SHS Web of Conferences 41, 05002 (2018)

https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184105002
eduARCHsia 2017

Composing the Layer of Knowledge of Digital Technology in

Architecture
Mikhael Johanes1,*, Yandi Andri Yatmo1
1
Department of Architecture, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

Abstract. The use of digital tools in architectural practice has been evolving significantly. In following
such developments, architectural practice has been incorporating digital technology not only to meet the
current demand but also to pursue the vast amount of possibilities ahead. However, the integration of digital
technology in architectural knowledge has been reasonably operative that produces uncritical understanding,
and it tends to put architects as a passive user of technology. This paper argues that there are layers of
knowledge that nees to be acknowledged and nourished accordingly in embracing the use of computation
tools yet avoiding the overly simplistic.understanding. It attempts to explore the methods of digital
technology in archietctural design practices as well as dicussions that follow to create a critical evaluation of
its roles and potentials. The review is conducted theoretically in which the use of digital in the design
process is explored in such a way to reveal its importance in architectural design methods. The review also
crosses beyond the disciplines of architecture to construct more comprehensive understanding that bridges the
logic of digital technology and architecture. The resulted map of methods of the digital thus can be used to
develop a framework for digital discourse that bridge the operative knowledge of technology to the more critical
perspectives.

Keywords: digital architecture, information, design method, architectural education

Introduction: From Representation to (Allen, 1997). The use of digital technology in

Information architecture transforms its representational medium into
an information system. This transformation inevitably
Architects commonly use analogue representation such changes the way architects work with their ideas in
as drawings and models as a medium to materialise their architecture. The traditional representational system
ideas. It requires skill to relate the visual presentations of enables architects to articulate their thoughts by
the medium as well as the tactile of hand involved with cultivating the immediacy between hand and paper
the real experience of the building for which takes years (Picon, 2003). On the other hand, the information of
to develop during the training of an architect (Scheer, architecture within the digital medium enables particular
2014). The materiality of the building and ideas is operations in a specific way according to its mode of
believed to relate directly to the representation that used information and underlying system (Christenson, 2016)
by the architects. Various stages of architectural which both allow new possibility yet causes difficulties.
production processes determined the mode of This change is somewhat inevitable in the current
representation that depends on its intention of creation architectural practice as well as our everyday life. The
(Robbins and Cullinan, 1994). For instance, architects ubiquity of information enabled by Internet shapes our
often use a series of vogue sketches in the early stages of primary perception thus shifts our physical reality as
the design process where the ideas are synthesised from well. The changing of the architectural working medium
different consideration. Meanwhile, the abstract yet clear from meaning-seeking representation platform into
conventional construction drawing is used in the final performance-based information system perhaps become
phase of design in which the precise delivery of the only options that we have now in responding to such
information to construction stage is necessary. The development.
practice of architecture thus shapes its internal system of This paper argued that the development of
representation that enables the communication and information based architecture profoundly challenges the
production of knowledge that is nourished in notion of materiality in architecture. Picon (2003) argues
architectural education systems. that digital development redefines our relation to
Digital technologies “abstractly schematize” the materiality by changing our perception and behaviour
analogic quality of representation into bits of through its medium. The immediacy of human gesture in
information, structured and processed into its medium sketches and drawings which allows intuitive coupling

*
Corresponding author: mikhael.johanes@eng.ui.ac.id
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
SHS Web of Conferences 41, 05002 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184105002
eduARCHsia 2017

