THE
FUNCTICU OF 'IESTINiG
ARCHITECTURAL
DURING
DESICI
by
GUY FE ARD
E.
JEINZAPFEL
Arch.,, University of Arizona
(1965)
SUBMITTED
IN
PARTIAL
REQUIFEMENTS
FULFILLMIENT
FOR
MASTEP CF
TEE DEGREE
CF THE
CF
ARCHITECTURE
at the
CF TECHNCICGY
MASSACHTSETTS INSTITUTE
APR 14 1971
1971
January,
LzPARIFs
/ /'12 ,
/2
fl/
Signature of the Author
Departrn i
f Architecture,
Janua yQ
71
Certified by .
Supervisor
Thesis
Accepted
.
............
1y
Chairman, Departmental
.
.
.
.
.
.a
. .
.
Corriittee on Graduate
.
.
.
.
Students
Document Services
Room 14-0551
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
Ph: 617.253.2800
Email: docs@mit.edu
http://libraries.mit.edu/docs
DISCLAIMER OF QUALITY
Due to the condition of the original material, there are unavoidable
flaws in this reproduction. We have made every effort possible to
provide you with the best copy available. If you are dissatisfied with
this product and find it unusable, please contact Document Services as
soon as possible.
Thank you.
The text on some pages is very faint. This is the
best quality available.
2
ABSTb A CT
The Function Of Testing During Architectural resign
Ey Guy Idward Wcinizapfel
Submitted to the Eepartient cf Architecture on
January 22, 1921, in partial fulfillment of the
reguirements for the Degree of Master of Architecture.
The otjective of this study is to explore and
clarify the role of testing in the process of
architectural design.
As the basis of the study, a
general definition of testing is developed.
Several
different kinds of testing are discussed in terms of
this definition.
oundaries are outlined between testing
and the related functicns of problem description and
evaluation.
And ways in which seemingly useful tests
can lead to erroneous conclusicns are discussed.
A design experiment is conducted as a means of
exploring some of the ways in which a designer employs
tests during his search for a problem soluticn.
The
experiment indicates that tests are made of three
important aspects of the design: of the alternatives
generated, of the criteria by which the alternatives are
judged, and of the design ohjectives which the criteria
represent,
Based on the experience of the design experiment, a
simple ccipputer routine is developed which can aid a
designer in testing alternative forms generated ty a
computer system. The routine is developed as an example
of the way in which a common form of testing can he
incorporated into a design aid system, The utility of
the testing routine is evaluated in relationship to
other kinds of testing which designers employ.
It is hoped that this study will be useful to the
designer and the design educator by externalizing and
providing a tentative structure for a portion of the
process which they ccnventionally employ,
Further, the
study may be useful to thte design methodologist who
seeks to develop new tcols to aid the designer in his
work.
Thesis Supervisors:
William 1, Porter
Associate Professor of Urban Studies
and Planning
rlimothy E. Jchnson
Assistant Professor of Architecture
AC KE CW LED GEM ENT S
The author would like to express his gratitude tc:
Professor William L. Porter, for his inspiration, guidance,
and supervision, especially in the. development of the
conceptual aspects of this work,
Professor Timothy E. Ochnson, for his assistance, suppcrt,
and criticism. thrcughout all phases. of the project,
John I. Perkins, with whom many of the concepts toth central
and suppcrtive tc. this wcrk were explored, for his
assistance during the design study,
Professor John R. Myer, for his counsel and ccumEnts,
Richard I. Krauss, of Ashley, Myer, Smith, Architects, for
providing the architectural prcgram and essential
information used in the design study,
and those professors
Architecture and of
interest and work in
preparation of this
and students in the Departments of
Urban Studies and Planning, whose
design methods has contributed tc the
thesis.
TABLE CF CONTENTS
Chapter
Cne:
.......
INTFODUCTICN......... ........
Objectives of tIe Study
Testing in Design
The Remaining ChaFpters
THE STRUCTURE CF TESTING..............
Chapter Two:
A General Definition
Alternate Forms of Testing
Tabular Comparisons
Compariscn cf Forms
Statements of Preference
Non-Translatable Tests
Defective Testing
Inaccurate Standards
Irrelevant Standards
Inaccurate Representaticns of Form
A DESIGN EXPERTMENT ...........
Chapt er Three:
The Use of IMACE
The Design Problem: A Fire Station
The Architectural Program
Circulation: A major Design Objective
The Model for Generation
The Design Prccess
Arrangements
Tests
Changes to the Model
New Generation
Observations
Chapter Your:
A COMFUTEF
TESTING
*
...
ROUTINE.............
79
The Purpose of The Rcutine
The Test Algorithm
The Output
Possible Improvements
Architectural PrOgrar Fcr A Fire Station
P11 Frogram for Computer Aided Testing
. ..
FOCTNOTES.......
BIBLIOC
APHY,..
...............
..
*
to*.
.. ..
112
.,..............
.
.
.*
.
.
.* ..
.
.
*..
116
TABIE OF FIGURES
FIGURE
List of Sraces for the Fire Station
FIGU FE
Matrix of Generating Specifications
.........
70
FIGUEE
Arrangement
.........
71
FIGURE
a)
Arrangement
b)
Diagram of Necessary
FIGURE 5: a)
b)
From First
Generation
Frcm Second Generation
.........
72
.........
73
Circulation
Arrangement Frcn Third Generaticn
Diagram of Nccessary
......... 42
Circulation
FIGURE
6: Diagram of Desired Circulation .......
.........
74
FI GUIPE
7:
.........
75
Arrangement
From Fourth Generation ...
FIGURE 8:
Final Computer Generated, Arrangement . ..........
......
FIGURE
Designer's Sketch of Alternative
76
Arrangement
FIGURE
10:
Conceptual Diagram of Solution Spaces......
FIGURE
11:
Diagram of IMAGE rata Structure ...........
FIGURE 12:
Flow Chart of Testing Algorithm. ...........
FIGURE 13:
TyFical Eistlays of Test Information
F IGURE 1 4:
Diagram of Possible Data Structure ........
.77
..
78
... 0
..
.91
92
......
...
93
Chapter One
INTECDUCTION
This study deals with testing as it is
the process of architectural design.
performed in
It is the result
of a study of testing which grew out of a reSEarch
effort to develop a computer aid for preliminary
architectural
design. (1. 1)
I.
It
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
the author's hcpe that the ideas put forth
is
here will help clarify that portion of design dealing
with tests.
These ideas might also facilitate the
develoFmecnt of design aids capable of assisting the
designer in testing his alternative solutions.
time when much effort is
aids for the designer,
actual activities,
those activities,
being devoted
At a
to developing
a clear understanding of his
and of the tools he needs to perform
is
especially necessary.
The study was nct undertaken to prescribe any
particular process for the designer.
-Rather it
is
the
author's belief that no single process could le employed
for twc prcblems by one designer, much less by two
different
designers,
The particular functions which are
CHAPTER CNE:
INTRODUCTICN
performed during design,
are selected,
organi2ed,
and
performed under the influence of the conte::t of the
problem being addressed. It is the problem, the state cf
the information concerning that problem,
the designer's
experience, the resources available to him, and
innumerable
other factors uhich make it
infeasible to
prescribe a particular procedure for even the single
function of testing.
What the author intends instead,
is
to develop a
general discription cf what composes a test,
a few of the characteristics of testing,
to cutline
to provide an
example cf the way testing can be employed in design and
the impact which it
can have on the designer's process,
and to develop a simple aid which a designer can use fcr
testing.
II.
TESTItG IN EESIGN
This study grew from the realization
that testing
is a very important function of design and a function
which could be analyzed separate from the otler
activities of design.(1.2)
A few examples of how
testing can be used in design may make this point clear.
It
is
often the case that in
the process of
generating solutions to his problems,
a designer
develops an alernative arrangement with which he is
pleased.
He may not be interested in
generating new
very
CHAPTER CNE:
IETPCDUCTILCN
alternatives but only in ascertaining how well the
present alternative satisfies his criginal problem
specification.
In other words, he would like to test
his present arrangement against the criteria cf his
original specification.
As an example, let us assume that an architect has
developed a problem specification for a schocl, and is
generating alternative arrangements.
Each arrangement
may be radically different from the last.
At some
point, an alternative is produced which appeals to the
designer in several vays,
The spaces may be organized
hierarchically, indicating their functional importance.
The overall arrangement
might also.be very symmetrical
(or asymmetrical) or possess some other order which
appeals to the architect,
simple structural system,
It
might lend itself to a
and have several other
attributes which please the designer for reasons he may
or may nct be able tc identify.
The architect is
reluctant to continue his search
for basically different design alternatives.
He may be
willing to make limited modifications to imprcve the
scheme, tut he is very reluctant to make large changes
in the 1asic order he sees. It is possible, however,
that there is
no reascn tc change the present
alternative.
It
specified.,
may already satisfy the criteria he has
He will therefore want to test the design
CHAPTER CNE: IETCDUC1C1CN
against those criteria,
If
the scheme docs indeed
satisfy them all, be mill. probably accept its lasic form
and Legin elabcrating
it
in
more detail.
If
it
fails in
small ways,
he may rcdify certain rortions of the
arrangement
until it
does meet all the criterea,
until
he has decided that the arrangement will never satisfy
the criteria and rejects it,
or until he decides that
some of the criteria are not significant enough to
warrant discarding tte design and ignores them,
In order to pursue his design, then, the architect
must be able to test varicus alternatives against the
criteria fcr which tLey vere generated.
SYNOFTIC
In
AFPPAISNL
another situation,
the designer may wish to
measure an arrangement against additional criteria,
criteria he had not previously
specified,
Obviously not
all criteria can be,
or even shculd he, described at the
cnset of a problem.
Many can be discovered cnly through
the process of exploring different alternatives.
if
all
criteria
were knoun,
unnecessarily complicated
it
Even
would probably le
to generate alternative fortcs
from the complete set; scue limited subset of the
criteria might be all that is
acceptable
alternatives.
the "good"
designer is
necessary to generate
In fact,
it
can be argued that
the designer who selects the
CHAPTER
CNE:
INTRODUCTICN
criteria which cause the rcst efficient search fcr a
solution. (1.3)
As an example, the generating specification for a
school may not deal vith the secondary roles which the
building is
to fulfill.
The playing fields might serve
as neighborhcod recreaticr axeas,
and the physical
complex might be used for civic events such as PTA
meetings.
These functions may not be significant enough
for use as generating criteria, lut they are significant
enough to be tested in the light of an otherwise
acceptalle
design.
Many times,
to light only in
seccndary
test criteria can be brought
the context of a generated alternative.
Clients, because they are not versed in the
opportunities and limitations they face,
often forE new
goals upcn seeing the consequences of their criteria.
This is even true of the iost sensitive designers.
TESTING FCRES CF UNKNCWN CRIGIN
A third rcle for testing is typified by the
situation in
which a designer is
design he had no hand in
modify to meet a new use.
faced with an existing
creating,
but which he must
In this situation,
he will
want to test how well the design already satisfies the
criter ia
describing tha t use.
Buildings remodellings are obvious examples of this
CHAPTER CNE: INTRODUCTICN
condition.
level,
Found object sculpture operates at this
ard in
nany fields objects are created
'or one
purpose which are fcund to satisfy other roles.
cases,
In these
the designer tests the existing forms against new
critera,
criteria for which they were not originally
generated.
All of these situations indicate that the designer
cannot generate alternative solutions exclusive cf
testing - that a very large part of the design process
lies outside the realm of generation.
However, they do
indicate that testing can cccur exclusive of generation.
The realization that testing vas a very important
function of design and that it could have a "life of its
own"
separate fror generatiCn,
led the writcr to examine
the nature of testing architectural form,
in the process of design.
and its
role
The results of that study are
the substance of this report.
III. TEE REMAINING CHAPTERS
The remaining chapters can be seen as three
different approaches to the subject: as theory,
documentary and as application.
testing in a general way.
as
Chapter Two discusses
Chapter Three documents an
actual design study, and Chapter Four descrites an
application of the experience gained from that design
study to the development cf a computer aid for testing.
CHAPIER CNVE: INTRODUCTICIN
In
order to establish a common basis for further
discussion,
Chapter Two,
"The Structure of Testing",
develops a general definiticn for a test as related to
the process of design.
It discusses what factors are
necessary to form a test, how they are derivEd, how they
operate and interact and what results they give.
Scme
of the different kinds cf tests which a designer
performs are discussed in terms cf this general
definition.
It is shown that both the representation of
the design being tested and the state of the ctjective
which it is to achieve will affect the way in which the
test is performed.
In
crder to identify the boundaries of testing and
to distinguish it frcm other, closely associated
activities, brief descriptions are given for measurement
and evaluation of design.
Cther factors,
such as
testing's facility and complexity are also treated in an
effort to clarify the territory included within the
boundaries of this function.
The final part cf Chapter
Iwo addresses the relationship between the otjcctives
which thE design must achieve and the tests which can be
made of the proposed scluticn.
It
outlines the
interdependancies between the different eleients of the
test,
the state of the alternative and the resouices of
the designer.
And it
discusses how faults in
those elements can render results which are
any of
CHAPIEP CVE: IITRODUCTICV
inappropriate,
mislcading cr ine.ffectual.
Chapter Three,
"A Design Experiment",
documents an
actual design study which was performed to illustrate
and enlarge upon the issues introduced in
Chapter Two.
The criteria are outlined for selecting the prcject used
in
the study,
a fire station.
Since the design
alternatives were generated by a computer system, the
reasons for using the comuter,
as-opposed to designing
in a conventional manner are discussed.
documentation of the design process itself
The
records uhat
steps were taken, what tests were performed, and how the
results of the tests caused modifications in the
designer's
strategy.
Chapter Four describes "A Ccmputer Testing Foutine"
which can be used for testing the alternatives generated
by a computer systeu.
This routine was developed in
response tc the experiences
cf the design study.
It
uses many cf the procedures in a presently existing
system.
Some of the different kinds of testing are
compared to the developed routine,
and some prcpcsals
are made for expanding the routine to include a wider
range thc designer's needs.
Chapter Two
THE STRUCTUE OF TESTING
A test is
a comparison Ietwcen the actual value of
some aspEct of the design and scne value which it is
supposed to achieve. The results of the comparison are
acceptatle within certain hirits and unacceptaile beyond
those limits.
AN EXAMPLE
In order to introduce the basic elements ccrposi.ng
a test, an example of a typical design test is
below.
dcscribed
Following the example, a general definition of a
test is derived, using illustrations from the example to
clarify its concepts,
Assume an architect is designing an office building
for a developer.
One of his client's
primary
objectives is that the building should make as much
profit as possible.
Knowing that the ratio of rentable
to non-rentable floor area vill significantly influence
the ultimate profit return of the building,
the
architect and client seek a ratio which will give the
greatest
probability of a high return.
this ratio is
They know that
rot the cnly factor bearing on profit,
but
CHAPTER TW1O:
that it
is
ST(RUCTUP
significanit enough to le carcfully
considered.
From his past experience,
the architect has found
that fev buildings can he expected to achieve a ratio
greater than six to one,
least four to one.
but that most are capable of at
The client's experience in real
estate developuent shows that buildings with a ratic
less than 3.5 tc 1 will return a marginal profit even
when fully occupied, and that those with greater than
5.5 to 1 fail to do much Letter because of high vacancy
factors caused by the teniants'
like sardines".
around 4.5 to 1.
feelings of being "packed
The optimum return appears to occur
They decide, then, to seek a design
which will have a 4.5 ratic.
They will be satisfied
with nothing less than four, and will avoid alternatives
higher than five and a half.
In
seeking a basic arrangement for the building,
the architect generates several alternative scherres.
Each shows the basic configuration of spaces In the
building.
Corridors,
offices,
elevators and nechanical
equipmert rooms are all rcughed in.
He determines the
area ratics for each scheme by the process of
subtracting the total rentable area from the gross area.
The ratios of each alternative scheme are ccmpared
to the standard he hopes to achieve.
Those scLemes with
ratios greater than 5.5 cr below 4 are set aside.
