want to run any risks. They often rely on the eloquence of their ‘elders’ or forerunners. Verbal advice falls into more fertile ground with them than advertisements or salesman tales. Dawdlers The last of the market are the super-traditional dawdlers. They will be the last to take their chance with innovations or, if it concerns project architects, they will have innovations applied by contractors, which is usually bad business because then it is only about economical benefits, whoever maintains that (contractor or principal). By the time the dawdlers are that far to consider the new product, it will be well possible that the pioneers are already busy with a once again improved version of that product. They are already behind when it comes to finally applying.

66

3.9

RISKS OF FAILURE WITH PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

Literature on marketing of new products [5] mentions that the greater part of financial investments in product development is not rewarding because of the high risk of failure. Usually there is an extensive going into the reasons behind failed products. Only a small percentage of new products becomes a success and the main part breaks down somewhere in the stage between product idea and product launching. In view of the herewith coupled destruction of capital investments it is particularly sensible to analyze the reasons behind a possible failure, before we thrust ourselves in full fierceness on the development process itself. According to the American firm of marketing advisers Booz, Allen & Hamilton [25] it is realistic to estimate that on the consumers market the chance to failure of a newly introduced product, even with a good marketing preparation, is as high as 80%. Viewing from the new product ideas (which, of course, not all have become newly launched products), then that percentage is even 98%. That means to say that only two of the hundred new product ideas will survive and become successful consumer market products.

Fig. 69: Failure of a glass panel during a structural glazing test for the ‘Garden Road Skyscraper’ in Hongkong.

Fig. 70: The cause for the failure proved to be a too small U-profile that fitted the glass.

Now, fortunately the building industry in this respect is an industrial market. Yet we must get this warning into our heads. A characteristic difference is that the building product usually has a long life-span, sometimes even longer than the life-span of the application to one single building. In fact, with the current state of affairs “the development of new products is the worst controlled process of the industrial enterprise” (quotation: Professor Paul de Ruwe in his inaugural speech ‘Young and Learned’ at TU Delft, 1993 [ ISBN 90-6275-863-4]). Only a very small fraction of all product ideas results in a successful product. Success is herewith defined as belonging to a product that answers to the expectations which the producing company had at the start, or better than that. Of all the product ideas which were taken in hand, almost 80% fails before the programme of demands is rounded off. To stop in as early a phase in the product development process as possible is probably the least worrying of all

67

failures: the efforts are still low at that time. The delay at the start of the next perhaps successful- product cannot be made up for. After that 3% of the cases stops before the concept is definitively determined. During detail designing only 0,5% of all the started ideas fails, but later, with the manufacturing and introduction on the market another 5 and 7,5% respectively breaks down. All together an output of successful products of less than 5%. To a valuable industrial development process an alarmingly low number! The traditional building market has, with its traditional atmosphere of piecework commissions, always been able to withdraw itself from the valuable unknown influences on the outlet of industrial products which were devised and produced and then introduced on the market. In the traditional building practice it has been the other way around for a long time: first there was the thinking of what to produce, then there was purchasing and only then came manufacturing. So, the marketing influence was less strong than in the other extreme case of the consumer market. Product development at the traditional building market was not much more than choosing from existing materials, drawing and producing. But the world changes irreversibly. Materials become more expensive, wages become more expensive, manual work experts become scarce and production techniques become more refined and specialized all the time. Also in the building practice more and more components are being manufactured in workplaces and factories outside the building industry and that at a point in time before the building-site is ready for application. This specialism calls for concentration of contracts. So the building producer arrives eventually at the industrial building market, while he has to go on with product developing continuously in order to stay ahead of the competition. Many producers in the building industry who are successful, use product development continuously because they introduce new products on the market far more often than their colleagues, they invest far more new technology in them, try to stick to a tight product development schedule and are at ease with far more product categories and geographical markets. Besides, product development has a certain learning effect (the more innovation takes places, the more efficient these processes can be carried out) and it becomes clear that product development can give a good lead of the competition. The following six failure causes are all seen from the viewpoint of the producing industry, it concerns standard and system products. However, as causes of failure very often the same will appear: • Insufficient marketing analysis; About half of the companies sees, in hindsight, the failure of the product as a result of insufficient market research. Sometimes a wrong product is manufactured for the market, in other cases a product for the wrong market. A lack of market research like that arises when the producer behaves as a technician, mainly focussed on technology, and does not take enough time for market research when his competitor introduces a new or improved product on the market and he feels challenged not to stay behind. Reactions like these often lead to hasty and ill-judged decisions.

68

• Technical problems with the product; A princely part of the failures is due to insufficient functioning of the product. Then it often concerns defects which well before the introduction could have been discovered but, due to a too hasty product development process were skipped or overlooked, respectively minimized (‘we will solve this when we get there’). Before the product is being launched the question must be asked: ‘What does the new product do what other products don’t do?’ When the answer is negative, the new product will not become a success. Depending on the branch technical problems are either or not at all tolerable (remember the aircraft industry). • Unexpected high production costs; When the final cost-price of a product turns out to be higher than was initially estimated, the product can prove to be not saleable. In that case it is advisable to choose a different production method, to issue the product completely under licence, or to simply stop it and swallow the losses. No company will want to manufacture a product of which the output does not equal the direct variable costs; the overhead costs can be stepped across in exceptional cases at times. Fig. 71: Six causes for • Power or reaction of the competition; failure of standard and system products seen The most common reasons for the failure of a from the perspective of product are within the limitations and the producing industry. possibilities of the producer. Sometimes there is, however, a market which suddenly drops off or shuts down, also sometimes the competitors will react more rapidly to an introduction than anticipate when they too already had a similar new product developed, only not yet introduced on the market. Sometimes even the tiniest price reduction of an existing product can take away much beat up power (with the advantages) from a new product. The same counts for international fluctuations of dollar versus euro. • Badly chosen point of time for Introduction; Every now and then it happens that a new product is introduced without having a market for it. More often, however, it occurs that the new product enters the market after a similar product from another producer has already answered the market’s demand, so the market has quickly vanished. The complicated internal procedures of product developing and the ever slowing external procedures at building factories for new products can be causes of late reactions to the market. Often planned introductions

69

must be postponed for a long time because of bureaucracy, and in the mean time the market or the interest of the producer changes. • Non-effective marketing efforts; Often a new product is not accompanied by the necessary extra care a market introduction needs. One thrusts oneself rather often on the next project, before the new product is hardly introduced on the market. And especially in this period of time, right after the new product is launched, often after receiving the first reactions of potential buyers, the marketing strategy needs adjustment. Also often the mistake is made that producers make their way to markets which are new to them, or sell new products with which they have no experience. A hasty entering of the market often leads to disappointment, not because the product as such would not be good, but because the marketing mix of a certain product market (a combination of, for instance, instruction, service with production of the design and distribution) is different than expected. In cases like these it is wise to provide a licence to a company that has already won its spurs with similar products. International markets must be approached like this. In essence the product-in-development can perish in all activities and phases of the development process. An encouragement to be alert above all, suspicious rather than easy-going. It may always go wrong on aspects. There is always something going wrong and it never goes right automatically. One has to design his own future all the way. If we want to handle our energy efficiently, we must operate extremely cautious, we may be naive at times, but moreover we must be sharp and provident. And we shall have to take risks. Murphy’s Law The meaning of this paragraph is actually derived from the failures in the abovementioned. As long as there is not enough discipline in the building practice to adjust the process organisation to the demands of prefabricated building, it will never work. Architects often tend to hand up changes till the moment on which the components appear at the building-site, as if it simply concerns building materials which one can choose, sometimes even till a week before delivery of the prefabricated components at the building-site. However, elements and components have a long period of designing, engineering and production behind them before they are delivered at the building-site. In general the architect and the contractor do not reserve enough time to go along with the preparation process properly (in the sense of production). The main contractor decides too late because he is waiting for some more competitive prices. He covets a ‘lever effect’: to make a lot of money with little trouble and no risk at all by obtaining an even lower price or by finding a contractor with an even more lower price, respectively to make a competitor from an ignorant branch brother. The architect thinks that it is not his cup of tea to force a purchase decision. Working with traditional materials the contractor could buy his materials at many suppliers. Now this choice is limited, the starting period much longer (we talk of system products and of special products) and that thwarts a traditional planning. What has Murphy’s Law got to do with this? Well, the prototypical designing and

70

building seem to have, in its process execution, so many degrees of difficulties and information transmission that may go wrong, that we can always say that “everything which can go wrong, indeed does go wrong”. Failure reports from the most unexpected angles. Product development is a specialism that must be managed with much consciousness and much concentration. These series of notions shows the manufacturing from raw material to a building or building complex. It starts with raw material in mass production, with the help of chemical and mechanical processes, being refined to elementary material, then mixed and produced to material and through various techniques they are assembled to mixed or alloyed material or composite material. This physical material can be assembled further without losing characteristics, like is done with the laminating of layers of material or composite material. Via one or more production processes follow the shape manufacturing into commercial material (also known under the less preferred, because confusing names ‘half-products’), which enter the building industry after that moment. Only then we begin to speak of the family of building products. Up to this moment the production normally is mass production. The numeric production decreases slowly until the product ‘building’ usually is put together as a unique (or multiple when house building is concerned) product.. Arrived at the workplace or the production hall of a building producer, the trading material will be roughly shaped and cultivated into mono-material sub elements which will become elements after surface processing and super elements after connection of similar elements . Elements which are manufactured by transforming and/or chipping from commercial materials are brought about by shape processing. Other elements which are manufactured by direct shaping techniques (casting, powder pressing etc.) from materials are brought about by shape manufacturing. Therefore a casting is in essence a sub-element which becomes an element after mechanical processing. After disengagement more processing take place, partly at the foundry (sharp-edge removal), partly at the assembly industry (machining, milling, threading, drilling etc.). Powder metallurgy always brings forth pure sub-elements. In this range an element is the smallest divisible substantive mono-material part. Here it was first the 3-D main shape which was manufactured as commercial material, usually in mass production in a factory, and afterwards in series the mechanical interim processing at a workshop and finally any of the surface cultivations to become a ready to hand element. A number of different elements which have various functions in the whole, are directly assembled into a component. As an alternative they can be assembled by one or more interphases into sub-components, of which a number then can be assembled into a component. Components, therefore, are the ‘composed parts’ of a whole (therefore, an element can be nothing else but elementary and a component assembled). The components are being transported to the building-site and, if necessary, at the building-site assembled on floor level into a super component which is hoisted and mounted on/to the building in the state in which it is. Components then are assembled to a building part, being the total collection of components with identical functions. The building part in its turn knows an order in the form of a sub building part and a super building part. A

71

building segment is any given part of the building, built up from incongruous components, like a segment of a pie. With the designing and engineering of a building segment all the characteristics of the assembled components are laid down, as well as their mutual connections. Hence segments are a popular way of presenting a designed building system by students: all difficulties are shown to be solved. A building segment does not play a prominent role in the hierarchy. With the producing and building of components into a building segment all the problems concerning connections are also checked and improved for further execution. The interest in product development, the care for the development of new and renewed building products and building components stops, in fact, with the building segment. Building segment, building and building complex are the three degrees of the building, comparable with sub-element, element and super element and sub-component, component and super component, but they fit, in essence, in the domain of the project architect. The different building parts form, in their assembled state, together the building, or its plural, the building complex. The lower level of the landscape and town-planning join in this, but from the point of view of product development it is not of a significant influence.

72

4.

DESIGN ORGANISATION

Every architects office and every design & engineering department of a producing company has an ongoing flow of projects which mostly revolves on their routine. The designing of new works with new materials and techniques is comparable with the position of a development department of a car producer. The usual horizontal process model in which continuous production prospers well, is now traversed by a vertical and strong information flow. This is usually well conducted by a project leader who is mainly concerned with his own project and has to execute this within his own time schedule. Design and development departments are often for obvious reasons left out of the production process. They often bring about much unease in a regular production process. Main contractors often say: “Experiments must be done before the building-site, or else on the site of another contractor”. 4.1

THE HORIZONTAL DEPARTMENT MODEL

The traditional architects office is divided into smaller functions or larger departments, including a number of added ad hoc sections inside or out, like that of the structural engineer and the costs estimator / quantity surveyor. The present specialisms in all sections take care of a smooth processing of the projects, if the design consists of ingredients which are known in all sections. All departments inside and out have their hierarchy and work division, their specialism and processing speed. It works well as a production-unit for known buildings and building types which, for instance, have social housing or rental development offices as their output. The introduction of the project based design processes, with a powerful stamp on the terms new, complex, experimental, extensive and fast, causes the separations between the departments to stand out clearer than the agreements. In that case the loss of information and motivation begins to show clearer disadvantages with every transmission from one department to the other, resulting in longer consultations and discussions. If the separations between the successive departments stay within one

Fig. 72: Architectural sequence.

73

company, something might be done about it. But when the separations are, in fact, not between departments in one company but between independent companies, the problem is even greater. The climax is the usual ad hoc building organisation around a new building project which is also horizontally strongly articulated in independent companies, being the sections which treat the building as a project. It does not seldom happen that the actual inquiry of a building component is faxed to producers from the main contractor on a couple of A4 sheets. Usually only with difficulty an insight can be gained in the connections with other components, let alone about the relation of the component with the whole building. While the architect has been busy for months to make detailed drawings on which also the position and the importance of the demanded component is shown, only a shadow of the available information appears at the desk of with the potential producers and co-makers. This erosion of information brings along the loss of motivation. In the realization process of the building practice, the above-mentioned sections are usually also independent enterprises. Between these enterprises there is not even the strive for the same purpose, namely profit for the complete enterprise, because there is no such thing as one complete business. Because of the continuous fragmentation of an ad hoc building team in separate companies in the building practice and the selfcomplacency, the horizontal model is likely to be understood. The model, however, does not function anymore when building processes get more and more complex, because such a process is doomed to deteriorate into a tribal feud. Every building meeting can become a collision between different interests, like the current building processes show in increasing frequencies. 4.2

THE VERTICAL PROJECT LEADERS MODEL

That is why a ‘vertical’ project leader from the architects office or the engineering department is busy in the preparation process to minimize the frictions between the separate designing and engineering departments. A ‘vertical’ project leader in the organization of the main contractor is busy to get the independent companies, which as subcontractors and producers become involved in the project, in one line. The advantage of the vertical project leaders’ model is the vigour of an explicit project leader who pulls the design or the project through all departments in the preparation phase and through all the companies in the execution phase. In the first instance this model suits a corporate process excellently, so within one single company. In the executing building practice with its conglomerate of ad hoc companies per building project a manner like that should also have to bear better fruits, in the sense that working can be more efficient, with less

74

Fig. 73: Project leader.

investments in working hours, less costs and towards a better product. Much energy usually gets lost in the battle between the horizontal structure of companies and the vertical directedness of the project leader. The stronger the project leader, the better the project runs. The weaker the project leader, the slower the development will take place, thanks to the autonomous decision qualifications of the separate heads in their horizontal departments or companies. The fight between the competencies of the horizontal heads of departments, respectively independent department managers (who have a flow of similar products for different projects under their care) and the vertical project leader (who manages all different components of one single project) often takes giant proportions. The fight between vertical and horizontal exhausts people and demotivates them. 4.3

LEAN DESIGN & PRODUCTION: MATRIX ORGANISATION

The question is how to find a better workable balance. A possible solution may be the matrix organisation, descended from the development processes for new cars of Japanese car manufacturers. The book ‘The Machine that Changed the World, the story of lean production’ by James Womack et al [15] is about the differences between the traditional horizontal processing (as this is operated in the mass production of American and European car manufacturers) and the vertical processing under the supervision of a project leader with a very high autonomy, a development manager, like in Japanese car factories. The result is as these Americans put in their MIT-studies, that the principles of ‘lean production’ are: • teamwork • communication • efficient use of resources and elimination of waste • continuous improvement. Through this only these are needed for results: • half the human effort in the factory • half the manufacturing space • half the investment tools • half the engineering hours • half the time to develop new products.

Fig. 74: Project leader through subsequent departments.

A total implementation of the ‘lean design & production’ principle would have revolutionary consequences for the role-playing in the building practice. But it also has to be possible to find and implement a good, coherent solution, which in spite of the fragmentation of the building process can nevertheless lead to the

75

realization of an inspiring design. A clear disadvantage of the matrix organization, however, is that the result does not indisputably need to be better in the sense of quality. As a result of the matrix operation the MIT scientists do not mention ‘double the quality’. Not many architects drive around in Japanese cars. The power of the conceptual nucleus of the design process can find itself in an under-exposed corner by the strongly time-directed process approach. This nucleus of the design process has to be marked in the matrix scheme with a red dot. The originality of the design must be strongly held upright and not be watered down in the waves of a consensus process. An obvious way to exploit the advantages and neutralize the disadvantages of these two types of design processes: the vertical and the horizontal design process, is to put them on top of each other and try to get to a matrix organisation whereby the process can be supervised by a powerful leader and whereby the design process within the complete development process is sometimes broad (horizontally directed) and sometimes narrow (vertical). To be successful, a strong project leader is needed. To score a qualitatively good result, a strong design has to be made which has to be respected and defended up to the completion. But one of the secrets of ‘lean design & production’ is that the negative obstructions have to be transferred into positive co-operations, maintaining the characteristic of the horizontal structures and the vertical process movement. In many organizations this will be a difficult job. The type of organization does not matter here, because a head-on collision between horizontal and vertical lies in wait every time and in the world of matrices it is a universal problem. 4.4

CONCURRENT ENGINEERING

One of the manners of organization to come to improving efficiency in the current product development is Concurrent Engineering. The manner of organization, indicated as Concurrent Engineering has been started in the American defense-industry, transmitted by product developing internationals and welcomed and imported by engineering departments of the civil engineering industry. It is based upon the principle of greater synchronism of execution of activities by various participants in a preparation process. The transition of civil engineering to architecture goes along with an increase of complexity and integration, through which separately and concurrently (simultaneously) working at separated aspects/components will be accomplished with much more difficulty. The notion Concurrent Engineering is not often used yet in the building practice. Yet the process agreements on which the notion is based are in use in the building practice right enough. It is something like new wine in old barrels. Simultaneous engineering implies engineering work at more than one place by more than one person. Analogous to the notion ‘co-producer’ and ‘co-makership’ we might speak of ‘co-engineer’ and ‘co-engineering’. The building process can, for convenience’ sake, be distinguished in a preparation phase and an execution phase. ‘Engineering’ implies that the design is the preparation process and not the execution process, where synchronism of executing activities is quite common. ‘Concurrent production’ is, by its nature of contracting and sub

76

contracting to different companies, very logical, on the condition that the products and component products to be made are sufficiently described in the preparation phase. In the engineering this is apparently less common, else it would not be worth it to dedicate a new notion to it. The notion ‘Engineering’ needs some more explaining. In the building practice ‘Engineering’ has two meanings: the overall process can be called engineering. The second meaning is working out only a part of the total process). In the first meaning it can be understood to contain the full package of four different functions: • Design • Development • Research • Engineering (overall working drawings, component drawings, production-, assembly- and installation drawings. Engineering is used for both the complete preparation process and for the last part of it, namely the engineering of the spatial plan, material principles and details, fixed in the preceding designing, developing and examination phases. In a less complex and less personally committed preparation process as is common in civil engineering, the notion engineering is understood by the complete preparation process. On the other hand, in the architectonical preparation process the design element is quite clearly lighted out, as being the strongest specialism of the architect as an autonomous building partner. Concurrent engineering is an attractive principle which in the great conglomerates in America has led to interesting efficiency improvements. Concurrent Engineering in product development is the simultaneously processing of different phases and activities by various participants during the development process. The improvement of efficiency (getting maximum results with minimum energy) as primary aim of Concurrent Engineering can be further detailed as: • shortening of the running time of the preparation process; • Drastically price-cuts of process and product; • Attaining the demanded quality faster; The time, allowed for the engineering phase, is often reversedly derived from the time which is needed from the side of the principal to obtain the building licence. This process is attended with the consequences of participation and legal regulations and can consume a lot of time. A principal often wants to earn back the loss of time by shortening the building time (= preparation + realization). With the reasonableness or unreasonableness of the demand, questions are allowed to be asked. With a parallel process of obtaining the building permit and the engineering process, time can be earned, but risks of unnecessary investments in working hours have to be considered if the executing engineering needs feedback again and must be done again if such proves to be necessary in the course of the building permit process. The usual planning of the building process is a beam chart of partly overlapping and partly shifted beams, representing separate activities in the process. Off-site productions may progress completely parallelic. Yet the

77

execution phase is based upon the presence of a set design which is described with a certain exactness. In the preparation phase, however, all design decisions have not yet been made. It is particularly the sequence, casu quo concurrency of these design decisions which are extorted by CE. With this the risk arises that work is done at one activity or process phase which, by the results of other activities afterwards is frustrated. In those cases it is either waiting for critical decisions or taking a calculated risk. CE is very popular with big companies which execute their process developments completely in-house. Also in Dutch companies where the preparation processes of product development take place completely in-house and the calculated risks take place within one financial annual account, CE is a good possibility to work more efficiently. The efficiency principle to come to a maximum result with the help of minimal energy is endorsed by many, provided that the result is of a sufficient quality. Or: final quality stands opposite process efficiency, an interesting opposition. Customary planning processes start from linear activities: one activity is followed by the other. That is surveyable. Some activities need feedback from other activities to get started: so, a feedback, a short cycle or a concurrency with in-between couplings. But there are also activities which can be executed without relations with others, autonomously and simultaneously. That could be called, derived from electrical connections, a parallel connection. There are a number of reasons leading to an obligation to improve the efficiency of the preparation process in the building practice: • The increasing complexity of the building plan; • The increasing level of technical specialization; • The shortening total building process time; • Tight building budgets; • More powerful influence on development of building parts. Because of these causes pressure is put on the engineering partners to come to a shorter total of building time. ‘Concurrent Engineering’ is one of the solutions. The four different process phases: Design, Development, Research and Engineering know their own suitability to co-engineering in the building practice. Co-engineering in the design phase does not mean that the fear of the large white sheet of paper will be shared together. In fact it is still the architect who has to put a totally private design on paper with all of his private wisdom and inspiration. The design phase is in the conceptual phase hardly suitable for co-engineering: that much know-how has to come from the architect himself. He has to unravel the Gordian knots of counteracting demands and his ideas all by himself. Co-engineering in the phase of the materializing and drawing of the design is often wished for because the architect needs information on systems, techniques and materials for the exact determination of his conceptual design which he does not have ready at hand himself. He can obtain this information from his technical architect-colleagues, from advisers and producers. Advisers in the phase of design are often followers and not initiating, at the most they are participating. That is the very complaint of many architects. In fairness it must be said that many architects do not give space to their advisers to participate, let

78

alone to take initiatives. However, the British high-tech architects offices are, by the way, striking examples of CE in the phase of designing, because their egos are generous enough to allow the impulses from producers and advisers; they even stimulate that. These architects are not afraid of losing their position and by thinking so, they don’t. The weaker the architect’s position, the more desperate the ambitious architect will try to keep up the power hierarchy, which in fact is emptied in the field of technological knowledge. Producers are an alternative road to the lacking technical knowledge of architects. Many invitations to producers for co-engineering are being made without any promise for compensation and often willing co-engineers are left out in the cold when it comes to the final building contract. The architect will always blame the whims of the contracting process, but the co-engineer will feel he has been cheated on and will not go for such an adventure a second time. Co-engineering in the development phase of a building design and of a component design occurs more often because in this phase, starting with the overall design of the building, the individual components of the building can be de-constructed and developed more or less separately, within the awareness of the integration of components. Co-engineering in the research phase can, of course, be done very easily because research is normally directed at strongly isolated problems, usually of components of the building or aspects of these and therefore various investigations and researches can be carried out simultaneously. The mutual stimulus of these partial researches is often not that strong that there will be a fierce mutual influence, in comparison with designing. Co-engineering in the engineering phase often occurs because the complete building design as well as the composed components are welldescribed, well-defined and so the building can simultaneously be developed in components. The stimulus of co-engineering, however, is by the dictated character of the components not often surprising anymore. In the usual ad-hoc building organization where many independent companies have to work together upon the basis of a rough agreement, there are no balanced and set rules for CE. Particularly by the differences in the hierarchical authority there will be continuous demands from the higher ranks, with financial consequences for the lower ranks to fulfill. Usually, with a cooperation in the conceptual phase, there will be an agreement on a set price and only then the demands will become clear. In the later phase of estimation it is usually only arranged that work drawings have to be executed to the satisfaction of the management. This gives all the power of veto to the architect, while the co- designer, who makes the work drawings, runs the risk of having to do his work all over again and again, for a fixed price. The alternative is waiting for full information before a new activity is started up, which lengthens the designing and engineering time. A solution could be to come to a well-balanced and clear set Concurrent Engineering agreement schedule, for the preparation phase as well as for the execution phase, which all parties in these processes should adhere to. Within one single company CE is easier to accomplish. In fact this means, viewed from the larger company with the countless manageable information flows, the recovery of efficiency which can only revolve in one single designer’s head. In

79

fact, CE is a means to get a slow working and broad engineering group to work faster again. On smaller companies CE will not have a great impact because they work with quick design decisions already. Concurrent Engineering for Product Development, or ‘Simultaneous Product Development’ is an important theme because it causes the process execution to work differently (shortened by overlapping parallels) than in the Organograms as described in the previous chapters. To standard products, where the product designer has a close relationship with the producer and where the producer is completely responsible for the preparation process, concurrency of phases is possible (for instance Concept Phase simultaneously with that of the Provisional Marketing or the Prototype Phase simultaneously with the Definite Marketing), but also of activities (for instance Structural Research, simultaneously with Detail Research and Material Research). For special products and all products between special and standard, where the influence of the demand side (i.e. the architect) is important, goes that beforehand there must be made clear agreements to which all the parties must stick. The main contractor as appointed filter and sieve between project architect and product designers can be a slowing-down factor at times. Co-engineering finds itself in a tension arc of stimulating and restraining factors. Modern means of communication like the computer, fax and E-mail have a very stimulating influence on co-engineering, even on a worldwide scale. But the hierarchy in the building process and in competences at personal level can, for instance, have a restraining influence. The mutual personal relations and the hierarchical authority relations determine for the most part the ordering and acceptance of a commission to execute a part of the engineering and of the whether or not positive use of the results of that executed co-engineering. If the authority relations are not uniform and the instructions not sincere, or if the instructions are changed during the process of co-engineering then, when the results of the co-engineering are not used, a feeling of slight disappointment with the party concerned is easily created. This can lead to a great frustration especially when, next to the not using of the results of co-engineering, also the efforts are not financially rewarded, when the co-engineering budget is not raised and the work has to be done again. That is very often the case if the relation between the engineering partners is hierarchical and came about on the basis of commercial agreements. The result of not rightly respecting the contribution made by the engineering partners in the whole preparation process is that the disappointed co-engineer after some (failed) attempts will not like to have himself manoeuvred into a similar situation again, after which the preparation process loses a specialist and the quality of the preparation could deteriorate. Over-sensitivity and the not accepting of the contribution of coengineers for the design often occur in a preparation process where the architect thinks he has to be the pivot of the process, but is not broad-minded enough to admit that large parts of that preparation process cannot be executed anymore without the impulses of specialists. The building then is compelled to become more traditional. It must be a strong architect who can afford the luxury of the consensus. The current contract methods in the building practice do not lead too often to an open way of co-engineering. It occurs only with special or complex

80

buildings or with special, respectively experimental components. There is hauling about with the work hours that co-engineering demands. With a growing resentment, the question from the co-engineer is: ‘Is this invested energy worth its while? Who has to pay for that lost energy?’ When it is the principal who requested for engineering, then everything is all right. When it is the co-engineer himself who, through no fault of his and his influence, becomes the victim of his subordinate position in the hierarchy of the building process, then this does not lead to a further stimulation of co-engineering. Concurrent Engineering is only positive in the building practice when all parties operate in mutual trust and all openness. A distinction has to be made here between processes without and with material innovations. Firstly, processes where innovation in the form of completely or partly new materials, techniques or logistics have to be developed for the complete building or for certain components (products), make the contribution of the co-engineers as specialists necessary. The more usual processes whereby more or less known materials, techniques and logistics from past experiences are being used. The innovation process is suitable for coengineering. The usual does logically lead to co-engineering. In the mega projects of civil engineering in the field of the European infrastructure, the combinations of technical specialism, logistic and liquidity lead to complete ‘design & build’ projects, whereby the preparation process is executed in co-engineering. In architecture the contract processes are often independent phases between a preparation process by designers and an executing process by contractors clusters. The ‘design & build’ process is hardly under discussion. Then co-engineering is limited at the most to the architect and his advisers. The concurrency of this process does not cause to give it a specific name, like coengineering. The non-committedness in this preparation phase by these advisers erects another barrier of insecurity, which will only be taken away by the contract. Until the phase of the realization contract the thought behind the usual building preparation process is the uncommitted assumption and not the binding contract. This only becomes effective after contract and award. After the contract more and more is passed on to the taking of ‘design, produce & build’ responsibility by the concerned specialist/co-engineer/co-producer. Unfortunately it happens all too often that advisers via the technical and administrative estimate determination, force the ‘happy’ sub-contractor to take over their design responsibilities, whereby they take advantage of their position of authority. Then the road to ‘design & build’ contracts is not so far away anymore. In a ‘design & build’ process the co-engineer will fully take and accept his responsibilities for both the design and the execution. In a ‘design & build’ situation the co-engineer is a full-valued partner in all fields. To architects, who still operate from the old-fashioned concept that the architect is the only one who has the copyright of the design of the building, comes along with the phenomenon co-engineering a notion that copyright has to be shared. This certainly applies when it concerns a co-design. Now this copyright is the biggest obstacle for a positive and stimulating co-operation between different factors in the design stage, typical to the building practice.

81

Industrial designers are very down-to-earth in this field: they often and without scruples contract out a part of the design to a co-designer who has specialized in that particular field. See the contribution given by graphic designer Professor Paul Mijksenaar to Dok Product designers at the time of the development of the ‘shelter pillar’ of the Trein Taxi (see chapter 11). But the building practice is not quite that far yet: there rules a somewhat oppressive culture which only seldom generously invites to participation in the designing process. Co-designing building technologists do still have to crack some nuts for future co-operations with architects. Surely afterwards, when all energy is spent, the fight has been fought and the building has been realized, then the architect’s memory of the merits of the contributions of co-engineers, is often amazingly short. It is clear that, together with the phenomenon co-engineering, also the notion copyright has to be examined. With a designing building team, consisting of a designing project architect and designing advisers/specialists, the copyright is divided among the respectively creatively contributing parties. Not one party can claim more than it has contributed. ‘Collaborative engineering’ is the indication co-operation in engineering surpassing concurrent engineering in the sense that where ‘concurrent’ indicates a simultaneous action, ‘collaborative’ indicates an active co-operation in action. Concurrent has a passive connotation, where the different activities are performed at the same time, but the interaction could be intensified in the process to collaboration. At different intermediate moments exchange of information, progress in thinking and engineering can be organized. Often in design engineering the problems are almost too complex to be solved by one person. Disorder or chaos seems to rule. A good engineering solution requires more actors with different specialties, working shoulder by shoulder and exchanging their growing insights to influence each other’s insights to attain the best possible total solution to proceed through the design process with ultimate efficiency and speed. There is one drawback to the pro-active approach. It requires more energy from more people simultaneously. Much of this energy will be in vain as the insights from other actors in this game will at the intermediate moments of common brainstorm give improved solutions which makes much of the individual energy impulses redundant. Much individual effort has been put in the game in vain. Smart engineers wait until the moment that other engineers take the lead and run harder so that they can follow. The lazy, passive attitude seems to pay off in individual terms. Of course in general terms of the game as a whole and of efficient results, collaborative engineering is a better concept. And collaborative engineering is unavoidable in case of ‘Free Form Design’ projects, where the constituent parts of the building and the free form character requires an open and trustful collaboration between the architect and free form specialists from the first design phases onwards.

82

5.

ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF METHODICAL DESIGNING

For building engineers goes: designing is an efficient process from the making of decisions to an original, ingenious, functional, material and spatial solution for a construction problem, from the initiative to the execution (and in future including maintenance and demounting). • Methodology is the theory of the methods which are used in a process; building design methodology applies to the theory of the methods for the building design process. • Methodics is a set of methods somebody operates with; in this case the set of methods used by a building engineer or a number of colleagues during the building design process. • Method is a fixed and well-described procedure. A building design method is used during building designing. There are methods which cover the complete process: overall methods and partial methods, only applicable to specific parts of the design process. Most methods are specifically meant for a part of the design process. An overall method can contain more part-methods.

Fig.75: Different modes of use of methodology by architects.

The word ‘method’ is derived from the Greek and means ‘the way between’, between the beginning and the end of a reasoning, between starting-point and objective. In linguistic usage it became understood by: the way, an absolute datum. That is somewhat inherent to the fact that a method is a fixed and welldescribed procedure. Therefore an individual method also has to be welldescribed, in order to not receive the predicate ‘arbitrary’. So, a personal interpretation of a design method always remains possible. For this goes the restriction that this must meet the general demands of the

83

methodology; that the different steps must be explicitly formulated and that the different steps or activities are open to communication, control and verification by outsiders. Although research methods are established the opinions on designing methods are divided. There are two extremes to be distinguished: the intuitive and the methodical design approach. The routine design approach is unconsciously methodical and lies in-between both extremes. In practice design processes often occur with an approach which shows an interchange, a combination or an integration of these three design approaches. In general, the practice shows that a design approach whereby some parts are done intuitively, other parts methodically and yet again other parts routine-wise, can lead to good design results. Successful design processes are combinations of intuitive, routine and methodical design approaches. 5.1

INTUITIVE DESIGN APPROACH

For the sake of clarity we will first look into the two extremes of intuition and method separately. On the one hand we find designers who show designs as being a very intuitive matter with a very frequent iteration of thinking up, framing and evaluating (which, as such, is a method of course). On these designers the discussion of design methods is wasted. They say that designing as a process is not as interesting as the plan or the design itself, the result of it. Mainly the results are validated. And when the design is good, why then distinguish the creative process in pre-set pieces and put that into words? Yet, the question is if architecture students with a more systematic design approach could learn to make a better plan with one or more design methods or a plan with higher quality parts. It is good for students to learn how to think and design in a methodical way and have these skills gradually evolve in design processes in their studies from unconscious to a self-routine. So doing they can, via the acquired routine, handle repeating design orders in an efficient way after their studies. Such a routine approach seems intuitive, but is in fact based upon invisible and unsaid methodical work, whereby these methodics have only become a lubricant which unconsciously takes care of the smooth running of the invisible design process. This routine design approach lies in-between the intuitive and the methodical approach but can, as opposed to the actual intuitive approach, be made cognitive when a design process has to be gone through with non-routine characteristics whereby just methodical work is efficiently enough. However, it is possible that an explicit design method with serial and parallel steps, and their feedbacks, puts off many inflexible intuitive designers. They feel limited in their spiritual freedom and think that the handling of (too much) systematics or methodics hinder their creativity. For artist-designers like the Czech-Dutch designer Boris Sipek this could very well be so. They are concerned with a possible loss of artistic and creative freedom. This creative design-kernel has to remain, in methodical designing as well.

84

On the other hand one could say that intuitive designing or designing ‘by the feel of it’ is uncontrollable and cannot be explained. It is a design approach which to engineers with smaller design commissions can very well lead to an acceptable and surprising result, but which offers no possibilities for design orders with nonroutine characteristics, like those with a greater complexity. For lack of an effective thinking process the iteration and the number of cycles of ‘trial and errors’ becomes greater. The process consists of trying, evaluating and trying again, until a lucky thought comes up which makes the strange taste of swimming around in circles go away. With intuitive designing there is usually a focus mainly on the appreciation of the result. The most important aspect therefore is then: the making of a plan or a design. Usually with the reviewing, the reviewing criteria are subjective and intuitive as well. This intuitive design attitude of designers is certainly stimulated by the course of events with the reviewing of design competitions, where the judging is done especially rapid, global, intuitive and subjective. To a reviewing like that the presence of a more profound design process makes little difference. It is different, however, with the measuring and judging of the performance of the eventually built design in larger design and engineering teams Explicitness and communication rule. In other cases even the most experienced advices or developments cannot bend a bad design (or design aspect) into a good one. 5.2

METHODICAL DESIGN APPROACH

Thinking and working systematically and methodically can improve this to an extent. The self-directedness or conceitedness of the designer does have to make space for directed, fixed and well-described methodics. The other way around, next to the methodics there has to be kept a clear space in the design process for the individual creative ideas which make design results often so selfwilled and attractive. Methodics must never suffocate originality. On the other hand, methodical designers in their searching process of designing try to apply systematics and methodics which, from previous experiences, give them a greater security for success. It is not so much the kernel of designing, the brainwave, where the looseness of thinking and creativity plays a grand part, which can be improved under the influence of a design method. But to be treated methodically is the introduction up to the growing towards that creative moment (because with that one is sure to be busy with the right design commission) and the following complete working-out (of materializing, detailing and evaluation). Every human being has certain systematics built in their ways of thinking and acting, usually unconscious, but sometimes by force explicit and extrovert. Thanks to the fact that these systematics determine our actions unconsciously, we have more energy to spend on outstanding and decisive moments in these actions. For students goes that the acquiring of designing as a skill can give more insight when this is done systematically and in a discussible manner. For the young students methodology will bring about a faster learning process because it has been made discussable. That communicative function also belongs to the methodical designing and its written reaction on it later: it advances the identification of parties around the designer with the interim and

85

definite process result and makes a sensible and effective reaction possible. A young designer will be insecure whether he is capable of accomplishing a design. Intuitively trying has the advantage of aim and shoot and it will miss often at first, and hopefully it will gradually become a hit. When an inexperienced designer has made a design strategy with his own methods and has practiced this a number of times, gradually a relaxation in his head comes about. Only then there will be a solution for working methodically. But at certain points in the methodical design there has to be room for the spark, the intuitive design explosion. 5.3

WHEN IS THE METHODICAL APPROACH INEVITABLE?

The described view on designing and developing originates from my experiences with the designing of building components, as well as with the designing of buildings. Small, repetitive or surveyable designs are often fed by unconscious knowledge and skill in an acquired routine of previous design processes, whether or not they were realized. Routine designing as a subject is not interesting, compared to the design process where the various steps and activities are done consciously and methodically. It takes place mainly in the same manner, only many times faster and undescribed. But it cannot be denied that routine designing also has its origin in the methodically and extrovertly made design process, which by repetition and routine can be carried through at a much higher speed. However, routine designing becomes a problem to the building engineer when the two qualities of the design ‘ingenious’ and ‘original’ disappear. The form of the design process, however, is isolated from the ingenious and original contents. For design orders with new challenges which rise above the routine, the use of design methods is very sensible. Especially when one or more of the following non-routine characteristics in the design problem are valid, it is extremely sensible to use a method which can be controlled and which offers the possibility for communication on the design process and the design itself: • New • Advanced • Complex • Experimental • Ultra-fast With new design problems the newness can indeed be found in one of the following characteristics, but what is meant is a design order which is totally new to the designer, or outside his experience (to a building designer, for instance, a ship’s interior), or before his experience (to a student, who is yet inexperienced in the field of designing). Students have to learn methodical designing before they give it a place in their own design approach: intuitive, routine-wise, methodical and yet typical, diversity, combined or integrated, whereby intuition and method chase each other to come to better results. With advanced design problems it is often sensible to divide the complete process systematically into different parts and have these parts

86

simultaneously developed: ‘concurrent (or better:) collaborative designing & engineering’, whereby the necessary methodical approach, resulting in 3D models, drawings and reports, makes the mutual communication about the different interim results possible. The part-designs are afterwards being integrated into a complete design. With complex design problems with a high level of complexity by mutual influence of aspects, these orders are often decomposed into smaller parts or aspects, each of them being better surveyable and solvable, after which an recomposition is made of the part-designs into a complete design. The integration is more complex than the assembly. This working sequence is also a method in itself. The methodical designing can completely take place in an all-enfolding schedule, like in the Organogram, described in chapter 9 and subsequent, but it can also manifest itself very simply as an ad-hoc agglomerate of smaller partial methods. The latter holds that in certain phases of the design process a scheme in abstraction is made of various activities to be undertaken, whereby especially the sequence and the influence is then graphically described. Very often these are small scribbles, immediately understood by spatially and visually thinking designers. As a means of communication, visual schemes are very effective in our profession. With experimental design problems there is a high degree of technical uncertainty. The designer must operate carefully in order to not overlook an important matter and so reduce the chance that the final design does not meet all essential requirements. Experimental design orders are characterized by great contributions from research. In the experimental design process the verification is important for communication and determination. The ultra-fast or fast-track design process has to be worked through in an incomparably short time. There will be no time for studying extensive alternatives. A course of solution has to be chosen by feel or experience. It is a challenge to choose a surprising course, and not a well-known one which will lead to an expected result. The complete design process, which in other cases can be worked through step by step, has now to be worked through in less time. The skill to make the right decisions is brought up from previous choices (experience) and not to work through an impoverished design process with less design variants and therefore a smaller chance on a good result (creativity). Often this type of design process also leads to ‘concurrent engineering’ with the danger that cause and effect do not connect anymore: sometimes there is already an effect while the cause has yet to be developed. Then the designers find themselves all mixed up: they confuse result with objective while in the mean time the evaluation criteria are silently shifted. A high level of alertness and ‘art of navigation’ is required. The design method supplies the basic framework for internal communication. Permanent Quality Assurance in the design process Parallel to the experiences of the car industry, in the building practice the notion also slowly dawned that to notice and remove the already made mistakes only with the final control (= product assessment), is not very efficient. Especially when mistakes are punished by the consumer, avoiding mistakes is of the

87

greatest importance. A car has to be, in principle, a ‘zero-defect product’, which is achieved by a continuous quality control in the entire production process and not just by testing periods after production. As a backing for intuitive building designers goes that the assessment criteria are not unanimous to the consumer. Moreover, defects in the building practice are not so often critical and measurable (with the exceptions of leakage and draught, although they are looked upon as execution mistakes, not often as designing mistakes). And there can always, till in the usage phase, be tinkered at the design by technical applications which can lead to a better building performance. A bold example of this is the sunshade & daylight regulation system to be applied after completion in the clear glass façades of the office building of the Netherlands Architecture Institute (NAI) in Rotterdam. All parties involved knew about the ‘greenhouse’ problem of these façades. In practice it is actually inoperable, but even for this very important architectonical monument there yet was no budget for shading being cleared during the building process. It is an example of the lowtechnological characteristic of the building industry, as opposed to a more industrial aspiration. At the same time the lack of clear assessment criteria leads to a continuance of an essentially wrong procedure: by the grace of ignorance, minority or matchlessness the design result has to be accepted as it is presented. It does not lead to a higher quality in the view of the consumer. The car industry has formulated a first answer to this in the Sixties with the TQA (Total Quality Assurance) and points to the process being controlled continuously, as opposed to the only and too late final control of the assembled car during a test-run. This process quality control is the basis of the notion ‘quality guarantee’ for the material realization of buildings and building components by the industry. The design quality is achieved by, first of all, communicable design processes. In the routine of design it could be followed by design quality manuals, eventually possibly leading to certification. If the minimum criteria are determined, control is indeed also possible. But what to do when the quality criteria are not, or hardly determined? To avoid that the designer fools himself as well as his client and the consumer by great uncertainty as framed in the notion ‘black box design’ and to achieve that he looks upon his design methods as a ‘glass box design’, there has to be at the start of every design process, among other things, the fixing of the evaluation criteria of the design result. After this the quality of the design can be assessed or measured continuously. This also can be intervened when insufficient interim results are noticed. This mechanism of feedback also proves to be a good help with the attending of graduates during their design processes. 5.4

LOGIC & INTUITION

In fact, methodical designing is strongly coupled to logical thinking. Common sense leads the design process. Systematically designing leads, by the effect of repetition of a manner of thinking from experience, to a desired result. Methodical thinking or designing adds a sequence to this, a steps-plan which leads to a purpose in an efficient way. Methodical designing means down-to-

88

earth and sound reasoning, getting issues in a row and weigh them, put one foot after the other and not in front, whenever this is not logical. To come to a solution which is better than an intuitive, non-explicable solution. Reasoned presentation of a design holds that an explanation is given with the design as a result. Yet, this does not guarantee that the reasoning came forth during a methodical design process. Sometimes it is a smoothing argumentation afterwards on why the plan is the only acceptable, while the followed design process was all but intuitive. Clients pay architects to have them design a good building. To draw a new building is not that difficult. To make an original design can also be done intuitively. Then in the explanatory presentation, the client is primarily flattered with some startling characteristics of the design, while other aspects which should have been considered in the design, are unconsciously or consciously not mentioned to not frustrate the brilliant design. And from that is then a story made, which the client is expected hopefully to swallow. In essence it then remains an unbalanced design which is only in some aspects original, but as a result of a complete process is not original at all and therefore insufficient. Competitions are joined to make a winning design. At the presentation of a competition design, the designing process is therefore primarily less important than the result. Besides, because of the relative arbitrariness of the judging, the energy is specifically aimed at the presentation of the design. This intuition by which the building designing seems to be soaked nowadays, is absolutely necessary to make a driven design but a successful design will always consist of an interference, a combination or an integration of intuitive, routine and methodical designing. The inclination towards intuition as a guiding principle for designing is quite understandable in view of the experiences of the modern design generation which finds itself more and more surrounded by super systematically elaborating computers. Intuition is the only characteristic computers do not possess; understandably designers focus on that. But it is the interaction between mind and hands, bedded in the motivation and reverie of the heart which leads to a good design. From a television interview at the Bouwbeurs ‘96, the author gladly quotes a sentence: “My students must dream with their hearts, think with their heads and work with their hands” to design good building components. Methodical interaction of heart, head and hands must lead to a synergy in the design process and to a higher quality of the resulting design. Especially when, in the near future, the step to scientific designing and designing at an acceptable scientific level has to be taken, the design process must not be founded on a situation of authority in a design process, on traditional opinions from an elder generation or on personal intuition. These three situations lead to working methods which are extremely subjective and cannot be discussed on a basis of rational criticism. In design processes where the involvement of a great number of professionals in various functions is required, the rational criticism is a collective means of communication.

89

Fig.76: Netherlands Architecture Institute (NAi), Rotterdam. Architect: Jo Coenen.

Fig. 77: Close-up of a semi-mechanical/semichemical glass node.

90

Fig. 78: Façade of the NAi.

6.

DESIGNING, DEVELOPING AND RESEARCHING

With the integral approach the three activities ‘Designing’, Developing’ and ‘Researching’ have to be looked upon as un inseparable synergetic unity to come to a good design with the qualification which has already been mentioned in the first chapter. Building designing is an efficient process of making decisions through a functional concept to an original, material and spatially elaborated solution of a building problem, from initiative to execution. The designing supplies the primary power in the integral Design & Research & Development process, but cannot be realized without developing and researching. 6.1

DESIGNING

In Architecture there are two essentially different conceptions of the position of the notion designing within the complete preparation phase: • The classical conceptual conception: only the making of the design concept is designing, the remainder is the afterwards developing and engineering. • The modern integral conception: everything between initiative and production is designed from the highest (town planning) till the lowest (technology of bolts and nuts) scale level and from the very first sketch up to and including the final production drawings and execution drawings. 6.2

Fig.79: Preferences in contracts for architects.

CONCEPTUAL DESIGNING

From the conceptual point of view the description of building designing reads: “Building designing is the collection of thought and visualization activities, belonging to the efficient search for an original and effective concept solution to a problem in the built environment”. Developing starts with the design concept and ends when production starts. “Developing is the collection of thought and producing activities, belonging to the further elaboration of the design concept to the phase of the final material production”. This is the current Dutch perception description as it is

91

laid down in the Dutch dictionary Van Dale and followed by many architects. We could speak of ‘Design & Development’. In this development the making of the Preliminary Design and the Final Design is comprehended. Research also comprehends investigation and study. Research is directed to new scientific results, investigations are directed to unveiling data, yet unknown by the investigators. Study is a more modest term to concentrate an unknown aspect to be made known. Research is being done to complement lacking knowledge. Research is executed spread over the whole process. Research is followed by developing to make the result of the research workable in practice. We then speak of research & development. If the problem is not new and neither are the material means, then the repetition character is very great and little creativity is needed. Professor Taeke de Jong writes on designing research and on purposeful and means-directed research [13]. Professor De Jong is a town planning researcher and philosophizes on the manner and the benefit of research by building engineers. His writings are greatly theorizing and difficult to access for newcomers who are used to the practical side of the reality, but interesting by his vision. They are strongly recommended for further studies. Taeke de Jong says in a lecture [11] “One does not have to ask a university graduate for advice when one has a known problem for which there are known solutions. For with this purpose specialists are being educated who make it their profession to work with these known solutions”. This reference to technical HBO education, by the way, does not imply that graduates (and in our case architects) never do this kind of work, but in essence it is more ‘engineering’ than ‘designing’. The consequences of this train of thought of designing being solely a conceptual occupation, is that to an architect the designing of the spatial plan stops when the concept has been drawn or rendered and when all principle decisions have been taken, including the details and all materials and finishing touches. In the design process there are decisions to be made on functional, spatial, building technical, aesthetical and economical areas. It may be good that the architect bides some of the design decisions or postpones them until a later phase of the preparation process or even until the realization process. The sole-designing concept distinguishes in the preparation process the conceptual designers from technologists who take care of the further development, working drawings and shop drawings and the like. 6.3

INTEGRAL DESIGNING

Opposite the conceptual model is the integral conception of designing, where all activities, from the idea up to the actual production are ranged in the denominator designing. In this conception integral designing is original, intellectual and creative head-work, stimulated and made transferable to the designer himself and others by a rendering in the shape of sketching, drawing, modelling and so on in an iterate process. Designing is finding an original and effective, materialized, elaborated solution for a new problem. Originality needs creativity and ingenuity. Elaboration demands a solid control of the techniques. Designing concerns concepts, fed by knowledge and insight of the related

92

available means and ordering principles. Designing connects many facets in a global manner. Designing is a cyclic and iterative process, of trial and error, of trying and evaluating. A part of the designing is the elaboration and optimalization of an idea to a higher level of reality. Developing is, as it were, control and elaboration of the design idea and takes place in many phases within the complete design process. Research as well has integrally included its stimulating share in the process. In the integral model, the concept as well as the materialization is completely taken care of under the denominator designing. In the integral process designing, developing and research are an indissolubly synergetic unity under the flag of designing. One of the most important kernel notions is ‘original’. On the ‘original’ aspect Professor Taeke de Jong [11] writes: “the designer’s duty is to explore improbable possibilities, especially when the most probable development is not wished for. These possibilities cannot be predicted by their improbability, one has to design them”. “The academic design has to bring to light essentially new possibilities (‘discovery’ or ‘invention’)”. The design criteria are mostly kept hovering and the design process is looked upon by architects as being hard to describe. This attitude comes from cultural narrow-mindedness and a desire for mystification. Fig.80: Relationship It is better to make the design process explicit out designing, developing and of the excess of intuition with which it is now research in architecture. surrounded. Besides, the Industrial Design Professor Jan Buys [2] tries to accomplish the exact opposite: in the cool scientific design process of industrial designers, he finds also that intuition, emotion, passion and creativity are needed. We hope to meet each other somewhere in the middle. Designing is a route with a strong technical character. Nevertheless for a good result in the occurring problems in the development phase, a great amount of creativity and sudden jumps of thought is required. An architect spends perhaps only 5% of his time on actually creative designing, the rest is engineering, developing discussions and consultations about problems, proposals and evaluations of solutions. Nevertheless, the architect derives his status with regards to other parties in the building process, from the fact that he is creative and original and capable of laying down new concepts for buildings on the white sheet.

93

6.4

DEVELOPING

Just like designing can be considered either as the conceptual partial process, or as the integral total process, so there are two current meanings in linguistic usage with respect to developing. To distinguish them clearly we could speak of a partial meaning and the total or ‘mantle’ meaning: • Partial meaning: developing is a partial process, wherein a concept is further elaborated to a stage of maturity; developing follows designing and ends with producing. • Mantle-meaning: Developing is the enveloping industrial process in a company inside of which the product is designed. For the benefit of the scientific field of Product Development these meanings must be distinguished and so be placed in the building industry.

Fig.81: Development of design is engineering.

Developing as engineering and elaborating First of all the partial or part-meaning. The notion ‘developing’ has a very clear meaning in Dutch. Developing stands for bringing something to maturity. Van Dale speaks of ‘to come to full growth, to grow up’. When there is an existing situation somewhere from that position to the following position development takes place. A new design concept can then be further developed into a final design and that again to a contract and production form. In Van Dale’s meaning that route between concept and production would be called ‘development’, respectively the three steps: three partial developments after another. Developing as a mantle activity The mantle meaning of developing is derived from Industrial Designing. The complete enterprise process, which enfolds the design process like a mantle, is looked upon as product development from the company’s perspective, while the actual product directed part is called ‘product designing’. This distinction between the two meanings of developing is important, because in various specialisms the relations between designing and developing are totally different. Some specialisms work with simple concepts which need a long elaboration, fortified by much analysis and research, like for instance the designing of a bridge. The design concept of this is relatively simple, but because of the interests of optimalization in the constructive concept and the use of material, the attention in the materialization phase has fully moved to development in the form of calculations and research, and hardly to the design concept. With the input of labour hours it will show, also quantitatively, that the ‘designing’ of a bridge is a very limited activity, not to mention the quality of the realized design. Sometimes this activity can be expanded, like the Dutch architect Ben van Berkel did with the Erasmusbrug in Rotterdam. From the bridges Santiago Calatrava has designed and realized in Europe in the last decade, it can be derived that a much longer design traject than usual lies at the root, concerning structural scheme, composition, use of material and detailing.

94

Fig. 82/83: Erasmus Bridge, Rotterdam. Design: Ben van Berkel & Gemeentewerken.

95

In building processes in general the number of design aspects is greater, the number of requirements with clashing interests as well. The decision process to go from initiative to concept is more complex for the architectural designer and the design traject is longer. Therefore an architectural designer will look at a longer design traject and a shorter development traject. In construction the total notion on ‘developing’ is also current, although this gives cause to confusion. A building project is developed by a project developer. That is a total enterprising activity, starting on a planning/ townplanning level, ending with the putting into use and the selling or letting out of the buildings. In some cases the interference of the developer goes even further, namely up to the usage of the building, like for instance with the new generation of Dutch prisons, where the project developer not only has the building realized but also has taken over the functional management and settles accounts on the basis of natural days’ expenses per prisoner. In the future the care will also stretch over the anticipation concerning dismantling, demolition and re-use of the building itself. The building developer will be paid in daily costs in which the building costs are integrated. The builder is paid in overnight stays, so to speak, per prisoner. In the field of building components a tendency like that is also perceptible: the façade builder is asked more and more often to remain responsible for the maintenance of the façade. In the future upgrading and possibly dismantling, including environment-friendly recycling will become his tasks as well. It happens already in the consumers industry. In such cases the term ‘product development’ will have to be replaced by ‘product development, operation and maintenance’. In that complete process of project development the designing of the materially built environment at different levels is only a part and it is the object directed part. The market directed part and the producer directed parts are no parts of it (although students have to acknowledge and know, in order to be able of designing appropriately). The complete development processes from idea to realization on each of the above-mentioned levels (macro, meso and micro) of town planning, architecture and building technology could be called respectively: • Location development • Object development • Product development A sensible distinction in view of the conceptional determination for industrial designing would be to name the process of the complete project enterprise: project development, while all technical activities which are connected with the preparation of the to be built spatial environment, could be viewed as ‘object designs’ or building designs. The phase of the initiative stands aside the designing, with projects as well as with producers, inside as well as outside the building practice. Nevertheless a sensible architect will try to hook on already in the initiation phase.

96

6.5

INTEGRAL DESIGNING & DEVELOPING

There was a totally different way of working in the traditional architects office. The ranks organization in the office was such that certain activities were not allowed to be adorned with the predicate ‘designing’: those were elaborations of the architect’s design scribbles. A building draughtsman elaborated the design of the architect, but could not be called a designer in the opinion of the architect. He worked out the design until it was ready to be built. He took care of the design to be elaborated further, under the instructions included in that design to a higher level of internal attuning of the components and of accuracy. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume that the traditional architects office mainly worked with traditional building materials and techniques. Some years ago the Dutch government introduced the new ‘Bouwbesluit’ or ‘Building Regulations’. Through that more flexibility is given to market parties to make alternative subscriptions at more global invitations. The possibilities for the subscribing party (= the contractor and his sub-contractors/producers) are thus wide open to fill in parts of the building design in accord with their own experiences. So from the calling party (= client, architect, advisors) a specific part of the materialization of the design is taken. With that also appears the phenomenon of subscribing parties, having busied themselves with the domain on which the architect used to hold the reign supreme: designing. So, a part of the designing is done by the designers at the side of the contractors, among them the product designers. An obvious reason to view the complete design process as an integral one and also to reckon the activities of product designers to this. The great turn came with the arrival of new techniques and materials, by which the process of designing a much longer demand on the preparation traject. Designing with prefabricated building components is, in general, more complicated than designing with traditional materials. Besides, more and more building draughtsmen are being replaced by young building engineers who are trained to design and will keep doing that even till the shopdrawing phase. The modern architects office has a project architect for every project who, from start to end of the preparation process (and often also during the coordination of the execution), conducts the project as the co-ordinating designer. Opposite to this there was the traditional architects office where a horizontal labour division was made, based on specialism and capacity. There was one person who made the design concept, another one to calculate it, a third worked it out in big surveyable drawings and a fourth made only the working drawings. In essence we found with this the same organization as in the mass production of, for instance, cars. There the individual successive persons are replaced by bigger departments, all of which having a different objective and different competencies. The great disadvantage of the horizontal structure of this traditional process is that the separations between the departments are barriers which, next to the loss of information, also show an opinionated autonomy and through that are causing high-handed changes. In the current building process where all sorts of industrially manufactured building products and prefabricated building components are being brought into

97

action, the traditional architect does not exactly know anymore how the modern production processes of those components proceed and he has more trouble making a balanced and optimum detailed design of the components of his building. Therefore, he often has to leave the engineering of many components of his building to the engineering departments of the producers, who have to transpose the architect’s drawings and descriptions from the tender documents into well considered materials, produceable principle details and production and installation drawings. This way of working is further reinforced by the change over from product approach to performance approach. The architect describes the spatial building and the desired performance on a component level, while the makers (contractors and producers) within this desired performances can give a material answer and even alternatives. Is this engineering covered by the predominator ‘designing’ (because numerous decisions have to be made in often clashing fields of interests), or is this covered by the predominator ‘developing’, so that the ‘designing’ remains reserved for the architect? Or do we have to distinguish the level of the building and that of the components? The architect designs the building and describes the performances which the component parts must meet, while the component designer designs the individual components. The engineering by component designers on behalf of the producers of a definite design or estimate drawings by an architect belong to the domain of the ‘designing’. In Building Technology we even speak of ‘product architects’ to indicate high aspirations and capacities. In England the designing of components would be called ‘component design’, whether it is executed at the high-tech architects offices, or at the producer’s offices. Therefore the conclusion is: if in the building practice designing is understood by the efficiently making of decisions concerning the geometry, the situating and the appropriate materializing of buildings to an original and creative result, then the entire preparation process between initiative and execution is covered by the predominator ‘designing’, whether or not this work is done by the architect, technical architects or by component architects in his employ or component designers employed by contractors and producers. Designing knows different levels which have to be gone through successively, which influence each other interactively and iteratively lead to the totality of a complete design: town-planning, environmental designing, functional designing, spatial designing, materializing designing. After that follows designing at building part and component level: the functional, technical, material and product conscious designing, up to and including sometimes the designing at a material conscious (and sustainable) level. The engineering of the building concept by building draughtsmen, or the component concepts by mechanical draughtsmen belongs to the design process as well, as a supporting activity, as ‘engineering’. Students must come to an understanding for the design concept, as well as for the final design materialization: both are fundamental for the success of the design.

98

6.6

RESEARCH

For designing and developing knowledge and experience or skills are needed, as well as insight and sometimes vision, as a background for the approach of the actual problem. This background is in existence and was once conquered and stored up by predecessors of the engineer or by the engineer himself (designer / developer / researcher) in a previous route. The knowledge for this has been laid down in the current state of technology. Research is the acquiring of lacking knowledge and insight in the possibilities of technology. Architecture is, scientifically speaking, more coloured by the complex and practical problems than by the gathering of fundamental knowledge. Few new fundamental knowledge is being generated, anyway not in the technological field. There is much research invested in the field of architectural theory. For fundamental research in technology reference is made to the effects and outcome of nano-technology when it comes to applications in the built environment. That is why the research, directed at knowledge gaps, is greatly focused on a great number of complex practical aspects which influence each other. Fundamental research would also be possible, but since the practically directed design tradition is stronger than the research tradition and because the specialism is very closely connected with the practice, little fundamental (‘nonpurpose directed’) research takes place. This, by the way, is gradually changing. The majority of the research in architecture is purpose-directed and so is said to be ‘applied’. It only makes sense to go and do further specialist research when the foundation under the broad wise knowledge, known as ‘the current state of technology’, has been placed or is already present. One does not research without further ado. First and foremost one gauges the state of technology (level it up), then keeps up with the times and thereupon the state of technology can actually be levelled up by research from the faculty. This certainly goes for scientific fields which nowhere in practice are instigated as a totality (for instance by a branch cooperation). Because of the low threshold and the high degree of open competition in the building industry, in practice little energy is spent on research. Jacobs et al [12] concluded in 1992 that “the building sector is no innovative puller, but technologically a following (the leader) sector”. “The building industry may experience few external tickles by technology development, there are also hardly any internal tickles. On the contrary: within great parts of the industry branch prevails a high degree of state-of-the-art and technological conservative thinking. New inventions find their way into the sector only slowly. However, Dutch designers, builders, suppliers and installation workers in general proved to be capable of adjusting rapidly to the technical demands of the current times by means of imitation and the adoption of what is offered from outside”. Imitation: say farewell to our good intentions and our hopes for drive. Annually the building industry does not spend more than a humiliating 0,5% on research and development. That is to say, if the project-wise design and advising work of architects, structural designers and advisers is not seen as R & D. It could also be looked upon as ‘object-directed research’. But that research does not contributes to build a clear body of knowledge because of the individual character of the

99

project and of the architect who, in general, does not aim for knowledge and insight after compiling to be carried over to others and, by so doing, to contribute to the state of technology. In architects offices the allotment in proportionally labour days for research is essentially more, but the lack of experience, equipment and preparation with most of the (former) professional groups in the research, is guilty of the not very spectacular and stimulating results of the research at architects offices. There must be pulled strongly before the research in the field of the designing disciplines of architecture has risen to an acceptable level. A general validity is that, when there are omissions in the knowledge or if the knowledge has to be levelled up, it is sensible to do closer investigating research, provided there is a sufficient need for it. But it is not just about knowledge. The skill to deal with that knowledge, to apply this knowledge by means of all sorts of ordering principles and the resulting insight of how to deal with a problem with this knowledge and skill, can also be a subject-matter for research. It is therefore very much in line with the observations in this monograph to stimulate that architectural education will accept the synergy between Designing, Developing & Research as a newness generation process, the process wherein a design is achieved. Hence, designing as a result of science must be stimulated to be acknowledged as a characteristic architectural approach to come to levelling up the knowledge of, skill and insight in and possibly the vision on the state of technology. Building engineers should make more use of the possibility to take their doctor’s degree on scientific designing. The author’s thesis [16] ‘Architecture in Space Structures’ from 1989 is considered an example. When art historians can get their doctor’s degree on the oeuvres of an architect or on one ore some designs of an architect, then why would building engineers not be able to get their degree, instead of on research, on designing where in the design process as well as in the resulting design sufficient newness is brought in to meet the high scientific doctoral degree regulations? In this way Architecture can perhaps develop an entirely new and characteristic research domain. Next to that, in architecture remains, of course, always the possibility to explore existing designs (of others, and likely deceased colleagues) and take one’s doctor’s degree on this. But for the development of a new vocabulary in the field of Building Technology, these studies are seldom interesting. 6.7

DESIGN SUPPORTING RESEARCH

Fundamental research can be viewed as an independent occupation, as is the case at common universities. At Technological Universities only applied research is carried out in the view of the general universities. In Architecture, being a designing and building group of scientific professionals, one looks upon research to serve the designing: “research is service to design”. Research in an architectonical faculty is for the greatest part a design supporting occupation in the end. Research needs development to come to engineering and application. The design supporting research itself is divided over many specific activities of the design process. Everywhere a proper concentration, independency or

100

distance and newness is exercised to come to new knowledge and insight, research is in place. Designing is positioning, research is asking questions. In essence, the following step after the positioning or after a design synthesis is that one wonders if the positioning is just. By that is shown that designing and research are so tightly coupled at this intimate level that a division on that level is not sensible, without losing the fruits of synergy. A designer who does not wonder if the designing act he performed is the best, is not a good designer but a shot at random, unless he is a genius which is seldom the case. Even the designs of Renzo Piano attest to an intensive synergy of designing, developing and research, where on all of the three activities a great deal of energy is spent. Just like designing is followed by the developing or engineering of the design, one could say that research consists of the elucidation of the problems, the objectives, the strategy, the evaluation criteria and the conceptual part of the research, while a great deal of the research consists of the further engineering or developing. So, research development exists as well (next to the abovedescribed design development). Usually research concentrates upon one single aspect or a small number of aspects which are under discussion in the design and development process. The researcher reduces his pupils, concentrates himself on the aspect. The designer, on the other hand, has to connect all aspects broad-wise if there has to be a balanced design. The ideal still leads to the same universal breadth like that of the best artists from the Renaissance. The designer works broad-wise, the researcher in the depths; the developer broad-wise as well as in depth, but less wide than the designer and less deep than the researcher. In both cases the developer gives the entrance to the practice of application and realization, having to bear in mind the interests of the producing company. Research can be focused on material / technical and immaterial / philosophical matters and it can also explore the methods of research. It can be directed at very practical subject-matters, but it can also philosophize on the means with which designing is done and on the effects which are achieved with realized designs. When the state of technology in architecture is a mixture of immaterial and material matters, it seems logical for this mixture to be carried through to designing as research. 6.8

DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, RESEARCH IN THE LABORATORY OF PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

In the obligatory programme of study of the Master program Building Technology at TU Delft a series of study modules is incorporated which are a literal illustration of the integral approach to the process of Designing, Developing and Research. The series can be characterized by the titles: ‘Concept’, ‘Prototype’ and ‘Laboratory’. In these modules in principle a design concept is made, respectively a prototype according to that concept and finally the testing and feedback of the produced prototype, manufactured in the laboratory is performed. With that an entire process cycle of designing, developing and research is ran through. During his graduation the student can, if required, in fact run through the same sequence on a free subject-matter. This description follows the publication on Building Technology by Professor Jan Brouwer et al [26].

