CLASSICAL COMPOSITION

I was looking at the Composite Order and came across a capital from Romania which has an interesting version of the Acanthus leaf. 

 

 

I decided to have a go at modeling this in Revit.  I want to keep things as simple and lightweight as possible.  In a BIM context, we are not going to capture every delicate ripple of a vegetation inspired ornament.  My aim is to capture the essence with a “few bold strokes”.  The magic of the human brain will do the rest.

The first piece of geometry is a flat central rib, with a hooked top.  This is a simple sweep on a curved path, cut by a void extrusion running at right angles to the path. 

 

In the first iteration the hook had a flat top, but by adjusting the shape of the void I was able to soften this.

The side leaves are created in a very similar manner, but the sweep profile is just a gentle curve, without the hook at the top. 

 

So that gives me the first row of leaves, to swap out in my standard Corinthian capital.  You can see the previous leaf shape in the second row.  Easy enough to make a taller version of my new leaf geometry  for the second row.  That was looking pretty good, so I felt inspired to work on the cauliculi, a bouquet of leaves in a cone-shaped container that softens the transition between the acanthus rows and the volutes.  These are just extrusions, but the trick is in setting the angle of the reference planes that host them.

 

What I have now is far simpler than the carved stone/wood or moulded plaster of an actual Corinthian capital.  Revit geometry is ill-suited to the task of capturing the subtle curves of foliage.  But it’s a significant improvement on my previous version, which itself was a step forward from the one before that. 

Importantly it’s a traditional family with none of the shortcomings of conceptual massing.  Crucially it’s relatively lightweight, around 1.3mb. 

Looks pretty good when rendered up in Enscape3d and given a bit of my favourite "rapid image processing."

 

 

Hope you guys will find this explanation of my work useful.  The modular column system uses capitals with a standard neck diameter which sit inside double-nested planting families for scaling to any size required in a project.  I have a wide range of capitals, shafts and bases which can be mixed and matched to create a huge set of options … and I add to these whenever I have the time and inclination, as was the case with these two capitals.

You can download these 2 capitals & a sample column from the link below. (Revit 2021 versions) The system works well for me, don’t know if it will suit your needs.  If any of you want to collaborate on a BIM study of the kind I have been sharing on this blog … maybe we can talk.

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sf6nnR1eDtQlLmbhdSYfqGMNkBzl_z0H/view?usp=sharing

 

IRONING OUT THE DIFFERENCES

 I was intrigued by a post on LinkedIn where Mark Somerfield credited the diagonal version of Ionic to Scamozzi. I hadn’t heard this attribution before, but I knew Scamozzi as a pupil of Palladio who completed some of his projects and wrote a book, as so many of the architects of that era did.

It struck me that this version of Ionic could be derived by reverse engineering the Composite Order. If you take a Corinthian capital and swap out the volutes with more substantial scrolls based on the Ionic order, you arrive at Composite. In the process you will have adapted the scrolls from two sets of parallel pairs to four diagonal corners.

 

Take the Acanthus leaves away again, and you get Scamozzi’s Ionic.  So we have the “flat/parallel” and the “diagonal corners” These are the two types that currently feature in my modular classical columns system for Revit.  But in this latest bout of research I also came across an intermediate version that may well predate the flat/parallel solution.  That will be an interesting one to tackle at some point in the future.

During my research I came across two interesting articles by Calder Loth, retired historian of classical architecture. Turns out that the diagonal Ionic goes back to the classical era although it was rare compared to the flat/parallel version.

https://www.classicist.org/articles/classical-comments-the-composite-order-an-overview/

https://www.classicist.org/articles/classical-comments-the-scamozzi-ionic-capital/

 

Loth credits Scamozzi as the popularizer of this version. Inigo Jones had a copy of his book and used it on the Banqueting House in Whitehall which stands opposite Soane’s Board of Trade (later remodeled by Barry and current home of the cabinet office)

 

Looking back at my own photos of the Banqueting House, I noticed that Jones used the Scamozzi Ionic on the lower range of windows and Composite capitals on the upper row.  There’s always something new to discover when you take a closer look at buildings in the classical style.  

 Fascinating

 

BOON OR BANE?

 MEP summit.  Is BIM a boon or a bane? 

My answer:

It’s a work in progress, it’s a moving target, it’s a broad church. 

 

Talking Points:

·         What value is BIM adding to the MEP stages of construction?

The value of BIM lies primarily in its ability to enhance collaboration.  I think about BIM in broad-brush terms. We are all aware of a dramatic digital transformation process affecting all aspects of our lives.  BIM is the impact of this digital revolution on the world of construction. 

As an architect I can remember trying to coordinate hand-drawn MEP layouts: flat plans traced by technicians.  I had to pore over these drawings for hours to prepare for meetings with the engineers, trying to anticipate problems that might crop up on site.  That was one of my least favourite aspects of the job.

