Digital Architecture

Edited by Mark Burry

© 2017 – Routledge

1,600 pages

Purchasing Options:
Hardback: 9780415816625
pub: 2017-03-01

About the Book

‘Digital architecture’ is a relatively recent critical concept and encompasses all aspects of the discipline of architecture engaging with computation. It has evolved into a domain in its own right, as it were, rather than always being present from the first time architects ceded slide rule use in favour of electronically assisted computation. As this major collection reveals, we have witnessed growth of a creative digital influence across all of architecture’s subdisciplines and few can deny that there is now a maturity in the conversation which had been previously quite elusive. As a major work of collected critical insights Digital Architecture therefore compiles the key texts that will be as useful to the initiate as to the experienced professional, as relevant to the academician as to the practitioner and as revealing to the sceptic as they will be to the digitally converted. It does not promote any particular stream of innovation nor establish any particular cultural agenda.

The focus of the collection is the contemporary period extending from the late 1980s to the present day contextualised through the inclusion of key texts from the earlier pioneers, ordered into six sections. Each section is arranged in chronological order except where thematic clustering helps consolidate the material more usefully for the reader.

A review of the best material that has brought us to an emerging digital design maturity, fully indexed, this will be a very valuable reference for all.

Table of Contents

Volume 1

Part 1: Info and Data Management

1. Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘Redefining the Role of Computers in Architecture: From Drafting/Modelling Tools to Knowledge-Based Design Assistants’, Computer-Aided Design, 17, 7, 1985, pp.319–328.

2. Bo-Christer Björk and Hannu Penttilä, ‘A Scenario for the Development and Implementation of a Building Product Model Standard’, Advances in Engineering Software, 11, 4, 1989, pp.176–187.

3. John S. Gero, ‘Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design’, AI Magazine, 11, 4, 1990, pp.26-36.

4. George Stiny, ‘The Algebras of Design’, Research in Engineering Design, 2, 3, 1991, pp.171-181.

5. Raúl Medina-Mora, Terry Winograd, Rodrigo Flores, and Fernando Flores, ‘The Action Workflow Approach to Workflow Management Technology’, in Proceedings of the 1992 ACM Conference on Computer-supported Cooperative Work, (Toronto: ACM, 1992), pp.281-288.

6. Rivka E. Oxman and Robert M. Oxman, ‘Refinement and Adaptation in Design Cognition’, Design Studies, 13, 2, 1992, pp.117-134.

7. Robert Amor and Ihsan Faraj, ‘Misconceptions About Integrated Project Databases’, ITcon, 6, 2001, pp.57-68

8. Brad Johanson, Armando Fox, and Terry Winograd, ‘The Interactive Workspaces Project: Experiences with Ubiquitous Computing Rooms’, IEEE Pervasive Computing, 1, 2, 2002, pp.67-74.

9. Charles Eastman, Rafael Sacks, Ghang Lee, ‘Strategies for Realizing the Benefits of 3D Integrated Modeling of Buildings for the AEC Industry’, in 19th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, (Washington DC: ISARC 2002), pp.9-14.

10. J.P. Van Leeuwen, and S. Fridqvist, ‘Object Version Control for Collaborative Design’, in Tunçer, Özsariyildiz, and Sariyildiz (eds.), E-Activities in Building Design and Construction, Proceedings of the 9th EuropIA International Conference, (Istanbul: EuropIA Productions, 2003), pp.129-139.

11. Robert F. Woodbury, and Andrew L. Burrow, ‘Whither Design Space?’, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 20, 2, 2006, pp.63-82.

12. A. Burke ‘Redefining Network Paradigms’, in A. Burke and T. Tierney (eds), Network Practices, New Strategies in Architecture and Design, (NY: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007), pp. 54-77.

13. Dennis Shelden, ‘Information Modelling as a Paradigm Shift’, Architectural Design, 79, 2, 2009, pp.80-83.

Part 2: Digital Representation

1. Tsuyoshi T. Sasada, ‘Drawing Natural Scenery by Computer Graphics’, Computer-Aided Design, 19, 4, 1987, pp.212-218.

2. M. Tan, ‘Saying What It is by What It is like - Describing Shapes Using Line Relationships’, In M.McCullough, W.J. Mitchell, and P.Purcell (eds), The Electronic Design Studio: Architectural Knowledge and Media in the Computer Era, CAAD Futures, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1990), pp.201-213.

3. Xiao D. He, Kenneth E. Torrance, François X. Sillion, and Donald P. Greenberg, ‘A comprehensive physical model for light reflection’, Proceedings of the 18th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques (SIGGRAPH '91). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 175-186. DOI=10.1145/122718.122738

4. Gerhard N. Schmitt, and Chen-Cheng Chen, ‘Classes of Design — Classes of Methods — Classes of Tools’, Design Studies, 12, 4, 1991, pp.246-251.

5. Mark D. Gross, and Ellen Yi-Luen Do, ‘Ambiguous Intentions: A Paper-Like Interface for Creative Design’, in Proceedings of the 9th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, (Seattle: ACM, 1996), pp.183-192.

6. Alan Bridges and Dimitrios Charitos, ‘On Architectural Design in Virtual Environments’, Design Studies, 18, 2, 1997, pp.143-154.

7. Paul Richens, ‘Image Processing for Urban Scale Environmental Modelling’, in Proceedings of the 5th International IBPSA Conference: Building Simulation 97, (Prague: IBPSA, 1997), pp.1-9.

8. Pia Ednie-Brown,‘The Texture of Diagrams’, Daidalos: Diagrammania, 74, 2000, pp. 72-79.

9. Alexander Koutamanis, ‘Digital Architectural Visualization’, Automation in Construction, 9, 4, 2000, pp.253-261.

10. H. Achten, ‘Requirements for Collaborative Design in Architecture’, In H.J.P. Timmermans and B. de Vries, (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Design and Decision Support Systems in Architecture and Urban Planning Conference, (Avegoor, The Netherlands, 2002), pp.373-392.

11. Tom Maver and Jelena Petric, ‘Sustainability: Real and/or Virtual?’, Automation in Construction, 12, 6, 2003, pp.641-648.

12. F. Penz, 'Architecture and the Screen From Photography to Synthetic Imaging—Capturing and Building Space, Time and Motion' in F.Penz and M.Thomas (eds.) Architectures of Illusion—From Motion Pictures to Navigable Interactive Environments, (Chicago: Intellect Ltd, 2003), pp.135-164.

13. André G. P. Brown, ‘Visualization as a Common Design Language: Connecting Art and Science’, Automation in Construction, 12, 6, 2003, pp.703-713.

14. Carlo Ratti and Paul Richens, ‘Raster analysis of urban form’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31, 2, 2004, pp. 297-309.

15. Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos, ‘Design Models', in UN Studio, Design Models: Architecture, Urbanism, Infrastructure, (London: Thames & Hudson, 2006), pp.10-23. © 2006 UN Studio. Reprinted by kind permission of Thames & Hudson Ltd., London

Volume 2

Part 3: Computer Science Philosophy

1. Gordon Pask, ‘The Architectural Relevance of kenetics’, Architectural Design, 39, 9, 1969, pp.494-496.

2. John von Neumann, ‘The Role of High and of Extremely High Complication’, in Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata, (Urbana: University Illinois Press, 1966) pp.64-73.

3. Gerard de Zeeuw, ‘Problems of increasing competence, Systems Research, 2, 1, 1985, pp.13-19.

4. Dirk J. Struik, ‘The Sociology of Mathematics Revisited: A Personal Note’, Science & Society, 50, 3, 1986, pp.280-99.

5. Lucien Kroll, ‘Computers’, in The Architecture of Complexity, (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987), pp.91-114.