101

Fig. 84: Scale 1:5 prototype of the ‘Maison d’Artiste’ a design of Theo van Doesburg & Cor van rd Eesteren (1923). Reconstruction and prototype production by 3 year students of the Delft University of Technology.

The concept Characteristics and application possibilities of materials are centremost. Coming up for discussion are singular materials and structures of various materials. Next to some insight in the physical and chemical characteristics the emphasis is put on gaining insight in the essential potencies of materials like strength, rigidity, processing techniques and the environmental aspects. The module knows three separate, small design exercises. The first exercise consists of the, directly in cardboard, designing and materializing of a chair with as few material wastage as possible and simple means of connection. The second exercise consists of the designing of a scenario for a façade fragment. Each student makes a scenario for an industrially manufactured façade fragment. This scenario goes from achievement requirements, via the conceptual idea to a materialized design, where the characteristic details are engineered on a scale of 1:20 and 1:5. The third exercise is dedicated to a small but complete object, like a light-weight spatial transmitter capsule which becomes connected to an imaginary, but existing embassy building. This capsule is to be produced in a small series and has to be suited to divergent climates. The attention with this exercise is therefore directed at serial production and at performances of the enveloping skin to be considered as a separation between interior and exterior all round the communicational function of the capsule.

102

The prototype Goal is the developing of a building component on the basis of a limited list of choices (aluminium façades, frameless glass façades, staircases, office units and such) or based on a previous design of the student. During the module a marketing study is done to see if the product concept offers a sufficient answer to an existing or a future question. With the given product function and the chosen kinds of materials the influence is studied of the respectively production techniques, the mechanical handling at the manufacturing of elements, the assembling into bigger components and the mounting of components into building parts in a building. If applicable, foreign techniques from outside the building industry are examined and introduced into the building practice. All production and assembly actions are involved in the developing process. A series of practices is ran through of shop drawings, metal-working: welding, fitting, machining, plate bending and folding and assembling of elements into components. Of all the produced sets of work-drawings of each scenario, onethird up to a quarter becomes selected to be materialized. In each group of students a play of roles is performed: designer, contractor, producer, calculator, purchaser. In these groups with real materials and on an actual scale, usually 2 x 2 metres, a prototype as a product fragment is produced. With this the student gets an image of the mutual influence of designing and prototype. The process of product developing is visualized. Material, production methods, technical systems and applications are important here, so is the cost price calculation and the logistics of manufacturing and distribution. Next to this, also the relation between the artistic design of the component and the architectonical design of the building is represented.

Fig. 85: Prototype for a continuous double façade (even with opened windows at the Laboratory of Product Development, TU Delft.

103

Fig. 86/87: Complicated, completed but inadequate cladding prototype for the Provincial Floriade Pavilion by students of TU Delft.

The laboratory In principle, it is the intention to submit the produced prototype to various scientific examinations. However, many designs are exceptional and can only with difficulty be build in in the test frames. In such cases a more normalized prototype is used as subject-matter of study and the original prototype is compared with that. It is about formulating here, the handling and the watching of the technical quality of components and building elements during the entire building process (= concept/materializing + production/building) by the various parties involved in this process. Through their own building physical and material skilled laboratory work, as well as through the use of building physical calculation programmes, students obtain, next to preliminary knowledge of methods of scientific research, insight in the technical qualities of their own design too. Acquiring knowledge takes further place through self-studies and through the attendance of directed lectures, practical work and instructions. Acquired knowledge and insight must for each student lead to a test, feedback and improvement of the concept design from conceptual phase and the prototype from the workshop. The latter activities therefore concern the improving of previous design and development results. The Laboratory for Product Development In the laboratory for Product Development research is done by Master students around the Zappi research cluster: research on a tough and transparent construction material with many aspects. In this laboratory our students learn how to weld and machine, which is unique for architecture students. After a prototype module they are other students! The laboratory also has capacity for other building technology and architecture Master students, and for PhD students with material-tied researches or prototype-tied design work. The costs of materials are greatly charged to the faculty, supplemented by sponsoring. The laboratory has been in action since 1995. In 2005 it changed spaces, migrated to the main building of the faculty and is now located next to the famous ‘Hall of Models’ of the faculty. It is now called the Laboratory for Building Technology.

104

Fig. 88: Glass Dome, a project at TU Delft by research fellow Jan Wurm and Zappi students.

Fig. 89: Details of the all-glass dome prototype.

105

7.

TECHNICAL DESIGNER

The University of Technology at Delft is composed of eight different faculties, all technical sciences. three of these faculties are designing and three constructing faculties. The professors at the different designing faculties have different views on the process of designing and the design methodology derived from that. As a general comparison of the position of architecture, the different design approaches are interesting as well. A short survey looks as follows. 7.1

FROM THE DESIGN FACULTIES

In the faculty of Architecture, teaching implies design methods. It is striking to find that in the Nineties little motivation is left to work as methodically as in the Sixties and Seventies, culminating in ‘Notes on the Synthesis of Form’ of Christopher Alexander (1964). For decades ‘Functional Designing’ is taught to architectonical students. The methodology of designing is nowadays considered a skill and so to be taught by tutors. However, readers or lecture notes in which the theories behind design methods are laid down in the form of knowledge, are concentrated in one book: “Ways to Study and research, Urban, Architectural and technical Design”, edited by De Jong and Van der Voordt [ ISBN 90-407-2332-A], written in 2000 and edited in 2002 by as much as 40 different authors from the faculty of Architecture, TU Delft. Professor Dr. Taeke de Jong philosophizes on methodology in his lectures and books on environmental designing. The author construes students of Building Technology on his method of developing standard products in his ‘Organogram’, which basically has been laid down in this book. This monograph also came into being because of a lack of information on design methodology.

Fig. 90/91: Maison Verre, Paris Architects: Chareau & Bijvoet.

106

The faculty of Mechanical Engineering is the Grand Mother of Technology and the scientific field to which material building moves more and more. The same two views on design methods are current: the intuitive approach of designing, which will have nothing to do with a systematized design process and the methodical approach of the design process, as is advocated by professor Klaas van der Werff. Van der Werff himself is an example of a ‘Gyro Gearloose’, a designing and researching inventor. Every year he calls an introductory contest for a strange apparatus like, for instance, a machine moving forward in de wind’s eye. Doing so, he observes that the level of original technology in the mechanical engineering design process is very high. His way of challenging students to make original designs often leads to an original invention-like concept with a very technical, but ingenious development into a working prototype as well. Following the functional design is the design of the technical system, the shape, the materials, the details and all of this in a number of iterative circuits. Mechanical engineers are far less mesmerized by the aura of designing than architects (mechanical engineer Jan Cool): “designing is the translation of a wish into a product that fulfils this wish”. In the faculty of Aerospace Technology TU Delft, Professor Boud Vogelenzang held and his successor Michiel van Tooren holds an integral vision in which designing, developing and research alternate continuously with each other in a completely integrated process and they are, in fact, indissolubly connected. Designing is understood by the putting up of a new concept for the whole, for a component, for a detail or for a material application. Research is the trying to make known the unknown. Developing is understood by the transfer of the design or partial design from the one phase to the following, by further engineering and optimalizing. Designing, developing and research stimulate each other without a sequence or preference. Each of these three clusters of activities can be optimally launched. With aircraft construction the meaning of research is far more labour intensive than designing, because of the necessary discipline of material optimalization, the long-term-of-live behaviour and the necessary ‘zero mistakes’ assembly. Professor Adriaan Beukers wrote a revealing book on the designing of lightweight materials and structures in aeronautics. [‘Lightness’, ISBN 90 6450 334 6] In the faculty of Civil Engineering TU Delft, Professor Hennes de Ridder understands designing from his scientific field Methodical Designing, by “all activities concerning the making of decisions in the material field”. He says in his oration [8] that “The purpose of a design process is to find an effective Fig.92: Design in aeronautics. solution for a problem, by which the solution can be

107

carried out efficiently”. And: “of old, most emphasis is on techniques, in design teaching as well as in design research. The structure in general gets sufficient attention as well. But on the organization of the design process, only little is said and written. That is regrettable because the civil engineer, educated in Delft, will in any case be expected to lead a ‘design team’ in his professional practice’. His predecessor, professor Polak, said in his reader ‘Functional Designing’ [9]: “I look upon designing as a thought pattern which runs through the following stages: • setting a problem • collecting data • developing alternatives • testing the alternatives • describing the chosen solution in a masterplan and a detail plan”. While somewhere else he said: “an engineer may be someone who is occupied with designing” and “Yet, it is possible that most engineers have designed their greatest projects while they were still students and that many of them became technicians afterwards, while there is an enormous lack of good designers”. In the faculty of Industrial Design TU Delft the approach of methodical designing stands at a high level. Because of its kinship with Architecture, Industrial Designing offers the clearest example of the methodical approach. Roozenburg and Eekels [1] phrase as an interpretation of designing: the entire enterprise process, from the first product idea up to the production and distribution of the product on the market, is called: ‘product development’. This entire product developing process consists of a technical (product directed) and a commercial (enterprise directed) process part. Product developing is a part of that comprehensive process of product development. Roozenburg and Eekels understand designing by “the contriving and fastening down the geometry, the materials and the processing techniques of a new product”. But they also write: “Yet, product designing is a lot more than drawing. In the first place it is in particular a directed thought process, in which problems are analyzed, goals are set and adjusted, proposals for solutions are developed and the characteristics of these solutions are assessed”.

108

Fig.93: Design and research in the domain of Industrial Design Engineering.

With this interpretation all technique directed activities between initiative and the final product manufacturing, should be looked upon as being designing. Designing is the total of the activities of product designers, while the enclosing total enterprise activity is called product development. Architecture often looks with some reserves upon the very commercially concerned product development at the faculty Industrial Design. Nevertheless, industrial designers discuss the entire process of product development and they know exactly who their principals are: these are producers of consumer commodities who finance their commissions. They identify themselves with the users of their products better than many an architect. Architects are not that obedient and moveable as their colleagues at Industrial Designing, their ‘brothers under the skin’ (after Rudyard Kipling’s The Ladies). Professor Jan Buys in his book ‘Integral Product Development’ [2], joins in with the theory of Roozenburg and Eekels. On the phasing of the innovation process of Roozenburg and ekels he observes: “The model proves that the designing of the new product itself, the core of product developing, is only one step in the entire process”. Especially this view on the object-directed or productdirected design process within the enfolding enterprise-directed development process, is followed more and more by constructional designing. In the mean time, the first generation of product designers has started in practice, with a reasonable knowledge of the building industry and a great affinity with industrial designing. 7.2

THE DESIGNER IN THE BUILDING INDUSTRY

In the building industry the joint activities of Designing, Developing and Research in the entire developing process takes place in three main domains which influence each other thoroughly: Town Planning, Architecture and Building Technology. This can be done in a positive manner when two successive domains are well designed and so strengthen and stimulate each other. But often frustrations arise from the lower quality of one of the two domains. It is as with a good town-planning schedule which deserves many buildings with a high architectonical quality; or a good building on a bad location which does not have the optimum radiance; or intelligent and high levelled developed building components for a simple building can be considered ‘pearls cast before the swine’: • Macro: Town Planning; • Meso : Architecture; • Micro : Building Technology. The three domains, indeed, influence each other, but in principle they have their own specialized domain designers.

109

7.3

THE TOWN PLANNER

The town planner watches over the built environment on the greatest scale. In his work politics, but also society philosophy and social developments play a great part, because especially town planning has to thoroughly take into consideration all sorts of long-term developments. Town planning is usually done from town planning offices and from governmental departments, but is sometimes also done from architects offices. Vice versa town planners who made a masterplan for an area, sometimes succeed in designing a building in full within their own town-planning scheme. The other way around it may happen that the architect of a building in the neighbourhood makes an entire town planning schedule. Architects look upon town planning as a means of acquisition to obtain commissions for buildings. Apart from that, many architects find it annoying when town- planners have already fastened down too many characteristics of the building in an intention plan or a location plan. But townplanners as well have their highly necessary contribution and competence, especially in more grand more lasting cohesions.

Fig. 94: Model of ‘De Resident’ area development, the Hague, NL.

110

Fig. 95: Detail of the Resident, the Hague.

111

A clear example is incorporated in the experiences of urban designer Mariet Schoenmakers (at the time employed by project developer MAB in Den Haag), in the town planning scheme of De Resident in Den Haag. Nine big buildings had to be designed in their town-planning cohesion. After that the nine individual building design processes with nine architects (among them Rob Krier, Cesar Pelli, Adolfo Natalini, Michael Graves, Sjoerd Soeters, Peter Drijver, Bert Dirrix and Gunnar Daan) had to be coordinated and led from a strong town-planning vision. But as a town-planner she also had to interfere with choices of materials so, the domain of the building components: often the domains overlap or touch each other and by this kind of domain overlapping there may come about something unexpected. The experiences of the resident are put into words by Vincent van Rossum in the book Stadbouwkunst: de stedelijke ruimte als architectonische opgave. [21]. 7.4

THE ARCHITECT

At the faculty of Architecture the study is done for more than 65% by students who hope to work as an architect in the future. Of old, architecture is considered ‘the Mother of Arts’ because the spatially built environment offers a motive as well as the opportunity for art. Therefore, the architect has, for a long time past, indulged himself in the mystical pleasure of being an applied artist. He looks upon his position as being placed in-between an artist and a technologist. For this reason the architect puts creativity and originality first in architectonical designing.

Fig. 96: Bridge-man house in Groningen. Architect: Gunnar Daan.

Fig. 97: Details of the bridge-man house.

112

Modern artists design creatively and intuitively and usually do not or hardly justify their design processes and only seldom do so with their results. The more selfwilled, the better. Art must be surprising and amazing one should not justify a surprise. The unexpectedness and uninhibitedness often runs a track from originality. It is often the other way around as well: when a self-willed design is credited with the unassailability of original thinking. An artist designs and creates his autonomous work completely for himself. The selling comes later. With a specific building task at hand the freedom is more limited and an explanation or motivation has to be given to principals, but a design which shows the relativity of common building is often enough. Art has to liberate. For this reason architects love artists. Their bond is a strong one. Technologists usually design functionally, with technical schedules and material-technically, in an efficient manner towards a practical result. ‘Building Engineers’ do so, or should be doing so, in an original and ingenious way. The architect tries to unite the qualities of the artist and of the technologist inside himself. However, the architect has, next to the task of solving a complex design challenge, a large social responsibility because the buildings he designs will determine a part of the city scene for generations to come. Often this part is not welcomed by his principals, he will certainly not be paid for it in a direct sense. Only the social respect and historical appreciation will be the external appraisal for his interpretation of the cultural role. In many cases his work is inspired by cultural influences. Culture, poetry and art influence his thinking and his designs are coloured by them. The architect also has a financial responsibility towards his principal, because he receives a building commission which has to be realized by a (more or less) fixed budget. He designs buildings which are being realized with other people’s money. Apart from that, this goes for many engineers, because with capital goods in general, like bridges, ships, refineries, power stations and aircrafts, engineers design for the benefit and the costs of others. But in contrast with his colleague-engineers, the architect can be called to answer personally to wastage much faster, through his enterprising in a small scaled and independent office. In The Nederlands feasting at somebody else’s expenses is not done and there are also no principals who supply super budgets at the cost of other spatial needs, as happened with ‘les

Fig. 98: Bibliothèque Nationale de France in Paris. One of ‘Les neuf Grands Traveaux’. Architect : Dominique Perrault.

113

neuf Grands Traveaux’ of the late François Mitterand in Paris. Dutch architects live in a culture of building commissions that are ambitious in aspects, with limited building budgets and they try to find their balance in this. Dutch architecture is internationally viewed as being modest, but costs-aware and especially down-to-earth with a number of gems of ‘designed away’ abstractions. 7.5

THE COMPONENT DESIGNER

In the mean time, next to town planners and architects, also building component designers appeared in college. This scientific field also knows its kinship and overlapping with architecture, but now at the lower scale. Designing components for specific buildings with traditional materials, was always done by the architect. The traditional process evolves into a site assembly of prefabricated components and industrial products. By the increasing level of the necessary knowledge of technical schedules, materials, production methods and assembly methods, the designing of components and the developing of building products begins to manifest itself by force as a full-valued scientific field. The competence should in fact exist at the (larger) architects offices (first possibility). It can also be accommodated in separate design offices for industrial building products and building components (second possibility) or in the engineering departments of producers (third possibility). There are only a few architects offices in The Netherlands where component designing is looked upon as an integral and inseparable part of the designing of a whole building. In British high-tech offices, designing of the components of a building is always an indissoluble part of the design process of the whole building. Philosophically speaking, British designers have always stayed in close touch with technology. Their predecessors from the ninetieth century were great instigators for the industrial revolution by their machine building, the railways and ship building. The steam engine, locomotives and steam ships of the last century were designed concurrently with bridges, railway stations and the more architectural parts of the public transport. The current British high-tech offices purposefully walk further on the same road. It is a high quality which is dearly paid for, but it has a clear example function for other designers. The quality of the components of a building can highly influence the quality of the building itself. So, the three domains of town planning, architectural and technical designing complement each other well, make each other stronger and in optimal cases all three of them must be clearly present and lead to designing at a proper level. The domains may differ, but the approaches to designing show many resemblances. To be able to work sensibly in the one domain, the other domain has to be of an inspiring quality.

114

Fig. 99: Design for glass stairs Gentlemen’s club ‘De Witte’, The Hague. Design: Maarten Grasveld. Structural Design: Mick Eekhout.

115

7.6

FROM MASTER BUILDER TO CONCEPTUAL DESIGNER

The handling or not of design methods has to do indirectly with the position of the designer in the entire building process, which has changed in the course of history by the increasing complexity of programme, building assembly and the two processes of preparation and realization which together form the building process. The attention of the architect is directed more at his position than, from a permanent position, at the optimalizing of the design result by a methodical process. When the architect is no longer the spider in the building process, the result of his design process, however methodically it was realized could, out of different motives, be changed by others into a sub-optimum result. In contrast with all the other technical scientific fields, the designer of buildings (called the Greek ‘master carpenter’, later in Gothic times the ‘master stone-cutter’, from the Middle Ages ‘master builder’ and ever since the Renaissance ‘architect’) has been able to distinguish himself prominently from other persons in the building process. The master builder had absolute control over the building process from the top, in an artistic as well as in an executing sense. The main contractor as we know him nowadays, has gradually risen from the architect’s assistant who took care of the realization. With the shortening of building hours and with the more parallel than serial organizing of activities, the entire building process has become more and more complex and less well surveyable by only one person. The increasing complex building process has further greatly been shaped in the last generation by advisers in all sorts of scientific fields, once belonging to the entire professional knowledge of the architect. Initially, structural advisers came on, followed by climatic advisers, then came building costs advisors with building management advisers at their heels who drew the managing of the increasingly complex building process as a full-time job towards themselves. The modern architect is quite a crack if he, nevertheless, is capable of maintaining the overall view on the activities of all the involved parties in the building process. Normally he will have to settle for a part of his former role. He usually has to exchange his place at the top of the pyramid for a place as a functional and aesthetic artistic designer somewhere in that pyramid. Apart from that it is not to be expected that building processes for larger buildings will be simplified that fast in the future. The entire society becomes more complex. Service which was initially offered as an attractive help standby, has become institutionalized itself in the mean time in such a way that a process without it is hardly possible anymore. It looks like a ‘going process without return’. The status of being the prime trusted representative of the principal, traditionally the architect’s status, has in the mean time been taken over by the building manager who has no artistic pretensions and conforms himself to the wishes of the principal, namely the building within the limits of budget and time in the tumbling network of the building process. The architect stands alone to watch it all, if he does not at least make these new advice disciplines his own and in this manner offers, in his architect’s office, a complete packet of services again. The architect finds himself in most of the large building projects in a less authoritative position and yet tries to maintain as much status as possible. “The architect has to reconquer his place in the

116

building production” [6]. A short sentence from an oration, however, is not enough to crank up the flywheel. For that an effort is needed from the entire architects branch. The high level of individually functioning of the architect takes care of the not complementing of individual protests on a larger scale. In the Whitsun pamphlet ‘95 of the Dutch architect professor Jo Coenen a protest was described against the sloppy association of principals with architects, who for little or no fee in a competition situation were expected to rally their creativity and ingenuity for a great design of which eventually only one was going to be realized. However, this pamphlet did not cause a wholesale protest too of architects or of their professional representatives. The current situation will remain unchanged, unless there will be many to set themselves to it and especially prominent professionals. But even well-known architects, also the professors among them who, on account of their professorship could break a lance, keep themselves far from publicity in this sense and so let an opportunity for the profession go by. In the last decade many ‘Free Form Design’ buildings have been proposed by architects and a few of them have indeed been realized. Free form architecture leads to the necessity of a mother 3D model of the designed building that is the basis for the overall design as well as for the co-design and co-engineering of the building team members. It is the question who will volunteer to function as the keeper of the 3D model. In the eroding development of the role of the architect, this opportunity may very well be the only possibility to gain back some say and power in the building process. This grasp for regaining power comes with high amounts of hours, deep involvement and high legal responsibility, though. In the building situation all parties in the building process originate from their own independent discipline and have, therefore, their own financial responsibilities next to their technical competences. Unwillingness, whether consciously or not, misunderstanding and juridically instead of technically interpreting of instructions can be the effect of this. This role of the architect in the building process is derived from processes surrounding the realization of medium and large buildings. With small buildings the situation is less pulled apart and the architect has a fair chance in general to a position as spider in the web. Although it is good to realise what evolutions took place in the recent past, they are remembered for the main part because of the future which lies before us. The university is directed at young professionals who will only enter the practice in the third millennium and who know nothing else but the current parts to play and the competencies. We must draw energy from the past but we have to aim for the future. This situation of an ad hoc composition of a building team or building connection springs from the grown tradition of contracts and sub contracts and in fact perhaps from the primitive Dutch merchandising spirit of principals, which actually stands diametrical with regards to the Japanese model where designing and realizing within the limits of a great Japanese industrial conglomerate or ‘gurupu’ is very well possible, and by that also obtains the power of concentration. In the mean time the EU has sanctioned the ad hoc composition of participants in building processes by the calling of activities in competition, the architect’s work as well as the contracts, on the basis of free enterprising and equality for all. There is no promise to have

117

another clustering in the ad hoc building organization. So, the prospect is that improvements in the preparation process and the realization process will have to take place within the current balance of power. In contrast with the privatized and fragmented situation in the building practice, the designers in other technical scientific fields are almost always part of a greater whole, in which designing, developing, research, producing and realization often take place in one company with different departments. Technical designers first make conceptual designs and make sure that after that this concept is actually materialized, developed further into readiness for production. But the designer has to submit as well to industrial objective number one: the making of industrial profits, even if this is minimal. Although the designer is responsible for his design in all circumstances, the above-mentioned train of thought illustrates mainly the power the building designer has to have his design realized totally after his own vision and to not have it devaluate. A strong position of the designer is a better guarantee for a higher quality level of the realized design and therefore should be pursued from every constructional education. The author himself has in his architect’s days, always stood up for himself. Sometimes, however, that brought about a tense relation with the principal as a result. 7.7

QUALITIES OF THE COMPONENT DESIGNER

The current building product and component designer divides his professional time into four main levels. In the preparation process he occupies himself with • Concept • Materialization and in the realization process with • Production • Building The first two are mainly activities at the office which are realized directly by him, respectively his co-workers or advisors: preparation. The latter two activities are realized by executing parties in offices, factories, workshops and at the site: realization. Next to this his task is production and building attendance and quality assurance. These four main activities play an important role in the quality of the building which has to be realized. The quality of the designer’s main activities results in a direct influence on the quality of the building product. This quality also depends on his capabilities which can be distinguished at four levels: Fig. 100: Four stages • Knowledge (facts, structures) in building process. • Capability (skill) • Insight (overall view ) • Vision (view on the future) Knowledge can be gained by studying. Knowledge also has to be kept up. Skill or capability is obtained by exercising the making of designs. A skilled designer

118

creates reasonable buildings and building products. But with all the knowledge which comes in ever increasing frequencies and with ever greater penetration via all sorts of databases of an audio/manual sort up to an electronic sort, the need for making connections for learning ‘why’ becomes ever stronger. Making inquiries without a structure to store this information and make it understandable, is senseless in the long run. It is known that more often the making of connections between data becomes more important than the data themselves. Insight is obtained when one has command over the complex intertwining of the ingredients of the field, its problems and their solutions, and operates from that position. Perspective, survey and insight all have to do with this. A designer with insight is a good designer. It is only given to a few to have a vision of where the development of society, the architecture, the building technology and the position and role of designing in this, is coming to. Vision stands for an opinion on the future of the scientific field in society and is not explained here as a design vision for a building, an explanation of how the design fits into its context, but rather as a view of the future. Students can look upon the aforementioned four steps as goals to come to self-expression. Vision, by the way, is like many perceptions liable to wear and tear by trendy usage (‘Building Maintenance with Vision’). Students need to have a couple of spiritual characteristics in the rising intensity of a pyramid: • Interest • Enthusiasm • Drive • Passion • The Gift These ever intensifying attitudes offer a fair chance to more better results in designing. The challenge of the teacher is to transfer interest into enthusiasm, and this into drive etc. Only passion and a gift for designing can give a designer the opportunity to change a building or a building component as a composition of lifeless parts, into a living object. Buildings and building components with a mind, a spirit, an esprit form the difference with a good and an excellent product. Therefore, it is not enough when education only administers knowledge and learning to students by design exercises. Teachers must show their insight and vision to make clear that there is a higher-levelled goal, through which students will become motivated to endure their annoyingly slow process of the taking in of knowledge. Too much knowledge without insight and vision is fatal for a designer. Endless exercises in knowledge without insight leads to a routine without passion. Insight and vision carry the motivation and object directedness, while knowledge and learning determine the actual dedication of the designer. But, just vision without providing knowledge and learning means flying around in circles without ever landing with both feet on the ground. One could found an office on vision and a little demagogy to seduce principals, however somewhere else in the office knowledge and learning are demanded for the materialization, which determines the success of the office just the same. Insight as such implies a decent basis of knowledge and learning, although this does not need to be factual. Insight and vision may very well lead to good, new developments. Readers of this monograph are component designers, working at the side of the

119

industry and technical architects, working in architects offices. That is why this monograph continuously considers the architect as well as the component designer. The component designer is, in general, in a position in which he has a limited responsibility for the management of the developing process. The product developer usually has this responsibility. Many architects are relieved, because in their opinion building management does not add enough to the quality of the building to spend much energy on it. In their view, the quality of the building is already completely comprised in the building specifications of the calling party. This is rather naive. So many things go wrong that, if only to defend the quality of the design, during the process of the making, the architect should be present at the building-site and the component designer should be in the factory. The realization process often shows a continuous fight between all the connected parties of the project, entangled in a Gordian knot. Fast and efficient judging and alterations have to be achieved. This requires a high degree of a designer’s sense of realism. On the other hand there are, of course, many building managers who are quite content when they can take over especially this part of the architect’s job. They are aware that ever more power will fall to them. The majority of participants in a building meeting nowadays, consists especially of onlookers: the non-directly producing parties. A skilled designer anticipates the production and building-site processes in his design, in order to prevent big surprises showing up during the realization. He has to take into account more and more the, unfamiliar to the profession, production and fabrication processes with the designing of prefabricated or industrialized elements and components out of which the building has been realized. So, most of the architect’s work must be done before the building is tendered. Technical architects work with prefabricated or industrialized elements and components and also have prepared and elaborated their jobs in the design phase already. They do not need to worry so much about leaving their management to others, although they are often such perfectionists that they will never lose control over the production and assembly process whatsoever. With this course of events the engaging in the market mechanism of the principal (have the building and components built for the lowest price with only minimal requirements as a prospect) and of the main contractor (finding leverage posts, ensuring good profits capacity of the company) causes a lot of stiffness and the compelled spending of much energy on quality negotiations of the architect during the realization phase. What goes for the architect, often also goes for the component designer. Logically the architect and the component designer need to possess a broad knowledge of production techniques, in order to know what materials are being used, what processes can be put in and what element and component shapes are the results of these. The architect often thinks the other way around: he thinks only of the building as a result. It is the contractor’s job to find a way to get it done. (‘There will always be some noodle around to make it for you’). Because an increasing part of the building technology is developed outside the architectonical drawing-room and outside the site, being the classical domains of the architect, he now has to collect his knowledge from the industry: the producers and fabricators, who actually re-design, engineer, manufacture and assemble the components of his building. The same industry has

120

sometimes been squeezed out like a lemon while still in the tendering process, after having given her information. Therefore she sometimes reacts frightened off at architects. It is the author’s experience as a component designer and a producer that project architects all over the world wrestle with the same problems to keep informed of the current production and manufacturing processes. The two main designing activities Conceptual Designing and Materialization are often found in two different persons at a (larger) architects office, a specialism which depends on the knowledge and skills from both sides. The power of the separation, however, often comes from the combination. Therefore, the conceptualist has to know how production processes come about, or anyway know enough about them to be able to design a correct scheme, and be little pervaded and blocked by that knowledge that he is capable of making a flamboyant design. Strangely enough it is often heard that a too thorough knowledge of technological processes can have a paralyzing effect on the architectonical concept. But this does not go for the building component designer. The current generation has an overflow of information, which is actually greater than ever before, while memory space is only limited. Besides, the designer has to cope with a complex of a great number of very diverged aspects of designing. Just for that reason it would be sensible to direct the education of designers more at survey and insight than at factual knowledge. It would be better to educate generalists with a minimum of profoundness, than specialists with a too great profoundness. Hopefully an esprit in the design will come up by their passion and gift over the knowledge, learning and insight. The importance of this insight as a means of connection between knowledge & learning and passion & gift is the reason why this book circles, as it were, over designing and developing processes. Ideally the capabilities of the making of the concept and the materializing should be united in one and the same person, but with larger building projects it is convenient to work with labour division and with that this separation is inevitable. The distinction between the conceptual part and the materializing part of designing originates from the last century already, when specialist techniques were introduced into the building technology and were for the main part neglected by architects or even scorned, because their interests were at different levels. These were directed more at the (glorious) history than at the then present time. The two typical attitudes of architects in the design concept and materialization actually spring from the controversy between the ‘Ecole des Beaux Arts’ and the ‘Ecole Polytechnique’. An architect who is unable to materialize is a dreamer and an architect who is unable to give his building a convincing or satisfying concept, is only a draughtsman and not a designer. The architect who is capable of having his building being possessed by an esprit, is a prima donna. A good project architect should, in principle, be in control of the conceptual design as well as the material design of a building. An excellent architect knows, moreover, how contractors, producers and fabricators must be challenged to manufacture building parts which enhance the state of technology. In this dialogue the industry is usually rather conservative because with the elaborating of new ideas discipline, organization, logistics and profit capacity are at stake, not to mention the ignorance with which to deal with other concepts. At the other side of the table many suggestions of architects to make

121

the impossible possible, break down on mere ignorance about the possibilities of production processes. The author only seldom meets architects who have sufficient knowledge of and insight in production processes and who would love to see new components being made, and indeed prove that they can be produced by the industry, but only after much pulling and pushing. And all the time the industry was not aware of that possibility with which the state of technology would actually be enhanced. Many of those persevering architects are truly interested in technology. British high-tech architects offices showed that way in the Seventies and the Eighties. Probably this development was depending on the British interest in mechanical engineering and related techniques like trains, ships and aircrafts, which influenced British architects to think positively about technology in architecture. Or maybe it would be better to say that it has vaccinated them against the loss of appetite and taste in technology. Architects with a great interest in the technology of building like Frei Otto, Renzo Piano, Richard Rogers, Norman Foster, Nicholas Grimshaw, Michael Hopkins, Ian Ritchie and Santiago Calatrava, to name but a few of the generation of ‘technical architects’, have shown the world and their colleagues what progress can be produced in a technological respect and how technique is able to stimulate the quality of architecture. They know that every achievement hides a new challenge. They all have a passion for designing and building and they also have the gift to elevate technology and architecture above the usual level. A society which cannot be appreciated for its buildings in history will be easily forgotten. And these architects also made delighting concepts which, like a tidal wave, cleared a way for their followers. Every generation will only have a few creative persons of the mould of Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, who were masters in the field of concepts, the choice of suitable materials and the knowledge to translate their concepts literally into materials. Renzo Piano is the greatest modern hero of technical architecture. Architects do not speak of materializing in the same literal sense, but figuratively: the destination of the design being materialized. The literal materializing is, of course, done by the industry and the builders. But the heroes lead the way for colleagues who are less gifted with capabilities and opportunities. Thanks to the compromising and fragmentised application of technology to ever complicating buildings, buildings become less severe compositions of various building parts and components. In this entire complex, technology is used less dominantly and sometimes even consciously wrongly used. That is why the denomination high-tech becomes less and less applied and it would be better to speak of ‘mild-tech’, in which the current balance between technology in its different levels and architecture would be expressed. It is possible to combine traditional techniques with very advanced technologies. The current generation has neither the aim, nor the means to build a kilometres high sky-scraper, or roofs with mega overlappings, because it is well aware that by concentrating on such designs and single aspects from the entire Gordian knot of the building commission, there is a great chance of an out of balance case. Architecture is applied art and moreover it is a costly affair for society and architects should be conscientious about that. These times ask for elaborated and balanced designs, with many adjustments and refining, but it needs the more élan and esprit.

122

Fig. 101: Alamillo bridge in Sevilla designed by Santiago Calatrava.

Fig. 102: Detail of Alamillo bridge.

123

Fig. 103-105: Olympic Stadium Roof, Munich. Architects: Günther Behnisch & Frei Otto.

124

8.

PARTIAL DESIGN METHODS

Design methods are planning instruments for design processes. They are, as it were, the means of navigation which can steady a once started course. Methodology is the study field of methods. The methodics of a scientific field is the sum of methods which are applied in a scientific field by a single professional or by a group. A method is a fixed, well-thought of general way of acting to achieve certain goals, a systematic way of working. Because designing happens individually, methodics at a higher level can only be a gathering of similar individual methods. A way of acting can be accomplished once, unexpectedly or incidentally and unprecedented, but yet by directed thinking. The pursued way of acting in the development process can also be very methodical, like a recipe of which one has experienced for many times that it leads to a purposeful result in an efficient way. Every well-minded human being tries to minimize the energy which is needed for repetitively occurring activities. Every human being has ways of acting which simplify the purposeful thinking at every partial activity to an unconscious attendance which does not require much energy. This goes for private life as well as for professional life. Only the methodical case will have a set pattern at the basis. The author often uses a pair of methods, especially during brainstorming: ‘back to basics’ and de ‘morphological chart’, can give a good survey of possibilities of which one would not think in first instance. Next to that the author often organizes the complete processes in his design approach with the help of an Organogram (see ch. 9, 10 and 11). 8.1

BACK TO BASICS

During a design process a stalemate can often be broken through by looking clearly at the core, in spite of all side-matters. This often means going back to basics. With the designing of a hanging glass space envelope in the shape of transparent ceilings and suspended glass screens for the Nieuwe Kerk in Den Haag, the architect Cees Spanjers and the author philosophized on the possibilities. This seventeenth century church, designed by Peter Post around 1650, has an inside height of 24 metres: approximately 17 metres high brickwork walls, with above these a timber roof-frame of 7 metres high, which runs through even higher into the attic. The glass wall screens were going to be positioned from 3 metres + to 10 metres + and the ceilings at 10 metres +. Inside the church four glass curtains were going to be hanged and three glass ceilings to shorten the echo in the church dramatically and so make the church fit for speaking and for chamber music concerts. For the sake of organ concerts, one head curtain had to be pulled up temporarily to 17 metres + upper side. During the preceding design phase we assumed all the time that this curtain screen, weighing 3,000 kilograms, could be hanged at the existing timber roof construction and that two hoisting winches could be installed on the wooden attic construction. We sought alternative scenarios to move the walls and so brought up the principles of the moving of windows. We went back to basics.

125

Fig. 106: Suspended glass screens in the Nieuwe Kerk, the Hague, NL. Acoustical Design: Metkemeijer. Architect: Cees Spanjers. Structural Design: Mick Eekhout.

126

With the same principles also a heavy glass panel had to be moved: according to the principle of shoving, turning and pegging. There are no other possibilities. Therefore, the solution had to be found in: • Shoving into X, Y or Z direction • Turning into X, Y or Z direction • Pivoting into X, Y or Z direction It was clear that shoving would cause single or double load on the building construction, that turning would cause large extra bending moments and that pivoting in the state of balance actually requires little energy to move. In the mean time the glass walls and ceilings are installed, with the intended effect the famous Dutch acoustic expert Rob Metkemeijer of Bureau Peutz Associés, with whom the author already had designed three glass concert halls, had in mind. However, the definite construction of the hoistable part of the design has not been realized yet, because of costs considerations. The walls and ceilings are that transparent that they are hard to be photographed. But to go back to basics for a moment in the design process was very clarifying for the analysis process of the concept for the moving of the glass walls. 8.2

MORPHOLOGICAL CHART

In the synthesis phase partial solutions often have to be singularly combined with each other. To make this graphic the method of the morphological chart can be used, where on each of the two axes the different partial solutions to be combined, are reflected. In the author’s thesis ‘Architecture in Space Structures’ [16] he has reflected on nine different main types of spatial structures in a morphological chart. While drawing the chart it became clear that, in the preceding years between 1982 and 1989, being a structural designer of spatial structures, he had not been aware that a certain amount of combinations nowhere in the world ever had been made. With this the handling of a method like that became a creative voyage of discovery of not yet discovered possibilities.

Fig. 107: Morphological chart of space structures.

127

8.3

CONCEPT MATRIX

The five categories of new, advanced, complex, experimental and ultra-fast design commissions require the same attitude of working carefully and thoroughly. (Perhaps these two notions ‘careful’ and ‘thorough’ cause intuitive designers to think that they are robbed of their spontaneity and creativity). Of the design process a global 2-D process matrix can be set up, where on the vertical axis the activities cluster can be put, and the main aspects on the horizontal axis. An extension of the design to the main components of the design could take care of the completion of the third dimension, usually viewed as a number of 2-D matrixes on top of each other with strong relations in the 2-D field and less strong relations between the different matrixes of the different components. From this process matrix each design process of partial design process knows a sensible division into a couple of global phases, each of which can be looked upon as clusters of various activities and have a logical sequence: •

OBJECTIVE / GOAL

•

ANALYSIS

•

BRAINSTORM

•

SYNTHESIS

•

SIMULATION

•

EVALUATION

•

ITERATION

Fig. 108: main phases of design concept.

The cluster phase objective/goal contains all considerations and activities for an efficient start, attendance and control of the entire design process. Analysis is understood by all activities which describe the problem in its totality and after that partially. Synthesis is understood by the activities which have to do with the generating of solutions for partial problems after spontaneous brainstorms and common sense reasoning. Simulation is understood by the reflection of the design as a whole and in parts, sketched or drawn on paper, drawn on the computer screen and printed on paper, moulded in scale materials or real materials and in the latter case the testing of the performance. The evaluation is the judging of the design result from simulation. The iteration is the feedback of the interim or final result of the design process back to a previous phase or cluster phase. This feedback is a very characteristic quality of the design process, where the non-clarity of the complexity to come to a good design results in a couple of efforts, has to be conquered.The cluster objective/goal deserves special attention, the start of a design process is as such of great importance in order to not end up in a swamp of conflicting and confusing requirements and wishes.

128

On top of the design process, and as far as the author is concerned in every genesis process of human activities, the following activities should be described and answered before the actual designing can start: • Goal • Strategy • Evaluation criteria • Financial means Only when these activities are sufficiently described the course is set and the actual design process can begin. The lacking of one of the four answers will lead to respectively aimlessness, razzling and searching, financial dragging or stopping prematurely and self-deception during presentations, because perhaps a wonderful design for an incorrectly set commission has to be justified. These four subjects must be answered with every start of a project: whether the subject is the making of a Fig. 109: Initial steps. materially spatial design, the writing of an article or a book or a consensus meeting. With the repetition of the design commission further drawing from experience of previous commissions is done and then the headwork can be much faster. Routine can replace a part of a cognitive design process by direct pointing to the best results, which furthermore must be weighed on the altered circumstances of the repetitive project. With complexity and experiments the acting has to careful, cold-blooded and methodical. In the contents of the process matrix, the following main aspects can be considered to be dealt with after or next to one another, but not back to front and they know an inert or frequent mutual influence: • Environment • Function • Space & Shape • Structure, Technology, Material & Details • Economy In environment all considerations come up from the higher scale level: considerations concerning physical planning and the politics for town- planning, town-planner’s considerations for a building and architectonical considerations for a building component. In the function considerations are at order concerning the functional analysis, starting with a programme of requirements, the determination of main and partial functions of the design to be made, its components and the relations of the functions to each other. After that follows for buildings in space the spatial analysis, the determination of the individual spaces and the relations, nearness or connections of the mutual spaces. With shape follows for buildings the material shape of the envelopment and the support of the envelopment. With

129

components space is not an item as such but is included in shape. Space & Shape usually are solidly developed in a strong reciproque relation, like Structure, Material, Technology & Detail. x Structure is understood by the planning for the design: the townplanning schedule, the building respectively the building components. The structure varies from immaterial or abstract to very material or a concrete form between the mentioned macro, meso and micro levels. The structure in the town-planning scheme can be made explicit by a great amount of means: highways, waterways, open plains, built-up areas, green spaces and the likes. The structure of a building is determined by the connecting of spaces, by dividing spaces by means of columns and by the main load-bearing construction of the building when it concerns a framework. The structure of components usually exists of load-bearing and separating parts. x Technology is understood by the mechanical, structural, material knowledge, installation and production technical aspects of the design process. The choice of the type of technology depends on the design. x Material is understood by the choice of the materials for the various parts of the town-planning scheme, the building or the components, usually a multi material result being a combination of technical considerations, because of the great variation of functions of the design’s various components and of visual or philosophical considerations like a wished for radiance. x Details are understood by the engineering of the whole in components and the connection of the (equal and unequal) components with each other. x Economy is understood by the financial consequences of the design. Economy is a result of the design and the production process. In many processes the economy is placed in front as a goal. Within this interaction many confusions and discussions between designers and their principals arise. The here described process matrix can be considered a personal attempt to structure the design process and so to work systematically and methodically. For students, a systematically set learning process leads to the faster obtaining of knowledge and insight. By known (customary) challenges in the later phase of the study or in the professional designer’s life, the unconscious design experience is activated to come to a design faster.

130

8.4

DESIRABLE, PROBABLE & POSSIBLE

Professor Taeke de Jong, in publications from his scientific field of Technical Ecology & Environment Planning, or the faculty of Architecture TU Delft, in connection with designing and research, speaks about different ‘futures’, indicated by the notions: • desirable • probable • possible He provides the adjacent scheme on the relations between these three ‘futures’ and illustrates them as follows: “the collection of probable futures cannot stand out the collection of possible futures, even when prognoses break adrift year after year. Our possibilities are no more constant, by the way: they get smaller by ecological exhaustion on a daily base. Between both, and partly outside the realm of the possible (1, fiction) lies the collection desirable futures. Fig. 110: De Jong’s improbability Some of them are probable (2), most of them scheme. are not (3). A part of the probable futures is not desirable (4). Furthermore there is a number of eco-technical possibilities which are not (yet) probable and desirable (5). This category of improbable futures we cannot predict, we have to design them. On this category in particular I will put the emphasis, because the probable futures are extremely gloomy from the environmental point of view. Our most important hope lies in the improbable, but nevertheless possible futures’ [17]. Futures (3) which are desirable and possible, but not probable (or originating from familiar knowledge), deserve the greatest attention. As a model of giving insight this triple division is used more and more by ever more scientists at the faculty of Architecture, in various versions of De Jong: • wanting, predicting and designing • goal setting, problem stating and means • political, scientific and technical 8.5

VISUALIZATION

Communication plays an important part in the building process. In society, in order to stimulate cooperation, there must be communication and the exchange of information. Even thoughts and methods of thinking must then be made public, or at least being expressed. This is harder if the matter is very complex and comprehensive, it becomes easier with more limited commissions. In technology it is easier to isolate partial problems and so to examine them in total seclusion. At the intersection of technology and philosophy and culture, where the scientific field of architecture can be found, the isolation of a partial aspect is

131

often a more precarious matter because with the setting of limitations very sensible mutual and synergetic influences are often left out. The result is that partial aspects can never be separately viewed, but that the inter-relations between partial aspects have to be very well considered. The total synthesis of a problem is not just an adding up of partial syntheses. The art of separation can be found in connecting. As soon as architectonical designers realize that they are complexity designers and get themselves suitable tools for this, they are well on their way. But between a thinking method and a mutual effort lies communication, which has to convince the participants in the process of the correctness of the headwork. This communication can be verbally, in writing, drawn (2-D or 3-D), or be moulded in an immaterial form (screen: 2-D, 2,5-D or 3-D) or in a fixed form (model, prototype, 3-D). The used means of communication is usually and with preference chosen because of its effectiveness in the concerned circumstances: there is a number of means of visualization. Drawing is one of them. Drawing must not be confused with designing. Drawing is the ‘sparring partner’ of designing. Designing is a continuous interchange between thoughts in the head, manual efforts to visualize these into writing and image and auditive communication with feedbacks afterwards. Designing is an iterative process between thinking brains, visualizing hands and the dreaming heart.

Fig. 111-114: Maritime Museum of Amsterdam. Design proposal for a glass roof covering the courtyard by Mick Eekhout.

132

9.

DESIGN METHODOLOGY

In the author’s thesis [16] the Organogram for Product Development is described for standard products. The Organogram describes in sequential and parallel activities with feedbacks, the main lines of a design and development process for a new building product, completed with the necessary marketing phases. The standard Organogram is illustrated at the inside of the cover at the back of this monograph. Complete design methods In view of the design results, students would benefit more when these and other methods are taught from the very start of their education. The handling of design methods should therefore, as far as it is lacking in the basic years, be brought to that basic training. Not only students need to be educated, teachers also have to become aware of that, in order to make explicit their individual design methods from their subconsciousness and then carry it through to students. Actually three types of building products can be mentioned, separated from each other by the influence of the project or the consumer/project architect, versus that of the product or the producer. In that tense field are: special, system and standard products. Reasoning from the project architect’s point of view, who used to draw all component parts of his building himself in former days, this is (extremely put) the sequence of 100% to 0% of influence from special to standard products. From the producing industries’ point of view (for instance glass production industries, also working for the automobile industry) the preferential sequence with the intermediate form of products (of which the characteristics also lie in-between the three main lines) is, of course, the other way around: from standard to special products (see Ch. 3.4): • Standard product • systematized standard product • standardized system product • System product • special system product • systematized special product • Special product The sequence reflects to the producer the sliding down of mass production at a large scale to the workshop productions at a small scale or one-offs. In view of the normally relatively small serial sizes in the building industry, a much used intermediate station is that of the system products, as greatest common divisors to be put in with more projects and which can be made suitable with relatively little trouble for individual projects in production. The three main types of products have enough different characteristics to scrutinize all of them separately and also to follow a different development process strategy in each of the three cases. Although the following process organizations are very analytical, there is also a holistic vision at the basis. Out of the holism the total is always reflected in the parts. With this is not meant the connections of parts, but

133

the character of the whole. This influence is especially strong at the synthetical activities like the design synthesis of phase 1 and the research activities of phase 3, by which these will always maintain the guarantee of putting them into the whole. 9.1

ORGANOGRAM STANDARD PRODUCTS

As a work method to control the entire process, the Organogram for standard products is illustrated. It describes the entire process of steps and activities from the initiative up to the actual regular production. The Organogram is a reflection of the sequence of process activities as the author has experienced it as a model for a smooth running process in designing and developing in his company Octatube. These activities, however, are described in a generalizing manner to have a broader validity. The sequence of the various steps or activities is serial (one after the other) or parallel (one next to the other). The specific project circumstances, like the completion of the concerned development project, the capacities and insights of the participants in the process, the time pressure from outside and such worries, cause a different interpretation of any of the three general Organograms up to a specific project Organogram or process Organogram, over and over again. But this does not in the least alter the validity of the Organogram as a general method for product development. Certain sequences are very consciously placed in the shown framing, like firstly Objective/Goal and Strategy, after that Evaluation Criteria and only then the working with the Analysis, Brainstorm and Synthesis of partial aspects, then the entire product concept and behind that the evaluation activities. Actually it concerns the sequence of four clusters of activities blocks: • Objective / Goal • Analysis and Synthesis of aspects • Clustering for product concept • Evaluation and Feasibility The order of these four blocks can not be altered, but there is more freedom within the blocks: the partial aspects can be gone through serially or parallelably, depending on the subject. Serial working means to be able to concentrate on one single problem at the time, while parallel working means the shoving around of information in one mind, or the simultaneous working of more division groups of process participants. The price of parallel working is a higher complexity in a structured chaos with an inherent loss of costs, the advantage is a more frequent feedback and a faster result. Parallel working is fierce and more expensive, but faster. No more waiting, but anticipating. The increasing demand for parallel working is expressed in the notion ‘concurrent engineering’ (see ch. 4). We must take into account that principals will want to work through design and building processes ever faster. One of the activities which is hardly to be shortened, is the building permission traject. In the beam chart of the entire (preparation & realization) building process the length of the beams of the building permission procedures are hardly alterable. The longer the building permission beams become, the less time is left for engineering and building. In

134

the future the building process will become ever shorter. Concurrent engineering or simultaneously working with all its dexterity to double activities as few as possible, should belong to the intellectual luggage of the engineer. These types of products which are mainly directed at the industrial market and at industrial manufacturing, are described in the very first Organogram [1,2]. They are distinguished from the special and system products because the project architect (practically) has no influence on the creation of these products, their manners of production and therefore, the actual resulting product. All he can do is choose: whether or not to apply a certain product. Sometimes minor interventions in the product can still take place per product, like the tangling of bricks, the cutting to fit of tiles or glass plates, but that is not an influence which is related to the nature or the production manner of the design. The Organogram for standard products is built up of five characteristic phases: • Design Concept • Preliminary Marketing • Prototype Development • Final Marketing • Product Manufacturing 9.2

FIRST PHASE: DESIGN CONCEPT

The first phase of the Organogram is titled ‘Design Concept’, and is comparable with a Provisional Design in architectonical designing. First we will globally explore the steps in this phase before going deeper into each phase. Especially head and tail of this phase, first and foremost deserve our attention. The Organogram was based upon the entire project being viewed as a ‘project’. Logical in activities, but rather confusing in connection with the titles of project architect and product architect. Therefore we will henceforth rather speak of process, instead of project, and in that sense the adjacent Organogram has been adjusted. It is of the greatest importance to correctly define the process objective, the start of the process, the process strategy, the process goal and the evaluation criteria. One could compare this with the importance of a good programme of requirements for an architectural design. If the programme does not meet the actual needs, then much energy is wasted and false expectations are raised which can only lead to disappointment. Firstly, this initial cluster of steps is important because from this the direction the process is heading for, is determined and from this the product will be developed in the process. Secondly, it is important to build in the expectation beforehand and the scoring rate afterwards. If the result of the process does not meet the evaluation criteria, the process has failed, unless halfway by a genius turn a consciously different route is taken. When this happens, it is good to realize that the initial goal is not achieved and the goal halfway (that is, after the genius turn) must be adjusted consciously and motivated. It has happened more than once that so-called coincidental discoveries in a research process led to radical results at a worldwide level, while from the original process only an anecdotal mention remained. But this can be looked upon as the exception to the rule that the

135

process must be gone through very accurately. The danger of ‘drifting about’ in a product development process with all its inherent loss of energy is many times greater and more frequent than the chance of an unintended brilliant sideproduct. It is a matter of efficiency of human resources. The end of the first phase must be concluded with the economical step of feasibility, which can also be looked upon as feedback for the evaluation criteria. When this first phase is thus concluded by a positive result, only then the second phase will be entered. The initiative of a producing company to complete the company’s assortment with a new product is derived from the unbalanced relation between changing demands and the set supplies. This new product shout fit in the current assortment, be produced by the existing, available equipment and channelled through existing marketing routes. From this initiative the specific product process comes about. Start of process: 1 The start of the process is set up by the commission to develop a certain standard product, mostly a material product. The motivation behind this commission can be formed from questions from the practice or market for a yet non-existing product, or an improvement of an already existing product which, by altered usage circumstances is no longer seen as a sufficient answer to the demand. It is also possible that this motivation contains a hidden theoretical objective (for instance in an academic study), leading to a hypothesis without a direct control on the practice. In that case the process must be understood as a product development game, where the end results not necessarily can be or have to be realistic. For instance, the development of Zappi (see ch. 3.8). Since, in the case of a hypothetical starting point, common sense and insight are capable, indeed, but personal practice experiences (knowledge) and learning are not capable of making sufficient corrections, it is an absolute necessity to describe and document the process game properly, in order to maintain one’s course at this outside world level, in order to communicate with the persons involved in the game. This goes for the student, as well as for the teacher. Well begun is half done. A false start is usually noticed late in time and means loss of energy, much displeasure and friction. The very first question one has to ask oneself at the start of the process and the choice, respectively the acceptance of the product commission, is if this required product is in accordance with the market demand behind it or if it will be so in the future. Process goal: 2 After the above, the first thing to do in the process is to describe its goal. When it concerns a building, which usually comprises a multiplicity of functions, a programme of requirements describes which functions a building must have. Such a programme of requirements is very extensive for a building. It also changes with time. For the smaller components of the building, however, each of them having less complex functions it will, of course, be more simple.According to Roozenburg et al [2] the programme of requirements must in any case mention how many identical numbers of the product must be manufactured,

136

what the price will be and for what market the product is meant. Besides, a design commission has to contain a product basic idea, given by the commissioning company. Here the question is if the objective or the programme of requirements is set clearly enough, if any inconsistencies have crept in, if there are too personally coloured visions processed in it (that is to say: hobbyism) which would not be just and would lead to a product which somebody may like to see, but would not be a realistic answer to a demand from the market. Enclosed in the company’s brief to the designer is the notion that the required product is likely to get a sound receipt at the market. So, this has everything to do with the initial estimating of the characteristics of the product at this point, in order not to become saddled with an unsaleable product after the development process. This market notion can be described and controlled by, for instance, making inquiries into a small group of professionals at the very least, or by dedicating a market inquiry on a large scale to it, completed with evaluation reports and a well-reasoned objective of the product. Since the danger of an initial deviation of course in the process, set in at this point and later to be corrected, does not seem hypothetical, it is of the greatest importance to document and elaborate one thing and another, so that afterwards, when there is a correction of course, feedback can be applied. All these activities are the client’s responsibility, before commissioning the designer. Process strategy: 3 Next to the process goal it is good to already map out a route towards the achieving of this goal. Estimated at this stage is how many steps or activities have to be to put in, one after the other or simultaneously. The exact progress of the process is in the dark, but it is good to make an overall survey before actually starting to work. To students who are confronted with a plan like this for the first time, it is good to set up their own process diagram of assumed steps or activities: their own Organogram. There must be no fear that all steps will not be mentioned or that the emphasis is put on other things when executing the process: the process diagram can be kept up and altered all the time, so that it can serve as a reference book of process management. A second time it will definitely be easier. After this, for instance, the standard sequence will be maintained and from the standard schedule the specific process alterations are brought in automatically. After the first exercise, a certain knowledge should arise in the guidance of oneself and in the reasoning on what activities have to be processed first, followed by what others, respectively what activities must be done simultaneously. At first sight the alternation of the technique and marketing phases in the Organogram is very striking. To the building technology student it is a clear sign that two marketing phases have been built-in between the three technique phases. To the building management student it is clear that the marketing activities need an intensively developed technical process in three phases to come to a technically suitable product.

137

Fig. 115: Characteristic activities in Concept Design Phase.

138

Evaluation criteria: 4 The fourth step in the process is already a small running start towards the result, taken by putting down the wishes and requirements a successful product must meet. To set these criteria at this point already, is indeed a precarious matter, because a great advance has to be taken on the process. But it helps to define the exact expectations and when they are expected to be fulfilled. If wished for, returning to this step a couple of times during the process is also possible, as is the well-reasoned adjustments of the evaluation criteria. The pattern of these adjustments also tells, of course, something about the purposefulness of the start and the drifting about of the process afterwards. However, if criteria are not set at this point, it will not be known if the process after having ran through an amount of steps, is the right one or if it will lead to the desired results. Obscure or ill-defined evaluation criteria may lead to simultaneously moulding of expectations and solutions. In the worst case, designers tend to adapt the evaluation criteria to the developed product or process result instead of the other way around! Process Assurance: 5 As is mentioned above the process consists of a contents part (at the right in the diagram) and a steering and assurance part (at the left). In this process the progress of the process is regularly compared to the previously set process plan, the agreed time schedules and the financial budgets. To this entry consequently belongs a financial estimation of costs beforehand, according to the process and previous experience, from roughly budgeted to, if possible, more refined at set time units, unit costs or total costs. A normal course of events covers the refining estimation of the next steps to follow, up to and including the roughly approximation of further remote steps which, in their turn are being refined from approximation to estimation when the actually processing activities are becoming better known. Since the specific product development process is mostly directly initiated from the company’s top management, the reporting of the contents process part is also management directed and the process assuring is a management related activity. The process assurance sets partial goals as well and controls these regularly by watching the actual progress. It almost goes without saying to neglect this financial activity in a study situation, if only a mark-reward did not go with this. Time is essential, even for contemporary students. Study aspects: 6 After the objective, strategy, evaluation criteria and assurance as conditions have been determined, the core of the process begins with making a distinction in the main problem by a number of partial problems. These are more or less autonomous, or for a short while as autonomously considered aspects of the subject, they can be studied separately. In some processes there will only be a few aspects, in other there will be more. It is clear that with the development of a complex machine or building, many aspects can be studied next to one another, while the designing of a simpler part, for instance a system of new glass blocks, will have fewer aspects. This step also distinguishes the different study aspects

139

in their independence, semi- dependence and total dependence. One thing and another of course leads firstly to the independent study and after that to the combined or integrated study of the distinguished aspects. This hierarchy is later also used again to combine aspects with each other in their interim and final results. After this, the various aspects are given a (identification) number, like in the standard schedule, or they are named. Every aspect is started with the respective (sub) goals and evaluation criteria and, if necessary, also with the aspect strategy. Then the distinguished aspects can begin to be looked upon as clusters, as collections of steps belonging to each other, around a certain aspect. In the following the characteristic steps of each aspect cluster will be mentioned in succession. Once more: the Organogram looks deceivingly simple, but a process of a complicated product can hold a complex of aspect clusters, which are here marked, for the sake of survey with the first numbers 1, 2 and 3 etc. Each cluster consists in principle of four steps: analysis, brainstorm, ideas, synthesis and the combination of the latter two in an aspect concept. The concepts of the various aspects are then combined into a complete product concept (whether or not after sub clustering in sub product concepts). Aspect analysis: 7 The first step of an aspect cluster is to unravel the aspect until it has become a combination of indivisible parts which are studied through literature research, competitive examination, research of existing designs, model research and the likes. In this phase the preliminary product concept is concerned, not yet the final product, so these analyses do not have to be exhausting at this point. It is, of course, also a matter of not losing the overall view, despite continuous feedbacks. ‘Better broad than profound’ is the motto here. Rather process all aspects than leave a few (later perhaps crucial) aspects out for ignorance or unfamiliarity. With the aspect analysis much actual information is gathered as well. Brainstorm ideas: 8 It often happens in an analysis like this that a kind of research blindness occurs. Apart from this, it happens with every long lasting study. That is why an unceremonious brainstorm step is introduced which, taking distance of the facts from the analysis, enables the designer or students to bring forth all sorts of ideas, ripe or green. The usual tactics then are to have a group of students improvise with each other and lay down all results, with the intention to judge them only later, throw them out if need be, or to combine them. Often such a brainstorm session is necessary to challenge unconsciously living ideas and, with the help of the fearlessness of the one, have them filled up with the responsive ideas of the other. Naturally it also occurs that a step like this can only be taken after a weekend of sailing, or during a long journey when the mind can quietly order the thoughts and is not burdened with all the heavy information of the analysis. Sometimes a spontaneous ‘Eureka’ moment occurs, a flash which also pushes others to go on. At this step the hope of many designers and architects is directed. Not unjustly, because this is where the creativity of the

140

designer has to come from. And there is always the matrix of the actual analysis which lies at the base of the brainstorm. Brainstorming without a preceding analysis often leads to cycling in the air. Therefore, there is an unsteady balance between conscious and unconscious (or subconscious) steps in this process. Designers are mostly well equipped, compared to many technicians who are hindered by the profundity in which they work in their technical environment. Aspect synthesis: 9 The factual information and the free flying of the brainstorm session are now being combined by hard and creative work towards a synthesis of the aspect in question. Here an attempt has to be made to give one or more solutions for this aspect. Preferably more solutions, because in the course of the hereafter following combinations many will perish because they will not be compatible with the synthesis of other aspects. Product concept: 10 The results of the aspect studies are laid down in individual aspect concepts. These are now combined with each other, be it in a free form, or in a number of clusters of aspects belonging to each other, or in a tight combination through, for instance, a matrix where each aspect is combined with all the others. This will produce an overdose of combinations of which many will not be practicable, or clumsy, and others perhaps feasible or even very promising. Hopefully, a number of combinations will come up which were never thought of before. It is, of course, a matter of cautious handling of these combinations. All too quickly a disapproval may occur, because it is difficult to recognize the quality of a combination which has never been seen before. From all these combinations it could emerge that the best does not answer to the set total requirements. In that case it is sensible to get feedback with the now acquired knowledge for the starting points, the analysis, the brainstorm and/or the synthesis of aspects, before submitting to this definitively. These feedbacks lead to doing the entire process, or a (major) part of it, all over again. These concentrical circles also tend to show a progressive match of the total solution of the problem. It is like swimming around in ever decreasing circles towards the buoy. A good product concept is the factual as well as the intuitive result of studying all aspects, with alternating degrees of success. Designing is looking for compromises. Technical feasibility: 11 For these reasons it is good to decide now if the resulting product concept is technically feasible. Strictly speaking it must be at this point in the process, as this decision must not be made too early in order to not ruin potentially creative ideas too fast. Of course it requires some ‘enlightenment’ of the reviewer, in order to prevent the feasibility of using one’s everyday spectacles, and having new glasses put in for a change. Perhaps new product techniques must be developed, or raw materials or basic materials may need a different pretreatment than usual, and so on. It is clear, when in this stage an absolute and final ‘no’ is heard from the production department, and that after repeated explanations and further discussions, the process should be cancelled. If it is,

141

however, not good enough yet, then it is logical to have yet another feedback towards one of the previous activities in order to thoroughly study one of more aspects for alternatives. When the result is positive, only then the next step can be taken. Preliminary market analysis: 12 The next step is the market, directed to comparing the resulting product concept in the market for which the product is meant (starting point), with the market for which it seems to be suitable (result). Are all the characteristics of the product experienced as being positive? Are there any favourite and tolerated qualities? What are the attractive qualities? Perhaps market segments, reacting differently to the product, are to be distinguished. If this short feedback of the product concept to the market is positive, or if the client (when known) is positive, then the process can be continued. Economical feasibility: 13 The last step in the first phase is the financial feasibility. If things were done correctly a global cost-price was proposed in the evaluation criteria. With the help of the proposed production techniques, belonging to the product concept, evaluation is now possible. With technically pioneering products it is not unusual that this economical feasibility step is moved far to the back in the process, simply because many unacquaintances darken the sight completely. In the building industry the sight is mostly obstructed as it is, but yet it is slightly present. The financial allowable margins products must meet is mostly rather limited, since it usually concerns new products which must perform in the same manner as existing products, and those have an actual and known set price. It is like developing an alternative with many set side-conditions. This makes the work sometimes very fascinating, but also hazardous and disappointing. In the case of a complete economical disappointment, the project has to be cancelled. Sometimes hard work must be done to come to a hardly noticeable result. There is no getting out of the way the building industry works with poor materials and low cost-prices per mass, surface or length belonging to that, in order to result in low cubic metre prices of the building practice as a whole. In other cases the products are even concealed and the surplus value is merely the flexible use in time, so in the further away future. 9.3

SECOND PHASE: PRELIMINARY MARKETING

At the very first start of the process a marketing indication must have been given. One does not start a product developing process without further ado. So a global notion of the market attainability must already have been there. This market suitability is also involved in the study at the end of the first phase. Now that there is an elaborated concept after the first design concept phase, it is advisable to first try the concept at the market: is this the product the market segment is in urgent need for? Or does the product perhaps not completely answer to the expectations of the market? Did, on the whole, something maybe go wrong in the first phase, through which a product, as such being very

142

potential, was created for a totally different market than was aimed at? In such a usually expensive product development process a keen eye has to be kept on the goal, as well as on the evaluation criteria. This in order to not get off the track or have a product result which can be added to the average 95% of failures with product development.

