Saturday, April 9, 2011

The final word on the Staircase Exercise

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.


  1. OK, this is your final post on the clocks in the staircase and toilet. I'm late to the game, so I looked at the first post with the 2D views (orthagonal(sp))and did not download.

    Got a mess of clocks with each attempt via the 3D views. Counted 19 clocks in 30 seconds +/- from the 2D views. Hopefully, the darker/lighter clocks refer to the visible/non-visible side of the wall.

    My vision is not too good anymore. I'm retired.

  2. Hello Bruce -
    If you email me your email address I will send you the PDF;
    It is quite fun to navigate.
    No, it will not solve all the world's problems but is cool;