sustainability

Article A Methodology Using Prototyping Based on the Digital-Physical Models in the Architectural Design Process

Do Young Kim Department Future Technology and Convergence Research, Korea Institute of Civil and Building Technology (KICT), Gyeonggi-do 10223, Korea; [email protected]

 Received: 23 April 2019; Accepted: 29 July 2019; Published: 15 August 2019 

Abstract: In this study, a design methodology based on prototyping is proposed. This design methodology is intended to enhance the functionality of the test, differentiating it from the prototyping that is being conducted in conventional architectural design projects. The objective of this study is to explore reference cases that enable to maximize the utilization of both digital models and physical models that have been currently used in architectural . Also, it is to explore the complementary roles and effects of digital models and physical models. Smart Building Envelopes (SBEs) are one of challenging topics in architectural design and requires innovative design process included tests and risk management. A conceptual prototyping-based model considering the topic is applied to the design studio (education environment in university). Designing SBEs is not difficult to conceive ideas, but it is impossible to “implement” using the conventional design method. Implementing SBEs requires to strengthen validities and improve responsibilities of ideas in the stages of architectural designs, with cutting-edge technologies and smart materials. The design methodology enables designers (represented by students) to apply materials and manufacturing methods using digital models (, simulation, BIM) and physical models, rather than representing vanity images that are considered simple science fiction.

Keywords: prototyping; digital model; physical model; smart building envelope; design process

1. Research Background In response to the demands of the 4th Industrial Revolution [1,2], there is a need for a way to rapidly derive users’ needs and strategies in the field [3]. On the other hand, in the automotive and aerospace fields, designs have been developed in response to the changes in the contemporary requirements, and the results have been achieved through a method called “prototyping” [4,5]. Prototyping can be explained by the meaning of “.” The word “prototype” is used in two ways: As an original model of something that serves as a basis for other things (Wikipedia, 19 February 2019) and as an “early” sample or model, including the functions of tests, which are created to find a design solution [6]. In the former definition, “prototype” refers to the beginning of the design, the basis, and the standard. In the latter definition, “prototype” leads to the ’s assuming-solving process in the course of all the design processes. Especially, in terms of the design process, the latter definition is closely related to the meaning of economic benefits. According to Acquisition Logistic Guide [7], in the last steps of the research and development process, not only does the cost of the project increase; the opportunity to reduce the costs also sharply decreases. That is, the design risks need to be eliminated at the beginning of the design phase, then the costs and resources can be reduced. The success of projects depends on the clarification of the requirements at an early stage and on rapidly eliminating the design risks.

Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416; doi:10.3390/su11164416 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 2 of 23

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

2. Research Objectives and Scope A new design methodology is proposed in this work to help architectural design firms respond to global movements. The purpose of this methodology is to increase the productivity of architects who are fundamentally faced by architects. The reason for low construction productivity is related to high tolerance characteristics compared to other designs [17,18]. This tolerance could be solved at the construction or use stage, but it is to strike the type of architecture that needs to be more modern (e.g., climate-responsive, smart enclosures). In fact, the problem of tolerance is related to situations that do not take into account all the variables involved in the design phase, or the variables involved in the ongoing process. In the process of completing a typical building and a differentiated building, there is a high possibility that the opinions and satisfaction of the end user are not reflected, which causes astronomical economic loss. In this paper, we focus on advanced cases of designing buildings as products. The designer quickly identifies errors that can occur during the design process by simultaneously considering the material and manufacturing process at the design stage. This means that early ideas can actually be created. Of course, purposing performance is not always able to be directly linked to productivity. The key in these cases is not only measuring performance as a way to achieve productivity, but also checking the measured values, both qualitatively and quantitatively, in a visible way. In conclusion, the purpose of this paper is to show that designers are performing in a visible way and to solve them. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 4 of 23

In general, the function of a digital model is known to enable a human to implement a complex form that is hard to be realized by calculation or imagination. Parametric design, simulation tools, and building information models are among the digital technologies that are currently being used in large-scale, atypical projects in the construction sector. The design firms (Zaha Hadid, Herzog de Meuron, Gehry Technology, etc.) have been able to easily implement complex geometry with mathematical rules and use algorithms to analyze the performance of buildings to improve design accuracy and building performance. However, it should be noted that, despite the efficiency of the digital model, most of the experiments taking into account the properties of the material, characteristics of the site and surrounding environment, and manufacturing process are realized through the physical model. This aspect is also evident in the design training environment. Of course, the of digital and physical models in practice and in the educational environment varies in size and in proximity to the end result. However, the complement of the two models proceeds at the same time without the internal validity of the design being established, not just the result. This clearly recognizes that the digital model’s functions are responsible for new and convenient information processing and analysis, but emphasizes that the analog approach is visually appealing and familiar with the physical aspects of the site. Despite the acknowledgment of the complementarity between digital and physical models, there is no example of defining the complementary role of both models, focused on productivity and performance efficiency. Therefore, in this paper, a design methodology is based on prototyping model using digital models and physical models to verify the effect of complementarity on designers. Of course, in the future digital models are able to substitute to physical models perfectly. However, in order to make highly functional and advanced products through digital technology, it is essential that the complementary utilization of two models is essential. It is because the physical model is an easy-to-make imagination to realize or validate plans according to the designer’s intentions. Suggesting a design method based on complementarity using digital models and physical models involves two purposes. First, a design methodology that can minimize design risks and can create a timely response to the rapid changes in the climate environment and users’ needs is necessary. The complementarity of digital and physical models (digital-physical models) theoretically minimizes the risks, which ultimately increases the reliability of the design. Digital and physical models used in the conventional designs are primarily employed to explore personal preferences like aesthetics of forms rather than focusing on the many design risks, such as environmental performance. In the design process of “Smart Building Envelopes (SBEs)”, such use of digital and physical models is likely to lead to design failure. Unless many types of material, as well as manufacturing methods or environmental variables, are considered at an early stage, it will be impossible to realize the shape and structure according to the design intent. The failure of realizing the initial expected design leads to unbelievable economic losses, so differentiated are essential. Second, the design methodology using digital-physical models is essential for design groups that use technology convergence to carry out challenging tasks. According to the 4th Industrial Revolution, design firms are sympathetic to the need for a variety of technical attempts. Compared to other fields, however, the technical introductions in architectural design are remarkably slow. In addition, design firms using high technologies are generally reluctant to share their design data or outcomes. Of course, there have been some cases of SBEs, but they were not reproductions or generalizations of new SBEs. Most SBE designs are differently constructed or finally abandoned. This is because many design problems have not been recognized and solved in the design stages, and as such, the use of such SBEs results in unbelievable economic loss. The realization of smart envelopes requires a way to identify and resolve design risks immediately. The purpose of this study is to apply the design methodology to the design practitioner. However, it is impossible for design practitioners to expect to participate in the experiment. The reason is that it takes time and spaces to experiment, and it is necessary to get financial support and cooperation in Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 5 of 23 advance. Due to this limitation, it should be replaced by a group similar to the design practitioner. As a similar group, a design studio, a kind of educational environment (novice designer) is adopted. The reason is because of the characteristics of current design studios and students. Although the importance of digital technology is still being addressed in today’s design studios, it has been only theoretically possible to see how those roles work in the design process. This has been raised as a problem in the process of operating actual design studios. In addition, the role, and effects of digital technology are limited by the students’ voluntary learning. We hope that another purpose of suggesting a methodology will be to help solve the gap between current teaching methods and the application of digital technology. In other words, (1) a design model is proposed that utilizes parametric design, simulation, and building information model. It is suitable for one of the objects, such as the SBE based on existing advanced design examples (design firms and design studios); and (2) a design methodology is proposed based on student works and processes after experiments using the design model. The method of this proposal is based on the results of the two-year college students’ participation (2nd semesters in 2015 and 2016—35 participants). Of course, there are insufficient quantities of cases to generalize with the methodology. However, readers can follow or utilize studied cases in implementations of innovative geometries without acknowledgment of the new method. Therefore, exploring the cases using complementary digital and physical models, prototyping-based models can be extended by applying new materials and technologies. Of course, the educational environment (design studio) is not exactly the same as the working environment. This environment allows students to experience the design process indirectly through the guidance of the instructor who participated in the practice before they experienced the practice. Therefore, the educational environment is similar to the working environment. First, through this case study, answers to specific questions are obtained. How do digital and physical models complement each other in the future? What are the effects on the complementarity of digital and physical models? With this content, practitioners attempting prototyping for the first time will be able to explore reference cases on the level and effectiveness of digital and physical models. In this study, a design method is based on the complementary use of digital and physical models for designing SBEs. The design methodology using digital-physical models is focused on the advantages of existing tools: Digital tools, such as parametric design, simulation, and Building Information Modeling (BIM), and physical tools like wood and plastic board. This is a method that is based on the functions not only of digital models, but also of physical models. This is to take into account the situation in which physical models are actively used beyond the current developments of digital technologies. For example, it is true that digital technologies have evolved in such a way that digital models can now be implemented in virtual worlds, almost in the same manner as in the physical world. Design firms that create complex buildings or unique shapes also use physical and digital models. Physical models have the potential to stimulate and inspire designer ideas. Indeed, design techniques like parametric design and simulation require knowledge of mathematics and of the data included in the form. While simple and small geometries may not be a big deal in digital modeling, it takes much time for complex design techniques to drastically improve the performances of designed forms or processes. As the number of building geometries and performances that a designer wishes to achieve increases, the optimization methods usually become more complex [19]. Misleading data and logic conforming to digital models may affect designers’ choices [20]. Thus, physical models are essential to identify or straighten the imperfect or immature data extracted from digital models. Proposed herein is a methodology for designing SBEs based on a process of prototyping using digital-physical models. The objectives of the work are to enable designers to embrace design implementation failures and learn from them early on. As illustrated in the framework, a case-based methodology is proposed. To derive examples based on the complementarity between digital and Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 6 of 23 physical models, conceptual models were formulated, and experiments were conducted on practical designersSustainability for 2019 two, 11, yearsx FOR PEER (2015–2016) REVIEW (Figure1). 6 of 24

FigureFigure 1.1. Research framework.framework.