Fig.116: Characteristic activities in Preliminary Marketing Phase

It is also imaginable that the activities of phase 2 ‘Preliminary Marketing’ run more or less parallel with the activities of phase 1. Especially when the total of the number of weeks the process is allowed to take up is extremely short, phases 1 and 2 would be possible to pass nearly parallel for those products for which the marketing people know all the routines. Designers must then be mindful that the marketing department will not start to dictate the design department. In general a marketing vision is directed at a short term, where a design vision has to be long term directed. Many designers are not at all amused with marketeers. Goals: 14 The goal of all activities in phase 2 is to control if the design concept of phase 1 meets the needs of the market, respectively if the product concept has to be adjusted to the requirements of the market. In this phase designers must work together with marketing people of the company, where the help of designers

143

often can be called in to estimate certain architectonical and building possibilities of the market. For instance, product applications for the various building designs of project architects who operate on the market. Besides, product designers can get, and also take, the opportunity to anticipate on product applications under many different architecture signatures and architectonical styles. By sketching alternative product applications with a piece of transparent paper, on project publications of recent buildings, it is even possible to make an architectonical marketing analysis. Finding applications and recognizing differences in them, naturally requires marketing skills as well as architectonical skills. Process Assurance: 15 Like activity 5 from the first phase, process assurance enters into the organisational and financial aspects. And here also goes that alert students must handle their time efficiently in order to let knowledge, learning and social education mature. Marketing analysis: 16 An analysis of the market for the intended product has to be made. How often, under what circumstances can it be applied, in what different performances? Can a distinction be made of different types of buildings or through different offtake channels? Then market segments can be mentioned, each with their own Product-Market characteristics. Market properties: 17 The market characteristics for which the product is thought suitable need to be described in all their particulars and peculiarities. Distinctions must be made in functional, building technical, architectonical and commercial aspects, and also the approximation of the market, the accessibility, the type of determiners and the determination hierarchy, and the geographical differences per country or countries and continents. Market segments: 18 The entire application market could probably be distinguished in market segments which, in their characteristics, prominently differ from each other. There will be strong mobile markets as well as more static markets. Market segments are also often to be approached differently among themselves. There will be interesting and less interesting market segments, fast to be conquered short term markets and slowly to be penetrated long term markets. Tactics: 19 The various market segments probably know their own determiner, or determination hierarchies. Nature and conduct of these determiners also arrange the most suitable manner to approach the market segment of these determiners, via which route, by which means, people and timing. Distribution and sales channels are also of importance. Tactics will be clearly different for the various geographical market fields. Tactics are the philosophy of approach to get the product to the market.

144

Promotion strategy: 20 When the different market segments, their determiners and the general tactics are described, then from this follows the strategy to draw the determiners’ attention to the product. Product & Market goal: 21 With this the combinations of types and quantities of products for the various market segments are qualified and quantified, distinguished in short, medium and long terms in time. Product & Market concept: 22 The characteristics of each desired type of product, in certain required qualities, should be taken to the customers in a specific manner. Testing product & market concept: 23 The combination of product and market as is set above, is tested for the time being in a small circle of customers, by means of individual presentations, a small group presentation or a presentation lecture, coupled with other events. Do not rouse the expectation yet that the product will soon be available on the market.

Fig. 117: Testing a full-scale prototype as part of the B3-modiule at the TU Delft.

Fig. 118: Testing the prototype.

145

Process evaluation: 24 The total process with technical and marketing aspects must be considered as being successful, or maybe there are reasons to adjust it. Other tenderers may have appeared on the market in the mean time. The total need for the new product must be determined at the end of this phase. Product & Market concept acceptability: 25 The product-market combination should have sufficient potential market opportunities to enter the next technical phase. If not, the process should be cancelled. If not entirely, another feedback is needed again for one or more suitable activities before this step. 9.4

THIRD PHASE: PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT

Formulation of goals: 26 After the subject of the phase is set, the goal is determined. For example: for study module ’Prototype’ this means the further designing and developing of the initial concept of the façade scenario up to a prototype on an actual scale, approximately 2 x 2 metres and with the actual materials, manufactured in the workshop by the students themselves. The prototype must be assembled as a technical piece of work. The requirement is added that the prototype is presentable, that it is coated and that a minimum of one glass panel is applied. It must be transportable through access doors and it must fit in a service elevator. At this stage a global description of the goal to be achieved, befits. This description consists of minimal three parts: • A technical or material part in which the kernel of the product idea is set • An economical part in which the required financial achievement is set (numbers, price) • A marketing part in which is set what market is intended to be attained Financial management: 27 At this point in the process the setting of the financial budgets is extremely important, as there will be much energy involved in all kinds of research activities and development activities, which in themselves are hardly calculable. Involved in this is the investment in time for the product, of persons times the costs of labouring hours. In the total process assurance this activity monitors all the different development activities of phase 3. Evaluation criteria: 28 A proper programme of requirements is, in fact, a description of the criteria the product will have to meet. Completely different criteria can be summed up per product. The continuous intention, especially at the end of the third phase, is the feedback for these criteria. The criteria can be quantitative, as well as qualitative. It is good to also distinguish stronger demands and weaker wishes. Because a solution which does not meet a demand is not acceptable while, on

146

the other hand, a solution which does not meet a wish, can still be usable. Furthermore, it is important to remember that there is a certain hierarchy in the programme of requirements or in the list of criteria.

Fig. 119: Characteristic Prototype Development Phase.

Product market identity: 29 A realistic product development does not start just like that, with an imaginary idea. The realistic validity must be analyzed. A suiting answer, to the assumed question or a proven problem, has to be found for the product. For instance, for which applications, types of buildings and architecture, for what kind of

147

climatological, functional, architectonical, technical and economical circumstances has such an answer to be found? Do different applications, like market segments, have to be distinguished? To what extent do these division markets influence the qualities of the product? How will the product distinguish itself from existing products which ought to be replaced by it? How would the product finally be introduced at the market? How are the information flows from the building industry? Who are the intended customers, who are the producers, which functions in-between them can steer the usage of the product? By these considerations the programme of demands and wishes is filled up or adjusted. To conclude the provisional marketing phase 2, a market product identity comes about for the time being which provides, as it were, the required image of the product at the desired market segment. This to control that no undesirable products are developed for other market segments which, in themselves can perhaps be very useful. But they leave the original principal empty-handed unless, in the mean time, the starting point has proven to have been an unjust assumption. (If such an unintended side-product comes about, then one must document, describe, sketch and store it for possible later elaborations in a different field of study). Preliminary marketing plan: 30 This will not be discussed here, because it actually comes down to a reflection of the process activities from phase 2. It is, however, sensible to discuss it here if that study does not catch up with this second phase. In the following activities 31 up to and including 37, a number of aspects of the design to be made will be further explored. These activities can take place one after the other with feedbacks, but also simultaneously with strong inter-relations. In any case, each aspect in itself must produce a result which must be brought to a synthesis in activity 38. In general it will not be sensible to choose a material in activity 31, to only study the production possibilities of that material in activity 35, and so on and so forth. All activities have strong inter-relations. Analysis separates the different aspects, but cannot be without the synthesis of once more assembling and combining. Material research: 31 For the chosen subject and design follows, initially, the research of the most suitable materials. They are compared to one another by chemical characteristics, physical characteristics of the separate elements, the components, as well as the capability of combining them. This study activity is processed simultaneously with the production research and the technical research. The chosen most suitable materials are then once again and far more thoroughly gone over for their chemical and physical qualities. The preference approach is not ’bottom-up’: starting with the chemical structure, up to the component, but rather a ‘top-down’ approach from the design: by firstly specify the behaviour of the product in question in the shape of a component, then that of the sub components and subsequently to come to the material qualities of these elements themselves.

148

Fig. 121: Material research for the Cardboard Dome: tensile rupture at bolt connections.

Fig. 120: Material research for the IJburg Cardboard Dome at Octatube.

Technical shape research: 32a The hierarchy between element, sub component and component must be explored in the shape which arises from a certain material and certain production techniques, to be used for a specific function. Continuous reasoning has to be done here from small to large, from element to component, from building part to building, and the other way around from large to small. The relation between product and architecture has to be studied in depth at this point. Technical assembly research: 32b This is the exploring of the way in which the various elements are connected into a sub component and the way in which several sub components are connected into a component, which perhaps in its turn influences, as a super- component, the shape of the separate building parts, the means and methods of connection and the resulting manifestations. Transport has its influence in the form of limitations of weight and sizes, hoisting points and possible transport reinforcements, while the hoisting crane can also have its influence. Sometimes specific mounting methods can have a dominating influence on the appearance.

149

Fig. 122: Site assembled top part of the cardboard dome (by Octatube).

Fig. 123: The top part of the dome hoisted on a frame of steel I-profiles.

150

Fig. 124: Assembly of the top part of the dome to the lower part and its frame.

Fig. 125: The result before the membrane is applied.

151

Production research: 33 The raw material is usually in bulk and out of reach of the designer, outside the building industry, purified and transformed into material. The material is transformed into usually standard marketable, intermediary products, in professional language normally called ‘semi-products’ or ‘pre-manufactured product’ (in the view of the processor, one step before him in the product hierarchy . Metal window-frames are, for instance, called ‘basic profiles’. In the case of window-frames there are, fitting in extended window-frame systems, assortments of basic profiles in the available materials of wood, steel, aluminium and PVC. They can be used as a starting point for further development, respectively serve as examples to design and develop an entirely new series of profiles. The question which has to be answered first and foremost is how many running metres window-frame profile of a certain section will be used in the future. For the various materials the material costs and mechanical writings-off with the production of the basic profiles are very different. The ascending line from low to very high shares in the production costs per m1 profile, respectively the economical attainability of small to very large series in wood, aluminium, steel and PVC. These production techniques are about basic profiles. In the further processing of these basic profiles into elements a choice must be made from a number of processing techniques which are specific for the material and for the desired element shape. Although the material is normally strictly limited, the number of processing techniques is large and the number of element shapes (= the result) is, if possible, even greater. But it is ever clear that the product designer draws a great amount of inspiration from the product techniques. Knowledge of the facts is therefore indispensable and essential when new product techniques must be contrived to obtain special process effects. Here, the definite relation between basic material & production techniques & element shape is laid down. Here could also be considered the various production techniques, as yet unknown to the building industries but surely in vogue with other industries, like car, bus, train and aircraft industries. In mechanical or civil engineering these are: gluing, laminating and casting. Application research: 34 The three main types of building products, namely: standard products, system products and special products all have a different, yet clear relation with the application of products in the building industry. Standard products can either be put into practice in many applications without alterations, or not be applied at all. System products need a game of question and answer to get their qualities filled in per project. Special products only exist in separate projects. Therefore, the influence of the project architect runs from zero, via partly, to fully. The mentioned main types of products are, to project architects, ‘closed’, half open’ or ‘open’. Applications, in their turn, can thus have a very penetrating influence on product development. In fact, an amount of technical and architectonical marketing sinks in here, at the level of the development process. The study of various application environments is in this phase of the project important enough to already give an advance on the multi-launching of the product system, in

152

order to do research on the various locations for the project product. On the other hand, a standard product in a varying context or country environment, can also have an ever surprising effect. Imagine a new car, photographed in the Sahara desert or in the snow. The application research of the ready to hand standard product is seen through the glasses of the product designer on the producing side. Design prototype: 35a Out of the combined facts of the designing research activities of phases 34 up to and including 37, follows a prototype design. Perhaps a couple of times feedbacks have to be made for preceding activities (especially the technical research activities, but also the objectives and product market identity are selfevident), extensively described, sketched, further drawn and elaborated at the level of workshop drawings. In this phase (the synthesis) all the gathered knowledge must in a creative manner lead to a design. Remember that most innovations prove to be essentially new combinations of already existing or familiar techniques! Building prototype: 35b Depending on the type of product a decision must be made in which form, scale, size and materials the prototype will be built. The prototype serves, in first instance, as a control of the design and development process for the product designer, in second instance as a confrontation model for the market or the principal. Ideally a functioning prototype is made on an actual scale with the intended materials in the manner of the workshop, but to do this in many cases the room, time and budget may be lacking. In that case it is better to manufacture crucial details, or to make a product on a somewhat smaller scale, respectively a form model on a full scale in non-realistic materials. Testing and evaluating the prototype: 36 In the workplace, the factory or the laboratory performance experiments can now be carried out on the prototype. If the prototype is of an actual size, in actual materials and assembled in a final manner (independent of the fact if it is manufactured by the definite production technique), then it must be possible to carry out a global performance experiment, with sufficient profoundness to have feedback for the functioning of the prototype at design level. Concerning the quality of this test simple devices must be considered, ran through with common sense in a short time. The aim of testing, if it concerns a technically challenging prototype at least, is to be able to view the reliability of the prototype’s behaviour with relatively little effort, roughly for 80%. In a more accurate situation (laboratory) the remaining 20% is intended. Since by this more is done in the depths of the research, a more sophisticated equipment is needed than that of the workshop. After this phase follows, as a rule, a feedback again for preceding phases if they do not sufficiently meet the set criteria.

153

Cost price calculation: 37 Estimating the necessary costs of a zero series, a small series or a large series of identical products after the model of the prototype. Dividing the costs into the costs of the preparation traject, the production traject and those of the sales traject. This is done in order to actually sell the products, to get an adequate sense of these mutual relations. Then a comparison of the resulting cost price + margin = market price with the market price of the intended products to be replaced by the new product. Finally the drawing of the conclusion, in relation to the financial feasibility at the market, of the new product. Prototype acceptability: 38 The prototype should answer to the specified expectations and to the specified respects. Prototype evaluation: 39 The manufactured prototype is evaluated according to the initial evaluation criteria (see activity 31). These are ranged in the order of functional, architectonical, technical and economical criteria. The measure of fulfilling these criteria is set, so is the possible non-fulfilment and the reasons behind this. It will be determined if the prototype will sufficiently meet the specified expectations. Next to that there is also a feedback for the provisional marketing and the product market identity. Process evaluation: 40 The entire process route is evaluated, besides the individual final results of activity 42. One and another is set and presented by students to module attendants and the external viewers in a, to them, convincing manner. Approval of progression: 41 In the study situation the study attendance is responsible for the approval of progressing into a next phase. The management of the company for which the product is developed will, on a basis of the technical results from the preceding activities and with a feedback for the provisional marketing phase 2, occupy themselves with the progression of the project. If the opinion is not entirely positive, then perhaps a feedback for further activities of phase 3 may follow. When the approval is granted, the following activities are those of the definite marketing from phase 4. If the management is of the opinion that the process must be stopped, then a reflection on the market position of the prototype product in activity 42 will follow first, before the plan is postponed, put away or thrown away and all costs are written off. Continuation of marketing: 42 This phase will only be ran through if the management’s opinion is that the project has to be stopped. It is to be considered as a summary of the definite marketing activities: are the data of the provisional marketing still correct for the now developed product? For there is a great chance that the technical product development and the marketing plan pulled a totally different track. The

154

marketing opportunities of the developed prototype must be evaluated. This activity does not have to be processed when the management agrees with the continuation of the process, since the fourth phase holds a far more extensive set of marketing activities. 9.5

FOURTH PHASE: FINAL MARKETING

After the product is further developed up to the prototype stage, and so physical examples of the product can be shown, photographed or filmed for presentations, the fourth development phase sets in: the definite marketing. In the second phase, with the data of the concept design, there already has been a provisional exploration of the market reaction to the concept product. It is, by the way, not unusual that the marketing phases are not linearly linked together after the technical development phases, but with an (partly) overlapping, where the danger of marketing pressure and force from the marketing department towards the product development, holds a risk for a balanced development. In view of the second phase, ‘preliminary marketing’, which is a requiring one, the fourth phase is a more determining one.

Fig. 126: Characteristic activities in Final Marketing phase.

155

th

Goals 4 phase: 43 The goal of the fourth phase is threefold. Firstly, the product related activities to definitely determine which possible production methods will be suitable to use (internally and/or externally) to have the product manufactured. Then to determine the resulting cost price and to be able to make the final choice of production. Secondly, the prototype related activities to definitely determine the marketing opportunities of the prototype product. And thirdly, the marketing related activities to make a marketing plan with a strategy to introduce the product at the market, to have it conquer a place and keep it. Financial management: 44 A budget has to be estimated, time-planning and staffing must be scheduled, as well as external costs be estimated or offered if a part of the activities are executed by others than one’s own staff. These activities together form the process assurance of phase 4. Production techniques: 45 The possible production techniques are now being definitely studied for the component parts, the sub assembling techniques for the joining of elements into sub components and the assembling techniques to manufacture components from elements and subcomponents. Also the transport possibilities and the super assemblies at the building-site, being the mounting, installing and finishing at the building-site, also are a part of this. Building prototypes for marketing: 46 A number of prototypes have to be built now in order to present them on the market. This must be done in a manner which makes a sensible presentation possible, and which must bring in enough data for a final marketing plan to be based on. The making of presentation material, like photos, videos, presentation folders of the prototype with possible application varieties and sufficient technical support, is part of this activity as well. Cost-price evaluation: 47 From the data of the most suitable production methods of activity 45 and the required materials and series sizes, a cost price calculation for the product can be set up. The marketing activity 48 will give the reaction to the market price, so that the profitableness of the product can be viewed. Test market reaction: 48 From the presentation of the prototypes in a physical form or in the shape of images with descriptions, personally (visits), as a group (part of the day presentation in a symposium manner or such) or per branch (exchange introduction), reactions of potentional consumers can be recorded. These persons are approached after a hierarchy is set of the route which the decisions concerning the whether or not applying of the product will follow. For instance, firstly the project architect as the determiner of the type of product, then the principal for the sake of the product budget, after that the building costs adviser

156

and possibly a building management office which once more controls the quality and price for the client. After the tendering and contract awarding it is mostly the main contractor who is allowed a semi-autonomous decision as to which of the competitive offers he will agree. He will do so in the knowledge that the architect (sometimes) has a preference and he will be thinking of his own profit position. In this stage the subcontractor or producer are rather often financially squeezed out, without the initial determiners knowing about this, or can do anything about it. To the architect only a management position holds a greater say. Positive reaction: 49 The marketing test as mentioned in activity 48, which can be processed on various market segments, is evaluated. If an insufficient success is scored, a feedback can take place for the activity in phase 3: which seems the most sensible, or the most probable. If an absolute negative reaction follows, then a reconsidering of the progression of the development project must take place, or a reconsideration of the market segments and the determiners. Perhaps the manner of presentation has to be altered, or a better occasion must be waited for, in order to create the chance that potential clients can reflect better or more profoundly on this. If the reaction is positive, as is suspected, then activity 51 can be entered. Choice of adequate production: 50 From the surveys of the most suitable production methods, plus the tenderings and the suitability of side producers or subproducers to perfect the product simultaneously (‘co-makers’ with technical assistance and high-standing), follows the definite choice of production techniques and production routes. Some of these choices have an artistic design consequence which has to be related to the market reaction, for instance the replacement of a fluently shaped casting by a cheaper, but more angular mechanically manufactured component. Determination of final product: 51 From the feedback of the market reaction, the cost price determination, the market price determination and the final production techniques, follows the final determination of the product. Final marketing strategy: 52 Now that the product is final, the market and market segments are known, the routes and hierarchies of decisions have been scheduled, the marketing plan must be rounded off with the marketing strategy. This must map out how, where, to whom, when and with what the product will be introduced to the great (professional) public. The first activities have to be determined, the following ones and the safety net activities when something threatens to go wrong. It must be considered if there will be an introduction at a large scale, or rather a more project directed one, or a ‘pilot project’ with substantial reductions to ensure the entrance to the market.

157

Product evaluation: 53 Yet again the definite product with the definite marketing plan is evaluated, in the presence of the management, the technical developing team, the marketing staff, the production staff and anyone who later on must spend their energy to make the product a successful one. Approval of the management: 54 As a summary of the preceding evaluation, the management will have to give the sign to enter the fifth phase of the actual production. This ‘go ahead’ in the car industry holds the starting sign to mostly extended investments. For less specific products, like in general in the building industry, normally the aim is to making the most of an existing machine fleet with a couple of additions. 9.6

FIFTH PHASE: PRODUCT MANUFACTURING th

Formulation goals 5 phase: 55 The fifth phase consists of a first production, whether or not directed at a specific project. This is seen as the final test of the technical product, plus the market reaction. Also the definite production of the product which can be launched after this is a part of it. Financial management: 56 The financial and organizational management must be accommodated in the regular management tasks of the company in this phase. They should no longer be a separate development process watching. In this phase even the test production is considered to be a part of the factory production, with all aspects connected with it. First product application (zero series): 57 This activity consists of the production and application of the first, whether or not paid for, test production, which needs to be attended with the necessary care of the technical development team and with the gentle assistance of the marketing team. Reactions of clients: 58 As a feedback after the first zero series application of the product at an actual scale and in a building, the reactions of the clients are once again gauged and viewed, in order to find if these reactions bring about any alterations in the product-marketing plan. Production plan: 59 The final production environment is organized as an alteration in the lay-out of the existing production. Or only the assembly room is reserved. If the production of elements takes place outside and only the assembly takes place inside, or a new facility is being created, with all the architectural, financial and social consequences involved. Location and logistics of production and transport also must be determined in this phase.

158

Acceptable results: 60 The results of the clients’ evaluation of the first zero series application are likely to be positive. If not, the product, the market, the strategy or anything else must be adjusted. It seldom occurs that no feedbacks for preceding activities are needed at this point. However, with a skilfully directed process the ‘loops’ will be short.

Fig. 127: Characteristic activities for Product Manufacturing.

159

Start of production: 61 The actual production is started with a small and slow running up or an approach at a larger scale if the management and/or clients ask for it. Also this activity will require an Organogram of different activities as such, a discipline which should follow from the discipline derived from the following of this Organogram. The matter will not be further discussed here. Sale of first application: 62 The contract for the first official commission of an entirely paid-for product. The clients are either or not informed of the fact that they are the first consumers. First application: 63 The producing of the first product application shows for the first time all the subactivities which have to be ran through to get the product eventually delivered. This single activity 63 consists in itself of dozens of subactivities. Engineering application: 64 For system products an input of engineering activities will be necessary in order to prepare the product application. For that matter, a different Organogram for system products is in existence, including a system design level and a system applications level. The system application needs engineering. Production and assembly: 65 The actual production of elements, assembly of elements into components and subcomponents, and the assembly of elements en subcomponents into components. After transportation to the building-site the super assembly, the mounting and/or the installation and the finishing off takes place there. Alterations: 66 From the first application the need for alterations of the product, the process, the marketing or anything else may come forth. Improvements: 67 The supplied suggestions are being studied, with feedback for the responsible persons and carried through as improvements of the product, the production process or the marketing. Start of official sale and production: 68 The official sale and production can now get started via the, in the mean time, set linear organization, the dealer net or whatever route: producer - sub contractor - main contractor - principal. Launching the product: 69 This is the starting signal for all sorts of activities concerning an adapted publicity campaign and all that is necessary, according to the marketing plan to get the production going and keep it going.

160

10.

CASE SYSTEM PRODUCTS: QUATTRO SR

System products are intended to be applied to several projects and in an ever somewhat differing form by the different fillings up of certain parameters. As a system, it needs to possess certain qualities to be acknowledged as a good product in the open variations, to be filled in per project and/or project architect. Sufficient freedom must be present to give each individual filling up a certain degree of self, or a project colour. Therefore, this is the first meaning of the word ‘system’. The second meaning comes from the side of industrial production (Mechanical Engineering), which rather quickly calls a product a system when it is built up from different components, specifically components with a different function in the whole. Because of the scale size of the building industry, all products are almost systems in this respect, and this will not take the terms of distinction much further. It is clear that two different levels are discussed in the development process of building systems: • the system level • the application level The individual phases are therefore accommodated in two levels:

Fig.128: System products are regarded in two different levels: system design level and system application level.

SYSTEM LEVEL: • System Concept • Provisional Marketing • Prototype Development APPLICATION LEVEL: • Project Concept • Project Prototype • Product Fabrication

161

In fact the customer and his demands are laid down (final marketing) in the fourth phase, and in the fifth phase the prototype is adapted to the specific project. This case as a system product is chosen as an illustration of the usage of design methods for building components. The example concerns the design process on behalf of an earthquake-proof frameless glazing system Quattro SR for the Japanese market. State of the art: 1 From 1988 the designing of large frameless glass panels for roofs and walls in buildings has the attention of Octatube. Starting from the knowledge of and the insight in spatial structures, which could be realized ever more fragile and refined in the course of time, arose the motivation to replace metal elements by glass elements which, apart from a sealing function (as is usual with glass), also could perform a supporting function for a greater part. After the first prototype from 1988 followed the definite design and the development of the frameless glazing of the Glazen Muziekzaal in the Beurs van Berlage in Amsterdam, after an idea of the architect Pieter Zaanen. This led to a drastically simplified realization of the structural system, where all steel elements were welded and the stabilizing tensile system was not constructed at both sides of the glass, but inside the glass façade. This was an architecturally considered decision. On the outside a smooth glass building volume would come about with all the mechanisms in the inside. The building up experience from previous mock-ups had been a lesson that a one-sided erection was far more easy to assemble. In the spring of 1990 the Glass Music Hall in Amsterdam was opened. The author still considers this a design with a successful mixture of an architectural concept, spatial positioning, choice of materials, detailing and a very renovating jump forward in the technique of structural loaded glass at the time. This came about thanks to clear headwork, continuous optimalizing of the design at the drawingboard, experimenting with glass/steel joints in the author’s factory laboratory and a careful, but systematic mounting sequence. The 8 mm glass panels hang one under the other as a literal glass curtain and this concept proved to have no problems at all. The Glass Music Hall was designed to be built in the former Berlage’s Exchange in Amsterdam where no high demands were yet made upon withstanding atmospherical wind, rainwater or snow loading. The philosophy was to avoid a too big or complex experiment and to enrich, step by step every time, a growing technology with a new technical aspect (‘incremental’ product development). The steel glass connector was welded from a number of strip elements and solid rod elements into a rigid component. Next to that also a pullloaded stabilizing system was developed, which in principle was capable of resisting wind pressure and wind sucking, as well as asymmetrical and antimetrical wind loads, as they arise with wind whirls against a façade. It was known that the application of such, only 10 mm. tensile bars, built up from vertical stabilizing tensile trusses, was also depending on the rigidness of the foundation, but also and especially of the roof. Because of the great pulling power the tensile trusses exercised on the surrounding structure (that is to say foundation or roof structure) a high amount of rigidity was required in the substructure. In many following design commissions this problem came up again.

162

Occasion and commission: 2 In 1991 Octatube received, through the glass façade builder John Hui of Reliance Control Ltd. from Hong Kong, who had read the publications on the Glass Music Hall, a request for two high glass façades in the Citicorp skyscraper, designed by the architect Rocco Yim from Hong Kong, to be built right next to the Bank of China of I.M. Pei. The ground floor lobby should become 32 metres high and on both ends of the lobby a frameless glass façade should have to be designed and realized. The width of the two glass façades was 10 and 12 metres. The vertical stabilization system of the Glass Music Hall with the counterformed tensile rods was also used here. But adjusted, in a horizontally instead of vertically arrangement, to the enormous windload in Hong Kong because of occurring typhoons. The effective load inside the Glazen Zaal was 0,3 kN/m², but in Hong Kong this wind effective load was raised to 5,25 kN/m². In Western Europe 0,75 to 1,1 kN/m² is usual. So, in essence, the system remained the same, the depth of the tensile bars in the truss grew and the bars were actually realized as double bars: 2 x 27 mm stainless steel, instead of 1 x 10 mm Fe in Amsterdam. The Quattro connector was enlarged from 200 x 200 mm bolt distance to 250 x 250 mm with wider elements, but actually it was an enlarged model of the connector in the Glass Music Hall. The hanging of glass panels one under the other, where the top panel is loaded with its own weight of 9 metres high glass in 5 panels of 1,8 metres, was considered unfeasible in Hong Kong: a vertical row of 16 panels of 2 metres high would mean an intolerable step across the shear forces of the bolt connection and shear force at the glass hole edges. That is why vertical suspension bars were introduced which could, independent of the wind stabilization system, catch the self-weight per glass panel to the top and lead it up to the upper structure at 32 metres height. The separation of vertical and horizontal loadings had now become a more often occurring phenomenon.

