A Design Methodology Using Prototyping Based On The Digital-Physical Models in The Architectural Design Process

sustainability
Article
A Design Methodology Using Prototyping Based on
the Digital-Physical Models in the Architectural
Design Process
Do Young Kim
Department Future Technology and Convergence Research, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building
Technology (KICT), Gyeonggi-do 10223, Korea; doyoungkim0123@kict.re.kr

Received: 23 April 2019; Accepted: 29 July 2019; Published: 15 August 2019
Abstract: In this study, a design methodology based on prototyping is proposed. This design
methodology is intended to enhance the functionality of the test, differentiating it from the prototyping
that is being conducted in conventional architectural design projects. The objective of this study is
to explore reference cases that enable designers to maximize the utilization of both digital models
and physical models that have been currently used in architectural designs. Also, it is to explore the
complementary roles and effects of digital models and physical models. Smart Building Envelopes
(SBEs) are one of challenging topics in architectural design and requires innovative design process
included tests and risk management. A conceptual prototyping-based model considering the topic
is applied to the design studio (education environment in university). Designing SBEs is not
difficult to conceive ideas, but it is impossible to “implement” using the conventional design method.
Implementing SBEs requires to strengthen validities and improve responsibilities of ideas in the
stages of architectural designs, with cutting-edge technologies and smart materials. The design
methodology enables designers (represented by students) to apply materials and manufacturing
methods using digital models (parametric design, simulation, BIM) and physical models, rather than
representing vanity images that are considered simple science fiction.
Keywords: prototyping; digital model; physical model; smart building envelope; design process
1. Research Background
In response to the demands of the 4th Industrial Revolution [1,2], there is a need for a way
to rapidly derive users’ needs and strategies in the building design field [3]. On the other hand,
in the automotive and aerospace fields, designs have been developed in response to the changes
in the contemporary requirements, and the results have been achieved through a method called
“prototyping” [4,5].
Prototyping can be explained by the meaning of “prototype.” The word “prototype” is used
in two ways: As an original model of something that serves as a basis for other things (Wikipedia,
19 February 2019) and as an “early” sample or model, including the functions of tests, which are
created to find a design solution [6]. In the former definition, “prototype” refers to the beginning of
the design, the basis, and the standard. In the latter definition, “prototype” leads to the designer’s
assuming-solving process in the course of all the design processes. Especially, in terms of the design
process, the latter definition is closely related to the meaning of economic benefits. According to
Acquisition Logistic Guide [7], in the last steps of the research and development process, not only does
the cost of the project increase; the opportunity to reduce the costs also sharply decreases. That is,
the design risks need to be eliminated at the beginning of the design phase, then the costs and resources
can be reduced. The success of projects depends on the clarification of the requirements at an early
stage and on rapidly eliminating the design risks.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416; doi:10.3390/su11164416 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 2 of 23
Prototyping is one of the ways to reduce design errors and eliminate the failure factors in the initial
design phase. The process involving the test-refinement-completion of designs using prototypes is
called “prototyping” [4,5]. Prototypes are used to test if designs respond to their intended performances
(e.g., “Will the design work as intended by the designers?”): According to ISO 15686, performance
means "quality criteria for key characteristics at a certain point in time". Some of these criteria
include energy efficiency, temperature and humidity, and the aesthetic and the interactions among
the building and users that designers pursue. For instance, in performance testing, the following
questions are posed: “Will the design meet the end user’s requirements?” and “Will the design meet
the required environmental performance?” Designers can use prototypes for learning, communication,
integration, and milestone setting through the process of improving prototypes. The prototype design
is refined to reduce the risk in the process of testing the prototype, or if constrained by the design
conditions, the design may be newly born with a prototype (design creation), by constructing different
concepts. The automotive and aerospace sectors have undergone an industrial revolution and have
succeeded in upgrading new materials and technologies. This process will be explained below in terms
of prototyping.
The Industrial Revolution needed corporate strategies and business models to incorporate new
technologies. The automobile and aerospace fields have successfully overcome the challenges posed
by such a revolution. Automobile and aerospace designs are actively developing core technologies to
maintain their existing competitiveness and to preoccupy the future markets.
Model T was an early prototype (called with a platform product) in automotive design [8–10].
Ford’s Model T began with the introduction of cars at a price lower than those of the expensive cars
at the time. To design a low-priced model, the production method was changed (mass production,
conveyor belt method), thereby making the design lighter, and the color types and shapes were
simplified. Its shape and basic skeleton/ appearance were almost identical to those of the present cars.
Even after its development, it had a long-term impact on the automotive design of other companies,
as well as its successors.
On the other hand, the Wright Brothers’ airplane was also an early prototype of various aircraft
designs with fixed wings [11]. The Wright brothers were the first inventors to have built the aircraft
structure in such a way as to allow speed and airflow control. The three-axis control allows pilots to
control aircraft and balance the aerospace effectively. This method introduced the basic principles of
maneuvering the future fixed-wing aerospace.
In the two aforementioned cases (Model T and the Wright brothers’ aircraft), an important key is
included concerning how prototyping is used to achieve breakthroughs in the design of automotive and
aerospace applications [12]. In these two cases, the shape and structure of the design are implemented
by representing design concepts and performance. This implementation was intended to provide a
quick experience of testing and failure, and could lead to future improvements and enhancements
of prototypes. Prototypes make designers acknowledge the design requirements that are easier to
understand. It also clearly shows the designers’ various assumptions. This is one of the most ways of
making tests proceed rapidly and accurately.
Traditionally, prototyping is also used in architectural design processes. For example, there
are wooden models of Filippo Brunelleschi and clay models of Michelangelo. These are shapes for
explaining the ideas of a designer to construction workers [13,14]. There are also Gaudí’s plaster
models for unique purposes [13,15]. These physical prototypes are comparable to today’s remarkable
digital models of complicated or large-capacity forms. Even they require deep understanding and
multi-disciplinary knowledge of building methods and materials.
In particular, Brunelleschi’s prototype is the same as the test-based prototype described above.
Brunelleschi’s prototype was not simply a means of visualization, but a means of exploring the concept
of architectural design morphologically. For example, the shape that Brunelleschi was trying to design
had characteristics that made it difficult to build using the existing methods, and he was able to realize it
in the process of designing new structures and methods, by using mathematical knowledge to overcome
the challenges involved. Brunelleschi’s domes were difficult to build through traditional construction
methods. Both a special construction process and special construction equipment were developed
to make this type of construction possible. The results of the prototyping process implemented by
Brunelleschi were innovative compared to the form of the era.
Prototypes of traditional architectures, such as Brunelleschi’s work are similar to the prototypes
of mechanical designs described in the previous section. The architects of the era are actually
such experts like artists, scientists, mathematicians and carpenters. However, due to the division
and specialization of fields in architecture, it becomes difficult to accurately estimate productivities
considering manufacturing processes and materials in the stage of architectural design. Thus, it is
difficult to expect holistic performances like traditional designs in the stage of architectural design.
Therefore, the prototype of the current architectural design remains only as a result of the technical
implementation of the architect and the completion of the result. The use of prototypes for testing
is often delegated to other experts. While the failures and solutions recorded during the testing
process will play a decisive role in technology development, architects have no choice, but to focus
more on the way they describe others than experience based on failure and resolution. Architects,
for example, inevitably spend a significant amount of time creating reports that summarize their skills
and achievements or visual presentations that are as good as 3D images.
For the future building designs, differentiated prototyping processes are required according to
the aforementioned cases. New forms and technological application are required to respond to the
changes in the climate environment and the users’ needs. Designs based on cutting-edge technologies
refer to application processes or high-performance materials that are not well known in conventional
building designs. For example, there is a large amount of complex new materials that are not utilized
for the general construction process. Despite the many advantages of these new materials over other
construction materials in terms of performance, firms use the existing materials, due to the risks
posed by the new materials. The main reason that the new materials are not used is that their prices
are not reasonable. In addition, there are few experts who understand how these new materials
should be used, and there are also no domestic design standards or specifications related to such
materials [16]. Therefore, new prototyping methods are needed to support numerous tests about new
materials/technologies in the design phase. Rather than making guesses about unknown performances
or just exploring individual design performances, design processes need to be facilitated to identify
and supplement the inherent risks in the design.
2. Research Objectives and Scope