TheThe researchresearch frameworkframework consistedconsisted ofof fourfour parts,parts, asas discusseddiscussed below.below. First,First, aa conceptual conceptual model model of of a prototyping a prototyping model model (O1 ) was(①) setwas up set using up theusing future the buildingfuture building designs anddesigns SBEs. and The SBEs. existing The literature existing was literature reviewed was for thereviewed requirements for the for requirements planning the prototyping for planning model. the Theprototyping future building model. designsThe future will building focus on designs the roles will of digitalfocus on and the physical roles of modelsdigital and in strengthening physical models the designin strengthening process by the considering design process the current by considering design techniques, the current and design SBEsfocus techniques, on the partsand SBEs of the focus design on processthe parts that of needthe design to be particularlyprocess that contributed need to be bypart theicularly digital contributed and physical by models. the digital and physical models.Second, an initial prototyping model (O2 ) was set up using cases of design projects carried out by designSecond, firms (Kieranan initial Timberlake, prototyping Gehry model Technologies, (②) was set up and using Withworks). cases of design In such projects cases, both carried digital out andby design physical firms models (Kieran were Timberlake, used (complementary Gehry Technologies, use) to and develop Withworks). a new construction In such cases, method both digital and smartand physical materials. models They werewere representativeused (complementary cases of e ffiuse)cient, to accurate,develop a reproducible, new construction and secure method designs and becausesmart materials. they were They based were on datarepresentative and experiments. cases of The efficient, successes accurate, of the threereproducible, design projects and secure that weredesigns used because in this they work were depended based on on data the conductand expe ofriments. early tests The forsuccesses finding of the the risk three factors design and projects early resolutionsthat were used [21– 25in ].this This work is impossible depended inon traditional the conduc designt of early methods. tests for A finding prototyping-based the risk factors process and modelearly resolutions was established [21–25]. by analyzingThis is impossible the roles andin traditional functions of design digital methods. and physical A prototyping-based models. processThird, model the was model established was modified by analyzing in detail the through roles and the functions project of of lab-based digital and design physical studios models. (O3 ). “DesignThird, studio” the model is a method was modified of operating in detail classes, throug andh “lab-basedthe project designof lab-based studio” design is a design studios studio (③). based“Design on studio” collaborative is a method work with of operating supportive classes, laboratories. and “lab-based The design design studio studio” is almost is a design the same studio as a practicalbased on design collaborative firm because work itwith is operated supportive by architecturallaboratories. designers The design and studio associated is almost experts the assumingsame as a practicalpractical roles.design Although firm because design it studios is operated are almost by architectural the same as practical designers design and firms,associated the roles experts and functionsassuming ofpractical digital androles. physical Although models design are studios more clearly are almost defined the insame relation as practical to novice design designers. firms, the rolesFourth, and functions experiments of digital were and conducted physical with models a group are more of designers clearly asdefined participants, in relation to verifyto novice the edesigners.ffectiveness of the prototype-based process model. The usefulness of the prototyping model was analyzedFourth, in termsexperiments of whether were the conducted roles of thewith digital a group and of physical designers models as participants, contribute toto the verify task the in theeffectiveness process. Thenof the the prototype-based effects of the prototyping process model model. The were usefulness surveyed, of the such prototyping as whether model designers was sympathizeanalyzed in withterms the of roleswhether of digital the roles and of physical the digita models.l and physical models contribute to the task in the process. Then the effects of the prototyping model were surveyed, such as whether designers sympathize with the roles of digital and physical models. In order to minimize the designer’s time to distort design results, design results were collected through pin-up announcements at fixed intervals (twice a week). If the presentation period is long, there is a possibility of distorting the intention or the concept of the design. This is done through qualitative research because the number of people involved in the design studio is small. (1) Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 7 of 23

In order to minimize the designer’s time to distort design results, design results were collected Sustainabilitythrough pin-up 2019, 11 announcements, x FOR PEER REVIEW atfixed intervals (twice a week). If the presentation period is7 long,of 24 there is a possibility of distorting the intention or the concept of the design. This is done through qualitativeObservation research method because of the thestudent number is based of people on “researcher’s involved in the non-participation” design studio is small. (observation (1) Observation using videomethod camera). of the student To prevent is based observers on “researcher’s from recogn non-participation”izing the researcher’s (observation observing using video behavior camera). or Toforming prevent familiarity observers with from the recognizing researcher, the a researcher’s video camera observing can be behavior set up to or allow forming students familiarity to freely with discussthe researcher, during the a camera process can (pre-installed be set up to at allow the beginning students toof freelythe design discuss studio during for students the design to processadapt to (pre-installed the device). (2) at theWe beginning also conduct of the surveys design and studio team for interviews students to to adapt investigate to the device).how students’ (2) We perceptionsalso conduct of surveys both models and team (digital interviews and physical to investigate models) howchange. students’ perceptions of both models (digitalBecause and physical it is case models) studies change. that are difficult to generalize, the method of qualitative research is appropriate.Because It it focuses is case studieson the thatimportance are diffi ofcult th toe various generalize, behaviors the method and outputs of qualitative derived research from the is process,appropriate. rather It focuses than the on theoutcomes importance created of the throug varioush the behaviors completion and outputs of the derivedexperiment. from theTherefore, process, qualitativerather than research the outcomes is appropriate created through for this the purpos completione. Moreover, of the experiment.since the design Therefore, is related qualitative to the creativityresearch is of appropriate design, creating for this a purpose. closed and Moreover, regular sinceenvironment the design can is relatedbe a means to the to creativity control creativity of design, itself.creating a closed and regular environment can be a means to control creativity itself. Ideally, architecturalarchitectural designdesign firmsfirms needneed toto cooperatecooperate in testing prototyping models, but the work environment is usually much influenced influenced by the daily or ad-hoc tasks tasks related related to to the the existing existing projects. projects. It is impossible to perform experiments targeting actual design firmsfirms without giving them economic support or compensation.compensation. Thus, Thus, the the design design educat educationion environment environment is is appropriate for testing the prototyping models as a similar target.target. Ultimately, Ultimately, this study sought to maximize the benefitsbenefits of digital and physical models by using design cases (student design results), and to provide a reference material that will enable designers to use digital tools and physical materials at the right time and in the right situations.

3. Conceptual Model

3.1. A Conceptual Model Using Contemporary Digital Models and Physical Models The rolesroles ofof digitaldigital and and physical physical models models have have changed, changed, and and the the functions functions of both of both models models are now are nowexpanded expanded Figure Figure2. 2.

Figure 2. Prototyping using digital-physical models.

The paradigm of digital models and physical mode modelsls allows designers to choose design solutions from as many alternatives as possible. In In particular particular,, by evaluating the design in terms of interactivity interactivity in termsterms ofof expression, expression, finally, finally, the the optimized optimized alternatives alternatives can becan selected. be selected. The rolesThe ofroles the of digital the digital model modelhave been have extended been extended to functions to functions of representation, of representation, generation, generation, operation, operation, and optimization. and optimization. • Digital model - “Representation”: Digital models like 3D models and 2D drawings have been extensively used in the form-making process. This involves iterative creation and modification of the operations requiring manual crafting by the designer as a computer operator. - “Generation” level: Due to the development of computational design tools like the generative parametric design based on scripts, digital models also better supports the regeneration of numerous offspring alternatives to help find the optimum forms [9,26]. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 8 of 23

Digital model • - “Representation”: Digital models like 3D models and 2D drawings have been extensively used in the form-making process. This involves iterative creation and modification of the operations requiring manual crafting by the designer as a computer operator. - “Generation” level: Due to the development of computational design tools like the generative parametric design based on scripts, digital models also better supports the regeneration of numerous offspring alternatives to help find the optimum forms [9,26]. - “Operation” level: The integration of parametric techniques, integrated modeling methods (like BIM), simulation enables the operation of large amounts of building information, which makes it possible to generate alternatives in cost- and time-efficient ways rapidly. In particular, advanced computer simulation allows the calculation of the overall building performances (capabilities to respond to the designer’s preference, end user’s satisfaction, and environmental changes). Digital fabrication tools also enable designers to create a variety of geometric shapes, enabling designers to explore issues that are actually created or operated [27]. As such tools support the iterative process of generation-operation, the digital model changes from form-making to form-finding as designers take advantage of design solutions selected from among a myriad of possible alternatives. - “Interaction” level: The digital model using Virtual Reality, or Augmented Reality) helps implement the infinite functions of forms beyond the contemporary state of the form and the design operation [28]. If the digital models connect with physical models, their interactions would be changed according to the sensor data on the environmental conditions and user behaviors. Thus, it helps demonstrate the level of satisfactory performance for the end users in real time. This interaction between the digital and physical models involves various aspects pertaining to the use of all the aforementioned technologies. The current BIM and multi-dimensional realistic technologies like the virtual haptic and tangible initiative have come to include this interaction. For example, BIM and the interactive augmented model have been expanded based on various sources, such as the terrestrial and airborne LIDAR, as well as other types of sensors. Finally, the digital model aids a prototyping process using the complementary digital and physical models by integrating technologies and Internet of Things (IoT). This integration requires cumulative functions of the digital model, such as “representation,” “generation”, and “operation”. Thus, the digital model supports the validation of prototypes by changing multiple ranges of operations and various types of shapes.

Physical model • - “Representation”: On the other hand, the physical model is would according to the designer’s intentions, the medium is strictly controlled by the material and the physical force (gravity, friction, etc.) [29]. Because they contain representations and tangibility of difficult to express using a digital model, texture, a physical model has received attention as a powerful medium of expression in the computerized age. - “Manufacturing”: Digital fabrication technology allows physical models to be embodied in a form suitable for production in its original intended form [30,31]. - “Operation”: Sensors, actuators, and processors enable not only the physical model to be evaluated based on real-time data, but also the shape or movement thereof can be changed. For example, the shape, configuration, and characteristics of the elements constituting the physical model can be changed according to the user’s information (name, occupancy, etc.) and environmental conditions (temperature, humidity, etc.) [32]. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 9 of 23

Smart building envelops (SBEs) is one of the challenging topics in architectural design and requires innovative design process included tests and risk management. The building envelope is a part of a building that is in contact with the interior or exterior of the building. It has a similar meaning as façade or a window system, and include the roofs of buildings. The SBEs’ shapes or functions change in response to the surrounding environment (e.g., climate, indoor environment, or user requirements). Designing SBEs is not difficult to conceive ideas, but it is impossible to “implement” using the conventional design method. The SBE itself can be implemented using only digital or physical models, but it is difficult to fully validate unless prototyping-based processes are supported by these roles in each model.