Fig.129: Installing the glass panels.

163

Fig. 130: Bamboo scaffolding for the Citicorp skyscraper in Hongkong.

164

Fig. 131: Interior view of the glass façade after completion.

165

The methodology of designing and building in Hong Kong was modelled upon British methodology: British norms were maintained. Besides, American expertise with the realization of skyscrapers was used. For the façade an American specification was applied, completed with a statically and dynamically loaded full-sized mock-up for a representative part of the glass façade. These loading tests were carried out in the TNO Laboratory in Delft. The mock-up consisted of three glass panels high and five panels width with two horizontal trusses, so that at least one row of panels could be tested under realistic conditions. Around this façade fragment an airtight case was built in which effective pressure and sub pressure could be generated. Together with the water spraying device this would be the maximum test loading. The first test failed just before the climax of the 5,25 kN/m² was reached, because at 5,0 kN two glass panels of 2 x 2 metres exploded by the aroused effective pressure. The pieces of glass were lying 15 metres away in the laboratory! Fortunately, analysis afterwards proved that the ledge fastening at the plywood of the case did not have a sufficient quality and that neither the glass system, nor the glass was the cause. The glass was supplied by the Japanese company Central Glass, the third in size float glazing manufacturer. The glass consisted of 19 mm float glass panels in ‘opti-white’, a low iron oxide and therefore colourless realization of clear float glass, with four holes at 150 x 150 mm from the angles for the fastening. It was this Japanese producer who invited Octatube, in spite of the failing of the first test, to further develop the rigid Quattro system especially for the Japanese market, in order to make it specifically resistant to the occurring earthquakes over there. For that matter, the second test passed with flying colours and is therefore not really a study object. Something similar is described in Karl Sabbagh’s book ‘Skyscraper, the Making of a Building’ [20], in which an extended analysis is made of the failure of a mock-up test, while the testing afresh did not bring in new data of scientific interest. The negotiations about the contents of the commission, the exact formulation and the prices took six months. The Japanese principals proved to be very scrupulous, took proper time to prepare their management decisions and remained polite and reliable. For the first time in Octatube’s existence, know-how was bought and a Fig. 132: Design concept phase.

166

planning was made beforehand of the development of the new Quattro SR connector with three realizations of prototypes of 6 x 10 metres in a row. And all that when nobody had any idea yet of how the connector was going to look! Central Glass probably thought that Octatube knew but was not yet willing to open up, like Japanese would do themselves. But Octatube really had no idea and so ran a great risk with the cost estimation. After this long introduction this case now begins to become interesting to this monograph. With reference to the Organogram and the included activities, the following activities have been ran through. 10.1 FIRST PHASE: PRODUCT CONCEPT Goal: 3 The first consideration in the product developing process is the goal: the development of a suitable joint system in frameless glazing for application in Japan, among other things characterized by its specific earthquakes loadings and conservative technical design work. The developed Quattro SR system would, by an especially to be established subdepartment of Central Glass Flat Sheet Glass Department, be capable of being engineered for various projects in Japan. Strategy: 4 Although Central Glass had the producing of float glass as a kernel activity and therefore, with the establishment of a sub department for the Quattro SR project, would enter into competition with their own clients, the idea also was to not stay behind with Asahi Glass who had adopted the RFR system (Rice, Francis, Ritchie), and with Nippon Sheet Glass who had concluded a licence agreement with Pilkington. The adaptation and adjustment of the third European system seemed an opportunity to obtain, with relatively little energy and investment, an accommodation for the Japanese market. Octatube could do the

Fig. 133: Development of aspects.

167

development of Quattro SR, with the assistance of skilled technologists of the Flat Glass Department. Octatube would play an active part in the first projects with the engineering of project applications. After the initial learning period, also the engineering in Japan could gradually be done. In order to convince the slow and conservative bureaucracy internally, a Quattro mock-up would be built first in the European version, after that a mock-up in the first SR prototype version and then a building-in in the, for this purpose especially to be built, testroom at the factory grounds of Central Glass. During the entire development process a continuous contact would be kept with one or more potential clients as representatives of the partly unknown industrial market of architects and contractors. From the beginning there was also a ‘pilot’ project on hand: the façades of the Seiroko Hospital in Tokyo. Evaluation criteria: 5 A frameless glazing system, consisting of single glass (whether or not laminated), with industrially manufactured connectors which could also resist earthquakes loadings, to be applied to glass façades and glass roofs according to the Japanese regulations, flexible enough for local engineering and inspiring enough to be used by Japanese architects, with a lower cost-price than the two known systems of RFR and Pilkington, and a technical build-up which would be patentable. Process Assurance: 6 The cooperation agreement between Central Glass and Octatube resulted in a lump sum payment for the transfer of know-how, a payment for the developing of the Quattro SR connector and for various prototypes which would be locally assembled, as well as an engineering fee for the pilot project. The contract made good for a development period of two years. The project was meticulously carried out within the set term. The prototypes, the tests and the pilot project were realized and the terms were invoiced and received according to the agreement, after a development period of two years. For the Quattro SR system a worldwide joint patent is applied for, with Central Glass as the owner for the Far East and Octatube for the rest of the world. Know-how transfer: 7 Parallel with the developing work, realized in the engineering department of Octatube, the author wrote a monograph ‘Guyed Structures in Glass and Steel, a book on Quattro Glass’, of which there are only two copies with the then state of technology in the field of frameless glazing as a basis for the transfer of knowledge and insight. Besides, in a number of three visits, one-day seminars were given by the author for a gathering of co-operators from different departments of Central Glass. Central Glass has not yet released the information in the monograph for publication.

168

Five main aspects: 8 Five main aspects were distinguished, leading to a number of five aspect studies, each divided into: • Aspect analysis • Aspect brainstorm • Aspect synthesis • Aspect concept after which the different aspect concepts were made fit for one another to become a product concept by engineering a number of corrections and additions for the five aspects studies in feedbacks for and to the different activities. The five aspect clusters were: • Geometry roofs and façades • Earthquake loadings • Glass panels • Glass panels connectors • Tensile stabilizations Roofs and façades: 8.1 In the building industry experiments hardly ever occur, because possible experiments are entirely carried out by the large building companies under their own control, are extensively tested and only after proven success and reliability are they realized. Flat glass frameless roofs are not known in Japan, but space frames with conventional sawtooth roofs on them, are. The Netherlands have, in the mean time, realized both various subtended frameless glass roofs and spatial panels with frameless coverings of glass panels. Combined with the fact that earthquake loadings in buildings have mainly horizontal movements as a result, the resulting roof concept, that roofs as independently built panels should be conceived with a great horizontal rigidity, laid on some kinds of wheels which make it possible for the building part ‘roof’ to make a disc-shaped movement on the pillars or layings. Some of these layings should be steady in certain directions, with elastic dampers to take care of the roofs not to shove from the pillars. The concept is like that of an aeroplane of which one wheel is tied to the ground. Vertical façades do not know problems, by the nature of the silicone filled joints between the glass panels, perpendicular in the glass plane: every seam is, as it were, a hinge line. But in the lateral direction, in the plane of the panels, moves the main support structure of the building, in Japan mainly consisting of vertical pillars and horizontal floors. These double-sided clasped pillars move more than pillars with vertical wind bracings, not desirable from an architectural point of view. The traditional Japanese glass façades allow the individual glass panels sufficient room in the usually generously dimensioned (read: bulky) window-frame mullions and transoms. The very elegant frameless glass façades meet, in principle, the problem of absorbing the horizontal lateral movements in the sealant joints, which must now, next to being wind and waterproof, also be very deformable. From a production-technical and structural point of view single glass panels must never be chosen larger than 2,1 x 2,1 metres, fastened at four points, with which also the maximum modulation of the façade is established. The glass panel in the roof is usually smaller, with an optimum between 1,5 metres

169

and 1,8 metres, when long lasting snow loadings and high Summer temperatures arise. From a material-technical point of view glass panels are isotropic in the plane of the glass panel and they have the same material characteristics in X and Y direction and therefore a square modulation/panel size is preferred. But in some projects horizontal glass panels, and in other projects vertical glass panels, will be called for. Earthquake loadings: 8.2 Japanese regulations were analysed, as well as the knowledge of earthquakes, among others in the United States. Earthquake loadings act mostly horizontally in high buildings. That is to say that vertical buildings have a great horizontal movement deflection in their less rigid direction. The last earthquake, which destroyed the city centre of Kobe, has also manifested itself in vertical movements.

Fig. 134: Deformation of glass façade in high-rise building during earthquake.

Glass panels: 8.3 In all applications of Quattro main material components are found. The glass panels can be manufactured from single glass, laminated glass and from joint panels, usually double glass. Each glass panel can be manufactured as float glass, semi pre-strained or completely pre-strained, realized in clear glass, or low iron oxide, in mass tinted, coated or screened. The gauge of the glass panels is usually a function of the panel dimensions and the loadings (wind, snow, self-weight, persons and vandalism loadings). The panel dimensions

170

come from the design of the roof, or the wall, the stabilization system, the required subdivision and economical optimalisation. Single glass applications were highly preferred: laminated in roofs, single in low walls and laminated in higher walls, especially when the walls on ground-floor level contain emergency exits. The glass panels are, in all cases, fully tempered and have undergone an additional heatsoak-test in order to minimize the possibility of spontaneous cracking caused by nickel sulphide enclosures. Central Glass have the skill to supply completely pre-strained glass panels of even 2 x 2 metres with a gauge of 12, 15 or 20 mm with a safety panel of 3 mm float glass. As a means of sealing the panels a chemical neutral silicone sealing, with a very high elasticity, preferably in black or, if translucently realized in a UV-light stable realization. Glass panel connectors: 8.4 Glass panel joints can be based upon an orthogonal panel division or such a one with divergent angles in X, Y and Z direction. The dimensions of the glass panels and the loadings influence the strength of the joint. The joint itself can be manufactured in aluminium, steel or stainless steel and can be cast, welded, rotated or manufactured in a combination of these manners of manufacturing. The fastening of the glass panel joint to the (double) glass panel can be realized: • double mechanically • semi mechanically, semi chemically • double chemically respectively single glass panels: • mechanically • chemically These differences in material fastenings lead to a number of characteristic details. The preference was for the most orthodox of these connections: the entirely bolted joint. Actually, on this aspect cluster ‘glass panel connector’ most of the energy is spent in the design & engineering phase. After the effect of earthquakes mainly in a horizontal direction became clear, the conclusion for façades was that the glass panels should be coupled horizontally into a rigid coupled row, while vertically directed the rows on top of one another should be able to move across with regards to one another. The initial idea was to split up the Quattro connector into two Duo-wings. Because of the extant of the RFR system, which has an H-shape and the familiar X-shape of Quattro, the H-shape could not be used. The two Duo-wings, therefore, would have the shape of two V’s, moving in a reflection position with regards to one another. Initially the idea was to make a horizontal groove in the centre around which the upper-V could move with regards to the lower-V. However, because of the X-shape the connector’s appearance remained unacceptable. With this principle it was simply not possible to compose the shape of the knot properly. It would work, though, although a damper mechanism was lacking. The second idea was to manufacture a two-axes hinge point, so that the centre of the connector could topple around the central axis, as it were, and so the two upper points, with regards to the two lower points, could be moved horizontally. This principle was worked out in a number of different models, first drawn, then realized in the form of steel real size models and these were presented to the principal.

171

Stabilizers: 8.5 The stabilizing tensile structure can be a part of the building, in that case it is usually a part of the concrete structure, or a separate support structure for the façade or the roof. Although in general slender, steel stabilizers are chosen, which do not undo the effect of frameless glazing, or even strengthen it. There are roughly three categories to be distinguished [10]: x Mass-active systems: beams, columns on bending x loading x Vector-active systems: truss girders, ‘Vierendeel’ girders and arched girders of which the parts alternately are loaded on tension or compression x Form-active structures: domes, mainly on compression, tensile trusses and cable structures on pure tension The client was the most interested in the tensile trusses which were built up and developed from solid round bars in the shape of welded or bolted tensile truss structures as a passively post-stressed counterpart of the actively stressed cable structures of RFR and Ove Arup. The ‘mother of the frameless glass structures’, was developed in the Eighties by Peter Rice et al for the glazed Serres of Cité des Sciences et de l’Industrie at La Vilette, Paris. An admirable step forward, which justly got much attention in the architectural press. However, it was financially unfeasible for the situation in The Netherlands at the time. From that arose the motivation for the author’s Quattro systems, being developed from 1988. They could do with less prestress, a greater rigidity and lower reaction forces on the adjacent concrete structures with more simplicity.

Fig. 135: Different connection glass / Quattro nodes.

Technical feasibility: 9 Continuously the interim results were reported by Rob Bakker, structural designer at Octatube, to Mr. Suzuki, the project engineer of Central Glass. The exchanged faxes gave evidence of concurrent engineering, a very inspiring and constructive simultaneously carried out engineering at two different levels, with sufficient respect and involvement to be open-minded for one another, as well as for continuous suggestions.

172

Fig. 136: Serres of La Vilette, Paris. Architect: Adriaen.Fainsilber. Engineering: RFR.

Fig.137: Detail of Serres of La Vilette.

173

In general concurrent engineering, in order to shorten the time of developing in one company with short lines between the various involved departments, is an excellent way of working to increase the general efficiency and speed for product development. Octatube became big by it. But simultaneous working with companies out of doors always brings along the problem of hierarchy and the set fees. When two parties with independent fees, of which one hierarchically can dominate the other, work simultaneously at a parallel development route, always one party comes off a loser, does not get paid for its efforts and can do things once again for the same fee to please the dominant party. In situations like these it becomes the recessive party to await what the dominant party will think up or command, with which the principle of concurrent engineering with the inherent time-saving is thrown overboard. In the case of Quattro SR Octatube was paid by the hour during the development work, so there was no negative pressure about that. In Octatube’s experience, the almost parallel or overlapping progress of the development work in connection with architectonical, structural and industrial designing, has always been realized with a very short beam chart time-planning, in comparison with the beam chart planning where independent companies wait for one another. When all professionals work under the same roof, five minutes in another room mean an increasing efficiency to oneself, or the opportunity to anyway think up new concepts and have these quickly commented upon in a first global round by the various experts of the company, after which the concept is improved, enters the dialogue again etc. until eventually it comes to an apparently realistic result. In the practice of the usual building projects in The Netherlands concurrent engineering is normally a financial disaster because of the hierarchical impulses, with everybody waiting passively for full instructions. When these are lacking, a claim for extra time is justifiable. In Germany this climate of claiming time leads to building processes with daggers drawn. But this negative spiral must, in the future, be broken through more often, on penalty of buildings remaining assemblies of standard or familiar system components. The technical innovation has then irreversibly died without a struggle. Preliminary market analysis: 10 The first market analysis is usually done before the initiative is taken to start a new product developing process. Product development is usually a management matter and the management must have the market information at hand with the viewing of its significance. One of the evaluation factors after the product concept has been finished is naturally the market again: is this a suitable answer to the market? The relation between the shape and the realization of the Quattro connector’s concept, the estimated cost-price and the reaction of particularly the architect of the pilot project, was the topic of the discussion here. The Japanese architect was of the opinion that the proposed nodal point design had to be of even smaller dimensions, after which all the hidden mechanisms were suddenly entirely revealed and the connector, in principle, had to follow a similar external mechanism as the RFR connector.

174

The architect was enthusiastic about the preliminary result. Other architects were approached by the sales department of Central Glass with an identical result. At this small scale the first confrontation with the market gave motivation enough to move on at the taken road. Economical feasibility: 11 After the functional, technical and architectonical evaluation was done, the costprice estimation for the pilot project was made by means of a cost estimation for the manufacturing of the project engineering for the pilot project and of the material nodal connectors, as well as for the glass and the assembly. This turned out to be three times as high as in comparable Dutch projects, but for Central Glass this was no reason to not continue. The building costs of the prototype building in Japan are 100 to 200% higher than comparable Dutch projects. Only with repetitions the gigantic initial investments are earned back. Incentives like prestige and loss of face with regards to regular clients or assurances are often at the base of making great initial investments. When after this step the yellow or red card was not given, the conclusion could be that the first phase was successfully ran through. 10.2 SECOND PHASE: PRELIMINARY MARKET ANALYSIS In accordance with this monograph this phase will not be elaborated on. It is identical to the phrasing in paragraph 9.3: Preliminary Marketing. 10.3 THIRD PHASE: TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT The third phase of Technical Development is concerned with the technical development of the product concept of phase 1, taking into account the reactions of the market on that concept, generated in phase 2, to a mature technical prototype. Goal prototype development: 12 The goal of this phase is to develop further the product concept to the stage of functional, technical, architectonical and economical maturity in which the prototype plays a central part. In the concept phase a number of suppositions were given which now have to be controlled, improved, altered. They must lead to an integrated whole with qualities which make the product acceptable to the demands and requirements of the market, as they were known at the start of the project and were defined in the second phase of the Preliminary Marketing. Also belonging to this goal is the description of the specific strategy, the aspects to be developed and explored, the required product cost-price, the duration of the process and the process costs, as well as the expectations of the final product at the end of this phase: the evaluation criteria. With this title is actually meant the goal block activities, as were dealt with in the first phase.

175

Fig. 138: Frameless glued glass roof of the ‘Fries Natuurmuseum’ (Frisian Museum of Natural History), Leeuwarden, NL. Architect: Jelle de Jong. Structural Engineering: Octatube.

176

Fig. 139: Details of the frameless glued glass roof in Leeuwarden.

Process assurance: 13 This prototype phase usually requires more energy and investments than the previous phases. It is not unusual that the first concept phase absorbs only 20% of the design and development costs and the third prototype phase 80%. An explicit estimation, subdivided in the various activities is a pressing need, it must be based on a budget item like R & D in the company when it concerns a private product development, or on a specific commission agreement when it concerns a specific external commission. Usually the development budget has a set amount. Product/market identity: 14 From the combination of the first development phase of the Concept and the second phase of the Preliminary Marketing, followed a Product/market identity: the description of the market segments for which the product with beforehand determined qualities, would be required. Quattro SR was meant for application in Japan, in prestigious buildings, particularly as a frameless glazing around semi-

177

public grand rooms where the progression of the building technology could sufficiently be displayed. The entire Quattro SR system, consisting of glass panels, Quattro SR nodal connectors and the stabilizations behind them, would be displayed in its totality and refinement. In this phase the possibilities of flat frameless glass roofs was not seen as realistic in Japan, nor was the frameless second (front) façade for offices, annoyed by traffic noise or too much sun radiation. In marketing the marketeers of Central Glass were not very inventive and many possibilities had to literally be brought to them. In this phase architectonical marketing was suggested. Preliminary market plan: 15 From this phase already a preliminary market plan must describe the specific goals of the future product introduction, the means, the strategy, the relation with the producing company. It was particularly for Central Glass not yet clear in this phase how the service around the entirely developed product would be presented at the market. Either from the mother company, the float glass producer, or from a semi-independent daughter who could also compete with other clients of the float glass producer. Two years later, Asahi Glass proved to have chosen for such a semi-independent approach. To the marketing plan at this point in time, also belonged the relation between the estimated annual money turnover, the individual project turnovers and the glass turnovers. Of course it became clear that the interests of mass producers of float glass with mega turnovers of a product with a minimal cost-price, were completely opposed to the very knowledge-intensive, engineering-intensive and production-intensive Quattro SR products. The market plans of Central Glass and of Quattro SR were very far apart. It was more a matter of ‘me too’: Central Glass wanted at all costs a frameless glazing system in order to compete with its two main colleagues. The Japanese building market shows, because of the division in some large industrial conglomerates, far more of a predestined division of tenderings and sub tenderings. Even before Renzo Piano’s design of Kanzai Airport was finished, each of the three glass producers knew already what part of the glazing they were allowed to supply. The development of the marketing plan is further realized parallel to the technical traject, if the producer wants to keep a finger in the pie. What follows is the technical developing block of developing and research activities, distinguished in the six main aspects: • Material • Technical System • Form & Composition • Production • Assembly • Applications Fig. 140: Technical developments for Quattro Seismic Resistant.

178

Each of these main activities is normally complex enough to be provided with a significant subdivision in sub-activities which refer to (re)designing, developing and research, in abstraction on paper and in concreto in the form of material models and prototypes, in order to go from a preliminary to a final product realization. Material research: 16 After the material was roughly determined in the concept phase, the definite type and chemical assembly of the material had to be determined at that point, including the required mechanical qualities, referring to the shape in which this material had to be converted, the structural manner in which it functioned and reacted on loadings and the manner in which it was produced, assembled and mounted. The three main components of Quattro SR, namely the glass panels, the connectors and the stabilizers each had their own material optimalization. In the case of the glass panels only the realizations in monolith single glass and laminated single glass were considered, where the typically Japanese attitude to exclude every possible risk, led to structural load-bearing panels of fully tempered float glass, in a low-oxide realization or not, safeguarded against breakage by minimally an annealed float glass plane of only 3 mm gauge, even for panel dimensions of 2 x 2 metres. ‘Zappi’, the tough and structurally reliable transparent plate material of the future, as the chair of Product Development of the TU Delft has in mind, was no option in the eyes of the float glass producer Central Glass. The connectors have squandered the greater part of the research hours. The preference material was stainless steel in a realization which did not demand further engineering and was preferably shaped in the production method of the lost wax casting. However, in the short development hours and the frequent shape alterations, from all sorts of considerations resulted welded connectors from mechanically processed and welded steel. These welded prototype connectors were to be followed by wax cast stainless steel connectors with a lead-in-time of twelve weeks for the manufacturing of the models and the casting of the first series. The stabilizers have a shape and realization which have to be designed in a very project involved manner. The material to be used was preferably steel massive pulling bars, as opposed to the competitor’s flexible realization of stainless steel cables, which caused a high level of pre-straining and therefore heavier building structure loadings. These stainless steel pulling bars had to be combined with welded pressure bars, which also have joints for the pulling bars and the connectors. Steel was preferred over aluminium because of the great pulling power and the more favourable temperature expanding co-efficiencies of steel/glass over aluminium/glass.

179

Fig. 141: Exterior close-up of a Quattro SR node in the Seiroko Hospital, Tokyo.

180

Fig. 142: Quattro SR façade in the Seiroko Hospital.

Technical research: 17 This particular technical research first and foremost studied the greatest problem of the loadings on the façade because of earthquakes and the consequences for the structure of the building and of the glazing, the mutual differences and the loadings and distortions of the Quattro SR system. The conclusion was that particularly multiple storey-buildings with concrete load-bearing structures, realized as columns and closed floor planes, would move horizontally during an earthquake. For a vertical frameless glass façade it meant that the glass panels next to each other would start moving as one row, as compared to a differently moving upper row and lower row. The first indication, therefore, was horizontally switching, vertically moving. Next to that there was the problem of the returning to the default after the earthquake. A façade with rambling glass panels moving above each other was not in order. Initially this led to the introduction of mechanical springs at the end of the stabilization. Later on the spring mechanism was absorbed in the artistic designing of the connector, which would automatically return to the default position because of the fact that, during the distortion by earthquakes, energy would accumulate in the connector, which would again become zero when reaching the starting point. A second aspect was: the demands which were made on the silicone seams between the glass panels. The vertical panels were hardly distorted, the horizontal seams, on the other hand, would start moving at a height of 12 to 20 mm to 20 mm sidelong, from left to right. The intersection of vertical and

181

horizontal seams had a distortion of squarely 20 x 20 mm, to a left or right diamond shape. The type of silicone to be put in was very transformable: up to 200%. A third aspect was: the glass panels, of which was said in general that, for the producer’s safety and potentional ‘loss of face’, the possible falling out had to be prevented by laminating the main panel by a thin float glass plane. A fourth aspect was: the tensile structures. In fact the occurrence of earthquakes caused that a diagonal tensile stabilization like in The Netherlands often is applied, was of no use here: either a vertical tensile stabilization, which at the ends hinges at the building structure, or a horizontal one which moves along with the horizontal side-ways movements of the building. Depending on nature and shape of the fastening points at the building structure a horizontal tensile structure was preferred and on it rotating connectors. A fifth aspect was: the mechanism that had to be extant in the connectors to absorb the wind loadings as well as the self-weight and at the same time to make possible the lateral movements, and the providing of a damper mechanism too.

Fig. 144: Close-up of a node with rulers in order to indicate displacements caused by earthquakes.

Fig. 143: Earthquake test facility for the Quattro SR node in Tokyo.

182

Fig. 145: Inspection of the node.

Shape research: 18 The development of the connector’s shape followed from the product concept on which the X-shape of Quattro, as it is internationally known, had to be further built upon, although the H-shape, as used in the RFR system, actually gave better starting points for internal movement. The moving in pairs of the two upper points opposite the two lower point by means of the double hinges at the central axis of the hinging pressure bar, developed from a first design and prototype with rather larger dimensions, based upon a whole distance of 300 x 300 mm, to a definite smaller dimension of 200 x 200 mm distance, where the initial typical Octatube artistic design with its hidden (from view) mechanism, was entirely made visible. The shape of the steel welded wings was developed after the casting model, but in the definite casting realization these parts should become more smoothly and more streamlined. Production research: 19 Although the six technical aspects often overlap each other and interlock, yet an analysis is stimulating for the progression of the process. The glass panels in their completely pre-strained and laminated, or not, realization follow familiar production manners. In the connectors the mechanically engineered parts could be developed geometrically from the concept. The two wings to be cast were also before the realization of the first project still manufactured as welded elements. Much attention was paid at the smallest possible tolerances between the various elements in the connector. In the connector a vertical rotation mechanism had to be possible, laterally with the glass plane, while vertically the self-weight had to be born. Looseness in movement versus rigidity because of loading. Next to that considerations were: product tolerance of the elements, tolerance of the assembly of the connector and the connector’s tolerance of the mounting on the pressure bars, not to mention the ‘misfit’ with the tolerances of the building structures, often found in centimetres in the glass in 1 or 2 mm, while the mechanism of the connector only foresaw tenths of mm. Actually every wire joint shows the same

Fig. 146: Deformations schemes.

183

image: in the direction of the wire there must be some room to be able to rotate, while perpendicularly, because of the loading in the fastened situation, the tolerance must be utterly small because every hinge-like joint causes great distortions in the connectors which form vertical cantilevers. A small rotation causes a great distortion in the glass panels. At that moment once again the confrontation with the fact that a bolt is designed to transfer power in the direction of the stem and not perpendicularly in the form of a bending, presents itself. The stainless steel stabilizing structures and welded pressure bars received sufficient wire-shaped joints to be able of neutralizing rough building tolerances to the finer glass tolerances. The number of hinges in the cantilever overhanging elements which are loaded on bending, had to be limited while in the pull loading elements the extant of hinges did play no part. Assembly research: 20 The various components, especially the connector, have to be designed in such a way that they fit well, with tolerances which guarantee the mechanical as well as the structural rigidity. Tolerances are extremely important and form the basis of industrial production. Of Henry Ford it is said that he invented the assembly line as the assembling principle. Before the assembly line, however, he had dramatically reduced the falling out percentage of components by ever keeping on about fitting tolerances of the components as a condition for an efficient assembly. Manufactured components were therefore, just before and during the assembling, adjusted to make them fit, as we sometimes still see in the building industry. Particularly this part was taken over by the Japanese. They seem less keen on designing a new concept than on perfecting a known concept. Application research: 21 The application research was limited to the possibilities of all sorts of applications and degenerated rather quickly into giving advices and proposals for project concepts. It was actually seen as the technical market control of the developed design. Design and building of prototype: 22 After these six aspect developments and development researches a number of four prototypes was made: two of a nodal point which illustrated in two related realizations the double hinge’s performance and two full size tests of 5 panels width and 3 panels high, with panel dimensions of approximately 2 x 2 metres. These buildings up took place in an especially designed and manufactured testroom which, apart from a front surface of approximately 6 x 10 metres had a depth of 2,5 metres and was provided with a double portal frame. The outer portal frame was rigid, the inner frame could move by means of the four hinges at the four corners. Test and evaluation prototype: 23 The glass façade was suspended on the upper transom of the inner frame which could be moved across hydraulically to simulate the lateral falling out of the façade during an earthquake. The tests consisted of overpressure and under-

184

pressure in the testing room, in a static manner (longer duration) and a dynamic manner (short and changing from overpressure to under-pressure) according to the Japanese regulations, attended by a hydraulically instigated and laterally moving glass façade with hinging nodal points, and all this sprayed by a standard water test. A number of laboratory assistants had themselves locked in during the tests in order to control if any water penetration occurred. They looked, by the way, like Buddy Hollies with their standard helmets and black safety spectacles. The lateral deformation was shown by means of measuring rules and yellow threads. The built-in glass panel rows indeed behaved rigidly and jointly in a horizontal direction, while in the vertical direction a distortion of approximately 20 mm occurred per row in the sealant. Both tests were carried out without any problems.

Fig. 147: Earthquake test facility for the Quattro SR node in Tokyo.

Fig. 148: Inspection of the façade.

Preliminary cost-price: 24 After the successful technical tests post-calculations were made for a standard façade, having a surface of 500 m² and these prices were considered rather high. The total development costs were highly risen in the mean time and it was clear that these partly had to be written off of the general research costs of the Central Glass Concern, and not of the project at hand. After some smoothing a suitable price level came about, almost double compared to European prices, but viewed from the intensively personal intervention with the project the initial costs of Japanese building products are always high.

185

Prototype acceptability: 25 By the criteria which the management of Central Glass had set with the granting of the commission, the prototype was an acceptable solution. Evaluation Quattro SR project: 26 In general there was satisfaction about the process as it was carried out. Approval of continuation: 27 The management of Central Glass approved of the process and enabled the following step to move to a first application of two vertical glass façades in the Seiroko Hospital in Tokyo. However, this concerns an application level and will not be elaborated on in this monograph. With this activity the system level of the Quattro SR tensile glass system for the Japanese market was completed. The second half of this development system, at the application level, has been executed, but in a scientific sense it is not interesting for detailing the Organogram.

Fig. 149: Close-up of the Quattro SR glass connection node.

186

11.

CASE SPECIAL PRODUCTS: TRAIN TAXI ‘SHELTER PILLAR’

Special products, or project products are unique products, especially designed, developed and produced for a specific building or project. Because of a direct question of the project architect, in view of the totality of the building concept, the actual programme of requirements and wishes is set very clearly and if there is a need for alterations which can take place quickly in a discussion, no marketing activity is included in this process. For, to the product designer the project architect represents the market. (To the project architect the principal is the market). The three typical phases of the development process of project products are therefore named without marketing phases as follows: • design concept • prototype development • product manufacturing An example of a special product: the design and development process of the Train Taxi ‘shelter pillar’ has been chosen. (In Dutch train is ‘trein’.)In general special products or special components are parts of buildings. The shelter pillar, however, is an independent structure, a small building in itself which is placed in the public spaces nearby Dutch railway stations as a waiting-spot for travellers using the train taxi. The shelter pillar has been chosen as an example because of the surveyable complexity of an especially developed building product and because the process was realized in the author’s presence. It is a very outstanding design, of which no more than a number of 120 would be built. The shelter pillar would determine the identity of the trein taxi and would not be used for any other purposes, nor by principals. For the following description a grateful use was made of texts of Sam van Haaster, project leader and one of the partners of DOK Produktontwerpers in Amsterdam. 11.1 CONTEST CONCEPT Pre-phase, restricted competition: 1 Train Taxi (TT, nowadays called ‘Transvision’) had in 1995 approximately eighty running locations in the main cities, with the exclusion of Rotterdam, Amsterdam and Den Haag. TT is a kind of franchise organization: a local taxi company adopts the formula to which TreinTaxi centrally attended the marketing and supporting. TreinTaxi is a full daughter of NS (Nederlandse Spoorwegen/Dutch Railways) with an excessive independence. One of the characteristic outstanding sales manners was that a traveller would never have to wait longer than ten minutes and that a taxi would always be available. The taxi would be shared by more travellers. At the locations, served at the time, this was reasonably easy to make good, in view of the travellers’ supply and the scale of the local taxi companies. A possible expansion of TreinTaxi especially had to be looked for at smaller locations. The short waiting time and the waiting taxi would, however, not become a reality so that a shelter accommodation became unavoidable. TreinTaxi instructed both NS-Design and DOK Produktontwerpers (an office of four Delft industrial designers in Amsterdam, which specified in

187

products for the professional market), to make a sketch design. Because of the author’s unacquaintedness with the design considerations of NS-Design, what follows is only the report of Dok Produktontwerpers. The following additional demands were made: x A shelter accommodation as an addition to the existing pillar x No resemblance with a (bus or tram) shelter x Assembly by means of a very short operation with a very logical addition to the existing pillar DOK reacted quickly with a series of concepts, among them a quarter circle segment hanging from the pillar like a roof, and a curved one-pieced transparent wall applied to the pillar. Characteristic of the idea in this stage already, was that in front of as well as behind the screen a shelter under a roof came about. This concept was elaborated upon. For the structure a framing of roof and wall in a curved welded tube was suggested, in the vocabulary of the existing stoppingsign. During the making of a 1:5 scale model the idea arose to make the roof transparent in order to obtain an airily whole. The presentation was done in November 1994. On the basis of effort and quality of the idea TreinTaxi chose to proceed with DOK in April 1995. Pre-design after final commission: 2 x In the intervening period TT had extended its programme of requirements: x lighting x intercom with train taxi exchange x a display-window for changing information concerning TT x a display-window for a newspaper x a seating accommodation, suitable for elderly people

Fig. 150: First phase.

