4D Construction Learning Environment

Observing and understanding the integration of design and technology in architecture

Installing services in the interior of the AEB

University of South Australia logo  Stephen Ward

Pedagogical intent

The AEB 4D Construction Learning Environment was trialled by students enrolled in the course BUIL 3004 Architecture and Technology in the Bachelor of Architectural Studies program at the University of South Australia. A building analysis exercise was designed so that students could observe the construction and associated drawings of the Advanced Engineering Building (AEB) to help them understand how services are integrated within a multistorey institutional building.

Application of 4D learning environment

Course: BUIL 3004 Architecture and Technology

Year level: Third year, Bachelor of Architectural Studies, University of South Australia

Study mode: Internal

Cohort size: 99

Learning activity

The 4D learning environment was introduced in a one-hour lecture which included background information on the building, navigating within the tool, accessing resources within the website, and an introduction to the assessment task. Students then completed the assessment exercises with guidance from course staff.

Assessment item/s

Assessment was divided into four exercises:

  1. Observation of the building’s exterior and interior spaces. Students used photographs, plans, sections and sketches to communicate their first impressions of the relationship between the design that the architectural team intended and the services technologies that have been integrated into the building.
  2. Spatial integration of services. Students identified the location of spaces dedicated to moving water and waste, electricity and communications, air and fire services through the building. Annotated screen shots from the 4D environment were used.
  3. Construction sequencing. Students used the 4D environment to select a ‘node’, containing at least 10 surveys, on one level of the building. Students provided annotated screen shots (including labels for services) for each survey date to identify the progression of construction activity.
  4. Sustainable design considerations. Students examined how the building design achieved sustainable design objectives: social, environmental and/or economic. Students identified patterns in the way occupied spaces were planned to respond to the building’s location, context, orientation or use; how effectively the building footprint or form optimises surface area/volume ratios; whether façade elements varied significantly in response to orientation; and design elements which encouraged or discouraged the use of services.

Student feedback

Student feedback undertaken through an anonymous survey indicated that:

  • 96% of respondents liked the appearance of the learning environment.
  • 91% of respondents found the learning environment easy to use.
  • 93% of respondents found the learning environment and associated activities assisted their understanding of architectural technology and its integration with design and construction.
  • 89% of respondents found the environment enhanced the architectural technology learning experience and their skill development.

buil3004 pie chart - responses to Q3buil3004 pie chart - responses to Q4

Impact on teaching practice

No comment.

Technical limits

Students suggested a number of technical improvements to the 4D environment. The number and position of camera points sometimes made navigation difficult: nodes often changed position as construction works progressed; in some survey periods photographs were not taken at specific nodes; and some key locations such as the core of the building were not photographed. Some students would like more instruction in using the tool, although 91% of respondents found the learning environment easy to use. Some students would also like more information within the environment, such as ‘pop-up’ descriptive text boxes for different elements in the building.

The virtual nature of the tool does not completely replace the physical experience of a site visit. The position of nodes is established early in the project and their location may not allow users to demonstrate different technologies and construction strategies as desired. Fixed nodes do not allow elements to be observed from different viewpoints. The viewing angle and image quality affect the level of detail available. Users cannot measure spaces or individual elements within the tool. These factors limit the information available for analysis.

Conclusion and recommendations

Operability could be improved by locating nodes more strategically and identifying new technologies such as 3D headsets to enhance the learning experience. In future, industry could potentially adopt the 4D environment for multiple uses such as record keeping and communication, to demonstrate compliance, and to assist in resolving disputes related to time and construction.

The project team is also investigating possible projects of different scales and typologies, such as private dwellings and existing buildings.