3.2. A Conceptual Model Based on Prototyping In the design of the SBE, complex requirements like structural reliability and operational safety, as well as design reliability and geometric constraints are required [33]. The design of SBEs is a process of coordinating the components’ functionality in terms of integrated engineering as a process of finding the interactions between the components that meet the above requirements [34]. To satisfy these requirements, architectural design is required, as well as ICT, robotics, smart materials, and . SBEs are related to mechanical, electromechanical, material, and information technologies [34,35]. SustainabilityFrom the2019 initial, 11, x FOR design PEER stage REVIEW of SBEs, designers must identify and resolve the errors that negatively 10 of 24 impact the overall performance of buildings. Considering the geometry, system structure, and operating sense,conditions, perception, all together cognition, presents and a problembehavior. that On contributes the other tohand, design physical failure. models It is not help easy todesigners find the conductoptimal a movement series of manufacturing and form of SBEs processes through in thereal usualenvironments. design process Using appliedphysical to models, general designers building areproducts able to [33 gain–41]. real-time Based on feedb examplesack to of SBEs,resolve design design problems problems give based rise to on many unexpected issues, such defects. as noise To modifyand operation designs, failure: however, Maintenance it is necessary cost (Arab to prepare World Institute),suitable materials, component but lifetime also to (Novartis secure extra campus), time forpower the consumptionmanufacturing (Bahrain processes, WTC), such and as noisethe fabrication and vibration and (Pearlalignment River of Tower). the components. The economic loss is also requiredThe point to is be how reduced the usability by testing of the digital shape, and structure, physical operation, models is and maximized. manufacturing The maximized methods. functionsSo far, of technology digital and and physical know-how models have is beenan idea accumulatedl case. To improve for many the years usability in the fieldof the of two architectural models, thedesign role based of the on complementarity the uses of digital modelsbetween (A) them and physicalis essential. models The (B). next The chapter concept shows of the prototypingthe role of complementarity,process is shown inwhich Figure is3 analyzed. It is set upusing to maximizecases of architectural the e ffects ofdesign current projects. digital technologies.

Figure 3. PrototypingFigure process3. Prototyping using process digital andusing physical digital and models physical in Smartmodels Building Envelope (SBE) design. in Smart Building Envelope (SBE) design.

3.3. CaseThe Studies use of of digital Architectural models Design can be Firms explained through “parametric design” (a), “simulation” (b), “BIM” (c), and “digital fabrication” (d) (e.g., 3D printers and laser cutters). Parametric design (a) and BIMPrototyping (c) allow creations in the and automotive maintenances and of shapesaerospace and motionsfields aims based not on theonly relationship to explore between ways theof implementingcomponents and geometries the members. suitable Simulation for design (b) concepts, also enables but the also evaluation to minimize of the the design risks posed performance by the use of certain materials and techniques at the levels of the actual implementation. In fact, in architectural design, there are reasons for the necessity of conducting this research. Advanced digital technologies have been applied in the field of architecture design. The required time for the commercialization of digital technology, however, is somewhat long compared to the engineering field. This is because architectural design firms are reluctant to introduce new materials and technologies, due to the economic burdens involved and their lack of understanding of materials and technology. Of course, advanced architectural design firms (e.g., Kieran Timberlake, Gehry Technologies, and Withworks) have applied new types of materials and techniques in architectural design. They have made digital and physical mock-ups from the initial levels of the design processes. Studies dealing with both the digital and physical models are categorized into two types. They deal with complementarity as an “alternative” aspect [42] or a “synergy” aspect [43,44]. Studies on complementarity as an “alternative” aspect emphasize the fact that the roles of digital models increasingly replace the roles of physical models. Studies on complementarity as a “synergy” aspect, on the other hand, emphasize the fact that despite the development of digital models, physical models have unique functions that cannot be replaced by digital models. The previous “synergy” researches, however, have not clearly explained “complementarity” (the relationship between digital and physical models). Proposing cases of “complementarity” helps designers not only test actual designs easily than test using only digital or physical models, but also find design inspirations. Thus, case studies are required to entice more designers to conduct design processes using digital-physical models. Assuming that designers utilize cases of prototyping process using digital-physical models, when they try to realize complicated geometries, prototyping enables them to create complicated Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 10 of 23 without directly demonstrating the conditions of the surrounding environment. In addition, digital fabrication (g) makes it possible to quickly manufacture and operate complex shapes and components using real materials. By using these four functions, designers can easily find and construct reasonable shapes and systems. The use of physical models can be explained through a “sensor” (f), an “actuator” (e), a “processor” (d), “digital fabrication” (g), and “digital scanning” (h). The sensor (f) is a tool that senses the positions/behaviors/conditions of the objects related to a specific task. The actuator (e) is a tool that drives the functions/parts of objects (e.g., parallel movement, rotation). The processor (d) converts the output of each device into meaningful information. It is necessary to analyze the information sensed by the sensor through the information processor, and to link the interpreted result to the act of the actuator. Digital fabrication (g) makes it possible to create shapes that are closer to reality than those created through 2D-based fabrication. It is important because it has made the sharing and production of digital files faster and reproducible. Digital scanning (h) helps designers read ready-made physical shapes. It is in fact, in the same context as the digital fabrication technology in terms of “digital file” and “rapid sharing.” The digital model allows the user to create a shape based on the rules defined by the designer (O1 ). In addition, it can simulate the environmental performance and driving method of various alternatives and can help find the optimum design (O2 ). Prototyping using the physical model allows the designer to test the shape and actual performance of the design through the implementation process (O3 ). This helps identify problems with actual fabrication, such as the combination of materials and components (O4 ). In addition, it is possible to represent the actual user’s point of view in the process of acquiring data appropriate to the user’s requirement, and to visually confirm the information of the actual environment (O5 ). Both digital fabrication and digital scanning allow designers to reduce the design time and cost remarkably and to improve the complementarity of the digital and physical models implemented in non-matching. Digital models help designers quantify the performance of designs across common test conditions, even without making physical models, but they do not represent all the various factors involved in designers’ inspirations. It also does not represent physical conditions like the end user’s sense, perception, cognition, and behavior. On the other hand, physical models help designers conduct a series of manufacturing processes in real environments. Using physical models, designers are able to gain real-time feedback to resolve design problems based on unexpected defects. To modify designs, however, it is necessary to prepare suitable materials, but also to secure extra time for the manufacturing processes, such as the fabrication and alignment of the components. The point is how the usability of digital and physical models is maximized. The maximized functions of digital and physical models is an ideal case. To improve the usability of the two models, the role of the complementarity between them is essential. The next chapter shows the role of complementarity, which is analyzed using cases of architectural design projects.

3.3. Case Studies of Architectural Design Firms Prototyping in the automotive and aerospace fields aims not only to explore ways of implementing geometries suitable for design concepts, but also to minimize the risks posed by the use of certain materials and techniques at the levels of the actual implementation. In fact, in architectural design, there are reasons for the necessity of conducting this research. Advanced digital technologies have been applied in the field of architecture design. The required time for the commercialization of digital technology, however, is somewhat long compared to the engineering field. This is because architectural design firms are reluctant to introduce new materials and technologies, due to the economic burdens involved and their lack of understanding of materials and technology. Of course, advanced architectural design firms (e.g., Kieran Timberlake, Gehry Technologies, and Withworks) have applied new types of materials and techniques in architectural design. They have made digital and physical mock-ups from the initial levels of the design processes. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 11 of 23

Studies dealing with both the digital and physical models are categorized into two types. They deal with complementarity as an “alternative” aspect [42] or a “synergy” aspect [43,44]. Studies on complementarity as an “alternative” aspect emphasize the fact that the roles of digital models increasingly replace the roles of physical models. Studies on complementarity as a “synergy” aspect, on the other hand, emphasize the fact that despite the development of digital models, physical models have unique functions that cannot be replaced by digital models. The previous “synergy” researches, however, have not clearly explained “complementarity” (the relationship between digital and physical models). Proposing cases of “complementarity” helps designers not only test actual designs easily than test using only digital or physical models, but also find design inspirations. Thus, case studies are required to entice more designers to conduct design processes using digital-physical models. Assuming that designers utilize cases of prototyping process using digital-physical models, when they try to realize complicated geometries, prototyping enables them to create complicated geometric shapes in digital models. It also enables them to learn and apply the shape deformation techniques in physical models without trying to implement them in digital models. The roles of digital and physical models were analyzed through design projects. Companies like those aforementioned have used digital and physical models in the design phase (Table1).

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

Name of Digital Model Physical Model Design Firm

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

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

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

 Form (FO): External shapes, internal shapes (space), details Categories of  Material (MA): Properties of the material tests  Operation (OP): Movements and facilities  Fabrication (FA): Production method

Kieran Timberlake has implemented smart-façade and modular building systems that incorporate prefabrication and embedded technologies. The success of design projects depends on the development of joints and the fabrication method used. Design projects have been operated with completed new design methods, such as the standardization of assemblies and the mixing of general and smart Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 12 of 23 materials. Withworks has optimized free-form systems while studying a new design method using existing technologies. To realize the shapes of free forms, the problems in the structural details and construction technologies need to be solved to make up for the disadvantages of the existing construction materials. The problems regarding the shapes have no correct solutions, and the success of the use of shapes depends on the time and cost. Gehry Technologies has realized Gehry’s ideas. To implement a unique geometry using general materials and glass, it has also developed construction methods to fabricate optimized panel surfaces using unique software and field experiments. Kieran Timberlake sought to explore building systems using embedded technologies like smart materials, information processing, and material mechanics. There has been no reference that allows the integration and output of multiple layers of materials, while keeping the thickness of a single substrate thin. Through prototyping, however, layers of general materials have been integrated with polyethylene terephthalate (PET). As devices or materials based on technologies are not commonly applied at the design stages, the firm needs to experiment in real environments, without reference cases for a single system. They call this work “science.” Gehry Technologies starts the initial programming and design phases by scanning the physical model in three dimensions. This is done to digitize the physical model for the development of the technical part or form. The row data acquired through physical models are structured through professional software, and the simulations for the environmental changes and production are used in the initial stage of the design process. Withworks has proceeded to make molds of irregular shapes and to optimize panels. There are two matters, however, that need to be overcome: The domestic steel engineering specialists are not familiar with the irregular concrete casting and the optimization of the panel, and the curvatures of free-form design are not constant. Designs are, thus, required to transform the curvatures through optimization, and to change the methods of casting irregular concrete in the field. Particularly, digital models are used as a means to evaluate construction errors using the scanned data extracted from physical prototypes. Physical prototypes are called “visual mock-up.” They are differentiated from general physical models because they can be digitized as data. What is common among the three aforementioned companies is that their designers have experienced a series of test-fails using the data of shapes with materials in the design stage. By making and studying designs in digital environments and in the physical fields, the firms have tried to maintain the intended shapes.

