Let me put the staircase to rest.
But not until I make a couple of additional comments about the exercise:
There were 20 clocks in the staircase, and yes, you could’ve come up with that number based purely on the 2D projections. (not many people did);
My main motivation for creating this little PDF was to explore the question of ‘spatial interpretation’.
While people outside the AEC industry often confess to having problems reading plans – this almost never happens within the circles I work in, i.e. no construction professional has yet admitted to me that s/he finds it challenging to interpret construction drawings based purely on 2D (orthogonal) projections (many often acuse their peers to suffer from this).
Still, I wanted to be open to the idea that everyone in the industry IS very good at reading plans (elevations, sections) – so based on that assumption, I was interested to see if there was a measurable time difference between the two methods of interpreting a spatial task.
The results, I’m afraid to say, are inconclusive.
They point to the entire project being a bit ill-conceived and definitely not described clearly enough.
Gives you an idea while I had not done that well in academia in the past – have the passion and drive, not the patience to work methodically through the data.
Chalk it up to experience.