The research described in this article utilises a phase-changing material, three-dimensional scanning technologies and a six-axis industrial robotic arms as vehicles to enable a novel framework where robotic technology is utilised as an ‘amplifier’ of the design process to realise geometries that derive from both constructive visions and architectural visions through iterative feedback loops between them. The robot in this scenario is not a fabrication tool but the enabler of an environment where the material, robotic and human agencies interact. This article describes the exploratory research for the development of a dialogic design process, sets the framework for its implementation, carries out an evaluation based on designer use and concludes with a set of observations. One of the main findings of this article is that a deeper collaboration that acknowledges the potential of these tools, in a learning-by-design method, can lead to new choreographies for architectural design and fabrication.
LloretEShahabARLinusM. Complex concrete structures: merging existing casting techniques with digital fabrication. Comput Aided Design2015; 60: 40–49.
13.
SchwartzTBardJGanonM. All bent out. In: McGeeWde LeonMP (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Cham: Springer, 2014, pp. 305–317.
14.
JohnsRL.Augmented materiality modelling with material indeterminacy. In: GramazioFKohlerMLangenbergS (eds) Fabricate: making digital architecture. Zurich: gta Verlag, 2014, pp. 216–223.
15.
BatlinerCNewsumMJRehmMC.User interfaces for live robotic control. In: ReinhardtDSaundersRBurryJ (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Cham: Springer, 2016, pp. 377–387.
16.
DuborACamprodomGDiazGB. Sensors and workflow evolutions: developing a framework for instant robotic toolpath revision. In: ReinhardtDSaundersRBurryJ (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Cham: Springer, 2016, pp. 411–425.
17.
LatourB.Pandora’s hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999, 332 pp.
18.
WalshamG.Actor-network theory and IS research: current status and future prospects. In: LeeASLiebenauJDeGrossJI (eds) Information systems and qualitative research. New York: Springer, 1997, pp. 466–480.
GramazioFKohlerM.Digital materiality in architecture. Baden: Lars Müller Publishers, 2008.
22.
LickliderJCR. Man-computer symbiosis. IRE Trans Hum Fact Electron1960; HFE-1: 4–11.
23.
CallonMLatourB.Unscrewing the big Leviathan. In: CicourelAVKnorr-CetinaKD (eds) Advances in social theory and methodology: toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies. Boston, MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul PLC, 1981, pp. 277–303.
24.
MalafourisL.At the Potter’s wheel: an argument for material agency. In: KnappettCMalafourisL (eds) Material agency: towards a non-anthropocentric approach. New York: Springer, 2008, pp. 19–37.
25.
Nahmad VazquezAJabiW.RAF – a framework for symbiotic agencies in robotic-aided fabrication. In: WeberP (ed.) Proceedings of the international peer-reviewed conference on ‘research based education’. London: The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL, 2016, pp. 130–149.
26.
PiconA.Digital culture in architecture. Basel: Birkhauser Architecture, 2010, 224 pp.
27.
OxmanNRosenbergJL.Material-based design computation: an inquiry into digital simulation of physical material properties as design generators. Int J Architect Comput2009; 5(1): 26–44.
28.
AlbertiLB.On the art of building in ten books (trans RykwertJLeachNTavernorR). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988, p. 7.
HeimsSJ.John Von Neumann and Norbert Wiener: from mathematics to the technologies of life and death. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1980, 546 pp.
40.
CarpoM.The alphabet and the algorithm. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011, 190 pp.
41.
JonesC.Experience and networked learning. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning, Lancaster, 9–11 May 2016, pp. 481–488.
