algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Why we do that?

The future of architecture is inextricably linked with an automation of design, and it is easy to prove. Such statements cause many people's response like "computer will never think of an architect" or "all produced by the machines - boring and soulless", etc.

But let's think more broadly. The purpose of architecture is a creating of an artificial environment. The purpose of architecture progress is a creation of the most perfect artificial environment. Modern architects solve much more complex problems than prehistoric man who solved problems how to bend wood to make a tent and how to take shelter from the rain. The number and complexity of these tasks has been steadily increasing, and this process never stops. Architecture over the time of its development has stepped over the threshold, when all the knowledge you need to create an artificial environment could fit in a human's head. Nowadays to create the environment we need for not only physical tools such as cement mixers and jackhammers but also information tools “for the brain.” As well as a crane multiplies physical capabilities of people for a thousand times a computer enhances a mind. The more of architectural design problems we hand over to computers, the more complex and multifaceted problems we will be able to solve being released. We still in the dark about these problems.

Suppose we put the two architects with the identical experiences and the identical potential to do the identical projects. Let’s gave them the identical deadlines - a month. But the first does everything by hand, and the second with the best possible using of a computer. While the first architect draw lines of the plans with a rapidograph, the second one during this time corrected the plans for many times improving and print quickly. While the first one drew with aquarelle the second one setup the renderer and has already started to make layout drawings. Not because the computer thought for him, but because while many of the problems were solved automatically, the brain of the architect was free to deal with such problems which his computer still could not solve.

So, the future of architecture in automation.

The purpose of existence “Hiteca” to collect, store and organize founded information, as well as their own ideas and developments, bring architecture closer to the maximum possible automation. Our most important task is the creation of programs that will be able to solve all the problems that modern architect overcomes in the design process. In other words, creation of artificial architect, which will have the opportunity to work closely with architects of the future, to make new discoveries, solve problem which people have not even thought, and improve the programm continuously. It would be something like a universal active knowledge base which each new generation of architects will fill, and which will not just gather dust in libraries and on hard drives, and will work together with people to improve our environment.


What benefits can it bring now?

Einstein said: "If you can't explain something to a six-year-old, you really don't understand it yourself." Computer — is actually stupid child who needs to explain everything to the minutest detail, to each step. We can say confidently  that understood the problem, if we can explain its decision to the computer, if we can create an algorithm for solving this problem. This approach to the study of architecture makes possible to organizing all your knowledge and identifies the essence.  So what we're doing all this not only for "the far and beautiful future " but also to improve the quality of architectural education.

Views: 445

Replies to This Discussion

Thank you for the text Alexey. Brilliant article !

I agree with most part of this text.

Those counter-technology advance streams in architecture, are mostly older architects - like my university professors. And their counter-attitude is not made because of some real reasons - it's just some kind of fear, that time will overrun them and that they will become useless in comparison to the new generation of "computer architects". That is why they are giving false replies on this subject you mentioned: about boring and soulless architecture.

But! I also need to agree that you can not be an architect if you can not draw that by hand, also and imagine the object and it's parts in 3d, in your head, without even using the 3d model from PC application.

I used to draw around 80% of all my projects on university during studies, by hand! And that part helped a lot, and gave me pretty decent base for usage of PC applications later. Drawing by hand develops a bit investigating spirit, and enables you to think about the shape, the way it looks, and the way it will look.
Even today, I first do a dozen number of sketches and drawings, before going onto the drawing on PC.
The same goes related to some details, that I am already drawing on PC - sometimes I feel it much more comfortable to solve them by hand, and then draw back to PC.

So my opinion on this is a bit mixed - I think that an architect needs to have a solid basis in hand drawing, in order to become a better architect. But I also think that using technology in process of creating architecture is inevitable and reasons for not using it, are pointless.

Just my two cents on this issue.






  • Add Photos
  • View All


  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2023   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service