Search results

This chapter reflects on the understanding of the phenomenon known as Smart Industry, Industry 4.0, fourth industrial revolution, and many other labels. It does so by reflecting on the issue of terminology, as well as the existing diversity regarding the description of the phenomenon. The issue of meaning is addressed by assessing the results from Culot, Nassimbeni, Orzes, and Sartor (2020) and Habraken and Bondarouk (2019) which are, subsequently, used to develop a workable description. Findings from the two assessed studies raise the question of whether a workable construction of the phenomenon is to be understood as the key technologies or the distinctive developments? A question without a definitive answer, but I will present my view by taking inspiration from the manner in which the prior industrial revolutions are commonly understood. This leads to a, still multifaceted though, more focused understanding of the phenomenon. The insights, formulated proposition and developed model stemming from the reflection of terminology and meaning of the phenomenon helps move the current technology-related phenomenon forward. They assist with the establishment of well-documented papers. A critical aspect if we aim to understand how management will look like in the era of this phenomenon.

Interview with Dutch architect N. John Habraken; his Supports' theory is made explicit aligned with the approach of the Open Building movement. It aims to understand it in order to make it possible into the context of Brazilian contemporary architecture.

Habraken points out that the architectural studio failed to bring students to basic questions in the architecture of everyday environments. Till criticizes that in a studio, it is only the professional value represented by the teachers that prevails. To investigate the reasons of the allegation, this paper introduces a learning model defined by David A. Kolb, in which a learning process consists of two dimensional movements: i.e., prehension (concrete experiences vs. abstract conceptualization) and transformation (reflection and experiment). The paper then inquires into Schön's observation in the studio learning mode characterized as reflection-in-action. It is found that this studio is mainly dealing with the transformation dimension, and prehension dimension is either suppressed or represented by the teacher's experiences and conceptions. The paper discovers that the cause of problems raised by Habraken and Till is the inherent lack of substance in the prehension dimension.

The paper assesses a studio programme in which the basic questions of built environment were systematically introduced. It analyzes the students' reactions and performance in line with students' learning styles found using Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (LSI). It suggests that the students' learning activities are more diversified than what Schön could perceive. There is a possibility to adapt students' personal experience and abstract conceptualization which may play into the studio. By enhancing diversity of learning styles rather than letting one's learning style (reflection-in-action) prevail, the studio may become a platform in which students may learn from each other.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance and significance of design strategies to enhance flexibility as an in-built design concept of residential building in developing countries. The study considers potential directions of building design in developing countries to ensure maximum benefits of resource utilization.

The study approaches using the qualitative data collection method, mostly based on interviews of local residents. Layouts of residential buildings that have been renovated for several reasons, such as the changes in family size over the last 30 years, have been studied. The concept of zone and margin, based on the theoretical framework developed by Dutch architect, John Habraken, is compared and tested in residential buildings in the city of Khulna.

This paper shows that people change floor layouts of their buildings over time for different reasons; for example, 29 percent of people change plans in order to accommodate more people, 19 percent in order to initiate new businesses, and 13 percent due to change in family structure. However, these facts impose an excessive monetary burden on the owners to re-adjust layouts even though the building does not have the provision to do so. The paper also reveals that people would welcome new plans for future readjustment during the design and construction phases instead of renovation phases.

This paper highlights flexibility and attempts to justify the possibilities to practice in developing countries. As an inherent design strategy of sustainable development, the concept would consider unknown future changes of building layouts and structures. It would consider the minimum reconstruction, or renovation, costs associated for future adaptation.

The Support and Infill concept has been generally accepted and adopted by the design disciplines as well as the construction and manufacturing industries. Support and Infill were developed as an alternative to mass housing (Habraken 1961) The author argued that mass housing made no sense because of the absence of the user as a player in the housing process. This led to all sorts ills and wasted opportunities. This was mainly a relationship problem between the inhabitant and the dwelling itself resulting in identical units in identical blocks in identical neighborhoods which never changed nor ever moved until the mass demolishers came in to make way for something better which often was ‘supports’. Overlapping with this concept, Open Building emerges describing decision making levels of the urban tissue, supports, infill and all their spatial and physical properties and components. Now Time Based Architecture (TBA) (Leupen 2005) has come to the front. It is, as the name suggests, an Architecture which does not resist change but which embraces it. It is something close to Supports and Open Building but slightly different. All Supports are TBA edifices but not all TBA edifices are Supports? To explain this it is perhaps sufficient to say here that Supports did not deal in flexibility per se but with restructuring the building industry, to re-orientate decision making and also a large amount of attention was paid to modular co-ordination. TBA addresses this but also crosses borders into high tech buildings, flexibility and explores the use of contemporary materials and the flexible nature of glass and steel construction.

At a time, when there are world-wide calls for sustainable building design and construction focusing on building adaptation and remodeling rather than demolition and replacement, a local system of remodeling and functional adaptation has been applied in many residential and commercial buildings in Bangladesh. Focusing on case studies in Dhaka city where major urban regeneration takes place, building adaptation is an emerging practice where economy has a critical role to play in convincing client, users, designers and builders to encourage the local method of adaptation process to suit the changing need of the occupants.

A case of adaptation of a residential building has been studied to generate an understanding of the local adaptation process. This process is found in many parts of the inner city built environment, which collectively affects urban regeneration process and reshape the urban form of the city and its edge condition. Findings from the exploratory studies suggest that despite the absence of Habraken's support-infill knowledge, the local practice of adaptation can be institutionalized as a sustainable building development process that is more economic and place-responsive approach than rebuilding.

When N.J. Habraken proposed the conception of support-infill in housing construction in 1960s, housing issues was centered by drawn material construction and consumption, although the needs of involving in the final occupants' participation emerged. It reflected a transition from the industrial economy to the post-industrial economy. Since the rapid development and evolution in the field of technology and social culture in the last several decades, both the social structure and ideology have been changing. The consumption conception of dwelling has also shifted from physical substance to some invisible items, such as knowledge and service. Therefore, open building, as an architectural design method, should adapt to this situation in its future development. This paper firstly describes the characteristics of the post-industry society. Based on analyzing and summarizing the theories and some examples, this paper tries to re-explain the definition of “flexibility” in the context of the post-industrial society. It concludes that the possible tendency of open building is to establish a service system for future occupants to adapt to the changing living environment in addition to physical changeability of the building.

I want to raise a more philosophical question. What fundamental images and ambitions have guided us in the past and may guide us in the future? I want to particularly call attention to the way we explain ourselves to ourselves and to those we work with. This question may not seem practical but, ultimately, our self-image determines the way we design: our buildings reflect how we see ourselves. To let you know right from the beginning what I am aiming at, my talk can be summarized as follows: we come from a tradition of monument builders, but today we are almost entirely immersed in design for everyday environments. Where we come from is very different from what we do now. The way we see ourselves is a product of the past and is becoming increasingly counter productive.

MANAGING URBAN DISASTERS

Palladio's Children

A SAFE AND SUSTAINABLE WORLD

FRAME & GENERIC SPACE