INTERVIEW WITH LARS HESSELGREN, THE SENIOR ASSOCIATE PARTNER AT KPF

参数化设计出现的背景—— KPF 资深合伙人拉尔斯·赫塞尔格伦访谈
CAUSE OF PARAMETRIC DESIGN: INTERVIEW WITH LARS HESSELGREN, THE SENIOR ASSOCIATE PARTNER AT KPF

1. 参数化设计出现的背景Cause of Parametric Design

Yan: 参数化设计已经在工业设计领域应用十几年了，而在建筑设计中的应用在这个世纪初才初现端倪。一个主要原因是相关软件的开发中需要解决的建筑设计方面的问题要比工业设计复杂的多。建筑设计要牵扯到许多相关专业，平衡很多包括技术，社会，政治，经济等在内的制约因素，相关软件的开发就缓慢得多。除了软件技术的原因，文化方面，在理论界浮现了很多新生概念，更接近宇宙规律的整体观受到越来越多学者的关注，比如Deleuze & Guattari 的关于复杂性和涌现 (a theory of complexity and emergence) 的理论，John D.Barrow 的《万物新论》New Theories of Everything 以及Stephen Wolfram’s《新科学》 A New Kind of Science， 等等。这些理论都在试图揭示生命现象中看似混乱但却有着自治规律的复杂性。社会方面，高速的城市发展和转变使得城市的功能需要更灵活和动态的设计，以适应短期的使用和未来的不确定性。建筑的内容不得不面对短期的固定功能。基于上述的事实，你觉得是不是可以让我们比较全面地从技术、文化和社会这三个方面，认识参数化设计的产生背景和原因？
Parametric design has been used in industry design for decades because of the availability of appropriate software, which are much less complicated to develop than those dealing with architectural design. Whereas in the beginning of this century, parametric design is becoming the potential main stream in architecture arena since the technology was able to tackle architectural design problems. Other than the technical context, quite a few new theories make people understand better how the world works, such as the theory of complexity and emergence by Deleuze & Guattari, New Theories of Everything by John D.Barrow, A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram, etc. All these theories are trying to discover the undersurface cosmic truth in a holistic matter. Socially, the rapid development and transformation of lots of urban functions require flexible and dynamic design to respond to changes over a short period of time and the uncertainty in future. Architectural content has to envisage short life span for a fixed program. Based on the points above, do you agree that the cause for parametric design could be understood comprehensively in the context of technology, sociality and culture? What is your own opinion then?

Lars: 我同意参数化设计可以说是这三个方面共同作用的结果。关于技术，在我们的讨论范畴中更准确地说是智能电脑运算，一旦你拥有了它，你就无法抗拒的要使用它。建筑界对电脑的使用，已经从最初的模仿重复性的手工劳动，到今天能够实现你在拥有这个技术前无法实现的想法，如对复杂性的表述。以前你很难通过手绘设计实现“迭代”的概念，比如“碎形递归”[1]，今天，电脑运算让这些轻而易举。所以你就这样做了。
Yes. I agree the cause is the mixture of these three perspectives. The point of technology, which is computing power in this particular scope, is that once you have it, you become determined to use it. The interesting point of using the computer for architectural design is moving from mimicking the hand work to doing what you cannot do in any other ways, such is the complexity. You can’t do iteration, like fractal, easily by hand, while the computing technology makes it possible. So you just do it.

