Technology Architecture and Design最新文献_第10页

Post Occupancy Evaluation in Architectural Education and Practice 建筑教育与实践中的入住后评价

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863663

G. Cranz, Lusi Morhayim, G. Lindsay, Johann (Hans) Sagan

引用次数: 2

Validating an Emerging Design Area through Industry‐Academia Research Partnerships 通过产学研合作验证新兴设计领域

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863661

Amy Seif Hattan

引用次数: 0

Methods: How We Invent and Research 方法:我们如何发明和研究

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863678

A. Zarzycki

{"title":"Methods: How We Invent and Research","authors":"A. Zarzycki","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863678","url":null,"abstract":"TA D 5 : 1 E D TO R IA L “[O]ur writing tools are also working on our thoughts” summarizes Friedrich Nietzsche’s experience using one of the early typewriters: a Malling-Hansen Writing Ball. His experience speaks directly to the tool-and-thought continuum evident in creative disciplines. It is also mirrored by Marshall McLuhan’s “the medium is the message” claim emphasizing the importance of the mechanism delivering the content. New tools and technologies (methods) often manifest themselves in new outcomes. While general questions remain unchanged, new methods can lead to qualitatively new answers. Thus, the focus of this issue is on how we invent, develop, and deliver new knowledge. Doris Sung advocates for expanding the entrepreneurial mindset within AEC disciplines by broadening architects’ services from exclusively client-oriented to product and building technology development. Sung uses her own experience as an inventor and developer of the InVert passively dynamic self-shading window to draw broader lessons for others following a similar path. This entrepreneurial path allows designers to respond to current and emerging social, technological, and environmental concerns by defining their own research questions and problems to solve—giving them autonomy and agency. In a voice coming from the allied discipline of civil engineering, Amy Seif Hattan demonstrates how collaborative research between an engineering firm and academia helps to validate best sustainable practices and ultimately become a catalyst for firm-wide environmentally focused transformation. The added benefit of this collaboration was the firm’s ability to offer new embodied carbon design services and gain market advantage over its competitors in addition to fostering a mutually beneficial relationship with academic researchers. In a similar way, the evidence-based design method helps practitioners to learn from their past projects and bring greater value to their clients. Galen Cranz, Lusi Morhayim, Georgia Lindsay, and Johann (Hans) Sagan emphasize the necessity of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) research in architecture, both in practice and academia, to address users’ manifest and latent needs. Christopher Pagano, Brian Day, and Leah S. Hartman expand the discussion of human factors in architecture by contextualizing it within a broader ecological psychology framework that sees people and the environment as interdependent. The authors point to affordance as a key characteristic that empirically quantifies this relationship. Precedents, either environmental performance data points or user feedback, are critical components of the architectural design process (method). William Braham in his review of Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers by Marja Sarvimäki reiterates the importance of case studies as one of the primary architectural research methods and grounds it in a larger interdisciplinary perspective. He also reiterates the importance of research methods, and ","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"3 1","pages":"110 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84480177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Building Integrated Evaporative Cooling Utilizing Pervious Concrete 利用透水混凝土的建筑整体蒸发冷却

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863675

A. Timmer

引用次数: 1

An Argument Framework for Ecological Psychology and Architecture Design 生态心理学与建筑设计的论证框架

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863665

C. Pagano, Brian J. Day, Leah S. Hartman

引用次数: 6

Molding Liquid Stone: A Computational and Experimental Mixed‐Method Study of 3D Print Formwork for Interlocking Concrete Modules 模塑液石:一种用于互锁混凝土模块的3D打印模板的计算和实验混合方法研究

