journal part b

Architecture Design Studio: AIR

ABPL30048_2013_SM1Madeleine Ingham

382523

Part A: A Case for Innovation

Introduction 6 Architecture as Discourse 8

Contemporary Computational Design 13

Parametric Modelling 19

Algorithmic Exploration 25

Conclusion 28

Part B: EOI III: Design Approach

Design Focus: Tessellation 31

Precedent: Tessellation 33

Case Study 1.0 39

Case Study 2.0 46

Technique Development 53

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly 57

Technique Proposal 66

Learning Objectives and Outcomes 70

Contents

PART A: A Case for Innovation

Introduction

My name is Madeleine Ingham. I am originally from Hepburn Springs in coun-try Victoria but have since moved to Melbourne to pursue territory study. I am currently a third year Bachelor of Environments student with a major in Archi-tecture. I hope to continue into a Master of Architecture in the upcoming years with a focus in sustainable and functional design. Over the years I have gained some experience in digital software in Photoshop and InDesign and have ba-sic skills in Rhino from Virtual Environments in my first year. Below is my body lantern which was completed through using Rhino software. Other than this I have very little in the level of skills and understanding of digital architecture.

I believe that digital technologies are an important part of any industry in this day and age, especially for presentation. This is one of the areas where I think digital design is very beneficial to the architecture industry. Presentation is how architects work to sell projects. If a designer has a great idea but cannot

present the idea coherently to the client it is a loss at both ends. Computers can assist in merging the understanding of the project between architect and client which I believe is very beneficial. This is the same between clients as it is between industry professionals. Clear concise designs and blueprints are important communication tools between the architect and the building industry. Computer programs largely assist in providing neat, clear and concise information between indus-try professionals. Computer aided design is also important for architects to use in association with the building industry.

In terms of digital design for architecture I only have the knowledge from which I have reviewed myself. I have mixed feelings about the use of digital design in architecture, mainly due to what I have seen in the industry rather than through academic learning. I think using the computer to aid in design generation is a dangerous concept as it can create a piece of art rather than a functional design. As a student who aims to focus in sustainable design I find this a flaw in computer aided design systems. However, imputing a design into a system to test the quality of the project I believe is a very beneficial analysis tool for architects.

I think computer aided designs should be just that, aids. I think that the design process should still be addressed at a paper based level or at least diagrammatically represented before computers become involved. This may be purely because of the way I wish to practice but I also think the act of the architect drawing the design by hand gives creates a greater connection between the architect and the design..

I think that digital design is a tool for refining a design, but that it should not be the only media with which architects should interact with. I hope that this subjects gives me a better understanding of how computer aided design and digital architecture simulation can benefit my future as an archi-tect.

6

Discourse In Architecture

http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/fuller_do-meovermanhattan.jpg

In the lecture we discussed the concept of discourse in architecture. Stanislav started the lecture by showing radical design ideas by Buckminster Fuller and discussed some of the debates and opinions which have been made about his designs. This led to a further discussion about conflict in architec-ture and how this has shaped the way in which architects have designed and practiced. Discourse in architecture, as I understand it from the lecture, is when cultural, social and political agendas create a differing opinions which ultimately can lead to a re-evaluation of a design. Discourse is an impor-tant component in architecture as without discussion about the design there would be no movement forward into other styles and ideas.

‘Any serious “rethinking” of architecture at the start of this century cannot be undertaken without upsetting the structure and emphases of the traditional profession, of traditional ty-pologies, and of traditional modes of envisaging the architectural subject.’1

I found this quote from the lecture very useful in displaying how discourse has affected architecture throughout history. Without reevaluating the effectivity of the design there would be no move for-ward or leading development in design. Understanding the discourse around the design can lead to positive outcomes in the building industry as changes can be made for the better. Who knows how architecture would have progressed if it was not for the development of literary articles which discuss the issues surrounding the built form.

The Richard Williams reading provides similar insight into the way in which discourse has shaped architecture design. In the Williams reading he discusses the difficulties in defining what architecture is as it is an ever changing profession. Williams address how as society changes, architecture in turn has changed with it. Throughout the article Williams discusses the progression of architecture from an art from and into a social and cultural expression.

“As it will become clear, architecture is as much a philosophical, social or professional realm as it is a material one, and it is through the consideration of architecture as discourse that one can engage with it as visual culture.”2

Over the years discourse in the architecture industry has encouraged and discouraged certain as-pects of design. This has lead to a developed culture surrounding architectural design and progress. Currently this culture is looking for new radical design ideas which have never been seen before however, as always, there is constant discourse over which designs achieve this. In the two prec-edents that I have chosen there are different levels of discourse with past and new architectural ideas. I feel that being open to discourse is a positive part of architecture design. Discourse provides the greatest analysis tool a designer can get. Discourse, despite its negativity, can be seen in a way as a form of constructive criticism.

1 Anthony Vidler, ‘‘Review of Rethinking Architecture and the Anaesthetics of Architecture by Neal Leach’’, Harvard Design Magazine (2000), 3.2 Richard Williams, ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, in Exploring Visual Culture : Definitions, Concepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), pp. 102 - 116.

8

3


Source: http://aldorf.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/amazing-paperhouse-by-shigeru-ban/

Source: http://aldorf.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/amazing-paperhouse-byshigeru-ban/

Source: http://aldorf.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/amazing-paperhouse-by-shigeru-ban/

Shigeru BanPAPER HOUSELake Yamanaka, Yamanashi, Japan, 1995

Shigeru Ban has created much discourse in the architectural industry after creating a new building material and by being a leading architect in sustainable design solutions. Ban’s use of paper to create load bear-ing building elements was revolutionary to the building industry. Ban used strengthened paper as a design solution for providing temporary shelters to residents affected by the Kobe Earthquake in Japan 1994.1 Ban used paper as it was a material readily accessible, made sturdy enough to support a structure and could be broken down and recycled after use.2 Using paper as the main material and the quick construction time made this project inexpensive and available to a variety of people of varying socio economic status.3 This meant that anyone after catastrophic events had the accessibility to one of his designs.

Ban’s humanitarianism work is seen throughout his career and he continually works throughout the world assisting in temporary building structures for the homeless. However, he has transformed his make shift shelter solution from paper tubes into more permanent structures such as Paper House (Lake Yamanaka, Yamanashi, Japan, 1995). Ban uses his paper tubes in a curving dynamic ‘S’ shaped manner to create the walls in between the static floor and roof elements.4 The floor and roof looks to reference back to Le Cor-busier’s simple design principle of a flat floor and ceiling separated by columns, however Ban has made it strictly his own style through the use of the paper tubes. This could display a discourse influence in archi-tecture as Ban has taken a well liked style posed by Le Corbusier and incorporated it into his own design.

The use of paper has become a defining element in Ban’s work and he continually experiments to push the boundaries with the material. Already Ban has dynamically changed the way in which paper is used in building in his two different projects. The original use of paper as a cheap and efficient material for the less fortunate is transformed into a design feature in a grand house. The occupants of Paper House do not have the same social economic concerns or distress as the previous users of the temporary shelter which fundamentally changes the original purpose of the material. Although the material is no longer about help-ing people in need it still reflects Ban’s want to insure that people are comfortable and that they enjoy the privacy of the space.5

Ban is well known for his innovative ideas with recyclable materials, paper being the major material. Ban was working on sustainable solutions in architecture back in 1980’s years before environmental solutions and recycled materials were even apart of the architectural community.6 This makes him one of the leading architects in the sustainable design industry. Ban can be described as a modernist, experimentalist as well as a rationalist.7 Ban has created a new form of architecture in sustainable design with recyclable materi-als in which other architects will be measured against. His work in the architecture industry is significant to the movement of sustainable design by sustainable architecture not only functional and environmentally friendly but also beautiful.

