columbia university - facade innovation: performance, optimization and integration

Phillip Anzalone, AIAColumbia University : GSAPP : Laboratory for Applied Building Science

Columbia University : GSAPP : Laboratory for Applied Building Science Phillip Anzalone, AIA


Saturday, October 10, 2009

Casa Italiana, Columbia University, New York

Columbia University : GSAPP : Laboratory for Applied Building Science Phillip Anzalone, AIACBIP LONDON THINK TANK

COLUMBIA BUILDING INTELLIGENCE PROJECT LONDON THINK TANK

CBIP NEW YORK CITY THINK TANK

COLUMBIA BUILDING INTELLIGENCE PROJECT NEW YORK CITY THINK TANK

CBIP STUTTGART THINK TANK

COLUMBIA BUILDING INTELLIGENCE PROJECT STUTTGART THINK TANK

CBIP TOKYO THINK TANK

COLUMBIA BUILDING INTELLIGENCE PROJECT TOKYO THINK TANK


On June 30, 2010, Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation (GSAPP) presented the Columbia Building Intelligence Project (C-BIP) Second International Think Tank, entitled Engineering Change.

Leading architects, engineers, contractors, fabricators and industry experts from various countries including the United States and Europe gathered at London’s Design Museum for a Think Tank intended to create a conversation that is collaborative at its core while simultaneously pushing today’s industry leaders to think differently and transform how the next generation of professionals is educated.

On February 18, 2011, Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation (GSAPP) presented the Columbia Building Intelligence Project (C-BIP) Fourth International Think Tank, entitled (RE)searching Knowledge.

Leading architects, engineers, contractors, fabricators and industry experts from various countries including the United States and Europe gathered at The Center for Architecture for a Think Tank that is intended to create a conversation that is collaborative at its core while simultaneously pushing today’s industry leaders to think differently and transform how the next generation of professionals is educated.

PRESENTATIONS BY FRANK BARKOW, JOHAN BETTUM, MARCEL BILOW, MARTIN HAAS, ANDREAS KETTNER-REICH, SCOTT MARBLE, RITA MCBRIDE, MICHAEL PURZER, JAN SCHELLHOFF, HARTMUT SINKWITZ, TOMOHIKO YAMANASHI, CORNE ZIJLMANS INTRODUCTIONS BY PHILLIP ANZALONE, JIM MITCHELL, WERNER SOBEK, MARK WIGLEY MODERATION BY PHILLIP ANZALONE, DUDE, HEIKO TRUMPF, MARK WIGLEY

On June 1, 2011 in Stuttgart, Germany, Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation (GSAPP), in collaboration with its academic partner, the Institute for Lightweight Structures and Conceptual Design (ILEK), presented the Columbia Building Intelligence Project (C-BIP) Fifth International Think Tank, entitled Manufacturing Change.

The Think Tank convened in Frei Otto’s experimental prototype for the West Germany Pavillion at the Montreal Expo 1967. This building houses the ILEK research facilities at The Unviersity of Stuttgart.


On November 3, 2010 in Tokyo, Japan Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation (GSAPP) presented the Columbia Building Intelligence Project (C-BIP) Third International Think Tank, entitled Auto-Modification.

Leading architects, engineers, contractors, fabricators and industry experts from various countries including Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States will gathered at Roppongi Academyhills, The Mori Building, for a Think Tank to explore solutions that could change the building industry for the better.


Leading educators, architects, engineers, fabricators, contractors, and other industry experts across a range of related industries gathered to explore new approaches that address the chronic adversarial atmosphere that has inhibited the progress of the AEC industry for many years. The think tank is designed as an open dialogue that simultaneously pushes today’s industry leaders to think differently and informs educators on trends that could transform how the next generation of architectural professionals are educated.

Architect

ManufacturerEducator

Engineer

C-BIP LONDON DEMOGRAPHICS


Architect

DesignerPolicy Analyst

TheoristGeographer

Computer Scientist

ArtistManufacturing

Engineer

C-BIP NEW YORK DEMOGRAPHICS


ArchitectsEducators

Artists

ManufacturersEngineers

Car Designers

C-BIP STUTTGART THINK TANKDEMOGRAPHICS


ArchitectsEducators


Robotics Scientist

C-BIP TOKYO THINK TANK DEMOGRAPHICS


CBIP STUTTGART THINK TANK

COLUMBIA BUILDING INTELLIGENCE PROJECT STUTTGART THINK TANK



On June 1, 2011 in Stuttgart, Germany, Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation (GSAPP), in collaboration with its academic partner, the Institute for Lightweight Structures and Conceptual Design (ILEK), presented the Columbia Building Intelligence Project (C-BIP) Fifth International Think Tank, entitled Manufacturing Change.

The Think Tank convened in Frei Otto’s experimental prototype for the West Germany Pavillion at the Montreal Expo 1967. This building houses the ILEK research facilities at The Unviersity of Stuttgart.