你也谈到社会，在很多方面它也是一样的，比如电脑，信息和网络在社会的普及，因为这些技术的存在，所以你会用它，因为你用了它，你继而又改变了文化。技术的革命多是如此，技术先至，随后人们开始发现它的用途，并影响文化。另一种有意思的现象是文化会也会引导技术的创新。19世纪就是这种文化盛行的时候，美国人组创了商业化的复杂体系，并使其在随后的20世纪傲视全球。可以这样讲，我们今天用的晶体管，电脑，操作系统，互联网，所有的这些现代化的技术都是缘于美国在那个时代的文化。从这个角度讲，文化创造了技术。你可以为了创新这个想法创造出新技术。当然也不都是只有美国文化才有这种文化特性。今天，这种文化已经在世界盛行。讨论技术和文化，你会发现这就像辩论鸡生蛋还是蛋生鸡一样，很难讲是文化至先还是技术至先。对我而言，最有意思的是二者的互动。如果文化不想接受技术，那什么变化也不会出现；同样的，如果技术不植根于渴求技术的文化，也是什么都不会发生。二者必须相互滋养。这已经从起初的西方发达国家的经济现象，拓展成世界范围的普遍现象。文化和技术的相互促生，导致了过去的10年中社会翻天覆地的变化。而我们正在开始意识到这种现象产生的结果。
When you talk about society, it does, in a lot of ways, precisely the same thing. It gets a hold of the computer, the information and the internet. Because it is there, you use it. And because you use it, you change the culture. Technological evolution is often like that. Technology comes first, then people find the use for it and it does things to the culture. It’s interesting to speculate that the culture drives innovation in one sense. That particular culture essentially comes back to the scientific revolution in the19th century. The Americans added a business complexity, which made the American culture pretty strong throughout the 20th century. So you get transistors, computers, operating systems, internet, and all these things coming out of American culture. In that sense, culture creates technology. You can innovate for the idea of innovating. Of course it isn’t just an American phenomenon. Now the culture of innovation has spread all over the world. By saying that, it is still difficult to say which comes the first, culture or technology. It’s like the question of the chicken and the egg. I think the interesting thing is that one drives the other. If the culture doesn’t want technology, then nothing will happen. Equally, if the technology isn’t embedded into the culture which is ready to accept it, then nothing will happen either. They have to feed into each other. It has been a global phenomenon. It moves from being a western developed economic phenomenon to being a world-wide phenomenon. This has radically changed in the last decade. We are only just beginning to understand the consequences of that phenomenon.

Yan: 按照你的看法，参数化设计最根本的源动力，还是在于数码技术的革新，虽然社会与文化也起到一定作用。
So if we talk about the fundamental cause, can we say parametric design is directly from the evolution of digital technology rather than anything else?

Lars: 我想是的。I would say so.

Yan: 而理论的发展是平行的。你不能片面地说理论推动了参数化设计的应用， 是么？
And theories are developed in parallel. You can’t really say theories push the application of parametric design, can you?

Lars: 针对你的疑问，我想到了一个有趣的实例，就是“碎形递归”。这个概念的基础工作是在19世纪末完成的，远远早于电脑的出现。是Mandelbrot把“碎形递归”的学术概念和迭代设计算法的技术融合在一起，突然间理论和技术走到一起，把我们引向更高一层的实践。这是今天建筑界正在经历的，但是更多的表现为全球范围的现象，而非某个人的影响。
An interesting example is for instance the invention of fractals. The most fundamental work on fractal was done in the end of the 19th century, long before we had computer technology. When Mandelbrot came along, he fused the idea of fractal definition with the idea of iterative design algorithm. Suddenly two ideas were brought together to move another step forward. When you bring technologies together, you always have the people who will grasp the opportunity to fuse different worlds together. That is exactly what is happening in architecture today, but as global phenomenon instead of individual’s influence.

2. 参数化设计的描述和优势Description and Advantages of Parametric Design

Yan: 参数化设计是一种基于新技术的新设计策略。你可否结合KPF的设计实例，概括地描述参数化设计在从最初的概念设计，到电脑模型与加工制造之间的数据转换，直至项目的最后竣工这个过程中的工作流程？同目前主流的经典建筑设计相比，参数化设计的优势又体现在哪些方面？Parametric design is a new design approach based on new technology. Could you give one example briefly describing the working flow of parametric design from the initial concept design, through the translation between digital models and fabrication, to the final completion on site? What are the advantages of parametric design respectively in different stage of projects compared to classical architectural design?