1 Designboom, ‘Shigeru Ban: Paper Loghouse’2010) <http://www.designboom.com/history/ban_paper.html> [Accessed 21/3/2013].2 Designboom, ‘Shigeru Ban: Paper Loghouse’2010) <http://www.designboom.com/history/ban_paper.html> [Accessed 21/3/2013].3 Shigeru Ban Architects America, ‘Paper Log House’ <http://www.dma-ny.com/site_sba/?page_id=331> [Accessed 23/3/2013].4 Elizabeth Nielsen, ‘Shigeru Ban Builds with Paper ‘, ARCPROSPECT International Foundation, (2012) <http://arcprospect.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2370&Itemid=2&lang=en> [Accessed 21/2/2013].5 Elizabeth Nielsen, ‘Shigeru Ban Builds with Paper ‘, ARCPROSPECT International Foundation, (2012) <http://arcprospect.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2370&Itemid=2&lang=en> [Accessed 21/2/2013].6 Barbara Porada, ‘Shigeru Ban’s Cardboard Cathedral Underway in New Zealand’, ArchDaily, (<http://www.archdaily.com/tag/shigeru-ban-archi-tects/> [Accessed 22/3/2013].7 Artek, ‘Shigeru Ban’ <http://www.artek.fi/company/designers/13> [Accessed 24/3/2013].

10

5

Source: http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Temppeliaukio_Church_1.jpg


Timo and Tuomo SuomalainenTEMPPELIAUKIO CHURCH (Church of Rock)Helsinki, Finland, 1969

The Church of Rock has a large construction history associated with a large amount of discourse. After many years of the parish trying to find a design for the church, in 1936 the parish accepted Timo and Tu-omo Suomalainen’s design of a church built into the bedrock.1There was a large amount of controversy at this time in the 1960’s regarding the role of religion in society and thus the scale, cost and necessity of the church was questioned.2 The churches original proposed size became smaller and ideas were squashed by the controversy of the Helsinki public. In fact, the original design did not include the walls to be left rough and virtually unworked as the architects thought it would be too controversial at the time to be ac-cepted by the Parish.3 However, once the excavations were done, the combination of discourse amongst the public regarding the cost of the temple and the success of the excavations meant that the rocks were left rough and unworked.4 The rough rocks have now become a major feature of the church as well as enhancing the acoustics, making it a great concert venue as well.5 This movement away from being a traditional form of church can be said to be influenced slightly by the surrounding opinions at the time of the build. There are also many influences which can be seen in the original design from the modern-ist movement. The idea of using the natural topography to form a feature in the landscape can be seen in earlier inspirational buildings such as Frank Lloyd Wright’s Falling Water. Like Wright, brothers Timo and Tuomo Suomalainen have used the landscape around the site to create features in the building. Wright used natural stone surfaces in the interior of the building and contrasts it against smooth concrete and stone elements. This idea of contrast between artificial and natural has been incorporated into the Church of Rock. Most of the rock surfaces have been left rough, but there is the contrast of smooth stone and of course the very smooth and perfectly rounded dome. The dome references back to the original idea of a dome within a church but the use of glass and copper has fundamentally changed the antiquity representation of the church and dome. The copper dome sits above 180 glass windows which give the dome the appearance that it’s floating.6

When approaching the temple from the south all that can be seen is a layer of rocks and the copper dome peaking up from the surface. It is well hidden considering its large expansive space. The building entrance is off a main street and a sense of euphoria is felt when entering the surprisingly large space.7 Although the church still follows the style of many traditional churches though its oval space, alter and large dome, the design is very unique in it’s style from a traditional church. Unlike many traditional churches in which the large expansive space is normally dark with diffused lights from stain glass win-dows, the Church of Rock is underground but brightly lit by the glass which sits below the dome. Today the Church of Rock is regarded as an amazing piece of architecture which combines the natural ele-ments of its surroundings while providing a separate well lit sanctuary used as a church, concert space and an architectural masterpiece.

1 Kirkko Helsingissa, ‘Temppeliaukio Church History’ <http://www.helsinginseurakunnat.fi/seurakunnat/toolo/touristinformation/temppeliaukio-churchhistory.html> [Accessed 22/3/2013].2 Maila Mehtälä, ‘Rectification to the Design History of the Temppeliaukio Church’2007) <http://www.temppeliaukio.fi/english/artikkeli1.htm> [Ac-cessed 23/3/2013.3 Maila Mehtälä, ‘Rectification to the Design History of the Temppeliaukio Church’2007) <http://www.temppeliaukio.fi/english/artikkeli1.htm> [Ac-cessed 23/3/2013.4 Galinsky, ‘Temppeliaukio Church’ <http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/temppeliaukio/> [Accessed 20/3/2013.5 JollyRogArrh, ‘Helsinki Rock Church’2012) <http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php>25/3/2013].6 JollyRogArrh, ‘Helsinki Rock Church’2012) <http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php>25/3/2013].7 JollyRogArrh, ‘Helsinki Rock Church’2012) <http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php>25/3/2013].

12

7

Contemporary Computation Design

The role of computers in contemporary design can be likened to the revolution of the industrial age on architecture. Beginning with Frank Gehry’s Guggeheim Museum, digital technologies have created a new realm to work in and are changing the way which we practice architecture.1 Computers are a great tool for architects, as unlike humans they will never tire and make arithmetical mistakes, providing ar-chitects with a logical analytical tool that can process tasks quickly and repetitively.2 Computers are largely beneficial to architects as they prevent errors in design, provide a way to see the design three dimensionally and can assist in the fabrication and construction of the design.

Computer programing has allowed for the design, development and manufacturing of more experimen-tal designs. In particular curved structures which were once limited by paper design are being revolu-tionized through computer aided design into organic forms which challenge the traditional development of buildings (solid, rigid structures which uniformly dissipate loads).3 Architecture largely ignored the use of curves throughout the last century despite how developed the use of curves were in other built industries. Computers are allowing architects to create geometries which were never before thought conceivable to build.

Computers have become a tool which largely assist easing the design process for an architect however, there are some negative outcomes from computer aided design. Digital technologies have created dis-course amongst the architectural community as these technologies, although pushing limits in designs, can also limit creativity. As with any media, the design in some ways is limited by parameters. The use of computers adds a new dimension to designing and can affect the design process. It is of concern to the architecture community that in generating design through the use of computer program-ming that the set parameters of a program will not be broken down and therefore designs will become the outcome of computer programs rather than the architects design capabilities. It is therefore encouraged in many academic journals that the design process should use multiple medias or follow the traditional explorative design process.

1 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 3.2 Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design ‘, (2004), 2.3 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 3.

The Guggenheim Museum BilbaoSource: http://www.guggenheim-bilbao.es/en/the-building/outside-the-museum/

Computerization is primarily seen as a tool in architectural design. This is where the initial design is created by the architect but computerization is used to present the final design which the architect has envisioned, such as Frank Gehry’s Guggenhium Museum in Bilbao. This is a fantastic way in which computers have contributed positively to the architectural industry. The Guggenheim museum would have been a nightmare to communicate design information to clients, builders and other external con-tractors without the use of computer programs to break down the design into a way which could be communicated clearly to all external parties. Computers also assisted in construction of the Guggen-heim by providing correct mathematical calculations allowing for the construction of the intersecting planes in the buildings.

In contrast to computerization, computation is where the computer aided design is used initially in the design process and continued to the end of the design. This sometimes begins by the exploration of patterns in computer programs where a set architectural form has not already been made. Computa-tion is surrounded by a large amount of discourse in the architectural community as this process solely relies on the parameters of a set program and redefines the role of an architect in the design process, which some architects believe is limiting.

For the Gateway Project we are required to use Rhino and the grasshopper plug in to generate designs. Grasshopper is great for generating very innovative designs and I believe there is a great potential to design something very eye catching for the project. I think it is also important that we acknowledge that although there are benefits in using this technology that caution should be taken when using this program to generate design. It is important to keep assessing the design related to how it will work as a built form. As this will largely be a computation design the computer programming will be used to generate ideas to fabrication of the design. It is important that while undergoing the Gateway Project that we do not get too lost in the potentials for design in the program and that we keep referring back to how the design will work within the context of the site.

14

9Source: http://www.tasmeemme.com/project/view/1002

Source: http://www.pscohen.com/torus_house.html


Source: http://www.pscohen.com/torus_house.html

Preston Scott Cohen INCTORUS HOUSEOld Chatham, NY 1998-1999.

