Anda di halaman 1dari 5

Distributed as a Keynote Paper at Changing Roles - New Roles, New Challenges

Noordwijk AAN ZEE, The Netherlands, 5-9 October 2009

Adaptable Futures: A 21st Century Challenge


Robert Schmidt III, Toru Eguchi, Simon Austin, and Alistair Gibb
Adaptable Futures Research Group, Loughborough University

A sustainable building is not one that must last forever, but one that can easily adapt to change.
- Peter Graham, Environment Design Guide, 2006, Royal Institute of Australian Architects

This paper presents the current thinking of Adaptable Futures research group based at Loughborough University
through a series of diagrams. The aim of the Adaptable Futures project is to facilitate the development of adaptable
buildings through research and real-life application. The investigation looks to make clear Adaptability as a definable design characteristic with a principle consciousness towards time and layers.

Adaptability - the capacity to change the buildings built-environment in order to respond and fit to the evolving
demands of its users/ environment maximizing value throughout its lifecycle.
Time - the design consideration that buildings are dynamic systems that interact with a set of evolving endogenous
and exogenous demands that require a capacity to accommodate change (space, function, and componentry) over
time.
Layers the design consideration regarding the organization and interfaces between components of varying life
spans and functions.
The diagrams encapsulate a web of inter-related dimensions which tell a story of our exploration into understanding
adaptability. They construct a framework and mark a beginning into generating a toolset for thinking about adaptability. Appendix 1 is an index for the complete set of diagrams used by the project.

SPACE

TIME
Figure 1: Perspectives

FUNCTION

COMPONENTRY

Perspectives (figure 1) regards the inclusion of time into the design


consciousness. Moving beyond form-based to a time-based design.
There are two distinct camps when considering time in design. The
typical one focuses on the durability and aging of materials with the
intent that the building will age well. The second and not often
addressed acknolwedges time pertaining to building performance and
the evovling demands a building has to be able to accommodate.
The current push to develop more sustainable places to live and work
must consider buildings not as finished works of perfection removed
from time, but as imperfect objects whose forms evolve to fit shifts in
society through time. This reality forces the designer to engage more
actively into the web of demands (political, economical, social, technological, legal, and environmental) placed on buildings.

Process (figure 2) diagrams the cycle which the sources


(figure 3)operate over time within the design process.
Ultimately, some solutions will materialize while
others will be abandoned and stored as design intelligence for future use.
Sources (figure 3) outlines the origins for which adaptability can manifest itself through strategies, rules,
policy, products, or design intelligence. The categories
are not realized in isolation, but help provide clarity for
communication. Their organization relates to the
degree in which they are bound in time.
The Adapting Ables table (Table 1) links the strategies
to stakeholders, scale, time and layers. For clarity, each

Design Intelligence
(e.g. knowledge,
experience)

Policy and Brief


Built
solutions
(buildings, products)

(e.g. legislation, client


needs)

DfAD

The process of extending


the life of our built
environment

Rules, Strategies,
and Products
(e.g. guidance, good
practice)

Unbuilt
solutions
(abandoned schemes,
unbuilt projects,
budget cuts)

What ifs (scenarios)


Technical solutions
(new or pre-existing)

Figure 2: Process

Distributed at Changing Roles Conference, Rotterdam 10/09

adaptablefutures
extending the life of our built environment

Timeless

Timebound
Design Intelligence

Strategies

the reuse of knowledge - proven and


plausible concepts, components, methods,
and processes benefiting design cost and
time , existing processes, and inventories.

Philosophies Experiences Protocols Solutions


ideologies, ethos

education, past
work

rules,
procedures

Figure 3: Sources

prototypes, mock
ups, design
models

Strategies for how the building


endures change over time.

Tools
software,
construction
techniques

Adjustable Versatile Convertable Scalable Refittable Movable


(task)

(space)

(function)

(size)

(performance)

(location)

Rules

Policy

Critical physical parameters which


allow the building the capacity for a
range of appropriate uses beyond
the specificity of its original use.

Legal framework for industry through


taxes, regulations and incentives
which either enable or impede the
process of building adaptability.

Service

transfering of a
material element
which services the
habitability/ function
of the building

Structure

Spatial

transfering of
physical
physical load either relationship either
vertically or
through constraint,
horizontally/ directly
boundry, or
or indirectly
adjacency

building regulations
planning regulations
Government-led incentives
Tax on demolition
Tax on use of new resources
Guidelines for designers
Industry guidance

Products
Technical or system solutions
for how the building endures
change over time.

standard details
iso standards
pre-designed products

Table 1: Adapting ables

Distributed at Changing Roles Conference, Rotterdam 10/09

strategy is defined by a type of change which allows for a decision


maker and built environment scale to be associated with each strategy.
In general, the strategies operate on different cycles and affect different
layers of the building. The magnitude and frequency of the types of
changes tend to act inversely (Figure 4).

