Computational design is not ‘wacky’ form-finding. It’s about finding design solutions for some of the biggest challenges of our time.

If you haven’t heard the term parametric design, it’s likely you’ve come across parametric forms around new buildings across cities. This can be seen at the new Crown Casino Tower for example, with the facades looking computer-generated because, well, they are.

Parametricism, as it’s known in architecture, uses advanced computational techniques and algorithms to ‘find’ forms, rather than designing them conventionally. The approach produces a style of architecture that would otherwise be unattainable. However, by taking the designing out of the designer’s hands, some critics argue the forms produced are merely provocative – a way to push the parameters of design, without purpose.

UNSW built environment associate professor M. Hank Haeusler argues that it isn’t just about creating unusual and whacky shapes without expression and emotion, he believes the opposite.

Instead, he says, the most effective applications of computational design don’t merely challenge the boundaries of design, they solve challenges through design.

“For us, the engagement with computational methods and tools isn’t to change the way the architecture looks, as a new parametric design style,” he says.

“What we see as the core focus of our work is based in pragmatism, to solve the grand challenges that we face… assembling a post-disciplinary team to assist with our understanding of computation and computing.”

Climate change is a critical challenge, and the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) sector is a major contributor. It’s responsible for a large amount of embedded carbon through concrete production, carbon emissions in the lifecycle of a building. Through energy use for heating and cooling, it uses vast amounts of natural resources and produces a significant amount of waste that ends up in landfill.

“A lot of those grand challenges have a design element, but they’re also a numbers game, and a computer can assist you in a numbers game,” Hank adds.

“Two examples: if you want to optimise a structure to make it as lightweight as possible to reduce the amount of material used, you can do that far better with computation.

“Or if you want to achieve waste reduction, you can combine data sources describing dimensions of building products, their use and quantity in a design, to understand where waste is occurring and how one can reduce it – we see waste reduction as a data exercise.”

However computational design isn’t about automating the design process, or outsourcing architecture to computers by removing the human, the associate professor says.

“A lot of people misunderstand computational design – parametric design, parametricism – as an entirely computerised process where the computer just gives you the black-and-white answers a human has to accept,” he says.

“We understand the design process as a partnership, a computer-aided process, where a human and the machine work together to produce results one can’t achieve without the other.

“What we strongly push forward in our computational design degree is the understanding that it should be an interaction between the designer and the computer.”