Architecture math IA? Help with topic please

[lmboyer04]

Hi everyone, I need a math IA topic pretty soon and I've been struggling to find something that I both like and can find an appropriate application of math to. I want to go into architecture so I was thinking something about that, but the issue is, most of it is just geometry which I think is too simple for SL Math. The other idea I had was too complicated and there was no research question I could come up for it. It was exploring ideas of parametric architecture like Zaha Hadid uses. Here's a link to some basic 3d parametric modeling I looked at, but again, it seem too complex and I dont know where I would go with it. Any suggestions? Thank You!

3d parametrics

[IBTopper]

Hi, 

I think its about taking math deep into your concept. I would recommend you to explore Euclidean Geometry and then for your architecture part, you could actually design a model of a building using a software like Google Sketchup Pro. I think it will add a lot of credibility to your exploration and the examiner will know how much effort you've put in. 

PS: Maybe you could re-design an existing building in your area using only triangular bases (connection to Euclidean Geometry and will help your personal engagement part)

Hope this helps  

[IB Math Helper]

The 3D parametrics topic is too complex. I don't suggest you do it.

If you're interested in architecture, you should look into truss roofs. Do a google image search for truss roofs. Here's the general truss wiki article. Since you take physics, you can explore how a force on the top or side of the roof will be distributed on the roof (this is where geometry comes in). Look into different truss designs and discuss their suitability in different environments.

Hope this helps.

[lmboyer04]

Thanks for the replies. 

I don't think integrating architecture will be any challenge, I'm just worried about the math being too simple for this aspect of the IA (which is the highest weighted criteria). Theres lots of simple geometry I could do, maybe leading up to trig. I guess that's sorta the idea that IB Math Helper was suggesting. I just worry that doing those kind of first order physics problems is not as IB math oriented as they are looking for. I'm completely new to this so I'm not sure. Let me know if you guys think this actually is sufficient or if you have any other ideas about how I would extend it further perhaps. Thanks for all the help thus far  - I appreciate it. 

[IB Math Helper]

The first order physics that you are talking about is fine by IB examiners (I know because I am one of them). Your concern about focusing on the Mathematical Understanding because it has the highest number of points is unfounded. In fact, in my experience of marking, this is one of the easiest to get marks for. You can double check calculations and explain why you choose certain formulae or made certain assumptions and as long as you know what you're doing, this satisfies the examiner.

What's harder to score marks on are the Personal Engagement and Reflection criteria. I find that most students struggle with these criteria and mainly score 1 or 2 points for each of these criteria. Rarely do I see full scores for these criteria. On the other hand, for the Mathematical Understanding criterion it's pretty easy to score 5/6 and with some effort even a 6/6.

[lmboyer04]

5 hours ago, IB Math Helper said:

The first order physics that you are talking about is fine by IB examiners (I know because I am one of them). Your concern about focusing on the Mathematical Understanding because it has the highest number of points is unfounded. In fact, in my experience of marking, this is one of the easiest to get marks for. You can double check calculations and explain why you choose certain formulae or made certain assumptions and as long as you know what you're doing, this satisfies the examiner.

What's harder to score marks on are the Personal Engagement and Reflection criteria. I find that most students struggle with these criteria and mainly score 1 or 2 points for each of these criteria. Rarely do I see full scores for these criteria. On the other hand, for the Mathematical Understanding criterion it's pretty easy to score 5/6 and with some effort even a 6/6.

Ok, thats useful to know. Thanks for the help. 

[JohnSchriner]

On 9/20/2016 at 10:41 AM, IB Math Helper said:

The first order physics that you are talking about is fine by IB examiners (I know because I am one of them). Your concern about focusing on the Mathematical Understanding because it has the highest number of points is unfounded. In fact, in my experience of marking, this is one of the easiest to get marks for. You can double check calculations and explain why you choose certain formulae or made certain assumptions and as long as you know what you're doing, this satisfies the examiner.

What's harder to score marks on are the Personal Engagement and Reflection criteria. I find that most students struggle with these criteria and mainly score 1 or 2 points for each of these criteria. Rarely do I see full scores for these criteria. On the other hand, for the Mathematical Understanding criterion it's pretty easy to score 5/6 and with some effort even a 6/6.

Does this still hold up in 2020 with the recent changes to the rubric?