Structural Engineering Participation in Integrated Design

Design cybernetics in support of cross-disciplinary collaboration: educating the next generation of Chinese architects and structural engineers

“…It is however understood that the stages tend to be used to manage designing but are not explanatory models to describe designing and offer only limited support for collaborative designing. New advances in digital designing (for example in the context of building information modelling) are encouraging integrated planning methods (Uihlein, 2017, p. 1), but these advances are only beginning to change architectural practice. While recent publications examining more developed construction contexts, such as Europe, Japan and the USA encourage increased cross-disciplinary collaboration, they tend to focus on descriptions of specific cases (Olsen and MacNamara, 2014) or providing a list of techniques while stopping short of providing an overarching theoretical framework (Carraher et al , 2017).…”

“…This exchange is however made difficult by diverging disciplinary narratives and language: Disciplines tend to maintain their own viewpoints and approaches in published texts. As a result, architecture and structural engineering have developed largely separate pedagogical traditions and professional cultures (Sprague, 2019; Uihlein, 2017, p. 7). Typically oriented towards science-based quantitative methods, structural engineers aim for generalisable models and processes to ensure reliability and repeatability, whereas architectural designers seek innovation and novelty (Tessmann, 2008, p. 10).…”

“…Common ground seems to be mostly documented and examined on a case-by-case basis by individuals collaborating in long-term respectful relationships (Rappaport, 2007, p. 8) – such as engineer Cecil Balmond working with architect Toyo Ito, engineer Joerg Schlaich working with architect Volkwin Marg, or engineer Guy Nordenson working with architect Steven Holl. Uihlein (2017, p. 7) outlines “openness” and “respect” on the part of all involved professionals as key values required to establish integrated practice conducive to collaboration. Collaborative practice is difficult to access for scholarly investigation: Only few studies have examined cross-disciplinary designing beyond the scope of case studies (Uihlein, 2017), and no theoretical model of cross-disciplinary collaboration has so far been proposed for the fields of architecture and structural engineering.…”

“…Uihlein (2017, p. 7) outlines “openness” and “respect” on the part of all involved professionals as key values required to establish integrated practice conducive to collaboration. Collaborative practice is difficult to access for scholarly investigation: Only few studies have examined cross-disciplinary designing beyond the scope of case studies (Uihlein, 2017), and no theoretical model of cross-disciplinary collaboration has so far been proposed for the fields of architecture and structural engineering. This lack of shared framework for discussing cross-disciplinary collaborative design processes beyond specific instances also impedes efforts to address these challenges as part of disciplinary research and education.…”

“…Given the disciplinary preoccupation with specific aims and methods outlined in the preceding sections, attempts to support cross-disciplinary collaborative designing need to establish new vocabulary and a sufficiently abstract common ground to avoid conflict with existing disciplinary narratives. Many cases of successful cross-disciplinary collaborations (Rappaport, 2007; Olsen and MacNamara, 2014; Carraher et al , 2017; Uihlein, 2017) documented in existing literature describe aspects that should be part of such an overarching approach – including mutual respect, skills in expressing ideas, listening to ideas of others, finding shared vocabulary, exercising generosity in cases of lack of understanding and a general openness to the unknown and unexpected. In the author’s educational practice, design cybernetics has provided this new common ground, from which more specific educational strategies for both architecture and structural engineering have been developed.…”