A new design methodology is proposed in this work to help architectural design firms respond to
global movements.
The purpose of this methodology is to increase the productivity of architects who are fundamentally
faced by architects. The reason for low construction productivity is related to high tolerance
characteristics compared to other designs [17,18]. This tolerance could be solved at the construction or
use stage, but it is to strike the type of architecture that needs to be more modern (e.g., climate-responsive,
smart enclosures). In fact, the problem of tolerance is related to situations that do not take into account
all the variables involved in the design phase, or the variables involved in the ongoing process. In the
process of completing a typical building and a differentiated building, there is a high possibility that the
opinions and satisfaction of the end user are not reflected, which causes astronomical economic loss.
In this paper, we focus on advanced cases of designing buildings as products. The designer
quickly identifies errors that can occur during the design process by simultaneously considering the
material and manufacturing process at the design stage. This means that early ideas can actually be
created. Of course, purposing performance is not always able to be directly linked to productivity.
The key in these cases is not only measuring performance as a way to achieve productivity, but also
checking the measured values, both qualitatively and quantitatively, in a visible way. In conclusion,
the purpose of this paper is to show that designers are performing in a visible way and to solve them.
In general, the function of a digital model is known to enable a human to implement a complex
form that is hard to be realized by calculation or imagination. Parametric design, simulation tools,
and building information models are among the digital technologies that are currently being used
in large-scale, atypical projects in the construction sector. The design firms (Zaha Hadid, Herzog
de Meuron, Gehry Technology, etc.) have been able to easily implement complex geometry with
mathematical rules and use algorithms to analyze the performance of buildings to improve design
accuracy and building performance. However, it should be noted that, despite the efficiency of the
digital model, most of the experiments taking into account the properties of the material, characteristics
of the site and surrounding environment, and manufacturing process are realized through the physical
model. This aspect is also evident in the design training environment. Of course, the level of digital
and physical models in practice and in the educational environment varies in size and in proximity to
the end result. However, the complement of the two models proceeds at the same time without the
internal validity of the design being established, not just the result. This clearly recognizes that the
digital model’s functions are responsible for new and convenient information processing and analysis,
but emphasizes that the analog approach is visually appealing and familiar with the physical aspects
of the site.
Despite the acknowledgment of the complementarity between digital and physical models,
there is no example of defining the complementary role of both models, focused on productivity
and performance efficiency. Therefore, in this paper, a design methodology is based on prototyping
model using digital models and physical models to verify the effect of complementarity on designers.
Of course, in the future digital models are able to substitute to physical models perfectly. However,
in order to make highly functional and advanced products through digital technology, it is essential
that the complementary utilization of two models is essential. It is because the physical model is an
easy-to-make imagination to realize or validate plans according to the designer’s intentions.
Suggesting a design method based on complementarity using digital models and physical models
involves two purposes.
First, a design methodology that can minimize design risks and can create a timely response to the
rapid changes in the climate environment and users’ needs is necessary. The complementarity of digital
and physical models (digital-physical models) theoretically minimizes the risks, which ultimately
increases the reliability of the design. Digital and physical models used in the conventional designs are
primarily employed to explore personal preferences like aesthetics of forms rather than focusing on
the many design risks, such as environmental performance. In the design process of “Smart Building
Envelopes (SBEs)”, such use of digital and physical models is likely to lead to design failure. Unless
many types of material, as well as manufacturing methods or environmental variables, are considered
at an early stage, it will be impossible to realize the shape and structure according to the design
intent. The failure of realizing the initial expected design leads to unbelievable economic losses,
so differentiated design methods are essential.
Second, the design methodology using digital-physical models is essential for design groups that
use technology convergence to carry out challenging tasks. According to the 4th Industrial Revolution,
design firms are sympathetic to the need for a variety of technical attempts. Compared to other fields,
however, the technical introductions in architectural design are remarkably slow. In addition, design
firms using high technologies are generally reluctant to share their design data or outcomes. Of course,
there have been some cases of SBEs, but they were not reproductions or generalizations of new SBEs.
Most SBE designs are differently constructed or finally abandoned. This is because many design
problems have not been recognized and solved in the design stages, and as such, the use of such SBEs
results in unbelievable economic loss. The realization of smart envelopes requires a way to identify
and resolve design risks immediately.
The purpose of this study is to apply the design methodology to the design practitioner. However,
it is impossible for design practitioners to expect to participate in the experiment. The reason is that it
takes time and spaces to experiment, and it is necessary to get financial support and cooperation in
advance. Due to this limitation, it should be replaced by a group similar to the design practitioner.
As a similar group, a design studio, a kind of educational environment (novice designer) is adopted.
The reason is because of the characteristics of current design studios and students. Although the
importance of digital technology is still being addressed in today’s design studios, it has been only
theoretically possible to see how those roles work in the design process. This has been raised as a
problem in the process of operating actual design studios. In addition, the role, and effects of digital
technology are limited by the students’ voluntary learning. We hope that another purpose of suggesting
a methodology will be to help solve the gap between current teaching methods and the application of
digital technology.
In other words, (1) a design model is proposed that utilizes parametric design, simulation,
and building information model. It is suitable for one of the objects, such as the SBE based on existing
advanced design examples (design firms and design studios); and (2) a design methodology is proposed
based on student works and processes after experiments using the design model. The method of
this proposal is based on the results of the two-year college students’ participation (2nd semesters
in 2015 and 2016—35 participants). Of course, there are insufficient quantities of cases to generalize
with the methodology. However, readers can follow or utilize studied cases in implementations of
innovative geometries without acknowledgment of the new method. Therefore, exploring the cases
using complementary digital and physical models, prototyping-based models can be extended by
applying new materials and technologies.
Of course, the educational environment (design studio) is not exactly the same as the working
environment. This environment allows students to experience the design process indirectly through
the guidance of the instructor who participated in the practice before they experienced the practice.
Therefore, the educational environment is similar to the working environment.
First, through this case study, answers to specific questions are obtained. How do digital and
physical models complement each other in the future? What are the effects on the complementarity of
digital and physical models? With this content, practitioners attempting prototyping for the first time
will be able to explore reference cases on the level and effectiveness of digital and physical models.
In this study, a design method is based on the complementary use of digital and physical models for
designing SBEs. The design methodology using digital-physical models is focused on the advantages of
existing tools: Digital tools, such as parametric design, simulation, and Building Information Modeling
(BIM), and physical tools like wood and plastic board. This is a method that is based on the functions
not only of digital models, but also of physical models. This is to take into account the situation in
which physical models are actively used beyond the current developments of digital technologies.
For example, it is true that digital technologies have evolved in such a way that digital models can
now be implemented in virtual worlds, almost in the same manner as in the physical world. Design
firms that create complex buildings or unique shapes also use physical and digital models. Physical
models have the potential to stimulate and inspire designer ideas.
Indeed, design techniques like parametric design and simulation require knowledge of
mathematics and of the data included in the form. While simple and small geometries may not
be a big deal in digital modeling, it takes much time for complex design techniques to drastically
improve the performances of designed forms or processes. As the number of building geometries and
performances that a designer wishes to achieve increases, the optimization methods usually become
more complex [19]. Misleading data and logic conforming to digital models may affect designers’
choices [20]. Thus, physical models are essential to identify or straighten the imperfect or immature
data extracted from digital models.
Proposed herein is a methodology for designing SBEs based on a process of prototyping using
digital-physical models. The objectives of the work are to enable designers to embrace design
implementation failures and learn from them early on. As illustrated in the framework, a case-based
methodology is proposed. To derive examples based on the complementarity between digital and
physical models, conceptual models were formulated, and experiments were conducted on practical
designers
Sustainabilityfor two
2019, 11, years (2015–2016)
x FOR PEER REVIEW (Figure 1). 6 of 24
Figure 1. Research
Figure 1. Research framework.
framework.
The
The research
research framework
frameworkconsisted
consistedof offour
fourparts,
parts,asasdiscussed
discussedbelow.
below.
First,
First, aaconceptual
conceptualmodel model of of
a prototyping
a prototyping model
model(O) was
1 (①) set
wasupsetusing
up the future
using thebuilding designs
future building
and SBEs. The existing literature was reviewed for the requirements for
designs and SBEs. The existing literature was reviewed for the requirements for planning planning the prototyping model.
the
The future building designs will focus on the roles of digital and physical models
prototyping model. The future building designs will focus on the roles of digital and physical models in strengthening the
design process bythe
in strengthening considering the current
design process design techniques,
by considering the current anddesign
SBEs focus on the parts
techniques, of thefocus
and SBEs designon
process that need to be particularly contributed by the digital and physical
the parts of the design process that need to be particularly contributed by the digital and physicalmodels.
Second, an initial prototyping model (O)
models. 2 was set up using cases of design projects carried out by
design firms (Kieran
Second, an initialTimberlake,
prototypingGehry modelTechnologies,
(②) was set up andusing
Withworks). In suchprojects
cases of design cases, both digital
carried out
and physical models were used (complementary use) to develop a new
by design firms (Kieran Timberlake, Gehry Technologies, and Withworks). In such cases, both digitalconstruction method and
smart materials.
and physical They were
models were representative cases of efficient,
used (complementary use) to accurate,
develop areproducible,
new construction and secure
method designs
and
because they were based on data and experiments. The successes of the
smart materials. They were representative cases of efficient, accurate, reproducible, and secure three design projects that
were
designsused in thisthey
because work depended
were based on ondata
the conduct of early tests
and experiments. The for findingofthe
successes therisk
threefactors
design and early
projects
resolutions
that were used [21–25].
in thisThis is impossible
work dependedin ontraditional
the conduct design methods.
of early tests for A finding
prototyping-based
the risk factorsprocess
and
model was established by analyzing the roles and functions of digital and
early resolutions [21–25]. This is impossible in traditional design methods. A prototyping-based physical models.
Third,
process the was
model model was modified
established in detailthe
by analyzing through
roles and thefunctions
project ofoflab-based
digital and design studios
physical (O).
models. 3
“Design studio”
Third, is a method
the model of operating
was modified classes,
in detail and “lab-based
through the projectdesign studio”design
of lab-based is a design
studios studio
(③).
based on collaborative work with supportive laboratories. The design studio
“Design studio” is a method of operating classes, and “lab-based design studio” is a design studio is almost the same as a
practical
based ondesign firm because
collaborative work itwith
is operated
supportiveby architectural
laboratories.designers
The design andstudio
associated experts
is almost the assuming
same as a
practical roles. Although design studios are almost the same as practical
practical design firm because it is operated by architectural designers and associated experts design firms, the roles and
functions of digital and physical models are more clearly defined in relation
assuming practical roles. Although design studios are almost the same as practical design firms, the to novice designers.
rolesFourth, experiments
and functions wereand
of digital conducted
physicalwith a group
models of designers
are more clearly as participants,
defined to verify
in relation the
to novice
effectiveness
designers. of the prototype-based process model. The usefulness of the prototyping model was
analyzed
Fourth,in terms of whether
experiments werethe roles of the
conducted withdigital
a groupand of physical
designers models contribute totothe
as participants, taskthe
verify in
the process. Then
effectiveness of thethe effects of the prototyping
prototype-based process model. model Thewere surveyed,
usefulness such
of the as whethermodel
prototyping designers
was
sympathize with the roles of digital and physical models.
analyzed in terms of whether the roles of the digital and physical models contribute to the task in the
process. Then the effects of the prototyping model were surveyed, such as whether designers
sympathize with the roles of digital and physical models.
In order to minimize the designer’s time to distort design results, design results were collected
through pin-up announcements at fixed intervals (twice a week). If the presentation period is long,
there is a possibility of distorting the intention or the concept of the design. This is done through
qualitative research because the number of people involved in the design studio is small. (1)
In order to minimize the designer’s time to distort design results, design results were collected
through pin-up
Sustainability announcements
2019, 11, at fixed
x FOR PEER REVIEW intervals (twice a week). If the presentation period is7 long, of 24
there is a possibility of distorting the intention or the concept of the design. This is done through
Observation
qualitative method
research of the the
because student
number is based on “researcher’s
of people involved in thenon-participation”
design studio is small.(observation using
(1) Observation
video
methodcamera). To prevent
of the student is basedobservers from recognizing
on “researcher’s the researcher’s
non-participation” (observation observing
using videobehavior
camera).or
forming familiarity with the researcher, a video camera can be set up to allow
To prevent observers from recognizing the researcher’s observing behavior or forming familiarity with students to freely
discuss during the
the researcher, design
a video process
camera can(pre-installed
be set up to at the beginning
allow students to offreely
the design studio
discuss for students
during the design to
adapt to the device). (2) We also conduct surveys and team interviews to investigate
process (pre-installed at the beginning of the design studio for students to adapt to the device). (2) We how students’
perceptions
also conductofsurveysboth models
and team(digital and physical
interviews models) how
to investigate change.
students’ perceptions of both models
(digitalBecause it is case
and physical studieschange.
models) that are difficult to generalize, the method of qualitative research is
appropriate.
Because Itit focuses on the that
is case studies importance of the
are difficult to various behaviors
generalize, and outputs
the method derivedresearch
of qualitative from the is
process, rather than the outcomes created through the completion of the experiment.
appropriate. It focuses on the importance of the various behaviors and outputs derived from the process, Therefore,
qualitative
rather than research
the outcomesis appropriate for thisthe
created through purpose.
completionMoreover, since the design
of the experiment. is related
Therefore, to the
qualitative
creativity of design, creating a closed and regular environment can be a means to
research is appropriate for this purpose. Moreover, since the design is related to the creativity of design,control creativity
itself.
creating a closed and regular environment can be a means to control creativity itself.
Ideally, architectural design
Ideally, architectural design firms
firms need
need toto cooperate
cooperate in in testing
testing prototyping models, but
prototyping models, but the
the work
work
environment
environment is usually much influenced by the daily or ad-hoc tasks related to the existing projects.
is usually much influenced by the daily or ad-hoc tasks related to the existing projects.
It is impossible
It is impossible to to perform
perform experiments
experiments targeting
targeting actual
actual design
design firms
firms without
without giving
giving them
them economic
economic
support or compensation. Thus, the design education environment is
support or compensation. Thus, the design education environment is appropriate for testing the appropriate for testing the
prototyping models as a similar target. Ultimately, this study sought to
prototyping models as a similar target. Ultimately, this study sought to maximize the benefits of maximize the benefits of
digital
digital andand physical
physical models
models by by using
using design
design cases
cases (student
(student design
design results),
results), and
and to
to provide
provide aa reference
reference
material
material that will enable designers to use digital tools and physical materials at the right
that will enable designers to use digital tools and physical materials at the right time
time and
and inin
the right situations.
the right situations.
3. Conceptual Model
3.1. A
3.1. A Conceptual
Conceptual Model
Model Using
Using Contemporary
Contemporary Digital
Digital Models
Models and
and Physical
Physical Models
Models
The roles
roles of
ofdigital
digitaland
andphysical
physicalmodels
modelshave changed,
have andand
changed, the the
functions of both
functions models
of both are now
models are
expanded Figure 2.
now expanded Figure 2.
Figure 2. Prototyping
Figure 2. Prototyping using
using digital-physical
digital-physical models.
models.
The paradigm of digital models and physical models allows designers to choose design solutions
from as many alternatives as possible. In particular,
particular, by evaluating the design in terms of interactivity
in terms
termsof
ofexpression,
expression,finally,
finally, the optimized alternatives
the optimized alternatives canselected.
can be be selected. The of
The roles roles
the of the digital
digital model
model haveextended
have been been extended to functions
to functions of representation,
of representation, generation,
generation, operation,
operation, and optimization.
and optimization.
• Digital model
- “Representation”: Digital models like 3D models and 2D drawings have been extensively
used in the form-making process. This involves iterative creation and modification of the
operations requiring manual crafting by the designer as a computer operator.
- “Generation” level: Due to the development of computational design tools like the generative
parametric design based on scripts, digital models also better supports the regeneration of
numerous offspring alternatives to help find the optimum forms [9,26].
• Digital model
- “Representation”: Digital models like 3D models and 2D drawings have been extensively
used in the form-making process. This involves iterative creation and modification of the
operations requiring manual crafting by the designer as a computer operator.
- “Generation” level: Due to the development of computational design tools like the
generative parametric design based on scripts, digital models also better supports the
regeneration of numerous offspring alternatives to help find the optimum forms [9,26].
- “Operation” level: The integration of parametric techniques, integrated modeling methods
(like BIM), simulation enables the operation of large amounts of building information,
which makes it possible to generate alternatives in cost- and time-efficient ways rapidly.
In particular, advanced computer simulation allows the calculation of the overall building
performances (capabilities to respond to the designer’s preference, end user’s satisfaction,
and environmental changes). Digital fabrication tools also enable designers to create a
variety of geometric shapes, enabling designers to explore issues that are actually created
or operated [27]. As such tools support the iterative process of generation-operation,
the digital model changes from form-making to form-finding as designers take advantage
of design solutions selected from among a myriad of possible alternatives.
- “Interaction” level: The digital model using Virtual Reality, or Augmented Reality) helps
implement the infinite functions of forms beyond the contemporary state of the form and the
design operation [28]. If the digital models connect with physical models, their interactions
would be changed according to the sensor data on the environmental conditions and user
behaviors. Thus, it helps demonstrate the level of satisfactory performance for the end
users in real time. This interaction between the digital and physical models involves
various aspects pertaining to the use of all the aforementioned technologies. The current
BIM and multi-dimensional realistic technologies like the virtual haptic and tangible space
initiative have come to include this interaction. For example, BIM and the interactive
augmented model have been expanded based on various sources, such as the terrestrial
and airborne LIDAR, as well as other types of sensors. Finally, the digital model aids a
prototyping process using the complementary digital and physical models by integrating
3D printing technologies and Internet of Things (IoT). This integration requires cumulative
functions of the digital model, such as “representation,” “generation”, and “operation”.
Thus, the digital model supports the validation of prototypes by changing multiple ranges
of operations and various types of shapes.
• Physical model
- “Representation”: On the other hand, the physical model is would according to the
designer’s intentions, the medium is strictly controlled by the material and the physical
force (gravity, friction, etc.) [29]. Because they contain representations and tangibility of
difficult to express using a digital model, texture, a physical model has received attention
as a powerful medium of expression in the computerized age.
- “Manufacturing”: Digital fabrication technology allows physical models to be embodied
in a form suitable for production in its original intended form [30,31].
- “Operation”: Sensors, actuators, and processors enable not only the physical model to be
evaluated based on real-time data, but also the shape or movement thereof can be changed.
For example, the shape, configuration, and characteristics of the elements constituting the
physical model can be changed according to the user’s information (name, occupancy, etc.)
and environmental conditions (temperature, humidity, etc.) [32].
Smart building envelops (SBEs) is one of the challenging topics in architectural design and requires
innovative design process included tests and risk management. The building envelope is a part of
a building that is in contact with the interior or exterior of the building. It has a similar meaning as
façade or a window system, and include the roofs of buildings. The SBEs’ shapes or functions change
in response to the surrounding environment (e.g., climate, indoor environment, or user requirements).
Designing SBEs is not difficult to conceive ideas, but it is impossible to “implement” using the
conventional design method. The SBE itself can be implemented using only digital or physical models,
but it is difficult to fully validate unless prototyping-based processes are supported by these roles in
each model.
3.2. A Conceptual Model Based on Prototyping