Some,
CiAP'IFR
TWO:
SURUCTUPE
in fact, are rejected.
Cthers are modified in hopes of
meeting the standard.
In
accepting or rejecting the alternative schemes,
the architect is
tests.
basing his judgcment on the results of
These tests are typical and embody the general
form and the basic ccnditicns of testing.
discussion in
To clarify
the renainder of this study,
definiticn and notation is
1.
a specific
given below,
A GENEFAL DEFINITION
A test, T, may he defined as a comparitive
function,
t, Lctween sorte neasurement,
and a measurement,
acceptatle
M2,
of an objective,
within scre tclerance,
T = f ( N 1(F)
THE FORM,
F, is
M2 (0)
which is
t)
the description or the
the fcror is
the office building.
0,
F,
t.
representation of a pcssible real form.
example above,
M1, of a form,
It
is
In the test
the alternative scheme for
actually a representation of
a possible form that might ultimately be built and not
the reality of the building itself.
For some tests the form may also be thought of as
the larger environment within which the building would
be only a part.
necessary in
This larger conceptual frame is
order to test those aspects of the design
CHAPTIER TWC: STiFUCTUFE
which
lic partially
cutside the description
building being designed.
would test
As an example,
the solar exposure
of surrcunding buildings,
a designer
of a building,
to have information concerning
of the
who
wculd have
the location and shape
the range of positions which
the sun would follow over tlhe year, the climate of the
region,
as well as the crientation and shape of the
building itself.
THE CEJECTIVEj, C, is the goal for which the
environnent is being tested.
normative in
nature.
Unlike the form, it is
It states how the form should
exist rather than how it
does exist.
In the example,
the objective states that the build.ing "should make as
much prcfit as possible."
M1 and M2 are the functions which measure the form
and the objective,
respectively.
They are noted
differently to indicate that their measurement
techniqucs
and the data they rely upon are not
necessarily the same.
of the form is
In the example,
the actual ratio
deterLTined frce a function which scales
the varicus dimensions of the form and by mathmatical
operations computes the actual ratio of the proposal.
The objective ratio derives from the past experiences of
the client and the architect.
The reasurement of the form derives an attribute,
"a",
some value which nay be attributed
to the form.
CHAPTER TWO:
SIRUCTURE
M1 (F)
=
"a"
The measurement of the objective
standard,
"s",
which the forn
=
M2(C)
In
4.5.
the test
The
exanple,
derives a
should achieve.
"s"
the value of the standard
value of the attribute
varied
was
for each
alternative form.
THE 1GLEBANCE,
between
t,
is
the allowable deviation
the attribute and the
standard.
It
is
the
amount of misfit which the designer feels he
bet;een the design and its objective.
In
can accept
the cxample,
the tolerance permitted a range one unit higher and one
half unit lower than the optimum ratio of 4.-.
The tolerance is perhaps the most flexible aspect
Nany tests uill maintain
of the test,
the same
objective and standard throughout a design,
tolerance
is
varied
while the
from very loose to very specific
in
keeping with the detail of the alternatives developed.
For example, the main entry to a building may at first
be acceptable anywhere cr the north facade.
arrangemEnt
of the building's interior,
Eut as the
and its
immediate environment, beccues mcre specific, there will
likely be only one acceptable location for the door.
The test
operations.
function,
It
first
f,
is
composed
of two
compares the attribute
and the value cf the standard,
of the form
thereby deriving
a third
CHAPTER TC: STRUCTUEE
measure,
the difference LEtLcen the two.
then compares that diffeiarce
The function
with the tolerai.ce, t,
and
passes or fails the test cn the basis of that
Thus, the form of a test. is: 1) the
comparison.
measurement of some aspect of the proposed fcrim,
r1 (F),
which results in a value of that aspect or attribute,
"a"; 2) the measurement cf that same aspect of the
objective,
M2 (0) , which results in a value for a
"s"; 3) the ccmparison of those two results,
standard,
"a'and "s", resulting in
4)
a measure of their difference;
the ccmparison of that difference with the tclerable
difference,
and 5)
t;
the passage or failure cf the test
derived from that final ccmp.arison.
II.
ALTERNATE
TORMS OF TESTING
Not all testing is the rathematical comparison of
quantifiable values,
above.
such as illustrated
in the example
many different kinds of tests are possible,
dependant upon the state of the form being tested and
the type of objective it is to achieve.
That is to say
that tests differ in kind due to the varied operations
and procEdures they require.
Diverse forms of
measurements are required by the many modes in
which a
form may be represented: as a mental image, as a verbal
descrirtion,
as a drawing,
as a model or as a final
CHAPTER
TUC:
SIRUCTUEE
constructed reality.
standard,
performed,
The type of cbjective,
and its
vill also influence the kind of test
Many objectives,
such as lighting till
necessitate reference tc some pre-established table for
quantifiable standards;
footcandles".
"The light level should be 75
Others 'will require an indication of
qualitative preference,
to externalize,
Yet others will be impossible
or translate into any explicit form.
In
short, different kinds of testing are produCEd by the
test's two
rajcr arguments and the procedures used to
measure and comrpare them.
Scme cf the different kinds
of tests pcssible are discussed below.
TABULAR COMIPARTSONS
A common type of test'is the comparison cf sone
aspect of a design to some tabulated or quantifiable
standard.
In tests cf this nature, the standard is
derived frcm a table, where M2 is the search of that
Ixamples
table, or the recall of its previous search.
abound as entire volumes have been devoted to iecording
such factors as hearth/flue area ratios. (2.1)
nearly every profession and trade,
And
as well as Uost
federal, state, and city bcard, regardless of how
remotely connected with building ccnstruction,
produce
copious guidelines for the designer.
An extension of this kind of testing is
made by
substituting an equation frcm which the standard can be
CHAPTFR TWO: STRUCTURE
calculated.
Rules cf thumb, such as "The riser plus
twice the tread should equal 29 inches", are more
convenient,
yet produce the same effect as tables.
The
derivation of structural and mechanical equipmcnt
standards are extensicns cf this approach.
Tests of this type are easily described, usually
tased on mathematical calculations and comparisons.
And the tests can
Their results are also quite precise.
be performed by even the most superficially informed.
CCEPARISCN CF FORMS
Another ccmmon kind of testing employs the
compariscn of two forms.
In this case, the standard is
intrinsic within ancther fcrm or its
which is
desirable
representation
known to be acceptable or to have certain
characteristics.
The test is
based upcn a
comparison betveen the "otjective" form and the form
under question.
For exaiple, a designer might develop a
scheme in
which a very cbvicus hierachical circulation
system is
evident.
He can test his other alternatives
against this scheme to determine if
such clear
circulaticn had been generated unnoticed before cr to
see if
the other forms cculd be easily modified to
incorporate it.
By an extension of the notation above,
such a test can be represented as:
T=f (M1(F 1)
M1 (F2)
t)
CHAPTER TUWO:
where F1 is
SRUICTURE
22
the alternative being tested,
objective forw
(in this case,
clear circulation),
F2 is
the
the scheme having the
and M1 is a common process of
measuring the twc forms
The objective form,
(here a visual inspection).
F2,
need not be otherwise
related to the design protlem for which the test is
conducted.
It Kight as easily be an existing building,
or an alstracted pattern,
wheel.
such as a grid,
a tree,
or a
It need only erbcdy or represent the objective
being tested.
representations
Diagrams are commonly used as simple
of fcrm cbjectives,
A frequent variation of this kind of test uses the
objective form as a "threshold standard",
of a least acceptable
level,
some statement
which may be cou-bined vith
an indicated directicn for improvement:
"The facade
should he at least as impcsing as Bonwits - hopefully
more so ";
or "This building must be at least cne story
higher than the Prudential."
Obviously thresIcld
standards are applicable to other kinds of tests as
well.
STATEMENTS OF
UEFERYNCE
Most standards Pay be seen as statements of
someone's preference.
Certainly the tabulated standards
CHAPTER TWO: SqRUCTURE
for heating and lighting mere determined by the careful
synthesis of many pecples preferences.
Hovevcr,
Eost
standards are not primarily identified with this
characteristic.
But certain test
criteria gain their identity
solely from the objectives cf some actor central to the
design problem,
the client,
the rser,
the designer,
etc.
The "Observations" in the Fire House Architectural
Program in
the Appendix contain many examples of
preference statements;
"There
will be a flagpole."
Many prefernces can not be foreseen pricr tc the
generation of alternatives.
As a result,
many tests in
this categcry arc perfcrmed by using the design
alternative to extract the preference of those involved.
In such cases,
the distinction betueen the elements of
the test become blurred, for in a sense, the alternative
is measuring the clients desires, which in turn pass or
fail the scheme.
NON-TRAES
ATAELE TESTS
At the opposite extreme from tabular comparisons
are tests in
which the standard,
and even the objective
it represents, cannot be made explicit, and in which
certain aspects of the alternative cannot be universally
understocd.
A designer nay continue to search for
alternatives
while nct being able to explain his reasons
for rejecting those at hand.
CHAPTER T1O: S'RUCTURE
It is perfectly understandatle that certain design
goals will be inexplicit,
image cf
siice the designer's
his problem is very rich and derives from many diverse
sources.
His prcblem image goes well beyond the
objectives stated or inferred by his client to encompass
his grasp of technological, economic, and political
systems - their resources, limitations, and potentials,
Further, the designer's image of his problem is
the culture and society cf which he is
based in
a product,
impacted by his previous design experience.
and is
These and
many other factors ccmbire to form a very rich
perception of his problem.
Moreover,
both the nedium in
which the design is
addressed and the discrepancies letween that
redium and
the consequent reality cf the built form pose issues
which cannot be externalized
communication.
in all
forms of
The homily, "One picture is worth a
thousand words", is not entirely accurate; words will
never recreate the picture.
In a similar way, many of
the attributes and relaticnships ccnveyed by
representations of the design cannot be communicated
adequately in
any other medium.
Ccnversely,
because of
his familiarity with both his. mede of representaticn
the buildings which result,
information
and
a designer may sense
frcm his representation of a design which is
not grasped by others.
CHAPTER TWO:
SSIUCTURE
As a consequence of the designer's diverse
perception of his prcblen aInd the iedium in
many
explored,
tests
will be conducted
of externalizing
possibility
their results.
vhici
it is
without the
prccess or
either their
As opposed to tabular comparisons,
tests
of this kind can be performed only by the designer,
himself.
AN ELEMENT CI TESTING
MEASUREMFNT:
For many,
a certain anbiguity exists regarding the
meaning of the word "test".
Tresting is
often used to
refer to functions which are not actually conmrarative in
nature.
For example,
determining the height of a sp-ace
or the numter of intersecticns
on a corridor are
considered by some tc he tests the design.
testing the state of
For purposes of this paper,
however,
determining the state of some aspect of a design will be
refered to as a measurement,
or a description.
when informaticn concerning the design is
comparison
Only
usEd for a
with an cbjective can the function le
identified as a test.
TESTING:
AN
ELIMET OF EVALUATION
A similar confusion exists regarding the
distinction
test is
between testing and evaluation.
whereas a
the .compariscn between the actual state of a
certain design alternative and the state necessary to
CHAPTER TWO:
STRUCTURE
satisfy a single objective, evaluation is taken to rean
either
1)
the assessirent cf a design alternative's
worth
tased upcu the ccmparison of that alternative to a
co2mprehensive set of objectives for the project, or 2)
the comparison and ranking cf several design
alternatives according
tc their relative satisfaction of
a set cf criteria.
In both forms, evaluation must determine the
relative significance of conflicting goals based upon
the preferences
(the value system) of some person or
persons, ic. client, user, designer, etc.
Evaluation
assigns the worth of a particular design alternative; it
ranks the relative "gocdncess" of several possible
designs.
In doing so, evaluation may employ testing in
much the same way that testing uses measurement.
But
evaluation poses conceptual and procedural guestions
which are well beyond the scope of testing and this
study.
HE FACIlITY OF TESTING
None of the conditicns which determine
certain functicn is
or evaluation)
that a
a test (as opposed to a measurement
have anything to do with the degree of
difficulty involved in
involve as little
performing them.
A test can
effort as a simlple visual inspection
or can require a complex and arduous mathematical
calculaticn.
Perhaps most design tests are the result
CIIAPTER TWO:
of brief
is
STRUCTURE
visual observation,
since the state
usually described by a drawing cr model.
cf a design
Put the
detailed ocinputations neccssary to determine an expected
foot candle level and compare it
to the intended
standard do not make that function anything micre or less
than a test.
IIT.
DE!ECTTVE UESTS
Several factors can cause tests to be inneffective,
thus leading the designer to errcneous conclusions.
major elements of a test,
and the derivation
Two
the description of the form
of the standard,
influence
thc
effectiveness of the test. This section will discuss:
the ways in
results,
which inaccurate standards can cause useless
the relationship Letween irrelevant standards
and meaningless results,
and the limitations cf tests
which measure a rcprcseta ticn of a form rather than the
actual form.
INIACCURAIF
If
STANDARDS
the value of a certain
standard
against which it
passed,
If
the result,
the standard
is
attribute natches the
Yeing compared,
itself is
tle test is
inaccurate,
however,
and hence the test may be meaningless.
CIIAPTER
TWO:
STR[UCTURE
Standards should be determined which accurately
represent the higher level cbjectives for wihich the test
is
being conducted,
to
Any standard mhich fails
accurately represent its cbjective vill cause misleading
results.
For example, a design may be sought which
facilitates easy installation of plumbing.
Chases of
less than 6 inches may, in actuality, be less than the
required clearances cf scme fittings and thwart that
objective.
A standard of 5 inches vould be inaccurate
and tests hased on that standard would be misleading.
There are many reasons for which standards might be
inaccurately derived,
Among them are:
are not easily quantified;
1)
standards which
2)standards for which no
universal value has been set,
either because the
objective is unique cr because insufficient study has
teen done to codify them; 3)
standards uhich have become
obsolete.
Many standards are especially difficult to
quantify. Qualitative objectives often fall in t1is
group.
Privacy,
openness, s pacicusness,
cheerfulness
are a few of the goals with which an architect might be
faced.
in
They convey attributes which are very important
any design.
Unfortunately,
subject to interpretation.
designs for his home,
their value or ireaning is
A client,
seeing the first
right reali7e that his conception
of privacy and that of his architect are quite
IWO: STRUCICTrPE
CHAPTIER
different.
The designer must szupect the standards Ye right
estatlish on the basis of qualitative objectives.
Tn
such cases, however, he may be aided by a special
By propcsing a range of design
application of testing.
alternatives to his clients, the architect can elicit a
response as to how well each achieves privacy or
In this way, he can begin to get a
spaciousness.
picture of his preferences,
and be able to mcre
accurately place the value cf the standards.
Sore standards,
though quantifiable,
are difficult
to measure accurately in the absence of the pecple for
whom they are created.
Cften, the -designer cannot
directly contact the people for whom he is
these cases,
preferences.
avoid.
In
designing,
he will lack the information regarding
Inaccurate standards will be difficult to
An excellent cxamplo of such a case occurred at
the Seattle World's Fair.
Several of the science displays at the fair were
very complex and required abundant time and effort to be
understocd.
It
visiter examined
was chserved,
however,
that the average
the displays fcr no more than a minute,
and that very few visitors remained for more than five
minutes.
When asked why the displays had been so
elaborately contrived,
the designers responded that the
intent was not to attract only the casual fair gcer,
but
CHAPTER TI-C: STRUCTUE
also the serious student cf the subject being displayed.
The designer explained
that the display had been
organised to offer information to such a student for as
long as an hour.
The designer had ccnjectured the existence of the
serious student, and tested the display's content on the
basis of his existence.
attented the fair,
In fact, no such student
and the displays were too ccwplex for
the average visitcr vhc did come.
In effect,
the
standards which tle designer had met were
inaccurate. (2.2)
Several techniques are available which car assist
the designcr when standards must he set in tc alsence
of those for whom they are created.