4. Course Design Using the Prototyping-Based Process

4.1. Case studies of Architecture Design Studios In the case of design studios, there are lab-based design studios with laboratories that use advanced technologies (Table2). Such laboratories study research methods using manufacturing technologies and new materials. They have also evolved to operate studios by applying digital and physical models, like practical firms of architectural design, based on the annual students’ results. According to the design results of the design studio cases, the functions of digital and physical models need to be extended. Because the functions originate from the characteristics and limitations of novice designers: Novice designers are explained through an opposite word as “experts”. They are not only naïve about design process and the viability of products, but also have less interaction experience and relatively poor to use or obtain knowledge to get design goals. The digital and physical models in design studios are different from the cases of practical design firms, as follows. The initial digital models are usually tantamount to the design principles for making design shapes (parametric models) and for the fabrication and transformation methods (simulation, BIM). As students are often either ignorant or have inaccurate knowledge of modeling or design shapes, they have difficulty implementing digital models. By making intermediate designs or parts of designs instead of the intended shapes, they try to control the digital models. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 13 of 23

Table 2. Case studies of architectural design projects.

Design Studio Digital Model Physical Model

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

 Form (FO): External shapes, internal shapes (space), details  Material (MA): Properties of materials Categories of Tests  Operation (OP): Movements and facilities  Fabrication (FA): Production method  Mid-tests (m-T): Intermediate trials and errors (F)

Note: In particular, novice designers mostly conduct a considerable amount of intermediate tests (F) for verifying uncertain information or hypotheses.

Physical models are used to gauge only the physical properties of materials that are difficult to examine using digital models. When representing or reviewing the combination of components, students need to consider expert knowledge of the final products in engineering. Physical models sometimes require designers to understand professional techniques like kinetic parts’ operation mechanisms or data processing logics. For example, production methods need to be practiced first to find a suitable production method when considering forms and structures. Physical models are used to roughly add details or supportive parts to assist structures. Although full-scale models are important for accurately evaluating the design performance, physical prototypes are preferred to be implemented on a small scale. Small-scale models are used like blob prototypes (unstructured form), due to economic burdens. For the prototyping process to reflect the users’ characteristics, digital and physical models need to evolve a series of challenging-evaluation-learning unknown areas of material properties and fabrication methods.

4.2. Course Design Based on Case Studies In the initial design phase, there are many factors concerning the building characteristics or components that are not determined. In the process of applying the unidentified parts sequentially, the digital and physical models may not be implemented at the same time. When modifications of each model occur, they affect the others. As there is familiarity with the existing teaching methods of design studios, however, examples should be presented to remind them of certain ideas. Cases of tools related to designing SBEs are shown: Referential digital tools like Rhino/Revit and Rhino plug-in (Figure4, O1 ), and referential physical tools like Arduino (O5 ). Cases of advanced design are also shown: The process and results of SBEs, automobiles, and aerospace (O2 ). In the course of utilizing the physical model, a presentation method related to such a model is provided as an example so that the performance of the model can be viewed objectively (O4 ). The reason for the offer is the preliminary questionnaire conducted among the students. In the surveys, the students are largely aware of the functions of digital models, and define these as “objective” and “rational” evaluation. On the other hand, they are not at all aware of the functions of physical models, and analyses using them focus on “visible” and “subjective” Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 24

For the prototyping process to reflect the users’ characteristics, digital and physical models need to evolve a series of challenging-evaluation-learning unknown areas of material properties and fabrication methods.

4.2. Course Design Based on Case Studies In the initial design phase, there are many factors concerning the building characteristics or components that are not determined. In the process of applying the unidentified parts sequentially, the digital and physical models may not be implemented at the same time. When modifications of each model occur, they affect the others. As there is familiarity with the existing teaching methods of design studios, however, examples should be presented to remind them of certain ideas. Cases of tools related to designing SBEs are shown: Referential digital tools like Rhino/Revit and Rhino plug- in (Figure 4, ①), and referential physical tools like Arduino (⑤). Cases of advanced design are also shown: The process and results of SBEs, automobiles, and aerospace (②). In the course of utilizing the physical model, a presentation method related to such a model is provided as an example so that the performance of the model can be viewed objectively ( ④ ). The reason for the offer is the preliminary questionnaire conducted among the students. In the surveys, the students are largely Sustainabilityaware 2019of the, 11 functions, 4416 of digital models, and define these as “objective” and “rational” evaluation.14 of 23 On the other hand, they are not at all aware of the functions of physical models, and analyses using them focus on “visible” and “subjective” evaluation. In addition, the basic manuals and use cases of evaluation.the laser In cutter addition, are provided the basic to manuals enable it and to usebe used cases as of an the intermediary laser cutter medium are provided to sequentially to enable it to ③ be usedcomplement as an intermediary digital and physical medium models to sequentially ( ). complement digital and physical models (O3 ).

Figure 4. Prototyping using digital-physical models. Figure 4. Prototyping using digital-physical models. The design studio is operated with the theme of “kinetic facade.” The kinetic envelope is a smart The design studio is operated with the theme of “kinetic facade.” The kinetic envelope is a smart envelope,envelope, which which began began with with passive passive movement, movement, but but its its implementation implementation features features andand performanceperformance vary accordingvary according to its application to its application to a wide to rangea wide of range advanced of advanced technologies, technologies, such assuch object as object networks, networks, artificial intelligence,artificial andintelligence, smart materials. and smart The materials. applications The applications of a broad rangeof a broad of technological range of technological applications are hardapplications to apply in classes.are hard The to apply reason in forclasses. adopting The reason “kinetic for facade” adopting in “kinetic this research facade” was in tothis allow research students to focuswas on to theallow transformations students to focus of formson the andtransformati structuresons rather of forms than and on structures the complexities rather than of technologies: on the The movements of the kinetic envelope require designers to visually orchestrate between components and to make clear structures, due to the smooth motion or function changes. It can be completed only through a perfect engineering-design combination. Kinetic designs have greater limitations in meeting the intended performances. As “kinetic” means to respond to changes in shapes or functions, the designs are dealt with in real environments like frictions and weight loads, due to the movement of the components. They can also cause noise. They require a series of challenge-evaluation-refinement because designs are difficult to implement only by using the usual form and structure of the general envelopes, and they allow designers to attempt to replace commonly used materials with new materials, or to study methods of manufacturing materials. The course for the design studio is largely categorized as a course for facilitating students’ development of the design by themselves, and as an evaluation course by tutors who play the role of clients or end users. Students first extract abstract shapes or the intentions of the kinetic facade (O1 , O2 , and O3 at level 1 in Figure5). They also make models of components with various logics of shapes and motions in a digital model, or roughly combine the components that enable imagining the system’s behaviors in physical models (O4 at level 2). Designers create digital models of the offspring types based on the same schemas (using parametric designs to control the variables and creations of variations), or artificially manipulate movements, while maintaining the overall shapes of physical models (O5 at level 3). Designers evaluate the performance of the design (O6 at level 5) and vary the shapes and movements based on the current ideas (O4 and O5 at level 4), or if the current idea needs to be changed, an attempt is made to improve the performance in a different way, by creating a new prototype (O7 at level 6). Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 24

complexities of technologies: The movements of the kinetic envelope require designers to visually orchestrate between components and to make clear structures, due to the smooth motion or function changes. It can be completed only through a perfect engineering-design combination. Kinetic designs have greater limitations in meeting the intended performances. As “kinetic” means to respond to changes in shapes or functions, the designs are dealt with in real environments like frictions and weight loads, due to the movement of the components. They can also cause noise. They require a series of challenge-evaluation-refinement because designs are difficult to implement only by using the usual form and structure of the general envelopes, and they allow designers to attempt to replace commonly used materials with new materials, or to study methods of manufacturing materials. The course for the design studio is largely categorized as a course for facilitating students’ development of the design by themselves, and as an evaluation course by tutors who play the role of clients or end users. Students first extract abstract shapes or the intentions of the kinetic facade (①, ②, and ③ at level 1 in Figure 5). They also make models of components with various logics of shapes and motions in a digital model, or roughly combine the components that enable imagining the system’s behaviors in physical models (④ at level 2). Designers create digital models of the offspring types based on the same schemas (using parametric designs to control the variables and creations of variations), or artificially manipulate movements, while maintaining the overall shapes of physical models (⑤ at level 3). Designers evaluate the performance of the design (⑥ at level 5) and vary the shapes and movements based on the current ideas (④and ⑤ at level 4), or if the current idea needs Sustainabilityto be2019 changed,, 11, 4416 an attempt is made to improve the performance in a different way, by creating a new 15 of 23 prototype (⑦ at level 6).

FigureFigure 5. Course 5. Course design design based based on on prototyping prototyping using using digital-physical digital-physical models. models.