In the design of the SBE, complex requirements like structural reliability and operational safety,
as well as design reliability and geometric constraints are required [33]. The design of SBEs is
a process of coordinating the components’ functionality in terms of integrated engineering as a
process of finding the interactions between the components that meet the above requirements [34].
To satisfy these requirements, architectural design is required, as well as ICT, robotics, smart materials,
and interaction design. SBEs are related to mechanical, electromechanical, material, and information
technologies [34,35].
From the
Sustainability 2019,initial design
11, x FOR PEERstage
REVIEW of SBEs, designers must identify and resolve the errors that negatively 10 of 24
impact the overall performance of buildings. Considering the geometry, system structure, and operating
sense, perception,
conditions, cognition,
all together presents and behavior.
a problem On
that the othertohand,
contributes designphysical
failure. models
It is not help
easy todesigners
find the
conduct
optimal amovement
series of manufacturing
and form of SBEs processes
through in the
realusual
environments. Usingapplied
design process physicaltomodels,
generaldesigners
building
are able to
products gain real-time
[33–41]. Based on feedback
examples to resolve
of SBEs, design
design problems
problems givebased
rise toon
manyunexpected defects.
issues, such To
as noise
modify designs,
and operation however,
failure: it is necessary
Maintenance to prepare
cost (Arab suitable materials,
World Institute), component butlifetime
also to(Novartis
secure extra time
campus),
for the manufacturing processes, such as the fabrication and alignment of the
power consumption (Bahrain WTC), and noise and vibration (Pearl River Tower). The economic loss is components.
The pointtoisbehow
also required the usability
reduced by testingofthedigital
shape,and physicaloperation,
structure, models isandmaximized.
manufacturing The maximized
methods.
functions
So far,oftechnology
digital andand physical
know-howmodelshave is been
an ideal case. To improve
accumulated for manythe usability
years of the
in the field of two models,
architectural
the role of the complementarity between them is essential. The next chapter
design based on the uses of digital models (A) and physical models (B). The concept of the prototyping shows the role of
complementarity,
process is shown in which
Figureis 3.
analyzed
It is set using cases of architectural
up to maximize design
the effects of projects.
current digital technologies.
Figure 3. Prototyping
Figure process using process
3. Prototyping digital and
usingphysical models
digital and in Smart
physical modelsBuilding Envelope
(SBE) design. in Smart Building Envelope (SBE) design.
TheStudies
3.3. Case use of of
digital models Design
Architectural can be Firms
explained through “parametric design” (a), “simulation” (b),
“BIM” (c), and “digital fabrication” (d) (e.g., 3D printers and laser cutters). Parametric design (a) and
BIM Prototyping in the
(c) allow creations andautomotive
maintenancesand aerospace
of shapes fields aims
and motions basednot only
on the to explore
relationship ways the
between of
implementing
components and geometries suitable
the members. for design
Simulation (b)concepts, butthe
also enables also to minimize
evaluation thedesign
of the risks posed by the
performance
use of certain materials and techniques at the levels of the actual implementation. In fact, in
architectural design, there are reasons for the necessity of conducting this research. Advanced digital
technologies have been applied in the field of architecture design. The required time for the
commercialization of digital technology, however, is somewhat long compared to the engineering
field. This is because architectural design firms are reluctant to introduce new materials and
technologies, due to the economic burdens involved and their lack of understanding of materials and
without directly demonstrating the conditions of the surrounding environment. In addition, digital
fabrication (g) makes it possible to quickly manufacture and operate complex shapes and components
using real materials. By using these four functions, designers can easily find and construct reasonable
shapes and systems.
The use of physical models can be explained through a “sensor” (f), an “actuator” (e), a “processor”
(d), “digital fabrication” (g), and “digital scanning” (h). The sensor (f) is a tool that senses the
positions/behaviors/conditions of the objects related to a specific task. The actuator (e) is a tool that
drives the functions/parts of objects (e.g., parallel movement, rotation). The processor (d) converts the
output of each device into meaningful information. It is necessary to analyze the information sensed
by the sensor through the information processor, and to link the interpreted result to the act of the
actuator. Digital fabrication (g) makes it possible to create shapes that are closer to reality than those
created through 2D-based fabrication. It is important because it has made the sharing and production
of digital files faster and reproducible. Digital scanning (h) helps designers read ready-made physical
shapes. It is in fact, in the same context as the digital fabrication technology in terms of “digital file”
and “rapid sharing.”
The digital model allows the user to create a shape based on the rules defined by the designer
(O).
1 In addition, it can simulate the environmental performance and driving method of various
alternatives and can help find the optimum design (O). 2 Prototyping using the physical model allows
the designer to test the shape and actual performance of the design through the implementation process
(O).
3 This helps identify problems with actual fabrication, such as the combination of materials and
components (O). 4 In addition, it is possible to represent the actual user’s point of view in the process
of acquiring data appropriate to the user’s requirement, and to visually confirm the information of
the actual environment (O). 5 Both digital fabrication and digital scanning allow designers to reduce
the design time and cost remarkably and to improve the complementarity of the digital and physical
models implemented in non-matching.
Digital models help designers quantify the performance of designs across common test conditions,
even without making physical models, but they do not represent all the various factors involved
in designers’ inspirations. It also does not represent physical conditions like the end user’s sense,
perception, cognition, and behavior. On the other hand, physical models help designers conduct
a series of manufacturing processes in real environments. Using physical models, designers are
able to gain real-time feedback to resolve design problems based on unexpected defects. To modify
designs, however, it is necessary to prepare suitable materials, but also to secure extra time for the
manufacturing processes, such as the fabrication and alignment of the components.
The point is how the usability of digital and physical models is maximized. The maximized
functions of digital and physical models is an ideal case. To improve the usability of the two models,
the role of the complementarity between them is essential. The next chapter shows the role of
complementarity, which is analyzed using cases of architectural design projects.
3.3. Case Studies of Architectural Design Firms

