14.9.14 - acsa fall conference - presentation...2014/11/14 · • project is the redesign of...
TRANSCRIPT
CONSTRUCTINGE X P E R I E N C E
Most designers - such as glass artists or furniture
designers, not to mention architects - rarely make the
objects they design themselves. Consequently, they need
to understand the possibilities and limits of the materials
and crafts, and communicate their ideas and intentions
to the specialist craftsman, whose hands become the
designer’s surrogate hands in the execution of the work.
- Juhani Pallasmaa
Exploring Design|Build Strategies within a Technology Course
C h a d S c h w a r t z , A I A
A s s i s t a n t P r o f e s s o r
Southern Ill inois University
c h a d . s c h w a r t z @ s i u . e d u
2014 Fall ACSA Conference
WORKING OUT
I N T E N T
I N T E N TGoals for this Study
• reflective analysis of the past three years of teaching
Building Construction I in the School of Architecture at
Southern Illinois University
• not a critique of the practice of design|build in general or of
the overall learning experience of this course
• primary examination of the relationship between course
learning objectives and project experience and outcomes
• other points of analysis include student performance data,
student survey data, amongst others
I N T E N TRevised Course Philosophies
drawing: Mark Ryan Studio
photo: Bill Timmermann
I N T E N TRevised Course Philosophies
I N T E N TRevised Course Philosophies
C O U R S E
C O U R S EBuilding Technology I: Wood
• core course in architecture and interior design programs
• second semester (spring) of second year in the program
• (2) one-hour lectures and (2) two-hour labs each week
(both faculty taught with graduate assistant support)
• (3) projects undertaken in the lab
C O U R S EEnrollment
Spring 2014Spring 2013Spring 2012
456167
C O U R S EFocus
Spring 2014Spring 2013Spring 2012
456167
Focus of this study is on the iterations taught in 2012 and 2014 as they utilized the same project set.
PROJECTS
PROJECTSProject 1: Intersection
constructions: E. Hamilton, A. Michael,
J. Mckinney, M. Ollmann
photos: by author
PROJECTSProject 2: Cairo Residence
drawing: M. Ollmann
PROJECTSProject 3: Design|Build
photos: R. Swenson and S. Jariwala
COURTYARD
COURTYARDProject Outline
• design|build undertaken in the courtyard of the School of
Architecture building
• project is a 4’-0” wide single story residential wall section
• students working in groups of 6 or 7
• project in both 2012 and 2013 with slight variations
• emphasis on translation through a series of tasks
COURTYARD1: Wall Section
COURTYARD2: Design Completion
COURTYARD3: Materials List and Cost Analysis
database: Group 5 - 2012
COURTYARD4: Storyboard
drawings: Group 4 - 2012
COURTYARD5: Build Day
COURTYARD5: Build Day
COURTYARD5: Build Day
COURTYARD5: Build Day
photo: R. Swenson
COURTYARDAdditional Notes
• one project built in the School of Architecture’s gallery for
longer display, including accreditation visit
• the courtyard constructions were disassembled one week
after construction in a single day - as much material as
possible was salvaged and brought to the woodshop
• each group submitted a photo narrative at the conclusion of
the project
H I L L S I D E
H I L L S I D EProject Outline
• design|build undertaken at SIU’s 3100 acre Touch of Nature
preserve in 2014
• funded by a grant from SIU
• project is the redesign of TON’s Camp I I hi l lside
amphitheater - space is used for camps, retreats, weddings,
and other events throughout the year; not a campus building
• students working in lab sections on components of overall
project and within multiple smaller groups for tasks
• goal was to translate the working process of the courtyard
build into a community-based construct
H I L L S I D E1: Site Analysis
photos: students in Lab 002 - 2014
H I L L S I D E2: Conceptual Design
drawings: R. Bdair and C. Cornell
H I L L S I D E2: Conceptual Design
drawings: L. Ovca and A. Nash
H I L L S I D E2: Conceptual Design
drawings: J. Mckinney and C. Lloyd
H I L L S I D E2: Conceptual Design
drawings: W. McGuire and S. Jariwala
H I L L S I D E3: Group Development Taskwork - Materials and Cost Analysis
drawings: Lab 001 Group 1
H I L L S I D E3: Group Development Taskwork - Storyboard
drawings: Lab 001 Group 3
H I L L S I D E3: Group Development Taskwork - Construction Documentation
drawings: Lab 001 Group 4
H I L L S I D E3: Group Development Taskwork - Construction Documentation
drawings: Lab 001 Group 4
H I L L S I D E3: Group Development Taskwork - Mockups and Models
drawings: Lab 001 Group 4
H I L L S I D E4: Build Days
H I L L S I D E4: Build Days
H I L L S I D E4: Build Days
H I L L S I D E4: Build Days
H I L L S I D E4: Build Days
H I L L S I D EAdditional Notes
• students were required to attend three full-day build days
and were rewarded with extra credit for coming to more
• in all we were on site for about 20 days
• each lab was required to submit a summary document of
the project at the end of the semester
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVESFour Types
Primary Lectures
Lab Tutorials
Quizzes and Tests
Project 1: Detail Construction
Project 2: Design|Build
Project 3: House CDs