They may he
predicted by the designer frcm his own experience or
from his empathy with the user,
shortcorrings of conjecture
But the possible
are seen in
the exanple cf
the fair displays. Experinents of pilot situaticns,
and
case studies of existirg, analogous situations can be
very useful.
detail in
These techniques have been covered in
numerous sources,
and are beyond the scope of
this study.
Inaccurate standards also occur because shifts in
preference make them obsolete.
which have been very accurately
In many cases stardards
determined will over
long periods of time !(in time scales larger tian the
CUIAPTER T"C: STBUCTUFE
schcdule fcr any design prcject) change and invalidate
their usefulness.
Fcr examrle,
were accurate twenty years
housing standards which
ago are no longer adequate
today.
Even within the time scale of a design, client
preferences may alter enough tc invalidate certain
standards,
This may cccur out of the resolution of
conflicts between standards or because of the appearance
of new alternatives.
IRRELEVPNT
STANDARDS
Standards may be accurately measured, hut they Pay
be irrelevant to the objective sought; they
ray te
incomplete, failing to acccunt for additional, dependant
standards;
they tray also be inadequate,
failing
to
account for all the factors they influence.
Standards,
context,
though accurately measured for one
may be irrelevant to the objectives they serve.
As an example,
low income housing guidelines have been
criticized as irrelevant for the people they serve.
professed
objective cf the guidelines is
The
to insure
adequate housing for the needs of low income families.
They are developed on the tasis of experiences with
middle class farilies,
and set minimum standards for
living rcoms dining rocrs,
Unfortunately,
kitchens,
kitchens and so-forth.
dining and living rooms fail to
CHAPTER
TVO:
SI PUCTUPE
reflect the actual life styles which lower inccmie
The standards are irrlevant tc the
families pursue.
needs of the users,
living room is
not sitply inaccurate.
Whether the
500 or 6CC square feet actually makes no
difference, The spatial centex t of the standards does
not "fit"
the life style of the users.
Lack of sufficient qualifications can also irake an
otherwise meaningful standard irrelevant to its
objective.
Many standards do not stand alone.
They are
actually cnly cne factor cf networks cf interrelated
criteria.
useful.
Alone they may seem very realistic and
they may even give reasonable results when
considered alone, if their dependant criteria happen to
be satisfied as well.
the architect is
Hosever, ccnditions change and
not aware cf one standard's dependancy
upon others, the results cf any number of tests can
become invalid.
Numerous examples of interdependant criteria exist..
Take for example, the "clinate" of a school, where a
good environment for teaching is sought.
The standard
for the heating and air conditioning might require that
the tempcraturc
be capable cf maintaining 72 degrees in
the room at all tirmes.
5his seems reasonable since many
experiments have shown that a temperature of 72 degrees
is
most universally sat.isfactory
The building is
designed and the hea ting systein meets the tetrpcrature
ClIAPTEIR
TWC:
standard.
STRUCTUFE
the students and teachers
Unfortunately,
complain about the heat.
fluctuating humidity.
satisfactory,
met.
This is
1Ihe answer turns out to be the
The environment failed to be
even though the temperature criterion was
a very common situaticn one standard being
highly dependant upon anctler.
Unless the complete
network cf interrlated criteria are all satisfied,
no
number of successful tests on one criteria will produce
meaningful results.
In
these situations,
standards
is
the network of intErdependant
best stated as a "ccmplex" criterion.
Perhaps even a range over uhich the set is
vill
satisfactory
be necessary to insure effective results.
The
temperature and humidity relationships might actually
indicate a range of catisfacticn from 80degrees and 15
per cent to 65 degrees and 80 per cent.
Just as several standards might be interdependant
for the satisfaction of a certain criteria,
so also
might those same standards relate to other criteria
which would further ccnstrain them.
temperature/hufidity
For example,
standard necessary,
above,
the
may be
satisfactory fcr ccmfort and therefore insure a good
climate for learning,
But good health might also be
strongly related to a certain range of humidity, while
the temperature range for laboratory conditicrs right be
additionally restrictive.
Therefore,
the designcr would
CHAPTER TEIC:
SIEUCTUFF
not only have to develop a range of possible
tempcrature/huiidity
standards for good learning but
would have to check their relevance against the criteria
of good health and acceptable laboratory conditicns,
as
uell.
INACCURATE REPRESENTATICNS CF FORM
The two sections above discussed the ways in which
invalid standards can cause invalid tests.
Sinilar
problems occur from the limitations of measuring
representations of the form rather than the actual forms
themselves.
Several factors make it
necessary to design
buildings by means of drawiings,
representations of reality.
the resources required
factors make it
models and other
The size of the prcjects,
to build them,
and several other
infeasible to design most buildings in
ways similar tc painting and sculpture.
The restrictions
imposed are often severe.
The conditions which will actually occur in
the
real building can only be estimated and assuned in
design.
its
The uncertain nature of these assumptions may
cause severe inaccuracies in
design,
wind forces for which a building is
For exanple,
the
designed are only
assumptions.
The building can be designed to withstand
these loads,
but in
actual fact the winds
ray te
CHAPTER TWC:
STRUCTUBE
substantially higher and cause the building to fail.
It
is because of just such uncertainties between reality
and its representation that safety factors are set so
high.
Limitations in
accuracy are also due to
discrepancies between the designer's specifications for
the building and the constructed reality in
its final
form. Highly specific, very cautiously prescrited
representations
will always differ from their final
For example,
realizations.
10'-4 1/2" floor to floor
dimensicns may be exactly specified in
documents.
the contract
When the building is constructed,
however,
the dimension vill certainly differ, from that reasure to
some extent,
But often,
Cften the difference is
as in
inconseguential.
structural design, the variance is
quite critical.
Measurements of representations may be invalid for
reasons cther than the descrepancies
between designed
and built -values. They may be incomplete as well.
representation,
short of the actual artifact it
models,
contains only a limited descripticn of the fcru.
is true by definition.
informaticn
result,
Every
This
If it contained all the
of the forn it
'%culd be the form.
As a
measurements cf a representation often exclude
significant information.
And tests based on incomplete
measurements may lead to invalid results.
Unknown
CHAPTEP TWO: SIRUCTUR
numbers of architects have designEd doors vhich,
the plan,
appeared tc orer freely,
frcr
but which were
actually constricted by overhangs or elevated
projections.
ests for adequate egress were satisfied
by the information taken from the plan, but they were
most invalid in reality.
One architect in the Scuthwest was disappcinted
during the construction cf a department store he had
designed.
He found that a gusset plate which supported
a mezzbnine girder passed six inches into the clearway
of an elevator shaft.
All his checks of the drawings
had teen insufficient tc show the situation which
existed in
reality.
Many qualities embodied in
the form of an actual
building are more than the sun of their quantifiable
measures.
And representation of the building are
inadequate to convey these qualities. The reverberation
time of a concert hall can be clcsely predicted fron the
drawincs.
The background ncise level can be determined.
The absence of echoes and flutters can be virtually
assured.
In sum, all the quantifiable factors for good
hearing can be validly tested.
And yet the ball nay
still be an acoustical disappointment.
the the result in more than one case.
failure is
in
This has been
This type of
not due tc uncertain assumptions,
the cCnstruction.
or faults
Rather, this type of failure
CHAPTER TVO:
S RCTU
E
37
37
results from qualities which cannot be conveyed in the
abstract.
SUMMARY
The discussion above points out many of th e ways in
which the results of tests Eight be invalid.
is
not ccmplete,
but it
TIe list
dces indicate a few of the
broader catagories of failure: inaccurate,
irrelevant
and inadequate standards as well as inaccurate and
incomplete representaticns of reality.
The designer,
in
order to conduct a test, nust actually test the validity
of the parts of the test and be ccgnizant of their
limitations.
derived,
to detect
He must understand how his stardard was
what data it
was based upon.
He should be able
those norms which are inaccurately reasured or
which have heccrfe cbsoclete,
either because of changes in
his design objectives or because of changes at levels
different from his design project.
He should know which
standards stand alone and which are valid only in the .
context of others.
The designer should have a sense for
the appropriateness cf a standard
know how well it
to his objectives and
reflects the many factors it
may
affect.
Further,
the designer must he alert to thc
possibility of significant discrepancies between the
representation
of his design and its
subsequent reality.
To be aware of these factcrs and their significance,
the
CHAPTER TTWO: STPUCTURE
38
designer must constantly mcnitor the arguments of his
tests during the design piccess and review tIe validity
of their ccnseguences in
building.
the final reality of the
Chapter Three
A EESIGN EXPERIMENT
In
order to illustrate and expand upon the issues
discussed in
problem,
tie preceding chapter,
a fire staticn,
a small design
kas studied.
A case study
approach was used for this experiment in order to
explore how tests are actually performed,
and how
several interdependant tests are often necessary to
provide adequate analysis cf a given objective.
The
case study was also used to explcre the ways in which
tests affect the design process, and to clarity what
kinds of tests, and what form of results are useful to
designers.
Alternate design soluticns were generatEd for the
problem by the ccmputer design aid system, IMAGE.(See
footnote 1.1)
These design alternatives
here tested by
both conventional and computer aided processes.
Some
cbservaticns regarding the kinds of tests made during
the design study are giver at the end of the chapter.
THE USE CF IMAGE
The experinent was conducted
system for several rcascns.
with aid of the IMAGE
First of all,
because of
C1APTER TEREE: EXPERILEN'I
the nature of the computeL system, the different steps
Since
taken during the design uculd be very explicit.
the computer system cperates on a very specific, though
limited,
set of infcrcaticn,
and since it
to generate form alternatives,
operates only
both the state of the
information and the design functicns being performed
would be clearly kncun at all times.
Since IMAGE had no testing capabilities at the
onset of the study,
conventicnal manner,
alternatives.
the tests would be performed in
a
separate frcm the generation of the
This vould further isolate the testing
function and prevent its
confusion with other
operaticns.
It
vas hoped that some p1orticn of the tests could
be computerized during the later stages of the
experiment -
that the experilent would help identify
those tests which were
mcst suitable for computer
applications, either because of their recurrance, the.
designer's need for accurate results, or because of
their difficulty.
As it happened, the study did point
out a need for a limited testing routine whic1
led to
the development of tLe Ircccdure described in Chapter
four.
1.
THE DESIGN PPCELEMN:
A FIRE STATION
A fire station for Boston was selected for the
CHAPTER THREE: EXPERIEEIT
was a relatively well defined
study because it
architectural
understood.
problem,
whose majcr goals were clearly
Those goals, of course, were to provide
housing for a squad of firemen and to provide maximum
egress from all parts of the housing to the fire
fighting apparatus.
The cfficial objectives and
requireaents of the prcbleu vere set forth in an
architectural
space program which was standard for all
fire stations in
the Boston area.
A list of spaces
specified in the program is given in Figure 1 cn the
follcwing page.
in
The architectrural program is included
the appendix. (3.1)
The fire station vas also selected because it was a
relatively small problem, and a problem for which there
appeared to be only a few acceptable design
alternatives.
spaces,
That is,
because of the limited number of
and the emphasis cf a single function,
only a
limited number of basic arrangements could be expected
This made the fire station a
to satisfy the problem.
particularly good problem with which to study testing,
since the standards of "good fit"
between design and
objectives could be clearly described.
THE ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM
Though the architectural
prcgram was typical of
those used for the design cf all
Boston,
and though it
fire stations in
was considered
to be fairly
FIGURE 1: LIST OF SPACES ICE, TIRE STATION
Area
Function
Apparatus
Room,....
PatrLCl RCC * ..
..
.
..
..
.
.
b*5@e)5*J
S
120
....
25
...
Washroom..........
Hose trying Tower
Hose Store Room
Dousing Shower
Clothes Drying Foom...........
...
Oil Stove
Gencratcr Rcom
Boiler and Mechanical Foom
Provisions for Air CcmFressor.
'..,
Engine Dormatory.....,
2,800
,......
%.....
3CC
5....
545
*
700
g55*
...
ladder
Firemens'
Washroom... .....
Firemens'
Shower
Locker
..
5**
700
I...
*9
~55
150
'..
0e594
1510
.5...
650
.5...
315
08550
315
eggs.
250
Dormatory...,,,.,..,..,
..
Room....*...
ec...............
Engine Officer's Rccr...
1
*..
Ladder Officer's Rcc........
Officers'
...
Viash and Shower Room
S
...
Kitchen-Dining
Recreation
Focm...........
room............
C C
C 4~
S.
SC
Linen Closet
Stationery Store
Janitorial Cleaning Closet
Household-Utili ty Surplies closet
and Cleaning Storc,..........
Janitorial
Two Fuel ranks
Gascline Fump
Frcnt Aprcn
Parking for 25
Cars
320
480
205
CHAPTER THREE: EXPERIEEN7
comprehensive,
form goals,
it
43
specified only a minimur numler of
mcst of uhich dealt uith room sizes and
adjacencies.
While the activities planned for the
different rooms were labelled, they were not elaborated
However, room furnishings, equipment and
upon.
mechanical services were outlined in
some detail.
Optimal or satisficing dinensicns were specified only
for equipment areas, such as the Apparatus (fire engine)
Qualities were described in
Room.
equipment reguirements,
terms of mechanical
maintenance characteristics,
water drainage, and heating/ventilating requirrents.
Cnly eight form-specific requirements were actually
given,
though many cther formal relationships could be
implied or were taken fcr granted.
The needs of the fire fighting apparatus
iere in
many ways described more elaborately than thcse of the
firemen.
Two scale drawings showEd the turning radius
of the vehicles and the dimensions to be allowed for
their parking.
Several reccomendations
were given for
the sizing,
prctecticn and operaticn of the Apparatus
Room doors.
The typical preoccupation with machinery
and its
progra!.,
operation was evident throughout the fire house
while the physical,
social,
and psychological
needs of the men using the fire house were seldom
directly addressed. (3.2)
The lack of comprehensive documentation of
CHAPTE
THpEE:
EXPqRPEENT
functional reguirements is not unusual.
When compared
to most architectural space programs, documentation of
the fire staticn is
one of the iore complete.
And, it
was for the abundance of this documentation that the
problem was selected. (3.3)
Voids in
the fire station
prograuc point cut the necessity for the designer to
acquire additicnal information on his own.
This
information can come from many sources: the architect's
past experience,
conferences
case,
documentation of similar projects,
with the cliert,
and sc forth.
In this
most of the detailed irfornation relating to the
individual activitics and their settings was obtained
through exeiisive discussioins with. the fire department
personnel and cbservaticn
existing staticns,
of opeLations at several
This iiformation was gathered by
achitects who had designed a staticn, and vas made
available for this study along with the architectural
program.(See footnote 3.1)
CIRCUIAIICN:
A MAJOR LESICN OBJECTIVE
Because of its impcortance to the success of the
fire station, circulaticn was identified as a primary
objective of the problem. Unfortunately, the
architectural program's description of circulaticn was
typical cf the program as a whole; it was sparse at
test.
cases.
Circulaticn
was mentioned explicitly in
orly ten
Tlese references 4ere usually general in
CHAPTER THREE:
character:
EXPERIMEiNT
"A twc story building lends itself better to
rapid alarm generated circclation than a single story
building."
The few detailed specifications dealt more
with maintenance than uith cperation:
"Floors should
not be waxed as firemen in a hurry, moving quickly, and
dressing as they travel are in danger of slipping."
Despite the general reccwmendation that "emergency
routes to the vehicles be direct and free frow
obstructions", no explicit description was given of
which areas those emergency routes should and should not
connect.
And while at least some attention was given to
emergency circulation,
use,
ncne vas given to non--emergency
such as between the dcrmitories and recreation
room.
Though the criteria of good circulation lad not
teen adEquately specified in the architectural program,
the additional information Fassed on by the architects
cf the prcject and available in architectural
journals
was more than sufficient to make the requirements clear.
Most importantly, no two major routes of emergency
circulation could crcss cre
ancther.
This was true for
the apparatus as well as the firemen.
A path in
front
of a fire engine wculd be ridiculous,
Secondly,
paths
from any of the major spaces to the apparatus should be
as direct as possible; it
any room tc the Apparatus
should be possible tc get from
ccm vithout going through
CHAPTEF TLEE: EXPEEIMENT
416
more than cne cther space.
