THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Structurally Informed Architectural Design Proposals for a Creative Collaboration between Architect and Structural Engineer LAURENS LUYTEN Department of Architecture CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Gothenburg, Sweden 2012 STRUCTURALLY INFORMED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN Proposals for a Creative Collaboration between Architect and Structural Engineer Laurens Luyten ISBN 978-91-7385-759-8 ©Laurens Luyten, 2012 Doktorsavhandlingar vid Chalmers tekniska högskola. Ny serie Nr 3440 ISSN 0346-718X Department of Architecture Chalmers University of Technology SE-412 96 Gothenburg Sweden Telephone + 46 (0)31-772 1000 Chalmers Reproservice Gothenburg, Sweden 2012 Abstract Laurens Luyten, Structurally Informed Architectural Design: Proposals for a Creative Collaboration between Architect and Structural Engineer. Department of Architecture, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden. Architectural form and its supporting structure are results of interdependent design processes that do not always develop in harmony: often major outlines of architectural form are decided before structural design is involved. This doctoral work investigates design collaborations between architects and structural engineers in which architecture and structure are designed in mutual agreement, and structural design is able to guide and inspire a creation of architectural form and space. The research is based on case studies derived from my practices as an independent structural engineer and a teacher of structures at Sint-Lucas School of Architecture. Participatory action research is applied to design collaborations in which I work as structural engineer together with architects and groups of architecture students. In different phases of design, collabora- tive design meetings are staged in which changes in the collaboration process and conceptual design communication are implemented and evaluated. Each evaluated change enables an improved understanding of design collaborations, and a design of more adapted changes to implement. This cyclic process of action research leads to a development of two sets of proposals for a structur- ally informed architectural design process. A first set of proposals stimulates a mutually informed design collaboration through a cyclic process of information exchange in which a conceptual design proposition is expressed as a wide range of possible design solutions by articulating its defining characteristics. This articulation of conceptual design characteristics enables the architect and the structural engineer to nego- tiate for common design goals. A second part of my findings presents a proposal for a new structural language that organizes structural knowledge for architectural design. This language focuses on expressing structural logic as a defining characteristic of structural conceptual design propositions through its layers of structural order, function, dimensions and design possibilities. These proposals for a mutually informed collaboration and a new structural language are applied and evaluated in both my practices. Inquiries show that architecture students appreciate the language to express structural behaviour, and that they relate to its underlying organization of structural knowledge. Analysing different design collaborations in both practices indicates that both sets of proposals enable structural design to guide and inspire architectural design. Keywords: design collaboration, architect, structural engineer, architectural design, structural design, conceptual design. Acknowledgements My thesis project has been a fascinating odyssey made possible through the help of many hands. For my explorations a vessel was forged through a joint research collaboration between the Department of Architecture at Chalmers University of Technology and the Associated Faculty of Architecture at KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Lucas. My undertaking was financially supported by Sint-Lucas School of Architecture, and I am gratefully in debt for the possibilities and trust provided by the head of the department, Dag Boutsen, and the former head of the department, Dr Johan Verbeke, to see this adventure through. On this journey I was gladly able to rely on a sturdy and accurate compass that kept me on course: Dr Karl-Gunnar Olsson at the Department of Architecture, Chalmers, has guided and supported me as main supervisor with his sharp analysis of my work and by pointing out which course of action to undertake. I am very grateful to him for promoting my work, especially in the last phase of piloting this vessel into the harbour. I also wish to specially thank my examiner, Dr Fredrik Nilsson at the Department of Architecture, Chalmers, for his many helpful words of advice and for making this project possible at Chalmers. Thanks are also in order to my co-supervisor Guy Mouton at the Associated Faculty of Architecture, Campus Sint-Lucas, for supporting me in my endeavours and for sharing his rich experience as a practicing engineer. On my voyage I was lucky to encounter many tutors with rich academic backgrounds who were willing to listen to my adventures and guide me with their knowledge. Among them I would like to thank Dr Gerard De Zeeuw, Dr Halina Dunin-Woyseth, Dr Ranulph Glanville, Dr Wolfgang Jonas and Dr Alain Findeli, guest professors at the Associated Faculty of Architecture, Campus Sint-Lucas, for the enlightening discussions and their valuable comments. Many of the explorations I undertook required support from fellow adventurers willing to accompany me on my search. The participation and enthusiasm of several architects, engineers and students in my investigations have filled my sails with favourable winds. I am very thankful to them and especially to Karolien Vanmerhaeghe, Jo Liekens, Tom Van Mieghem, Edith Wouters, Tomas Nollet, Gerrit Verbeeck and the late Hendrik Van Liedekerke for their voluntary support and for providing their insights on my reflections. At times the journey felt solitary, but on many occasions I was reminded that I was not traveling alone. I want to thank the colleagues, friends and family who kept me in their thoughts and supported me along the way, especially Dr Nel Janssens for her encouragement and for sharing her research experience. Where would Odysseus have landed if there were no Penelope? Much credit for this work goes to my wife, Mieke Maes, not only for giving advice and support as an academic and an engineer-architect in my intellectual search, but also as the guardian angel of my emotional and physical well-being. Finally, I also want to thank my children for being supportive and understanding when their dad’s mind was absent again. Laurens Luyten Ghent, 2012 Content 1. Introduction ............................................................................................... 1 1.1 Collaboration example ........................................................................1 1.2 Research aims .....................................................................................6 1.3 Research limitations and extrapolations ........................................... 10 1.4 Research approach and thesis format ................................................ 12 Research design 2. Referential background ............................................................................ 17 2.1 Architect and structural engineer: a schism of skills over time ........ 17 2.2 Design culture ................................................................................... 21 2.3 Design process .................................................................................. 30 2.4 Design collaboration ......................................................................... 38 2.5 Design communication ..................................................................... 43 3. Development of referential background .................................................. 47 3.1 Design process .................................................................................. 47 3.2 Design communication ..................................................................... 54 3.3 Design collaboration ......................................................................... 69 3.4 Proposals for a mutually informed design collaboration .................. 78 4. Exploratory and explanatory research through case studies .................... 79 4.1 Participatory action research ............................................................. 79 4.2 Case study research ........................................................................... 83 4.3 Applied data retrieval in cases .......................................................... 87 Research Findings through Case Studies 5. A research focus on collaboration and communication ........................... 97 5.1 First investigations in structurally informed architectural design ..... 97 5.2 Enabling architects to develop structure early in design ................. 100 5.3 Investigation of collaborations early in the design process............. 103 6. Cases for explorative research ............................................................... 107 6.1 Research Seminar 2009 .................................................................. 107 6.2 Project Jo & Karolien ..................................................................... 112 6.3 Project Tomas ................................................................................ 118 7. A structural language for conceptual design .........................................