between ideas in its representation provide convenience toward this simulated environment. This progression of
medium for architects to work. In contrast, the structured highly simulated digital environment inevitably affects
and systematic nature of digital medium creates a thick the practice of architecture as well as our lives in
layer of complexity that breaks the convenience. The general. This ubiquity of simulated materiality thereby
following sections thereby attempt to break down these creates limited understanding because it mostly
thick conceptual layers of digital medium in which the perceived as simulated experience and left its underlying
materiality of architecture is transformed into abstract entities behind.
information to put it into different “reality”. The interior of digital medium has less fascinating
existence for people but perhaps holds more critical roles
in understanding the digital materiality. The invisible,
The materiality of Architectural abstract mathematical entities (Emmer, 2005) inside the
Information computer are the building blocks in digital architecture
that are located within this interior as information. This
Mastering the use of computers does not mean that we information is somehow abstract, but its computability
need to learn all program available in the market. In promises a wide range of opportunity if one can
contrast, the ability to work with computers is measured understand its operations. However, the current digital
by the capability to extend its functionality beyond its culture is seemingly flocking into the same direction in
designated utilisation. We can attain this capacity if we which a lot of things is done by similar blueprints with
can understand how the information is processed and lack of inventiveness (Axel Killian in Burry, 2014). This
manipulated in its digital medium. In other words, it is condition reflects the shallow understanding of digital
necessary to understand the materiality of the digital tools which only scratches the surface of digital without
information analogous to building elements on the really digging deep by into its interior state. We argue
building construction. Computers create the new that the knowledge of the digital should go beyond this
“perceptual entities” and objects that enable architects to surface, cultivating the space of abstract information
manipulate different kind of transformation that is within its medium that can sustain this development.
unavailable to traditional means of architectural Christenson (2016) creates an analogy between grain
representation (Picon, 2003). While the perception of in the physical objects to the materiality of digital
architecture in the conventional representational medium information in architectural practice. He reveals that
often oscillates between concrete experience and abstract each mode of information has a different way of
ideas of materiality, digital tools fundamentally alter this interpreting “reality” into digital environment thus
relation by creating a different realm of materiality. affecting the kind of “force” that can be applied to it.
Unlike the real physical objects that respond to natural
forces such as gravity, weathering, and resistance in
unity; the digital entities fragments and structures the
reality into the various modes of information which can
only be affected by specific operation enabled by its
underlying systems. The more profound understanding
of the way of information operation in digital
architecture becomes crucial both to expose its limit and
reveals its wide range of possibilities.

The Operational Layer of Architectural

Information
The use of digital technologies is inevitably operative.
However, the passive use of technologies puts its real
operational capacity still intact, in which the nourished
Fig. 1. Two Essential Elements of The Digital Medium.
knowledge is more often only touching its surface of the
We can conceive the digital medium such as interface. We propose that there are layers of operation
computers according to its two essential elements: the by which the information of architecture potentially
surface demarcated by the interface on which people can cultivated in an active manner, allows the tactical use of
interact with the medium and its interior that is the technologies instead of surrender to the given strategies
underlying system that works behind our vision (Figure (Figure 2). Those layers are the generation, translation,
1). In its surface, the visible interface of digital medium materialisation and simulation. Generation involves the
creates a simulated experience in which its entities are operation of creation of digital entities which argued
perceived as reality, or even becomes the new reality critical in the ideation of architectural possibility yet
itself (Scheer, 2014). The typical manifestation of this often limited by the existence of digital interface.
kind of digital surface is found in a smartphone, where Translation enables the fragmented nature of digital
the abstract information is experienced as reality using entities into the realm of conversations, to complement
its intuitive touchscreen. The ever increasing each other thus develops a richer architectural
development of virtual reality marks our fascination information system. Materialization and digitalization