5. Verification5. Verification

5.1. Design5.1. ResultsDesign Results Students are ideally able to predict performances by considering forms (FO), materials (MA), Students are ideally able to predict performances by considering forms (FO), materials (MA), operation (OP), and fabrication (FA) using digital prototypes and physical prototypes. Digital operationprototypes, (OP), and however, fabrication were (FA) used using primarily digital in the prototypes process of and implementing physical prototypes.forms while assuming Digital prototypes, the however,material were usedand the primarily operation in and the fabrication process of methods. implementing This is formsbecause whilestudents assuming have difficulty the material and theimplementing operation and these fabrication in digital mode methods.ls, or time This is wasted is because on thestudents implementation. have diWhenfficulty students implementing only these in digitalassumed models, these problems or time (FO, is wastedMA, OP, on FA) the through implementation. such digital models, When it studentswas necessary only to assumed create a these problemsphysical (FO, MA, model OP, that FA) included through the suchremaining digital problems. models, it was necessary to create a physical model that included the remaining problems. Physical prototypes were used mainly to actualize material properties and fabrication methods, which are mostly unknown. For example, they were used to judge if they had structurally safe forms/movements against gravity, or if there were inappropriate frictions between components, or noise. When physical prototypes were used to implement a form, however, they were manufactured by digital prototypes. This was the reason for considering the exact dimensions and areas of components. To utilize physical prototypes to change designs’ motions or functions by considering the surrounding environment, the use of digital devices was essential. By monitoring the data values of specific sensors or actuators, students were able to gauge the performance of small movements or the functional changes of prototypes, and to compare prototypes. Even so, it was difficult to perfectly synchronize the digital and physical models. To come up with a perfect match between the digital and physical models, much content was needed, but it was not at this level. In fact, as many tests and selections had to be done initially to determine ideas, the process of mutually matching prototype types and functions was impossible and premature. Table3 shows an example of the complement between digital and physical prototypes. Each example of digital and physical prototypes contains a number of assumptions and conclusions. The previous and later prototypes in each example were compared in terms of FO, MA, OP, and FA. Each model has a different expression and assumption, even though it has similar contents to other models. The case of EX 1 can be explained as below. The digital prototype is a two-dimensional representation, which was considered a form that did not actually represent materials and operations, particularly how they were made. In this case, the physical prototype is a three-dimensional shape, but a conceptual form about the actual operation and manufacturing methods were just implied. In the case of EX 2, even if the previous physical prototype represented all the four aspects, the subsequent digital prototypes may contain incomplete information. This is because the physical prototype implementation did not meet the intended performance, and it was necessary to create a new shape or to fine-tune how it worked. SustainabilitySustainability 2019 2019, ,11 11, ,x x FOR FOR PEER PEER REVIEW REVIEW 16 16 of of 24 24 SustainabilitySustainability 2019 2019, 11, ,11 x ,FOR x FOR PEER PEER REVIEW REVIEW 16 16 of of 24 24 PhysicalPhysical prototypes prototypes were were used used mainly mainly to to actualize actualize material material properties properties and and fabrication fabrication methods, methods, PhysicalPhysical prototypes prototypes were were used used mainly mainly to toactualize actualize material material properties properties and and fabrication fabrication methods, methods, whichwhich areare mostlymostly unknown.unknown. ForFor example,example, theythey wewerere usedused toto judgejudge ifif theythey hadhad structurallystructurally safesafe whichwhich are are mostly mostly unknown. unknown. For For example, example, they they we werere used used to to judge judge if ifthey they had had structurally structurally safe safe forms/movementsforms/movements againstagainst gravity,gravity, oror ifif therethere werewere inappropriateinappropriate frictionsfrictions betweenbetween components,components, oror forms/movementsforms/movementsSustainability 2019, 11 against, xagainst FOR PEER gravity, gravity, REVIEW or or if ifthere there were were inappropriate inappropriate frictions frictions between between components, components,16 orof or 24 noise.noise. When When physical physical prototypes prototypes were were used used to to im implementplement a a form, form, however, however, they they were were manufactured manufactured noise.noise. When When physical physical prototypes prototypes were were used used to to im implementplement a form,a form, however, however, they they were were manufactured manufactured bybynoise. digitaldigital When prototypes.prototypes. physical prototypes ThisThis waswas were thethe reason usedreason to for implementfor consideringconsidering a form, thethe however, exactexact dimensionsdimensions they were manufacturedandand areasareas ofof byby digital digital prototypes. prototypes. This This was was the the reason reason for for considering considering the the exact exact dimensions dimensions and and areas areas of of components.components.by digital prototypes To To utilizeutilize. physicalphysicalThis was prototypesprototypes the reason toto ch forchangeange considering designs’designs’ motions themotions exact oror dimensionsfunctions functions byby and consideringconsidering areas of components.components. To To utilize utilize physical physical prototypes prototypes to to ch changeange designs’ designs’ motions motions or or functions functions by by considering considering thethecom surrounding surroundingponents. To environment, utilizeenvironment, physical the the prototypes use use of of digital digital to changedevi devicesces designs’ was was essential. essential. motions By By ormoni moni functionstoringtoring the theby data consideringdata values values thethe surrounding surrounding environment, environment, the the use use of of digital digital devi devicesces was was essential. essential. By By moni monitoringtoring the the data data values values ofofthe specific specific surrounding sensors sensors environment, or or ac actuators,tuators, thestudents students use of were weredigital able able devices to to gauge gauge was the theessential. performance performance By monitoring of of small small themovements movements data values or or ofof specific specific sensors sensors or or ac actuators,tuators, students students were were able able to to gauge gauge the the performance performance of of small small movements movements or or thetheof specificfunctional functional sensors changes changes or actuators, of of protot protot ypes,studentsypes, and and were to to compare compare able to prototypes. gaugprototypes.e the performance of small movements or thethe functional functional changes changes of of protot prototypes,ypes, and and to to compare compare prototypes. prototypes. the functionalEvenEven so,so, it itchanges waswas difficultdifficult of prototypes, toto perfectlyperfectly and synchroniz synchronizto compareee prototypes. thethe digitaldigital and and physicalphysical models.models. ToTo comecome upup EvenEven so, so, it itwas was difficult difficult to toperfectly perfectly synchroniz synchronize thee the digital digital and and physical physical models. models. To To come come up up withwith a Evena perfect perfect so, match itmatch was between difficultbetween theto the perfectly digital digital and and synchronize phys physicalical models, models,the digital much much and content content physical was was models. needed, needed, To but but come it it was was up withwith a perfecta perfect match match between between the the digital digital and and phys physicalical models, models, much much content content was was needed, needed, but but it itwas was notnotwith at at athis thisperfect level. level. match In In fact, fact, between as as many many the tests tests digital and and and selections selections physical had had mo to todels, be be donemuchdone initially initiallycontent to towas determine determine needed, ideas, butideas, it wasthe the notnot at atthis this level. level. In In fact, fact, as as many many tests tests and and selections selections had had to to be be done done initially initially to to determine determine ideas, ideas, the the processprocessnot at this of of mutually mutuallylevel. In fact,matching matching as many prototype prototype tests and types types selections and and functions functions had to bewas was done impossible impossible initially andtoand determine premature. premature. ideas, the processprocess of of mutually mutually matching matching prototype prototype types types and and functions functions was was impossible impossible and and premature. premature. processTableTable of 3mutually3 showsshows an anmatching exampleexample prototype ofof thethe complementcomplement types and functions bebetweentween was digitaldigital impossible andand physicalphysical and premature. prototypes.prototypes. EachEach TableTable 3 shows3 shows an an example example of of the the complement complement be betweentween digital digital and and physical physical prototypes. prototypes. Each Each exampleexampleTable of of digital 3digital shows and and an physical physicalexample prototypes prototypesof the complement contains contains aabetween number number digitalof of assumptions assumptions and physical and and conclusions. prototypes.conclusions. EachThe The exampleexample of of digital digital and and physical physical prototypes prototypes contains contains a numbera number of of assumptions assumptions and and conclusions. conclusions. The The previouspreviousexample and ofand d laterigital later prototypes prototypesand physical in in each prototypeseach example example contain we werere scompared compared a number in inof terms terms assumptions of of FO, FO, MA, MA, and OP, OP, conclusions. and and FA. FA. Each Each The previousprevious and and later later prototypes prototypes in in each each example example we werere compared compared in in terms terms of of FO, FO, MA, MA, OP, OP, and and FA. FA. Each Each modelmodelprevious has has and a a different different later prototypes expression expression in and andeach assumption, assumption, example were even even compared though though it itin has has terms similar similar of FO, contents contents MA, OP, to to other otherand Fmodels. models.A. Each modelmodel has has a differenta different expression expression and and assumption, assumption, even even though though it hasit has similar similar contents contents to to other other models. models. TheThemodel case case has of of aEX EX different 1 1 can can be be expression explained explained andas as below. below. assumption, The The di digital gitaleven prototype prototype though it is hasis a a two-dimensionalsimilartwo-dimensional contents to representation, representation, other models. TheThe case case of of EX EX 1 can1 can be be explained explained as as below. below. The The di digitalgital prototype prototype is isa two-dimensionala two-dimensional representation, representation, whichwhichThe case waswas of consideredEXconsidered 1 can be aexplaineda formform thatthat as diddid below notnot. actuallyTheactually digital representrepresent prototype materialsmaterials is a two andand-dimensional operations,operations, representation, particularlyparticularly whichwhich was was considered considered a forma form that that did did not not actually actually represent represent materials materials and and operations, operations, particularly particularly howhowwhich theythey was were wereconsidered made.made. aInIn form thisthis that case,case, did thethe not physicalphysical actually prototype prototyperepresent materialsisis aa three-dimensionalthree-dimensional and operations shape,shape,, particularly butbut aa howhow they they were were made. made. In In this this case, case, the the physical physical prototype prototype is isa athree-dimensional three-dimensional shape, shape, but but a a conceptualconceptualhow they formwereform about madeabout .the theIn actual thisactual case, operationoperation the physical andand mama prototypenufacturingnufacturing is methodsmethods a three- dimensional werewere justjust implied.implied. shape, InIn but thethe a conceptualconceptual form form about about the the actual actual operation operation and and ma manufacturingnufacturing methods methods were were just just implied. implied. In In the the casecaseconceptual of of EX EX 2, 2, form even even aboutif if the the previous theprevious actual physical physical operation protot protot andypeype manufacturing represented represented all allmethods the the four four were aspects, aspects, just the theimplied. subsequent subsequent In the casecase of of EX EX 2, 2,even even if theif the previous previous physical physical protot prototypeype represented represented all all the the four four aspects, aspects, the the subsequent subsequent digitaldigitalcase of prototypesEXprototypes 2, even if maymay the previouscontaincontain incompletephysicalincomplete prototype information.information. represented ThisThis is isall becausebecause the four the theaspects, physicalphysical the subsequent prototypeprototype digitaldigital prototypes prototypes may may contain contain incomplete incomplete information. information. This This is isbecause because the the physical physical prototype prototype implementationimplementationdigital prototypes did did maynot not meet meet contain the the intended incompleteintended performanc performanc information.e,e, and and This it it was was is becausenecessarynecessary the to to create physicalcreate a a new new prototype shape shape implementationimplementation did did not not meet meet the the intended intended performanc performance, e,and and it itwas was necessary necessary to to create create a newa new shape shape Sustainabilityororimplementation to to fine-tune fine-tune2019, 11, 4416how how did it it not worked. worked. meet the intended performance, and it was necessary to create a new shape 16 of 23 oror to to fine-tune fine-tune how how it itworked. worked. or to fine-tune how it worked. TableTable 3. 3. Categories Categories of of design design results. results. TableTable 3. 3.Categories Categories of ofdesign design results. results. TableTable 3.3. Categories of ofdesign design results results.. ImagesImages of of digital digital models models ImagesImages of of physical physical models models Num.Num. ImagesImages of ofdigital digital models models Dir. ImagesImages of ofphysical physical models models Num.Num. Images of digital models Dir. ImagesImages of of physical physical models models Num.Num. FunctionsFunctions Dir.Dir.Dir. FunctionsFunctions FunctionsFunctions Dir. FunctionsFunctions Functions FunctionsFunctions