COLUMBIA BUILDING INTELLIGENCE PROJECTSTUTTGART THINK TANK



ArchitectsEducators

Artists


Car Designers

C-BIP STUTTGART THINK TANKDEMOGRAPHICS


Participants for the 2011 C-BIP Stuttgart Think Tank are being asked to rethink the future of the building industry in four 60-minute sessions of short pecha-kucha style presentations followed by roundtable discussions. We seek provocative and speculative ideas across four broad themes of Materials, Processes, Assemblies and Facilities as they pertain to the conceptual and applied topic of Manufacturing in the built environment. Engaging those who operate embedded in the physicality of realizing the building industry, we hope to open a dialog across the professions, between the academy and practice, and with the global network of the contemporary environment.

C-BIP is a three year pilot project comprised of a series of local and international Think Tanks coordinated with the Integrated Design Studios (IDS) and associated research seminars at the GSAPP. The project was launched in the fall of 2009 with a Think Tank in New York, followed London in June 2010, a third in Tokyo in November 2010, and returning to New York in February 2011 to recommence the annual sequence . The Think Tanks act as a catalyst to establish a broad foundation for the C-BIP Integrated Design Studio that takes place each spring. As a pioneer of digital design and one of the leaders in contemporary thought in architectural education, Columbia University GSAPP is dedicated to fostering discussion and debate about the future of the AEC industry through academic research and professional instruction in order to develop the next generation of industry leaders. Exploring new forms of industry collaboration is the key to a successful future and will lead to a renewed connection between designers and builders.

Phillip AnzaloneChair, C-BIP International

Think TanksColumbia University, GSAPP


INTRODUCTIONS


Mark WigleyDean Columbia University GSAPP

“It’s not clear what we will have learned on this journey. This is exactly the point, that if we knew what we would have learned, we would have not started the journey. It’s a journey simply to ask some of the top professionals of the world to speak what is at the top of their minds at the moment. To ask what is on the top of their minds is to get some sort of feeling for the shape of the questions that are urgently facing the field. Architecture, engineering, manufacturing, all of these disciplines are facing a future that is extremely exciting but is also unclear.”

Werner SobekProfessor and Director

Stuttgart University ILEK

“We are normally sitting in a “Think Tent.” Somehow the tent and what goes on in the tent perfectly coincides with what happens in the tank. I wish everyone a very fruitful afternoon.”


PANEL 1MANUFACTURED MATERIALSMaterials are the foundation of the built environment and exist as the fundamental elements from which we construct. There have been extraordinary innovations in the development, production and improvement of materials. The !rst session, Manufactured Materials explores how the building industry engages material science as a critical partner in the application and development of these manufactured materials? And asks what the desired materials of the future will be?


PANEL 2MANUFACTURED PROCESSESProcesses employ the materials of the built environment and create new possibilities for design and construction. The second session Manufacturing Processes investigates how these modes of production currently perform (or underperform) and asks how these processes can be improved and integrated to better serve the industry.


PANEL 3MANUFACTURED ASSEMBLIESAssembling parts into wholes across multiple scales requires intense coordination of global networks and parallel processes that de!ne the way the industries currently work. The third session Manufactured Assemblies examines innovative methods to develop products and environments that are realized through complex logistical oversight, ef!cient integration and design intent.


PANEL 4MANUFACTURED FACILITIESFacilities are simultaneously a location of potential and embody a capacity for exchange. The final session Manufactured Facilities considers the results of the various processes that create elements that make up the built environment: buildings, infrastructure and sites of opportunity.


3KLOOLS�$Q]DORQH��6KDXQ�6DOLVEXU\��*6$33�&ROXPELD�8QLYHUVLW\TENSEGRITY TOOL


x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Parameters

Relations

Geometrical Set.1

BaseGeometry

Connection

PartBody

TensegrityTool

R̀otationAngle01 =̀30deg

D̀iameter01 =̀0.577in=(1in)*(sqrt(3)/3)



H̀eight.1 =̀0.954in=(1in)*sqrt(3+3*sqrt(3))/3


R̀odDiameter =̀0.02in

C̀onnectionDiameter =̀0.2in

SINGLE LAYER TENSEGRITY MODULE

Traditional tensegrity form-finding processes involve iterative model making exercises or complex linear equations to solve for the indeterminate forms associated with the structural system.

One analytical form finding method exists that requires the designer to predefine cable length but then calculates the compression strut ratio directly without involving the iterative process.1

1. H.J. Bungartz. Analytic and numerical investigations of form-finding methods for tensegrity structures. Max Planck Institute for Metals Research, Stuttgart, DE. 2007.

Diameter02

Diameter01

x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations







Connection

BaseGeometry



x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations







Connection

BaseGeometry


SINGLE LAYER TENSEGRITY MODULE

When properly constrained, the compression strut ratio to cable length is 1.46788:1

Horizontal Tension Cables


Vertical Tension Cable


x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations







Connection

BaseGeometry


MULTI LAYER TENSEGRITY TOWER

Diameter02

Diameter01

Diameter03


x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations







Connection

BaseGeometry



When properly constrained, the compression strut ratio to cable length remains 1.46788:1

However, the introduction of multiple layers requires the calculation of saddle cable lengths and the associated drop in vertical height due to gravity loads.