Prototyping in the automotive and aerospace fields aims not only to explore ways of implementing
geometries suitable for design concepts, but also to minimize the risks posed by the use of certain
materials and techniques at the levels of the actual implementation. In fact, in architectural design,
there are reasons for the necessity of conducting this research. Advanced digital technologies have
been applied in the field of architecture design. The required time for the commercialization of digital
technology, however, is somewhat long compared to the engineering field. This is because architectural
design firms are reluctant to introduce new materials and technologies, due to the economic burdens
involved and their lack of understanding of materials and technology. Of course, advanced architectural
design firms (e.g., Kieran Timberlake, Gehry Technologies, and Withworks) have applied new types of
materials and techniques in architectural design. They have made digital and physical mock-ups from
the initial levels of the design processes.
Studies dealing with both the digital and physical models are categorized into two types.
They deal with complementarity as an “alternative” aspect [42] or a “synergy” aspect [43,44]. Studies
on complementarity as an “alternative” aspect emphasize the fact that the roles of digital models
increasingly replace the roles of physical models. Studies on complementarity as a “synergy” aspect,
on the other hand, emphasize the fact that despite the development of digital models, physical models
have unique functions that cannot be replaced by digital models. The previous “synergy” researches,
however, have not clearly explained “complementarity” (the relationship between digital and physical
models). Proposing cases of “complementarity” helps designers not only test actual designs easily
than test using only digital or physical models, but also find design inspirations. Thus, case studies are
required to entice more designers to conduct design processes using digital-physical models. Assuming
that designers utilize cases of prototyping process using digital-physical models, when they try to
realize complicated geometries, prototyping enables them to create complicated geometric shapes in
digital models. It also enables them to learn and apply the shape deformation techniques in physical
models without trying to implement them in digital models.
The roles of digital and physical models were analyzed through design projects. Companies like
those aforementioned have used digital and physical models in the design phase (Table 1).
Table 1. Roles of digital-physical models in architectural projects.
Name of
Digital Model Physical Model
Design Firm
Combining smart and ready-made materials

Planning the envelope pattern
Realizing the performances of smart materials
Planning the structure
Implementing the production process and method
Planning for the combinations and details of
Kieran Testing the combinations and details of the members
the members
Timberlake Testing the production of panels
Planning space and modular systems
Establishing a pilot environment considering the
Planning and simulating construction
site environment
Simulating the details and combinations
Testing the real-time performance
Making curved panels

Exploring shapes with structures, members,
Reviewing the performance in a real environment
and divided panels
Reviewing the method of heat-treating glass
Analyzing or reviewing the performance of
the geometry Conducting tests through the shape of the joints and
Gehry the welding process
Reviewing the effects of a series of construction
Technologies processes and construction methods Testing the combinations of the members in the
structure (beams)
Reviewing the details (joint part shape)
Testing the combinations of the sublayers of
Reviewing the construction method with
multiple layers
the details
Reviewing the construction tolerance
Mathematically analyzing the shape

Reconstructing the shape based on Changing and examining the overall shape according
the production to the change in the construction method used
Planning and analyzing the details considering Applying and testing materials, examining the
Withworks the features of the shape feasibility of mixing with existing methods
Planning a system of structures Testing the safety
Planning a panel system based on construction Testing the accuracy of construction and production
Reviewing the construction tolerance
Form (FO): External shapes, internal shapes (space), details

Categories of Material (MA): Properties of the material
tests Operation (OP): Movements and facilities
Fabrication (FA): Production method
Kieran Timberlake has implemented smart-façade and modular building systems that incorporate
prefabrication and embedded technologies. The success of design projects depends on the development
of joints and the fabrication method used. Design projects have been operated with completed new
design methods, such as the standardization of assemblies and the mixing of general and smart
materials. Withworks has optimized free-form systems while studying a new design method using
existing technologies. To realize the shapes of free forms, the problems in the structural details
and construction technologies need to be solved to make up for the disadvantages of the existing
construction materials. The problems regarding the shapes have no correct solutions, and the success
of the use of shapes depends on the time and cost. Gehry Technologies has realized Gehry’s ideas.
To implement a unique geometry using general materials and glass, it has also developed construction
methods to fabricate optimized panel surfaces using unique software and field experiments.
Kieran Timberlake sought to explore building systems using embedded technologies like smart
materials, information processing, and material mechanics. There has been no reference that allows
the integration and output of multiple layers of materials, while keeping the thickness of a single
substrate thin. Through prototyping, however, layers of general materials have been integrated with
polyethylene terephthalate (PET). As devices or materials based on technologies are not commonly
applied at the design stages, the firm needs to experiment in real environments, without reference
cases for a single system. They call this work “science.”
Gehry Technologies starts the initial programming and design phases by scanning the physical
model in three dimensions. This is done to digitize the physical model for the development of
the technical part or form. The row data acquired through physical models are structured through
professional software, and the simulations for the environmental changes and production are used in
the initial stage of the design process.
Withworks has proceeded to make molds of irregular shapes and to optimize panels. There are
two matters, however, that need to be overcome: The domestic steel engineering specialists are not
familiar with the irregular concrete casting and the optimization of the panel, and the curvatures of
free-form design are not constant. Designs are, thus, required to transform the curvatures through
optimization, and to change the methods of casting irregular concrete in the field. Particularly, digital
models are used as a means to evaluate construction errors using the scanned data extracted from
physical prototypes. Physical prototypes are called “visual mock-up.” They are differentiated from
general physical models because they can be digitized as data.
What is common among the three aforementioned companies is that their designers have
experienced a series of test-fails using the data of shapes with materials in the design stage. By making
and studying designs in digital environments and in the physical fields, the firms have tried to maintain
the intended shapes.
4. Course Design Using the Prototyping-Based Process
4.1. Case studies of Architecture Design Studios

In the case of design studios, there are lab-based design studios with laboratories that use advanced
technologies (Table 2). Such laboratories study research methods using manufacturing technologies
and new materials. They have also evolved to operate studios by applying digital and physical models,
like practical firms of architectural design, based on the annual students’ results.
According to the design results of the design studio cases, the functions of digital and physical
models need to be extended. Because the functions originate from the characteristics and limitations of
novice designers: Novice designers are explained through an opposite word as “experts”. They are not
only naïve about design process and the viability of products, but also have less interaction experience
and relatively poor to use or obtain knowledge to get design goals. The digital and physical models in
design studios are different from the cases of practical design firms, as follows.
The initial digital models are usually tantamount to the design principles for making design
shapes (parametric models) and for the fabrication and transformation methods (simulation, BIM).
As students are often either ignorant or have inaccurate knowledge of modeling or design shapes,
they have difficulty implementing digital models. By making intermediate designs or parts of designs
instead of the intended shapes, they try to control the digital models.
Table 2. Case studies of architectural design projects.
Design Studio Digital Model Physical Model
Conducting performance evaluation of the

Representing the type in actual
shape at the concept phase
construction (using parametric
Determining if the shape can be constructed
design tools)
when the material is introduced
Complex rule geometry
Trial implementation of the production
representation (using parametric
TU Delft, Bartlett, process considering a new
design tools)
Carneige Mellon production method
Shape change expression (using
Learning about techniques of introducing
simulation tools)
new production methods
Prediction of shape change based on
Implementation of the practical production
environmental variables (using
process incorporating production methods
simulation tools)
and properties
Form (FO): External shapes, internal shapes (space), details

Material (MA): Properties of materials
Categories of Tests Operation (OP): Movements and facilities
Fabrication (FA): Production method
Mid-tests (m-T): Intermediate trials and errors (F)
Note: In particular, novice designers mostly conduct a considerable amount of intermediate tests (F) for verifying
uncertain information or hypotheses.
Physical models are used to gauge only the physical properties of materials that are difficult
to examine using digital models. When representing or reviewing the combination of components,
students need to consider expert knowledge of the final products in engineering. Physical models
sometimes require designers to understand professional techniques like kinetic parts’ operation
mechanisms or data processing logics. For example, production methods need to be practiced first
to find a suitable production method when considering forms and structures. Physical models are
used to roughly add details or supportive parts to assist structures. Although full-scale models are
important for accurately evaluating the design performance, physical prototypes are preferred to be
implemented on a small scale. Small-scale models are used like blob prototypes (unstructured form),
due to economic burdens.
For the prototyping process to reflect the users’ characteristics, digital and physical models
need to evolve a series of challenging-evaluation-learning unknown areas of material properties and
fabrication methods.
4.2. Course Design Based on Case Studies

In the initial design phase, there are many factors concerning the building characteristics or
components that are not determined. In the process of applying the unidentified parts sequentially,
the digital and physical models may not be implemented at the same time. When modifications of each
model occur, they affect the others. As there is familiarity with the existing teaching methods of design
studios, however, examples should be presented to remind them of certain ideas. Cases of tools related
to designing SBEs are shown: Referential digital tools like Rhino/Revit and Rhino plug-in (Figure 4, O),
1
and referential physical tools like Arduino (O).
5 Cases of advanced design are also shown: The process
and results of SBEs, automobiles, and aerospace (O). 2 In the course of utilizing the physical model,
a presentation method related to such a model is provided as an example so that the performance of
the model can be viewed objectively (O). 4 The reason for the offer is the preliminary questionnaire
conducted among the students. In the surveys, the students are largely aware of the functions of digital
models, and define these as “objective” and “rational” evaluation. On the other hand, they are not at all
aware of the functions of physical models, and analyses using them focus on “visible” and “subjective”
shown: The process and results of SBEs, automobiles, and aerospace (②). In the course of utilizing
the physical model, a presentation method related to such a model is provided as an example so that
the performance of the model can be viewed objectively ( ④ ). The reason for the offer is the
preliminary questionnaire conducted among the students. In the surveys, the students are largely
aware 2019,
Sustainability of the
11,functions
4416 of digital models, and define these as “objective” and “rational” evaluation.14 of 23
On the other hand, they are not at all aware of the functions of physical models, and analyses using
them focus on “visible” and “subjective” evaluation. In addition, the basic manuals and use cases of
the laserIncutter
evaluation. are provided
addition, the basicto enable it
manuals andto use
be used
casesasofanthe
intermediary
laser cuttermedium to sequentially
are provided to enable it to
complement digital and physical models (③).
be used as an intermediary medium to sequentially complement digital and physical models (O). 3
Figure 4. Prototyping using digital-physical models.