HIGH

MAGNITUDE
OF CHANGE

Specifity (figure 5) shows varying levels of specificity driving a building


to be a specific response each time. The levels move from Level 1 (all
enclosed spaces) to Level 5 (a very individual response). The industry
operates with a tendency to build for a specific use, client, and site each
contributing and moving further away from a set of general principles.
The more specific a building becomes to a particular set of demands at
a fixed point in time the more limited its capacity to respond to changes.

Unique

TASK

LOW
LOW

HIGH

FREQUENCY
OF CHANGE

Figure 4: Changemeter

General

Tension between two continiums

Common

LOCATION

level 01

Building

level 02

Use Range

level 03

Specific Use

(all buildings;
enclosed space)

(a similar range of
building demands)

Specific Client
(client specific needs)

Specific Site

level 05

(use type)

level 04

A1

Specific

Figure 5: Specficity
(FIT AT LEVEL 02)

(FIT AT LEVEL 05)

Building
capacity

Building
capacity

Building
cycle

Building
cycle

Business
cycle

A1 A2

(adapted to site
conditions)

Business
cycle

Business
cycle

Business
cycle

Figure 6: Landscape
Scales (figure 7) lays out the varying levels of our built
and organizational environments as a reference for
understanding at what level and to what extent the
dimensions operate at.

Many uses have a similar range of physical


requirements which can classify them into use
ranges (level 2 in Figure 5) which could allow
convertability within that range. We also tend
to associate a sense of uniqueness with
specificity, where a more generic design tends
to have less value and get labeled common.
The evolution of a new built form is inevitable,
but the capacity of that form to accommodate
change dictates the forms performance ability
and ultimately the length of its life - Landscape (figure 6). The two lines represent variations on the cycles of the built stock or landscape. One indicates a building fit at level 2
and the other level 5 displaying a shorter cycle
because of a limited capacity to respond to a
single business cycle. On the other hand, the
level 02 fit building can respond to three
business cycles.
Society

Influencers (figure 8) is a diagram we are using to


attempt to capture who/ what influences the decision
making process for a building. For example, how much
influence does the designer have with his own set of
beliefs and experiences. How much impact/ push does
the client or society have on the finished product?

(government, global
communities, future generations)

ORGANIZATIONAL SCALE
MICRO

Designer

Practice

Industry

Society

BUILT-ENVIRONMENT SCALE

MICRO

Part

MACRO

Component

Figure 7: Scales

Assembly Building Neighborhood City


System

MACRO

Region

Industry

(designers, manufactuers,
consrructors)

Client

(owner, funder, occupier,


developer, local community)

Figure 8: Influencers

Distributed at Changing Roles Conference, Rotterdam 10/09

Lifecycle (figure 9) looks at the building througout its life and identifies critical decision points for investment (CDP
01 How much to invest initially?) and scenarios for action at the point in which funtional adaptation (potential
convertibility) takes place.
CDP 03
How to handle an aged building?
(sub-optimal for use)

Building Reuse
Functional Adaptation

CDP 01
How much to invest initially?

option A

Upgrade / Major repairs

(what capacity will be built in)

Financial Gap
Maintenance
Operate (early years first 5-10 years)

Operate (later years after 10 years)

Continual (sub-optimal) Use


option B

Sell / Rent / Lease


Construction
Procurement
CDP 02
How much to invest in upkeep?

Design

Sell

Buy existing building

option C

Build new (new site)

Scrap & Build (existing site)

(what capacity will be kept)