Outer - 2012 | Inner - 2014 Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective Does Not Meet Objective
Primary Course Objectives CIDA Professional StandardsNAAB Student Performance Criteria
CoreObjectives
1: U
nder
stan
d W
ood
as a
Mat
eria
l
2: U
nd
ers
tan
d H
ow
to
Bu
ild
wit
h W
oo
d
3: U
nder
stan
d C
onst
ruct
ion
Doc
umen
ts
4: U
nd
ers
tan
d A
rch
ite
ctu
re a
s an
d A
sse
mb
ly
5: U
nder
stan
d R
egul
atio
n of
Bui
ldin
g
6: D
eve
lop
Cri
tica
l Th
ink
ing
NA
AB
A4
: Te
chn
ical
Do
cum
en
tati
on
NA
AB
B9
: Str
uct
ura
l Sys
tem
s
NA
AB
B1
0: B
uil
din
g E
nve
lop
e S
yste
ms
NA
AB
B12
: Bu
ild
ing
Mat
eri
als
and
Ass
em
bli
es
CID
A 5
c: C
oll
abo
rati
on
an
d T
eam
wo
rk
CID
A 6
e: P
rodu
ctio
n of
Con
trac
t Doc
umen
ts
CID
A 1
1a:
Aw
aren
ess
of M
ater
ials
CID
A 1
1c:
Pro
pe
r S
ele
ctio
n o
f M
ate
rial
s
CID
A 1
2e:
Und
erst
and
Ther
mal
Dyn
amic
s
CID
A 1
3a:
Str
uct
ura
l Sys
tem
s
CID
A 1
3b:
Non
-Str
uctu
ral S
yste
ms
CID
A 1
3f:
Vert
ical
Circ
ulat
ion
Sys
tem
s
CID
A 1
3g
: Re
adin
g C
on
stru
ctio
n D
ocu
me
nts
CID
A 1
4a:
Sus
tain
abili
ty
CID
A 1
4d:
Und
erst
andi
ng o
f Bui
ldin
g R
egul
atio
n
CID
A 1
4g:
App
licat
ion
of B
uild
ing
Reg
ulat
ion
1: D
eve
lop
Ab
ilit
y t
o T
ran
slat
e R
ep
rese
nta
tio
n
2: D
eve
lop
Ab
ilit
y t
o R
ela
te S
cale
s
Primary Course Objective
2: Understand How to Build with Wood Light FrameStudents should understand the pr incip les, mater ia ls, means and methods, and sustainable design issues for wood light frame construction. Students should learn the basic tenants of the construction of a wood light frame building and learn the steps necessary to design and assemble it.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students directly engage materials, means, and methods of construction with wood light frame construction
all students have relatively equal opportunity to meet objective
students directly engage materials, means, and methods of construction with manufactured wood
many students to not directly engage with any traditional wood light frame construction (amphitheater vs. stage vs. threshold)
Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
Primary Course Objective
4: Understand Architecture as an Assembly of PartsStudents should understand the reali t ies of architecture being an assembly of par ts t ha t a r e jo ined toge the r. Students should understand the fundamentals of tectonic assembly, joining, and making.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students directly engage in the assembly of full-scale work (both virtually and in reality)
students directly engage in the assembly of full-scale work (both virtually and in reality)
Meets Objective Meets Objective
Primary Course Objective
6: Develop Critical Thinking SkillsStudents should develop an ability to think critically about how and why we construct architecture in the ways we do.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students directly engage in a complex problem that must be thought through carefully
students must seek out information in addition to what is provided to them in lecture/lab sessions
Meets Objective Meets Objective
students directly engage in a complex problem that must be thought through carefully
students must seek out information in addition to what is provided to them in lecture/lab sessions
approached the borderline of being too complex for many students to think through in the timeframe given
NAAB Student Performance Criteria
A4: Technical Documentation[Students need the] abili ty to make technica l ly clear d r a w i n g s , w r i t e o u t l i n e specifications, and prepare m o d e l s i l l u s t r a t i n g a n d iden t i f y ing t he assembly of mater ials, systems, and components appropriate for a building design.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students create detailed storyboard drawings that outline the construction of the build
students are required to interpret a given construction document
students do no create construction documents of their own
all students have relatively equal opportunity to meet objective
Partially Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
25% of the students create construct ion documents for the built project
25% of the students create detailed storyboard drawings that outline the construction of the build
50% of the students to not engage with technical documentation of any type
drawings were not fully reviewed
NAAB Student Performance Criteria
B9: Structural Systems[S t uden t s mus t ga in an] understanding of the basic principles of structural behavior in withstanding gravity and lateral forces and the evolution, r a n g e , a n d a p p r o p r i a t e application of contemporary structural systems.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students learned about the construction and application of light wood frame structural systems through the project’s process
the constructions themselves, as sectional works, were not of themselves structurally sound without additional support
the support systems were incomplete at the foundations as the built work was temporary
Partially Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
as a permanent structure, structural design was included in the process including looking at gravity loads and the lateral loading of vertical cantilevers