2
SHS Web of Conferences 41, 05002 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184105002
eduARCHsia 2017

enable a specific mode of translation from and to digital establishment of such systems (Legendre, 2011) due to
realm into our physical realities. Those specific its very abstract nature behind the instrumentality of
translations are argued to have important roles in computation. Parametric systems bring mathematics into
bridging the two realms of architectural materiality. life by enabling operation that allows people to get
Simulation enables digital entities to reflects reality by results from its conceptual process in the form of
performing it according to particular laws. While the geometry representation. However, people tend to avoid
generated data has significant value in anticipating the the difficulties in tackling this kind of abstracts problem
real performance of architecture, more critical evaluation and constraint itself using easy but limited operation in a
of its law is arguably importance thus open architectural well-designated application.
practice to a broader field. While the creation of architecture geometrical
information using a specific application as well as
parametric systems is performed through a well-
designated interface, scripting allows us to bypass the
limitation and interface to perform the particular
operation defined by specific syntactical computer
language called codes (Burry, 2014). Script exploits the
procedural process of computation to generate
architectural information from its logical cores. It
Fig. 2. Layers of Operation by The Information of enables people to extend the operation of an application
Architecture. that is not defined in its interface yet possible. In other
words, scripting opens a wide array of possibilities of
action enabled by its medium rather than specific
Generation
application. Understanding computer codes require the
Using digital medium requires the ability to generate abstraction of procedures in which the process is
desirable entities in which those objects convey composed which is not easy for everyone. The
particular information. There are three generation dichotomy between user and programmer creates a
methods that dominate the current digital architectural paradigmatic gulf that hinders the pollination between
process: directly creating using specific designated digital medium and architecture (Derix and Izaki, 2014).
application, parametric systems and scripting (Dunn, However, Kay (2012) argues that the digital language
2012). Generating information using the assigned perhaps holds important roles in the future of learning
computer program is a pretty straightforward approach. analogous to literacy system that enables the forming of
In this method, the process is enabled but constrained by past civilizations. Once the difficulties of reading and
the interface of the program. For example, creating free- writing of digital entities are surpassed, it amplifies our
flowing continuous surface is more feasible using ability to cover different ground thus enable us to think
NURBS based modelling application rather that polygon differently.
based modelling application that is more appropriate to
develop arbitrary surfaces from a collection of faces, Translation and Interoperability
edges and vertices (Corazza, 2012). This method
requires the simulated environment to present the created Christenson (2016) describes translation as the act of
abstract information directly to application’s interface. interpreting information into another form such as
Interfaces that both enable and limit the interactions interpreting a text as a visual image. In translation, the
between digital medium and its users define the very loss is inevitable, because each mode of data is
action that can be performed thus tend to hinder us for designated as such according to its intended meaning and
cultivating its latent possibilities. delivery purpose. Translation only allows particular
Parametric systems enable architects to explore information to be passed. In the case of conversion from
different possible outcomes from one abstract formal text to an image, it neglects the textual data and
system by changing the finite value set of parameters. maintains its graphical appearance. The loss also implies
Parametric models are built from a set of components the translation is sometimes irreversible, which means
that embody specific operation, assembled as such to we can never recover the missing information once it
perform a somewhat complicated process and dealing performed.
with its abstract data structure (Woodbury, 2010). Each mode of information suggests a different
Parametric systems can extend the process of operation according to its particular logic. Translation is
information generation beyond the designated interfaces not supposed to be seen as a form of loss. Instead, it
by deliberately composing them. The tricky part of enables various procedure that extends the meaning of
creating parametric system lies on the configurations of initial information. Translation allows the abstract
operations and the generated data to establish a desirable information to be processed “outside” its original form.
semantical relationship (Christenson, 2009). In architectural processes in which the multiplicities of
Fundamentally, creating a parametric system is a information are inevitable, translation enables
construction of a mathematical function that transforms a transformative forces to be applied in the different
set of finite parameters into visible geometry. situation thus provide a vibrant area of experimentation
Mathematics thus holds an essential position in the where new connections and associations are made