Thirty years later I can see the ductwork appearing in the ceiling voids of our architectural model, sometimes projecting through the ceiling, or crashing into a door head.  I can walk over to the MEP team, or drop a screenshot and a note into a messaging app and know that my concerns are being considered in real time. 

It’s not perfect, but it’s a much better way to work.

 

 

 

 

·         What are the challenges being faced in the current level of application?

BIM has become a separate discipline.  Perhaps this was inevitable, but it’s ironic that a concept that aims to break down the barriers to collaboration has itself become an insulated bubble to some extent. 

The designers and decision makers who should be using BIM to connect with each other in more dynamic and interactive ways are often put off by the jargon and the complexity of the tools.  They may be too busy to learn new software packages, and take the “easy way out” by offloading the BIM deliverables to a specialist team or (horror of horrors) outsourcing to a cut-price operation on another continent.

Building is a team sport. We have seen how digital connectivity can transform communications.  Think of Wikipedia, Google Earth, WhatsApp, GoFundMe.  Our industry can and will be connected in ways we can scarcely imagine at present.  But we have to make the BIM ecosystem much more welcoming and user-friendly. 

There is so much knowledge and experience out there.  BIM should be the golden thread, linking it all together.

 

 

·         Are stakeholders benefitting viz. the cost in software, hardware, and the high cost of staffing?

We really have to think about the long game.  Remember, BIM is a work in progress.

Yes, there are many benefits which we can realise immediately, and there is no way I will ever go back to using 2d CAD for any purpose.  But the biggest pay-offs are yet to come.  We have seen this time an again in the digital space.  Technologies take time to mature and they reimagine themselves multiple times.  The goal is much more rapid and fluid information flows between all stakeholders in construction projects.  Everyone is using digital tools and processes to some extent these days.  The challenge we face is to figure out how to connect them together, robustly and securely.

Can you afford to invest in the future?  Can you afford not to?

 

·         Will better collaboration between the client-contractor-consultant-FM to maximise BIM benefits?

This question highlights the life-cycle issue.

I have already mentioned the need to widen the circle, to bring more people into the BIM fold. I think we have tapped maybe 10% of the potential.  The schematic and detailed design phases of projects have developed quite effective digital processes, although some disciplines are still trapped in “CAD world.”  Other phases of the life-cycle are less advanced perhaps, but progress is being made.  In my view, the “hard problem of BIM” is how to bridge the transitions between phases in a seamless way.  Worthy attempts have been made, but I think we can do better.  Let’s keep working on it and sharing our ideas and experiences.

One word of caution.  We have all seen that there is an Upside and a Downside to the digital era.  You can share you views with the whole world from a device that fits in your pocket.  But you can also get attacked by Twitter mobs and find your reputation in tatters for a chance remark.  We should be prepared to pause from time to time and rethink our approach to building collaboration platforms.

 

 

·         Is there a need for more robust technology solutions or are there better methods to using BIM more efficiently?

It’s a journey. My life splits quite neatly into two halves.  Let’s call them BC & AD. (Before Computers and After Digital)   

I first started using computers in the mid 80s on a machine called the BBC Micro.  I was working in education and using Word Processing and Spreadsheets.  There were no hard drives, we used 360K floppy disks and “daisy wheel” printers.  By the late 80s I was doing commercial Architecture using IBM compatibles with DOS and AutoCAD.  I could go on like this for hours.  15 years ago I started using Revit, but I had become aware of the BIM concept some years earlier and dabbled with early versions of ArchiCAD.

In recent years digital tools for construction have diversified immensely. Laser scanning, drones, generative design, robotics, augmented reality. These are all part of the digital sphere, and BIM has become a handy label to cover the interactions between all these tools.

So yes we are expecting to see more robust tool kits, but we have to remain nimble and adaptive. Ultimately humans are the most stable and robust element in the mix. 

 

 

·         Is it time for software vendors to focus on conducting training and development along with the industry, so that BIM can be a solution?

 

Digital transformation is an opportunity. Can we grasp that and shape it to our needs?

Expecting software companies to hand us solutions on a plate is surely too static a vision. BIM is a moving target. We should be alert to new possibilities and actively seeking ways to connect our activities. How does collaboration take place? Could that be enhanced digitally? Sometimes a WhatsApp group might do the job, or perhaps you could commission an Android app that would give product reps around the world a place to connect with consultants and contractors, record issues, issue project proposals so that they can be tracked and commented on.

The evolution of social media over the past decade or so has surely taught us that we can’t just sit by passively and expect “Big Tech” to deliver a perfect world.  We need to think critically about the kind of digital future we would like to see in our industry, to engage actively in the discussion and try out new ideas.

Perhaps the future of BIM will be crowd sourced.  Why not?