Gehry Partners Case Study.

[Roger Evans]

As a matter of interest is there any software out there that claims to do the actual design for us?

In my latter years at college (Early 70's) we were given a few lectures as to the future of computers and one guy showed us a housing layout produced by a computer ~ Each house was designed with defining categories / parameters size of rooms orientation etc and the whole site laid out on plan.

So what has happened in the last 30 years?

[aggockel50321]

Reading this thread, the question seems to be, is it the software that's driving the design, or is it what's in the architect's mind that drives the design.

Surely it's the latter, and he's just looking for the most expedient way to get there.

Whether it be a hot piece of software, or the old pen & paper method, whatever it takes, and whatever he's comfortable with, he'll use.

[GuyR]

The point I was making , was that its interesting that a practice that promotes itself as a champion of the latest technology does not see fit to adopt many other available technologies which might assist design production and information exchange.

With respect beegee I think you're missed the main point of the article. According to the article they have/do use video conferencing, digital cameras, rapid prototyping etc. I guess it depends what you call latest technology.

For me the signficant point of the article is summed up in the last paragraph:

In conclusion, Gehry Partners has, over the course of their practice, developed a process and workflow that works for them and allows them to create the kind of architecture they wish to create. As a result, they carefully manage this workflow and go at great lengths to avoid any disruptions to it, even if that means living with some inefficiencies in their process and the products they use. The technological choices they make have to fit within this workflow, which often makes them late adopters of some technology solutions. Technology is critical to them, but at the same time, they are far from being dictated by it.

Regardless of the solution(s) used it's the 'process' and how it fits into your practice that matters, this is the point. IMO this is why getting the most out of Revit is not just a matter of installing the software and continuing to work the way you always have. As much work needs to be spent on your workflow processes as learning the software if you are ever going to get the most out of Revit or any other 'BIM' solution.

Guy

[beegee]

With respect beegee I think you're missed the main point of the article. According to the article they have/do use video conferencing, digital cameras, rapid prototyping etc. I guess it depends what you call latest technology.

Not to belabour my point, ... but they do a small amount of rapid prototyping ,and this is outsourced rather than in-house. And this is in a culture where the primacy of physical models is a cultural imperative and hi-tech methodology is espoused. See what I'm saying ?

The firm periodically uses high-tech rapid prototyping methods such as laser cutting; this, however, is outsourced to service providers rather than done in-house. 3D printing is not used as often as one would expect, given the organic forms of most of the firm's projects. I found out that despite the complex appearance of the building forms, most of them have single curves and can be modeled with standard techniques. Only the occasional sculptural piece has double curves and such models are outsourced for 3D printing rather than done in-house.

Yes they do use video conferencing, FTP sites, email, telephones and couriers ... and even Autocad . Great ! Hardly innovative and of no real consequence except when viewed in the light of their percived technological superiority.

leveraging the very best in digital tools for building design and construction

I don't doubt for a minute that their process and work flow works for them

even if that means living with some inefficiencies in their process and the products they use. "

.
I merely express surprise, and hopefully make the point, that they are prepared to openly accept such inefficiencies when they actively promote high tech solutions and "cutting edge " design and when other technologies may provide solutions. And I question how far they have investigated those technologies and if they have, does their investigation provide any answers for other practices, or is their culture so unique that no conclusions can be drawn.

As Khemlani says

...indicating that even technologically advanced firms still have areas where the potential of technology to improve efficiency and minimize costs hasn't been fully exploited.

And that, I think , is where I came in.

[GuyR]

but they do a small amount of rapid prototyping ,and this is outsourced rather than in-house. And this is in a culture where the primacy of physical models is a cultural imperative and hi-tech methodology is espoused. See what I'm saying ?

I see what you're saying. But why is it a surprise they don't do more rapid prototyping? As someone who's done a lot of R.P it's neither rapid or cheap (both machine and part). The laser cutting is interesting but those machines are bloody expensive. Also thin elements like mullions etc don't scale well. Perhaps what they're saying is there isn't a R.P process currently good enough to replace old fashioned model making.

Even more surprising is the use of the TIFF format instead of PDF or DWF for information exchange.

They say they use faxes a lot . My fax software stores faxes in TIFF. Perhaps it's as simple as this.

I can see why they use Rhino with CATIA. Rhino is a breeze to use compared to CATIA so they use it during the scheme design and it links to spreadsheets etc more easily than CATIA would. CATIA is very hard to use, particularly surfacing so they don't start getting into CATIA until they have a definite direction they're heading in. Seems to make sense.

Gehry Architects appear to have a damn good handle on the weaknesses of their different tools and methods.They're prepared to accept the minuses because the pluses are so significant. It's the process and workflow that's innovative not the tools. I hardly think they're low tech just because they still make a lot of physical models.

..indicating that even technologically advanced firms still have areas where the potential of technology to improve efficiency and minimize costs hasn't been fully exploited.

Exactly, If the technology exists.

And I question how far they have investigated those technologies and if they have, does their investigation provide any answers for other practices

Isn't that the point of Gehry Technologies?

They also find such capabilities lacking in the industry in general, and are attempting to provide them through their spin-off venture mentioned earlier, Gehry Technologies, which is working with Dassault Systemes to make its CATIA product better suited for building design and construction. Essentially, Gehry Technologies is aiming to provide a CATIA-based BIM solution to the AEC industry that is focused not just on the building design process but also extends to the fabrication and construction processes that are critical to the creation of unconventional architecture.

Which is basically saying they could be Revit competition one day. Mind you, given the price of CATIA that should stop most people in their tracks.

Guy

ps: You've got to love Radio Triple-M's sense of humour. Pity Columbians don't...

'If Juan could Juan just Juan Formula Juan race which Juan would Juan want to Juan?'

Go Ferrari....

[crullier]

I ...I hardly think they're low tech just because they still make a lot of physical models.
....

Well, I saw a Ghery film tonight in class, and while watching I was intrigued by how where the drawings produced for his buildings.. so I did some research... if you guys want BIM techonlogy and the modeling power of rhino and Catia why not look into Inventor? I think that inventor and revit would make a great combo (which I plan to try out for my final project this semester)

anyhow, I am overhelmed by the number of discussions I have found regarding Ghery's design tools for documenting. good stuff. So I guess Revit alone can not produce a building like the Disneys Orchestra...?

thanks

[hand471037]

Well, I saw a Ghery film tonight in class, and while watching I was intrigued by how where the drawings produced for his buildings.. so I did some research... if you guys want BIM techonlogy and the modeling power of rhino and Catia why not look into Inventor? I think that inventor and revit would make a great combo (which I plan to try out for my final project this semester)

They would if they would talk to each other. That's one place that the Revit team has really dropped the ball I feel. Why can't I load up someone else's Inventor part as a Revit family, or at least import it the same way I do a DWG to make a family? What good is it to me that someone is using Inventor for the fabrication detailing or furniture design, when the models I get in the end to use within Revit are just as dumb as if they had been made within AutoCAD in the first place?

[ariasdelcid]

Agreeing with Jeffrey , I must say also: work smarter, not harder. Has anybody seen the new product by Graphisoft?