Pequirements for non-emergency circulation were
much less important.
It was desirable that the
officers' rooms be accessable without passing through
the firemens'
guarters.
vas also necessary tc move
It
easily from the pumping engine to the Hose Tower for
Public
handling, drying and stcring the hoses.
circulation was to enter the station in clear view of
the Patrol Room and te kept from penetrating the staticn
was seen as the major public
too deeply.
The Restrocc
destination
(after the Patrol Rocm) , and was therefore
The Fecreation
to be kept to the frcnt of the station,
and Kitchen-Dining areas were to be equally accessable
for both the ladder and engine crews,
This factcr could
be judged by the distance and complexity of the paths
from each
group's guarters.
Several of its
general characteristics made
circulaticn an especially suitable objective for
emphasis in
the design experiment.
convenient circulation is
architectural probleas.
enough,
an objective common to all
also ccmplex
Circulaticn is
embracing a variety cf components and
characteristics,
factor,
The need for
No single
to require many tests.
regardless of how satisfactory
it
is
tested,
guarantee the overall acceptability of a circulaticn
system.
Eather,
a designer must test his circulaticn
can
CHAPTER
THEEE: EXPEBIMENT
against a wide range of interdependant factors: the
length of paths, the sequence of spaces they join or
exclude,
as well as the interest,
clarity,
directness of the circulation network.
factors could,
in turn,
many other criteria.
and
Each of these
depend on the satisfaction cf
Clarity and directness,
for
example,
night relate to the number of interconnections
between
Faths and the number of turns within the various
It
sub-elements.
was felt, therefore,
that these
characteristics of circulation would foster different
kinds of tests, thereby eypanding the concepts of
Chapter Twc.
II.
THE MODEL FOR GENERATION
Alternative forms for the fire station were
generatEd by IFAGE frco
"model".
The initial
a limited problem descripticn or
model cf the problem was limited to
only a simplified set of spaces,
program,
reduced from the
and a very minimal set of relationships between
those spaces.
It
was the designer's intentin
that the
model be limited for the initial phase of generaticn,
and elaborated as more was learned from the arrangements
generated.
In
this way,
IMAGE could be used by the
designer in an heuristic search for an adequate problem
description and solution.
It was also felt that by
CHAPIER
TEREE:
EXPE1i11'EINT
under-constraining the prcllem, the tests peifcrued
could play a greater rcle in
the development cf the
model.
ThE seventeen
in
spaces used for the model are listed
Figure 2 on the following
given the same initial
page.
All the spaces were
location and the same size (cne
foot square) to eliinate any form preconceptions vhich
the designer might have had.
specified
The relationships
between the spaces are also shown in Figure 2.
These consisted priuarily of relative size and
proportion along with a fev adjacency or proiffity
This reflected the architectural
tequirements.
program's primary concerns.
Each space was scaled to a
(usually the Apparatus Room) in terms of
control space
maximum area and a range of acceptable proportions,
The
intended effect was to maintain specific areas while
allowing the location and proportions to vary as widely
as possible.
Visual access was required from the Tatrol.
Room to the Apron, the Apparatus Room,
Cf course,
and the Restroc,
non-overlap was specified between all the
spaces, since each was to represent an individual rcom.
The model was specified with all
spaces on the same
level.
This was done because of limitations within
IMAGE.
The system could have dealt with a multi-floor
specification,
but much time would have been necessary
to improve the system.
Since this was not relevant to
CIIAP7E1
THEEE:
the study,
EXPFE3BENTI
prcgrau did not
and since the architectural
was strongly
demand a two flcor schene (though it
suggested),
-a single floor model was specified.
The
primary Effect of this was to further limit the number
of possible satisfactory alternatives.
The model was additionally removed from reality by
the absence of an actual site and its inherent
The crly site characteristic vhich was
restrictions.
built into the model was achieved by fixing the Apron.
Since other spaces were related in
some way to the
Apparatus Boom, this had the effc-t of creating an
exclusive "street" cn the side of the Aprcn opposite the
Apparatus Room,.
But no site boundaries,
street were specified,
other than the
or irillied.
III. THf EESIGN PEOCESS
The fire staticn study involved five major series
of interactions.
Each was originated by the generation-
of a series of arrangements. The arrangements were
tested, and on the basis of the- tests' results, changes
were made to tle' model and the next sequence was begun.
The designer referred tc during this experiment is
the autLor.
It would have been possible to use someone
else as the designer, thereby avoiding the possibility
of a biased analysis of the process.
However, it was
prohablc that this alternative methodology would have
CHAPTER TEPEE: EXPEFIMEET
merely substituted cne perscn's prejudices for another.
It
was alsc possible that rany of the designer'z
insights into his process would have been blurred by
their double translation, first by the designer himself
Lue primarily
and then by the analyst.
fears,
it
to these two
was decided to ccndense the two roles of
designer and analyst into a single actor and to accept
which that methodclogy
the liuitations
implied.
'TBE INITIAL GEEEEATICN
Using
2,
the generating
THAGE enlarged all
the spaces
Figure
from their criginal one
square foot area to the size specified.
also disaggregated from
in
ncdel as illustrated
The slaces were
their single locale
ard
repositioned in an effort to satisfy the specifiEd
relationships.
this
first
Figure 3 show a typical arrangement
from
series of geneiaticns.
ERRORS IN THE ARRANGEM1ENI
There were obvious faults which were conrcn to all
the alternatives, and which could be deduced easily frcm
tests made by simple cbseivation.
small by one half.
It
The Apron uas too
was tc have the same dirension on
both sides as the Apparatus Room had on its
The Cfficers Quarters
(E-CF,
away from the main cluster
way.
L-OF,
and W-CF)
of spaces in
short side.
were moving
an unpreditable
But the most chvicus flaw was the fact that the
CHAPIEB 1HJFF: EXPEFJIENT
51
spaces were ba-dly cverlapjcd.(3. 4)
All three of these conditions were so obvious as to
Cnly a minimal understanding
virtually test themselves.
of the space program and a quick examination cf the
display was necessary to see the problems.
The errors led to a recheck of the model which was
used for the generation.
It was found that the
non-overlap specifications had been made as interded.
Evidently they had to be more highly weighted in
to accoffplish their cbjectives.
The Officers Quarters
had alsc been specified as intended,
them tc flcat.
crder
but this allowed
A freedcm which was not desired.
The cily specificaticn
which had been made
incorrectly was the size cf the Apron.
This was a
simple oversight and easily rectified.
It wculd have been irrelevant to test any of the
other elerents of these arrangements, since the three
errors mentioned were sc severe as to confuse the rest
of the design.
Proximity was specified between the Officers
Washroom
(9-CF)
and the Firemens Washroom
(WASE),
and
the system was run again.
THE SECCNED SET CF AUDANGEMEVIS
The best arrangement of the second series of
generaticns is
shown in ligure 4a.
Two major kinds of
CHAPIER TIEREE:
EXPEBIETI
tests were made of this arrangement.
First, all the
specifications of the imodel were checked for
satisfaction.
And second, the circulation nCcessitated
by the arrangement was analysed.
TESTS OF THE ECLEI
The model was tested in order to know when it
approaching sclutior.
when nearing solution,
it
was
was
generally not necessary to continue generating because
the trend of the arrangements could be seen.
Eut if the
model was not near solution, significantly different
arrangements could still
be expected.
Frcm tests of these arrangements,
it
appeared that
the generating model had been satisfied
exception of three conflicts:
with the
the Officers Washroom was
undersized; and the P'echanical Pocm was not adjacent to
either tIe Hlcse Tower cr the Locker Room.
Tests of the mcdel were performed by comparing the
informaticn crntained in
the specification matrix with
the graphic display cf the arrangement.
Since all the
specifications of the model were simple geometric
conditicrs, visual inspecticn was usually sufficient to
determine their state of satisfaction.
Officers Washrcor,
fcr exarple,
The size of the
vas clearly too small.
The matrix showed that that space was supposed to be 250
square feet wiile tec Washrccm
(EASH)
was to be 150 s.f.
Since the display showed t-OF to be smaller than WASH,
CHAP
T
ER
IEFEE: EXPERl]LENI
53
cne or perhaps both were incorrect.
Compariscn of
the
WASH to cther sraces led tc the ccnclusion that V-OF was
the odd space,
probably having been shrunk by IMAGE to
alleviate cverlaps.
This.kind of multiple ccmparison is
of testing.
a ccmmon form
Many designers draw design sketches
entirely by proportional relationships
without the aid cf a scale. (3.5)
("by eye"),
It is a siirple matter
of checkirg the consistercy between known elements and
concluding that these inccnsistencies which are in the
minority are incorrect.
This form of testing is given
special note here because of its common use in all forms
of arhitEctural design and because-it was used, with few
exceptions,
to estirrate the state of the generating
model.
TIESTS
CF CIRCUlATION
A trief
examinaticn cf the arrangement in
Figure 4a
will show the reader that the seccndary criteria of
circulation were fairly well solved while those relating
to emergency circulation were not.
The access between
the various sleeping quarters and their lcckers and
washroons was quite adequate.
But unfortunately, it was
impossible to get frcm any of those dorms to the
Apparatus Room without encountering considerable
congestion and many obstacles.
the ladder Crew Dorm
(L-DF)
Surely the route from
through the Lockers, the
CHAPIEE THREE: EXPEEIMEET
Washrocn, and the Mechanical Boon fails to meet the
The same *as true for
definition of direct circulation.
nearly all of the major spaces to the Apparatus Ecow.
As in
the tests of the model,
most tests of
The diagrarr in
circulaticn were performed visually.
Figure 4t
illustrates
the raths traced mentally from the
various spaces to the A-RE.
The guidelines for making
the paths were 1) not to go outside the arrangement and
2) to go as directly as possible between destinaticns.
otvious.
Room is
The congestion at the Mechanical
And
nothing seems sillier than having to pass thrcugh a
Tashroon to get fron one uajcr srace to another.
CHANGES TO THE MODEL
Proximity was specified between each of tIc dorms
and the A-HM as an indirect representation of the
objectives of direct circulation.
specified between
the Apicn and
Alignment vas also
the A-BM.
THE TUIRD GENEEATION
At this pcint tLe designer felt he had developed a
fairly complete Ecdel of circulaticn.
quickly showed his oversights.
The computer
Figure 5a shows an
alternative which alaost ccmpletely satisfies the
generating model but fails to satisfy the prchleir.
TESTS OF THE MCDEL
As in
the last interaction,
the latest state of the
CHAP I ER TER EE: E XPZRE
E NT
specification nmatrix was cciimpared to the arrangement it
generated.
as virtually solved, except for
The model
was clear that the model was cver
it
one anomaly:
constrained and inconsistent in
Storage and Vechanical
the Hose,
its logic relative to
Rcoms.
It
was seen
that the model had declarEd all three rooms tc be
adjacent, all to abut the A-RM,
and all
to be
That is a gecmetric impossitility.
rectangular.
Cf
course the proximity relationships were not intended as
absolutes.
TIcy bad been specificd primarily to draw
not necessarily touching.
the three spaccs rear,
Hoever,
the discovery that this set of relationships
his
was contradictory caused the designer to re-evaluate
translation of the architectural space program.
It
was
concluded that though the Storage Room was a relatively
large space,
it
was in
fact a conglomerate
of nincr
spaces which were mcre apprcpriately related to cther
functions.
Because cf the gross scale of this model,.it
could easily be eliminated from the specifications and
assumed as dispersed in other rooms.
Morcover, there seemed to be no persuasive argument
for having the Mechanical Fccm near the Hcse- Tcwer as
opposed to near any cther space.
such an argument,
it
seemed
And in the absence of
unnecessary to influence
arrancement with such a specification.
between
the Hose and
Iechanical
the
So the proximity
rocms was eliiTinated
CH AF IE R THEEE:
EXPI
JE NT
along with the Storage.
TESTS OF CIRCULATION
The circulation was clearly better than in
previous schemes.
from the
the
Direct access was indeed rossible
rajor activity areas cf the building.
tracing the paths of hypothetical firemen,
it
But by
uas clear
that the chjective fcrbidding cross circulation had
failed.
Pity the member of the engine crew who,
taking an extra moment to grah a cooky,
is
in
run over as
he darts from the Dining area to the far side of the
A-RH.
And it
is
rot toc Lard to imagine a Buster Keaton
as the Engine Officer being trampled in
the exit of the
Ladder Porir Cops.
What has happened is
fairly ccmmon;
concentrating cn cne rrchler,
Ly
the designer failed to
consider the contingency cf cthers.
The model had been
modified to avcid tcrturous circulation, only to be
catisfied with severe cross circulation.
ADDITION1AL SPECIFICAUICES
A satisfactory representation
for all the
objectives of good circulaticn had to be developed.
was hypothesized that if
It
the different crews' quarters
were on opposite sides of the A-RM,
and if
the
respective officers' quarters were near their own crews,
then the two groups would never have to cross each
others raths in an eTrergercy.
This concept also
CHBAPTER
TBEEE:
57
EXPIRIEENT
necessitated the location of the Recreation
and
Kitchen-Dining areas on axis with the long dimension of
the A-RM1,
so that men from both crews could get to their
trucks Uithout crossing one another's paths.
This was
tested by a mental check to see if such a specification
could result in a satisfactory solution to the
circulation.
A diagraratic
representation of that test
Since no paths crossed,
can be seen in Figure 6.
there
was at least a possibility that the additional
specifications would solve the protlem.
CHANGES TC THE MODEL
As already uentioned, Storage was elimi-nated and
the Mechatical Rocm - Hcse
Besides this,
lower affinity was broken.
the designer dccided to push the Hose
nearer the street where be could use it to create a
"more
interesting" facade.
The new specifications for
improving circulation were also added,
and the model was
run again.
HiE FCUEIT
SERIES CF AFERAGIMENTS
Despite the pretest cf the circulation criteria,
arrangement
could be found
generating model in its
vhich wculd satisfy the
latest form.
Apparently it
was
impossible to satisfy all the proximity relaticnships
while maintaining the spaces in
and procrtion.
no
their appropriate size
CHAP'IER TEREE: EXPERIIIENI
An examnination of Figure 7 will show that whereas
the majority of the proximities are nearly satisfied,
certain significant gaps do exist.
horeover, uany cf
the spaces are unreascrably propcrtioned.
Apparently an
unresonatle ccnflict had been created by the number of
spaces constrained to occur within the area ringed by
the locker and the two dorms. The E-OF and I-CF could
have moved outside the ring except for their futual
affinity to the W-OF.
The same was true for the WASH
and SHWR.
TESTS OF TlHE MODEL
As in
the previcus interactions the model matrix
time.
However,
and pushed,
it
one specification at a
satisfacticn,
was checked for
since so rany spaces were being squeezed
was impossible to be certain of many of
the visual tests.
Tor examFle,
it
was not clear whether
E-OF was undersized in the arrangement or if
it
was
capable cf changing prcporticn in crder to meet the
Washrocn.
Morcover,
error vas.
it
was imicssible tc know how severe the
For example, it
was obvious that the
Becreation Room was undersized,
small it really was.
but it
was not clear how
This information could have been
determined by using a scale which matched the display tc
measurc tle various spaces in
unfortunately,
guestion.
the designei had neglected
Put
to display a
CHAPTER TER
EX1E:
EXPEE,LENT
constant scale symbol with which the measure ments would
have been inpreved. This iculd still have teen an
arduous process and somrewat inaccurate.
information desired uas primarily
Since the
guantitative,
and
since the computer already possessed that data, it
seemed much more useful to develop a routine which wiould
use the actual data cn which the ccmputer operated to
conduct thc tests.
The actual operation cf the test routine is
described in the next chapter.
It enabled the designer
to test all the specifications on a space, to find cut
if they were satisfied or not, and to know hcw large an
error existed.
Since the rcutine showed
what
specification actually existed, the constant rechecking
of the generating model was greatly simplified.