The Torus House by Preston Scott Cohen is an example of computer aided architecture. The curves are based on the mathematical concept of a torus.1 Preston Scott Cohen liked the torus for its symbolism and blended this shape into the formal home styled living spaces creating a struggle between curves and flat surfaces.2 Computer aided design heavily assisted in the evolution of this project as the unconventional curves between the straight flat surfaces re-quired careful mapping and calculations for manufacturing. This project is referred to as smooth architecture belonging to an avant-garde style which explores curvilinear design.3 Computer technologies and CAD programs revolutionized the possibilities of curvilinear design through the understanding of NURB systems.4

This design can be described as a computerization design as the architect has used the com-puter to assist in representing the design after the initial idea was already created prior to computing commencement. In my opinion this is an example of where digital technologies have been positively utilized as a tool in the architectural process. Computers have allowed for precise measurement of curves and provides an insight into how these forms can be built, especially important when choosing materials. Without computers this would have been a very complicated design to produce and manufacture.

1 Derek Magee, ‘Preston Scott Cohen’2009) <http://dmageeish.blogspot.com.au/2009/01/preston-scott-cohen.html> [Accessed 3/4/2013.2 Derek Magee, ‘Preston Scott Cohen’2009) <http://dmageeish.blogspot.com.au/2009/01/preston-scott-cohen.html> [Accessed 3/4/2013.3 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 6.4 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 6.

16

11Source: http://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang=en&cat=0&param=overview&param2=21&param3=0&

Source: http://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang=en&cat=0&param=overview&param2=21&param3=0&




Franken Architekten GmbHBMW BubbleFrankfurt, Germany, 1999

The BMW Bubble is one of the first structures in the world that was created from start to finish by computers.1 This can be described as computation as the whole design process has been developed using digital technologies. The design is based on the interaction between two water droplets and like Torus House, the design is curvilinear and has used computer aided technologies greatly assists in producing this struc-ture.2 The movement and tension of the water droplets was explored through comput-ers, specifically using a drop simulation, making this design a project of movement or kinetics.3 The mapping of movement is a new design technology produced through computers and gives us a greater understanding of how the building will work, as well as making more specific bio-inspirational analysis. The curves in the BMW Bubble reference the study of water droplets very correctly as they do not follow one radius and display the shape of water surface tension.

This design, in my opinion, is successful in communicating the idea of two water drop-lets. The design does not appear restricted by computer aided technologies, instead enhanced. It can be assumed that computer technologies assisted in manufacturing and producing the design as the produced form follows the lines of the digital design very closely. The BMW Bubble is an example of a computation design success where the design is creative and the materials elaborate the form of the design.

1 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 21. 2 Franken Architekten, ‘Bubble’ <http://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang =en&cat=0&param=overview&param2=21&param3=0&>3/4/2013].3 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 21.

18

13 14

Daniel Davis’ lecture on parametric modelling provided a good summary on what parametrics is, how it has been incorporated into the architecture industry and the positives and negatives associated with it. Davis describes how parametrics is a term borrowed from mathematics which we now use in the architecture industry. The definition which Davis uses to define parametrics is taken from a mathematical encyclopedia where parametrics is described as a ‘set of equations that express a set of quantities as explicit functions of a number of independent variables known as parameters’.1 Davis describes how this expression has been adopted into architecture where ‘the idea of the explicit connection between the parameter and the geometry at the end’ is explored as design.2

Davis makes it clear in his lecture that parametric modelling does not require scripting and computation. Paramet-rics can operate in a realm outside of computers and has been used for many years prior to computation. A perfect example of this is Gaudi using a parametric model consisting of weights forcing point sources into certain shapes based on the force of gravity to create his design. This can be defined as parametric because there are set param-eters (location of the weight points), equations (laws of gravity) and quantities (the model itself).

As with many new technologies there is a large amount of discourse in the architecture industry which surrounds it. Woodbury has his own opinions on parametric modelling and how it should be implemented into the design process. Woodbury states that “Design is change. Parametric modelling represents change” and that archi-tects should embrace parametrics.3 Woodbury discusses the many positives in using parametrics as it moves the designer forward from add and erase to add, erase, relate and repair.4 This is a major breakthrough in design as it means that a change in algorithms and numbers can lead to a change in the design and vise versa so bringing change to the design is very easy.

“Initially, a parametric definition was simply a mathematical formula that required values to be substituted for a few parameters in order to generate variations from within a family of entities. Today it is used to imply that the entity once generated can easily be changed.”5

Being able to manipulate changes quickly and efficiently in a design while still being able to control the param-eters of the design is a very beneficial aspect of parametric design. However, not all changes are fluent and easily adapted in parametric modelling. For instance, finding the point in the algorithm or in the program nodes which represents a certain aspect of the design to be changed can be difficult without a very deep understanding of the design and program. This makes it very difficult for external onlookers who have not participated in the digital parametrics to alter the design. In general it can even become hard for the original user of the parametric model to create major changes to the design as changing the parameters can create larger scaled negative effects. Creating changes to parametric designs later in the design process can lead to disfunction in the construction process as the initial parameters have been disrupted and altered.

1 Eric Weisstein, in CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics Chapman and Hall/CRC. doi: 10.1201/9781420035223-18., 2003).2 Daniel Davis, Parametric Modelling Lecture, 20133 Robert Woodbury, ‘Elements of Parametric Design’, (2010), 1.4 Robert Woodbury, ‘Elements of Parametric Design’, (2010), 5.5 Chris Yessios, ‘Is There More to Come?’, Architecture in the Digital Age. Design and Manufacturing (2003), 68.

Parametric Modelling

14

Working with parametric modelling does create a large amount of control and efficiency in a design but there are many underlying issues which are becoming more prominent in the design industry.

The more that parametric modeling software is being used the more similar we are seeing the end product becom-ing. This has created discourse amongst the architecture community as to what level should be parametric model-ling be used in the design process. Scripting is an emerging solution which designers are using to break through the set parameters of parametric programs and make their designs more original and different to other parametric designs.

Scripting is beneficial to parametric modelling as it provides a deeper engagement between computer and user which is not always present in using the set parameters of a program.1 Scripting is also a way in which design-ers reduce their time by automating routine tasks. Scripting cultures are emerging where designers create more imaginative, innovative solutions without being restricted by a programs parameters.2 Despite scripting’s position not yet being defined in the industry, scripting appears to be a positive solution to the issues regarding parametric modelling creating derogative design. However, like most computer technologies, there are issues with integrating them into the design industry.

Scripting is largely an amateur based skill and it is a time consuming process, even for those who are considered experts at scripting.3 Scripting is limited by the skills and knowledge and “even after a model is created, other designers can’t easily modify the design because they don’t possess the knowledge about how it was cre-ated and the original design intent.”4 This is an issue when working in large groups in design which is becoming a more common way to practice when addressing large scale projects.

Parametric modelling is very advantageous to the design community in providing great designs quickly and easily which are functional. Parametric modelling provides control and efficiency to a design which is not seen in many other design processes which eases the process of design. However, on a larger scale there are negatives to parametric modelling as the more it is used the more frequently we see the similar styles and patterns in built form around the world. Scripting provides a solution to these problems as it is usually the software’s parameters which continually create these similar designs. However, scripting in itself creates more issues in communications of de-signs despite the new and imaginative designs which are being created through this design process.

I think that all design projects are different and parametric modelling can sometimes be very beneficial to a design. However, parametrics is not a necessity of the 21st century and it should not be used for the sake of using it. Para-metric modelling, for me, is a great design generator which like all mediums has its limitations. It can be used more effectively in some designs more than others and I believe that there should be more observational analysis of the effectiveness of parametric modelling to find where exactly it is most beneficially used.

1 Mark Bury, Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley, 2011) 8.2 Mark Bury, Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley, 2011) 62.3 Mark Bury, Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley, 2011) 11.4 Parametric Technology Corporation, 2008. “Explicit Modeling: what To Do When Your 3D CAD Productivity Isn’t What You Expected.”