Lars: 我想参数化设计的最重要的优势就在于它是一个自动生成多种选择方案的系统，这个至关重要。现在KPF的一个方案，严格意义上讲会生成上百个可能的设计选择。例如Pinnacle塔楼，我们就做了500个选择方案。在现实中，如果没有一个可以自动过滤庞杂数据的程序，你根本无法对所有的选择方案进行评估。现在KPF谈论的是成百上千个选择方案，不久后的将来，我们极有可能针对一个建筑生成上百万个选择方案。当你优化方案时，你要全面地考虑很多因素，比如业主的项目资金回笼，建筑的运行效率和广义美学，交通流线的效率，施工建造的技术，等等，参数化设计可以生成成百上千个选择方案，这些选择从概念设计阶段直至工程竣工，可以一直平行发展。Pinnacle是一个很好的例子。起初，它是钢结构框架，但是结果变成了钢筋混凝土框架的核心。因为设计的变化总是不期而至，你就需要一种高效的方法处理全局性的变化。在过去，你可能在两三个月里做出两、三个选择方案；但是今天，你或许只有一周，或者两天，甚至两个小时、两分钟的时间做出几个选择方案。这也就是为什么参数化设计可以让你在设计过程反复变化。除了Pinnacle塔楼，还有很多方案我们都是一轮一轮的修改，演变出无数的设计选择策略。比如如何分割和排布弧形立面的挂板体系，就能有成千上万种可能性，你必须引用参数化设计才能得到最优化的经济可行的设计结果。
I suppose the main advantage of parametric design is that you have an automated system for generating alternatives. That is really important. Normally, we would literally need to design hundreds of alternatives for one building. An example is The Pinnacle tower where we have five hundred alternatives. In order to do it realistically you need an automated process using all the data that allows you to evaluate those alternatives. At the moment we are dealing with hundreds, or maybe thousands of alternatives. Extremely likely, in the next few years, we will be dealing with millions of alternatives for just one building. When you are looking to optimize everything, like return capital for the client, efficiency of the building, general aesthetics of the building, efficiency of the circulation, construction technologies, etc., it generates a huge number of alternatives, all of which go right from the concept design, all the way through to the construction completion. The Pinnacle is a good example of this as it started with steel frame core, but it may end up with concrete frame core. Because changes of design keep happening, you need to have an efficient way of dealing with global changes. In the old days, you may have been allowed to do one or two alternatives within a couple of months. But today you may have a week, or two days, or two hours, or even two minutes to make alternatives. That’s why parametric design is able to allow you to iterate through the process. Apart from the Pinnacle tower, there are many other projects at KPF where we went around the design again and again, and devising numerous alternative strategies. Issues such as panelising a curved building, how do you layout the panels, how do you divide up the surface? There are millions of ways doing it, so you have to start it in parametric design.

Yan: 你谈到了非常有意思的一点。因为在经典的设计过程中，对于每个阶段的选择方案你都需要做一个决定，只能选择一个然后向下发展，就像走迷宫，虽然你也会不断地发现很多选择，但每次你只能选择一条路走下去，永远无法知道其他路通到哪里。然而，在参数化设计里，你可以平行发展所有已有的选择，不必每步只选一个。这样的结果是，最后方案的可能性被成几何级数倍的扩大。同时因为所有选择方案都可以贯穿项目始终，这就让最后分析优化的定案，比较经典主流设计方法中每次只能作出一个选择得出的方案，更优化、更高效。
You touched on a very interesting point here. Because the classical design process is that you start from the concept design with alternatives. Then you need to make a decision to choose one to further develop. Then you generate alternatives again and chose again. So it’s like you always generate alternatives based on one of the previous alternatives. One analogy is labyrinth, although you will face multiple choices from time to time, you can only choose one at a time without knowing where the other routs leading to. But in parametric design, it seems you can generate alternatives based on all previous alternatives. Therefore the possibilities increase significantly. And because of the huge number of alternatives come all the way through, the optimized, or the final decision could effectively be more efficient compared to the one done in classical way, which is based on much less alternatives.

Lars: 是的。关键是你要在概念设计阶段设定合适的参数，让它们能够有效响应之后各个阶段的可能变动。经典的设计方法是你做完了概念设计，然后开始设定几何形式。一旦所有的形式都定好了，你就不可能再改了。换句话说，你不可能再退回到最开始的大形控制阶段改变基本几何形式的设定，但是参数化设计就允许你这样做。在参数化设计的过程中，即使你修改最开始的雏形设定，只要参数和几何形式之间的逻辑关系不变，这些更新都会自动繁殖到最后的发展阶段。更形象地讲，比如你的方案已经进入到细部设计阶段，突然因为某种原因需要改一草时的大形，有了参数化设计，你就可以很容易的退回到一草的设定中调整方案，然后一草之后的工作可以自动更新直到你最后的细部设计。这是设计的一种根本性的演变。对于线性不可逆的经典设计的流程我们已经习以为常。然而，参数化设计从根本上改变了这个设计流程，它的灵活性是具有里程碑意义的。试想，当业主在你已经做到深入设计时突然修改任务书，对此，你完全可以修改最初的体形设定，而非仅仅调整后期的深化设计。一个很好的例子是我们正在做的一个艺术级的飞机场，在设计的任何阶段，我们都能轻松地改变登机口的数量，整体体形随之自动更新，这个过程简单到只需敲一个键。
Yes, and more importantly when you are in the concept design stage, you determine parameters, which can change and influence all the further stages. The classical way that you design a building is that you do a concept design, and then you do the setting out of the geometry. Once you have done the setting out geometry, it will never change, because that determines the building. When you have design problems further down the design process, you cannot go back to change the fundamental design assumptions that were made at the very beginning. But parametric design allows you to do that. In parametric design, all the design details are still valid when you march back to the design assumptions, which will propagate themselves and take into account all the design details you have developed. That is really fundamental evolution. We used to take for granted that we had frozen the form of the building once setting out of geometry had been done which meant you could not re-visit the source in classical way. When you re-think the design process, the milestone is much less rigid in parametric design. When the client comes up with more requirements in later design stages, the response to the client can be to change the overall design rather than only changing the details. One good example is a new state-of-the-art airport that we are developing. We have modified the number of departure gates through the development process. We can easily do that with literally touching a button.