6. Ivan Sutherland, ‘Micropipelines’, Communications of the ACM, 32, 6, 1989, pp.720-738.

7. William Mitchell, ‘Design Worlds’, in The Logic of Architecture: Design Computation and Cognition, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1990), pp.37-57.

8. Jeffrey Kipnis, 'Towards a New Architecture' in Architectural Design, 63, 3-4, 1993, pp.40-49.

9. John Frazer, ‘The Architectural Relevance of Cybernetics’, Systems Research, 10, 3, 1993, pp.43-48.

10. Richard Coyne, ‘Heidegger and Virtual Reality: The Implications of Heidegger's Thinking for Computer Representations’, Leonardo, 27, 1, 1994, pp.65-73.

11. Bernard Cache, ‘A Plea for Euclid’, ANY: Architecture New York, 24, 1999 pp.54-59.

12. P. Coates, T. Broughton, and H. Jackson, ‘Exploring Three-Dimensional Design Worlds Using Lindenmayer Systems and Genetic Programming’, in P. J. Bentley (ed.), Evolutionary Design by Computers, (Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann, 1999), pp.323-341.

13. K. Chu and X. Kavya, ‘The Turing Dimension’, in F. Migayrou, B. Simonot, and M.A. Brayer (eds.), ArchiLab: Radical Experiments in Global Architecture, (London: Thames & Hudson, 2001), pp.490-494. Archilab © 2001 the city of Orleans; Architects’ texts and images © 2001 the architects; Essays © 2001 the authors. Reprinted by kind permission of Thames & Hudson Ltd., London

14. Ranulph Glanville, ‘An Intelligent Architecture’, Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 7, 2, 2001, pp.12-24.

15. Patrick Janssen, John Frazer, & Ming Xi Tang, ‘Evolutionary Design Systems and Generative Processes’, Applied Intelligence, 16, 2, 2002, pp.119-128.

16. Manuel De Landa, ‘Deleuze and the Use of the Genetic Algorithm in Architecture’, in Neil Leach (ed.), Designing for a Digital World, (Sussex: Wiley-Academy Press, 2002), pp.117-120.

17. Sanford Kwinter, ‘The Complex and the Singular’, in Architectures of Time: Toward a Theory of the Event in Modernist Culture, (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002), pp.3-31.

18. Lars Spuybroek, ‘The Structure of Vagueness’, In L. Spuybroek, (ed), NOX Machining Architecture, (London: Thames and Hudson, 2004), pp. 352-359

© 2004 Lars Spuybroek. Reprinted by kind permission of Thames & Hudson Ltd., London

19. Ali Rahim, ‘Affects and Effects’ in Catalytic Formations: Architecture and Digital Design, (Oxon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2006), pp.136-187.

20. Michael Speaks, ‘Intelligence After Theory’, Perspecta 38, 2006, pp 103-108

Reprinted with the permission of Perspecta, Yale School of Architecture

21. Usman Haque, ‘The Architectural Relevance of Gordon Pask’, Architectural Design, 77, 4, 2007, pp.54-61.

22. Neil Leach, 'Swarm Urbanism', Architectural Design, 79, 4, 2009, pp.56-63.

23. Patrik Schumacher, ‘Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design’, Architectural Design, 79, 4, 2009, pp.14-23.

Volume 3

Part 4: Design Computation

1. Steven Anson Coons, ‘An Outline of the Requirements for a Computer-Aided Design System’, in Proceedings of the May 21-23, 1963, Spring Joint Computer Conference, (Detroit: ACM, 1963), pp.299-304.

2. Terry Winograd, ‘From programming environments to environments for designing’,

Communications of the ACM, 38 ,6, 1995, pp. 65-74

3. Ulrich Flemming and Robert Woodbury, ‘Software Environment to Support Early Phases in Building Design (SEED): Overview’, Journal of Architectural Engineering, 1, 4, 1995, pp.147-152.

4. D. Bharat, G. Schmitt, S.G. Shih, L. Bendel, B. Faltings, I. Smith, K. Hua, et al, ‘Case-Based Spatial Design Reasoning’, Advances in Case-Based Reasoning, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 984, 1995, pp.198-210.