Using this routine it vas found that all the spaces
at the rear of the Apparatus Room were significantly
undersized,
Dorms,
out of proportion,
Recreation,
and narrow.
or both.
and Kitchen-Dining
The Cfficer's
were all tco
long
Cbviously, all four could not fit within
the narrow dimension of the A-BM.
FINAL CBANGES TO THE MODEI
The objectives of the architcctural prcgram were
reviewed and compared to the generating model.
Clearly
the F-D and EEC had to be near the axis of thc A-PM
since men from both crews uculd be using the space and
CBAPTEE THEEE: EXEEIENT
no other location would picvide the equal direct egress
necessary.
the two officers rooms
On the other hand,
were related only by proximities to the sare space,
which was now Ladly stretched.
h-CF,
resolve
the ccngesticn
In an effort to
at the rear of the fire house, it
was decided to split the W-CF into two equal spaces,
for each of the officers.
one
The proximity between the old
W-OF and WASH was not respecified between the two new
rooms.
THE FINAL ARRANGEMENI
The arrangement in Yigure 8 shows a generation
which ccwpletely satisfies this model.
computer
Tests with the
routine shoued that those specifications
which
were not satisfied had cnly minor errors and were well
tclerance
within the acceptable
cf the designer.
Since
the ma-jor part of the specification was met, it was
decided tc look for anomolies outside of the
specification.
CTHEF CEJECTIVES
The vcid Lehind the Kitchen-Dining area was curious
and caused questions
"Could it
remain?";
such as "What
"Could
it
could fill
it?";
be a courtyard?";
then doesn't the L-:EM have one?".
"Why
All of which raised
the issue of the qualities inside the various living
quarters.
This Nade it
clear that previous schemes had
CHAPIEE 11HEEE: EXPEETME11
T
6
61
not been so generous to the Cfficers Quarters, which
could notw have exterior views.
This led in
"Why
turn to the question,
K-D and EEC have an exterior exposure?1
can't the
The idea of
flipping the two spaces with the Lccker group was
considered.
A quick check cf the model showed that the
proximities to the A-RM would be violated, but the
designer questioned the necessity of those relaticnships
in the light of the rew fcssibilities.
A check of the
architectural rrcgrar showcd no specific requirement of
adjacency.
The drawing in Figure 9 shows the designers own
arrangement of such a scheue.
arrangement
It is possible in this
to get frcm the two rear spaces to the A-RM
by going through the Locker Rocm.
It
could be supposed
that this would not he a bad feature since the firemens'
boots and coats could be stored there.
In fact, if they
were stored there, the last computer generated
arrangement failed to provide direct paths from the
dorms to the lockers to the A-EM.
However, the need for
such a path was not a known fact - only a supposition.
It was equally pcssible that the coats and bccts were
kept at the mens' staticns cn the trucks.
ADDITIONAL
INFORMATICN
It was clear, then, that additional infcrmaticn was
needed in order to continue, since decisions cculd no
CHAPIEE
EE: hXPERI;ET
IE
longer Le
lased cn kncwn preferences.
Further
arrangements would also have to ccntain more detaiid
information.
For example,
knowledge of the placement
and size of doors was critical for further testing of
circulaticn.
And scue ccncept of the surrounding
environment was necessary tc evaluate the value of
providing the dorms with external exposures.
The study was stopped at this point.
TEe purpcse
of the study had not been the total solution of the
problem, but tbe exploraticn of testing.
By this pcint
many observaticns regardirg that objective could be
made.
IV.
CBSEBVATICNS
The most obvious lesson of the study was that the
designer tested his Ircblen at many different levels.
He not orly tested the generated arrangements for their.
satisfaction of the generating model, but for their
satisfaction of both the architectural space prograu and
his own objectives as vell.
lie also tested t1e fit
Letwieecn these differcnt descripticns of the problem to
determine
how wiell the generating model represented the
space program and to deternine how completely the space
program represented the many aspects of the prctlem.
This fcrmed a complex netv;ork of interdependant tests,
CHAPTIE TEEE: EXPEFJNMEi T
all of which were necessary for the continued
improvement of the design.
It appeared that the first arrangements wcrc tested
cnly against the generatirg
so poorly solved,
there
was
mocel.
little
And since that was
value
in
testing any
other asrects of the problem,
arKra njeament
is
bys
i!Etested
fe~'
model
The later generations provided arrangements which
largely satisfied the criteria
specified in
the model
while failing to meet the ctjectives of the space
program.
In
this case, both the arrangement and the
model were tested against the larger set of criteria of
the space progiau.
CHAFEPR
ILTEE:
And in
EXPEFIVINT
the final computer generated arrangement,
the form met the specificaticns of the model and the
space program but failed to satisfy the designer's image
of the prcblem.
mode5
61C ce
-
ro
10n1
This is not to infer that a series of tEsts will
always proceed so clearly.
The differentiation ncted in
this experiment was largely due to the computer aided
nature of the process.
Mcreover, as the model and space
prcgram
the tests of the model,
aere satisfied,
program,
and mental image made an untraceable series cf jumps,
and only the major catagorics or levels could te
identifiEd afterwords.
It dces seem reasonable to
conclude, however, that tests at these different levels
are common to all design processes.
KINDS Of
IESTS: STATE OF TEE MODEL
By and large, tests of the state of the model were
made on the basis of visual inspection and ccnparison.
Since th~e specificaticns cf the model were all geometric
CHAPIEF THFEE:
EXPERlEENT
relationships,
they lent theuselves to visual analysis.
Only when it
was clear that large sections of the model
were out of order was it
necessary to use the computer
testing rcutine.
The visual tests consisted of a set of ccuparisons
between kncwn conditicls in which the space that did not
appear to meet the patter
was concluded to be in error.
This .uight be characterised as a ccmparison of the
actual form with a ngentally Cx PectEd form in
which the
measurement of each form was made on the basis of
further ccmparisons
(either nental or visual)
one space and several cthers,
Letween
where the several others
were used as the base or "yardstick".
M(F) = asau. compwred wrh
other
The test was passed or failed on the basis of the
equality of the results of the two measurements
ell
-
on how
the two forms resembled each other.
M(F)acbuI
M(F)cJeri red
CHAPIEF
TEREE:
EXPELME
The computer aided rcutine, by contrast, vas based
on the ccmparison of rumeric values determined
by
algebraic equations which represented the relaticnshir
to be satisfied.
And since its base of measurement was
absolute, a couputer aided test did not need the
additional comrarisons with which to establish a point
of reference.
The two types of test procedures
established results which varied primarily it accuracy,
but did sc thrcugh ertirely different processes.
0
STATE CF THE ClHEB CEJECqIVES
Tests of chjectives cutside the scope of the model
uere similar tc those perfcrmed to determine the state
of the model.
charactErized
That is,
such tests could all te
as costiariscns cf graphic patterns.
should he clear from
This
the diagram and discussion
associate:d with Figures 4b and 5b.
It
shculd be pointed cut,
however,
that this study
was a simple excercise in basic spatial arrangement.
It
did not get to the level Cf' detail to which mcst of the
architcctural rrcgrar had been written.
As a result, it
was never possible tc test the quality of the flcoring
or the location and the number of sill
cocks.
The only
kind of tests which were Loth relevant and pcssible were
CHAPER THEE: EXPERJMEVT
those of basic spatial relationships - all of which
could be tested graphically.
While it is obvious that all the specifications in
the model and the space program vere exhaustively
checked, it is unknown how ruch cf the designer's image
was ever tested.
And it is just as unclear what caused
certain aspects of his image to le tested as oppcsed to
others.
This type cf infcrmation could not te
determined in this experirent.
CCMPARISCNS
BETWEEN
PRCG311E,
DESCRIETIONS
Satisfaction of criteria at cne level resulted in
an escalation of tests to another broader set cf
objectives.
If the arrangeent satisfied the model, it
was checked against the archtectuaral
space program.
This in itself is a subtle test cf the relevance of one
set of cbjectives tc another.
comparisons
However, more obvious
than these were common.
Most objectives, such as direct circulation, are
open to scme interpretation.
By using the ccmputer as a
generatcr, the nature of that interpretation vas
necessarily very clear; there could be no ambiguity
regarding what specification had been used to represent
a certain objective.
However,
this made it
possible and necessary to test how well the
1oth
CHAPTEF THFEE:
EXPEIPIENT
interpretation
(in
represented
this case the specificaticn)
its objective.
lests between different
probleml. descriptions were usually made as apriori
compariscns of the type of soluticns which were
acceptafle to the different elements:
the objective and
its
it
reprcsentative specification.
that the interpretation
If
cf an objective
could be seen
would allow
solutions which fell outside of the range acceptable to
the objective,
it
representation,
did not pass as a reasonable
This ccncept is diagramed in Eigure 10.
Circulaticn prcvidcd an excellent example of
specifications which failed to adequately represent
their objectives.
The circulation.objectives were
interpreted into several different sets of
specifications before a satisfactory model was fcund,
During tle third generaticn,
the designer considered
several rcssitle representations for
he could have specified.
if
circualtion which
Each was analysed tc determine
an arrangetent might satisfy the specificaticr
not the objectives it represented.
but
It became. clear that
no single relationship could adequately guarantee the
higher level objective of eiergency circulaticn.
Several relationships vere finally selected which
it was felt wculd acccuplish the objectives desired.
These arc noted in the discussion cf the changes to the
model in the third interacticn, and the form of their
CHAPTaER
RIIPEE:
analysis is
IMPACT OF
T
EXPERIH'EN1T
illustrated with the diagrao in
Figure 6.
HE TESTS
The effects of the various tests were tcc numerous
and varied to draw any general conclusions,
Those tests
which failed cften lcd to cther kinds of tests
concerninC:
which specifications had been made;
the
adequacy of the specification for its objective; the
significance of the objective; the existence cf
conflicts between differert cbjectives; etc.
On the otler hand, successful testing also
generated additioral tests regarding:
the corpleteness
of the model; the satisfaction of the architectural
program; the satisfaction of the designer; etc.
all lead to different kinds of actions.
At scre point,
however, cne of the following set of tests is
the prccess halts:
ansvered negatively,
rade and
1) Is the information at hand
sufficient to continue? 2)
to continue? 3) Is
These
Are the resources sufficient
more to he done?
the design is
If
any cne is
arrested.
FIGURE 2: MIATRIX OF GENERATING
SPECIFICATIONS
P= PROXIMITY
VA
VISUAL ACCESS
ALL SPACES DECLARED
EXCLUSIVE, AREAS SHOWN
BELOW SPACES" NAMES,
ABBREVIATION BENEATH
NAME SAME AS SHOWN ON
ARRANGEMENTS
F
7m)F3 AF%.ft!rF FIT FROV
FI
RTE,-,~ I
L- D~M
W-OF
A-RMA
'-RM I
STOR
ELOCK
~S
VWVAI
~
PFRON
L
t CJ,
7,7 4,
F~~1
P,rt,
4
V
IQ nF
I
SC.
r!7(Y' Jnrr
h
iN
pF'
A T ItO
n FI"FT !Z!\
10 t I
C-!-L,,V
FI . UE I 5a:
'IT
5n:: F /1'r2/! f
Ft CURE
FrOM
THI
OF ( ICUL/\T C !
GEI'ER)ATIO1" r
EIREf
7 .
FIGURE 6: DIAGRAM OF DESIRED CIRCULATION
75
F I ('U!.~
I ~'L
C',-
UTF
r)!,
1rFPT
F
EILJMC
W
LO
-F
Aff '
r
77
F!GURE 9: DESIGNER T S SKETCH OF ALTERNf\TIVE ARRANGEMAENT
FIGURE 10: CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM OF SOLUTION SPACES
AREA OF ACCEPTABLE SOLUTIONS DEFINED BY ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM
AREA OF ACCEPTABLE SOLUTIONS DEFINED BY ARCHITECT'S IMAGE OF HIS
PROBLEM
AREA OF SOLUTIONS DEFINED
BY MODEL WHI CH DOES NOT
ADEQUATELY REPRESENT OBJECTIVES OF THE PROBLEM
AREA OF SOLUTIONS DEFINED
BY MODEL WHICH IS AN ADAQUATE REPRESENTATION OF
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE
PROBLEM
Four
Chapter
A COMPIEF TFSTING POUTINF
This chapter describes a computer routine
arrangements
a designer in testinq spatial
assists
generated
which
by the IMAGE computer system
(See
footnote
The chapter discusses the reasons for developing
111)
the routine,
output
how its algorithm is structured, what
produced by the icutine,
is
and
how its
algorithm
might be improved,
I
OF
THE PIRPCSE
THE ROUTINE
The testing routine was developed
to meet needs
in
which arose during the design experiment discussed
Chapter Three
chapter
needs pointed out in
involved the designer's desire
accurate tests
used
Two of the
to perform
on the set of specifications
by I[AGE to generate
he had specified
how well those specifications
It
In
he wanted to know loth
what specifications were being operated upon
particular
which were
spatial arrangements,
testing the generatinq model,
constraints
that
what
(ie
properly or imporperly) -and
were satisfied
by a
arrangement.
was possible to obtain this informaticn
without
CIAPTE R FCU:
any
CO1PUTEF TESTS
the specifications could.
many of
since
computer aid,
and the number and
be estimated by visual irspectiori
type of specifications could be examined by naking a
special search of the 1MAGE data structure.
the
visual tests
However,
were not uniformly reliable,
was difficult
search of the data structure
and the
ard time
conISu ming
A third factor,
design cxperiment,
operating on,
result of
tc
know what information
and what. decisions
it
Since that
it
was
the algorithm was
was making as a
the information
II. THIE TEST
The test
ALGOIPTHM
a subroutine
routine is
called from
can access the same data
It
TMAGE's main program
structure
algorithm.
undergoing development,
was still
advantageous
the
had to do with analysis and
of TMAGE's generating
developrent
algorithm
wLich vas not significant in
upon which TIMAGI's generating routinc
operates
This data
concerning
the current state of .the .spaces and the
structuro contains the information
relationships specified
is
organized,
Letween those spaces.
as shown in
Figure
semi-lattice or directed graph
The designer actuates
a command to the main IMAGE
11,
in
The data
the form of a
(4,1)
the test
program
procedure
which calls
by typing
the test
CHAPTER
FOUR:
subroutine
in
Figure
(4
12,
COMFPUTER TESTS
2)
A flew chart of
the algorithnm is
and the P11 program is
included in
shown
the
for those who would wish to follow the actual
Appendix
commands
asks the designer to type
testing program first
The
the name of thE space he
made of all
wishes to test.
relationships sp-ecified
by the designer.
If
the name is
Tests will
to the space named
typed incorrectly or if
the designer names a space which does not exist,
computer
will respond
exists ",
If
with the message "No
and will ask, "Aire
the designer types "yes",
The perfcrmnice
of the
f u'rther tests
from the base point,
locating the nancd test
then locates a relationship
which is
specified
diagram in Figure 11,
(also called
to that space,
each of
if the designer has typed the name
by
the tranches of the semi-lattice from
the tase point to the space level of the structure,
would then trace a tranch frcm the APRON
constraint
a
From the
the routine would search the data structure
"Apron",
tracing
are automatic
The routine searches the data
structure
constraint)
such space
necessary?"
actual. tests
point.
It
the
he can try again
from this
space
be
level,
finding
related to constraint,
is
"node"
It
to the
PEOXR . The other space which
found by tracing the
constraints other branch back to the space level Cf the
structure
In
the exarple,
the A-RM1
would be thc
CHAPTE?
FCUR:
related
space.
COTIPUTIR
TFSTS
The type of the constraint and the name
of
the
related space are then typed out. for the designer.
testing routine can access the same subroutines
The
IMAGI uses a set
as the rain IMAGE prcgram,
subroutines
which suqgest chanqes
to be made to the
Each of these subroutines
arrangement
type of constraint
which can
maintains a general
two spaces related
condition
it.
if
determines
it
by the specification
they fail,
If
which the specification
by IMACE,
When called
represents
represents one
be specified to a syace.