3. 参数化设计在实践中的终极目的Ultimate Goal of Parametric Design in Practice

Yan: 参数化设计的优点在扩初尤其是施工图阶段已被广泛认可。除此之外，还有很多前卫机构在概念找形的阶段试验参数设计的方法。你认为参数化设计可以最终统领设计的所有阶段么？换句话说，最理想的是能有一个参数化控制的主模型，其他所有相关工种都可以从中直接获取他们需要的信息。你认为这是参数化设计在实践中的最终目的么？
The strength of parametric design in production information stage has been well recognized. Whereas, there are many cutting-edge organizations experimenting parametric design approach and technique at form-finding stage. Do you believe that parametric design could be applied throughout the architectural design stages eventually? Or in another word, ideally there will be one parametric controlled master model accessible for all the consultants and contractors. Is this the ultimate goal of parametric design in practice? If not, what is it then?

Lars: 这与模型信息的导出和工程分工的责任有关。当你考虑配合单位之间的合作时，情况就不一样了。我不会愿意把参数控制的主模型发给结构工程师让他可以直接在模型上修改，因为建筑师的核心任务是控制和平衡设计的各个环节，包括环境设计，结构设计，业主需求，等等。实际工程中，最后的问题总是如何导出模型中的信息，与其他协作单位共享。考虑到共享参数化模型，有一种可能性是，当你导出模型时可以锁定某些设定，比如平面设定，只允许工程师调整一些在设计师可以接受范围内的微调，比如弧形曲率等。建筑师是可以通过附加这些限制来和其他协作单位共享参数化主控模型的。
This is to do with publications, responsibilities, and so on. I think when you consider the work flow with consultants, it is slightly different. I would not be happy to give structural engineers the parametric model and say you could change these things, because the whole role of the architect is to control and balance between environ-mental design, structural design, clients’ requirements, and so on. In practical terms, it is always the matter of publishing the model. But what could happen is that certain behaviors could be constrained when publishing the model to engineers. For instance, you can lock the setting out plan, but when it comes to the shape of curves or arches, you can modify it, within limits, because that doesn’t affect me as a designer. So architects can set those limits before circulating the master model.

Yan: 可是，即使你已经通过自己的参数主控模型生成所有的技术图纸，工程承包商仍然会重新根据实际建造的限制条件做一个他自己版本的模型。这是不是有些画蛇添足？But, if you have generated your own version of technical drawings through the para-metrically controlled model, the consultant need to re-model his own version in order to produce technical drawings again based on the true way they are going to build it. Don’t you think it is inefficient?

Lars: 谈到承包商，就更难共享参数主控模型了。工程师可能还不会在意是不是直接用你的模型做他们的计算，但是承包商和生产商的态度就完全不一样了，因为他们要负责把房子安全的盖起来。他们当然要有自己亲历亲为的模型版本。这也是为什么我们总是不厌其烦地描述几何形式，力求传达最准确的建模数据，确保只要他们按照我们的描述做，无论他们用什么软件，都一定会得到和我们设计一样的形式。
It’s a very difficult area. Engineers don’t worry about using your model, but you will find contractors and manufacturers have very different attitudes, because they are responsible for building it. They will rebuild a new model. That is the reason why, along with many others, we give the contractor geometry statements, telling them this is the way you should build it. If you follow it, you should get the same form back with any other design software packages.