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863677

N. Emami

引用次数: 2

Research Redux 研究回来的

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863660

D. M. Addington

{"title":"Research Redux","authors":"D. M. Addington","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863660","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863660","url":null,"abstract":"TA D 5 : 1 Research Redux I was about three years into my doctoral studies at Harvard’s GSD when three questions, or more accurately, three challenges to my work, were posed. For context, I was part of the initial wave of academic researchers and practitioners who were enamored with all things “smart,” particularly walls in whatever nominative designation rendered them as technologically advanced and functionally, if not formally novel: smart skins, intelligent facades, performative glazing, interactive surfaces, adaptive envelopes. Inspired by the cover of James Marston Fitch’s seminal text, American Building: The Environmental Forces That Shape It, depicting a building envelope as mediating the full sweep of environmental phenomena, I planned to develop a wall system to control all scales of heat transfer, thereby covering thermal, luminous, and acoustic behaviors—the ultimate smart wall. The first challenge came from one of my doctoral advisors in Mechanical Engineering who kept asking me what my hypothesis was. I thought he simply didn’t understand; in Architecture, we dealt with big ideas. The second challenge came from my doctoral advisor in Environmental Health, who kept pressing me on method. How was I going to determine the value of what I produced? What were my criteria? I thought he didn’t understand that true innovation lay beyond the bounds of the known and should not be constrained by the limits of measurable criteria. The third challenge lit the proverbial light bulb when I took an undergraduate course on Plato and the Socratic Elenchus and discovered my writing less than enthusiastically received. I expected to excel as I had in all of my previous classes in Architecture, but I was instead roundly criticized for my overly personal reinterpretation of Socrates’ argument. It was at that point I began to realize the argument I put forward as a thesis was but an empty vessel, a diversion to obscure that there was indeed no thesis. My entire approach was predicated on what I wanted to do, to make, and I justified the project by self-determining both the criteria for measuring the results and the ultimate value of the results. I was completely trapped in the closed circularity of my personal view. So I inverted my thesis: instead of technologically advanced smart walls, I shifted the smartness directly to the atmospheric physical phenomena that we had heretofore attributed to the walls. It was enough of a shift that the hypothesis and method were deemed acceptable by my circumspect advisors. While I am proud of the resulting thesis, it was only a first step toward a lifelong rethinking and reassessment of how our profession develops research questions, brings objectivity to its methods, and, most importantly, frames meaningful contribution. There have been many missteps and retrenchments along the way, and I am grateful to the intrepid doctoral students who hung in there with me as I tested and retreated from different methodological pa","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"14 1","pages":"10 - 13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82119517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

TAD 5:1 Issue PDF TAD 5:1 Issue PDF

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1908056

引用次数: 0

Re‐Opening 重新量开

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863654

M. Uihlein

引用次数: 0

On: Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers 上:建筑师和设计师的案例研究策略

Technology Architecture and Design Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863679

W. Braham

{"title":"On: Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers","authors":"W. Braham","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863679","url":null,"abstract":"slightly modified version of Yin’s original definition of a case study to highlight architecture’s focus on the built environment: “A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon or setting within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.” It is not difficult to see that buildings and cities exemplify that kind of complexly embedded phenomenon, and both Yin and Groat and Wang used Jane Jacobs’ seminal work Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) to illustrate the use of multiple forms of documentation and data in a specific case study to develop and support a general thesis about the city. The most recent contribution to the literature on case study research in architecture is a somewhat uneven book by Marja Sarvimäki, Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers (2018), which synthesizes material from Yin, Groat and Wang, and others. The book is organized in three main sections. The first section addresses the history and theory of case studies; the second, types of case studies; and the third, methods for evaluating them. The first two sections follow much of the material in Groat and Wang, though they draw more widely on the case study literature from other fields and expand the treatment of methods for evaluating and establishing the validity of case studies. The unevenness of the book appears in the introduction of a confusing argument for Actor Network Theory (ANT) as a theoretical basis for the treatment of nonWestern cultures in Critical Regionalism, with which the book concludes. Not only is ANT mistakenly attributed to Michel Foucault, but the well-known catalogue of animals Foucault cited in his preface to The Order of Things (1971) is presented as an authentic Chinese account and not as a fictional construction by Jorge Luis Borges from his 1942 essay “The Analytical Language of John Wilkins,” itself meant to reveal the cultural specificity of language and other descriptions of the world. Sarvimäki has clearly immersed herself in the case study literature, so the book serves as a useful introduction and commentary on those methods for design educators. That literature was explicitly developed to distinguish qualitative methods from the powerful quantitative methods used in the sciences. The explanations in the originals are often clearer than Sarvimäki’s, though she translates them into terms familiar to designers. A great deal of the original literature is devoted to categorical distinctions meant to help researchers determine what a particular case study will reveal, which methods are appropriate, and how to judge and present the results. There is much in the work useful for architectural research. The most fundamental category is the general paradigm or system of inquiry within which the researcher operates. Sarvimäki largely adopts the three categories used by Groat and Wang: “(1) positivist/post-positivist, (2) intersubjective, a","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"5 2","pages":"111 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72579265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1