Figure 4. Prototyping using digital-physical models.
The design studio is operated with the theme of “kinetic facade.” The kinetic envelope is a smart
The design studio is operated with the theme of “kinetic facade.” The kinetic envelope is a smart
envelope, which
envelope, began
which withwith
began passive movement,
passive movement, butbut
itsits
implementation
implementationfeatures
featuresand
andperformance
performance vary
according to its application
vary according to a wide
to its application torange
a wideofrange
advanced technologies,
of advanced such as
technologies, object
such networks,
as object artificial
networks,
intelligence,
artificial intelligence, and smart materials. The applications of a broad range of technological are
and smart materials. The applications of a broad range of technological applications
hard applications
to apply in classes.
are hardThe reason
to apply in for adopting
classes. “kinetic
The reason forfacade”
adoptingin“kinetic
this research
facade”was
in to
thisallow students
research
wason
to focus to the
allow students to focus
transformations on theand
of forms transformations of forms
structures rather thanand
on structures rather than
the complexities on the
of technologies:
The movements of the kinetic envelope require designers to visually orchestrate between components
and to make clear structures, due to the smooth motion or function changes. It can be completed only
through a perfect engineering-design combination.
Kinetic designs have greater limitations in meeting the intended performances. As “kinetic”
means to respond to changes in shapes or functions, the designs are dealt with in real environments
like frictions and weight loads, due to the movement of the components. They can also cause noise.
They require a series of challenge-evaluation-refinement because designs are difficult to implement only
by using the usual form and structure of the general envelopes, and they allow designers to attempt to
replace commonly used materials with new materials, or to study methods of manufacturing materials.
The course for the design studio is largely categorized as a course for facilitating students’
development of the design by themselves, and as an evaluation course by tutors who play the role
of clients or end users. Students first extract abstract shapes or the intentions of the kinetic facade
(O,
1 O,
2 and O 3 at level 1 in Figure 5). They also make models of components with various logics of
shapes and motions in a digital model, or roughly combine the components that enable imagining the
system’s behaviors in physical models (O 4 at level 2). Designers create digital models of the offspring
types based on the same schemas (using parametric designs to control the variables and creations of
variations), or artificially manipulate movements, while maintaining the overall shapes of physical
models (O 5 at level 3). Designers evaluate the performance of the design (O 6 at level 5) and vary the
shapes and movements based on the current ideas (Oand 4 O5 at level 4), or if the current idea needs
to be changed, an attempt is made to improve the performance in a different way, by creating a new
prototype (O 7 at level 6).
system’s behaviors in physical models (④ at level 2). Designers create digital models of the offspring
types based on the same schemas (using parametric designs to control the variables and creations of
variations), or artificially manipulate movements, while maintaining the overall shapes of physical
models (⑤ at level 3). Designers evaluate the performance of the design (⑥ at level 5) and vary the
shapes and movements based on the current ideas (④and ⑤ at level 4), or if the current idea needs
to be
Sustainability changed,
2019, 11, 4416an attempt is made to improve the performance in a different way, by creating a new 15 of 23
prototype (⑦ at level 6).
FigureFigure 5. Course
5. Course design
design based
based ononprototyping
prototyping using
usingdigital-physical
digital-physicalmodels.
models.
5. Verification
5. Verification
5.1. Results
5.1. Design Design Results
Students are ideally able to predict performances by considering forms (FO), materials (MA),
Students are ideally able to predict performances by considering forms (FO), materials (MA),
operation (OP), and fabrication (FA) using digital prototypes and physical prototypes. Digital
operation (OP), andhowever,
prototypes, fabrication
were(FA)
usedusing digital
primarily prototypes
in the process ofand physical prototypes.
implementing Digital prototypes,
forms while assuming the
however,material
were used
and theprimarily
operation inand
the fabrication
process ofmethods.
implementing
This is forms
becausewhile assuming
students the material
have difficulty
and the implementing
operation and fabrication
these methods.
in digital models, This
or time is because
is wasted on thestudents have difficulty
implementation. implementing
When students only
assumed these problems (FO, MA, OP, FA) through such digital models, it was
these in digital models, or time is wasted on the implementation. When students only assumed necessary to create a these
physical model that included the remaining problems.
problems (FO, MA, OP, FA) through such digital models, it was necessary to create a physical model
that included the remaining problems.
Physical prototypes were used mainly to actualize material properties and fabrication methods,
which are mostly unknown. For example, they were used to judge if they had structurally safe
forms/movements against gravity, or if there were inappropriate frictions between components,
or noise. When physical prototypes were used to implement a form, however, they were manufactured
by digital prototypes. This was the reason for considering the exact dimensions and areas of components.
To utilize physical prototypes to change designs’ motions or functions by considering the surrounding
environment, the use of digital devices was essential. By monitoring the data values of specific sensors
or actuators, students were able to gauge the performance of small movements or the functional
changes of prototypes, and to compare prototypes.
Even so, it was difficult to perfectly synchronize the digital and physical models. To come up with
a perfect match between the digital and physical models, much content was needed, but it was not at
this level. In fact, as many tests and selections had to be done initially to determine ideas, the process
of mutually matching prototype types and functions was impossible and premature.
Table 3 shows an example of the complement between digital and physical prototypes.
Each example of digital and physical prototypes contains a number of assumptions and conclusions.
The previous and later prototypes in each example were compared in terms of FO, MA, OP, and FA.
Each model has a different expression and assumption, even though it has similar contents to other
models. The case of EX 1 can be explained as below. The digital prototype is a two-dimensional
representation, which was considered a form that did not actually represent materials and operations,
particularly how they were made. In this case, the physical prototype is a three-dimensional shape, but a
conceptual form about the actual operation and manufacturing methods were just implied. In the case
of EX 2, even if the previous physical prototype represented all the four aspects, the subsequent digital
prototypes may contain incomplete information. This is because the physical prototype implementation
did not meet the intended performance, and it was necessary to create a new shape or to fine-tune how
it worked.
which
which waswas considered
considered a form
a form that
that did did
notnot actually
actually represent
represent materials
materials and
and operations,
operations, particularly
particularly
how
with
how
which they
waswere
a perfect
they match
were made.
between
made.
considered aIn
In this
thethat
this
form case,
digital
case, the
did notphysical
and
the actuallyprototype
physical
physical models,
prototype
represent isis aacontent
much
materialsthree-dimensional
was needed,shape,
three-dimensional
and operations, but but
but aa
it was
shape,
particularly
howthey
how theywereweremade. made.InInthis thiscase,
case,thethephysical
physicalprototype
prototypeis isa athree-dimensional
three-dimensionalshape, shape,butbuta a
conceptual
not at this
conceptual
how they form
level.form
were In about
fact,
about
made. asthe
In actual
many
the tests
actual
this operation
and
operation
case, and
and manufacturing
theselections
physical had to be done
manufacturing
prototype is methods
ainitially
methods were
to just
just implied.
determine
were
three-dimensional ideas,In
implied.
shape, the
In the
butthea
conceptual
conceptual formform about
about thethe actual
actual operation
operation and
and manufacturing
manufacturing methods
methods were
were just
just implied.
implied. InInthethe
case
process
case ofofEX
of
conceptualEX 2,2,form
mutually even if
ifthe
evenabout theprevious
matching previous
the actual physical
prototype types
physical
operationprototype
and
prototype represented
andfunctions all
was impossible
represented
manufacturing all the
thefour
methods aspects,
and
four just the
premature.
aspects,
were thesubsequent
subsequent
implied. In the
case
case ofofEXEX 2, 2,
even even if the
if the previous
previous physical
physical prototype
prototype represented
represented allall
the the four
four aspects,
aspects, thethe subsequent
subsequent
digitalof prototypes
Table
digital
case 3 shows
2, evenan
prototypes
EX ifmay
may
the contain
example
contain
previous incomplete
of the complement
incomplete
physical information.
between
information.
prototype This
This isis
digital
represented because
alland fourthe
thephysical
because the physical
prototypes.
physical
aspects, prototype
Each
prototype
the subsequent
digital
digital prototypes
prototypes
implementation may
did may
not contain
contain
meet the incomplete
incomplete
intended information.
information.
performance, This
This
and it is is
was because
because the
necessary the physical
physical
to create a prototype
prototype
new shape
example of digital
implementation
digital prototypes and
didmay physical
not meet prototypes
containthe incomplete contains
intended performance,a number
information.and of assumptions
it was
This necessary
is because and conclusions.
theto physical
create a new The
shape
prototype
implementation
implementation did
did notnot meet
meet the
the intended
intended performance,
performance, andandit it
was was necessary
necessary toto create
create a new
a new shape
shape
or to
tofine-tune
previous
Sustainability
or and 11,
fine-tune
2019,
implementation laterhowdidititnot
4416
how worked.
prototypes
worked.
meetin each exampleperformance,
the intended were compared andinitterms of FO, MA,toOP,
was necessary andaFA.
create newEach
shape 16 of 23
oror
toto fine-tune
fine-tune how
how it it worked.
worked.
model
or tohas a different
fine-tune howexpression
it worked.and assumption, even though it has similar contents to other models.
The case of EX 1 can be explained asTable Table3.3.The
below. Categories
digitalof
Categories ofdesign
designresults.
prototype results.
is a two-dimensional representation,
Table
Table 3. 3. Categories
Categories of of design
design results.
results.
which was considered a form that Table did not3.
Table Categories
3.actually
Categories of of design
design
represent results.
results.
materials and operations, particularly
Images
Images of
ofdigital
digital models
models Images
Imagesofofphysical models
physicalshape,
models
howNum.they were made.
Num. Images
Images In
ofofthis case,
digital
digital the physical prototype
models
models Dir. is a three-dimensional
Images
Images ofof physical
physical models but a
models
Num.
Num. ImagesFunctions
of digital models Dir. Images
Images of
of physical
physical models
modelsIn the
conceptual
Num.Num.form about the Functions actual operation and manufacturing Dir.
Dir.
Dir. methods were Functions
just implied.
Functions
Functions
Functions Dir. Functions
Functions
case of EX 2, even if the previous Functions
Functionsphysical prototype represented all the four aspects, Functions
Functions the subsequent
digital prototypes may contain incomplete information. This is because the physical prototype
implementation did not meet the intended performance, and it was necessary to create a new shape
or to fine-tune how it worked.
Sustainability
EX1 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
EX1 16 of 24
EX1EX1
EX1
EX1
Table 3. Categories of design results.
Physical prototypes were used mainly to actualize material properties and fabrication methods,
Sustainability
which are 2019,
mostly 11,Images
xunknown.
FORMA PEER REVIEW
For models
example, they 17 of 24
Num.
FOFO FO MA of digital OP
OP FA were used to
FA judge
FOImages
FO if they
ofMA
MA had structurally
physical models
OP
OP safe
FA
FA
forms/movementsFOFO MA
against MAMA OPOP
gravity,
OP
or if
FA
FA
there FA
were Dir.
inappropriate
FO
FOFO MAMA
frictions MA
between
OP
OPOP
components, FAFA or
FA
00 ★
★Functions ★ ★ ★★ 0 0 ★★
Functions ★
★ ★★
noise. When physical ★
0 0 0 ★ F
prototypes ★ ★ used ★
F
were to★
F implement a form, however,★they
00 0 F ★ were ★ F ★
manufactured ★★F
by digital prototypes. This was the reason for considering the exact dimensions and areas of
components. To utilize physical prototypes to change designs’ motions or functions by considering
the surrounding environment, the use of digital devices was essential. By monitoring the data values
EX2 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Sustainability 16 of or 24
ofEX1
specific
EX3 sensors or actuators, students were able to gauge the performance of small movements
EX2EX2
EX2
the
EX2functional changes of prototypes, and to compare prototypes.
EX2
Physical FO MA OP FA FO MAfabrication OP FA
Even so, prototypes
it was difficult weretoused mainly
perfectly to actualize
synchronize material
the digitalproperties
and physical and models. To methods,
come up
Sustainability
Sustainability
which are
Sustainability
with a perfect
2019,
2019,
mostly 0
2019, FO
match
11,
11,
11,
xxFORFOR
unknown.
xxxxxMA
FOR★ PEERFor
PEER
MA
PEER
between
REVIEW★
REVIEW
example,
OP
REVIEW
the digital and they
FA
0 were used
models,FO to judge0 if they
MA MA
0 had 0
structurally
OPOP but17
17
17safe
17
of
of
FA24
of
24
0 24
24
Sustainability
Sustainability
Sustainability
Sustainability
FO
Sustainability2019,
2019,2019,
FO
2019,
2019,
FO
11,
11, x FOR
11,
11,
11, FOR
MA
FOR
FOR
MA
PEER
PEER
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW
PEER REVIEW
OP
REVIEW
OP
REVIEW
OP FAphysical
FA
FA much
FO FO content
FO MAMA was needed,OPOP it17was
of
17
17
FA
17 of
FAof24
24
of
of
FA 24
24
forms/movementsFO FO against MA
MAasF gravity,
manyOP or
OP if there
FA were
FA inappropriate
had to be FO FO frictions between
MA components,
OP or
FA
not at this level.
0 00 In 0 fact, ★★ ★
tests
★ ★F
★
and selections
★0 00 0done
0 00 initially0 MA
★0 0to
OP
00 00 ideas,FA
0 determine
★ ★0the000
noise.
processWhen 0physical
0
of mutually ★prototypes
★
matching were
★ ★ used
prototype to
types0 0implement
and functions a form,
was 0 0however,
impossible 0they
0andwere manufactured
0 0
premature. 0 0
by digital
Table 3prototypes.
shows an example This wasofthe the reason
complementfor considering
between digitalthe exact dimensions
and physical and areas
prototypes. Each of
components.
example To utilize physical prototypes to change designs’ motions or functions by considering
EX3 of digital and physical prototypes contains a number of assumptions and conclusions. The
the surrounding
previous and later environment,
prototypes inthe useexample
each of digitalwere devices was essential.
compared in termsBy of monitoring
FO, MA, OP, the data
and FA.values
Each
of specific
model EX3
EX3 has sensors
a different or expression
actuators, students
and were ableeven
assumption, to gauge
though theit performance
has similar of smalltomovements
contents other models. or
EX3
EX4 EX3
EX3
EX3
EX3 EX3
EX2
the EX3
functional FOchanges MA
of prototypes, OPand to compare FA prototypes. FO MA OP FA
The case of EX 1 can be explained as below. The digital prototype is a two-dimensional representation,
Even so, it 0 was difficult ★ to ★
perfectly ★
synchronize the digital 0
and physical 0 models. To 0 come up 0
which was considered a form that did not actually represent materials and operations, particularly
with a perfect
how they were FOFO match
FO made. between
MA MA
MA the
In this OP digital
OPOP
case, and
OP the physical physical
FAFA models,
FA prototype is much
FOFOFO content
MA was
MA
MA
a three-dimensional needed,
OP OP
OP but
shape, it was
FAFA
but FAa
FOFO FO
FO FO MA MA
MA
MA OP
OP
OP FA FA
FAFA FO
FOFOFO MAMA MA
MAMA OP OP
OP
OP FAFA FA
FA
not
conceptual 0 FO
at this level.
form00 In fact,
FO
★★
MA
MAasMA
★ many 0 OP
tests
★
OP FA
★ and selections
FA
★
FA had to beFO
★ manufacturing
0and 0 FO
done
00 initially
FO 0MA
0to
MA OP
0 determine0 OP
00 ideas,
OP FA
the
FA
0the
FA
00
0 0000 about ★★
the
★
actual
★★
operation
★ 0 ★ 0 methods
0 0were
0 just implied.
0 0 In 0 0
★ ★ ★F★ ★ 0000 0000 0 0000
process of mutually 0 ★
★ F prototype
matching ★
★ types ★
★and functions was0 impossible 0 000
and premature.
case of EX 2, even0if the previous F
physical prototype represented 0
all the four aspects, the subsequent0
digitalTable 3 shows may
prototypes an example
contain of the complement
incomplete between
information. Thisdigital and physical
is because prototypes.
the physical Each
prototype
example of digital
implementation did and notphysical
meet theprototypes contains a number
intended performance, and itof was assumptions
necessary to and conclusions.
create a new shapeThe
previous
or and later
to fine-tune howprototypes
it worked.in each example were compared in terms of FO, MA, OP, and FA. Each
model 5 has
EX4
EXEX4 a different expression and assumption, even though it has similar contents to other models.
EX4 EX4
EX4
EX4
EX4 EX4
The EX4
case of EX 1 can be explained as Table below. The digital
3. Categories prototype
of design is a two-dimensional representation,
results.
which was considered a form that did not actually represent materials and operations, particularly
how they were FOFO FO made.
Images MA MA
MAIn OP
this case,
of digital OP the physical
OP
models FAFAFA prototype is FOFOFO
a Images MA MA
MA physical OP
three-dimensional
of OP
OP
shape,
models FAFA
but FAa
Num. FO FO
FOFO
FO FO MA MA
MA
MA
MA MA OP OP
OP
OP
OP FA
FA FA
FAFA
FA FO
FO FO
FOFO
FO MAMA MA
MAMA
MA OP
OP OP
OP
OP
OP FAFAFA
FA
FAFA
FO MA★ OP FA FO MA OP FA
conceptual form 0 0 0
0 00000 about ★★ the
★ actual★ 0 0
operation
0 ★ 0
and0
0 Dir.
manufacturing 0 0 0
methods
0 0 0
were
0
0 just 0 00
implied.
0 In 0the00
0
0 ★★ ★
★Functions
★F
0 0000 0 0
0 000 0 0
0 000 0 0 0
Functions
000 0 0
0 000 0 00000
case of EX 2, even if the previous physical prototype represented all the four aspects, the subsequent
digital prototypes may contain incomplete information. This is because the physical prototype
implementation did not meet the intended performance, and it was necessary to create a new shape
or to fine-tune how it worked.
EX
EXEX 5
6 55EX
EX1
EXEX5 5555 5
EX
EX
EX
EX Table 3. Categories of design results.
FO Images
FO MA
MAof OP
OP
digital models FA
FA FOImages of
FO MA
MAphysicalOP OP
OP
models FA
FA
Num. FO FO
FO
FO FO MA
MA
MA
MA MA OP OP
OP
OP
OP FA
FA FA
FA
FA FO
FO FO
FO
FO MAMA MA
MA
MA OP OP
OP
OP FA FA
FA FA
FA
FOFO
FO
00 MA
MA
MA★
★ OPOP
★
OP
★ FA★FA
FA
★ Dir. FOFO
FO
00 MAMA
MA
00 OPOPOP
00 FAFAFA
00
0 00000 0 ★★ ★ ★ ★ 00 00000 000 00 00000 0
0★
★Functions★ ★ ★F★ ★ 0 ★0Functions ★ ★0 000
★★★F ★ 0★
F
0 ★ ★ 0 0 00 ★ 0 00
Note: O: Included; -: Not included; ★: Not included but assumed.
Digital and physical models are used to solve design problems through student work results.
ForEXEX 66 6 the digital and physical models are largely utilized in three ways. First, it is used to
example,
EX1
EX
EX2
EX6 6666EX
EX
EX
EX
EX 6 the validity of ideas. In the early stages, designers plan for shape, performance, material
reinforce
composition, and data usage and explore existing methods and available resources to realize them.
This step FO involves measurements, evaluations FAFA and re-measurements similar to OPthe OP next FA step.
FOFO FO FO MA MA MA
MA MA OPOP
OPOP
OP
OP FA
FAFA
FO
FOFO
FOFO FO MA
MA
MA
MA
MA OPOPOP FAFA FAFA
However, there FO FO
FOFO are MAMA
various
MA
MA levels
OP OPOP of FA FA
implementation,
FA
FA failure, FO and
FO
FO learningMA MA
MA
MA because OPOPOP
they
OP explore FA
FAFAFA
FO
0 FO ★MA
MA
★ ★ OP
OP ★ FA
FA FO
0 FO ★ MA
MA ★ OP
OP
★ ★ FA
FA
★★ 0★
00 0 F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F 0 000
0
0 0
★ ★ 00000
0 0 0 0 0 0
★
various factors 0 0000without ★★★★
knowing
★
0whether 0 0000intentions are right.
their 0 0000 Second,0 it 0000is used ★ to★ ★★
increase0the
★
0000
Note:
Note: O:Included;
Note:design
O:
O: Included;-:-:-:Not
Included; Not
Not included;
included;
included; ★:
★: F:Not
Not Not included
included
included butbut
but assumed.
assumed.
assumed.
reliability of ideas. Identify Note: O: strengths,
Included; -: Not find ways
included; ★: ★:
toNot
★:
★: improve
Not included weaknesses,
but assumed. and voluntarily find,
Note:
Note:
Note:
Note:O: O:
Note: O:O: Included;
Included;
Included;
O: Included; -:
Included; -:-: Not -:
Not
-: Not
Not included; ★:
included;
included;
included;
Not included; Not
★: Not
Not included
included
included
Not included but
included but but
but assumed.
assumed.
assumed.
but assumed.
assumed.
measure, and measure existing planning and design methods that can contribute to real-world design.
Digitaland
Digital andphysical
physicalmodels
modelsare areusedusedto tosolve
solvedesign
designproblems
problemsthrough throughstudent studentwork workresults. results.
Third, Digital
it
Digital is used
Digital
Digital
Digital and and
and to
and
and physical
refine
physical
physical ideas
physical models
models in detail.
models
models are are
are
areusedused
Look
used
used tototo
for
to solve
ways
solve
solve
solve design
to improve
design
design
design problems
problems
problems
problems through
performance
through
through
through on student
detail,
student
student student work work
other
work
work results.
than
results.
results.
results.
Digital
For example,
For example, andthephysical
the physical
digital and
digital models
models
and physical
physical are
are used
used
models
models to
to solve
solve design
design
are largely
are largely problems
problems
utilized
utilized in through
through
in three
three ways.ways. student
First,work
student
First, work
it results.
results.
it isis used
used to
to
theFor
Formainexample,
example,content the
the digital
confirmed
digital and
andin thephysical
second
physical models
step.
models are
are largely
largely utilized
utilized ininin three
three ways.
ways. First,
First, it
it itit is used to
ForFor
For
For
EX2
example,
example,
example,
example,
reinforce
reinforce
the the
the
the
thevalidity
the
digital and
digital
digital
digital
validity
and
and
and
of ideas.
of
physical
ideas.
physical
physical
physical
InIn the
models
theearly
models
models
models
early
areare
arelargely
are
stages,
stages,
largely
largely
largely utilized
designers
designers
utilized
utilized
utilized
planfor
plan
three
in
in three
forthree
in threeways.
shape,
shape,
ways.
ways.
ways. First,
First,
First,
First,
performance,
performance, itisis
is
it is used
used used
used
ismaterial
used
material
toto to
to
to
reinforce
reinforce
reinforce
reinforce
reinforce the the
the
the
the validity
validity
validity
validity
validity of
ofof
of
of ideas.
ideas.
ideas.
ideas.
ideas. InIn In
the
In
In the
the
the
the early
early
early early
early stages,
stages,
stages,
stages,
stages, designers
designers
designers
designers
designers planplan
plan
plan
plan for for
for
for
for shape,
shape,
shape,
shape,
shape, performance,
performance,
performance,
performance,
performance, material
material
material
material
material
reinforce
composition,
composition, the validity
anddata
and data of ideas.
usage
usage and
and In the
explore
explore early stages,
existing
existing designers
methods
methods plan
and
and for
available
available shape, resources
resources performance,
totorealize
realize material
them.
them.
5.2. Surveys
composition,
composition,
composition,
composition,
composition, andand Video
and
and
and
and Recording
data
data
datadata
data usage
usage
usage
usage
usage and and
and
and
and explore
explore
explore
explore
explore existing
existing
existing
existing
existing methods
methods
methods
methods
methods and and
and
and
and available
available
available
available
available resources
resources
resources
resources
resources to to
to realize
realize
realize
to
to realize
realize them.
them.
them.
them.
composition,
This step
This step involves and data usage
involves measurements, and
measurements, evaluations explore existing
evaluations and methods and
and re-measurements available
re-measurements similar resources
similar to to
to thethe next nextthem.
realize them.
step.
step.
This
This
This
This
Thisstep step
step
step
step involves
involves
involves
involves
involves measurements,
measurements,
measurements,
measurements,
measurements, OP evaluations
evaluations
evaluations
evaluations
evaluations andand
and
and
and re-measurements
re-measurements
re-measurements
re-measurements
re-measurements similar
similar
similar
similar
similar to
toto
tothe
to the
the
the
the next next
next
next
next step.
step.
step.step.
step.
This
However,
However, step FO involves
there
there MA
are
are measurements,
various levels
various levels of
of evaluations
FA
implementation,
implementation, and re-measurements
FO and
failure,
failure, and learningMA similar
learning to
OP
because
because the they
they next FA step.
explore
explore
However,
However,
However,
However, therethere
0there
there are are
are various
various
various
are various levels
levels
levels
levels ofofof
of implementation,
implementation,
implementation,
implementation, failure,
failure,
failure,
failure, and and
and
and learning
learning
learning 0 because
learning because
because
because0 they they
they
they explore
explore
explore
explore
However,
However,
variousfactors
various there
there
factors are
are★various
without
without various
knowing
knowing ★ whether
levels
levels of
of
whether implementation,
0their intentions
implementation,
their intentions failure,
are0right.
failure,
are and
and
right. learning
learning
Second,
Second, itititisbecause
because
is used
used tothey
to they
increase
increase explore
0 the
explore the
various
various
various factors
factors
factors without
without
without knowing
knowing
knowing whether
whether
whether their
their
their intentions
intentions
intentions are are
are right.
right.
right. Second,
Second,
Second, it itis isused
used
isused toto to increase
increase
increase the the
the
Digital and physical models are used to solve design problems through student work results.
For example, the digital and physical models are largely utilized in three ways. First, it is used to
reinforce the validity of ideas. In the early stages, designers plan for shape, performance, material
composition, and data usage and explore existing methods and available resources to realize them.
This step involves measurements, evaluations and re-measurements similar to the next step. However,
there are various levels of implementation, failure, and learning because they explore various factors
without knowing whether their intentions are right. Second, it is used to increase the reliability of
ideas. Identify design strengths, find ways to improve weaknesses, and voluntarily find, measure,
and measure existing planning and design methods that can contribute to real-world design. Third,
it is used to refine ideas in detail. Look for ways to improve performance on detail, other than the
main content confirmed in the second step.
5.2. Surveys and Video Recording