Yan: 我在Marks Barfield事务所做Kew 皇家花园树冠步行桥的方案时，情况就如你所述。我已经用Digital Project做了细到节点的所有模型部分，但是承包生产商还是用他们熟悉的另外一个参数化结构设计软件完全重新做了一个自己的模型。在当时看来，我认为如果我们能够共享一个参数化模型，效率一定会提高很多。现在看，建筑师不可能从承包生产商的实际建造角度去建模，因此共享一个模型不太现实。
We have exactly the same situation in Kew Garden Walkway. I developed the whole parametric model in Digital Project, but the contractor re-built a new one in Tekla. At the time, I thought it would save time if we could have shared the same model. Whereas when I stand back and look at the case again, I agree it isn’t practical to share one parametric model between architect and contractor.

Lars: 如果能共享一个模型，当然会省很多时间。这里面还有一个法律责任的因素。如果承包商不能通过自己的检查确信建筑师的模型准确无误，他们就必须自己再建一个模型。只要在法律上指出承包商承担责任，他就不敢直接用你的模型。然而，我认为，随着人们对技术越来越熟悉和信赖，承包商也会慢慢的接受直接出自建筑师的模型。比如在Pinnacled的项目中，承包商就愿意在我们模型的基础上搭建他们的信息。当然在这之前，我们已经做过平行的测试证明导出数据的准确性。所以，法律责任上的限制其实大于技术上的制约。
It would. But it is to do with liability of different people. It is a legal situation. It is very different to reuse architects’ model until contractors are convinced that the model is either correct or has been developed for them to enable checking if it is correct. As long as the law says it is the contractor who takes the liability, he doesn’t dare to use your model. It’s too dangerous. However, I think when people get more used to technologies they will be more willing to take other people’s work as given. For instance in The Pinnacle, they preferred to build their data on top of ours. But first we did a parallel exercise to make sure the data was correct. So, it is more a legal issue rather than a technological issue.

Yan: 看起来承包商也要提高他们的建筑专业技能，否则很难配合和支持掌握参数化设计技术的建筑师。
It seems contractors also need to improve their professional skills in order to catch up with architects’ parametric design techniques.

Lars: 可以这么说。但是建筑师并不总是建模的最合适人选。建筑师总是要犯这样那样的错误。建筑师经常要设想房子是如何盖起来的。当你面对制造厂商时，他们才是真正知道如何生产钢梁的人。他们专长于机器的控制程序，切割、钻孔和弯扎的工具和细节，等等。这也说明没有必要有一个贯穿项目始终、统领一切的主模型。实际上，不同协作单位在工程合作期间的衔接是有一些断点的。有一种错误的概念，就是认为如果所有的人都用一种软件，那么就能实现合同协作的无缝链接。这个是根本不可能的。更多的时候是你如何把几何形式本身或者对其的描述转手给下一个人。现实生活中，你不可能指望只要把模型给下一个人了，他就能解决所有的问题。所以说参数化设计的终极目标应该更多的是关于如何通过发展设计的工具，把各个协作单位更智能化的组织在一起。相应地，软件制造商必须明白他不可能把使用者锁在他唯一的软件世界中。至今没有一个成功的软件标榜它能够做所有的事情。不同的软件需要理解如何与其它软件接口，在参数化设计的范畴内，指的是如何推动几何形式的参数化关系。我相信这个会发生，尽管在建筑业内，这个过程是痛苦的，这在机械领域内已经发生了。另外一种现象是人们会使用各种各样的软件。曾经一度盛行这样一种观点，即一个事务所只要选一个软件就可以做所有的事。而事实是现在的事务所发现他们已经引进了很多种软件，这样才能协调不同使用者之间的关系。独立地使用一个软件已经不复存在了。
Yes. But it is also true that architects are not always the best people to do it. Architects do make mistakes. Architects make assumptions about how things are put together. When you go to the manufacturer, he knows how to put together the steel frame. He knows the process of robot control, tools and details in terms of cutting, drilling, bending and so on. That does actually support the point that there is no real need to have one master model to be carried through the whole project. In fact, there are some natural break points. It is one of the big misconceptions that if everyone uses the same software, then everything will become seamless. It’s simply not true. Most of the time, it’s a matter of handing over geometries, or geometry descriptions to the next person down the line. It doesn’t mean that you just give him the model assuming that that will solve all the problems. Real life doesn’t work like that. So the ultimate goal of parametric design is much more to do with developing tools for people to collaborate intelligently, which means software suppliers have to under-stand they cannot lock people into their world. No software will be successful if it assumes everything can be done within its own package. It’s not a smart way to think about it. All software has to learn how to collaborate, I suppose, to push across the parametric relationship to adjust the geometry. I think it will happen but it will be painful in the construction industry. It has happened in mechanical industry. One alternative, which is perfectly likely, is that people start to use all sorts of different software. It used to be a big trend that people said every office got one piece of soft-ware doing everything. But the fact now is that offices find they have to introduce a lot of different software, because of the relationship to all sorts of people. Software as individual application is no longer as important as it used to be.