EX1EX1 EX1EX1EX1 EX1

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 24 FOFO MAMA OP OP FA FA FOFO MAMA OPOP FAFA FO MA OP FA FO MA OP FA FOFO MAMA OP OP FA FA FOFO MAMA OPOP FAFA 00 ★★ ★★ ★★ 00 ★★ ★★ ★★ 0 0 0 ★★ FFF★★ ★★ 00 0 FFF★★ ★★ ★★

EX2 EX3 EX2 EX2EX2 EX2EX2

FO MA OP FA FO MA OP FA

SustainabilitySustainability 2019 20190 , ,11 11, ,x x FOR FOR PEER PEER REVIEW REVIEW 0 0 0 0 17 17 of of0 24 24 SustainabilitySustainability 2019 2019,, FO, 11 11,, , x xx FOR FORFOR★ PEER PEERMAPEER REVIEW REVIEWREVIEW OP★ FA FO MA OP 17 17 17 of of of FA 24 24 24 SustainabilitySustainabilityFO 2019FO2019FO ,, 1111,, xxMA FORFORMAMA PEERPEER REVIEWREVIEW OP OP OP FA FA FA FOFOFO MAMAMA OPOPOP 17FA 17 FA FA of of 24 24

FOFO MAMA OP OP FA FA FOFO MAMA OPOP FAFA 0 00 0 ★★ ★ FF★★ ★ ★0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 0 0 0 ★★ ★★ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

EX3

EX3EX3 EX3EX3 EX3 EX4EX3EX3 FO MA OP FA FO MA OP FA

0 ★ ★ ★ 0 0 0 0

FOFOFO MAMAMA OP OP OP FA FA FA FOFOFO MAMAMA OPOPOP FAFAFA FOFOFO FOMAMAMA MA OP OP OP FA FA FA FA FOFOFOFO MAMAMAMA OPOPOPOP FAFAFA FA 0 FO00 ★MA★ ★ 0 ★ OP★ 0 ★ FA★ 0 FO00 0 MA00 0 OP00 0 FA00 00 ★ ★ ★ 00 00 00 00 00 0 ★★★ FFF★★★ ★★★ 000 000 000 00 0

EXEX4 EX45 EX4EX4EX4 EX4 EX4

FOFO MAMA OP OP FA FA FOFO MAMA OPOP FAFA FOFO MAMA OP OP FA FA FOFO MAMA OPOP FAFA FOFOFO FOMAMAMA MA OP OP OP FA FA FA FA FOFOFOFO MAMAMAMA OPOPOPOP FAFAFA FA 0 00 ★ ★ 00 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 00 ★★ ★00 ★00 00 00 00 00 00 0 ★★★ F 00 000 000 000 000 00 0

EXEXEX 6 5 EX5 5 EXEXEX 5 55 EX 5

FOFO MAMA OP OP FA FA FOFO MAMA OPOP FAFA FOFO FOMAMA MA OP OP OP FA FA FA FOFOFO MAMAMA OPOPOP FAFA FA FOFOFO0 0 MAMAMA OP OP OP FA FA FA FOFOFO0 0 MAMAMA0 0 OPOPOP0 0 FAFAFA 00 0 ★★ ★★ ★★ 0 0 0 0 000 0 ★★ FFF★★ ★★ 0000 0000 0000 000 0 0 0 ★ ★★ 0 ★★ 0 ★★ 0 0 0 0 ★ 0 0 0 Note: O: Included; -: Not included; ★: Not included but assumed.

Digital and physical models are used to solve design problems through student work results. ForEX EXexample, 6 6 the digital and physical models are largely utilized in three ways. First, it is used to EXEX 6 6EX 6 EXEX 66 reinforce the validity of ideas. In the early stages, designers plan for shape, performance, material

composition, and data usage and explore existing methods and available resources to realize them.

This step involves measurements, evaluations and re-measurements similar to the next step. FOFO FOMAMA MA OP OP FA FA FA FOFOFO MAMA OPOP OP FAFA FA However, thereFOFOFO are variousMAMAMA levels OP OP OP of implementati FA FA FA on, failure, FOandFOFO learningMAMAMA because OPtheyOPOP exploreFAFAFA FO00 0 MA★★ F OP00 0 FA00 0FO00 MA 00 ★OP★ F FA00 0 00 ★ 00 00 00 00 ★ 00 various factors00 without ★ ★knowing★ whether00 their00 intentions are right.00 Second, it00 is used to★ ★★increase the00 Note:Note:Note: O: O: Included; Included; -: -: -:Not Not Not included; included; included; ★ ★:F :Not Not: Not included included included but but butassumed. assumed. assumed. reliability of ideas. IdentifyNote: design O: Included; strengths, -: Not fin included;d ways ★ to: Notimprove included weaknesses, but assumed. and voluntarily find, Note:Note:Note: O: O:O: Included; Included;Included; -: -:-: Not NotNot included; included;included; ★ ★★:: : :Not Not NotNot included included includedincluded but but butbut assumed. assumed. assumed.assumed. measure, and measure existing planning and design methods that can contribute to real-world design. DigitalDigital andand physicalphysical modelsmodels areare usedused toto solvesolve dedesignsign problemsproblems throughthrough studentstudent workwork results.results. Third, DigitalitDigital is used andand to physicalrefinephysical ideas modelsmodels in detail. areare usedLookused totofo solversolve ways dede tosignsign improve problemsproblems performa throughthroughnce on studentstudent detail, workwork other results. results.than ForFor example,example,DigitalDigital andand thethe physicalphysical digitaldigital and and modelsmodels physicalphysical areare usedused modelsmodels toto solvesolve areare larglarg dedeelysignsignely utilized utilized problemsproblems inin threethroughthroughthree ways.ways. studentstudent First,First, work work itit isis used results.usedresults. toto theForFor main example,example, content thethe confirmed digitaldigital andand in the physicalphysical second modelsmodels step. areare larglargelyely utilizedutilized inin threethree ways.ways. First,First, itit isis usedused toto reinforceForForreinforce example,example, thethe validity thevaliditythe digitaldigital ofof ideas. andideas.and physicalphysical InIn thethe early earlymodelsmodels stagesstages areare, ,larg designerslargdesignerselyely utilizedutilized planplan forininfor threethree shape,shape, ways.ways. performance,performance, First,First, itit isis material materialusedused toto reinforcereinforce thethe validityvalidity ofof ideas.ideas. InIn thethe earlyearly stagesstages,, , , designers designersdesignersdesigners plan planplanplan for forforfor shape, shape,shape,shape, performance, performance,performance,performance, material materialmaterialmaterial composition,reinforcereinforcecomposition, thethe and validityvalidityand data data of ofusage usage ideas.ideas. and and InIn exploretheexplorethe earlyearly existing existing stagesstages ,,methods methodsdesignersdesigners and and planplan available available forfor shape,shape, resources resources performance,performance, to to realize realize materialmaterial them. them. 5.2.composition,composition, Surveys and andandVideo datadata Recording usageusage andand exploreexplore existingexisting methodsmethods andand availableavailable resourcesresources toto realizerealize them.them. Thiscomposition,composition,This stepstep involvesinvolves andand datadata measurements,measurements, usageusage andand exploreexplore evaluationsevaluations existingexisting and andmethodsmethods re-measurementsre-measurements andand availableavailable similar similarresourcesresources toto to tothethe realizerealize nextnext them. them.step.step. ThisThis stepstep involvesinvolves measurements,measurements, evaluationsevaluations andand re-measurementsre-measurements similarsimilar toto thethe nextnext step.step. However,ThisThisHowever, stepstep thereinvolvesthereinvolves areare variousmeasurements,measurements,various levelslevels of ofevaluationsevaluations implementatiimplementati andandon,on, re-measurements re-measurements failure,failure, andand learninglearning similarsimilar becausebecause toto thethe theythey nextnext exploreexplore step.step. However,However, therethere areare variousvarious levelslevels ofof implementatiimplementation,on, failure,failure, andand learninglearning becausebecause theythey exploreexplore variousHowever,However,various factors factors therethere without without areare variousvarious knowing knowing levelslevels whether whether ofof implementatiimplementati their their intentions intentionson,on, failure,failure, are are right. right. andand Second, Second, learninglearning it it is becauseisbecause used used to to they theyincrease increase exploreexplore the the variousvarious factors factors without without knowing knowing whether whether their their intentions intentions are are right. right. Second, Second, it it is is used used to to increase increase the the reliabilityvariousvariousreliability factorsfactors of of ideas. ideas. withoutwithout Identify Identify knowingknowing design design whether whetherstrengths, strengths, theirtheir fin fin d intentionsintentionsd ways ways to to improve improveareare right.right. weaknesses, weaknesses, Second,Second, itit isis and and usedused voluntarily voluntarily toto increaseincrease find, find, thethe reliabilityreliability of of ideas. ideas. Identify Identify design design strengths, strengths, fin findd ways ways to to improve improve weaknesses, weaknesses, and and voluntarily voluntarily find, find, measure,reliabilityreliabilitymeasure, and and ofof ideas.ideas. measure measure IdentifyIdentify existing existing designdesign planning planning strengths,strengths, and and design finfindesigndd waysways methods methods toto improveimprove that that can can weaknesses,weaknesses, contribute contribute andtoand to real-world real-world voluntarilyvoluntarily design. design. find,find, measure,measure, and and measure measure existing existing planning planning and and design design methods methods that that can can contribute contribute to to real-world real-world design. design. Third,measure,measure,Third, it it is is andand used used measuremeasure to to refine refine existingexisting ideas ideas in planninginplanning detail. detail. Look andLookand design designfo forr ways ways methodsmethods to to improve improve thatthat cancan performa performa contributecontributencence on toonto real-worlddetail,real-world detail, other other design.design. than than Third,Third, it it is is used used to to refine refine ideas ideas in in detail. detail. Look Look fo forr ways ways to to improve improve performa performancence on on detail, detail, other other than than Third,Third,the main itit isis content usedused toto confirmed refinerefine ideasideas in ininthe detail.detail. second LookLook step. fofo rr waysways toto improveimprove performaperformancence onon detail,detail, otherother thanthan thethe mainmain contentcontent confirmedconfirmed inin thethe secondsecond step.step. thethethethe mainmain mainmain contentcontent contentcontent confirmedconfirmed confirmedconfirmed inin inin thethe thethe secondsecond secondsecond step.step. step.step. 5.2. Surveys and Video Recording 5.2.5.2. SurveysSurveys andand VideoVideo RecordingRecording 5.2.5.2.5.2. Surveys SurveysSurveys and andand Video VideoVideo Recording RecordingRecording Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 17 of 23