about 10% of the students were highly involved in the structural analysis done on the project
most students actively participated in the build and assembly of structural components of the project
NAAB Student Performance Criteria
B10: Building Envelope Systems[Students must develop an] understanding of the basic pr incip les involved in the appropr ia te appl icat ion of building envelope systems and associated assemblies relative to fundamental performance, aesthetics, moisture, transfer, durabil i t y, and energy and material resources.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students learned about the exterior wall system and roof system of a wood light frame building and engaged in its construction as the primary focus of this problem
Meets Objective Does Not Meet Objective
as an outdoor structure, there was no enclosure system included in the project that satisfies this objective
NAAB Student Performance Criteria
B12: Building Materials and AssembliesParallels objective 2 from the primary course objectives.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students directly engage materials, means, and methods of construction with wood light frame construction
all students have relatively equal opportunity to meet objective
students directly engage materials, means, and methods of construction with manufactured wood
many students to not directly engage with any traditional wood light frame construction (amphitheater vs. stage vs. threshold)
Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
CIDA Professional Standards
5c: Collaboration and TeamworkThe interior design program [m u s t i n c l u d e] l e a r n i n g ex pe r i ences t ha t engage s tudents in col laborat ion, consensus building, leadership, and teamwork.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students work in a team environment (group of 6-7 students) to develop and build a complex project
s t uden t s wor k i n a mu l t i - t i e r ed t eam environment of small and larger groups to develop and build a complex project
Meets Objective Meets Objective
CIDA Professional Standards
11c: Proper Selection of MaterialsParallels objective B12 from the NAAB Student Per formance Criteria, but with an emphasis on interior design materials
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students directly engage materials, means, and methods of construction with wood light frame construction
the s tudy of t rad i t iona l in ter ior design components is limited
students directly engage materials, means, and methods of construction with manufactured wood
the s tudy of t rad i t iona l in ter ior design components is limited
Partially Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
CIDA Professional Standards
13a: Structural SystemsParallels objective B9 from the NAAB Student Per formance Criteria.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students learned about the construction and application of light wood frame structural systems through the project’s process
the constructions themselves, as sectional works, were not of themselves structurally sound without additional support
the support systems were incomplete at the foundations as the built work was temporary
Partially Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
as a permanent structure, structural design was included in the process including looking at gravity loads and the lateral loading of vertical cantilevers
about 10% of the students were highly involved in the structural analysis done on the project
most students actively participated in the build and assembly of structural components of the project
CIDA Professional Standards
13g: Reading Construction DocumentsStudents [should be] able to read and interpret construction drawings and documents.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
students are required to interpret a construction document as the fundamental starting point of the assignment; the translation begins with this reading
Meets Objective Partially Meets Objective
students were asked to create construction documents that were used on the jobsite to build the project
the construction documents were, for the most part, incomplete and hard to interpret on the site (a good learning experience in its own right though)
Core Objectives | Pedagogy
1: Develop the Ability to Translate Representation to RealityEach student needs to realize that the lines they generate have meaning, inform their “su r r oga t e ha nds ,” a nd , therefore, must be carefully considered.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
the s tuden ts take a g iven drawing and translate it through a series of tasks into a built construction of the original drawing
Meets Objective Does Not Meet Objective
students develop virtual products in groups that are translated into a built product
very few students were able to make the connections from one step to the next due to the necessity for a division of labor
Core Objectives | Pedagogy
2: Develop the Ability to Relate Between ScalesThe other core pedagogical issue was that of scale. The course was designed to explore wood light frame construction at a variety of scales.