4. 参数化设计中的创造性Creativity in Parametric Design

Yan: 以我的理解，在应用参数化设计的技术时设计师需要根据设计的文脉和概念设定一个可调控的三维电脑模型。这就鼓励建筑师重新考虑建筑是一个自我组织的复杂系统，在这个系统中形式是根据各种设计限制条件（如预算、环境、功能、尺度等）的共同制约作用下自主生成的，而非靠主观直觉统帅的自上而下的设计方法。所以，创造性在参数化设计的流程中需要重新定义，也就是说更多地考虑如何通过追踪相关因素间的关系建造出启发性的三维参数控制模型，而不是主观的去设计形式。在你看来，创造性在参数化设计里应该如何诠释？
As I understand, designers need to identify the parameters based on the design context and concept before establishing the operational 3d model, which suggests that architects should re-think architecture as a self-organized complex system, within which form will be generated through constraints, e.g. budget, environment, functions, scale, etc, rather than determining forms with intuition in conventional top-down design approach. Hence, creativity needs to be re-defined in parametric design approach, i.e. to think more about how to establish an inspiring model by tracing the relationships between relevant factors rather than designing forms subjectively. How will you interpret creativity in parametric design though?

Lars: 在参数化设计的范畴里，我发现一个不同以往的有趣现象，就是你不得不为了创造性的目的，快速地建模。可能有一种假设认为，一旦你的参数化模型建完，就万事大吉了。这在现实中从未发生过。每一个参数控制的模型，都可以生成千上万的变体，但这仍然不够。变体往往只是试验性的。因而能否快速且高效的建模是参数化设计中的下一个目标。有些参数化设计软件这方面就弱一些，他们的工作机制非常复杂，以至于你需要花很长的时间才能领会和掌握。参数化设计中的创造性体现在建模的高效性上。这也是我为什么认为Generative Components作为创造性设计的工具很可能是最强的，因为它具有小巧、简洁且相对快速的建模机制。但是如果谈到设计的生产制造阶段，有些软件，比如Catia，就要强大的多了。Catia不利的地方在于建模成形之前，你必须做大量的设计决定。这就会限制你探索建模的效率。
One of the interesting things I found that has changed in relation to parametric design is that you have to build the conceptual model very quickly in order to be creative. There is somehow an assumption that you build one parametric model, and that’s it. That is almost never the case. Each model will generate thousands, tens of thousands alternatives, but that is not enough. The variations are often trivial, so the ability to create models quickly and efficiently is the next big goal for parametric design. You will find that lots of parametric softwares are not very good at that. They have very complicated and confusing mechanisms that mean you don’t understand what’s happening. It takes a long time to grasp how to manipulate the software. The creativity will rely on those who can build a model very quickly and efficiently. That is why I think Generative Components is probably the strongest in that sense, because its models are small, light-weight and comparatively rapidly built. Whereas when it moves into real manufacturing, something like Catia is much better. But you have to already make a huge amount of design decisions before building the parametric model in Catia. It’s not an explorative environment. 5. 参数化设计的拓展Extension of Parametric Design

Yan: 参数化设计目前主要局限于建筑设计，你有没有想过它在城市设计中的应用？在AA伦敦建筑学院设计试验室的研究生课程（Design Research Laboratory, AA School London）中已经开始探讨参数化城市设计。你认为参数化城市设计是否可行？为什么？
Parametric design is being used most in architectural design arena. Have you ever thought the application in urban design? One of such research is the Parametric Urbanism course in current AADRL. Do you think it make sense to push parametric design in city scale? And why?

Lars: 这是一个很有意思的问题。设计城市的问题在于它受政策的影响太大，所以我并不认为参数化城市设计能够发挥多大作用。我会饶有兴趣地关注参数化城市设计，这个课题应该还是刚刚起步的阶段。
This is an interesting one. The problem of designing cities is that it is as much to do with politics than anything else. That is why I am not sure if parametric design will solve the problems. I will be very interested to look at it, but parametric urbanism is right at the beginning.

Yan: 可是，参数化城市设计仍然可以根据环境因素设定形式的控制参数，不是么？
But, in parametric urbanism, you could build in environmental factors to determine the massing, and so on.

Lars: 对。但是更多（城市设计）的基本决议还是关于文化和社会方面的，比如城市密度和交通系统，这些都是政策性问题。是机动车系统还是地下轨道系统，或者自行车系统，都不是设计上能控制的。在技术的周边还有很多政策性投资的问题。参数化设计在这个尺度的应用恐怕要大打折扣。它不会像在建筑尺度的应用那么有意义。可能以后会有更多的参数化城市设计，但现在还很少。
Sure. But there are lots of fundamental decisions about where the building is in terms of culture and social environment, such as urban density, traffic systems. Those decisions are really made in the political arena. – the motorway system, or the underground system, or other systems such as bicycle paths - these are political issues much more, in a sense, than design issues. There are lots of politics with investment around technology. Parametric design can play an interesting role there, but how do you apply that? I don’t think it will be as fundamental as in architectural design. Maybe it will be, but not yet.

6. 参数化设计对于建筑职业的影响 Impact on architectural profession of Parametric Design

Yan: 作为参数化设计的实践者之一，我感觉需要很多的时间学习和掌握软件实用技术和相关知识。考虑到每个人发展自己专业技能和知识的时间都是有限的，是不是会出现一个新的设计工种，为建筑师提供参数化设计的专业服务？也就是建筑设计人员的内部分工将更细？还是说未来的建筑师都要掌握参数化设计技术，最终变成建筑程序设计师？
As one of the parametric design practitioners, I feel that a great amount of time of training is needed to grasp the technique as well as the knowledge. Bearing in mind every designer has limited time to develop his or her professional skills and knowledge. Does this indicate that a new type of architectural designer will emerge as the sub-consultant to architects in order to apply the technique? Is that true that a more sophisticated job division within architecture is coming into being? Or will some architects become programmers eventually?

Lars: 我相信建筑设计最终都会参数化，因为新的这一代建筑师是在高度发达的计算机环境中成长起来的，电子游戏始终伴随你们的左右。一旦你进入到这个（计算机的）世界，就很容易迅速理解编程的强大能力。我想Generative Component已经是在半途上了，它已经把建筑师引入编程的理念。与此同时，另一种相对的情况是参数化设计专家的出现。很多像KPF这么大规模的事务所都开始有自己的高端几何形体设计小组。这并不意味着我们将淘汰传统的设计配合顾问，但是会有越来越多的这方面的专家参与到设计中，尤其是在方案的前期阶段。大规模的事务所是一定需要这样的专业技术小组的，就像视觉表现小组一样，为整个公司提供支持。专业技术小组的支持最终会以工具的形式转交给普通的建筑师使用。我相信这种特殊参数化几何形体小组的想法一定越来越普遍，不知不觉中他们已经在我们身边出现了。
I think architectural design will become parametric eventually, because the new generation of architects is growing up in the highly computerized environment of doing things like computer games and so on. Once you are into that, you will begin to understand rapidly the way you can do powerful things by programming. I think it has already happened and GC is a half way step. It pulls people into the idea of programming. What will also happen simultaneously is exactly the opposite, which is that you will get specialists. KPF and many other large practices all have geometry groups, just as we have visualization groups. Architects will require simulation expertise in-house, things like wind, sun, sustainability, economics, etc. It doesn’t mean we will get rid of all the traditional consultants, but it does mean we will need more and more of those with expertise when we compete at the early stage. The big office will definitely have specialists. And of course because they are specialists, they are ahead of generalists. The specialist knowledge will be passed into the tools that ordinary architects use. I think the idea of special parametric or geometric units is going to happen. Suddenly it just takes off.

Yan: 这些新技术、新知识的引用会不会与主流经典的建筑设计评判标准冲突？
This won’t contradict to the traditional architectural criteria?

Lars: 不会的。建筑师就像交响乐队的指挥，这个交响乐队里有结构工程师，设备工程师，项目预算工程师，承包建筑师，视觉表现专家，几何形体专家，等等。参数化设计只不过是在这个交响乐队中加了一个新的乐器。至于领导者，可以来自这个乐队中的任何一个角色。有些方案从视觉效果出发，有些从其他角度切入。不可避免的是，有些建筑师会成为建筑编程师。实际上这个已经发生了。
Not necessarily. The architect is the conductor of the orchestra, which is composed of structural and service engineers, quantity surveyors, job architects, visualization guys, geometry specialists, and so on. All you have done with parametric units is that you add another group of people into the orchestra. The leader of the orchestra could be anyone out of these people. Some people approach design purely from the visual effect, other people approach it from a different angle. So yes, some architects will eventually become programmers. It’s already happening. 7. 与可持续性设计的兼容性Compliance to sustainable design.

Yan:作为当今建筑设计基本指导之一的可持续性设计策略，在应用参数化设计的技术后会更加切实可行，因为它可以量化环境的因素，然后影响几何形体的调整。你能举出一些KPF在这方面应用的例子么？
As the fundamental guidance to architectural design, sustainable design becomes more tangible after applying parametric design technique, which generates forms by quantifying environmental information. Can you give an example from projects in your office?

Lars: 是的。我们目前的参数化设计方案都是致力于如何切实可行地发展可持续性的设计，尤其是对能量的考虑，像如何在立面上根据日照和热量获取排布饰面板。例如在南京火车站的竞赛设计中，我们计算出根据当地日照安置太阳能光电板最有效的位置；在科威特塔楼方案里，我们依据日照沿曲线立面的分布布置面板。没有参数化设计的技术，这些环境分析将很难在设计中实实在在地体现。
Yes. In most of our current projects we are looking at sustainable design, particularly in terms of energy; tasks of how you distribute panels across a façade, cor-responding to the sun passage and heat gain. In the Nanjing railway station compe-tition, we did studies about where preferentially we put PV cells. In Kuwait Tower, we panelized the curved skin based on the distribution of sunlight on the façade. You will find it very difficult to reflect these analyses without parametric design tech-niques.

8. 参数化设计的未来Future of Parametric Design

Yan: 你认为参数化设计会成为建筑设计的主流么？有人总结当今的建筑潮流是非标准化、个性化的多元时期。在你看来是这样么？
Do you believe that parametric design will inevitably become the next mainstream of architectural design? Some people conclude that the latest wave of architectural evolvement as non-standard period in architectural history. Do you agree? If not, what is your version to the current wave?

Lars: 是的。但是我想参数化设计会逐渐成为标准的计算机辅助设计工具。3到5年后，所有的计算机辅助设计软件应该都会具备参数化设计的功能。到时人们可以不需要选择特殊的软件，就可以在他熟悉的软件平台上进行参数化设计。
Yes. I think it will. But I think parametric design will also migrate into standard CAD applications. Three to five years further down the line, every CAD application will have parametric design interface. Instead of choosing a special software to do the work, people want to do it anywhere he or she chooses to work.

9. 参数化设计的地域性Territory of Parametric Design organizationsYan: SmartGeometry Group 已经成功举办很多次了。然而至今还都是在欧洲和北美，你有没有兴趣在远东举办？
The SmartGeometry Group has successfully hosted many events so far. However, it only focuses in Europe and North America . Do you have interests to extend to far-east?

Lars: 我们当然有兴趣。明年基本定了还是在北美，很可能在西海岸。后年还不知道去哪，可能就是远东。香港对我很有吸引力，澳大利亚也不错，或者中国大陆。一切都是未知。但是如果有人在远东提供很好的条件邀请我们，我们也可以提前考虑远东之行。
Yes, we are certainly interested. But next year we will do North America again. Probably it will be in west coast. But the year after, we may go to the far-east. I guess it will be Hong Kong , which is quite attractive for me. It could be Australia , or mainland China . We haven’t decided yet. But if somebody has a really good offer, wants to host it in the far-east, we might go earlier.

[1] 递归是一种靠自身详述一个过程的方法，即在一个反复重复中，一个或多个算法步骤的序列在程序循环中执行。碎形是类似的数学和科学上的概念，其中的几何形状在各种尺度中都自我相似。碎形几何学与混沌学同样认为在混沌状态中存在秩序；一些看似随即的体系，其实从模式上看是属于可预知领域的。这在计算机程序应用中被广泛使用。摘自《世界建筑》190期，晰释复杂性，29页。