Digital and physical models are used to solve design problems through student work results. For example, the digital and physical models are largely utilized in three ways. First, it is used to reinforce the validity of ideas. In the early stages, designers plan for shape, performance, material composition, and data usage and explore existing methods and available resources to realize them. This step involves measurements, evaluations and re-measurements similar to the next step. However, there are various levels of implementation, failure, and learning because they explore various factors without knowing whether their intentions are right. Second, it is used to increase the reliability of ideas. Identify design strengths, find ways to improve weaknesses, and voluntarily find, measure, and measure existing planning and design methods that can contribute to real-world design. Third, it is used to refine ideas in detail. Look for ways to improve performance on detail, other than the main content confirmed in the second step.

5.2. Surveys and Video Recording The questionnaire was administered to the students who participated in the class at the beginning and end of the curriculum. Most of the students had no experience in studying and participated in architectural design competitions. The first questionnaire (administered at the start of the curriculum) investigated “the experiences of measuring and evaluating design performance in the design process” in existing design studios. Specifically, the questionnaire was designed to predict what the students would gain from this study. In other words, the purpose of this study was to judge if the students usually agree with the functions of the digital and physical models, and with the complementary effect. According to the results of the first questionnaire survey, the students had tried to come up with “eco-friendly” designs in their previous design studios. They did not verify the performances, however, using simulation or modeling, and just completed the design at the level of imagination or assumption. At the stage, digital models had often been used to produce results or explore aesthetics rather than to verify or test something. Physical models had also been used as a means of presenting results. Based on the results of the second questionnaire survey, some changes were found compared to the first questionnaire survey. First, the ranking of the factors that contribute to the design development changed (factors: Environmental performance, assessment of end user, feasibility, operational inefficiency, and designer’s preference). At the start of the design project, the students were less concerned with the factors other than the designer’s preferences, which are typically very important as design factors in the engineering field. At the end of the design project, however, the students changed their rankings. For example, they realized that objective data and physical phenomena in the real world were important. This was because the viability of designs is directly connected with objective performances like an assessment of users, evaluation of environmental performances, the inefficiency of operations, and cost (Figure6). The uses of digital and physical models have also changed compared to the early days of the project. For example, digital models were mainly used for visualizing creative forms during the presentation time. With the experience of the projects, digital models have been used to clarify the concept or express the validity of forms and structures. Although digital models were used as a visible method, they were different because their data or images were media for strengthening the students’ ideas. For example, digital models were used as media for exploring parametric forms. Most of the students, however, gave up establishing the logics of the shape. For this reason, searching for various parametric shapes was not widely utilized as expected (Figure7). Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 24

Sustainability 2019, 11, x 4416 FOR PEER REVIEW 1918 of of 2423

Figure 6. Factors that are important to the designers in evaluating the building.

Figure 6. Factors that are important to the designers in evaluating the building. Figure 6. Factors that are important to the designers in evaluating the building.

Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs. Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs. The physical model played other important roles and had common uses. In addition to the Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs. existing visual representation methods, it was used to investigate and evaluate performance using real models. What is unusual is that unlike digital models, which are known to be convenient, physical models have been conveniently handled to show and explain ideas to others (Figure8). Above all, what was most challenging for the students was the process of implementing envelope movement and working principles. In particular, communication with the team members and collaborating tutors are given priority over knowledge and theories when measuring and improving the performances of kinetic designs. In other words, when students implement design concepts, the material properties and manufacturing methods are the most important, with the students believing that the success of their design lies in quickly finding and solving the cause of failure. Video recording allows the observer (researcher) to view multiple discussion processes within the team during the same period. For example, the recorded process includes the following: How to define concepts using a kind of performance, how to measure and visualize performance, and finally, whether the problem is clearly resolved. Because there were many types of unforeseen trialand error in this process, there wereFigure big and 8. smallFunctions discussions of physical with models team in members designing and SBEs. ideas. Of course, not all of the expected data were collected. As well as discussions of design concepts, discussions during Figure 8. Functions of physical models in designing SBEs. Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 24

Figure 6. Factors that are important to the designers in evaluating the building.

Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 19 of 23 manufacturing and operations were expected to be recorded. Originally, students were expected to familiarize themselves with the video recording environment through a trial installation of one to two weeks. However, designers have not tried to manufacture and operate design models in video recording environments. The reason for this is the familiarity of the work environment. The space in which students make or operate the model was not a video recording environment, but a private workspace. In order to investigate behaviors of designers in the future, requirements of the design workspace are needed. Figure 7. Functions of digital models in designing SBEs.

Figure 8. Functions of physical models in designing SBEs. 5.3. Design Methodology Based on Prototyping In this prototyping process, the digital and physical models are designed in such a way that the designer does not rely on subjective tastes or assumptions, but has experienced a way of rationally improving the design through the evidence, such as quantitative data and phenomena. In the design process, digital and physical models are used as a vehicle for identifying design problems and finding solutions to these (Figure9). In the prototyping process, the complementarity between the digital and physical models depends on the level of “Strengthen validities of ideas” (Figure—O1 ), “Improve responsibilities of ideas” (O2 ), “Refine ideas” (O3 ). The design process is divided into these three stages, and the roles of the digital and physical models are coordinated in each stage.

O1 Strengthen validities of ideas The designer explores the design concept to achieve his or her intended outcome. The initial concept is either the designer’s pursuit of an ideal goal, untested based on the designer’s experience or imagination. Designers use similar examples to illustrate the concept of the initial design, or similar cases where the intended outcome is similar to the case of the project. In this process, the complementarity between the digital and physical models enables the exploration of the method of implementing the characteristics and performance of the case equally. It also helps designers understand the principles of materials and techniques that are unfamiliar, and the procedures of using them. The design derived from the exploration of the case becomes clearer through experiments on the physical, mechanical, and chemical properties of the material and how it is used. Experiments are conducted under a variety of conditions to ensure that the theoretical part of the material and technology is known, and that the designer’s hypothesis based on it is in fact fit. In this process, the mutual complementarity of the digital and physical models improves the understanding of the principle of the material and technology, and how to use it, and makes it possible to sample objects based on this. O2 Improve responsibilities of ideas The designer explores how to shape design ideas in form, composition, and structure, with ideas for form and function determined. Designers combine the shape, color, and key elements of a building, and coordinate the function and performance of each element based on ideas. In this process, the complementarity between the digital and physical Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 24

Sustainabilityprocess, 2019the ,complementarity11, 4416 between the digital and physical models enables the comparison20 of 23 and evaluation of the aesthetic performance, the performance considering the environmental conditions,models enablesand the the performance comparison andconsidering evaluation the of theuser’s aesthetic needs. performance, In addition, the by performance considering the actualconsidering performance, the environmental such as the conditions,changes in and the the fabrication performance method considering and behavior, the user’s needs.the design problemsIn addition, associated by considering with the the construction actual performance, and maintenance such as the changesstages can in the be fabrication addressed. method ③ Refineand ideas behavior, the design problems associated with the construction and maintenance stages can be addressed. The designer explores ways of efficiently improving the creation and operation of shapes in a O3 Refine ideas The designer explores ways of efficiently improving the creation and operation of rough form and with the function determined. Even if the main forms and structures of the shapes in a rough form and with the function determined. Even if the main forms and structures designof the have design been have determined, been determined, the process the process will cont willinue continue to improve to improve the thedesign design in detail. in detail. In this process,In this the process, complement the complement of the digital of the digitaland physic and physicalal models models is used is used to collect to collect and and process process data, so thatdata, it so can that analyze it can analyze the performance the performance in indetail. detail. It Italso also allows thethe thickness thickness or heightor height of the of the membersmembers to be to beadjusted, adjusted, or or the the details details to be adjustedadjusted as as well well to to make make up up for for the the specific specific problems problems of theof thedesign. design.