3
SHS Web of Conferences 41, 05002 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184105002
eduARCHsia 2017

(Christenson, 2016). Translation is argued as necessary giving the digital-enabled process for having a “reality
in digital architecture to form a more diverse check” during the process. Digital fabrication thereby
architectural design process. makes architecture as both spatial and material practice,
Interoperability between systems in digital medium practically blurring the boundary between design and
enables a kind of translation that has a slightly different construction.
aim from the former. Interoperability is defined as the On the other end of translations between digital and
capability of the various system to exchange its data physical, digitalization denotes the reverse vector of
(Jeong, Eastman, Sacks and Kaner, 2009) and prevent translation which enables realities to be denoted as
data loss as much as possible. While the translation information (Allen, 1997). The most of loss is tend to
between different modes of information aims to changes happen in this kind of translation in which idealisation
its method of interpretation and operation, and structuration are inevitable. However, the ability of
interoperability seeks to create a shared understanding of the digital medium to manage a large sum of information
separate systems to minimise the loss of information enables it to be a better medium of working rather than
then it can be processed in the entirely different system. writing and drawing. While writing frees us from the
The more complex information in one system, the more necessity of memorizing and enable us to think
laborious exchanges to be performed because every otherwise (Kay, 2012), digitalization extends this
system has its way in structuring its information. prosthetic capability even forward. What is more,
Standardisation of such complex data is thus necessary digitalization extends our capability of thinking through
to face those difficulties. For instance, the use of computation.
universal exchange format in BIM industry enables the
different platform to work with each other (Jeong et al.,
Simulation and Performativity
2009). However, total standardisation potentially will
restrict the possibility of a different system to have Computation enables the digital medium to perform
various features which limit the possibility of extending digital simulations. Simulation fundamentally is a
the capability of the digital medium. The differences are replication of reality that provides the possibility to study
necessary to maintain the possibility of diverse real-world phenomenon without direct intervention to its
extensions. Both translation and interoperability bridge real context (Groat and Wang, 2013). Digital simulation
those gaps and thus allows a healthy diverse digital holds an instrumental value that conventional medium
ecosystem to grow and work together. cannot offer. The importance of simulation lies in its
ability to generate information and forming iterative
Materialisation and Digitalisation process between design and analysis. Simulation enables
architects to anticipate building performance (Scheer,
Digital fabrication fundamentally is a form of translation 2014) before being built into reality. High-performance
that transforms geometry information from the digital architecture becomes possible due to the available
medium to physical materials through machinic computation technology in optimising different aspects
operation controlled by computers (Ox-man and Oxman, of the building that sometimes have competing values
2014). Digital fabrication requires the ability to which is harder to solve using conventional means of
transform digital abstract information into process-based calculation.
information to be executed by specific machines. This There is no universal simulation yet and perhaps
stage involves the understanding of available material there never will be. Different simulation is needed to
process such as cutting, subtractive, additive and analyse various aspects of performance and requires a
formation fabrication (Kolarevic, 2003) as well as the different set of information. For example, simulating
strategies that available for specific materials (Beorkrem, structural integrity of the building requires information
2013). The capability to differentiate the process of on the structural system that is not available in the 3D
materialisation enables building construction industry to modelling application that only gives geometrical
shift from mass production that is based on information. Building Information Modeling (BIM)
standardisation into mass customisation from which system was thus invented to overcome this limitation by
differentiated building elements can be produced fundamentally providing better information management
economically. Digital fabrication in building industry system and enable interoperability between different
extends the possibility of construction thus giving systems. BIM systems create “mirrored” reality of a
architects more space in realising their ideas. building by forming a structured information that covers
Digital fabrication also enables architects to quickly almost every aspects of the building including spatial,
materialise her ideas during the process using rapid material, structural, operational, cost, schedules and even
prototyping (Oxman and Oxman, 2014). It is a form of life-cycle factors over long periods of time (Groat and
translation between abstract digital entities that enables Wang, 2013). The development of digital simulation has
iteration between the abstract materiality of the digital come to the point that almost every performative aspects
and physical materiality within design process which can can be managed, evaluated and finally anticipated.
bridge the gap between these two domains. The bridging However, there is a limit. No matter how
between digital and physical reality allows architects to sophisticated and complex the simulation created in
reconfigure its architectural information systems replicating real-world phenomenon, it is only a mode of
according to the feedback from physical realisation thus analysis that should not be confused with the reality

4
SHS Web of Conferences 41, 05002 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184105002
eduARCHsia 2017

itself. The knowledge that can be gathered is highly

operative from which the only observable effects is
already anticipated by the “law” that underlies behind
the simulation (Scheer, 2014). While the “law” aim to
explain and predict a particular real phenomenon,
simulation is created to perform according to this law.
The way to expand the understanding the of reality
through simulation should begin from its underlying
theoretical basis. The multidiscipline effort is important
in which different disciplines can work together to
develop collective understanding in performing a
simulation. Simulation can be seen as a door to open
dialogue outside the discipline of architecture where the
assessment and evaluation of performance requires a fair
amount of theoretical understanding. Simulation can
ground architecture to its reality only if it is constantly
evaluated and criticised. Otherwise, the detachment of Fig. 3. Whole Layers of Digital Knowledge of Architecture.
architecture from the “reality” is perhaps inevitable. The emergence of the digital process also enables
architecture to reconsider its relation to materiality. The
The Layers of Digital Knowledge: Beyond development of digital is often seen as a movement away
Rationale of Vision from architectural materiality (Picon, 2003). It is true
that the virtualization of architecture in the digital
The development of digital has come to an era when medium allows the material reality to escape from the
digitalisation of architectural practice is inevitable. grasp of our perception, but the dialogue of the digital
However, the current development mostly puts and physical in digital medium goes beyond our
architectural materiality as a simulated experience of perceptual experience. The fabrication process of digital
information using its interface. The information based lessens the gap of digital and physical where the material
architecture requires further understanding of how the aspects inevitably should be taken into account. On the
actual logic of the digital works in the medium. Digital other hand, simulation puts the materiality of
entities embody different materiality (Picon, 2003) in architecture in the medium of the digital domain in its
which architectural ideas can be generated. Generating abstract form based on particular theory or law. The
architecture in a digital medium both enable and theorization of materials enables a wide range of
constraint architects in using its interface. Bypassing the hypothesis to be tested before being realized into built
constraint of the interface thus becomes crucial in forms. However, simulations and their underlying
opening a wide range of possibility that lies in the digital principles must be continuously checked to its real-world
interior system. Derix and Izaki (2014) suggest that context empirically. Both simulations and fabrication
mathematical thinking and computer programming is oscillate the materiality of architecture within the realm
necessary to create intuitive coupling between digital of digital and physical, creating entanglement between
media and its user. Intuitiveness in using digital media both domains and forming the iterative architectural
does not come from a seamless interface between user material practice.
and media, but from familiarising oneself to the logic of Figure 3 shows the whole layers of digital knowledge
how information is interpreted and operated digitally. of architecture. It can be conceived in two form which
The transformation of architectural communication perhaps holds an essential role in the development of the
from representation into information enables procedural architectural education curricula: the layers of the
mode of presentation of architecture. Parametric system medium and the layers of methods. The layers of the
and algorithmic architecture show that design can be medium denote the interface and interior in which the
presented as a set of procedures containing various abstract entities inside should be understood, allow us to
values and rules. The resulted architectural forms thus work in surpass the interface and work more tactically
are only consequences from such processes. Reviewing by understand its operating language. Computer
such architecture thereby cannot be judged solely based language and its abstract foundational knowledge such
on its final result. Instead one has to evaluate the very as mathematics are arguably held important roles in
logic of values and rules that operate behind. It is not digital practice as notation and convention also form the
impossible if the future of architectural design language of architectural representation. The layers of
publications will contain sets of procedures showing the method denote the operational layers in which the
logic behind rather than a set of drawings that solely entities of architectural information are generated and
represent its formal consequences. This transition is translated from and to the digital medium. Although
perhaps the best bet for architecture to escape from the those methods of operation can be performed in every
rationale of vision that already dominates the layer of the digital medium from interface level to its
architectural practice from the beginning of its deeper interior level, the deeper the layer of the medium
development (Eisenman, 1992). used, the more possibilities can be founded thus provide
a richer area of cultivation. On the other hand, these

5
SHS Web of Conferences 41, 05002 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184105002
eduARCHsia 2017

layers of methods also hold important roles in bridging Jeong, Y.-S., Eastman, C. M., Sacks, R., & Kaner, I.
the fundamental knowledge of digital medium with the (2009). Benchmark tests for BIM data exchanges of
more practical architectural design processes. precast concrete. Automation in Construction, 18(4),
469–484.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.11.001
Concluding Remark: Missing
Kay, A. (2012). The Future of Reading Depends on the
Information Future of Learning Difficult-to-Learn Things. In B.
The transformation of architectural representation into Junge, C. Zwick, & Kunsthochschule Berlin-
information, however, has a limit in itself. The Weißensee (Eds.), The digital turn: design in the era
abstraction into digital realm forces architecture to be of interactive technologies. Zürich: Park books.
translated into entities and sets ontological equalities Kolarevic, B. (Ed.). (2003). Architecture in the digital
between them in which the status of relations between age: design and manufacturing. New York, NY: Spon
entities must be clarified (Loo, 2013). This translation Press.
implies that there will always be missing information in Legendre, G. L. (Ed.). (2011). Mathematics of space.
the digital architecture. The very abstracts nature of London: Wiley.
mathematical and algorithmic creates a stubborn reality
Loo, S. (2013). Abstract Care. In H. Frichot & S. Loo
of quantities has been limited itself in grasping the
(Eds.), Deleuze and architecture (pp. 245–261).
bodily feeling of spatiotemporal experiences (Parisi,
Edinburgh University Press.
2013). Although digital transformation enables the
materiality of architecture to shifts to new realm thus Parisi, L. (2013). Contagious architecture: computation,
allowing it to evolve as such, the immaterial aspects of aesthetics, and space. Cambridge, Massachusetts l
architectural materiality are yet still missing and perhaps London, England: The MIT Press.
can never be incorporated in the digital medium. Picon, A. (2003). Architecture and the virtual: towards a
new materiality? Retrieved from https://e-pub.uni-
weimar.de/opus4/files/1236/picon.pdf
References
Robbins, E., & Cullinan, E. (1994). Why architects
Allen, S. (1997). Object to Field. In M. Toy (Ed.), draw. MIT press.
Architecture After Geometry (Vol. 67). Academy Scheer, D. R. (2014). The death of drawing: architecture
Press. in the age of simulation. London ; New York:
Beorkrem, C. (2013). Material strategies in digital Routledge.
fabrication. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Woodbury, R. (2010). Elements of parametric design.
Group. London ; New York, NY: Routledge.
Christenson, M. (2009). Testing the Relevance of
Parameterization to Architectural Epistemology.
Architectural Science Review, 52(2), 135.
https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2009.0022
Christenson, M. (2016). Beginning design technology.
New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Corazza, S. (2012). Modelling Techniques-Differences
between NURBS and Polygon. Retrieved October 3,
2017, from
https://seraphinacorazza.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/
modeling-techniques-differences-between-nurbs-and-
polygon-modelling-new-york-city-rooftop-3d-
architecture-project-research/
Derix, C., & Izaki, A. (2014). New Curricula: Syntonic
Systems. Architectural Design, 84(5), 122–129.
Eisenman, P. (2015). Architecture After the Age of
Printing (1992). In M. Carpo (Ed.), The Digital Turn
in Architecture 1992-2012 (pp. 15–27). Hoboken,
NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118795811.ch1
Emmer, M. (2005). Mathland: The Role of Mathematics
in Virtual Architecture. Nexus Network Journal, 7(2),
73–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-005-0023-1
Groat, L. N., & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research
methods (2. ed. [updated and expanded]). Hoboken,
NJ: Wiley.