5. Kristina Shea, and Jonathan Cagan, ‘Innovative Dome Design: Applying Geodesic Patterns with Shape Annealing’, AI EDAM: Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 11, 5, 1997, pp.379-394.

6. Jules Moloney, ‘Digital Craft’, Unpublished.

7. Les A. Piegl and Wayne Tiller, ‘Computing Offsets of NURBS Curves and Surfaces’, Computer-Aided Design, 31, 2, 1999, pp.147-56.

8. Athanassios Economou, ‘The Symmetry Lessons from Froebel Building Gifts’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26, 1, 1999, pp.75-90.

9. J. Szewczyk and A. Jakimowicz, ‘Multi User Interface Problems in Current CAD Systems’, in M. Stellingwerff, and J. Verbeke (eds.), ACCOLADE - Architecture, Collaboration, Design, (Delft: Delft University Press [DUP Science], 2001), pp. 183-194.

10. C.J.K. Williams, ‘The Analytic and Numerical Definition of the Geometry of the British Museum Great Court Roof’, in M. Burry, S. Datta, A. Dawson, and A.J. Rollo, (eds.), The Proceedings of the third International Mathematics and Design Conference M&D2001: digital, hand, eye, ear, mind, (Geelong: Deakin University, 1999), pp.434-440.

11. Terry Knight, ‘Computing with Emergence’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30, 1, 2003, pp.125-155.

12. Hugh Whitehead, ‘Laws of Form’, in Branko Kolarevic (ed.), Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing, (New York: Spon Press, 2003), pp.81-100.

13. Kostas Terzisdis, ‘Hybrid Form’, Design Issues, 19, 1, 2003, pp.57-61.

14. Mark Burry, ‘Between Intuition and Process: Parametric Design and Rapid Prototyping’, in Branko Kolarevic (ed.), Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing, (New York: Spon Press, 2003), pp.147-162

15. James Glymph, Dennis Shelden, Cristiano Ceccato, Judith Mussel, and Hans Schober, ‘A Parametric Strategy for Free-Form Glass Structures Using Quadrilateral Planar Facets’, Automation in Construction,13, 2, 2004, pp.187-202.

16. Robert Aish and Robert Woodbury, ‘Multi-Level Interaction in Parametric Design’, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3638, 2005, pp.151-62.

17. Axel Kilian, ‘Design Innovation Through Constraint Modeling’, International Journal of Architectural Computing, 4, 1, 2006, pp.87-105.

18. Jane Burry, ‘Mindful Spaces: Computational Geometry and the Conceptual Spaces in Which Designers Operate’, International Journal of Architectural Computing, 5, 4, 2007, pp.611-624.

19. Neil C. Katz, ‘Parametric Modeling in AutoCAD’, AECbytes Viewpoint, 32, 2007.

20. Ingeborg Rocker, ‘Versioning: Architecture as Series?’, in First International Conference on Critical Digital: What Matters(s)?’, (Cambridge: Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 2008), pp.157-170.

21. Sawako Kaijima, Computational Design Consultancy, Architecture in Computro [26th eCAADe Conference Proceedings Antwerpen (Belgium) 17-20 September 2008, pp. 311-318

22. A. Menges, ‘Integral Formation and Materialisation: Computational Form and Material Gestalt’, in B. Kolarevic and K. Klinger (eds.), Manufacturing Material Effects: Rethinking Design and Making in Architecture, (New York: Routledge, 2008), pp.195-210.

23. Brady Peters, ‘Parametric Acoustic Surfaces’, in ACADIA 09: reForm(): Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA, 2009), pp.174-181.

24. M. Turrin, A. Kilian, R. Stouffs, and S. Sariyildiz, ‘Digital Design Exploration of Structural Morphologies Integrating Adaptable Modules: A Design Process Based on Parametric Modeling’ in T. Tidafi and T. Dorta (eds.), Joining Languages, Cultures and Visions: CAADFutures 2009, (Montreal: Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal, 2009), pp.800- 814.