FigureFigure 9. 9.DesignDesign methodology methodology using digitaldigital models models and and physical physical models. models. 6. Conclusions 6. Conclusion It is important to specify the processes that use the digital and physical models, the performance ofIt theis important product, and to specify how to determinethe processes if the that product use the is as digital effective and as physical the designer models, intended the performance it to be. of theThe product, prototyping and processhow to is determine a step-by-step if the process product of overcoming is as effective the designas the failuredesigner factors intended related it to to be. The shape,prototyping structure, process and operation is a step-by-step according process to design of concepts. overcoming The processthe design is important failure factors because related the to shape,design structure, failures and are potentially operation related according to the to quality design of designconcepts. outputs. The process There are is two important types of failuresbecause the designthat failures are addressed are potentially through the related prototyping to the process.quality of design outputs. There are two types of failures First, it is possible to define the causes or characteristics of failure factors, but it is difficult to that are addressed through the prototyping process. quantify or measure the potential loss and damage factors accurately. For example, the designer First, it is possible to define the causes or characteristics of failure factors, but it is difficult to performs energy performance evaluation in the process of designing the building envelope. Through quantifyvoluntary or measure information the retrieval potential and loss existing and knowledge, damage factors it is understood accurately. that For the energyexample, performance the designer performsof the buildingenergy performance envelope is aff ectedevaluation by environmental in the proc conditionsess of designing like airflow, the sunshine,building andenvelope. topography. Through voluntaryThe actual information physical parametersretrieval and related existing to the knowledge, performance it ofis understood the building that envelope, the energy however, performance vary. of theSimulations building based envelope on quantified is affected formulas by canenvironmental make it diffi cultconditions to find alike definitive airflow, solution sunshine, to the and topography. The actual physical parameters related to the performance of the building envelope, however, vary. Simulations based on quantified formulas can make it difficult to find a definitive solution to the problems that occur in the physical environment, especially if they include materials or technologies that have not been specifically applied. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 21 of 23 problems that occur in the physical environment, especially if they include materials or technologies that have not been specifically applied. Second, the failure factors are interpreted differently, or the degree of acceptance is different. Architectural design has a relatively large tolerance for the result compared to general engineering products. Even if the performance of the building is unsatisfactory, the performance of the overall building can be improved by the resident adapting to or increasing the capacity of the plant system. In the case of a kinetic building envelope, however, unlike a typical building design, the tolerance to the design is low. The kinetic building envelope determines the sophisticated interactions between the components to determine the success of the system. This interaction is based on the integration of the functions and roles of the various components. The prototyping process involves hypothesis setting—experiment planning—evaluation and verification to identify and address the failure factors accurately. In this respect, the prototyping process is similar to the research process. Eliminating or minimizing these failure factors plays an important role in understanding the validity of the technology to be introduced in advance and in improving accuracy. The prototyping process is an process. In this paper, a prototyping process is proposed based on case studies. These cases are the result of a two-year (the second semester in 2014, the second semester in 2015) digital design studio. These results were analyzed by focusing on the complement of the digital and physical models and the role of the traditional design medium. Various factors of the design environment should be considered so that the prototyping process can be applied to the practical process. For example, the resources in the work environment, the nature of the designer, the nature of the , and the rules or customary behavior within the organization should be considered. The prototyping process of this study considers the influence of the resources of the educational environment and the characteristics of the designer, but there are few cases for comparing and applying the environment and characteristics of the practitioner to apply these to the work environment. The future prototyping process should be conducted not only for the students, but also for the working designers. In addition, it should be improved and made into a process that closely examines the conditions of the work environment by conducting a detailed analysis of the process of the design company or conducting surveys among the practitioners.

Funding: This research was supported by a grant (19AUDP-B127891-03) from the Architecture & Urban Development Research Program funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of the South Korean government. Acknowledgments: This research was supported by a grant (19AUDP-B127891-03) from the Architecture & Urban Development Research Program funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of the South Korean government. Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

1. Industry 4.0 Report; BDO LLP: London, UK, 2016. 2. World Economic Forum. Harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution for Sustainable Emerging Cities; Fourth Industrial Revolution for the Earth Series; World Economic Forum: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017. 3. Hargrave, J.; Mistry, R.; Wilson, R. It’s Alive: Can You Imagine the Urban Building of the Future; Arup: London, UK, 2013. 4. Ulrich, K.; Eppinger, S.D. and Development, 4th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2008. 5. Ulrich, K.T.; Eppinger, S.D. Product and Design Development, 5th ed.; McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-007-108695. 6. Dam, R.; Siang, T. 5 Stages in the Process. Available online: https://www.interaction-design. org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-process (accessed on 28 January 2019). 7. Defense Acquisition University. Acquisition Logistics Guide; Defense System Management College: Fort Belvoir, VA, USA, 1997. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 22 of 23

8. Ford, H. My Life and Work; Doubleday, Page & company: Garden City, NY, USA, 1922. 9. Brooke, L. Ford Model T: The Car That Put the World on Wheels; Motorbooks: Beverly, MA, USA, 2008. 10. Bryan, F.R. Beyond the Model T: The Other Ventures of Henry Ford; Wayne State University Press: Detroit, MI, USA, 1997. 11. Padfield, G.D.; Lawrence, B. The birth of flight control: an engineering analysis of the Wright brothers 1902 glider. Aeronaut. J. 2003, 107, 697–718. 12. Cavaliere, L.A. The Wright brother’s odyssey: Their flight of learning. New Dir. Adult Contin. Educ. 1992, 51–59. [CrossRef] 13. Smith, A. as Machine-A New View of Models from Antiquity to the Present Day; Architectural Press: Burlington, MA, USA, 2004. 14. Prager, F.D.; Scaglia, G. Brunelleschi: Studies of His Technology and Inventions; Dover Publications, Inc.: Mineola, NY, USA, 2004. 15. Makert, R.; Alves, G. Between designer and design: parametric design and prototyping considerations on Gaudi’s Sagrada Familia. Period. Polytech. Arch. 2016, 47, 89–93. [CrossRef] 16. Bell, V.B.; Rand, P. Materials for architectural design, 1st ed.; Laurence King Publishing: London, UK, 2006. 17. Kolarevic, B. Why we need architecture of tolerance. In High Definition: Zero Tolerance in Design and Production; Sheil, B., Ed.; Architectural Design: London, UK, 2014; Volume 84, pp. 128–132. 18. Kolarevic, B. Digital Production, Architecture in the Digital Age-Design and Manufacturing; Taylor Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 31–51. 19. Aish, R.; Woodbury, R. Multi-level interaction in parametric design. In Smart Graphics; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), Butz, A., Brian, F., Antonio, K., Olivier, P., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; Volume 3638, pp. 151–162. 20. Carpo, M. The Alphabet and the Algorithm; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011. 21. Wallick, K. Digital and Manual Joints. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA)): In Silicon + Skin: Biological Processes and Computation, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 13–19 October 2008; pp. 370–375. 22. Wallick, K. Making SmartWrap: From parts to pixels. In The Green Braid: Towards an Architecture of Ecology, Economy, and Equity; Tanzer, K., Longoria, R., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2007. 23. Cowey, J.; Danis, B.; Guichard, D.; Raynaud, J.; Aubry, S.; Boniface, V.; Chinzi, G. Glass Sails Above a Sea of Forest: Louis Vuitton HQ; Intelligent Glass Solutions: London, UK, 2013; pp. 73–91. 24. Kim, S.J. Digital Fabrication in Architectural Design and Construction Engineering for a Complex Geometry. J. Arch. Inst. Korea Plan. Des. (Arch.) 2015, 59, 46–52. (In Korean) 25. Kim, S.J. BIM Integration process for design and construction for digital fabrication of free-form buildings, All BIM seminar. Available online: https://www.slideshare.net/seongji$\delimiter"026E30F$ng1/digital- fabrication-bim (accessed on 11 October 2018). (Presentation file). Published on 22 September 2014 (In Korean). 26. Shelden, D.R. Digital surface representation and the constructibility of Gehry’s architecture. Ph.D. Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002. 27. Gann, A. Greg spaw on digital fabrication at AUS. Available online: https://www.studyarchitecture.com/ blog/school-news/outside-the-studio/greg-spaw-digital-fabrication-aus/ (accessed on 12 August 2019). 28. Sampaio, A.Z. Enhancing BIM methodology with VR technology. In State of the Art Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Knowhow; Mohamudally, N., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2018; pp. 59–79. 29. Bhanu, B. CAD-based 3D object representation for robot vision. Computer 1987, 8, 19–35. [CrossRef] 30. Cochran, D.; Zhao, Z.; Ng, Q. The Role of Physical simulation in the re-design of existing manufacturing systems. In Proceedings of the 34th International CIRP Seminar on Manufacturing Systems, Athens, Greece, 16–18 May 2001. 31. Sun, L.; Fukuda, T.; Tokuhara, T.; Yabuki, N. Differences in spatial understanding between physical and virtual models. Front. Archit. Res. 2014, 3, 28–35. [CrossRef] 32. Nakama, Y.; Onishi, Y.; Iki, K. Development of building information management system using BIM toward strategic building operation and maintenance. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Computer-Aided in Asia (CAADRIA 2015), Daegu, Korea, 20–22 May 2015; pp. 397–406. 33. Parigi, D.; Kirkegaard, P.H.Towards free-form kinetic structure. In Proceedings of the IASS-APCS Symposium 2012: From Spatial Structures to Space Structures, Seoul, Korea, 21–24 May 2012. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4416 23 of 23

34. Kirkegaard, P.H.; Foged, I.W. Development and evaluation of a responsive building envelope. In Proceedings of the International Adaptive Architecture Conference, London, UK, 3 March 2011. 35. Matin, N.H.; Eydgahi, A.; Shyu, S. Comparative analysis of technologies used in responsive building facades. In Proceedings of the 2017 ASEE Annual Conference Exposition, Washington, DC, USA, 24–28 June 2017. 36. Wang, J.; Li, J. Bio-inspired kinetic envelopes for building energy efficiency based on parametric design of building information modeling. In Proceedings of the Power and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC), Chengdu, China, 28–31 March 2010. 37. Alter, L. Does Building-Integrated Wind Power Work? Available online: https://www.treehugger.com/ renewable-energy/does-building-integrated-wind-power-work.html (accessed on 16 August 2017). 38. Weng, Y.S.; Chen, Y.P.; Ma, P.; Pan, C.A.; Jeng, T.S. Eco-machine: A green robotic ecosystem for sustainable environments. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, Singapore, 15–18 May 2013. 39. Ron, R. Exploration of eco-kinetic systems in architecture: Development of dynamic interactive building elements, Paper presented at Physical Digitality. In Proceedings of the 30th eCAADe Conference, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic, 12–14 September 2012. 40. Salim, N.A.; Mydin, M.; Ulang, N.M. Biomimetic architecture in building envelope maintenance (a literature). In Proceedings of the Emerging Technology for Sustainable Development Congress (ETSDC 2014), E3S Web of Conference, Bangi, Malaysia, 5 August 2014. 41. Zari, M.P. Ecosystem processes for biomimetic architectural and . Arch. Sci. Rev. 2015, 58, 106–119. [CrossRef] 42. Rosen, R.; Wichert, G.; Lo, G.; Bettenhausen, K.D. About the importance of autonomy and digital twins for the future of manufacturing. IFAC-PapersOnLine. 2015, 48, 567–572. [CrossRef] 43. Pignataro, M.A.; Lobaccaro, G.; Zani, G. Digital and physical models for the validation of strategies. Autom. Constr. 2013, 39, 1–14. [CrossRef] 44. Wolfe, L.S. Physical and Digital Prototyping Belong Together. 2010. Available online: http://www. eurekamagazine.co.uk/article-images/31853/Prototyping_Whitepaper.pdf (accessed on 16 August 2017).

© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).