Each of these constraint sutroutines
description cf the ccnditicr
of
satisf)
the
that
determnes a change which
would cause them to meet the condition
(4, 3)
The testinq routine calls the constraint sulroutine
which matches
to the test
call
the specification
space.
the subroutine
In
in
has found ccnnected
the example,
the routine would
for prcximity
checks the arrangement
deterriine if
it
This subroutine
of the AP'RCN and
A-FM to
fact the two rooms are proxiwate,
they meet that condition,
satisfied
a "marker"
is
calculated
which wculd mcdify the test
achieve the conditien
is
The "'marker"
specification
changes
space in
are
order to
and the suggested
chanqes are then passed back to the test
the constraint
If
set that the
If they do not,
constraint
If
the
is
routine
satisfied,
that
CHAPTE
is
if
FCUR:
COMPUTEF
thc "marker"
satisfied,
shows that the subroutine has been
the test
"acceptable,"
TESTS
routine types out the message
Otherwise,
the condition is
the significance with which
and displayed as
calculated
violated is
the "errcr"
The changes suggested
by the constraint subroutine
are also displayed on a screen adjacent to the
arranqem ent
of the
From this display, the new configuration
space can be compared
condition
of this
appears in
as it
display
The test
constraints
example,
is
visually
with its
the arrangement
given in
Figure
existing
An exanple
13,
routine continues to search for additional
specified to the test
space,
In
the
would locate ALIGN and VISACC by tracing out
it
the other branches connected to the test
space,
APPON
Once all constraints specified to the space have
been tested and the results displayed,
further tests
asked "Are
necessary?"
the designer
If
the answer is
negative,
the designer is returned to IMAGE's main
proqram
If
he answers
"yes",
however,
is
he can continue
testing his generating model
TII
The
specified
TFE OUTPUT
designer receives a
to the test
space;
list
of constraints
the current state of those
CHAPTPR
iOUR':
constraints,
relative
COCPUT
rf T.T1
S
whetlher they are satisfied
measure of the significance
a display
constraint
c(
a
of their crrcr;
and
how the space would he changed by the
subroutines
This information can satisfy
the
or not;
desicner might wish to ask.,
a number of questions
It
enables
him to rake
a quick check of what specifica tions have been made
properly
Second,
he can get a very accurate
of how well a condition is
being satisfied
Father than
relying upon a series of visual comparisons,
learn exactly
if
a geometric condition
conpletCly satisfied
tells
cMerecver,
hir how significantly
The error is
This is
relatlive,
he can
has been
the error statement
the ccAdition is
hovever,
measurement
violated.
and could be improved
discussed later
Third,
the display of the changes suggested by the
constraint show the designer, how the specification
could be satisfied
his goes beyond simple testing,-
but can te useful to the design
process,
the designer might. see that a space is
specifications,
constraint
violating several
but. that the changes suggestcd
could solve
himself and retesting
hypothesis
For example,
ther all,
fcr one
By changing the space
the model, he can verify his
In this way,
he uses the test routine to
make limited experi mental changes, without riskinq the
unknown ccnsequences of using TIAGE's generating
CHAPTER FOTIR:
COMPJRi
TEST
He can choose to control the charges
a1gorith m
himself,
indirect
guidance by the IMAGE
substantially
to be made under his
them
or allcw
directly
This
systenm
broadens TIMAGE 's
which
capailities,
were
previously limited to automated generation
Fourth,
tie
display of the suggested changes
the developers of
enables
IIAGE to know both hciv well
and how well
the constraint subroutines are functioning,
the
generating algorithrv is
sugqestion
incorportating
this benefit
However,
is
their
not directly
relevant to this study
TV. POSSIBE I-PRCVEETN TS
The
First,
test
routine can be improved
terms of a space,
terrs cf the
permit him to ask for
This would elimina te tests
Alternati vely,
of a constraint
developing
of the other two
Figure 12,
he could specify
- In
type onl.
PPOX2 would be tested
need
tests
of only the prcxilmity constraints on a given
constraints on the APPCN in
Those
but also in
This would
type of constraint
space
several ways.
the designer could be allowcd to request
not only in
tests
in
his test
this case,
in
terms
both PEOX1 and
This could be useful in
new features for the generating algorithm,
types of ccnstiaints
more emphasis
Future
which are always violated may
improvements
to IMAGE may
CHAPTER
FOIRI:
COMLIP UER1ESIS
enable the designer
constraints
generaticn
to temporarily
other than a certain
routine
The ability
suspend all
type
from the
to test
only a certain
kind of constraint wculd he very helpful in
sit
this
uaticn
of course,
constraint
both the pair of spaces and the
type could be specified together.
firther limit the set of possible
tests,
This would
(See footnote
3.6)
ADJUSTABIE
TCLERANCE
At present the ccnstiaint
whether or not a condit icr is
magnitude
of error is
condition is
subroutine determines
satisfied
exactly,
the only estimate of how badly the
violated
Eut since the error
upon some characteristic of the test space,
of its
dimensicns,
designer to specify
The
it
is
tascd
usually one
vould be possible to permit the
a tolerance,
specify that proximity would
related spaces were
he satisfied
uithir 5-%
sral-lest dimension
For those
under this tolcrance,
For example,
if
of the test
he could
the two
space's
tests which were failed
the error could
be displayed
either as a percentage of the dimension or as a
comparison of two values,
the spaces'
size and their
distance apart
ANALYSTS
In
CF THE FROELEM
many cases,
the designer
tests
an arrangement
CHAPTER
COPiIUEIL
FOUP:
TE77 S
not only to kncw how certain
a whole -
Tfo address
solved and which are not
routine could be nonitored,
test
space in
satisficd"
ask
permit him
the problem.
greatest error,
Naturally
the
gained frow
rest useful to his process
with different
for the ccnstraint
the
weighting
specifications
In
this
he could easily explcre the significance of
value systcns on the state
different
of
the problem's
But this goes well beyond the sirple use
specification
of
effect
into that area by allowing
designer to experiment
way,
in
this borders on evaluation and could
easily be extended
structures
he could
type of ccnstraint
-This would
information
to structure
or "least
Alternately,
or even the
ways which i.ere
in
were
This routine could
to ask for the "worst"
for the ccustraint
which was in
tests
and operated by
and which cnes were not,
permit the designer
are
the
need,
this
which would determine which spaces
another routine
satisficd
doing as
the arrangement
out which areas of
to find
being
are
hcw well. his problem is
but to learn
satisfied,
specification
testing
TESTS OUTTSIDE THE GENFT!ItNG
At
only these constraints
prEsent.,
the generation
useful
which operate in
routine and which have been specified in
the qenerating model of
would be
MODEL
,
howevor,
the problem
can be tested.
to be able to test
criteria
It
CI[APTE? FC T p:
88
COPIVUTEIR TESTS
other than those which are used for generation
would he possible,
(lower)
fcr exaIle,
to set up a third
level set of specifications
structure
those in
in
the data
which would contain constraints sirilar
the second level
generation
designer
It
to
but which were not used for
(See Figure 14)
This would permit the
to define a. set cf
relationships
which were
important but which he did not wish to use for
genera tion
For example,
he could specify one set cf
constraints
for the generation
represented
its
construct
neighborhood
relationships
this
functions,
another set of relatinships
the eveninq
influence
educational
of a school which
He could also
which represented
use of the building -
vhich would not
a set of
be important enough
directly the arrangement of
double set of relaticnships
to
the spaccs,
With
the designer could
generate
forms for the needs of the academic functions,
and
them against
test
the other
functions which they
were to perform
These are the major kinds of improvements
additions
which can be made to this
There are several arcas which
the program.
These
limitations
use of and dependance
te advantageous
lie
testing routine
beyond the score of
are due to the routine's
upon the IMAGE system.
to permit the designer
other than those of qeoretry
or
Color,
It
would
to test criteria
texture,
sound
CHAPTER
YOUR: COIPU ITIR
and occupancy
quality,
factors
'ILE IS
loads are but a few of the.
which a designe: mijht
At the present time,
this is
IMAGE system will be expanded
type,
and
and
additional test
,;ish to specify and test
not
possible,
However, the
to include data of this
routines will be both possible
necessary at that point
For the present,
the
improverents outlined ahovc are the major changes
possible
FI GURE I I : DI AGRAM OF I W\GE DATA STRUCTURE
BASE POINT
SPACES
GENERATING
CONSTRA I NTS
VI SA CC'
AL I GN
PROXI
PROX2
FIGURE 12: FLOW CHART OF TESTING ALGORITHM
MAIN IMAGE PROGRAM
"TYPE NAME OF SPACE
TO BE TESTED"
r
LOCATE SPACE IN DATA
STRUCTURE
IS TEST SPACE FOUND?
r
-
4"SPACE DOES NOT EXI ST"
\J/Y
LOCATE CONSTRAINT SPEIFIED TO TEST SPACE
LOCATE OTHER SPACE RELATED BY CONSTRA INT
TYPE OUT: KIND OF CONSTRAINT & NAME OF SPACE
CALL CONSTRAINT SUBROUTINE
\/
i
/Z
)
IS CONSTRAINT SATISFIED?
N/
N
CALCULATE AND TYPE OUT
"ERROR"
I
DI SPLAY SUGGE STED CHANGE
DO OTHER CONSTRAINTS EXIST?>
AN
ARE FURTHER TESTS NECESSARY?
RETURN TO I MNIAGE
TYPE OUT "ACCEPTABLE"
Arrangement Displayed on
Another Screen
TYPE NAME OF SPACE TO BE TESTED
aprn
1.00000E+02 0.0000F+00 4t.00000E+01 4,.00 OOE+01
APRN2
PROXIMITY TO
1
A-RM2 0
IS ACCEPTABLE.
PROXIMITY Tn
1
Q
P-RM2
IS ACCEPTABLE.
ALIGNMENT WITH
1A-RM2 0
THE ERROR= -P ,52000E+nO
IS UNACCEPTABLE.
Q 1.00000E+02-4.2f600E+0 0 t.00000E+01 4.00000E+01
A-RM2
ARE FURTHER TESTS NECESSARY
no
FIGURE 13: TYPICAL DISPLAYS OF TEST INFORMATION
Fl GUR7E 14: DIAGRAM4 OF POSSI BLE DATA STRUCTUR-E
BASE POINT
APR
P-mA
SPACES
GENERATI NG
CONSTR~A INTS
NON GENERATING
CONSTRA I NTS
PROPORT ION
PPN DIX7 I
A2C1ITECTURAL SPACE PRtOGRW
FOR A FI
STATIONC
AREAS ATD USES
2,800
Apparatus Room
Patrol Room ...
W.0C. ...........
Engine Dormitory
Ladder Doritory ....
Firemens 'lash .......
s.f.
120
25
2,945 s.P.
Hose Drying To rer.....
Hose Store Room ......
Dousing Shover
.......
Shower
...
Linen Closet ........
Locker Room .
75
75
20
130
Clothes Drying 1oo ..
Oil Store............. 30
Generator ...........
1?0
Boiler and Iechanical. 400
25
Air Compressor .......
30
Janitorial and Clean
905
Fireiens
Clerical Supplies ...
Janitorial Cleaning .
Household Utility ...
Fuel
Tank
............
Jk.
Engrine Officers Room
Ladder Officers Ioom
50
.
*
.
.
700
150
150
50
.
650
2,400 s.f.
25
50
50
300
300
250
850 s.f.
150
150
Stairs and Circulation: 700
Total Ab,,ove:
700
125 s.f.
Officers Tiash .......
Diesel Pump..........
Fuel Tank ..........
.
4,550
Kitchen Dining
...
IRecreation ....
Telephone Area
......
Total Above:
320
430
10
810 s.f.
4,185 s.f.
Fire Station
1 APlAiTUS 20l0U, 2 door, for Engine 32
Each bay to be minimum
and Ladder 9.
dimensions 70' x 20' as
of 1,400 s.f.,
's 1 and
per Firehouse layout criteria
...
...
.......
2 ...... ... ... ... ...
2,
PATROL I002, to contain control console,
with seating provision for duty fireman,
and commandin; functional vie.,s of the
apar atus room and the firhouse apron
....
and fronting street .
LAVATORY and U.C.,
00 square feet
120 s.f.
for use by (1)- The
duty Patrol Room fireman,
(
) The public,
To be located
personnel on ground floor.
adjacent to Patrol Room and main entrance
to enable use by the duty patrol fireman
and use by the public without undue station
25 s.f.
penetration.............................
The apparatus room will have particular proii
vision for heating, washing don,
air hose, water hose, door control.
1 HOSE
DRYINGr TOiER, camable of dryinj hoses
ith one
,s fold only.
of fifty
feet leng
of the to:er to be
interior .alls
The loer
lined with a materi.al proveating damage to
the floor of the tower
metal hose fittings,
The tower will be
to have srater drains.
so positioned in relation to the pumper enthe handling of hoses
gine as to facilitate
.............
from the pumper to the to.er.
75 s.f.
STORE 00,
with a minimum capacity of
1 HOSi
Hoses are
75 hoses when rollerd and stored.
clesign
pipe
to be held in troughs of metal
and
construction
......
...........
DOUSING SHO E. (with deluge valve) to hamve
two sho;;r heads and a two per-son capability.
Maybe two stalls
to open directly onto apparatus room; but does not have to be situated with
a particular high speed access or convenience
!?ater rust be heated
circulation reeuirement.
75 s.f.
20 s.f.
1
1
CLOTiJ-S DBYIG 100,
for the specC
drying of
wet firemen's clothing in quantity.
Provide for
their personnel of three companies plus 25'.
Special consideration to be given to the design of clothing racks, whUich may be of metal tube construction.
OIL STORE,
180 s.f.
to contain small quantities of oil in
lockable
...........................
metal drums,
30s.f.
1
GENERATO1 RtOC, containiIg a generator with capacity
to carry the full electric load of the fire
station
in emergency.
Generator to have automatic spark, operate on illuminatinr gas, have provision for automatic
testing.
Generator to be positioned to permit walk around
and to have designed air intake and exhaust........
120 s.f.
1
BOIL:R
' "00U. anmmechanical, to contain heating and
ventilating
equipment and air compressor ..........
1
Provision for one electric air compressor
providi.ng copressed air to engine and ladder.
Air hose should be ceitrally positioned and
service
1
1
should be from cabove ceiling
25 s.f.
..............
Janitorial
and cleaninag store, with receptor
of 1 3, height, shelves and provision for cleaning raterials
and implements...................30
s.f.
DO IMITCOY for ENGIT' CG1Cm2Y 33 to contain 10
beds of ample size with partitions separating
eaci
bed
.........................
1
DORMITCJY for LDr
1
FIiW'N'S Tf~I L00,
containing 3 U.C. 's of ample
dimensions and 3 urinals, separate from shower
room
1
400 s.f.
.
COLiY 15 as above ..........
...............................
FI11EN'S 1103E iT00h, containing 4 showers and
a drying bench, also containing 6 wash basins
equipped with large, good quality mirrors, ample
shelving for toilet articles, good lighting and
strong tow-el rails
..............................
Note that total and generous use of the shover
room takes ploe frequently, andthat space and
abundant hot water are prime requirements, plus
cxhau:;t system.
s.f.
.700
700 s.f.
150
s.f.
150 s.f.
1
LIN
1
Stationary and clerical SUPPLI>S STO.'Z...
1
LOCKER 2001,
war , 'ell-lit
and ventilated; containing I ground of 25 hanging lockers for Engine 33 firemen; 1 group of 25 hanging lockers for Ladder 15 firemen; and one set of 80 bootracks each large enough
to hold a "hitch".
N CL.......
.
... ....................
The bootracks are not to be more than 3 tiers
50
.
s.f.
25 s.f.
high.
The lockers are not to be more Then 24" wide and 24"t
deep, and to have dust collection prevention devices
on top.
The lockers are not to be less than 24"1 wide and 24"
(leep, and to have dust collection prevention bvices
on top.
There shall be stout,
lockers......
anchored bencheslntaeen the
........................................
650
s.f.