The questionnaire was administered to the students who participated in the class at the beginning
and end of the curriculum. Most of the students had no experience in studying and participated in
architectural design competitions. The first questionnaire (administered at the start of the curriculum)
investigated “the experiences of measuring and evaluating design performance in the design process”
in existing design studios. Specifically, the questionnaire was designed to predict what the students
would gain from this study. In other words, the purpose of this study was to judge if the students
usually agree with the functions of the digital and physical models, and with the complementary effect.
According to the results of the first questionnaire survey, the students had tried to come up with
“eco-friendly” designs in their previous design studios. They did not verify the performances, however,
using simulation or modeling, and just completed the design at the level of imagination or assumption.
At the conceptual design stage, digital models had often been used to produce results or explore
aesthetics rather than to verify or test something. Physical models had also been used as a means of
presenting results.
Based on the results of the second questionnaire survey, some changes were found compared
to the first questionnaire survey. First, the ranking of the factors that contribute to the design
development changed (factors: Environmental performance, assessment of end user, feasibility,
operational inefficiency, and designer’s preference). At the start of the design project, the students were
less concerned with the factors other than the designer’s preferences, which are typically very important
as design factors in the engineering field. At the end of the design project, however, the students
changed their rankings. For example, they realized that objective data and physical phenomena
in the real world were important. This was because the viability of designs is directly connected
with objective performances like an assessment of users, evaluation of environmental performances,
the inefficiency of operations, and cost (Figure 6).
The uses of digital and physical models have also changed compared to the early days of the
project. For example, digital models were mainly used for visualizing creative forms during the
presentation time. With the experience of the projects, digital models have been used to clarify the
concept or express the validity of forms and structures. Although digital models were used as a visible
method, they were different because their data or images were media for strengthening the students’
ideas. For example, digital models were used as media for exploring parametric forms. Most of the
students, however, gave up establishing the logics of the shape. For this reason, searching for various
parametric shapes was not widely utilized as expected (Figure 7).
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 24
Sustainability 2019, 11, x4416