Source: http://zeospot.com/exotique-by-projectione-an-amazing-interior-installation-architecture-design/exotique-lighting-installation-design/

20

Source: http://architecturerevived.blogspot.com.au/2008/08/mercedes-benz-museum-in-stuttgart.html




The Mercedes Benz Museum was a very large project comprising of over two hundred and forty six companies and engineering firms.1 The museum is a complex double he-lix form based on the shape of the Mercedes Benz logo.2 Parametric design was used throughout the design, more specifically in reducing the labyrinth to a single diagram and controlling the overall geometry.3 According to Ben van Berkel, UN Studio’s cofounder and director, parametric modelling and digitally controlling the design made it possible for changes to be made quickly and efficiently and display the change on all other aspects of the building.4 This was interesting to read as the effect of small changes in parametric modelling can sometimes have negative impacts. It is interesting that parametric model-ling was used to map and experiment changes in the design as working with such a large variety of companies requires many people to be able to use and adjust the design. This is difficult as it requires many people to know the exact parameters of the design and continually follow the changes which are made. As far as we know parametric modelling was successfully used throughout this design as the complex form has been compiled together effectively. Computer aided design separate to parametric modelling was also very important to this designs structure due to the combination of many materials and the curved surfaces in the design.5

1 Robbie Moore, ‘The Benz’, Specifier, (2013) <http://www.specifier.com.au/pastissues/9592/The-Benz.html> [Accessed 3/4/2012].2 Ibid.3 Ibid.4 Ibid.5 Ibid.

UN StudioMercedes Benz MuseumStuttgart, Germany, 2001–2006

22

17


All images from source: http://zeospot.com/exotique-by-projectione-an-amazing-interior-installation-architecture-design/exotique-lighting-installation-design/

PROJECTiONEEXOtique Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA

The EXOtique project was produced by PROJECTiONE and students from the Institute for Digital Fabrication.1 There were specific constraints such as time, budget and the site (the ceiling at the school architecture building).2 The intention of the designers was to ‘create a simple, hexagonally based, component system that would act as a lit “drop ceiling” for the space, as the ceiling height would allow for quite a bit of variation in the surface.3 To create this design PROJECTiONE used the parametric modelling program Rhino and primarily used its plug in Grasshopper. These computer tools were also used for preparing the fabricated surface, printing and connections.4 The design created is light bulb lit, loose hanging structure which is curved throughout the structure rather than just at its edges. The connections of this project were therefore critical to the design as it is the connections which are also responsible for the way in which the fits together and reacts with each hexagonal member. This process was an exploration of digital modelling for fabrication where the design was already in their minds. In Rhino they created a surface and divided the space into hexagonal forms with the aim of creating a non planar folding and bending surface.

This is an example of a beautiful design using parametric modelling. As the design and build was based primarily on repetitive patterns and had a set size, parametric modelling was ideally suited to this project. This is a design where parametrics have not limited the design but rather the design is an exploration of what parametrics can achieve. Parametrics largely benefitted fabrication of this project by calculating the edges for the hexagonal components which were a critical part of the design as without these elements coming together the fluid motion would not have been achieved.

1 PROJECTiONE.com, ‘Exotique’2009) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/>.2 PROJECTiONE.com, ‘Exotique’2009) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/>.3 Arch Daily, ‘Exotique/Projectione’2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/125764/exotique-projectione/>.4 Arch Daily, ‘Exotique/Projectione’2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/125764/exotique-projectione/>.

24

19

Algorithmic Exploration

Understanding AlgorithmsFor the first week readings we were assigned to read a definition of an “algorithm.” The reading describes the different ways in which an algorithm can be defined. Al-though it did provide a sentence long definition of an al-gorithm being a ‘recipe, method, or technique for doing something’,1 the reading also explains how the term algo-rithm can be used quite loosely and how this has made the definition of algorithm become a derogative term for something which requires a computer to generate it. Al-though computers can perform algorithms they are not the only way which algorithms can be solved or produced. Algorithms can be mathematical equations but more im-portantly can be anything which can be expressed finite-ly. The author then re-evaluates the previous definition to include that ‘an algorithm is an unambiguous, precise, list of simple operations applied mechanically and system-atically to a set of tokens or objects.’2 The author deems this a more appropriate definition as an algorithm can be anything from a mathematical equation or tax bill to a cake recipe as long as the list of ingredients are finite.

I think that understanding the definition of an algorithm is important to this course work as Rhino is an algorithmic program. However, just because Rhino uses algorithmic expressions it does not mean that these functions are incapable to complete by hand. This begins to create the idea that Rhino is merely a tool used to express these equations which can be completed outside of a computer and that it is not creating something which cannot be Replicated elsewhere.

1 Robert Wilson and Frank Wilson, ‘Algorithm’, in The Mit Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science ed. by The MIT Press (London, 1999), 11.2 Robert Wilson and Frank Wilson, ‘Algorithm’, in The Mit Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science ed. by The MIT Press (London, 1999), 11.

Algorithmic Challenge Week OneThis week we were asked to reproduce an al-gorithmic challenge demonstrated to us in a tu-torial video. This tutorial explored how we could loft curves together and integrate this with Rhino to morph the loft into different forms. For this ex-periment shown along the bottom of the page I used a pentagon a circle a square and a circle. I then made set these curves into Grasshopper and joined them together with the loft tool. I then turned the points on and adjusted the curves which adjusted the lofts and kept baking my prod-ucts to get the forms below.

Algorithmic Challenge Week Two “AA Driftwood”This weeks “Algorithmic Challenge” required for us to try and replicate a sculpture through following a grasshopper tutorial video. Mine did not come out as I hoped it would (model opposite). I experi-mented with sliders to try and adjust the depth of which the extrusions cut into the BREP but could not find the right number set for this to work. I experimented with different BREP’s and curves and got some very cool results. Although not outcome I was required to make I did understand the con-cept of cutting away sections to create “AA Driftwood” project.

26

20

Algorithmic Challenge Week 3For Week 3 we were asked to find a Grasshopper tool or definition and implement it into a design. I tried to find a pipe shape which I had seen already completed on a previous tutorial video. I found on the Grasshopper web site that what I was trying to achieve is done through us-ing a pipe tool and that it is usually projected between two curves. I experimented and found that I could select curves, divide them (evenly so that the pipes can be pro-jected evenly between the two curves) and then a line created between the divided curves. I then use the pipe tool to project pipes along the dividing lines of the curves and this gets me my achieved result. However, I wanted to take this further. So I created a spiral around a straight line and repeated the steps. The result was this amazing design of tubes twisting around a central axis. I tried to find a way to replace the pipe tool with something else which was a matter of examining node inputs and out-puts and I found that the cone surface could be used as a substitute. Using sliders I can alter the radius and length of the cones to create these beautiful swirling designs.

Algorithmic Exploration

Conclusion

To conclude my Case for Innovation I wish to summarize the knowledge which I have gained from this sec-tion into how I will address my own design approach for the Gateway Project.

Using computer aided technologies is an intrinsic aspect of this course and knowing how to properly use them in the design process is crucial to the effective outcome of the design. I have analysed the discourse around computational design and found that the main concern within the design community is that due to the limitations of software there is an evolving ‘digital style’ which is very repetitive in its style. This is a concern, however avoided if computer aided design is included in the right part of the design process. Ob-viously within the Gateway Project we are to use Rhino and Grasshopper to generate the design however, this does not necessarily mean that research and innovative design ideas will not be generated prior to computation. I personally find the computation approach a better design approach when addressing func-tional built models. However, using the parametric modeling design approach appears very beneficial to this project. Looking at precedents using parametric modelling such as EXOtique by PROJECTiONE which has a more similar brief with the Gateway Project compared to the larger built forms I have studies gives me much hope for a very innovative design to be created using Grasshopper. The gateway Project needs to be exciting and eye catching. Patterns is a very eye catching design feature and disruption within patterning immediately avert the eyes to get our attention. This is what EXOtique has done through its use of curves and patterns. However, what I found most appealing about this project is the tesselation of the surfaces. This design is striking and I think that the use of tesselation and lights is a very dynamic statement within the context of the Gateway Project.