1
A JANITOALw CL
1
HOGUS~ILD UTILIY
1
OFFUICEIR'S 200O0t for
I
CIILFY, to
contain 2 beds, 4 built-in lockable
closets, 1 desk, 1 desk-heigjht, 4 draaer
legal size file
cabinet, 1 swivel desk chair.......
300 s.f.
OFFICER'1S ROOM for LADDER COMfPAY.
(Provision as for Engine Comany)...................
300 s.f.
1
1
oFFIc2'S
basins,
1
1
JING CLO LT with 18"? high receptor
CLEiiIC CLST.....................
:AS
and SLO ER ROO containing 2 wash
'.C., 1 urinal, and 1 shower with 2
head ...... ... ... .... ....
...
...
....
...
...
50 s.f.
50 s.f.
.200 s.f.
KITCH-D1ININGR00
with provision for gas
cooking, and a waroing even, for the storage
of dry foods and food under refrigeration,
and for cutlery, ccockery, etc.
Dining will be off 2 tables, each about 4' x 6'
and the room will be so proportioned that the
tables will normally be used end to end, ie.4'
x
12'
...........................................
320
s.f.
l
adjacent io thec LkitchenICRETIONi 200c,
diningroora, and divided fro- it by a flexible
curtain pall to thus cnabling joint use of
.---.....
....
.....
.....
thlese rcooras0 .....
-...
480 s f.
There should be provi sion in or near the above
roorms for a cigrarette iachine, and 2 slot machines
dispensing soft dru'nks and candy.
In this living-dining-rocreational area there
will be provisional for a wall pay telephone for
use by station personnel with a miodicu of privacy.
any) and
rising to second floor (if
Allow for stair
Al11ow; for circulato top of hose drying to;er.
...
...
.................................
tion.
10 s.f.
700 s.f
Fire House Criteria (5)
ODSERVATIONS
(1)
A two story building lends itself
better to rapid
alarm-generated circulation than a single story
building.
(2)
When firemen respond to an alarm sinal
sounding within
the firehouse and response is a reflex action - and
partially
blind and irmpetuous.
For this reason the
cnergency routes to the fire
vehicles must be ms direct
as possible and free from obstructions and blind spots.
(3)
There'will be ample, clear, circulation on the anpoaratus
floor.
Equipment will be wall or ceiling hung, walls will
be vaterproofed as will attendant equipnent, the entire
capable of hosing down.
(4)
Drains in the appiaratus room will be ample, contain traps,
and be of sufficient strength to support the vehicles.
(5)
There must be a heating system in the apparatus roora capable of de-icin-; vehicles and equipment quickly.
(6)
The apron in front of the house will have a minimum depth
of 30 feet and will fall
away from the firhouse.
Cliectric
snow relter
mats shall be used with an automatic control
to prevent icing of rap.
(7)
Vehicle Apparatus 2oom ')oors -!ill
have a
height offinmum
13 feet and minimum of 13 feet.
Doors uill
have an automatic opening system, but will be cpable of manual operation in energency.
(8)
Bumpers .ill
be incorporatced as apparatus doors to minimize
contact damage.
Such bumpers shall ba at ground level.
(9)
Patrol Room should be in optimin command position,
vie wing Apron, street and Apparatus Room.
(10)
There will be a flagpole.
(11)
Landscape and site ireatment will be such as to reqluire a
mininmun of upkeep.
(12)
The Gasoline Pump will be crd operated and lockable,
enclosed for security--yet naturallywented.
and
100
OBC
VATI;
S (Cont' d)
(13)
A changeover from gasoline to diesel fuel is anticipated.
tanAi to diesel
Allow for the future conversion of one full
oil, and the installation of a diesel fuel punp.
(14)
The Patrol Room rust enjoy clear functional views of the
apparatus rooi., the apron, and the immediate highway.
(15)
.C. on the ground. floor is for use by duty personnel
The
The public may also use this facility.
in the patrol room.
It should be DositioneC to -iinimize the consecuences of
temporary absence of patrol roorm fireman from the patrol
console, and also to minimize nonetration of firehouse
premises by the public.
(16)
Eercury switches with stainless steel wall plates have
Circuit breakers -are
proved cfective and pleasant.
preferable to fuses.
(17)
Intercom and public address systems
throughout the firehouse.
(13)
Eledt'ric sockets in
proofed.
(10)
Fire Fighting can be a dirty business for men and machines,
In such arears as is
and make cleaning an absoring task.
practical, surfaces shall be washable and capable of hosing
This may consequently rerquire floor drains and srlo
down.
to floors in domestic as well as firefighting areas.
be
0illprovided
apparatus room areas shall
e w-ater-
fes
(20)
Firemen' s U.C.' s and ;ash basins shall he separate
from showers.
(21)
dooms are to be provided with receptLors, the
Janitorial
are
-hichto be bet-:een S" to 107 high
front walls of
(22)
Good quality locks are recuired throughout andthere will
be double locking systems on personal lockers.
(
Personal lockers
33)
(24)
The walls of the base portion of the hose drying tower
must be surfaced with a cushioning naterial to prevent
at hose ends.
damage to metal fittings
(25)
'1acks for hoses are to be coustructed of metal pipe of
Care will be taken to avoid sharp
round cross section.
surfaces or corners on racks which would damage hoses.
ill
have dust-free tops.
101
OBSVxTI ONS
(Cont' d)
(26)
Imaginative use of color is
firehouse.-
(27)
There will be a heat actuated alarm system: installed
in the locker room, linen closet 'and boiler room.
(3)
Ceilin% hung light fixturcs are preferred,
fitting where prac tical and ossible.
(29)
It
expect
throu2out tie
as are flush
is
comimon practice fore firehouse personnel to maintlehone
at privauo ese.
It is
commonly a pay station phone.
Provision will be imade
for this phone, and directories, and a miniimal writingarea or shelf.
tatin one private
(30)
All doors on -round floor to be lackable from the outside,
(:ith
self-locking latch locks.) but with inside manual
opening cacCpability.
(31)
There will be a separate rater sup)ly line for refilling
booster tanks on apparatus on ground floor.
Valve and
water line shall b l-V inc'L diameter equipped with a
1-1- inch National Standard Fire Depart::ent male thread
gated outlet
(32)
Ample sillcocks are ar
propOrly located.
(33)
Doors on circulation routes should have observation
windows of shatter proof glass, and should swving, as
eat asset to any fire
station if
appropriate.
(34)
There will be raised thresholds for the containment of
water in hose dorn areas, where practical.
(35)
The consumption of hot food nay be delayed by an alarm,
c onsecuently a varming oven i.s required in the kitchen.
(36)
Ihile there must be a forced heating device in the hose
drying tower, care must be taken to prevent excessive heat
capable of da0ainS hoses.
(37)
Iose
(38)
Dormitory beds shall be at least 6'6" lon; and 40"
wide.
to.;er shall be veiLed to prevent condensation.
10 2
OBlV~AIONS
(39)
(Cont' d)
mas.culine crcu:staces,
Firemen, in res;idence undier tot
naked or halfmCay be observed through firehouse ;'idows
The fenestration desigrn Ihall
dressed from time to time.
minllimize
tlis
visual
po7sibilit
y.
an.e should be
(40)
Kitchen cooker shall be eledtrical.
connercial heaxvy duty tvpe.
(41)
All enterior nedestrian doors to be self-closing.
(42)
The temperature control device for the building heatin'30 automatic, but capable of
coolin-g systen slioul
The nature and position
f"icer.
adjustment by the Fir
should be such as to prevent.
o1 the adju;tment con'trl
indijscriminate use by firehouse personnel.
(43)
All doestic,
4-)
All polos
office,
shall
and hall areas to be air conditioned.
be shutterd.
Item 45
the nis-Simple becauoe the human numbers are sCl,
that d7onestic
take should not be nade of assuin'
kitchen appliances are suitable for fireh:ou;e use.
it ha- been de nons-trated thaT t si:1
For exampl,
A.ll to
installed in the pst .which were too
have bec
Also, the
conveniently reccive firehou e fryin-g pan.
eitchen
efri erator rovec to be too
ur;uJl dom stic
ood
smiall for stations in ;;hich there is co unity
purchases and stock piling and the daily storing of
lunches carrieC in by the firemen.
Iten 4.6
Fireen
Flooring in a firehouse m-ust be heavy duty.
have to
not
Floors should
quite comronly wear boots.
be :axed as firemen in a hurry, novinS quickly, and
dres;sing as they ravel are inatInger of slippng.
Additionally, extremecly light colored flooring in a
:
firehouse is i
Iten 47
suggestions concerning the
There have beei previou
use of color and the creation of an attractivo fireIo-re:er, it has been observed in
house environnent.
at least Pro instances that architects in the past have
used attracLive, heavy duty, -;ater-proof wall parers in
the domesTic rfos;, but have made the mistake of haxvin
collectors,
te:;tured anidthey have become dirt
the:e paprs
The architectsm
not easily ashable and requiCinv crubbing.
this well-intentioned mistake.
are cautioned ai-nst
103
Item 48
of the dormitory shoul d be provided with
The -aIls
bed lights so that individual Fireen miay rea anight awithout distubing the dor itory.
Item 49
Full use should be rmde of the art of acoustics
provide for maximum quiet in the domitorics.
Item 50
Firemen have to familiarize themselves with the
geography of the station' s immediate territory.
Additionally, they must be familiar with adjacent
on their
firehouse territory, which they may visit
it
this
reason,
For
clergencies.
in
owi ap aratus
more
or
three
for
is usual to provide wall soace
large maps readily and frequently -ecA by firemen
near the Patrol Room is
A po.,ion
in passing.
preferred.
Drin'ing fountains should provide cold,
water.
Item 51
The architect should pay particular attention w;hen
designinr the Patrol Room to running- card index or
A typical station may have fcom
assignment board.
150 to .00 items listed and occasionally up to a
The possibility of a rapid usie
maximum of 300.
or a display under a glass
index, circular file,
Note that
been suggested.
have
table
topped control
and
con'er uent
change
to
subject
are
items
individual
resoe
of
worthy
Tais
is
removal and replcement.
Immediate
design.
search and an o-pportunity for
and readability is a pri-e requireent.
visibility
Item 52
Before conuencing a firehouse design the architect
should spend one full day in a firehouse with Andre
Department.
Anderson-Beoll of the Public Facilities
Item 53
It is not enough merely to provide automobile parkAutomobiles may be subject to theft
ing facilities.
security precautions are re-uired.
and
or vandalism
Item 54
required there are
Boecause of the high visibility
often large areas of glass in Patrol Room, and just
As a
as often, no special provision for insulation.
result, Patrol Rooms often become exceedingly hot or
The architects are cautioned against
exceedingly cold.
this mistake.
Item 55
'ahen an alarm sounds the Apparatus Room doors are
openedi and the entire firehouse [,aff denarts the
The firehouse doors close
firehouse on the vehicles.
lights go out autofirehouse
the
automatically and
leaving the firehouse
minutes,
several
matically after
freThis situation and its
unguarded and in Jarkness.
quency should be noted and provided for, particularly
in terms of security.
to
104l
Ite.
5
Uhen an al;rm is sounded at night,house is il uaated.
the darkened fire-
Item 57
The impact of the alarm on a sleepinr min can have side
effdcts.
The Firehouse internal illumination and the
alarm bell system should be on separate s-itches in
the Patrol toon so that lights rmay be siitched on one
or tw:o seconds before the alaru is sounded.
Item 58
There shall be a provision for 1ow-level lighting in
thc Anparatus 1oom at nigAht when the main illumination
may i.ormally be sitched
off.
Item 59
It is not consiider-Vd an advantage to have a splendid,
smooth surface finish under -et conditions.
A floor
with too rou-h a surface
ill
hold water by "pocketing"
and canot be satisfactorily squeeee'd.
Item 60
Incredible as it
seem,
Cay many instances have been
observed in firehouses in Which doors did not swing in
the direction most apsropriate to facilitate
rapid
movement by fireen
responTingv to an alarm.
Also
observed were doors hug
on the sidc
of the door frame
best suitable to impeCe novement under these
cir cuL tances.
Tie designers are ;:arned against this
thoughtlessness.
Item 61
In keeping with the principles of maintenance and
cleaning ,
rsee roller
blinds are preferred to
venetian blLds-, in a irehouse.
The designs
should
be constantly
:ara that there scarcity of tir-m for
cleaning and maiance
throuhout the fi re house.
The architect shoulc enacavor to esign dust-free
kitchens andto incor)orate surfaces nhich lend themselves to clean
by firemen.
105
Apparatus Room
:iging vehicl
(* 40'
min ~
50' miIn
90 feet minimum
The apparatus should have two thirds of its length clear of- the
apparatus room before commencing the turn,
i.e. minimum 40'.
A turning radius, measured from the outside of the vehicle
commencing the turn, of at least 50' shall be allowed.
10C
Maximum Apparatus
8'0"w
by
62'7" long
The design and layout of the Apparatus Room must be based upon this
maximumvi vehicular unit although in practice the space may be occupied
by one or more shorter units.
A width for circulation is allowed
between the apparatus and the long wall,
minimum of
hence the outer bay width
2 0'.
70 feet length minimum
--
y-
30' min
APRON
II may be advan-tageous to have
one rear entrance
if site conditions
a I i ow.
ExitEntranc
13' w min I
13'
j min
107
APPENEJX
FL1
II
PC-PAV FC1 COMEUTE
TESTEF:
FFCC
IIEIF T1STING
(IErWGNC, V,SChL F).;
DEC LARAlI CNS
DCI PET(L)
IAEl.,
(SXY , IFI RST INITIAL (') ) .TATIC,
(IN,P
P (250,:3, 6) , T
( ,V ;IS3AS (250),7)
,VP)I :S2 FIX D STATIC,
(SVNAME ,II
,SVN,ISV ,JSV,
AI,SVV AL,SVCST,SVI)
EIN F71 XED STATIC
(SVN2, KT 1 , 1X, IY,OTA 3(2
S) S USI,A TA3 (Q)
,SVVC)
FIN FI XED STATIC
DCL EXFC RETURNS (ECI1NTEF),
S ET (3: 2 ) B IN F IXED
PASED
(20
,
1 UDATA SThqIC,
2 UIA VE CHAF (9) VAFYII"G,
2 VARS(9)
2 UV1 EIT (9)
2
MDCE1 11IN FIXEF,
2 -CDE2 BIE
FIXEL,
2 fEIF3,
2 r U 14
GVARS (9)
1 CTF1 (3) STAT1C,
2 DTYPEX EIN FIXE,
2 DP TCIENTEF,
2
EL EIN FlXED,
2 1 BI ,' iX T7Pj
(I,
S( T~ N , )1 1STIf 1 JN
F1 T4 I-IC I t< Nr N INN r X SU I~SHEb)
STI AT IC,
41-CI
) , L1
3T FIXIE ST TAT I,
I
N FIX,
INITIA",L ()
SAEAT ICF
2 CT
I)
BIN FIXED STATIC
(USE INITIAI (1) , CCESTFAINT INITIAL (2) ,
VALE iNITIAL (3) , PEL INTIIAL (4))
FT XED,
INPUT CH AR ( 1) VARYTNG,
ID 1G1C CH A R (1)
V AFYING,
IN 2 Cl-AR (4)
VARYING,
I13 CHAF (1) VAPYING,
ASTR C1AR (8)
VARYIN9,
0ST S CHAH (8) VAFYIG,
SPACE CHAI(10) VARYING,
13ET (10) lABEl,
LAPEL,
AP RCC(50)
P1CC_ NC(5
I) lAPEl
LAE L ,
RETV (4)
CUTCH CH AP (R) ST ATIC,
1 CTAP STATIC,
2 UNA F1 CI AR (8)
VAFYI NG,
2 C ITTS(6)
T f) (9) ,
FFI
2 W,
2 CET A, 2 CETA 2, 2 CD TA 3,2
I C1DE,
CD TA 4,2
CDTA5,2 CLTA6,r
A PPE NDI X II
108
(2 CONCT, 2 SEENL,2 EEC E) BIN FIXED,
2 CNAfME CI!A F (8) , 2 DUP1, 2 DUM2,
1 VDA TA (6) STA TIC,
2 CDAT A CHAF (8) VARYING,
2
FEATA(9)
,
I 1 (9),
2 M1 PIN FIXED,
2 F22 1IN FIXED, 2 DUV5, 2 DUM6,
(V DAT A ((6, 9) , AMAi (1,9) ,C NA T (1,1) ,ANS (1
BIN FIXED,
SV !AT A1 (2, 9) ,XM ' (9, 1) IN ITTA L ( (9) (0.9)
DECLARE (P,QNE1,F('1)
F Ei U RNS
(HIT (1)
DSTAPT RETRJNS (POI
)
2
UV
))
STATIC;
IN IT IAILIZ AT ION
INX=0;
INIT: NEEBIT=2
IIG-=0;
IC=0; CLDIDCI=U;
INT1=1;
1NT2=9;
GET
T
IEST
J=0; CIEEC=(; CLDID=0;
INFCFMIATICN
DISPLAY ('TYPE NAME CF SFACE TO
SPACE = IN21 1 IDWGNO;
IGUYID = ID SE (SPACE) ;
fE
TESTEE') REPLY (IN2);
/*----------
TEST POUTINE IS AUTCMATIC FRCV THIS ECINr.
