Communication tools in the planning process : A qualitative study of physical and digital models

Purpose: Due to the development of technology, communications related to designprojects have become more complex. Previous studies show that physical threedimensional (3D) models are more useful tools for communications than digital models.Despite this, the use of physical models has decreased. The aim of this study is toincrease knowledge about how architects, 3D-visualizers, and modelers find physicaland digital models work as communication tools, and to give suggestions for theirability to collaborate. Method: The study is based on a qualitative approach. Used methods are literaturestudies and interviews. The literature gives an up-to-date research in the field. Theinterviews contribute with rich answers and provide an overall picture of the subject.The respondents consist of architects, 3D-visualizers and modelers. Findings: According to internal and external communication, physical models haveseveral strong advantages and a number of distinct disadvantages. Physical models arestraightforward, they give an overview and open up for discussion. Furthermore, theyhave a valuable influence on designers’ creativity in conceptual design stages.However, physical models are ineffective at visualizing technical information, and theyare not considered to be time and cost efficient. The advantages with digital models aremainly linked to the latter and more detailed stages of the planning process. The modelsare informative and able to visualize technical information. Furthermore, they are timeefficient when making revisions and valuable when selling. Simple digital models areeffective in rapid investigations during the project. More detailed digital models canhowever inhibit creativity in early stages of the planning process. Proposals can easilybe found definite which affects communications negatively.Physical and digital models can cooperate in communications in two ways. The firstway consists of using physical models in the early stages of the process and then transferthe extracted information into digital models. The second way consists of using physicaland digital models parallel during the process, to take advantage of both of theirdifferent qualities. Implications: Physical and digital models have different qualities and contributes withdifferent information. Depending on which information that is important in every stepof the process, the models should be used in different ways. To reach an efficientcommunication, physical and digital models should complement each other. Limitations: The study discuss internal and external communication. The result isbased on the perspective of architect, 3D-visualizer and modeler. The interviews arebased on personal values, but after both empiricism and theory are considered, the resultis found relatively general. The study provides an indication of what the threeprofessions think about the subject. The result can’t however be applied on otherprofessions. Keywords: 3D printing, architecture, CAD, communication, digital model, physicalmodel, planning process