In tackling the design process for the Gateway Project I hope to use parametric modelling as a generative design tool based on innovative ideas which fit with the brief. I hope to generate these ideas using Grass-hopper and continue to alter and develop the design until refinement. Using the tesselation technique will require many experimental models using light and colour prior to fabrication to assure that what is pro-cessed in the computer is communicated into the real form. The form of the model is crucial for this design to be effective. What makes using the tesselation process so innovative is how the design looks when you move around it. How the tessellated patterning appears to change as you move around the object is what I believe to be one of the most beneficial aspects of using it in the Gateway Project because as traffic moves around it, all sides can be beautifully eye catching and spectacular.

Learning OutcomesThrough learning about the theory and practice of architectural computing I have developed a greater un-derstanding of how digital software can interact within the design process. Prior to studying architectural computing I was very negative about how software’s can restrict design and take the creativity out of de-sign. Learning about scripting and the cultures which surround algorithmic and parametric modelling I have much hope that architects are not planning on letting software’s limit their designs. This was a main concern for me coming into this course and I am glad to see that discourse in the architectural community is leading to people doing something about it.

I have found beauty in the designs of Torus House and EXOtique through understanding how revolutionary they are to the built world. The use of curves in architecture is something which I myself have struggled with while working on paper which in some ways has limited my designs. Through understanding computer technologies I actually have more hope at being able to effectively use curves within the architectural field and manufacture them in a way I felt restricted through paper design. This is what made my last Algorithmic Challenge for week 3 so special to me. I was able to express curves effectively and beautifully in a way I couldn’t on paper.

28

PART B: EOI III: Design Approach

Design Focus: Tesselation

Source: http://www.archivenue.com/voussoir-cloud-by-iwamotoscott-with-buro-happold/

Source: http://cubeme.com/blog/2009/07/07/puppet-theater-at-harvards-carpender-center/

Source: http://www.mediaruimte.be/digital_territories/projects/cybernetic/Aegis-Hyposurface_deCOi.html

source: http://archinect.com/softlab/project/polyp-lux

Source: http://www.triangulationblog.com/2011/05/fermid-by-behnaz-babazadeh.html

Source: http://www.arch2o.com/articulated-cloud-ned-kahn/

Dissecting the BriefWyndham City is pleased to invite submissions for the Western Gateway Design project to cre-ate a Gateway into Wyndham for city bound traffic on the Princes Freeway. This project is an opportunity to capitalise on the success of “Seeds of Change” Gateway, located at the eastern interchange, and create an equally compelling installation. The proposed site for the Western Gateway offers a high exposure location to those entering the urban precinct of the municipality, as well as to those travelling along the freeway.Wyndham City is seeking responses from design professionals for the design and documentation of an exciting, eye catching installation at Wyndham’s Western Gateway.We would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in this initiative organized by Wyndham City, and encourage and challenge you to develop a proposal that inspires and enriches the municipality.

Key words in the brief: gateway, Wyndham City, compelling, high exposure, exciting, eye catching, inspires, enriching, municipality

TesselationMy understanding of the definition is that tesselation is to cover a planar surface by the repeated use of a single shape, without gaps or overlapping. It is my belief that tesselation will reflect the requirements of the brief as despite the simplicity of its definition, its application provides strong compelling, exciting and eye catching designs which can become an iconic gateway for Wynd-ham City. Through studying it’s application I believe that this design focus can be reinvented into a gateway design which can achieve the desired effect which “seeds of change” be an iconic symbol for the city of Wyndham.

32

Precedents: Tesselation

Source: http://zeospot.com/exotique-by-projectione-an-amazing-interior-installation-architecture-design/exotique-lighting-installation-design/

PROJECTiONEEXOtique Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA, 2011.As mentioned previously in Part A: A Case Study for Innovation, EXOtique by PRO-JECTiONE is a perfect example of a dynamic tessellated surface. Produced to be an eye catching ceiling feature at the Ball State University Architecture Building this project relates to many of the aspects of the Gateway Project brief.1 The intention of the design-ers was to ‘create a simple, hexagonally based, component system that would act as a lit “drop ceiling” for the space, as the ceiling height would allow for quite a bit of variation in the surface.2 Using the hexagon has been tessellated across a very largely curved dynamic surface which in my opinion has enhanced the tessellated design feature. Al-though tesselation is in itself repetitive, this design has used tesselation on a curving sur-face to create a large amount of variety within the design. The tessellated design is then further enhanced through the use of artificial lighting which has been distributed evenly throughout the grid. However, due to the curved structure of the surface, the design proj-ects lights from many areas of the design further enhancing the variety in the form. This precedent perfectly demonstrates the versatility of tesselation.

EXOtique’s Achievements in Tessellated Design

There are many aspects in this design which can be used as inspiration for the gateway project. The use of the curving planar surface creating variety in viewing points can be incorporated into the gateway design to create variation in the design as the car drives past. Lighting can also be used to further enhance this variation as well as the tessel-lated pattern through puncturing of holes in the surface. An exploration of light distribution across the surface of the gateway design is important as in different lights the project can look dramatically different. There might need to be different lighting consideration from day to night.

1 PROJECTiONE.com, ‘Exotique’2009) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/>.2 Arch Daily, ‘Exotique/Projectione’2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/125764/exotique-projectione/>.

34


Source: http://matsysdesign.com/2013/02/27/shellstar-pavilion/

MATSYSShellstar PavilionWan Chai, Hong Kong, 2012.

The Shellstar Pavilion was designed to be an iconic gathering place for festival attend-ees.1 This design therefore had to be eye catching and compelling to captivate the audi-ence. MATSYS worked within a parametric modelling environment (grasshopper and kangaroo) and was quickly developed and iterated taking just 6 weeks to design, fabri-cate and assemble. The design process can be broken down into 3 processes that were enabled by advanced digital modelling techniques; Form-Finding, Surface Optimization, Fabrication Planning.2

The structure is composed of nearly 1500 individual cells that are all slightly non-planar.3 The curvature of the form meant that some of the cells overlapped which was minimized using a custom python script.4 Although there were some difficulties in fabrication, the solution in the end design is very effective. The structure appears light in a different way to EXOtique due to the larger holes within the structure. This is partly to do with the lighting which enhances the variety of both sides by projecting light along the surface rather than through the surface like EXOtique.

Shellstar Pavilion’s Achievements in Tessellated Design

Shellstar Pavilion displays that there can be some difficulties in creating tessellated de-signs through parametric modelling due to overlapping of components. This will have to be something which is examined in the gateway project to ensure that the design can be built effectively. For Shellstar Pavilion a fluid surface was very important and there could be no kinks through overlapping. In the end they have used beautiful joinery so that the underside of the design has a different design effect than at the top. Utilizing joinery in the design may be important due to the many angles of which the gateway project may be viewed.

1 Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/2 Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/3 Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/4 Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/

36


Source: http://www.sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html


Skylar TibbitsVoltaDomMIT, Department of Architecture, Massachusetts, USA, 2011.

The VoltaDom is a double vaulted passageway based on the structural design of the inside of a cathedral.1 The design varies hugely along the surface through changes in both the tesselations shape and size and the distribution of joinery across the surface. The joinery is very dynamic where the corner of the panels create a new sharp feature making the joinery as much a feature as the projected tessellated panels. The variety in this design is very dynamic and eye catching. It is not necessarily beautiful in the same way as the smoothness of the Shellstar Pavilion but it is eye catching in a way which can be very beneficial to the gateway project in attracting attention and focus of the viewers. This aspect of the design would be beneficial to incorporate into the stylings of EXOtique and Shellstar Pavilion in creating a more monumental recognizable feature to the Gate-way Project.

VoltaDom’s Achievements in Tessellated Design

This design represents a different aspect of tesselation through its rough and sharp fea-tures. This is eye catching from a distance and becomes more intriguing the closer you approach the design. This aspect of interest in design and the approach should be con-sidered in the gateway project. From a great distance the VoltaDom can be seen and still be very eyes catching whereas the smooth surfaces of EXOtique and Shellstar Pavilion where not as dynamic from a distance. The bold edges and joinery are an integral part of the design and emphasise the overall structure of the tessellated surface which make the design so sharp and eye catching. If the gateway project was to be projected over the highway this change from exterior to interior might be something to consider.

