The exploited project, L-System in Architecture by Michael Hansmeyer is not particularly a building; in fact it is an experiment, a project that assesses the actuality of algorithms being able to uncover possibilities in the field of architecture. This design approach adopts design disciplines branched from the very computational design theory. Hansmeyer is a computational architect; he believes that one must interpret complexity as an opportunity for further design explorations. Hence he portrays compelling interest in finding unimaginable forms and endeavours by believing that algorithms and computation can imbue the generation of architecture with unprecedented amount of information.

His design solution is to adopt Aristid Lidenmayer’s, a theoretical biologist and botanist, parallel rewriting system, L-system to generate a bundle of form. L-system is a formal grammar that espouses the simple process of plant’s growth to generate complex forms. This theory consists of a generative and interpretative process.  The generative process is prominently string rewriting. The process initiates with letters that are then generatively replaced by other letters prior to a certain rule to form strings. Normally this process is repeated by assigning a certain amount of iterations. Then there is the interpretive process which is where string is ‘interpreted’ to as a form with each individual letter of the strings correspond to a geometric rule. This interpretation is then visualised with either turtle graphics or mapping of string. The advantage of this system is that Hansmeyer can have minimal input information and after the generative and interpretive process; he can generate an unimaginable form. This process inarguably adopts the design discipline of self-organising bodies; the differences are

Nonetheless, this project can be considered as premature because Hansmeyer only focused on the modelling and visualisation; not the fabrication of architecture.  Keeping in mind that Hansmeyer’s objective is to assess not to ultimately have his project built. I intend to take a conventional approach of presenting my model and contents on a slideshow as it seems to me to be the most appropriate approach.

Week 1

To design is to put the thoughts of an individual or group onto paper for creating purposes; that was what I believed to be true. The introductory lecture of computational design theory says otherwise and I strongly agree. I have disregarded the importance of existing theories from the past decades that have contributed in the designing process of architectures from the previous decades until today and perhaps will also be kept true in the future depending on the impact of the digital revolution. After reading Architecture or Revolution by Le Corbusier and Computation or Revolution by Philippe Morell; many questions have popped up in my head. Specialization is bad? Man is not taking full advantage of the ridiculous development rate of technology? Artificial Intelligence? Through group discussion and some self-contemplating I came to believe that; Le Corbusier intends to portray that laborers specializing in one field are only responsible for a small part of their products and only sees their products when they are finished. This also made me think that studying computational design is beneficial as we affiliate ourselves with different areas inside and outside the field of architecture. Technology is advancing very quickly and I don’t know if we are prepared for it. It’s not that we are not taking advantage of it; it is that there are too many ethical and economic issues if mankind does take this big leap. We are the designers and automation are the workers; I still don’t know if it is correct for automation to take up both these roles.