It was clear that this would be impossible to realize while retaining the initial pillar. This meant a considerable extension of the developing efforts, with many unforeseen aspects. Add to this that TreinTaxi aimed for an introduction on 1 December 1995! DOK and TreinTaxi agreed on a phases schedule and an appointed task budget, based upon after-calculation, which is unavoidable with such a short processing time and so many unknown new aspects. The detailed task and the allied trust which was given to DOK by TT can be called exceptional. It does not often happen that a principal offers such a free hand to an office. DOK advised by the end of May 1995 that TT should associate with a producer of street furniture as soon as possible, in order to have them involved

188

directly in a definite designing and so integrate existing know-how and building elements. TreinTaxi, DOK and advisers of NS Purchasing formed a designing working-group which met frequently (once a week). This working-group would later be extended with the selected producer. The frequent deliberations with the consequently written minutes have proved to be of the greatest importance for obtaining and keeping the mutual thoroughly acquaintedness of the project, for coming to fast resolutions, for keeping sufficient pressure on the project process and staying in control over the progression. Testing concept with 1:1 mock-up: 3 At the time TreinTaxi wondered if the concept design would have sufficient sheltering capacity. Entirely in line with DOK’s motto “seeing is believing”, the definite design phase was therefore preceded by a test by making a 1:1 wooden mock-up. A rain-and-wind team from the film business was hired (it was the middle of June and it had been bone-dry for weeks). The object was then exposed to downpours from all wind directions. The quarter circle shape of the roof proved to provide insufficient protrusion at the straight sides. By giving these sides a circle shape as well, this was corrected. The front side, which had to provide room for 3 to 4 persons, had insufficient depth to withstand frontal incoming rain. Because of the fact that, for practical reasons, the bent windscreen had been made in two parts, it was very simple to try out on the spot how the placing of one half of the screen to the back, would turn out. This proved to be a golden strike. With the shoved walls an asymmetrical groundplan could be made, with which it was possible to react to the dominant wind direction on the spot. A programme of requirements was drafted in which the results of the test were included. TreinTaxi took stock of all locations with photos to obtain insight in the placing conditions, like available spaces, the kind of paving and orientation of the cab-stand in relation to the station’s exit. Producer selection and preliminary design: 4 NS Purchasing had pre-selected, by means of its extant channels, five producers who were approached with the request to make a preliminary estimate based upon the status of the concept design of DOK, plus the additions. DOK proposed to TT to involve Octatube in the process, as a possible supplier of the glass components. At DOK some ideas ripened on the application of glass, which could never be realized without know-how and courage in that field. TreinTaxi, however, added Octatube to the list as the sixth producer, for the entire project! Based upon the written offers and the susceptibility of the project plan, four producers were invited to amplify their offer. Some of them took the liberty to sketch their own interpretation of the concept. One producer was weighed and found wanting. DOK then made three new sketch designs which expressed the characteristic materials and possibilities, to be found by each of the three remaining candidates. By the end of June 1995 the different imagoes of these parties were illustrated in spherical collages. Each of the producers in question was sent the, to them, suitable design in order to react on it. The design evolved quickly in this phase from a traditional steel tubular framework with panel completion into a light-footed framework with a fragile little

189

roof. The information which was given by the producers in the offering conversations could be incorporated immediately by DOK in the design work. Inspired by Octatube’s building elements a high-tech imago was sketched around their alternative, by which every building team member proved to be enchanted. In view of Octatube’s lack of experience with street furniture there was, however, some doubt about an adequate possibility in the field of industrial production logistics, placing and aftercare. For Octatube was not an organization used to manufacturing in series complete products with a great number of different components. A structural score matrix was set up within which marks were granted to every producer for criteria like expected visual quality, assessment, value of the contribution to the development traject and reliability concerning the pass through time. It was striking that TT in this stage wished to exclude the price from the judging criteria! The total scores of the producers were not significantly far apart. The decision was made to apply for a new offer based upon the last status of the sketch design in question, in order to make the price of great influence after all. In separate communication with every producer, the specific product alternative was prepared where the, till then merely aesthetic, sketch designs were provided with a structural set up and details. Every producer offered a different product, namely the design fitted to themselves. This may be marked as relatively unique. Normally the principal followed the strategy of the purchaser, who would try to obtain the lowest price with a uniform design. 11.2 CONCEPT PHASE Goal final design: 5 After the selection of the producer, by an extended building team deliberation the further design development was carried out, in order to achieve an outstanding design for a reasonably low and sufficiently transparent price composition. Strategy final design: 6 The building team consisted of client TreinTaxi, NS Purchasing, DOK and Octatube. The client initiated, agreed, financed and attended to the installation sequence, as well as to the licence process for each stand. DOK undertook the main design, the choice of materials, the shapes of the elements and the detailing on its own account. Octatube, as the selected producer, prepared calculation based upon component cost-prices and hours with a set overhead percentage and advised during the designing development. Its task was to structurally determine the components, the engineering, the production, the assembly and the fitting. Evaluation criteria: 7 The target became a clearly recognizable Train Taxi-stand with a target price of approximately EUR 6,000 excl. VAT, in a number of variants which could be placed at the various locations, and a programme for placing the first examples by February 1st 1996 at 25 locations for the official opening.

190

Different aspects: 8 The final design as it was developed by DOK, consisted of a large pillar in an elliptical section which penetrated the roof, encircled with a pendent glass roof, with two round glass walls, two small benches and an information displaywindow. Through the contacts with the street furniture manufacturers and their own opinions, the building team had formed an anti-vandalism strategy which came down to “strength veiled in vulnerability”. No radiating of suspicion towards the public by indestructible structures, but showing confidence by an elegant and well attended-to design. The structural qualities as they emerged from the contacts with Octatube corresponded perfectly with this strategy. The roof, for example, was far stronger than it looked, which discouraged vandals from climbing on it. Considerations at this point were the following: Shape of pillar: 9 A vertical element as a primarily recognizable element, chosen in clear colours and with graphical signs. Hanged around it were a transparent little glass roof and two curved transparent glass panel walls. As a shape, the pillar dominated and real soon was named ‘shelter pillar’. The pillar was in fact a reminiscence of the traditional halting-place sign, in proportion as well as in colouring. The section of the pillar was slightly transformed in the course of time from a flat box into a flat elliptical shape, in order to create space for the gradually increasing functions. As it became clear what more it had to contain, the ellipse became more and more ‘puffed up’. What followed was a long time of toying with the more dynamically slanting upper side and the horizontally cut variant, which was lower. The design overuled the costs. The dismountable slanting ‘mitre’ was realized. Structure and construction of pillar: 10 The diameter of the ellipse was too big to be extruded out of aluminium: 300 mm wide and 900 mm long. So, the pillar had to be assembled from several components. Structurally there was a vertical truss out of a concrete foundation slab. Dismounting had to be possible because of the electronics of the calling installation and electrical illumination. Therefore it was decided to make a steel framework of square tubes and a finishing of aluminium panels. Both round headsides would be manufactured in an extrusion profile, the panels in bent aluminium plate or steel plate. Because of the durability in the outside climate and the risk of damages, later the choice for aluminium was made for the entire pillar. (In order to be able to receive, without any shame, the Aluminium Design Award in 1997). Because of the transportation of as completely as possible assembled shelter pillars, a separation was made in the upper roof between the lower and upper frameworks, lower and upper plating, which had consequences for the structural and sealing up details. During the transportation the upper roof part would be loose.

191

Shape of roof: 11 Initially the roof consisted of two eighth circle segments of synthetic material, framed by a tubular construction, hung up at the central pillar. The mock-up test had led to an enlargement of the roof plane into two parts which were only mirror symmetrical. During the contacts with Octatube the clear ideas about the application of a glass roof, which was unusual for its use in street furniture was confirmed. The protective tubular construction disappeared. The roof became a set of two free glass plate cantilevers, which met in the middle at a cantilever support, serving as a drain at the same time. Later this support also disappeared when it became clear that an entirely free-hanging glass roof was possible, through which the qualities of glass could appear to full advantage. An entirely transparent roof, with its cantilevers giving an Fig. 151: Glass roof connection of image of vulnerability responding to the design the Train Taxi pillar. criteria. Since it arose that with the application of laminated glass one layer might be tinctured, the panels needed to be mirror symmetrical in order to prevent the necessity to produce two different types. The roof obtained its definite lens shape with two intersecting circle segments with the same radius. Materialization of roof: 12 The roof could consist of one single 12 mm fully tempered glass plate or two 6 mm float glass, heat-strengthened plates laminated upon each other for greater protection against the consequences of a co-incidental or wanton burst of one of the two panels. Electronics in the pillar: 13 In order to make permanent stationary taxies at quiet locations redundant, TreinTaxi required a call button in the pillar, behind which an automatically dialling telephone was hidden, in direct contact with the telephone exchange. TreinTaxi itself conducted tendering negotiations with the suppliers of the intercom installations. For a long time TreinTaxi had tried to avoid that a 220 Volt connection had to be used because of the expected mishaps with the local electricity companies. For the illumination TreinTaxi even thought of solar cell feeding in combination with batteries: suggestions which were turned down by the technical designers with raised eyebrows. When it became clear that the intercom could not be sufficiently amplified from PTT feeding, TreinTaxi capitulated to a permanent 220 Volt connection from the main electricity grid. For this, at many locations, local utility companies demanded a main switch cupboard with an earthed switch!

192

Information on pillar: 14 Next to the main announcement “TreinTaxi” with plastered letters on the aluminium panels, a display-window would be placed in the pillar for informative announcements on behalf of train taxi. The definite programme of requirements already spoke of a display-window somewhere in the pillar which would show the daily newspaper. Despite DOK’s objections to the consequences of the frequent use (a nice idea, but how long will it last?), TreinTaxi persevered and proudly announced that the daily NRC Handelsblad wanted to co-operate. Aware of the risky character of this part DOK once again started to design a display-window which, if it would fail, could be removed again without a trace. Entirely in the line of the design a subtle solution of one bent little glass plate with aluminium extrusions at the head sides came about which, together with the large bent glass panel formed a display-window which could be read from both sides. In its simplicity and yet in its daring, it also surpassed the expectations of DOK. Limited variety versus standardization: 15 As a result of the diversity and restrictions of locations and orientations concerning wind direction and walking direction to the exit of the railway station, it quickly became clear that a variation in left and right types had to be possible. A variant with a standard deep or shallow roof through which the shelter pillar could be placed upon a narrow pavement. Also shelter pillars without a roof and without walls might be needed if the placing so required. Already five models proved to come about, by which the serial effect in the assembly (also cost-wise) was not as efficient anymore as was initially thought. The knack proved to be the standardizing of the smaller components and the specializing or making particular of the total assemblies. By assembling left and right, large or small variants from the stock of standard elements and components. In principle, the left and right models could be identical, if only the roof would not have been a spoil-sport. By that a certain fall backwards came about and consequently a slanting in the connecting elements with many mirror symmetrical elements. In an early stage an estimate had to be made of the minimum amount of the different types with an over-measure of remaining components. Materialization and detailing: 16 The shelter pillar became an assembly of components which were all especially designed and developed for this project: a concrete footplate, a welded steel framework, aluminium bent panels, extruded ellipse ledges and pillars, cast plinth ledges, bent, screenprinted hardened glass wall panels, semi-hardened laminated roof panels, stainless steel suspension equipment, electronics, the information display-window and the newspaper display-window. Of all the elements the shape had to be designed and developed and the manner of fastening had to be taken into account, in order to be able to dismounting for purposes of maintenance, possibly by third party mechanics. At countless places where various materials and components meet, to be taken into account were the mutual production size differences, caused by the very different manners of production and the differences at the assembling and repeatedly fitting and

193

dismounting. And this while initially drawing at straight lines, gradually the idea arose that a straight line as a border between two different elements could better be a zone with tolerance regulations. DOK’s applied strategy looked like the application of the plating of cars. The principle there was that a meeting of two parts could not be accurate. For that reason a broad gap was left open with, in fact, unnoticeable divergences. Where metal and glass, and glass with glass met, this was less successful, because bent glass showed, next to the expected size differences also large shape differences. For instance, the bent information display-window did not follow the radius of the underlying door panel. This emerged more significantly when the comfortable tradition of catching the tolerances in masked notches (think of glass in wooden window-frames) was replaced by the strictness of the abstraction and the bare placing of elements next to each other (think of the application of a lute joint between two hardened glass plates). A clear example of production tolerances was the glass bent panels which, by the highly thermal treatment, could not be guaranteed to have the exact size. They could be disapproved of on excesses, but by too many disapprovals no producer would produce anymore. So a balance came about with admissible tolerances, which in the middle of a 1,2 metres wide plate came to 20 mm, that is to say: 10 mm in and 10 mm out. The usual NS positioning of glass walls with free lower and upper sides fortunately connected without complications with the tolerance account of bent glass. During the co-operation of DOK and Octatube sometimes the difference in culture appeared in the form of the usual tolerances which, in industrial designing are in the order of one hundredth to a few millimetres, while these are going from millimetres to centimetres with building technical designing. A plate processing company working for the building industry, proved to work according to different norms than a sheet metal worker who supplied to an industrial production company. Another consideration of the detailing was the connection of elements of non-compatible materials, like the aluminium plating on the steel framework. Sufficient material insulation had to be applied between these two metals to prevent stress corrosion. For in the humid outside climate are excellent conditions extant to cause considerable corrosion damage. The steel was thermally zincked, where needed provided with an epoxy coating, while the aluminium was powder-coated. The connection between them was done by means of stainless steel bolts. A great number of these considerations only became clear in the engineering stage, but in fact they belonged in the design stage. Therefore they are treated here somewhat anachronically. Technical realization prospects: 17 In all the conversations with the producer and with various subproducers, like the aluminium foundry and the producer of the bent glass, the prospect of the realization of the different parts was checked. The finishing round was that of the assembly line which would have to be set up. With something of an assembly line of a small aircraft factory in the back of the mind, a series of 20 to 25 shelter pillars was expected which would be assembled simultaneously as a week’s production.

194

Economical feasibility: 18 Right from the first contacts with NS Purchasing prices for entire assemblies, as well as separate components, had to be stated. Initially a price for a private variant with a steel ellipse tube was stated on 13 June 1995 of EUR 3,380. After the receipt of DOK’s new design concept by the end of June, a price was estimated of approximately EUR 6,000 by the middle of July 1995. Through various optimalizations a definite price was estimated of approximately EUR 5,000, excluding the costs of the design development as well as the costs of electricity and furniture. In this phase it became clear that the DOK design was very well affordable and so the choice of the producer became definitive. 11.3 PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT With the approval of the next phase the run to it was taken: the development of the prototype, in which a working definite prototype had to be produced with the actual materials and the final perfectives of the design. A short time span was thought of, from August to December 1995. This proved to be very short in view of the manufacturing of particular extrusion profiles, castings and similar components. Very important was the decision to invest in this phase already in matrices for extrusions and castings. Through this, in fact, hours could be shortened by time-representing beams which normally run after one another: of Prototype Development and Production Phase. A form of concurrent engineering took place, the engineering of the prototype and the engineering of the preparation of the production. This is the reason why in this case of the shelter pillar a couple of considerations of the production phase will be treated already in the prototype phase. Goals and prototype development: 19 The goal was to be able to show the press, and with them the candidate franchise taxi companies, a working prototype by the end of December 1995. Strategy prototype development: 20 DOK would supervise the definite design traject of the whole and of all elements, while the producer had to state the prices continuously. To save time it was suggested to work on a basis of a ‘cost-price plus’, a set percentage for engineering and overhead, profit and risk, on top of the calculation of the component prices and the assembly costs. From that moment on DOK could apply for prices and discuss them, have technical discussions with sub-producers and so DOK became

Fig. 152: Prototype phase.

195

co-responsible for the financial programme as well. Because of the relatively small scale of the project, this proved to be a formula which worked reasonably well, although in the end a correction had to be applied to the assembly prices, in order to be able to account for the reduced scale effect. For Octatube it was easier to have the design development take place in this manner, although the item ‘contingency’ was kept small from the beginning and therefore, with the many additions, continuous corrections had to be applied to the price. The cost account, however, was an open book. Because of this openness, a preliminary contract was worked with during the production passing time, which actually after finishing of the production was definitive enough to be signed. Also because materials and moulds had to be ordered continually, anticipating the final contract, the design development, production orderings of components and the building of the prototype were done in confusion. Dates of deadlines had to be arranged constantly, after which the prototype could not be finished in time, because of the necessary ‘lead-in’ times (model and firstling productions of components). In some cases the complete series of all components of one type had to be ordered, before one single part could be built into the prototype. The openness of orders, reasons for changes and finances were based upon trust. The prototype procedure deviated very much from the usual. In general a producer avoided to engineer components as a serial product when the prototype had not been tested yet. He would postpone the investments at stake until certainty of the correct functioning of the design would be obtained. In view of the extremely short production time from the prototype to the first series (approximately six workable weeks), it was inevitable that many components got their definite shape immediately. The development process was, therefore, not directed by a natural course of order, but merely by delivery time. That, which had to be ordered first, had to be on the drawing first. So, the glass roof panels were fixed early in October, while the underlying drainage was not known at that time. Soon afterwards followed the extrusion profiles and the casting elements. Actually, great risks were run with this. Yet, this tight schedule had a motivating influence on the development. By the forced early determining of some parts, realizations for these were thought up with nothing fixed for later alterations. The roof plate, for instance, knows only one tolerance: its hanging points. It remained free from the construction. After the definite ordering decisions for some components were made, there too things quieted somewhat. Designers, who would tend to endlessly smoothing and refining, were now forced to compelled designing. DOK’s design work, commissioned by TreinTaxi, covered a clearly set traject while Octatube had included an engineering traject in its estimate: calculations of the strength and rigidness of components and the making of workplace drawings. Because of DOK’s great involvement and the clear separation of activities, it was decided in mutual consultation that DOK would carry out the greatest part of the engineering by order of Octatube, sometimes up to visiting producers (like Interglass in England), in order to check the results of the firstling productions of components. At that time Octatube’s duty remained the continually co-drawing of the design, the calculations in consultation with DOK, the consulting and

196

optimalizing of the design. TreinTaxi did its bit by the development of the PR and the intercom on the one hand, on the other hand by the development of the locations and the necessary licences, sometimes through the institution Buildings of Historic Interest, always through Heritage, through public utility and through PTT and this was done in 120 train taxi cities.

Fig. 153: Train Taxi pillar part.

Fig. 154: Assembeled Train Taxi stand in the Octatube factory.

Casting in aluminium: 21 The aluminium castings in natural cast work were entirely developed by DOK together with Kinheim Foundry in Boxmeer, The Netherlands. The large pillar feet were parted in order to be able to later place the pillar plating upon the paving and to remove them when re-paving had to be done. They were of natural aluminium because of the many damages when used. In the large castings very cleverly an outfall pipe for rain was designed which was led through the pillar in the thermally zincked load-bearing frame. The little feet and heads of the pillars got castings for a neat finishing. The casting was done, because of the small amount of identical castings (2 foot-halves, pillar foot, pillar head), by means of the vacuum foil/sand technique. The castings were wireedged (as is usual) and drummed to obtain an equable colour and to smooth away the wire-edging traces. Aluminium quality: AlSi 10 mg. The costs of the total of matrices, being EUR 5,400, were entirely amortized to the project.

197

Plating of aluminium or steel: 22 The plating against both flat sides of the pillar, lower roof and upper roof, consists of four parts with different shapes, of which two had to be able of being opened as a door panel for the entrance to the electricity works. The choice between 1,5/2 mm steel plate and 3 mm aluminium was, after the production of specimens, made by a suitable sub-producer to be aluminium. Damages would not lead to corrosion. Not the thermal expansion coefficient was a consideration this time, but the perfection with which the aluminium could be set, bent and rolled. The little cases of the display-windows were, for that matter, made of thermally zincked steel plate. Welding was easier to be done in steel, without burning and distortion of the piece of work.

Fig. 155: Aluminium casting of the foot.

Aluminium extrusions: 23 The head sides of the elliptical pillar plating were designed in an aluminium extrusion profile because of the desired freedom of shape. With the ribs and grooves in the nose profile, good connections could be obtained for the other plating by means of hidden clicking connectors. The little columns became round tubes with three middle rigidities and grooves for the glass and the cover strips. The centre would contain a smaller round opening in order to be able to lock in the massive steel bars at the top and bottom. These would provide the anchorage in the concrete slab, respectively the connection to the glue dottle under the glass. The total matrices costs for the two extrusions amounted to EUR 6,000 and were also amortized to the project.

198

Bent prestressed glass: 24 Already in the first design, the glass walls were considered to be bent. Because of vandalism Octatube preferred bent, laminated and tempered (or prestressed) glass. However, it proved to be an unaffordable combination. Octatube had in the preceding year glazed two shops with bent, single hardened glass in Rotterdam, where the same argument came about. Two bent glass panels will never perfectly connect with each other with tenths of mm deviation, the maximum of what PVB-foil can take. In their stead the two panels would have to be laminated upon each other by means of epoxy casting resin. The price of the single panel would triple, with the advantage that it would remain hanging in the two side rabbets, in the event of a crack. The custom in The Netherlands was much more simple: single glass was used for shelters and quickly replaced, so vandalism leaves no traces and so is discouraged. DOK thought of another way: the better well-groomed, the greater the chance of respect and the less possible damage by vandalism. Graphical designer Professor Paul Mijksenaar was asked to design a specific graphical screening for the bent glass panels and came up with a pattern of little symbols in a translucent colour. This design would be screened on the flat glass, after which the glass would be heated to 570°C and the screening would actually be burned in. After that, by forced air a fast cooling down (deterring) would take place which would result in prestressed glass: pressure on both surfaces and a pulling zone in the heart of the glass plate, a glass panel with a great strength. The bent glass which was produced by Interglass in England, proved to show a typical deviation of shape which, by the way, was exactly within the agreed tolerances. The radius was not constant, in the middle it was smaller than nominal and to the outside just larger. Because of that it looked as if the panel twisted especially in the middle and was flat at both sides. This was already noticed in the prototype stage, but marked as being a one time phenomenon. At the later serial production it was repeated in an identical way. Because of that, at the newspaper display-window, built up from two concentrically glass panels, a strongly varying mutual space occurred. This had to be corrected by a sealing up rubber profile. Laminated semi-prestressed glass: 25 The roof panels have a very vulnerable character because of their bare and thin layers. From the beginning came from Octatube’s designing experience the use of single or laminated glass. Actually every ground-plan shape, provided gradual edges, a reasonable holes pattern and particular sizes, can be cut accurately with a water laser jet cutter. The roof panels were realized in a light grey tone, so that dirt accumulation would be less visible. The grey colour also gave, to the shelter taking people, a little ‘body’ to the transparent roof, while this was hardly visible from a distance because of the small height and the perspective of the pedestrian. To be certain that the glass plate was sufficiently vandalism-proof, two laminated models were produced and in Ocatatube’s laboratory loaded to crack, by dancing upon them and beatings with steel pipes. Vandalism was not yet standardized, therefore an acceptable collapse behaviour was searched in mutual consultation. It proved that when both hardened glass plates were cracked, the roof panel came down like a cloth because of the small

199

fragmentation of the two plates. Semi-hardened glass showed a different collapse behaviour. When it cracked it showed some large tears, comparable with ordinary glass. Because the patterns of the cracks in both plates normally were not on top of each other, a moderate rigidity still remained and the panel did not drop down. In this manner the laminated semi-hardened glass panels of the roof were produced by Secirit in Switzerland. In one year of usage only one single roof panel cracked. The ultra slender edges of the glass, which so much intrigued the post-Rietveld generation of designers, were not spoiled by metal edges which would essentially affect the glass-like character of the edge. This was a choice of design and taking a chance on the usage.

Fig. 156: Assembled Train Taxi stand in the Octatube factory.

200

Switch and control technique: 26 The intercom unit was ordered unknown to the producer and was built in behind the plating which, for that reason, had a number of perforations in order to let sound pass. The installation was done by an electrical engineer as a subcontractor. Some experiments were needed to generate sufficient acoustical deadening in order to suppress the echo which came from the plating of this resonance-box. A normal telephone knows no feed back effect between the listening and the speaking parts. To prevent an intercom from taking in the sound from the speaker by the microphone, it has a switch system which pushed away one direction of the communication all the time. This did no good for the intelligibility. The measure of pushing away could only be adjusted to the real product. Information display-windows: 27 The regularly changing TreinTaxi information was thought up to be placed in an exchange display-window, consisting of a steel inside mantle and a glass window with an added little door through which the posters could be exchanged. It needed lighting within and the basic colour would have to fit in the colour of the pillar plating. Its development took place in a drawing by DOK, only the locking and the waterproof sealing needed perfectioning at some points by means of models. Design screening glass walls: 28 The current dull anti-passing through graphics on glass panels in the public environment consisted of vertical grooves at hip height. Professor Paul Mijksenaar was approached to function as an intermediary for graphical artists. Mijksenaar had re-designed the signposting at Schiphol Airport. Fortunately the office took the commission itself. The design of the screening consisted, seen from a distance, of a grid of little spots which proved to exist by approximation of a motley collection of little symbols related to travelling, waiting, the weather and, to the connoisseur, some quotations of famous icons. At a later stage the office took the design work of the information poster in the display-window in hand in a matching style.

Fig. 157: Signs and lettering designed by Paul Mijksenaar for Amsterdam Schiphol Airport.

201

Assembly of prototype: 29 During the assembly of the first prototype a small number of shortcomings was discovered, mainly of fittings and tolerances of different parts. In view of the required short passing through time a pragmatical style of engineering was chosen. All serial parts for which tools had to be manufactured, were worked out in drawings including the allowable tolerances, all parts to be produced were only nominally measured. The prototype would serve as an example for later production, deviations which would be found in it could still be corrected. This is a very usual way, numerous products have reached the market without one single drawing made. The model served as the source of information. This went well, provided no change of supplier took place. In that case the information which was collected in the prototype, got lost for the greater part. But because of the well-prepared design and engineering, as well as the individual control of the quality of the components before they were assembled into a shelter pillar, no essential alterations were necessary. Personally, the author always found that the less successful design detail was the glued trumpet connection under the glass, nota bene an introduction from Octatube, but in proportion with the entire design too minimal in mass. A larger, more sturdy knot would make a far more steady impression: visual balance. Because holes had to be made in the plate by the place of the ellipse pillar anyway, in hindsight gluing would not have been necessary. It could have led to less component types.

Fig. 158: Close-up of the upper part.

Cost-price calculation: 30 In the mean time the total costs, by all sorts of additions, achieved in an open estimation and checked by various parties, had risen to an amount of EUR 6,580 in the series. An amount which was, in view of the turned in quality, still acceptable to TreinTaxi.

202

Go ahead firstling: 31 Right after the presentation to the press, in the middle of December 1995, it was decided to start the production of the entire series, this with the restriction of obtaining approvals for placing which would be depending on local municipal services and public utilities. 11.4 PRODUCTION PHASE Reaction of principal: 32 The principal reacted very positively on the design, the realization and acknowledged the costs estimations. Production schedule: 33 Already during the running start for the prototype, the firstling, a great number of orders were placed for the production of the actual series. To get the production of the first components going, matrices had to be manufactured for the castings, the aluminium extrusions, the roof panels and the screening of the glass panels, in the smallest possible series. At the same time of the ordering of the prototype, investments also had to be done for the series, which exceeded manifold the size of the prototype. Together with the sub producers the elements and components were carefully prepared and during the production preparation actually only two components, which were added to the project at the last moment, caused problems: the sound installation and the benches. Working drawings: 34 All drawings were already made in the prototype stage, so were the drawings for pieces of work. New machines were not needed, nor the designing of new production lines, since the series was so small that production had to take place at regular engine grounds, even if they were in Switzerland, England, Germany and The Netherlands. Ordering matrices extrusion and casting: 35 The matrices and casting moulds for the prototype were already ordered and so actually belonged to the prototype costs. Production in elements: 36 In accordance with the first experiences from the prototype phase with their feedbacks, the elements were produced in various factories in different countries.

Fig. 159: Production phase.

203

Pre-assembly to components: 37 From elements which belonged together components were assembled and stored in the assembly storehouse, around the work-floor for the large production assembly. Assemblies in small series: 38 The 120 pillars were assembled in five series of 10 to 25. The pillar was built up from a prefabricated concrete slab of 2500 x 1500 x 150 mm, the steel framework and the clothed plating and glazing. During the assembly the entire electrical installation was also put in. By means of special anchor inserts the assembled shelter pillar could practically entirely be hoisted upon the truck and later unloaded on the spot. In the producer’s assembly shop the assembling of the supplied elements and components from a project storehouse, was carefully set up, but realized by personnel which was used to ‘one-off’ products, a little freebooting-like. It was difficult for the management of the producer to turn sufficient discipline from Octatube’s adventurous atmosphere around the developing and building of prototypes into an efficient production of a small series. The series came about jolting as well, because at the side of licencees continuous impediments were found with the realization. By the way, the American industrialization after 1945 provided the possibility to manufacture industrial homes for returning soldiers in the empty aircraft factories. However, the bureaucracy around mortgages and building licences caused a potential streamlined production of hundredths of homes per day to stuck at tenths and eventually failed. Transport and local fittings: 39 Every day knew its pre-destined route of three nearby locations. In the evening the three shelter pillars were loaded up and after departure in the morning were early delivered, hoisted out and mounted with the loose top. Maintenance: 40 The only parts which required maintenance in the first half year were the mechanically moving components: the newspaper display-window and the door panel in the pillar, as a result of growing pains in the detailing of hinges and locking. Attentive train taxi drivers took care of reporting defects immediately. Hardly any vandalism occurred, to our great surprise and satisfaction, naturally. For every 100 pillars an average of one reparation per month proved to be necessary. Usage evaluation: 41 Of the total estimated amount of 120, about one hundred have been placed in the mean time. With the experience of the maintenance period of one year, one reparation per month will have to be carried out. And this is far less than was initially expected. With respect to the train taxi travellers the shelter pillars are satisfying as clearly striking images in the public rooms nearby the railway stations, and they offer shelter for the sort times travellers may have to wait.

204

Therefore, the shelter pillars function to entire satisfaction.

Fig. 160: Train taxi stand Delft.