1 Http://www.sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html

38

Case Study 1.0


Case Study 1.0VoltaDom

We were given the task to explore a provided VoltaDom definition on Rhino and Grasshopper and explore its limitations and provide new potentials. As a group we found many limitations to the design through our own lack of understand-ing of the components which make up the definition. It took a lot of explora-tion to find what each component did and how this effected the design outcome.

We found through adjusting the sliders in the definition that many aspects could be changed in terms of variations in the surfaces, heights and radices of the com-ponents. It was possible to change the cone shapes by replacing the cone sur-face with a sphere however, to change the surface which the cone shapes origi-nally lay on did require more adjustments. We were able to extend the already existing surface quite easily but creating curves for the definition to be projected onto required a new component to be added to the definition as displayed below.

To make the definition be projected onto a different surface structure we needed to popu-late points onto the chosen surface and evaluate the surface before connecting it into the definition. This gave the definition a new potential and allowed for the development of many new designs from the original definition provided.

Matrix: Case Study 1.0

A

B

C

D

E

F

VoltaDom Definition Exploration

The matrix outlines the many different outcomes which we were able to gener-ate using the original definition and using the adjusted component to the definition to change the surface.

A In this sequence we first explored adjust-ing the sliders in the original definition to change the radices and heights of the cones. We then changed the surface to be slightly curved and experimented with the extremes of the original definition.

In this sequence we projected the defini-tion onto a torus surface and then turned points on to extend the surface into more organic shapes.

In this sequence we explored the sphere and how it can be adjusted to make tear-drop shapes. We also explored adjusting the cones to very high long skinny projec-tions which we thought could be further en-hanced by putting a light inside the sphere.

In this sequence we returned to the to-rus surface and explored using spheres instead of cones in the definition and the effect of removing the trimmed hole at the top.

In this sequence we continued to explore the definition on a torus with extreme vari-ations in radius adjustments. We made a long curving surface to project the defini-tion onto which we found very successful.

In this sequence we continued to explore the curved surface which we liked experi-menting with the different shapes, heights and radices of the definition.

B

C

D

E

F

42

Case Study 1.0

Case Study 1.0VoltaDomFavourite ResultsAs a group we found that we really liked how dynamic we managed to make the defini-tion through changing the surface input and changing the components of the original definition. We particularly liked the idea of using the cut outs as a way to experiment with lights coming through the surface which this definition allowed for. We also really liked using the curved fluid surface which we find to be a more favourable characteristic of tes-selation for the Gateway Project as we believe a softened form with subtle variety will be more attractive as a roadside feature.

I think that the potential for the definition can be greater than just a smaller scale hallway. It has the potential to be used for very dramatic art forms. An idea we discussed was us-ing these curved shapes and holes as a kind of water feature. As a public walkway like with VoltaDom it could still be used but even at a larger scale like as a skin for a building or a train or car tunnel exterior or interior.

44

Case Study 2.0



Case Study 2.0Shellstar Pavilion

For Case Study 2.0 we were asked to reverse engineer an already existing project using our own knowledge of Rhino and Grasshopper. We chose the Shellstar Pavilion as we already had an understanding of it through study-ing it as a precedent. We also thought that its purpose related in some ways to our own brief through trying to create an eye catching design which was recognisable to people at a festival but for our purposes it would be an iconic a gateway to Wyndham.

On MATSYS website we found the image below which outlines the development of the Shellstar Pavilion. It starts with the basic geometry of a five pointed flower shape com-posed of small triangles trying. This pattern provides a natural attraction or spiral around the central point. This flat surface then uses some kind of attractor or gravity points to make the curved surface. Then the tessellated pattern work has been later applied through the use of repetitive hexagons with an opening on each of the hexagonal panel shapes. We then attempted to replicate the surface and the tessellated design of the Shellstar Pavilion using Rhino and Grasshopper. To distribute the work evenly we had one person working on the surface exploration and another on the tesselation effect.

Matrix: Case Study 2.0

A

B

C

D

E

F

Shellstar Pavilion Explorations

The matrix outlines the many different outcomes which we created in attempting to reverse engi-neer the Shellstar Pavilion.

A In this sequence we started by lofting a surface in Grasshopper and using the panelling tools to create a panelled surface. We began by starting with three dimensional panelling which required projecting a second set of grid points from the lofted surface to create the panelling. We then explored the same shaped in two dimensional paneling which created less depth and interest but matched the design of the Shellstar Pavilion more clearly.

In this sequence we explored changing the den-sity of the panelling grids.

In this sequence we explored the use of attractor points which was not successful for this surface but in creating the Shellstar Pavilion surface we could examine the use of attractor points as it would have been used for this project.

In this sequence we explored a little bit further away from the Shellstar Pavilion in examining our own interest with the hexagonal shaped three di-mensional panelling which we liked. We then took an earlier experimentation to bake for fabrication.

We began to explore how by creating grid points on a larger curved surface and using the domain surface grid tools we could adjust the panelling based on how the surface naturally flows which would work with the Shellstar Pavilion Surface.

In this definition we examined the honeycomb three dimensional panelling tools as we thought that this could be a really dynamic effect for the Gateway Project.

B

C

D

E

F

48

Case Study 2.0

Case Study 2.0Shellstar Pavilion

We were unable to reverse engineer the Shellstar Pavilion into an exact form but we did learn a lot about tessellated design in attempting to re-create its design features.

We had great success in using paneling tools and found that if we could have made the surface that we would possibly have had great success in closely replicating the design. To create the paneling we used the paneling tools associated with Grasshopper and projected it onto a surface. An issue we had with creating the Shellstar Pavilion surface was that there were a lot of inputs which were not provided through Rhino and Grasshop-per which we needed to create the differing gravitational effect of the Shellstar Pavilion surface. We then had to use other plug-ins we had less of an understanding of such as Lunch-box, Weaver bird and Kangaroo which took a long time to learn. We managed with great difficulty to lift some of the surface up but it wasn’t very successful in making it fluid like the surface of the Shellstar Pavilion. Another negative outcome of the surface was that to use Weaverbird we had to work with meshes which means the end output was not a surface but a mesh which didn’t correspond to our knowledge with the tessellated pattern design.

To conclude in our reverse engineering it can be said that we managed to re-create aspects of the Shellstar Pavilion or at least understood how it could be achieved. We managed to create smooth tessellated surfaces like the Shellstar Pavilion but we did not manage to communicate this fluidity through the surface. This does not mean that the surface is not appropriate for a design, just that it does not reflect the fluidity which is such an appealing aspect of the Shellstar Pavilion. To reflect on this it can be said that the issue we had was combining our results together rather than a lack of trials or understanding of how this was to be created. However, despite the lack of a completely successful outcome this case study has provided us with many exciting ideas for our own Gateway Project.

50

Case Study 2.0

Case Study 2.0Positive Outcomes

In the many attempts that we made to try and replicate the Shellstar Pavilion we found a real interest in the use of three dimensional panelling tools. We particularly like the use of the elongated honeycomb effects which we believe can be really effectively incorpo-rated into our own project. They provide an interest to us as we have a fascination with elongated tesselation, holes across the surface, the use of projecting light to emphasise surface and fluidity of the overall design. In many of the outcomes we found that although the hexagon is quite a sharp shape it became very soft and fluid when used with the right surfacing. Using the original rounded mountain shape which was explored in trying to replicate how the tesselation might coordinate with the surface we found through extract-ing parts of the pattern that both sides of the design was very dynamic and interesting. We continued to explore this idea in part F of the matrix study in creating more elongated hexagonal tessellated shapes which overlapped creating many different directions for the openings of the hexagonal pattern. This was a really interesting outcome to potentially implement in the Gateway Project as it creates a dynamic feature which would be fan-tastic to observe while moving past it in a car.

52

Technique: Development

A

B

C

D

E

F


The matrix outlines the development in technique from the outcomes of the previous matrices and new develop-ments.

A In this sequence the use of three dimen-sional panelling was continued through explorations of different shapes and grid distributions. An issue occurred with more complex lofted surfaces and the panels overlapped one another. Lofting continuous curves allowed even distribution of panels but made the out-come very heavy in appearance loos-ing fluid appearance which we enjoyed.

In this sequence the honeycomb defini-tion was explored as a surface rather than as a built up form. It created a very subtle tessellated effect.

In this sequence the honeycomb defini-tion was explored on curved surfaces and used attraction techniques to cre-ate very dynamic outcomes.

In this sequence the honeycomb defini-tion was explored creating varying ef-fects based on changing the complex-ity of surface projections and density of the honeycomb tesselation.

In this sequence the previous tes-sellated definition was explored and we found this definition worked better with dynamically curved surfaces mak-ing it much easier to control within the program so adjustments were more straightforward.

In this sequence the cut out panel effect was explored using attractor points and the definition was then trimmed onto a surface. This surface was then manipu-lated to create varying perception of the patterning across the surface.

B

C

D

E

F

54


A

B

C

Technique: DevelopmentPositive Outcomes

In Kalay’s reading, Architectures New Media, the search technique is described as a development and analysis tool for designers to use to progress their design.1 I cannot say that as a group we fol-lowed Kalay’s exact outlined approach to developing our design but as designers we naturally blend-ed many of the described techniques.

The selection of which techniques we wanted to further develop were selected though unknowingly using the three search methods of depth first, breadth first and best fit. I can say that our selection of which process to explore further development were chosen using the best first search technique. We also used the Breadth search method to generate several alternative ways to develop a candidate solution which we have then used in this final development to bring to it’s logical solution. I feel that the depth first solution has been continually explored in all aspect of Par B of this assignment as it is a pro-cess of elimination which is commonly used by designers to address which designs are successful and should be further developed. The following three sequences display the development of techniques in which aspects of these search techniques are used.

This sequence for development follows the cut out surface technique as explored in Case Study 2.0 using panelling tools. The experimentation began with the development of a two dimensional panel-ing grid which was then projected onto a lofted surface where the panels were then trimmed out of the surface to create tesselation through subtraction. This technique was developed through the use of attractor points to create a more varying surface. The variety in density of the panels gave the sur-face a natural fluid and directional movement appearance across its surface. The experimentation with attractor points was successful in this scenario where it had previously failed in panelling tools in Grasshopper. It created the desired effect of variation across the surface which we thought would be very interesting as a feature in the Gateway Project as vehicular traffic moved past the structure. Then began the exploration of curving the surface to further enhance the effect of movement across the surface and created restricted and changing views of the structure as the vehicle moves past it.

In Case Study 2.0 we explored a hexagonal projection definition where two surfaces could be drawn and the long hexagonal honeycomb pattern would be projected between these two surfaces. The de-velopment of this technique was created though surface manipulation and creating sweeping surfaces that created a fluid movement for the projection of the three dimensional shapes. The desired effect would be for the hexagonal tubes holes to be projected away from approaching vehicle traffic and that it is not until you come nearer or begin to pass the structure that you notice its composition of long hexagonal tubes. At night time the cars on the opposite side of the freeway will alter the way in which the structure is viewed through headlights possibly moving through the structure.

This technique development uses the same honeycomb projection definition as seen in B’s develop-ment. What was thoroughly explored in this development was the grid density and attraction to certain points. We were able to create separate elements from reducing the grid in the U coordinates which we thought would be great to link to the Gateway Project through creating a set of progressive elements along the freeway.

1 Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2004), p 18.

A

B

C

56

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly

Source: http://www.monkeypuzzleblog.com/2011_10_01_archive.html

Prototypes: Fabrication and AssemblyRichard Serra’s “Wake”

Exploring built projects with a similar idealistic scale and materialistic ideas helps provide an insight into the fabrication and assembly of our developed techniques into a built form. Richard Serra’s sculpture “Wake” for Seattle’s Olympic Sculp-ture Park is composed of large metal panels which appear to be projected out of the ground. This design reflects similar ideas of fabrication and assembly as the cut out technique explored in technique development.1 Serra’s design uses heavy metal sheets laid on steel platforms which have been further secured with a concrete slab poured over the top. The metal has been left to rust and for our own design this idea might be explored but there is the potential to use other coatings or cladding systems for the metal sheeting in the proposed Gateway Project design. Metal is a good material to use to create smooth curves and be durable enough to maintain form on the highly exposed Wyndham site.

1 Http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM151K_Wake_by_Richard_Serra_Seattle_Washing-ton

58


Source: http://www.suckerpunchdaily.com/tag/cloud/

Prototypes: Fabrication and AssemblyHelbery Suarez & Remi Melander“Cell Cloud”

The “Cell Cloud” installation was created by Helbert Suarez and Remi Melander in and exhibited in the Tent London, 2012.1 This installation provides a perfect example of a fabricated and assembled design which contains a structure very similar to that of our own explorations. This precedent provides insight into the way in which light, colour and materials can create a dynamic piece of art. This installation uses both white and blue polypylene, a transparent material, which allows light to pass through it and be reflected in coloured shadows.2 The polypyl-ene’s transparency also allows to see through the three dimensional object cre-ate depth in the design. The material polypylene acts as a feature in the design as much as providing structural rigidity. Polypylene is a good material to use for this type of project but might not be durable enough for the gateway project. The idea of the use of transparent materials can be further explored using more durable materials like fibre glass and even coloured glass to reflect similar properties of polypyrene.

1 Http://www.evolo.us/architecture/cell-cloud-installation-helbert-suarez-remi-melander/2 Http://www.evolo.us/architecture/cell-cloud-installation-helbert-suarez-remi-melander/

60


Source: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/13/next?context=user

Source: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/13/next?context=user

Prototypes: Fabrication and AssemblyBrosalin K. Sokolov D. Beliy A. Hexagonal structure “Kartonsk” 2011, Ulianovsk, Russia.

The Kartonsk project is more related to what we are going to be replicating at a prototype model scale to demonstrate our design three dimensionally as we can-not for obvious reasons have it physically fabricated in its true materialistic form. Kartonsk is a Grasshopper produced design using a similar hexagonal idea to our design developments. This precedent uses a heavy cardboard, punctures holes and threads the structure together with string. This is a clear example where join-ery has more than one structural purpose. The string is used to tie the elements of the design together but also used to connect the design to the ceiling to hang it as a curved ceiling structure. This could work for numerous of our developed models, especially if we are to suspend them between wires like the Kartonsk model represents.

The below model will need to use different techniques for fabrication as it is in many ways opposite to this precedent as a structure is largely in compression rather than in tension in the way which we want to represent this structure at the site. However, we found that if we were to suspend this developed model in our design that this is a good example of how choice in material and joinery can con-tribute to the structure of the design.

For the model below we started discussing the possibility of the hexagonal struc-ture being raised by columns rather than sitting on the ground and due to the smaller sized connections in would need to be made of a sturdy material such as fibre glass, steel or even wood.

62

Prototype: Fabrication and AssemblyPhysical Models

When it came to fabricating our own models we had to consider replicating similar ma-terialistic ideas which we had seen in our precedents exploration with a limited amount of materials.

We began by creating a prototype of the “cut out” development exploration using card. This was a fairly simple technique to fabricate but it did not necessarily maintain the exact surface form which was made using Grasshopper. The surface is much more straight and has lost it’s curve. Further exploration using thicker card or a more plastic material might be needed to be used to maintain the curved form. The subtractive technique is really interesting and from a distance it might just look like a solid form from a vehicle and as the vehicle moves closer the solid object might begin to become lighter and lighter as the tessellation becomes clearer. We used the prototype to experiments with different light sources to create very dynamic shadowing effects on the ground and to really enhance the form of the prototype.