25. Sean Ahlquist, ‘Realizing Formal and Functional Complexity for Structurally Dynamic Systems in Rapid Computational Means: Computational Methodology based on Particle Systems for Complex Tension-Active Form Generation’, in Advances in Architectural Geometry, (Vienna: Springer, 2010), pp. 2005-220

26. Fabian Schuerer, ‘Signal to Noise - What is Quality in Digital Architecture?’, in T. Valena, T. Avermaete, G. Vrachliotis (eds.), Structuralism Reloaded: Rule Based Design in Architecture and Urbanism, (Fellbach-Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges, 2011), pp.269-274.

27. Andrew I-kang Li, ‘Computing Style’, Nexus Network Journal, 13, 1, 2011, pp.183-93.

Volume 4

Part 5: Novel Architectural Design

1. Greg Lynn, ‘Multiplicitous and Inorganic Bodies’, Assemblage, 19, 1992, pp.33-49.

2. Cecil Balmond, ‘New Structure and the Informal’, Assemblage, 33, 1997, pp.47-57.

3. Mark Goulthorpe, ‘Aegis Hypo-surface: Autoplastic to Alloplastic’, in Architectural Design: Hypersurface Architecture II, (London: Wiley Academy Press, 2000), pp.60-65.

4. Michael Nitsche and Maureen Thomas, ‘Stories in Space: The Concept of the Story Map’, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3805, 2003, pp.85-93.

5. S. Roudavski and F. Penz, ‘Space, Agency, Meaning and Drama in Navigable Real-Time Virtual Environments’, in M. Copier and J. Raessens (eds.), Digital Games Research Conference 2003 Proceedings, (Utrecht: Utrecht University, 2003), pp.1-16.

6. Marc Aurel Schnabel, Thomas Kvan, Steve K.S. Kuan and Weidong Li, ‘3D Crossover: Exploring Objets Digitalisé’, International Journal of Architectural Computing, 2, 4, 2004, pp.476-490.

7. Philip Steadman, ‘Why are Most Buildings Rectangular?’, Architectural Research Quarterly, 10, 2, 2006, pp.119-130.

8. Neri Oxman, ‘Digital Craft: Fabrication Based Design in the Age of Digital Production’, in Workshop Proceedings for Ubicomp 2007: International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, (Innsbruck: Ubicomp, 2007), pp.534-538.

9. Marcos Novak, ‘Transmitting Architecture Revisited’, Conference proceedings, The XXIII UIA World Congress of Architecture, Torino 2008

10. Jenny E. Sabin and Peter Lloyd Jones, ‘Nonlinear Systems Biology and Design: Surface Design’, in Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), (Minneapolis: ACADIA, 2008), pp.54-65

11. Mario Carpo, ‘Nonstandard Morality: Digital Technology and Its Discontents’, in Anthony Vidler (ed.), Architecture Between Spectacle and Use, (Williamstown, Massachusetts: Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, 2008), pp.127-142.

12. Neil Spiller, ‘Plectic Architecture: Towards a Theory of The Post- Digital in Architecture’, in Digital Architecture Now: A Global Survey of Emerging Talent, (London: Thames and Hudson, 2008), pp.362-366.

© 2008 Neil Spiller. Reprinted by kind permission of Thames & Hudson Ltd., London

13. K. Oosterhuis, ‘We Robots’, in K. Oosterhuis, H. Bier (eds.) IA # 5, Robotic Architecture, (Heijningen, the Netherlands: Jap Sam Books, 2012), pp.6-12.

14. M. R. Thomsen and M. Tamke, ‘The Active Model: A Calibration of Material Intent’, in P. Ayres (ed.), Persistent Modelling: Extending the Role of Architectural Representation, (London: Routledge, 2012), pp.141-154.