205

12. TOWARDS A NEW BALANCE BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING TECHNOLOGY. With the arrival of the new millennium the building practice will not change all of a sudden, but it will be a moment for evaluation. Much can be said about the cooperation of architecture and building technology. The spatial quality of architecture in particular will change more rapidly through activities in the conceptual stage than will the technical building structures. The geometrical possibilities, as offered by the computer as a 3-D drawing instrument, have become so attractive that architects keenly throw themselves on making concepts of a complex spatial design. However, the very same spatial quality and the manufacturing of the necessary components, cost excessive energy when being engineered. Because of this an ever widening gap arises between the stages of preparation and realization. The mutual feeling of identification recedes. In its turn the technology of the building practice develops itself largely beyond the eyesight of the architect. Many new building materials, building products and building techniques have been introduced, mainly by the building industry. Others are initiated by pioneers among architects. Others again have fallen out of grace. Due to the increasing specialisms of production, the current varieties of technical building possibilities are no longer mastered solely by the architect. Some architects feel overwhelmed by the growing complexity of building technology and by the way the different aspects have been integrated and interwoven with one another. Others only think that architecture and building technology are drawing daggers at each other. Sensible architects play the game more subtly. 12.1 INSPIRED BY HISTORY Today’s relation between architecture and building technology is totally different from the last turn of the century. At that time architects were mainly interested in neo-styles which, indeed, held a technical element as well , but secluded themselves from the technical building developments the industrial revolution brought along. The Rijksmuseum and the Centraal Station of C.P. Cuypers were under construction in Amsterdam. There were hardly any cars yet. H.P. Berlage’s commodity exchange was under construction in Amsterdam as well. With the help of the French engineers Monier and Hennebique reinforced concrete, a new material, was on its way to adolescence, through practice rather than theory. Only gradually a proper insight into the forces within this massive construction material, was generated. In the preceding decades entirely glazed houses were realized in parks. Malls were covered with glass. But these clever feats of building techniques were not acknowledged as architecture. The construction of railways brought along series of huge bridge structures and railway stations. Benjamin Baker’s steel Firth of Forth railway bridge near Edinburgh, despite the lack of analytical calculations at the time, but thanks to a paramount insight in force activities, was built as a tubular structure with

206

enormous cantilevers. High up in his laboratory in his iron tower in Paris, Eiffel experimented with windforces which would later be used by aircraft designers. Still, the gap between architects and design engineers was wide. During the last turn of the century architecture was considered to be autonomous, overloaded with cultural awareness but with little interest in the stimulus which was brought about by independent building technology. There was hardly any dialogue, let alone a combination or integration.

Fig. 161 / 162: The Firth of Forth Bridge near Edinburgh, Scotland. Engineered by Benjamin Bake & John Fowler, 1889.

Fig. 163 / 164: Eiffel Tower by Gustav Eiffel, Paris, 1889.

207

How different the situation is one century later. In the 75 years of modernism, in which architecture and building technology grew towards each other, integration was brought about. However, after the long years, many look upon modernism in architecture as being an old patriarch, who is not willing to pay much attention to the efforts of much younger architects trying to express their own identity. Architectural historians go out of their ways in trying to prolong the state of intensive care this old man is in by analyzing his youthful activities on end, instead of considering the possibilities of the future. Most of the associates are still loyal to him because they are aware of their kinship and do not wish to deny their ancestry. Stimulated by the possibilities, architects in the last quarter of the century, often bravely challenged engineers to develop their technology one step further. Prominent are the heroic acts of technical architects like Günther Behnisch and Frei Otto for the cable-net roof at Munich, as well as the revolutionary design of the Centre Pompidou at Paris, designed 20 years ago by Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers, establishing the reputation of technical architecture for all time. But also due to the British high-tech architecture of the Eighties of Norman Foster, Richard Rogers, Nicholas Grimshaw and others, the awareness has grown that building technology is indispensable and can be allowed to be so for architecture. To stress the characteristics and the design level of supporting structures in steel tubes, the author has introduced the notion ‘constructure’ [10] once before. In the field of structural designing it was the Ove Arup office which built themselves an excellent reputation at the time. Peter Rice, Martin Francis and Ian Ritchie initiated many new developments of ingenious building techniques. The building technologist, however, has to know his place. Architects find that building technology should serve architecture and may not surpass it. Peter Rice was the prototype of the architectonically thinking structural designer who stimulated a balanced integration of architecture and building technology in all its details. Renzo Piano did so as well with one of his last works, the terminal of the Kanzai Airport at Osaka, a contemporary cathedral. With his buildings Santiago Calatrava also strives for a balanced integration of architecture and building technology, sometimes that of Art and building technology. The mentioned technical designers profiled themselves through exceptional projects. They made a wide track on which the sub-top and sub sub-top can enjoy more freedom of movement with less heroic projects, although these do provide the daily spatial surroundings. To the author, who is specialized in the designing, developing and realizing of new spatially structural building components, the relation between architecture and building technology is very important. In building technology product development and component designing play a stimulating part. Therefore, this chapter has consciously been written from that point of view. Today’s architecture philosophizes about the contribution of building technology and product development as part and parcel of it, by ideas and methodology carried to a balance between architecture and building technology in future architecture. Today’s generation started it up and the studying generation should follow in its footsteps.

208

12.2 FROM TODAY’S ARCHITECTURE The spatial environment is being shaped by landscapes, public residences, public traffic areas, buildings and their external spaces. The torn apart functions in spatial environment as approved at the time by CIAM, seemed clear enough at first. But, while its popularity grows, thoughtless work brings about more poverty by the isolation of functions. Nowadays functions in urban environments are gradually brought together again and integrated into a higher level of the richness of life and variation. This may mean that the solely functional value will not necessarily increase, but the experience value certainly will. The city originated from crossroads, human contacts and material exchange. Buildings, as an intersection of human communication, can achieve the same complexity as a small city. Within the great frame of Modernism subsequent architectural trends have been variants, each of which was surpassed by a following sub-trend in one or two decades. Structuralism’s ambition is to accommodate life from the smallest human level to a greater co-operating whole. It has the shape of a built image of the beehive-like character of society. Next to that many sub trends busied themselves particularly with different external shapes of buildings as material appearances in which the characters of later generations always can be distinguished. A distinction to show an age difference and a difference of opinions. In a building technology sense this leads to a different choice of materials and shapes of building components. It is normally not because of technical performances that building products fall out of grace. More often the changes in functions and aesthetics, spurred on by the urge of manifestations of new generations, will lead to this. After the age of the clarity of Modernism with its analysis and separation as a thesis, the integration as an antithesis shot forward and started to overrule the architectonical profession. Everybody has to co-operate with everybody. Everybody interferes with everything and only a few are ready to take clear responsibilities. A communal game of shifting off responsibilities is the result. Everything has to be integrated until nobody remembers cause and effect and who is responsible for what. In fact integration has often struck inward, it imploded. Instead of a large community, a great fogginess occurred. As a possible synthesis the introduction of individual actions will again be distinctive and clarifying. The building process is a social process and as such influenced by the spirit of the times. Both building and spatial environment are the result of a super integration, they are achieved more and more laboriously and cost fortunes in these stages of preparation. To justify interventions in public areas is a right which should be kept safely, but it often results in inactivity. Some investment is needed in the search for a better balance in this public process of integration, in order to get it manageable again. Would it not be better to gradually get rid of the outgrowth of the achievements of participation as seen in the Seventies? At the academic level the minister already set a clear example with the introduction of a hierarchical structure.

209

Fig. 165-167: Train station in Lyon. Architect: Santiago Calatrava.

210

Fig. 168: Detail of Centre Pompidou, Paris.

211

In these days of increasing computer sciences and virtual reality, the question should be asked whether it is still logical to create a material envelopment for a society which changes so rapidly. An envelopment for which the preparation and realization take such a long time and of which the material form is so rigid that every subsequent changes will outdate any building. Should we, in the future, build like we have in the past? If so, how adaptable must these buildings be! This leads to a different answer than that of Archigram in the Sixties, where the building of the future was looked upon as a material framework which could be changed and adapted at random, by which individual spatial needs can be plugged in, zoomed out and blown up. From this image of material adaptability within a minimally conditioning framework grew the concept of the Centre Pompidou.

Fig. 169: Centre Pompidou, Paris (south façade).

Fig. 170: Centre Pompidou, Paris (north façade). Architects: Richard Rogers & Renzo Piano

212

For that matter it is one of the first and few buildings which materialized Archigram’s idea so clearly. And even that building hardly changes on the outside, certainly not in the way it was meant to be or in the way the building is capable of. This may be a matter of limited vision of the building management. After twenty years of intensive use the building has been painted again and once more looks like the bomb that changed architecture for ever. But many of the buildings from the Seventies and Eighties, flirting with their skeleton-like nature and flexibility of usage, prove to be unchanging buildings when it comes to their usage. The point has not yet been reached that the use of the virtual reality of Cyberspace has changed the view on the built reality. But, minding the imperfection and the enormous energy which material building brings along, and the apparent perfection of virtual reality, the future holds a transition from the concrete to the abstract, from material to immaterial. This image is summoned by the apparent nonchalance with which images of a newly designed building can be generated on the computer in 3-D. For that matter it is known that not everything which is drawn, can actually be built. First the laws of the material world, the logic of building technology and rational estimating shall have to meet their requirements. The new buildings of the current turn of the century stand out because, in general, they do not outshine by technical newness, but are sooner compositions of familiar components, built with familiar materials and by familiar production manners. Sometimes the material composition of a building can be eccentric in its components, in order to give the building distinction. Usually, however, the maximum freedom granted to the architect, is the positioning of material components in space. The different placing of components of the building in space has everything to do with the shape of the building, the shape of building parts and the shape of components. This is highly stimulated by using the computer mainly for shape and geometry. Without the help of drawing and mathematical computer science for the benefit of the phases of both materializing and working drawings, architecture would never, or only with great difficulty, have been released of the orthogonal system. One single slant or bent line is just possible. Scharoun and Aalto are masters of the slanted line. But when the geometry of a building can no longer be described as mainly orthogonal, a border is crossed: the geometrical complications of predominantly slanting and bent influences in buildings can hardly be worked out by hand. However, the Eiffel tower has been produced with the help of approximately 15,000 drawings, done by hand, of mainly straight components with non-orthogonal endings. So, we no longer have our hand in it, also by the conveniences of the straight T-square and the orthogonal Modernism. In contrast with the shipbuilding industry, architecture is capable of functioning without bent and slanting lines. Is oblique and curved the trend of the moment? Working with the computer on these complex geometries goes at the cost of valuable time by many, in preparation as well as in realization: it takes a lot of energy and effort.

213

Fig. 171: 3D generated drawing by Bob Kleuters, Octatube.

214

12.3

THROUGH BUILDING TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

The traditional building techniques were mastered by both designers and builders. This brought rest and matter of course in the communication between them. Both parties had acquired sufficient knowledge and experience to have the building industry in all its elements be a known process. By the introduction of many new techniques and components which are shut out of the communal field of experience, however, the building process has become very restless. What is more, it seems there is no way back anymore. Due to the common ruling suspicion among ad hoc constitutional parties in the building team, sometimes tangled together for one single building project like a Gordian knot, the learning curve is not positive. During the transition period from ‘traditional & rational building’ to the ‘prefab & assembly building’ it is not surprising that certain knowledge and experience get lost. This happens with every succession of generations. It goes hand in hand with the introduction or the pushing through of newly developed building techniques by the new generation. The senior generation will, at first, look with unholy glee upon the lack of knowledge of the junior generation when it comes to technique, but will thereupon be amazed to have to come to the conclusion that after a period of learning the new techniques are being mastered. With that, designers have the courage to make bold proposals, in manners of working, compositions and details, by which they pull forward the building technology considerably. This assumption is based on the designer’s eagerness to learn about building technology. Of course, it will sink the ship if young architects only occupy themselves with conceptional designing and not with the preparation for the actual building.

Fig. 172 / 173: Manufacturing machines in steel shop.

The young generation of Building Technology students at Delft is taught, with the help of all the usual workplace techniques, how to design prototypes of metal façades, how to manufacture these themselves and how to test them. And these designers will demonstrate in five or ten years how they have become competent technical architects when materializing building designs, and

215

professional consumers with respect to the building industry. They look upon architecture and building technology as one item which cannot be separated. Ten years ago, this professional view on the future introduced the term ‘product architect’: a designer of building products with architectonical ambitions. He is cousin to the ‘component architect’, who designs and develops the components of the building at the office of the architect, like the component designer does at the design & engineer department of a special component producer and like the product designer does for standard products. These young designers know that for the development of new building techniques an inventor cum engineer is needed between the architect and the engineering parties, who serves as ‘Jumping Jack’ between concept and building, in a renewing and surprising way with a mixture of commercial, scientifical and artistic aspirations. Some industrial designers try to converse the very limited choice of mass manufactured consumer products into a broader choice for the consumer. The building industry has traditionally always been directed mainly at the wishes of the customer. A contractor usually builds exactly what his principal wants, he follows the consumer’s wishes precisely. Producers in the building industry, particularly system producers, know that only the additional requirements of the consumerarchitect complete the programme of requirements for the product in question. With special products only a direct development between consumer and producer can precede the manufacturing. In the building industry ‘customising’ or customer directedness has never been absent. Indeed, this is the cause that the industrialization of the building industry stuck fast at the level of serial prefabrication. A level of industrialization as is usual with the production of cars, will never get started up in a comparable manner in the building industry, because of the fragmentation of the order flow and the diversification of consumer demands. Although standard products like the smallest components are actually industrialized, this level of industrialization recedes in the series ‘Standard - System - Special’. But the building industry has its own charming way to work as rationally and efficiently as possible within the given parameters. Components are often manufactured from trade materials with the help of computerized manipulation machines. And when the series’ size does not allow it, building components will be produced manually/mechanically if necessary. The level of quality and costs of fully industrially manufactured products will then, of course, only remain a wish-dream. Quality was, traditionally, something which came about at the building-site and could be checked there as well. With the introduction of more and more building components which are produced outside the building-site, both designers and builders have lost sight somewhat of the production manners. By moving the place of production, both architect and contractor lost sight on the daily supervision of achieving quality. The quality of the many components to be prefabricated elsewhere depends on the quality assurance processes of the involved producers. On the one hand, the lower thresholds of the building industry cause few producers to take initiatives to develop new building products and introduce them on the market, because there is only a small chance that the products will be protected and a far greater chance of being copied by competitors. On the other hand these lowered thresholds are a direct cause for

216

the enormous level of boredom which buildings reveal. Our built environment is the literary result of spiritual poverty and lack of courage to take new initiatives. This goes for the tendering party, the producers, as well as for the party calling for tenders, the architects cum suis (advisers). And when new courses are being taken, the vision from the party calling for tenders on that of the producing party is often merciless. Many sacrifices are expected for a cleverly built feat. An example is the bankruptcy of both the steel construction company and the glazing company at Nicholas Grimshaw’s new Waterloo Station in London, while the building itself and its architect are praised. Conservative designers are of the opinion that sufficient materials and techniques are known and ready to be used in the building technology. In general the architect will be more selective and combining than being a reinventor of the wheel. Indeed, there is an over-supply of means to build buildings with. However, means regularly fall out of use. Directed interest is capable of completely brushing aside a matured technology and to direct itself at something different. After twenty years of research and developments the concrete industry knows how to make perfect parapets in washed clean concrete which will not get dirty anymore, come rain come shine. Unfortunately architects are no longer interested to propose this material for lining a façade. Béton brut is also hardly used anymore. The knowledge of formwork carpenters to make timber formwork for rough concrete exposures, has almost gone lost. The architect’s choice of materials and techniques has a lot to do with what they want to express to society through the building.

Fig. 174: Section and roof plan of Waterloo Station, London. Architect: Nicholas Grimshaw.

217

Fig. 175: Detail of the Waterloo Station.

218

Fig. 176: Waterloo Station seen from the station hall.

In the workplace environment it almost seems a contradiction for the increasing immaterialization of electronic information flows via the uncheckable usage and development of the computer to house them in their opposite: ultimate material and heavy stony buildings. In there, hope for eternity is radiating. Sooner fine building techniques, which are developed with care and intelligence, would be considered for a contemporary expression. Large, washed concrete panels have lost it from lightweight suspended façades, build up with sandwich panels from millimetres veneer layered natural stones on a rigid aluminium honeycomb structure. Sandwich panels have an energetic accountability without an annoying warmth-accumulation. Glass panels get a growing insulation value, in combination with a highly light transparent quality and a low transmission of sunenergy. In the future glass coatings will be developed with characteristics which can adapt to seasons, as well as to the time of day, in reaction to the amount of received sunlight. This adjustment of physical characteristics is done chemically and does no longer need to be directed mechanically, like in the Institut du Monde Arabe of Jean Nouvel, or architecturally like the ‘brises soleil’ of Le Corbusier and the beetling roofs of Frank Lloyd Wright. An irreversible transmission can be traced in the interest in interesting aspects Building Technology from Civil Engineering, where she leaned against for generations, to Mechanical Engineering, which notably in façades, interior building, installations and moving components of the building, begin to predominate more and more. Façades and installations put together often make up more than half of the building budget. Concrete load-bearing structures are functionally speaking still of an essential importance, but to architects they are no longer interesting

219

because there is no designing in them. They have given up their sculptural aspirations. Through that the building technology has developed further, unfortunately at the cost of necessary spatial quality. Which, by the way, does not mean to say that architecture should become less sculptural. But more values get lost in the delusion of the complex geometry. Architects who have always worked conscientiously and cautiously for ‘durable’ architecture and who used the orientation on the sun as their starting point for an optimum spatial geography of their buildings, now watch helplessly the orientation on the North for photosensitive activities disappear as a consideration for designing in the workplace environment. The home environment, on the other hand, aims far more at logical duration and energy-economy. The individual needs more protection than the organisation. The growing demands which are claimed upon materials and components with which buildings are being assembled will no doubt result in the going out of use of certain materials. In general the material assembly will become more complex in order to fulfil the growing demands of different natures. With the increasing demands goes a longer duration of materials, often founded on guarantees. On the other hand it can be stated that technical performances no longer determine durations, but rather aesthetical or functional considerations. Durably designed buildings will have to be adapted, long before their technical duration of life is reached. In a way durable materials will provide their own specific problems. How to re-use materials which still wear well, but never again will be used in the same form of elements and components because between use and re-use there is normally a generation of years and ideas. In architecture, till the end of the Middle Ages, re-use of components always occurred. Blocks of marble and purposely hatched natural stones were often reused as precious building stones for buildings of later generations, until the days of prosperity and plenty made an end to this re-using. Today politics subsidize conscience-easing developments to more durable materials in society. The building industry, as a branch of industry in which materials already have a relatively long duration of life, joins gladly in this way of thinking. The growing ingeniosity to answer to higher quality demands brings along an improvement of materials which are, for that reason, not so simple to re-use. Coated glass with silicon edges in double glass panels pollutes the melting bath of recycled glass so much, that a far much lower quality of glass would be the result. Therefore, this coated glass is no longer recycled. Nobody wants to reuse the heavily reflecting silver-coloured and bronze-tinted glass anymore. So, valuable material which could live much longer, is being removed as nondegradable waste. The future generation of coatings therefore has to be degradable again or possible to melt down without problems.

220

Fig. 177: Façade of diafragma’s (exterior), Institute du Monde Arabe, Paris. Architect : Jean Nouvel.

221

Fig. 178: Façade of diafragma’s (interior), Institute du Monde Arabe.

12.4 VIA IDEA AND METHODOLOGY Architects are in arrears because of their lack of knowledge of contemporary production techniques of industrial and prefabricated building products, compared to manufacturers. Manufacturers are orientated on results and interested in the medium long and long-term survival chances of their company. They lack knowledge and insight when it comes to architecture, their market. They know more of the building industry and the building process. From their point of view, architects complain that it is difficult to get data from producers. The reservedness in the attitude of manufacturers also comes from the number of times when they got no appreciation for their design inputs. The only way to get a flowing stream of information going is to achieve a direct dialogue between architects and manufacturers, based on mutual respect and trust. An architect can, in general, ‘shop’ only once at a manufacturer’s, the next time he will lack the courage or will find the door closed. Innovations of building processes and building products have to be well prepared. The main part of the innovation traject has to take place outside the application process of the building project, in

222

a preceding or parallel development traject of the innovation system. Separation of development and application of innovations finds its cause in the great difference between thinkers and doers. The building industry knows many doers and the thinkers are being forced to canalize and temporize their thinking. Few principals will be willing to pay for innovative research with a somewhat more fundamental character than the direct applicability. Not many main-contractors will offer the opportunity for this. Innovation in an ongoing building process can sometimes have the same effect as a stick between the spokes of a riding bicycle. Headwork, preceding innovations in the conceptual design, are often stimulated by architects by means of design competitions and magazine publications. With main-contractors this is done by reflections on logistics and organisation. Manufacturers work with material research and developments which, next to the objectives of the company, aim at the rousing of new products or the improvement of quality and prolonging the duration of life of existing products in operation, building up or assembly. With the increase of complexity of building tasks and buildings, there is also an increasing work division for preparing and guiding the engineering of building projects. Next to the complexity, a number of added advice and management layers became a fact. These specialists, however, are only capable in their autonomous fields and by this they burden the communication in the process. Although every specialism contains autonomy and responsibilities, in the building industry it seems to become a sport to throw responsibilities to one another, from the calling to the tendering parties, from the first contracted parties to the last contracted ones. This excess of participants with diminished liability asks for order, back to a well-organized and manageable building process. Concentration of authority and responsibility would clarify the relations within the building team considerably. It is up to the architects to manifest themselves strongly enough to take charge again of the revealing weeds of the building management, and by so doing retrieve, for a great part, their earlier position in the building process. This will only happen if the architect places himself squarely before his task and accepts again full responsibility for the growing importance of the process of, for instance, the attending and control of building components drawings, made by specialists. The drawings of the architect are insufficient for engineering purposes. Legally the architect takes no responsibility for any measurement. Also on drawings of prefabricated buildings and their components sometimes the phrase ‘measurements in the work to be taken before engineering’ still appears which is legally correct, but in technical engineering is an incomprehensible anachronism. We will hopefully live to see that the design- and builder’s estimate drawings in the form of discs will serve as writing-pads for the drawings of all manufacturers and sub-contractors. The architect will then have to take responsibility for the correctness of his work, in the knowledge that other building team members will rely on it. The certified architect will be introduced. In the end all quality assurances of all building team members, as set in certificates ISO 9000/9001, must correspond. None of the building team members will be able to withdraw from that, not one manufacturer and not one architect. The formula of the building team is directed at cooperation, while the usual system of tendering and sub-tendering leads to

223

passive or even forced co-operation, whereby too much sand causes a considerable slowing-down of the smooth running of the wheels. The ever increasing perfection of the computerized manners of drawing, challenges a greater spatial quality which can be calculated mathematically up to an unprecedented high complexity level. As a result of this, the preparation traject will win considerably in quality from complexity and refinement. If the computer processings of the engineering parties and those of the architect will be coupled, then the rapidity and accuracy of the describing of components in working-drawings will increase as well. For orthogonal buildings goes that every automation can mean profit in many respects. But particularly more complex geometries will, with decreasing surplus energy, be laid down in partsdrawings. The step to the actual manufacturing will be considerable and the assembly at the building-site will drop behind a good deal. The computer pulls forward the preparation process, while production and engineering stay behind, because these are more material and humane committed activities. As far as the author knows, there is no building component in The Netherlands yet which is placed automatized, for instance with the help of a barcode. Considerable investments will have to be made in the engineering process, in order not to lose the profit in spatial quality, as made possible by the computer in the conceptual phase. The pioneers of complex, by the computer stimulated geometries, like the architect Kas Oosterhuis, who in their design instrument also find a stimulus to get to better designs, will initially have to take entirely in tow their building team members of the engineering traject, in order to diminish the widening gap between CAD and CAD/CAB (Computer-Aided Building).

Fig. 179: Provincial Floriade Pavilion, Haarlemmermeer. Architect: Kas Oosterhuis

224

Fig. 180: Provincial Floriade Pavilion (interior), Haarlemmermeer.

12.5 TOWARDS FUTURE ARCHITECTURE The work environment becomes more and more coupled to physical and virtual information flows. Location and position with respect to pedestrians, cars and public transport play an important part, buildings are alive thanks to the infrastructure of the city. The information revolution with its unprecedented high speed of development, will ever more quickly influence the discomfort of an unchangeable building. Many facilities which a decade ago testified to a

225

foresight, like a computer exchange and computer floors, are being rendered out of date by the great strides of miniaturization of the computer. Large, bright glass façades for office spaces are, because of the great and blinding power of light, no longer to be combined with working behind computer screens. The significance of the façade-opening as a look-out possibility when using computers, is decreasing. The relevant Safety & Health regulations can be adapted. The current office environment gets a more and more pleasant atmosphere by the partly turned-off neon lights. The building and the façade as its visually most important part, will have to symbolize the evolving of the organization with its time. The building becomes a three-dimensional infrastructure, capable of growing with the changes of the twenty-first century. Therefore, the façade as a metaphor is interpreted by many architects in their own way and translated into a material design. The architecture of durable building will doubtlessly result in a neutralizing and abstracting of buildings, in order to give the entire building a longer life, functionally and aesthetically. Buildings which are over-measured in floor space and volumes will, for that matter, go along with changes of organizations and different visions on use longer than in economically dimensioned and tightly cut-in buildings. This also requires a change in the economic way of Dutch investment thinking. The on-going developments in hardware and software of the computer science technology may result in an increase of working speed, a greater completeness of production and perfection of releases. The critical factors remain, after the vision of the principal, creativity and imaginative faculties, the search for spatial tension and unexpected surprises in the work of the architect. Important are the knowledge, know-how and insight of the architect to choose the most appropriate materials, elements and components and to know and describe the artistic design of singular materials via various methods of manufacturing. Designers with sufficient knowledge and skills, but without insight and vision will increasingly be unmasked when the revolution in the designing information science will have spent itself. Architecture is still about making good and excellent buildings. It is the author’s opinion that the architect must be completely responsible for the entire building. This can be done on a continuous basis if he watches over the entire building traject. Ad hoc project processing in which at the same time the long term is not directed at, will not lead to a consolidated ‘body of knowledge’. In those cases an equal surplus energy will be necessary, which will eventually lead to loss of interest of the parties involved and to a slowly disappearing out of sight the started search for a better quality. Improved material assemblies, details and material performances require a higher level of building technology than the mere geometric fiddling with the computer. Engineering follows design, as an activity essential to come to a good processing of the design. From a building technical point of view, the computer designs of Bernard Tschumi are assembled from very conventional, if not to say traditional elements and components. Spatially curved roofs in his designs are build up from round rolled open steel profiles, while the building technology was already far more developed into a higher level of refinement. Excellent in the field of geometry, but not so in building technical assembly. The secret might be that one can only spend one’s money once, either on a complex geometry or on

226

a complex and refined assembly or structures, but not yet on both. Architects do have the ambition to create the new spatial quality by means of new building techniques, but for the time being they must ‘reculer pour mieux sauter’. First the forward jump, later refinement in the striving to an intelligent form, an intelligent assembly and possibly even an intelligent responsive building. That level of a pre-programmed responsive intelligence of buildings is surely a prospect in the near future if architectural technology will be intertwined with installation and façade technology at a higher level. In general, building becomes ever less massive and ever more influenced by Mechanical Engineering. Even the concrete building industry will experience its influences. As the bearer of all finished structures, increasingly higher demands will have to be met by the concrete framework, in the sense of strictness and tolerances. The precision of the concrete building industry cannot remain what is was one generation ago. This requirement will influence the manufacturing manners of concrete. It will lead to 3-D definitions and the drawing of the framework after pouring or the dry assembly. There is an increasing need for a defining party at the building-site as an independent estimate activity, not forced by bad work, but as a necessary intermediary between the building parties. Especially on the fracture in between rough building and finishing stage many obscurities and non-fulfilments occur. In earlier days the building surveyor did this job, but it is now taken off his hands. The building parties have to be affiliated to the project-CAE, which watches over and determines geometries yet to be built, a necessary step to CAB. In several fields, the computer shall have to simplify local building (i.e. the pouring of concrete) and the assembling of prefabricated components. A control function, instigated by a specialist operator, in future mechanization, automation and robotizing of a growing number of activities at the building-site, will be a prospect for the computer. The manufacturing techniques of building products and components, which came into use during the last generation of industrial architecture, will become available and absorbed as common knowledge. That will provide a balance between the knowledge and know-how of the architect at a building technical level, like it was known in the traditional and rational days. The current tendency to escape into conceptual thinking because of the lack of knowledge and insight in manufacturing techniques, and stimulated by the strive for performance estimates will, after the injection of the present very mechanical engineering-like production techniques, form a new balance again. The architect has to regain his mastership of integration of all components into a building which bears his view on spatial quality. The designing of buildings has to lead to architecture with a highly functional and spatial quality and a long duration of life. But, most of all, architecture has to be exciting, surprising and give us the feeling of living in an exciting world.

227

Fig. 181: Parc de la Vilette, Paris. Architect : Bernard Tschumi.

228

REFERENCES [1]

Roozenburg en Eekels, Productontwerpen, structuur en methoden, Lemna Publishers, Utrecht 1991, ISBN 9051890672

[2]

Buys en Valkenburg, Integrale Productontwikkeling, Lemna Utrecht 1996, ISBN 9051895283

[3]

Eekhout, POPO, Proces Organisatie voor Product Ontwikkeling, Faculty of Architecture, Delft 1996

[4]

Schalkoord, 5 Jarenplan onderzoek Bouwtechnologie, 18.03.96

[5]

Meijdam, Ravesloot, Criteria voor wetenschappelijk ontwerp & onderzoek, Baio, Bouwkunde TU Delft 1996.

[6]

Van Duin, Vorm en functie, Publicatiebureau Bouwkunde Delft, 1995 ISBN 9052691738

[7]

Focqué, Ontwerpsystemen, een inleiding tot de ontwerptheorie, Antwerpen 1975

[8]

De Ridder, Het ontwerp van Nederland, Delft University Press 1995

[9]

Polak, Functioneel ontwerpen, Faculty of Civil Engineering BB 25, Delft 1993 ISBN 9010104125

[10]

Eekhout, Tubular Structures in Architecture, Cidect Geneve 1996 ISBN 9075095260

[11]

De Jong, Diësrede 1995

[12]

Jacobs, Kuijper en Roes, De economische kracht van de bouw, noodzaak van een culturele trendbreuk, Stichting Maatschappij en Onderneming, Den Haag 1992 ISBN 9069620774

[13]

De Jong, Kleine Methodolgie voor ontwerpend onderzoek, Boom, Meppel 1992, ISBN 9053520163

[14]

Boelen et al, Criteria voor wetenschappelijk ontwerp en onderzoek, Demian Publishers, Delft 1996, ISBN 9080292915

[15]

Womack, Jones & Roos, The Machine that changed the World, the story of lean production, Harper Perennial, New York, 1991 ISBN 0060974176

229

[16]

Eekhout, Architecture in Space Structures, Uitgeverij 010 Rotterdam 1989 ISBN 9064500800

[17]

De Jong, Inleiding Technische ecologie & Milieuplanning, monografie 20 Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft 1994

[18]

Attaran, Fuzzy logic: de ijzeren logica voorbij, Journal of Systems Management March/April 1996, PEM Select, Kluwer, Deventer 1996 nr 3

[19]

Eekhout, Gespannen glas, Zappi of productontwikkeling voor het NAi, NAi Publishers, Rotterdam 1996 ISBN 907246978X

[20]

Sabbagh, Skyscraper, the Making of a Building, Penguin, New York 1990, ISBN 014015284 9

[21]

Van Rossum, Stadbouwkunst: de stedelijke ruimte als architectonische opgave, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam 1996 ISBN 9056620126

[22]

Eekhout, Architectuur tussen traditie en experiment, of Zappi en het uitdagende productmysterie, Delft, 1992

[23]

Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Vienna, 1923

[24]

Eekhout, Architecture in Space Structures, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam 1989

[25]

Eekhout, Product Development in Glass Structures, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam 1990

[26]

R.Leduc, Marketing van nieuwe producten, Samson, Alphen a/d Rijn, 1973

230