Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 3 – uploaded by Bojan Tepavcevic

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 4. Ontology of an urban-design tool based on shape grammars: FM (formulation module); GM (generation module); EM (evaluation module). GM uses shape grammars for design generation. eS Swometiess Saee ia et Fase se Beirao (2012) module of the Ci SSE RTS MUTINY eRe oan oe np ere ome tee nears BN develops an urban design tool based on urban grammars and the generation ty Induction project. This tool is called CityMaker and Beirao gives two prototype implementations, an implementation in AutoCAD using VBA and Vlisp APIs, and an implemen ation in Rhinoceros using Grasshopper. The first implementation model offers an advantage in terms of integration with GIS platforms. On the other hand, the second model provides a with updated resu user-friendly interface, allowing all inputs to be changed at any moment ts in real time, while in the first model this implies regeneration.

Figure 4 Ontology of an urban-design tool based on shape grammars: FM (formulation module); GM (generation module); EM (evaluation module). GM uses shape grammars for design generation. eS Swometiess Saee ia et Fase se Beirao (2012) module of the Ci SSE RTS MUTINY eRe oan oe np ere ome tee nears BN develops an urban design tool based on urban grammars and the generation ty Induction project. This tool is called CityMaker and Beirao gives two prototype implementations, an implementation in AutoCAD using VBA and Vlisp APIs, and an implemen ation in Rhinoceros using Grasshopper. The first implementation model offers an advantage in terms of integration with GIS platforms. On the other hand, the second model provides a with updated resu user-friendly interface, allowing all inputs to be changed at any moment ts in real time, while in the first model this implies regeneration.

Related Figures (5)

“ _- Itis important to mention that more recent versions of this application embedded traditional 3D modeling tools, fully integrated with CGA shape, in order to overcome the inherent yaradox of parametric design, as defined by Steino (2010). In his work on parametric thinking n urban design Steino points out that these low-tech approaches represent a meaningful supplement in cases when designers need to depart from parametrically bound components luring the design process. This, apart from interoperability with GIS, also suggests that a successful implementation of this formal system in urban design practice is more likely to be ichieved through its integration with other techniques and implementation in greater systems ind platforms. Figure 1. CGA (computer-generated architecture) shape application showing the transition from a modeling tool to a tool adapted for design processes.
“ _- Itis important to mention that more recent versions of this application embedded traditional 3D modeling tools, fully integrated with CGA shape, in order to overcome the inherent yaradox of parametric design, as defined by Steino (2010). In his work on parametric thinking n urban design Steino points out that these low-tech approaches represent a meaningful supplement in cases when designers need to depart from parametrically bound components luring the design process. This, apart from interoperability with GIS, also suggests that a successful implementation of this formal system in urban design practice is more likely to be ichieved through its integration with other techniques and implementation in greater systems ind platforms. Figure 1. CGA (computer-generated architecture) shape application showing the transition from a modeling tool to a tool adapted for design processes.
advantage as well as a limitation to this approach. It is an advantage in cases when we are dealing with areas with strong local character (both examples mentioned fall into this case). The limitation is the need to create a new grammar for each specific context. Interactivity is limited due to practically complete automation of design derivation, especially when coupled with optimization techniques.
advantage as well as a limitation to this approach. It is an advantage in cases when we are dealing with areas with strong local character (both examples mentioned fall into this case). The limitation is the need to create a new grammar for each specific context. Interactivity is limited due to practically complete automation of design derivation, especially when coupled with optimization techniques.
Figure 5. Schematic representation of the generation module.
Figure 5. Schematic representation of the generation module.
Figure 6. (a) Derivation of plan for Praia; (b) design variations achieved with generic grammars (source: ©: José Nuno Beirao, 2012).
Figure 6. (a) Derivation of plan for Praia; (b) design variations achieved with generic grammars (source: ©: José Nuno Beirao, 2012).
Figure 7. Comparison of shape grammar applications in urban design in terms of interactivity flexibility, and application in various contexts. 5 Conclusions
Figure 7. Comparison of shape grammar applications in urban design in terms of interactivity flexibility, and application in various contexts. 5 Conclusions
Related topics:
Computer ScienceHuman Computer InteractionArchitectureFlexibility in engineering designRule-Based Machine Translation
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved