Case
To explore the potential that digital fabrication methods provide the design and construction process, we will approach a practical case and examine the possibilities that lie therein. The goal is not to identify the ideal solution from a functional, economical, or aesthetic point of view, but rather to explore the landscape of possibilities that digital fabrication methods enable.
The ideal case for the explorations is a larger residential project, somewhere between 4 to 8 stories. These buildings are typically constructed by large developers on tight budgets with financial return being the driving motivator. The architects are usually given little leeway in regard to aesthetics, economy being the limiting factor. The over-rationalization of the entire building to bring prices down usually leads to a project severely lacking in aesthetic qualities. The buildings in this category are often described as all looking similar regardless of location, whether in Norway or Australia, and are common subjects of public architectural critique.
To identify a case, the architecture office LOF Arkitekter was approached. LOF has worked on several residential projects in the 4-8 story size for large developers in Norway. Through initial discussions with architects at the office, the Thurmannskogen project came up as a possible case. After interviewing two architects that worked on the project and learning more about it, Thurmannskogen was selected as a project that fit the bill.
Thurmannskogen
Developers
Contractor
Architect
OBOS, AF Eiendom, Klaveness Marine
AF Bygg Oslo
LOF Arkitekter
Location
Constructed
Lørenskog, Norway
2015 - 2019
Situated in the village of Lørenskog, a part of the Oslo urban area, Thurmannskogen is a residential project consisting of 333 apartments and 11 row houses. The project is located within walking distance of the village center, subway, local schools, kindergartens, and is a 15-minute drive from the Oslo city centre.
Thurmannskogen is a project by Norway’s largest housing developer, OBOS. The project faces an area of single-detached housing and the main road in the north, with a central roundabout to the northeast, and a forested area with a large industrial warehouse to the south. The area is named after the industrialist Wincentz Thurmann Ihlen, who founded several sawmills and grain mills and thus established industry in Lørenskog during the 19th century.
The area was put up for sale by the municipality, regulated as a residential area with a high utilization rate. The area slopes down from south to north with a seven meter height difference. The apartment blocks are located on the eastern half of the area with the module houses to the west. For this case we will be focusing on the apartment blocks, as they are typical examples of industrial residential construction. The regulation decreed that the corner to the northeast towards roundabout defining the main thoroughfare was to be pronounced in some form, and that there had to be an opening between the buildings to the east.
Wincent Thurmann Ihlen (1826-1892)
The five easternmost apartment blocks are six stories tall, the southern middle block top out at seven stories, the northern middle block at five stories, while the three western blocks are four stories tall. The blocks have underground parking garages, so from certain directions the apartment blocks are one story taller from ground level, like in the northeast corner. The apartments range in size from 35 square meters to 112 square meters, and from one-room to four-room apartments. The smallest apartments were marketed as being for “compact living where you utilize the square meters you didn’t know you had”.
Typical apartment plans from the blocks in the Thurmannskogen project. These are from the fifth floor of apartment block F.
The main structure of the apartment blocks mainly consists of prefabricated concrete slabs and columns. The exterior walls are insulated timber-frame construction with some concrete walls, while the interior walls are steel studs covered with gypsum plates. The facade is mostly plastered with some areas with wood or metal plating. Initially, the developers wanted the project to be all white, but the architects were able to change their mind to include some color, a pale moss green, on some of the buildings. The balconies are bare concrete with galvanized steel and frosted glass railings. The ground-level terraces are made of wood. The main stairs are prefabricated concrete stair elements. The ceiling height of the apartments is 2.4 meters except in some areas like bathrooms, entryways, and storage where it is 2.2 meters. To keep costs down, the bathroom pods were delivered as identical modules that were preassembled in a factory and then moved to the site and directly installed in the skeleton of the building.
The interior walls in the apartments were all painted white, and the bathroom pods were delivered with white wall tiles and grey floor tiles. The buyers were given few options in regard to personalization because of the “projects systematic organization”. The options were limited to a select few colors on the interior walls, a selection of parquets from the supplier, the kitchen suppliers’ stock of counters, cupboard finishes and handles, and a few different bathroom tiles from the bathroom module manufacturer. More electrical outlets could also be added for a fee.
The project was marketed as being close to nature, with the sales documents highlighting the mental health aspects of living near nature. The outdoor spaces were referred to as oases with a wide variety of Norwegian flora that would flower at all times. The various spaces were referred to as intimate and cozy. Thurmannskogen is sold as a project that “is a nod to your childhood, reminding us of who we are and where we come from, and that whoever you are, wherever you come from and whatever you need, you will find a home in Thurmannskogen.”
Interviews with the Architects
To learn more about how a project ends up like Thurmannskogen, interviews with two architects that worked on the project at various stages through its development and an architect working on similar projects were conducted. The interviews were structured as open interviews (Jacobsen 2015), meaning that they were structured to flow like a conversation rather than being bound to a set of static questions. For the interviews with the two architects involved with Thurmannskogen, a list of topics and questions were used as reference for the conversation to make sure the various aspects of the project were brought up. The main points were:
• What were the goals of the project?
• In what phase did you participate in the project?
• What limitations were placed on the project?
• What parts of the project are you not satisfied with?
• What would you have done differently on the project?
• What do you think is solved in a good way on the project?
• What prevented the project from reaching its full potential?
The interviews with the architects were done one on one, and the architects were provided with a series of images, drawings, and plans from the different stages of the Thurmannskogen design process as reference. The architects were also presented with the state of the art of digital fabrication methods and asked how they would incorporate technology into their design and workflow. When discussing the project Thurmannskogen project with the architects there were several topics that stood out.
Reflections on Thurmannskogen
The initial point that all the architects involved brought up was cost. Everything on Thurmannskogen ended up like it did because of cost. The developer wanted to create as many apartments as possible as cheaply as possible. Throughout the process every detail was scrubbed to the cheapest product that would be accepted by the municipality and be able to sell the apartments to potential customers. This had consequences for every aspect of the building. One architect that worked on the project mentioned that when they saw pictures of the finished project after its construction, they did not recognize it because it had been pressed so far past its limits and become so massive.
The second point is the size of the project. Because the developer wanted as many apartments as possible, they wanted the buildings to be as big as possible. One architect said that the developer actually wanted the buildings to be up to three stories taller than they ended up being. The architect explained that they thought the project was too large. The scale of the buildings made them stand out too much out, especially the tallest buildings which are six and seven stories tall, in the sloping landscape. Another architect said that while the size was not catastrophic, a lower maximum height, slimmer apartment blocks or better massing would have improved the project greatly.
The interior spaces in the project were defined by the structural elements of the buildings. Because the apartments are stacked on top of the parking garage, the dimensions of the open spaces in the parking garage define how the structural elements are placed. This placement of columns forms the basis system of axes which in turn defines how the apartments can be laid out. One of the architects interviewed reflected that this system of building is the reason that a lot of apartments all share the same cookie cutter layout, and freeing the structure from this dependency would enable better apartments with more room for variation, personalization, and freedom.
One of the architects lamented the need for bathroom pods. Plumbing work is very expensive, so using prefabricated bathroom pods is an effective way to keep costs down. The way these pods are produced limits the size, layout, and number of options available. Each type of apartment has an identical pod. Since these pods are prefabricated off-site in their entirety, they also have to fit with the mode of transportation, so the dimensions of the bathroom are subservient to the truck that has to transport the pod to the site.
When it came to the aesthetic and facade of the buildings, the architects were not very satisfied with the result. One stated that the buildings do not provide much visual appeal, another said that it is not a good-looking project. It was said that the overall aesthetic of Thurmannskogen is characterized by industrial residential construction because the large surfaces of the project become very monotonous and uninspired when they are all so similar. One of the architects thought that the project would have been a lot more interesting if there had been more variation in the facade and form, if they had been able to work with in layers in the exterior, had been able to work with shadows and light to create a relief in the facade, or had used larger or more varied glazed surfaces. But because of the nature of industrial residential construction, using the same products allows them to reuse all the details which saves a lot in costs. Early in the process, masonry was discussed for the facade but rejected because of the price. The architect was of the opinion that masonry would have been able to provide a more comfortable and varied aesthetic to the project.
The initial sketches show a smaller project with more varied facades, warmer natural materials, improved massing, with better contrasting elements that also ties the facade together, avoiding the “shoe box with small air holes” look. The windows and layout of the project were criticized by one architect, which stated that “there is not a single window format that is nice in this building, they are almost like little peepholes in these large volumes” and that “the small windows enhance that shoe box feeling”.
When asked what the architects were satisfied with on the project, one answered the technical solutions and the flow of transportation in the area. Most of the open green spaces between the buildings were well done, and they thought the landscape architects did a good job, but some of the outdoor spaces were simply too small in comparison to the large buildings bordering them. The architect also thought the project was well done on the project level, as information flow and cooperation between developer, architect and contractors was good.
Thoughts on Digital Fabrication
During the initial interviews with the architects, after being introduced to the current capabilities of digital fabrication methods, one of the architects noted that the premises of the buildings are often laid down very early in the design process, and that it would lead to completely different choices throughout the design process. They said that if they did a project where they knew from day one that they would be able to use digital fabrication methods that it would be very hard to imagine, as “it would completely change the rules of the game”. Another architect brought up how “this technology, when utilized to its full potential, would revolutionize the entire industry, both for the designers and the construction workers. You will have to have a completely different mindset. You’ll have so many possibilities that you will think in a completely different way.”
One of the architects highlighted the point of producing architecture that is “solid” enough that fulfilling technical requirements or using alternative or cheaper solutions would not take away from the overall concept or feel of the project. This means that the architecture is designed well enough that such elements can be properly integrated without looking tacked on. Another architect talked about when computer software entered the design process, all the architects expected to have more time to work on the design because the process of producing drawings would be much faster. That did not happen, instead the time you had to create the entire project was shorter, which meant the project had less time to mature. While in the old process, the time spent drawing bathroom tiles by hand would also allow the design to develop in your mind as you worked, now that time was lost. The architect noted that the advantage that comes with digital fabrication methods might be that the designer would have to draw the project to a higher level of detail, but it could be problematic that non-standard solutions might take more time. This way of working could, however, make for a front-heavy process when it comes to making decisions. You are not able to hold off on certain decisions until the last minute, as these cannot be solved on the building site if the geometry in question is deeply interlinked with its surroundings. The developers are not willing to pay for thorough construction drawings to be made for the general permission application. However, with modern technical requirements for buildings, very detailed drawings often have to be produced early to establish how large the ducts need to be or whether the design fulfills accessibility requirements regardless.
When adopting a new workflow, like with digital fabrication methods, it is important to review the entire process when working with pricing between the architect and the developer. If the process is front-heavy and a large part of the work has to be done before the general permission application, that part of the process should be compensated accordingly, and not await the final set of construction drawings which might render the architects out of business. The architects mentioned situations where an architect had put in a lot more work than they were compensated for early in the process, as the main payment would come from a later phase, just to be switched out with a different architect before reaching that phase. The developers themselves might also not be able to finance the project up front, as they are dependent on buyers coming in with capital during the process itself. The entire economic flow of the construction process is still lagging behind. It is still the same as when architects were creating construction drawings by hand. They were paid per line drawn, aspects they knew took a long time like specific details could be noted as being solved later, allowing for the general permission to be applied for and received before the majority of the work had to be done. The architects could then work on one building at a time while getting paid for one building at a time. In today’s process, a lot of the requirements have to be solved early in the process, like a parking garage that is below and shared by multiple buildings. “The economic model has not been changed to fit the design and construction process after the design and construction process changed”. This is an important aspect to take into account when adopting a new way of designing and constructing. The help of digital fabrication methods to customize designs as well as modern visualization methods (VR, AI) could be used as a tool to include the end-buyer in the process early.
Another point brought up by one of the architects is that with a digital fabrication system, you could develop a set of principles, test them, and make sure they work during the first month of the design process. Those principles could then be used as a basis for the entire project while creating enough variation for an aesthetically pleasing design. The architect thought that a set of rules are needed to create order in a project, and that without such order, it would all descend into chaos. The architect compared it to the “font-chaos” that appeared once everyone was able to pick from all the fonts available in the first word processors that allowed it. Everyone was “going crazy” with fonts until it eventually settled down.
The architects noted that the residential architecture industry itself is controlled by the current production methods and the market. The latter is influenced by the realtors who dictate how large the balconies should be, what kind of demographics they think will move into this area, how many bedrooms that demographic wants, how large the various rooms should be, whether open or separate kitchens are popular right now, and more. These conditions are already included in the brief the architects receive from the developer. The production form then controls how the architects can work with the building. Axis systems based on the available slabs’ span decide how the columns are placed in conjunction with factors like how much space is needed for the basement parking garage. This in turn decides where the walls between the different apartments are placed. The architects said that the repeating monotonous expression that characterizes industrial residential construction is the way it is because the components are factory produced and have to fit preset module sizes. They have to be easy to fabricate, easy to communicate, and easy to build or assemble for the craftsmen.
According to one of the architects, technological leaps are only interesting in the industrial residential construction industry when they increase the developers profit margin. Another architect was worried that the costs you would save from using digital fabrication methods would just go to the developer instead of being used to make more aesthetically pleasing architecture. Being able to provide aesthetically pleasing architecture to segments of the population with lower purchasing power was noted by the architects as a good motivator to adopt digital fabrication methods into the workflow.