option D

Brief

Figure 9: Lifecycle

esign stra
abled
teg
t
p
a
ies
d
a

Si m
pl
ier
de

modules
bus systems

parallel processes

easy interfaces

MOVABLE

VERSATILE

change of location

change of space

trussed rafters

up-to-date services

inflatable

new technologies

ADAPTABLE

kit of parts
biodegradable
regional materials

changable panels

demountable
portable

capable of altering its space, function,


or components in order to respond
to evolving demands

insulated building
recycled materials

stackable units
oversized structure

modular units

renewable services

easy connections

typ

change of size

large spaces

es o

ti
f changes over

me

REFITABLE
change of components
deattachable

motile / mobile

renewable materials

movable partitions
collapsable
extendable

n ge
cha

CONVERTIBLE
change of function

ure
fut

foldable

le

in s

f
ize o

de
ra

open span

its
Su

etter building performance


use B

Easie
r to
a

sse
m

Ea

ceiling space

ab l e
eus
eR
cat
elo
r
r to
si e

reusable parts

ell
/

ble
Ea

sie
r

to
up
g

Presenter and Professor


Alistair Gibb
a.g.gibb@lboro.ac.uk
+44 (0) 1509 223097

is

Eas
ier
to
re
s

www.adaptablefutures.com

sR

coordinated connections

standard components
product family
prefabricated

SCALABLE

Contacts

Le
s

furniture type

as

occ
up
ati
on

change of task

haning functions/ tasks Prolo


t for c
nged
djus
lifec
to a
ycl
e

ed t
o

ADJUSTABLE

system building

ier
Eas

able Recognition Quicke


Renew
r spe

o
pr

urn
ret
ter
ea
Gr

The framework presented in this paper is an


ongoing development of the AF project. We
are currently validating the framework
through its application with a number of
casestudy and partner projects. Thoughts,
criticsms, etc. are all welcome.

n
sig

eed of construction Done Be


ker sp
fore
Quic
Ea s
ier
sign
e
to s
d
er
ell/
t
s
a
F
lea
ss
se
e
c

k/

Framecycle (figure 10) places the strategies in a


clock-like position indicating their potential to
be used. Filtered inbetween the strategies are
various solutions associated with the strategies, and around the outside list some of the
benefits.

Figure 10: Framecycle

Researcher
Robert Schmidt III
r.schmidt-iii@lboro.ac.uk
+44 (0) 1509 222897

This paper and its contents are copyright and property of Loughborough University 2009

Distributed at Changing Roles Conference, Rotterdam 10/09

WPs AF DIMENSIONS

APPENDIX 1

WP1AF FRAMEWORK

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

WP2 AF PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE


LAYERS

PARADIGM

PARAMETER
(PHYSICAL & SPATIAL)

COMPONENTRY, STAKEHOLDERS, TIME

TIME, LAYERS

FUNCTIONAL
TYPE

COMPONENTRY, SPACE

PROCESS

The process of extending


the life of our built
environment

WP4 AF LIFE CYCLE COSTING

RULEs
FUNCTION, COMPONENTRY, SPACE

PARAMETER
(SPATIAL)

TIME, COMPONENTRY, FUNCTIONS, SPACE

DfAD

RULES

DEPENDENCIES

PERSPECTIVES
TIME

WPs AF TABLES

PARAMETER
(PHYSICAL)

RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN PHYSICAL AND
SPATIAL PARAMETERS

CAPs
COMPONENTRY, SPACE

SOURCES (all), TIME

ECONOMICS
SOURCES

PERSPECTIVES (all), BENEFITS, COST


ADAPTABLE
STRATEGY

DESIGN INTELLIGENCE, STRATEGIES, RULES,


POLICIES, PRODUCTS

LIFECYCLE
TIME, ECONOMICS, SCENARIOS

ABLES
STRATEGIES, SCALE, TIME, LAYERS, STAKEHOLDERS

WLA
PERSPECTIVES (all), BENEFITS, COST

FRAMECYCLE
STRATEGIES, PRODUCTS, BENEFITS, TIME

SPECIFICITY

PARAMETER
(PHYSICAL & SPATIAL)

WP5

FREQUENCY
OF
CHANGE

LANDSCAPE

STRATAMETERs
STRATEGIES, COMPONENTRY, SPACE

STRATEGY
DEMANDS AND
RELATIONSHIPS

CHANGEMETER
MAGNITUDE, FREQUENCY

SOURCES

CASE
STUDIES

BENEFITS

DEMANDS AND
RELATIONSHIPS

MAGNITUDE
OF CHANGE

AF BUSINESS CASE

FUNCTION

STRATEGY

DIMENSION
VERIFICATION AND
CATEGORIZATION

VERIFICATION
CASE STUDIES, SOURCES (all)

STAKEHOLDERS, STRATEGIES

TIME, SPECIFICITY

PERMUTATIONS
STRATEGIES
MICRO

Designer

Industry

Society

MICRO

Part

MACRO

Component

Assembly Building Neighborhood City


System

AF DESIGN PROCESS

INFLUENCERS

SCALES

MACRO

Practice

WP6

Region

extending the life of our built environment

STAKEHOLDERS

STAKEHOLDERS, COMPONENTRY
____________

SPECTRUMS
DIMENSIONS

Distributed at Changing Roles Conference, Rotterdam 10/09

Anda mungkin juga menyukai