In the second prototype we had less success. This was largely due to difficulties in unroll-ing the surface in Grasshopper as the file was so large the computer kept crashing. We therefore made a smaller prototype model from the design. We were unsure how was the best way to fabricate the design and with many issues with getting the prototype cut at the fablab we tried our best to fabricate the design as economically as possible. We started with one long flat surface which we scored and then bent to make the hexagon patterns attaching them together with internal tabs in the form of internal walls. An issue with this technique was that the shape continually deformed and as shown in the bottom image the faces to be attached to the structure did not fit. For this process tabbing at each edge might be needed to make the structure rigid. The type of tabbing we will use depends on what type of materials we plan on using. From the information provided on the LMS we could do two different tab types. Fabrication Tool Three: Type one - Simple, would be more beneficial if we were to use less rigid materials like card at a small scale and polyphere at a larger scale. Fabrication Tool Four: Type two - Zip teeth,would be more effective for rigid materials like wood. From our own explorations we now have a greater understanding that the density and composition of the materials has a great effect on what type of joining techniques should be used.

64

Technique Proposal

Why Tessellation?

Our exploration and development of the design focus tessellation gives me the greatest confidence that its application is highly appropriate for the Gateway Project. Tessellation is no longer defined simply as a repetitive shape or pattern across a surface. Tesselation is dynamic, eye catching, exciting, intriguing, imaginative and iconic. We have explored tesselation at both small and large scales and have discovered that there are many ways to represent this design focus. Through solid forms, patterning, form and light tesselation can be applied in a design and this is what gives us the greatest confidence in the potential for its application in the Gateway Project. In particular we believe that we can design a tessellated design which is appropriate for the design audience or drivers and passengers in vehicles which can put Wyndham City on the map. What we found so exciting about tessellation is its perception of movement and how viewing approached and angles largely effects how it is viewed as either a solid or light object. We believe that we can use tesselation to create a monumental approach to Wyndham City. Our hope is that from a distance the structure appears to be solid from a distance and the closer the vehicle becomes the more visible the tessellated applica-tion can become. This created a threshold and an interest in the structure. As vehicles approach there is the interest to discover what the structure is and once they become closer they will be excited by the design and thus be excited to approach Wyndham again and again. We believe that through using tesselation we can create a threshold in the ap-proach to the design and make the design iconic in its shape and structure to reflect the City of Wyndham.

66

Technique Proposal

Site B

Place of Proposed Development

Wyndham City SiteMock Proposals

We chose from a very early stage in development to have our design located at Site B of the freeway as it allows for dual viewings from both flows of traffic. These two images of mock proposals display the diversity which tessellation can provide. Locating the tesselation patterning to face parallel to the roadside rather than perpendicularly to the road is a critical part of our design and why tessella-tion can be more effective that other explorations such as geometry. The effect of the tesselation can be concentrated in such a way that it can captivate the viewer to see the whole design rather than just the one easy viewing point. Tessellated design can be head turning if achieved correctly. Not achieved correctly it can be perceived as messy but we believe that we now have the understanding to prevent this from happening through our exploration of varying surfaces and at-tracting techniques.

The mock technique developments placed on the site give an indication of the kind of scale we would like the design to be on the site. This is largely to do with our idea of creating a threshold through the movement of vehicles towards a surface and changing the viewers perception of the design.

We propose that tesselation is an innovative design technique for the Gateway Project as through our technique development we can create an iconic structure to act as a threshold for the Gateway to Wyndham City.

Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Learning Objectives and Outcomes After the mid semester presentation we were given a variety of feedback, particularly in accordance with how we could implement our experiments into the Gateway Project and onto the given site. We addressed this through exploring fabrication and assembly at both a small model scale and its possible implementation at a larger scale on the site. We still need to experiment further with prototype models but we encountered many difficulties in unrolling on Rhino and Grasshopper due to overlapping ele-ments and complex shapes. This link between computation and fabrication is something we will really need to consider moving into the next stage. That is not to say that we should limit our design potentials but merely examine more closely how some of the designs can be implemented in the real world. With this feedback in mind we attempted to make sure that our development reflected the learning objec-tives and outcomes outlined in the assignment requirements.

70


Objective 8Begin developing a personalised repertoire of computational techniques.

Through Case Study 1.0, Case Study 2.0 and technique development we have definitely developed a per-sonalised repertoire of computational techniques. Despite our group not being able to successful replicate the Shellstar Pavilion in Case Study 2.0 we definitely found our own understanding of how it could be used and found learning aspects such panelling tools which were used quite simply in the design to incorporate them into much more experimental and challenging designs. In Case Study 1.0 we show display how ex-tensive our understanding of the definition is. We were able to explore the limitations of the definition, attach our own elements to the definition and create a large variety of very diverse outcomes. Our matrix develop-ments display how diverse we have been in our exploration of computational techniques and that we have a large repertoire of computational techniques.

Objective 1Developing “the ability to make a case for proposals.”

This objective we have explored extensively through part B of the assignment. We have continually dis-cussed the shortcomings and limitations to our designs. Many limitations we encountered when commu-nicating our digital designs into real life scenarios became the foundation for how we developed our tech-niques. There were some designs which we created using definitions which were more effective on one surface than another and therefore different definitions needed to be created to make it effective in a real life situation if that surface was to be used. For example, in the images below we used the same definition on both these surfaces. However, the paneling tool definition was not effectively executed on more com-plex lofted curves. The definition was however successful in a more simplistic lofted surface. Even though this worked effectively we found that the design was not appropriate for our intentions in designing for the Gateway Project. This analysis of technique development and effective design outcomes has made us able to make a case for proposals as we know how to examine our own work to make sure the design fits with the chosen proposal.

Objective 2Developing “an ability to generate a variety of design possibilities for a given situation.”

In developing a personalised repertoire of computational techniques we have proved that we can generate a large variety of designs for a given situation. While being given to task to explore the VoltaDom definition (the given situation) we were able to generate a great diversity of designs despite the limitation of using a single definition as the basis for our design. Even when we tried to recreate the Shellstar Pavilion we came up with many different designs and techniques to try and create the desired effect. Technique development led to further explorations, especially of the techniques used in Case Study 2.0, to create a large variety of designs from a linear idea development. This objective has been extensively explored throughout our jour-nal. The one limitation in our variety is that we have looked extensively at hexagons rather than exploring any different shapes. This is largely to do with our given precedents as we particularly loved this pattern in our precedent examples.

Objective 3Developing “skills in various three dimensional media”

We have extensively explored three dimensional media through using Rhino and its various digital media plug ins such as Grasshopper, Weaverbird, lunch-box, Panelling tools, Kangaroo and Python. We have not explored extensively enough in my own personal opinion into physical models to investigate scale. We have explored fabrication and found the various difficulties we would have in fabrication. We have looked at what kind of scale we want the designs to be used at through our Photoshop explorations of designs at the proposed site and using examples such as Richard Serra’s Wake sculpture to demonstrate what kind of scale we our designs to be.

Objective 7Develop foundational understandings of computational geometry, data structures and types of programming.

We have developed a very broad foundational understanding or computational geometry, data structures and types of programming. Even in our failure to successfully replicate an exact digital model of the Shell-star Pavilion we understood why we were encountering difficulties, merely did not have the extensive knowledge of the program to know where to locate the correct nodes to correct the problem. In reverse engineering the Shellstar Pavilion we started to understand how different programs and Rhino plug-ins could achieve different results. Although we were unsuccessful in implementing the spring tool in Kangaroo to pull the Shellstar surface into position we came very close and understood the various methods in how we could achieve this.

In using the VoltaDom definition we developed an understanding of the various inputs and that some inputs require a specific component (for example a curve is not a surface, brep or geometry). However, we man-aged to provide a solution to many of these issues through adding other parts to the definition so that we could use a variety of different components for our definition.

72

Final Remarks

The set theoretical research tasks have further developed my understanding of how computation can play a role in the design process. Physically using computation as a design tool is very different to studying how it can be implemented in the design process and it’s role in architecture. It feels like working you are working with a design tool and it provides different exploration and understanding of an idea. Computation, like painting and modelling is another media for experimentation of de-sign. I feel that the program has restrictions like any other media and therefore it is neither limiting or enhancing my design any more than any other media would. Like any other media it requires a development in skill and as my skills have developed the more confident I become in my design ca-pabilities. I am now able to create, manipulate and design using parametric modelling.

74