Saddle Tension Cables






x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations







Connection

BaseGeometry



Diameter02

Diameter01

Diameter03

BASE CONDITION


x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations

D̀iameter01 =̀0.866in=(1in)*(sqrt(3)/3)*1.5






Connection

BaseGeometry



Diameter02 (constrained)

Diameter01



Tensegrity Tool allows unconstrained geometry to properly resolve tension cable length while maintaining fixed relationships (strut ratio, vertical height and rotation angle.)


x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations


D̀iameter02 =̀0.433in=(1in)*(sqrt(3)/3)*.75





Connection

BaseGeometry



Diameter02

Diameter01





x y

z

xy plane

yz plane

zx plane

Geometrical Set.1

PartBody

TensegrityTool

Parameters


Relations


D̀iameter02 =̀0.433in=(1in)*(sqrt(3)/3)*.75





Connection

BaseGeometry



Diameter02

Diameter01

Diameter03




Curve-Bent MetalPhillip Anzelone | Brigette Borders | Justin Fabrikant | John Hooper | Sean Salsbury


Curve-Bent Metal

Concept

Single Fold Single Sinusoidal Fold Triple Fold Triple Fold


Machining Technique

Oblique Dye

Press Break

Manual pinching and adjustment

Folded Product

Plasma-Cut Perforations

Curve-Bent Metal


Flexibility

Increased force increases cuvature

and deformation

Curve-Bent Metal


Prototype

Curve-Bent Metal


Curve-Bent Metal


Application

Curve-Bent Metal


Curve-Bent Metal


micro deformation

surface expansionsurface impact

plastic zone

compressive resistance

tension

peened side

unpeened side

compression


Shot Peened Unpeened

macro deformation

stress

depth

integral sheet

new sheet

surface expansion


test 1 samples


Gantry Peening Machine


Anticipated material response with masking and concentrted targeting`

Peen Here

Masking

Original Material

Deformed Material

HAND PEENING Material: 7 sheets, 11”x11“, 1/16” AluminumShot: 230 Air Pressure: 70 PSI

Explorations utilizing hand-peening techniques, will offer new ways to mechanically peen-form


COVERAGE

50

50

60

70

80

90

230

230

230

230

230

170

170

170

100 200

AIR PRESSURE SHOT

Recommended Maximum

AUTOMATIC PEENINGMaterial: 18 sheets, 11”x11“, 1/16” AluminumShot: 170 (3), 230 (15) Air Pressure: 50-90


PEENING PANELS_prototypes

PRESS PEEN

HAMMER PEEN

SHOT PEEN

PANELS_01

PANELS_02

STRUCTURAL SURFACING RESEARCH (CNC AND LASER PEENING: 2010)

Columbia University : GSAPP : Laboratory for Applied Building Science Phillip Anzalone, AIASTRUCTURAL SURFACING RESEARCH (CNC AND LASER PEENING: 2010)


PEENING JIG_prototypes

PROTOTYPE_01

PROTOTYPE_02

PROTOTYPE_03

STRUCTURAL SURFACING RESEARCH (CNC AND LASER PEENING: 2010)


First production use of mechanical prestressing under controlled conditions

Hammered gold helmets, UR Crusade armor was cold formed by hammers

First rolling of Iron

Hardness of materials is explained and tested by SmallHenry Court patents grooved rolls for rolling metal

Williams develops earliest controlled test for hardnessRoll burnishing used on railroad ties

Canadian National Railway used cold rolled sheets for improved strength and !nishRinehart develops formula to compute depth of penetration on impact of round shot metal

S.A.E. presents mathematical analysis for determining the stress in the contact bodies

Dr. Brinell announces his new hardness tester - still in use today

Studies of the ‘hardness of blow’ of bullets

WWII

Post WWI examination of cold-worked metals, residual stresses , fatigue and ballistic studies

Cloudburst machine drops quantities of steel balls to impact a work piece

Auto-frettage hardening of gun barrels

Shot peening used as metal !nishing

Present: Striving to accurately measure depth, intensity and distribution of cold worked e"ect

WWI Shot Peening research on ballistic preventative clothing and armory

Bullets and ShotsCold Process Craft Control

2700 BC 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 1950 2000 2011

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

1100

CNC processes can be used to accurately control these variables; Research can be done to test, catalogue, discover and design new metal strengths and forms through shot peening

Wor

ld S

teel

Con

sum

ptio

n in

10^

6 to

ns

SHOT PEENING: MOLD-LESS CUSTOMIZATION

Phillip Anzalone, Columbia University GSAPPDirector, Building Technology SequenceDirector, Avery Digital Fabrication Laboratory


Columbia UniversityGraduate School of Architecture, Planning, and PreservationCenter for Applied Building Science==================================================================================

Paris AtelierSummer 2012

Phillip Anzalone : GSAPP : Columbia University

Question: Who’s your favorite Architect?

Phillip Anzalone : GSAPP : Columbia University

Answer:

columbia university - facade innovation: performance, optimization and integration

Documents

aiacolumbia university

preservation gsapp

international think

new yorkcolumbia university

industry experts

todays industry leaders

various countries

leading architects