This reading discusses bridging the gap between speculation, simulation, and built architecture. It discusses the implications of the inaccuracies of simulations, because of their simplification and inability to account for unpredictable variables.
As simulations become more trustworthy, we can challenge the traditional basis of design knowledge. CATIA is one of these tools where many different kinds of knowledge meet, including information from consultants, architects, and fabricators.
Even once simulations have passed all the tests, it is difficult for them to have precedence over trusted regulations. This is not only because of the variables that bring change into an environment but also that varying assumptions can produce virtually infinite results. What use are these simulations to us now? Designing with multiple simulations that attack a problem from different angles is a good way to gain a holistic perspective on building performance. As long as we understand that simulations do not give us a whole or accurate picture of what will actually happen, they do provide valuable information to influence architect's design decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment