I. Preliminaries
4. Synthesis
Humans possess a strong ability to assemble and to use compositions made out of words, sounds, physical
forms, colors, etc. This ability has been exercised during all the historic phases and socio-economic, cultural or
other circumstances.
Assumptions about the process of architectural synthesis must pay attention to the heterogeneous diversity of
conditions and problems that impose themselves on the designer and are involved in his work. Designs emerge
from the treatment of heterogeneous fragments that evolve, mingle, enter into relations, and produce effects.
Synthesis is a technique of assembling, on the basis of a design concept. Biris (1996) notes: “The design concept
lies constantly at the beginning of a series of phases that evolve incrementally. It is the center of multiple stratums,
retaining constant relationship and affinity with all the phases of synthesis”.
In this study, design synthesis, which is an activity of the human imagination, is approached as a process of
calculation. The study is conducted within the context of shape computation theory, introduced by Stiny and Gipps
(1972), where algebras of spatial elements are used as an abstraction of our interaction with shapes. It is
suggested that the design process consists of posing a design concept, or hypothesis, deriving its
consequences, and then testing the results against the known empirical facts. The outcome of this process, as
Schon (1987) points out: “is objective, in the sense that one can discover error to it, but it still remains personal”. It
is objective because the testing reveals any inconsistencies against the known standards. And, it is personal
because actions are relative to the initial concept and the commitment to a particular system of values.
Synthesis requires the invention of a sequence of thoughts and actions in combination with some initial
hypothesis. The possibilities even within the limits of a single hypothesis remain immense. The method of the
designer consists of effectively narrowing the space of search by developing a particular way of looking at things:
allowing certain procedures, while excluding others.
First, the general consequences of a design hypothesis are sketched out in a broad manner. Abstract schemata of
action are used for this purpose. They suggest particular relationships without determining the exact identities of
the participating elements. These can be expressed computationally as rule schemata including predicates and
variables. Second, from the action schemata, specific actions can be introduced and several alternative courses of
action can be proposed. The possible actions can be expressed as rules. The rules are defined by substitution of
the variables in the rule schemata. A rule specifies that given some condition x, a conclusion y can be produced:
An objective can be accomplished provided that some conditions are satisfied. But the application of any rule does
not guarantee the accomplishment of a desirable broader objective. For this reason, the design concept is
necessary to provide general direction.
Third, an ordering of the rules into an effective system (grammar) can be
produced retrospectively. |