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
good relationship between the scale of the section in this project and the scale of the building in the shotgun house cd set
poor relationship to the scale of the detail in the 2x4 joint problem
Partially Meets Objective Meets Objective
only a partial relationship to the larger scale building of the shotgun house cd set
good relationship to the scale of the detail in the 2x4 joint problem
excellent comparison of scale within the design/build problem itself
Summary of Findings
OBJECTIVESSpring 2012 | Courtyard Build Spring 2014 | Hillside Build
8 Meets Objective
5 Partially Meets Objective
0 Does Not Meet Objective
4 Meets Objective
7 Partially Meets Objective
2 Does Not Meet Objective
• not a fair comparison
• the courtyard build was designed to fulfill the objectives
• the hillside build was an experiment to understand how
community based design build would work in this course
• I think this is a regular scenario for courses venturing into
community based design/build
• how are the results evaluated?
• does the project modify, or do the objectives modify?
Summary of Findings
OBJECTIVES
G R A D E S
G R A D E SPerformance on Construction Document Set
The Construction Document set for the small residential house is an individual project that is worked on concurrently with the group-based design/build project.
Spring 2014Spring 2013Spring 2012
+1%+2.1%+4.1%
Percentage Improvement from DD to CD Submittal
G R A D E SPerformance on Construction Document Set
The Construction Document set for the small residential house is an individual project that is worked on concurrently with the group-based design/build project.
Spring 2014Spring 2013Spring 2012
+1%
42%
+2.1%
26%
+4.1%
15%
Percentage Improvement from DD to CD Submittal
Percentage of Students Performing Worse on the CD Submittal
G R A D E SPerformance on Construction Document Set
The Construction Document set for the small residential house is an individual project that is worked on concurrently with the group-based design/build project.
Despite the fact that the CD set has decreased from 4 sheets in 2012 to only 2 sheets in 2014
Spring 2014Spring 2013Spring 2012
80.2%81.4%
-5.2%
85.4%
Average Overall Score on the Final CD Submittal
G R A D E SPerformance in the Course
The average loss on the CD set was almost 4 times greater than the loss in the class over the same period.
The ave r age loss on t he Midterm and Final exams was only -0.4%
Spring 2014Spring 2013Spring 2012
82.7%83.8%
-1.4%
84.1%
Average Overall Score in the Course
G R A D E SPerformance in the Course
Based on student participation in necessary extra credit build days to finish the project.
Spring 2014
82.7% --> 85.4%
+2.3%
Average Grade After Accounting for Extra Credit
I S S U E S
I S S U E S
• What is the best strategy for keeping 45-65 students busy?
• How can this be done within the available timeframe of the
course? How many days can be spent building?
• How does the site allow for one faculty to monitor and
control 45-65 students?
• How does each student receive a well-rounded experience?
• Where are the funds coming from?
• How does the project activate the school and surrounding
community?
Other Key Considerations for This Course
P R O D U C T
P R O D U C TProduct: Courtyard Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Courtyard Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Courtyard Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Courtyard Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Hillside Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Hillside Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Hillside Build
P R O D U C TProduct: Hillside Build
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
[Kubler] is startlingly alone among art historians in his
claim that the significant meanings of this monument
are to be sought in reconstructing the particular building
activity - and not in a formal analysis of the architecture.
I believe there are ‘forms’ to be found within the activity
of making as much as within the end products. These
are forms of behavior, aimed at testing the limits and
possibilities involved in that particular interaction between
one’s actions and the materials of the environment.
- Robert Morris
Product vs. Process
C h a d S c h w a r t z , A I A
A s s i s t a n t P r o f e s s o r
Southern Ill inois University
c h a d . s c h w a r t z @ s i u . e d u