FOR PEER REVIEW 18of
19 of 24
23
Figure 6. Factors that are important to the designers in evaluating the building.
Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs.

The physical model played other important roles and had common uses. In addition to the
existing visual representation methods, it was used to investigate and evaluate performance using real
models. What is unusual is that unlike digital models, which are known to be convenient, physical
models have been conveniently handled to show and explain ideas to others (Figure 8).
Above all, what was most challenging for the students was the process of implementing envelope
movement and working principles. In particular, communication with the team members and
collaborating tutors are given priority over knowledge and theories when measuring and improving
the performances of kinetic designs. In other words, when students implement design concepts,
the material properties and manufacturing methods are the most important, with the students believing
that the success of their design lies in quickly finding and solving the cause of failure.
Video recording allows the observer (researcher) to view multiple discussion processes within
the team during the same period. For example, the recorded process includes the following: How to
define concepts using a kind of performance, how to measure and visualize performance, and finally,
whether the problem is clearly resolved. Because there were many types of unforeseen trial and error
in this process, there were Figure
big and8. small discussions
Functions with
of physical teaminmembers
models designingand ideas. Of course, not all
SBEs.
of the expected data were collected. As well as discussions of design concepts, discussions during
Figure 8. Functions of physical models in designing SBEs.
manufacturing and operations were expected to be recorded. Originally, students were expected to
familiarize themselves with the video recording environment through a trial installation of one to
two weeks. However, designers have not tried to manufacture and operate design models in video
recording environments. The reason for this is the familiarity of the work environment. The space
in which students make or operate the model was not a video recording environment, but a private
workspace. In order to investigate behaviors of designers in the future, requirements of the design
workspace are needed. Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs.
Figure
Figure 8. Functions of
8. Functions of physical
physical models
models in
in designing
designing SBEs.
SBEs.
5.3. Design Methodology Based on Prototyping

In this prototyping process, the digital and physical models are designed in such a way that the
designer does not rely on subjective tastes or assumptions, but has experienced a way of rationally
improving the design through the evidence, such as quantitative data and phenomena.
In the design process, digital and physical models are used as a vehicle for identifying design
problems and finding solutions to these (Figure 9). In the prototyping process, the complementarity
between the digital and physical models depends on the level of “Strengthen validities of ideas”
(Figure—O),
1 “Improve responsibilities of ideas” (O),
2 “Refine ideas” (O).
3 The design process is divided
into these three stages, and the roles of the digital and physical models are coordinated in each stage.
O
1 Strengthen validities of ideas The designer explores the design concept to achieve his or her
intended outcome. The initial concept is either the designer’s pursuit of an ideal goal, untested
based on the designer’s experience or imagination. Designers use similar examples to illustrate
the concept of the initial design, or similar cases where the intended outcome is similar to the
case of the project. In this process, the complementarity between the digital and physical models
enables the exploration of the method of implementing the characteristics and performance of the
case equally. It also helps designers understand the principles of materials and techniques that
are unfamiliar, and the procedures of using them. The design derived from the exploration of the
case becomes clearer through experiments on the physical, mechanical, and chemical properties
of the material and how it is used. Experiments are conducted under a variety of conditions to
ensure that the theoretical part of the material and technology is known, and that the designer’s
hypothesis based on it is in fact fit. In this process, the mutual complementarity of the digital
and physical models improves the understanding of the principle of the material and technology,
and how to use it, and makes it possible to sample objects based on this.
O
2 Improve responsibilities of ideas The designer explores how to shape design ideas in form,
composition, and structure, with ideas for form and function determined. Designers combine the
shape, color, and key elements of a building, and coordinate the function and performance of each
element based on ideas. In this process, the complementarity between the digital and physical
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 24