One architect noted that on the project they are currently working on, prefabricated modules were being pushed by the developer because they wanted to cut costs on scaffolding, as the modules can just be hoisted in place with a crane. The current way these modules are produced in the industrial residential construction industry dictates that the modules are all similar, often leading to repeating facades and monotone expressions. The architects pointed out that a digital fabrication-enabled industry would give the architects the freedom to shape as they please, as the production method is not based around identical elements. This would allow the architects to not only to create facades that are more aesthetically pleasing but would have consequences for the interior layout of the building as well, as the apartments themselves would not need to be identical.
Safety, health and working environment (SHA) was brought up as something that digital fabrication methods would be able to improve in the design process. Per the Norwegian Construction Client Regulations, the developer is responsible for safeguarding the safety, health and working environment in both the construction and operation phase of the building when making architectural choices. With digital fabrication methods, robots can be used to perform tasks that are considered especially risky for workers.
From Chapter 2, Section 5 of the Construction Client Regulations:
“During planning and project preparation, the client shall particularly safeguard safety, health and working environment in connection with
a) the architectural, technical or organisational choices made
b) describing and paying regard to risk factors of relevance for the work to be carried out
c) setting aside sufficient time for planning and executing the various work operations.”
When presented with the robot that assembles timber frames (DFAB HOUSE), the interviewed architects brought up that the ability to convert a digital file into physical form without having to explain it to a craftsman would significantly lower the threshold for creating more interesting structures in timber. In the current way of building, complex constructions or elements are very time consuming to communicate efficiently to the craftsmen creating them. With digital fabrication tools, that is not a problem as the element is produced straight from the digital file fed to the machine.
A concern that one of the architects had when it comes to new ways of doing things is that one should be mindful of not losing the connection between the designers and the contractors and craftsmen assembling the buildings. It is important to make sure everyone knows what the intent and goals of the project are. Speaking from experience, the architects talked about incidents where contractors with a lack of understanding for the context in which they were working, whether it was installation of hot water storage tanks or electrical installations, caused problems with other elements that were coming later, requiring costly work to rectify. In one example, the contractors had changed details on the ground slab to make it easier and faster to construct, but when it came to the second floor, the changes they had made did not fit with the structure of the rest of the building, resulting in them having to do it all over again.
The possibility of using digital fabrication to create custom solutions to engineering problems like structural thermal breaks for balconies, insulating connectors that prevent thermal bridging to conserve heat and reduce condensation risk, was something that one of the architects thought had a lot of potential. Currently, knowing what kind of structure is going to be used for the building is important, as it decides what kind of elements and detailing can be added. However, developers are often hesitant to make a decision early on in the process as they want a total view of the various costs before committing to a design. This limits the choices available to the architect or requires expensive redesigning to fit changes later on in the process. The floor slab is an example of this, hollow-core concrete slabs do not provide support for balconies, so exterior columns are commonly used. Cast-in-place slabs are able to support balconies and use thermal breaks but are heavier and take more time to create as they have to be cast on site. The architect noted that digital fabrication would allow you to make structural elements that are possible to use regardless of the type of slab and also allows for more complex geometry and interesting aesthetics on those components.
The architects also lamented the lack of variety in available products. Railings were an example used, in current industrial residential building, like in the Thurmannskogen project, the developer picks a supplier, and the architects are only able to pick from that supplier’s catalogue. These suppliers might not provide a wide variety of products, some only have the choice between a few simple options. Digital fabrication would allow the architect to design their own custom railings and have them produced exactly to specification. Another example mentioned by one of the architects are firewalls, which are often extremely limited when it comes to aesthetic options. Firewalls are fire resistant barriers used to prevent the spread of fire to neighboring units or buildings. They have to be structurally independent and are usually made of cinderblocks or concrete. Using digital fabrication methods, firewalls could be produced to have a higher level of aesthetic quality while retaining the required fire and structural rating.
One architect saw the opportunity to integrate technical requirements like noise and fire resistance in the design during the concept phase using digital fabrication methods. A common problem in construction is that different parts of the building have different technical requirements. One side might be exposed to noise from a nearby road or railway, which means that it will need to be constructed differently, which can often lead to it having a different expression than the rest of the building. The architect theorized that with digital fabrication methods one could integrate noise reducing properties into the structure which did not look “tacked on” and was properly integrated into the overall aesthetic of the project. The ability to get multiple uses of single elements, for example exterior columns with integrated seating, was something positive that the architects mentioned.
"This technology, when utilized to its full potential, would revolutionize the entire industry, both for the designers and the construction workers. You will have to have a completely different mindset. You’ll have so many possibilities that you will think in a completely different way." -Interviewed architect