SEARCH DAT A STSUCTUPE FOR TEST DATA
NCTE: P IS A SPFCIAT IUEFCSE LOOP FUNCTICN
TO S EARCH THE EATA STRUCTURE.
Q,ID ENT, DSDSPL1, IDSE., AND IDTYEE1
ALSC SFECII EATA S2ARCHi FUNCTIONS.
LOCATE TEST SPACE IN DAIA STRUCIURE
P1:
iF P (D,
SUSE)THEN DO WHTILE (Q(1B,USE,N)) ;
IDUU=IDEN T (SE"T (USE) ) ;
IF
(IDENT (SET (USE))-,=lGUYIE)
THIN GO TO SKIPIT;
Rl: IIG=1
GET
ATA ON
TEST
SPACE
IECOM
DA'A
STFUCTJFE
CALL., ESDSPL 1 (SET (USE) ,ADDR (UNA ME) ) ; SVUSE=ST (USE)
CIIDC=0 ;J=1 ;
APEEN\DifX
11
DO KKJ-=1 TIO 0
XMAT (KK ,1) =VA F S(KFJ);
FN E;
BYBY:1)C I=1 TC 9 ;IFAN
ITJ ID=IDEN I (SET (USE))
DO I=1 7 C 9;
GVARS (1) =VA RS (I) ; ENE;
(
)=0;ENE;
NEWPIC BIANES SCREEN AEJAC FNT TO
ARRANGEMINT
BEING TESTED
IF
INX = 0 THEN DO;
I N X =1; END;
CHIIGDSP DISPLAYS
EISPLAY OF
CALL NEWPIC(SCALE,0.0,C.0)
TEST SppC
AS
IT
;
EXISTS.
CALL CIEE CDSP (ITJID,GVARS (1) , CV AES (2) , GV ARS (4) ,GVAR S( 5) , UNAME) ;
CL=1 ;AL=1;
/*-~-- - --LOCATE CONSTRAINIS CN SPACE IN DATA STTUCTURE
IF P(USE,CONSTRAINT)
CLDI D=1DENi (SET (USE))
IF OLEC=) THEEN GO
N=1;
GO IC CPDEJ;
RETPT(1)
N1;
R2: CLDC=1
GET
DATA
CN
TEEN DO WHILE (Q(1B,CCESTEAINT,N))
;CLIEPT=SET (USE);
!, 2;
CCNSTFEItT
FOM
EATA STRUCT
CALIL DSDSPI1 (SET (CCNST FAINT) , AEDP (UNAMF 1));
CALL ETYPE1(SET (CONSTRAINT) ,CIRL (1))
I =;
LOCATE OTER
SPACE RELATED
BI CONSTRAINT
IF P (CONSTR AINT, VALUE) THEN DO WHI LE
I=I+1 ;
CALL ETYPE1 (SET (REL) ,CTRL (I+1))
CET
DATA
ON OTIIER
(Q (10 EVALUJEEEL,N))
SPACE
CALL ES)SPL1 (SET (VALUE) ,ADDR (CDATA (I)) ) ;
IF IDE NT (SET (VAiUE) ) =CL.EID TE EN II=I;
ELSE EC; SVID=TDENT (S}T (VALU E))
SVVAL=SET(VALUE) ;SVC S'=E T (CCNSTRAIT) ;Ki=I;
END;
OUTHEVE:
END; END; ELSE DO;
IF IC=1 THEN LO; OlEID=0 ; IC=0; END; END;
GO TO EONE1;
APPENDIX
II
110
SnIrIr:
END;
DONEI1: N= 2;
END CF
ORDER IS
TETl 1UTINEF
THE ECUTINE WHICH
CALIS
T-iiE
GO TO CEDEB;
RETPT (2):
P3:
DISPlAY ('A E FUUTER TESTS
IF IN3=' Y' THEN GC T1C I IT;
RETURN;
COlISTRAINT
NECESSARY'
SUBROUTINES.
) REEIY (IN3);
ODER: IF IIG=C
THEN D0; D1.S PLAY ('NO SUCH SP 1PCE EXISTS.');
GO
0O BLIET (2);
EN£;
DO Il=1 TI7O I;
DO F=1 TC I;
IF M+7'0a=D YPFX (K+1)
'IHEN
DO;
IF !=II THEN VNAFE=;
CO NE=1 TC 9;
VDATAU (A, A N) =FDA 'I (K ,N)
;
E ND; END;
IN E ; ENE;
NND
EYEX
(1) -810;
GO TO PROCNO (tN);
PROC NC( 1) :
C
L 01LP, AP( VIA ME,VDA TAU ,C1ITS,
,CDTA, NUEsCIT)
DISPLAY (' A T-Cv
WI ; f] ') ; CALL FIXLOCO (CE ATA (KKi) ) ;
GO TO M'ATSET;
SUBROUTlES
CALLED
ItN
FOR OTHER POSIBLE CCNSTRAINTS AEF
SI NIL AF WPYS,
EUI b.R E NOT SHON HERE.
SA T ET:
0 N = 1 TC) 9;
A1YAT (J, NN) = VDATAU (1, N\ N)
IF APS (AMAT (J,
) )>1.0E '-(95 THEN IRANK (NN)=1;
END;
C MAT (,1)=-VDATA
J(2,1) ;
OUT:
IF A Z ERO VN!A E IS
RPTUPNE 1)l ilE TQEST HAS
BEENZ SATISFIED.
C9 HEFWISI ITHE ERRR
IS CALCULATED AID DISPLAYI I.
IF V"A&E=0 THEN DC;
TLISYIAY ('IS ACCEPTAEE
);
GO TO RETPT (N); END;
CA LT. IVMGG (AMAT,
XMA'T ,I NT 1 , I NT 2,1
E:Z=ANS (1,1 )-C
AT
1 ,1) ;
NT1, ANS);
;
APP1EDIX
II
iII
T E l ERlP= ' I I E R) ;
DISFLA Y ( 'IS UNACCEFT A 1LE.
THEN DO0;
D0 ICUY=1 TO 6; IF AHAT (1,1GY)- GY)
AV A Y =C2 AT (1, 1) /AMA 'I (1 ,IG UCY) ;
GVARS (IGCY)=AVApY;
END;
END;-~
THE CHANC F WHICH WOULT) BE
SUB0UTINE IS DISPlAYED.
NADE
CALI. CllhGDSP(ITJID,GVAPS (1)
CDEAIT A (YKKII)
E ND
);
GO TOPR ETP1 (N)
qE S1 IA X ;
BY
,GVA-S
THE
(2)
CONSTFAINT
,GVARS (4)
,GVAIRS
(5),
112
C S
FCCTTE
CHAPTIE?
ONF
From 1968 until the present, the author was
(1 ,1)
involved in a projec t Vhcse objective was the
development of a computer aid for space arrangement
That project resulted in a systew of programs which
an
arrargen-aits to satisfy
generated spatial
architectural rrobleu spccified by the designer/user
The system is called TMAGF
"TAGE is a nettcrk of ccmputer programs which
generate three dimensi-onal spatial arrarge.mcnts to
icnships specified by a
spatial r satisfy
is ccmrposed of
'pecification
A prol:
designer
two EClements: gccmetrLic descriptions of the spaces
to be confiqured; and relationships between those
Given
spaces which the designer wishes to achieve.
a problem description, IMIAGF generates arrangements
a confiquration is achieved which satisfies
until
If no such
specified relaticnshi ps.
all
configuration is possible, IMAGE produces
arrangements which mrinimize dissatisfaction of the
specified relaticiiships
The dimensions, position and orientation cf
each space may takbe cn any value in a continuous
rance and are not c1onfinod to discrete intervals.
The spaces may cvcrlap cr be excl.iisive according to
th1e relationships specified by the designer,
thereby pcrmitting prcjects to be described in
terms of individual rocms or in terms of the
and fucticn they serve
activities
A diverse set of relationships way be used to
Thbe designer may constrain the
specify problems
size, shape, orientation, and position cf any
space, and need not limit his specifications to a
tine or
single type of function, such as trip
may be combined
Different rela tinships
prox imity
to represent: specific, complex objectives, allowinq
his specification to his
a designer to tailor
particular method of design
It was believed that a computer system which
assisted spatial synthesis would enable the
designer t c explore varia tiens of his image of a
prchlem - to maintain close watch over his
objectives - to develcp a wide range of alternative
schemes, and thereby, to achieve more satisfactory
"i
fors
tc
It was soon realized however, that the alility
tectural
archi
to
scluticns
form
alternative
generate
problems vas inadaquate for desiqners' needs in at least
one ma jor respect: it was incapable of assisting the
user in the sirple task of testing alternative
FOOT NO TE -S3
113
,-as in the
It
arrangements against diffeeint criteria,
of mecting this ncd that the study cf testing
i:'terest
See:
was undertaken
JohnsonTimothy E , et al,
IMAGF: An interactive, Graphics-Pased Computer
System for Multi-Ccnstrained Spatial
(Cambridge: IITT Dept. of
Synthesis
Architecture,197 )
(1 2) Seec the discussion of "City Design", "City
Designing", and "Functional Analysis of City Design"
Porter,
in:
William" 1,
The Developreent cf Discourse: A Languaqe for
Computer Assisted City Design,
thesis, NIT rept,
(Cambridge: unpublished PhD
1969)
Studies,
Urban
of
(1 3) An elaborate present ation of the synoptic approach
.weaknesses as compared to
to problem solving ardthe lasic contcri c,:
,vides
pt
apprcaches
heuristic
Lindblom, Char
and
David
Braybrooke,
Eccision
of
A Strategy
(New
York:
Prce Press,
1963)
CHAPTER T0O
(2. 1) Several well known volumes exist, the lest knowln
of which is Ramsey and sleepers, Graphic Standards.
(2 2) This Phenomenon w:as observed by Dr, Pohert Weiss
during a case study of the Seattle World Fair acne for
Other observaticns are reported in:
IBM
and lBoutourline, Scrge
Weiss, Robert S
Fairs, Pavilicns, Exhibits, and Their
Audiences
Report, 1962
Unpublished P
CHAPTER THEiEE
(3 1) The program was made available for the study by
It bad been
Ashley, Myer, Smith, Architects, Cambrida.e
existing
of
an
remodellinq
the
for
office
that
by
used
provided
been
and
had
Station,
Bay
Back
house, the
fire
for the architectural ren'cdelling by the Public
ThE
Department of the City of Boston
Facilities
the
physical
to
bring
purpose of the remodel ling vas
house, built near the turn of the
condition of the fire
century, up to the quality of recently constructed
The program, therefore, was not signi fica ntly
stations
FOCTNO TE S
changed
lii
frcm thcse used fcr rev ccnstruction
(3 2) During visits
to the fire
house, the architects
found that security of possessions was very irportavt to
the firemen,
Evidently, snccping and pilferaqe were not
uncommon among the nen on duty
Several men indicated a
desire fcr lockahle clcsets and storage areas vhich
could be easily and continuously observed and guarded.
Consistent to Tiost architectural programs, no mention of
needs of this kind was made
(3 3) Tc a large extent, the selection of the fire
station was made on the ccmmendation by the designers at
the architects office that this program was far and away
the most complete that had been used in the office.
(3 4) Whereas IMAGE attempts to alleviate all
errors, at
any point during the generation process, a large portion
of the rodcl may be in errcr
(3 5) A design instructo: at the University of Arizona
once failed to attend a student party on the qrcunds
that the map to the party had been drawn with "utter
disregard for relative distances".
He had dcduced frcm
other relationships cn the map that the p: .
aoit
a mile from a locating intersection, wheti in fact it was
three miics.
Having drive.n the mile and not locating
the house, he returned hoie in confusion,
(3.6) An excellent discussion of set theory, thc algebra
of events, is given in the first
chapter of:
Drake, Alvin W
Fundamentals cf Applied Probability Theory
(New York, McGraw Hill, 1967)
CHAPTEP FCOR
(4 1) For a more detailed discussion of this
data
structure system see the appendix of:
Timothy Johnscn, et al,
Op Cit, 197>
or
Crick, M F
lorie, PA. Mosher, E d, and
Symonds, A J
A Data System for Interactive Applications
(Cambridge, IBM Report 320-2 58, 1S71)
(4,2) IMAGE operates on an IFM 36,/67 computer using the
CP/CiS time sharing systerr
The user communicates with
the system by a typewriter-like, console,
His typed
commands, as w:elI as typed and 2 dimensional graphic
responses, are displayed on a simall1 optical scrccn,
si ilar
i
to a tclevIsio
screeil
(4, 3) For a more elaborate discussion of the various
constraints possible within IlAGE, the conditions they
and the vay in which TPIAGE uses them
snek to satisfy,
during generation, see Chapter 2: The IMAGE Systcm, in:
Timothy Jchnscn, et al, Cp Cit, 197-
116
FIL
R1OG RAPU"y
Alexander, Christopher
Notes on the Synthesis cf Fcrm
Cambridge: Harvard Press, 1964
Brayhrocke, David and lindblcm,
A Strategy of recision
New York: Free Press, 1963
Yastman,
Charles
Charles
Solving Strategies
in Design," EDRA1, Proceedings
of the 1st. Annual Environmental resign Researcl Association
Conference, Henry Sanoff and Sidney Cohn, editors
Chapel Hill: School of Design, North Carolina Stzfte
University, 197
IProblei?
Ju,
Perkins, John
Weinzapfcl, Guy
Johnson, Timothy E
Morris, David
ScloTova
Doris
TM1AGE: An Interactive, Graphics-Based Computer SysteM for
tulti-Constrained Spatial Synthesis
19T'
Cambridge: MIT, Depari-ent cf Architecture,
Hall, F I
and Schwarts, J.G.
Manheim, Marvin L
Modelling the Evolutionary Nature of Problemn Solving
Cambridgc: HTT, Schccl of Engineering, 1967
Narvin L,
Manheim,
Problem Solving Process in Planning and Design
Cambridge: MIT, Schccl cf Fngineering, 1967
Herbert A,
March, James G, and Simon,
Crganizaticns
New York: Wiley, 1959
Myer, John R,
lewis,
Krauss, Richard I.
Danielson,
Scott and
Poger
Design: A Case History
Cambridge: MIT, Center for Building Pesearch,
1968
Negroponte, Nicholas P and Groisser, Leon B.
Urban5: An On-line Urban Design Partner
Cambridge: IBMI Feport 32C-2r012, 1967
Porter, William I
The Develcpment of Disccurse: A Language fcr
Ccmputer
Assisted City resign
UnpublisLed PhD
Thesis, MTT, Department of Urban Studies
and Planning, 1969
Paiffa, Fcward
Decision Analysis
Reading: Addiscn-Wesley,
1968
Simon, Hertert A
Sciences of the Artificial
Cabridge: MTT Press, 1969