process, the complementarity between the digital and physical models enables the comparison
and evaluation of the aesthetic performance, the performance considering the environmental
conditions, and thetheperformance
models enables comparison and considering
evaluationthe user’s
of the needs.performance,
aesthetic In addition,the byperformance
considering the
actual performance,
considering such as theconditions,
the environmental changes inand thethe
fabrication
performance method and behavior,
considering the design
the user’s needs.
In addition,
problems by considering
associated with thethe actual performance,
construction such as the changes
and maintenance in the
stages can befabrication
addressed. method
and behavior,
③ Refine ideas the design problems associated with the construction and maintenance stages can
be addressed.
The designer explores ways of efficiently improving the creation and operation of shapes in a
O
3 Refine ideas The designer explores ways of efficiently improving the creation and operation of
rough form and with the function determined. Even if the main forms and structures of the
shapes in a rough form and with the function determined. Even if the main forms and structures
design have
of the been
design determined,
have the process
been determined, will continue
the process to improve
will continue the the
to improve design in detail.
design in detail.In this
process,
In thisthe complement
process, of the digital
the complement and physical
of the digital models
and physical is used
models to collect
is used and
to collect andprocess
process data,
so that
data, so that it can analyze the performance in detail. It also allows the thickness or height of theof the
it can analyze the performance in detail. It also allows the thickness or height
members
members to be adjusted,
to be adjusted,ororthe
thedetails
details to be adjustedasaswell
be adjusted welltoto make
make up up
for for
the the specific
specific problems
problems
of the design.
of the design.
Figure
Figure 9. 9. Designmethodology
Design methodology using
usingdigital
digitalmodels
modelsand physical
and models.
physical models.
6. Conclusions
6. Conclusion
It is important to specify the processes that use the digital and physical models, the performance
ofItthe
is important
product, and to specify the processes
how to determine if thethat use the
product digital
is as andasphysical
effective models,
the designer the performance
intended it to be.
Theproduct,
of the prototyping
andprocess
how toisdetermine
a step-by-step
if theprocess of overcoming
product the design
is as effective as thefailure factors
designer relatedittoto be.
intended
Theshape, structure,
prototyping and operation
process accordingprocess
is a step-by-step to designofconcepts.
overcoming The process is important
the design becauserelated
failure factors the to
design failures are potentially related to the quality of design outputs. There are
shape, structure, and operation according to design concepts. The process is important because the two types of failures
that are addressed through the prototyping process.
design failures are potentially related to the quality of design outputs. There are two types of failures
First, it is possible to define the causes or characteristics of failure factors, but it is difficult to
that are addressed through the prototyping process.
quantify or measure the potential loss and damage factors accurately. For example, the designer
First, it is possible to define the causes or characteristics of failure factors, but it is difficult to
performs energy performance evaluation in the process of designing the building envelope. Through
quantify
voluntaryor measure
informationtheretrieval
potentialandloss andknowledge,
existing damage factors accurately.
it is understood that For example,
the energy the designer
performance
performs energy performance evaluation in the process of designing the building envelope.
of the building envelope is affected by environmental conditions like airflow, sunshine, and topography. Through
voluntary
The actualinformation retrieval and
physical parameters existing
related to the knowledge,
performance it of
is understood
the building that the energy
envelope, performance
however, vary.
of the buildingbased
Simulations envelope is affected
on quantified by can
formulas environmental conditions
make it difficult to find a like airflow,
definitive sunshine,
solution to the and
topography. The actual physical parameters related to the performance of the building envelope,
however, vary. Simulations based on quantified formulas can make it difficult to find a definitive
solution to the problems that occur in the physical environment, especially if they include materials
or technologies that have not been specifically applied.
problems that occur in the physical environment, especially if they include materials or technologies
that have not been specifically applied.
Second, the failure factors are interpreted differently, or the degree of acceptance is different.
Architectural design has a relatively large tolerance for the result compared to general engineering
products. Even if the performance of the building is unsatisfactory, the performance of the overall
building can be improved by the resident adapting to or increasing the capacity of the plant system.
In the case of a kinetic building envelope, however, unlike a typical building design, the tolerance to
the design is low. The kinetic building envelope determines the sophisticated interactions between the
components to determine the success of the system. This interaction is based on the integration of the
functions and roles of the various components.
The prototyping process involves hypothesis setting—experiment planning—evaluation and
verification to identify and address the failure factors accurately. In this respect, the prototyping process
is similar to the research process. Eliminating or minimizing these failure factors plays an important
role in understanding the validity of the technology to be introduced in advance and in improving
accuracy. The prototyping process is an integrated design process. In this paper, a prototyping process
is proposed based on case studies. These cases are the result of a two-year (the second semester in
2014, the second semester in 2015) digital design studio. These results were analyzed by focusing on
the complement of the digital and physical models and the role of the traditional design medium.
Various factors of the design environment should be considered so that the prototyping process can
be applied to the practical process. For example, the resources in the work environment, the nature of
the designer, the nature of the design tool, and the rules or customary behavior within the organization
should be considered. The prototyping process of this study considers the influence of the resources
of the educational environment and the characteristics of the designer, but there are few cases for
comparing and applying the environment and characteristics of the practitioner to apply these to the
work environment. The future prototyping process should be conducted not only for the students,
but also for the working designers. In addition, it should be improved and made into a process that
closely examines the conditions of the work environment by conducting a detailed analysis of the
process of the design company or conducting surveys among the practitioners.
Funding: This research was supported by a grant (19AUDP-B127891-03) from the Architecture & Urban
Development Research Program funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of the South
Korean government.
Acknowledgments: This research was supported by a grant (19AUDP-B127891-03) from the Architecture & Urban
Development Research Program funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of the South
Korean government.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish the results.
References
1. Industry 4.0 Report; BDO LLP: London, UK, 2016.
2. World Economic Forum. Harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution for Sustainable Emerging Cities; Fourth
Industrial Revolution for the Earth Series; World Economic Forum: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.
3. Hargrave, J.; Mistry, R.; Wilson, R. It’s Alive: Can You Imagine the Urban Building of the Future; Arup: London,
UK, 2013.
4. Ulrich, K.; Eppinger, S.D. Product Design and Development, 4th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2008.
5. Ulrich, K.T.; Eppinger, S.D. Product and Design Development, 5th ed.; McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.: New York,
NY, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-007-108695.
6. Dam, R.; Siang, T. 5 Stages in the Design Thinking Process. Available online: https://www.interaction-design.
org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-process (accessed on 28 January 2019).
7. Defense Acquisition University. Acquisition Logistics Guide; Defense System Management College: Fort Belvoir,
VA, USA, 1997.
8. Ford, H. My Life and Work; Doubleday, Page & company: Garden City, NY, USA, 1922.
9. Brooke, L. Ford Model T: The Car That Put the World on Wheels; Motorbooks: Beverly, MA, USA, 2008.
10. Bryan, F.R. Beyond the Model T: The Other Ventures of Henry Ford; Wayne State University Press: Detroit, MI,
USA, 1997.
11. Padfield, G.D.; Lawrence, B. The birth of flight control: an engineering analysis of the Wright brothers 1902
glider. Aeronaut. J. 2003, 107, 697–718.
12. Cavaliere, L.A. The Wright brother’s odyssey: Their flight of learning. New Dir. Adult Contin. Educ. 1992,
51–59. [CrossRef]
13. Smith, A. Architectural Model as Machine-A New View of Models from Antiquity to the Present Day; Architectural
Press: Burlington, MA, USA, 2004.
14. Prager, F.D.; Scaglia, G. Brunelleschi: Studies of His Technology and Inventions; Dover Publications, Inc.: Mineola,
NY, USA, 2004.
15. Makert, R.; Alves, G. Between designer and design: parametric design and prototyping considerations on
Gaudi’s Sagrada Familia. Period. Polytech. Arch. 2016, 47, 89–93. [CrossRef]
16. Bell, V.B.; Rand, P. Materials for architectural design, 1st ed.; Laurence King Publishing: London, UK, 2006.
17. Kolarevic, B. Why we need architecture of tolerance. In High Definition: Zero Tolerance in Design and Production;
Sheil, B., Ed.; Architectural Design: London, UK, 2014; Volume 84, pp. 128–132.
18. Kolarevic, B. Digital Production, Architecture in the Digital Age-Design and Manufacturing; Taylor Francis:
New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 31–51.
19. Aish, R.; Woodbury, R. Multi-level interaction in parametric design. In Smart Graphics; Lecture Notes in
Computer Science (LNCS), Butz, A., Brian, F., Antonio, K., Olivier, P., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2005; Volume 3638, pp. 151–162.
20. Carpo, M. The Alphabet and the Algorithm; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011.
21. Wallick, K. Digital and Manual Joints. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Association for
Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA)): In Silicon + Skin: Biological Processes and Computation,
Minneapolis, MN, USA, 13–19 October 2008; pp. 370–375.
22. Wallick, K. Making SmartWrap: From parts to pixels. In The Green Braid: Towards an Architecture of Ecology,
Economy, and Equity; Tanzer, K., Longoria, R., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2007.
23. Cowey, J.; Danis, B.; Guichard, D.; Raynaud, J.; Aubry, S.; Boniface, V.; Chinzi, G. Glass Sails Above a Sea of
Forest: Louis Vuitton HQ; Intelligent Glass Solutions: London, UK, 2013; pp. 73–91.
24. Kim, S.J. Digital Fabrication in Architectural Design and Construction Engineering for a Complex Geometry.
J. Arch. Inst. Korea Plan. Des. (Arch.) 2015, 59, 46–52. (In Korean)
25. Kim, S.J. BIM Integration process for design and construction for digital fabrication of free-form buildings,
All BIM seminar. Available online: https://www.slideshare.net/seongji$\delimiter"026E30F$ng1/digital-
fabrication-bim (accessed on 11 October 2018). (Presentation file). Published on 22 September 2014
(In Korean).
26. Shelden, D.R. Digital surface representation and the constructibility of Gehry’s architecture. Ph.D. Thesis,
MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
27. Gann, A. Greg spaw on digital fabrication at AUS. Available online: https://www.studyarchitecture.com/
blog/school-news/outside-the-studio/greg-spaw-digital-fabrication-aus/ (accessed on 12 August 2019).
28. Sampaio, A.Z. Enhancing BIM methodology with VR technology. In State of the Art Virtual Reality and
Augmented Reality Knowhow; Mohamudally, N., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2018; pp. 59–79.
29. Bhanu, B. CAD-based 3D object representation for robot vision. Computer 1987, 8, 19–35. [CrossRef]
30. Cochran, D.; Zhao, Z.; Ng, Q. The Role of Physical simulation in the re-design of existing manufacturing
systems. In Proceedings of the 34th International CIRP Seminar on Manufacturing Systems, Athens, Greece,
16–18 May 2001.
31. Sun, L.; Fukuda, T.; Tokuhara, T.; Yabuki, N. Differences in spatial understanding between physical and
virtual models. Front. Archit. Res. 2014, 3, 28–35. [CrossRef]
32. Nakama, Y.; Onishi, Y.; Iki, K. Development of building information management system using BIM toward
strategic building operation and maintenance. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Computer-Aided
Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA 2015), Daegu, Korea, 20–22 May 2015; pp. 397–406.
33. Parigi, D.; Kirkegaard, P.H. Towards free-form kinetic structure. In Proceedings of the IASS-APCS Symposium
2012: From Spatial Structures to Space Structures, Seoul, Korea, 21–24 May 2012.
34. Kirkegaard, P.H.; Foged, I.W. Development and evaluation of a responsive building envelope. In Proceedings
of the International Adaptive Architecture Conference, London, UK, 3 March 2011.
35. Matin, N.H.; Eydgahi, A.; Shyu, S. Comparative analysis of technologies used in responsive building facades.
In Proceedings of the 2017 ASEE Annual Conference Exposition, Washington, DC, USA, 24–28 June 2017.
36. Wang, J.; Li, J. Bio-inspired kinetic envelopes for building energy efficiency based on parametric design of
building information modeling. In Proceedings of the Power and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC),
Chengdu, China, 28–31 March 2010.
37. Alter, L. Does Building-Integrated Wind Power Work? Available online: https://www.treehugger.com/
renewable-energy/does-building-integrated-wind-power-work.html (accessed on 16 August 2017).
38. Weng, Y.S.; Chen, Y.P.; Ma, P.; Pan, C.A.; Jeng, T.S. Eco-machine: A green robotic ecosystem for sustainable
environments. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design
Research in Asia, Singapore, 15–18 May 2013.
39. Ron, R. Exploration of eco-kinetic systems in architecture: Development of dynamic interactive building
elements, Paper presented at Physical Digitality. In Proceedings of the 30th eCAADe Conference,
Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic, 12–14 September 2012.
40. Salim, N.A.; Mydin, M.; Ulang, N.M. Biomimetic architecture in building envelope maintenance (a literature).
In Proceedings of the Emerging Technology for Sustainable Development Congress (ETSDC 2014), E3S Web
of Conference, Bangi, Malaysia, 5 August 2014.
41. Zari, M.P. Ecosystem processes for biomimetic architectural and urban design. Arch. Sci. Rev. 2015,
58, 106–119. [CrossRef]
42. Rosen, R.; Wichert, G.; Lo, G.; Bettenhausen, K.D. About the importance of autonomy and digital twins for
the future of manufacturing. IFAC-PapersOnLine. 2015, 48, 567–572. [CrossRef]
43. Pignataro, M.A.; Lobaccaro, G.; Zani, G. Digital and physical models for the validation of sustainable design
strategies. Autom. Constr. 2013, 39, 1–14. [CrossRef]
44. Wolfe, L.S. Physical and Digital Prototyping Belong Together. 2010. Available online: http://www.
eurekamagazine.co.uk/article-images/31853/Prototyping_Whitepaper.pdf (accessed on 16 August 2017).
© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

A Design Methodology Using Prototyping Based On The Digital-Physical Models in The Architectural Design Process

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Design Methodology Using Prototyping Based On The Digital-Physical Models in The Architectural Design Process

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416; doi:10.3390/su11164416 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2. Research Objectives and Scope

3.2. A Conceptual Model Based on Prototyping

3.3. Case Studies of Architectural Design Firms

Table 1. Roles of digital-physical models in architectural projects.

Combining smart and ready-made materials

Making curved panels

Mathematically analyzing the shape

Form (FO): External shapes, internal shapes (space), details

4. Course Design Using the Prototyping-Based Process

4.1. Case studies of Architecture Design Studios

Table 2. Case studies of architectural design projects.

Design Studio Digital Model Physical Model

Conducting performance evaluation of the

Form (FO): External shapes, internal shapes (space), details

4.2. Course Design Based on Case Studies

Figure 4. Prototyping using digital-physical models.

5.2. Surveys and Video Recording

Sustainability 2019, 11, x4416

Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs.

5.3. Design Methodology Based on Prototyping

Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 20 of 23

You might also like