15. M. Hensel, ‘Performance-oriented Design from a Material Perspective – Domains of Agency and the Spatial Material Organisation Complex’, in Y. J. Grobman and E. Neuman, Performalism: Form and Performance in Digital Architecture, (London: Routledge, 2012), pp.43-48.

Part 6: Trans-disciplinary

1. Pierre E. Bézier, ‘A Personal View of Progress in Computer Aided Design’, ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 20, 3, 1986, pp.154-159.

2. J. Wojtowicz and B. Kazimierz, ‘Lessons from Distributed Design Practice’, in A. Brown, (eds.), Architectural Computing from Turing to 2000 eCAADe Conference Proceedings, (Liverpool: eCAADe, 1999), pp.482-487.

3. Thomas Kvan, ‘Collaborative Design: What Is It?’, Automation in Construction, 9, 4, 2000, pp.409-415.

4. Branko Kolarevic, Gerhard Schmitt, Urs Hirschberg, David Kurmann, and Brian Johnson, ‘An Experiment in Design Collaboration’, Automation in Construction, 9, 1, 2000, pp.73-81.

5. Kevin R. Klinger, ‘Expressive Form or Digital Craft?: Historical Arguments for an Alignment of Design and Fabrication processes in the Digital Age’, in ACSA National Conference, (New Orleans: ACSA, 2002), pp.1-6.

6. Bryan Lawson, ‘Schemata, Gambits and Precedent: Some Factors in Design Expertise’, Design Studies, 25, 5, 2004, pp.443-57.

7. Bob Sheil, ‘Transgression from Drawing to Making’, Architectural Research Quarterly, 9, 1, 2005, pp.20-32.

8. Francois Roche, {Science} Fiction & Mass Culture Crisis’, in B. Durandin and A. Ruby (eds.), Spoiled Climate, (Birkhauser, 2004) pp. 56-60

9. Michael Weinstock, ‘Self‐Organisation and Material Constructions’, Architectural Design, 76, 2, 2006, pp.34-41.

10. Klaus Bollinger, Manfred Grohmann, and Oliver Tessmann, ‘Form, Force, Performance: Multi‐Parametric Structural Design’, Architectural Design, 78, 2, 2008, pp.20-25.

11. Thomas Fischer, ‘The Interdependence of Linear and Circular Causality in CAAD Research: A Unified Model Source’, in Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, (Hong Kong: CAADRIA, 2010), pp.609-618.

12. Flora D Salim, Hugo M Mulder, and Jane R Burry, ‘Form fostering: A Novel Design Approach for Interacting with Parametric Models in the Embodied Virtuality’, ITcon, 16, 2011, pp.135-150.

About the Editor

Mark Burry is Professor of Innovation (Spatial Information Architecture) and Director of Spatial Information Architecture Laboratory (SIAL), RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

SIAL has been established as a holistic transdisciplinary research environment dedicated to almost all aspects of contemporary spatial design activity. The laboratory focuses on collocated design research and undergraduate and postgraduate teaching with associated advanced computer applications and the rapid prototyping of ideas. The laboratory has a design-practice emphasis and acts as a creative think-tank accessible to both local and international practices, including ARUP in Melbourne, Sydney and London, dECOi in MIT, and Gehry Partners in Los Angeles.

Professor Burry is also the Founding Director of RMIT University’s Design Research Institute (DRI) which fosters new knowledge and innovative practice, products and environments through trans-disciplinary design research, with a focus on design research as a ‘solution finder’ to real current and future challenges.

About the Series

Critical Concepts in Architecture

Edited and introduced by leading experts in the field, Routledge’s Major Works collections are designed to meet today’s research, reference, and teaching needs. These ‘mini libraries’ bring together canonical and cutting-edge scholarship to provide users with historical context as well as a thorough, broad overview of current issues and debates.

Learn more…

Subject Categories

BISAC Subject Codes/Headings:
ARCHITECTURE / Design, Drafting, Drawing & Presentation
ARCHITECTURE / History / Contemporary (1945-)