soon_wei chern_617557_part b
DESCRIPTION
University of Melbourne, Studio Air, Semester 1 2015TRANSCRIPT
STUDIO AIRWEI CHERN SOON
2015/SEMESTER 1 CHEN
A great building must begin with the unmeasurable, must go through measurable means when it is being designed and in the end must be unmeasurable.
-----------LOUIS KAHN
CONTENT
INTRODUCTION4
A1. DESIGN FUTURING9
A2. DESIGN COMPUTATION13
A3. COMPOSITION/GENERATION17
CONCLUSION18
LEARNING OUTCOME19
APPENDIX & ALGORITHM SKETCHBOOK21
REFERENCES23
INTRODUCTION
I am a third year Bachelor of Environments student, majoring in architecture. I was born and grew up in Malaysia and fortunately have the opportunity to come to Melbourne to complete my university studies in architecture. Occasionally, I still doubt my passion and ability to be an architect, but I am determined to surpass myself and accept the challenge to come in the future years. I had little experience in digital design except for the basic exposure to Rhino in Virtual Environments during first year. Other than that, I am more inclined towards traditional approach of making models.
In regards to digital architecture, although I am aware of the advantages and the unlimited possibilities in terms of designs that can come out of digital architecture, my knowledge in this aspect can still be considered as just slightly above none. Therefore, I am very much looking forward to the knowledge that I might obtained through Studio: Air in addition to brushing up my skills in many of the computer design software.
Technical knowledgeAdobe Illustrator
Adobe Photoshop
Adobe Indesign
Rhino 3D
Sketchup
CONCEPTUALISATION
PAGE 5
ACONCEPTUALISATION
A1: DESIGN FUTURINGTHE EDEN PROJECT
The Eden project is a giant, multi-domed greenhouse which houses plants from around the globe led by architect Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners also horticulture engineer, Tim Smitt.1 To date, it still functions to educate the public about the importance of relationship between plants, people and resources, with the aim of achieving a sustainable environment in the future through the study of plants.2
PROJECT CONTRIBUTION
The most interesting point of this project is that it not only satisfies the design brief, the architecture is also designed with consideration for the nature and sustainability of the environment. The idea of designing for the future is clearly evident in the entire design process, from site selection to design concept and even material selection. The existing site, originally an abundant pit composed mostly of clay which cannot support extensive plant life, was converted into a site with rich soil by mixing clay waste from the site with composed green waste, bringing life to the previously dead site.3
Moreover, the form and materials used are also well derived from nature. For example, in terms of form, the geodesic dome-like structure, also known as ‘’he-tri-sex’’, was inspired by the honeycomb of bees and also the multifaceted eyes of a fly. This form is adopted so that the structure is able to conform to the changing contours of the clayey soils on site.4
In addition, the enclosure of the structure is constructed of ETFE, which is a light-weight material (1% of the weight of glass) that is strong and self-cleaning besides having the ability to span large area without large footings and numerous internal supports, which in turn reduce the total embodied energy of the whole structure.5 Even the interior timber roof is derived from the pinecone ‘scales’ and are insulated with recycled newspaper.6
FUTURE POSSIBILITES
Such usage of forms and materials managed to further inspire future architecture and is evident in the Beijing National Aquatic Centre, also known as the Water Cube, where ETFE is used as enclosure cladding, whereas the geodesic form is evident in many pavilion and sculpture worldwide.7
CONCLUSION
Hence, it is apparent that the Eden project not only instigates change in the field of architecture, where sustainability gradually becomes the focus in terms of design approach and strategies, it also changes the thinking of public with the inspirational and educational display which emphasize on sustainability within the structure. To quote the architect himself, ‘I think this is a project we will return to time and again. Not just to see the structure, but to see the growth and change in this botanical kingdom’.
1. Kenny Bisseger, ‘The Eden Project’ (London, 2006) < http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/arch504ukgreenarch/CaseStudies/EdenProject1.pdf> [8 March 2015] (p. 1).2. Nicholas Grimshaw, ‘The Eden Project’, Grimshaw Architects, 2000, < http://grimshaw-architects.com/project/the-eden-project-the-core/> [10 March 2015].3,4. Kenny Bisseger, ‘The Eden Project’ (p. 3).5. Tom Harris, ‘How the Eden Project Works’, < http://www.solaripedia.com/files/461.pdf> [8 March 2015] (p. 2)6. Nicholas Grimshaw, ‘The Eden Project’. 7. Tristan Carfrae, ‘Engineering the Water Cube’, Architecture Australia, 95(2006), < http://architectureau.com/articles/practice-23/> [8 March 2015]8. Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), ‘Eden Project’, Architecture, 2001, < http://www.architecture.com/Explore/Buildings/EdenProject.aspx> [10 March 2015].
PAGE 6
IMAGE 1.1 (Top): Geodesic form and the use of ETFE exterior cladding of the Eden Project Biomes.IMAGE 1.2 (Right): Original abandoned site condition.IMAGE 1.3 (Bottom left): Nature-inspired timber roofing.IMAGE 1.4 (Bottom right): The Beijing National Aquatic Centre.
PAGE 7
A1: DESIGN FUTURINGSERPENTINE PAVILION
The Serpentine Pavilion, nicknamed ‘Cloud’, is designed by Japanese architect Sou Fujimoto in 2013 in a short 2 month time from design to execution in collaboration with structural engineers AECOM.1
PROJECT CONTRIBUTION
Moving away from the typical architecture definition where a building structure must consists of an enclosed space; Sou Fujimoto took the leap of creating a ‘translucent architecture’, where the pavilion itself blends into the site background and is semi-enclosed to allow people to explore the site in a new and diverse ways, i.e. via the architecture itself. The used of semi-transparent white steel tubes allow the structure to meld with the nature and even human while creating a vague view of the background to the approaching user. This instils curiosity in the user to interact with and explore further about the site and the architecture.2
The pavilion is constructed of repetitive cubic steel grid placed together at different depth which creates interesting spaces for the user to be innovative and decide on how the spaces are to be used. For instance, human sized simple cube can act as seating, viewing platform or even just as a partition of space.3 It is a fresh insight to see how the users are able to create their own experience within the architecture instead of having the architecture providing the experience that the architect wants the user to experience.
CONCLUSION
Although the Serpentine Pavilion is a temporary exhibition, it showcased a concept of architecture being part of the terrain and how an overall interesting and multi-purpose structure can be created from series of repetitive geometry.
1. AECOM, Serpentine Pavilion 2013 (London, AECOM,2013) <http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/Internet/Geographies/Europe/360%20Ingenuity%20Awards/serpentine_pavilion_2013.pdf> [13 March 2015] (p. 1).2. Daniel Portilla, Serpentine Pavilion/ Sou Fujimoto(Archdaily, 2013) < http://www.archdaily.com/384289/serpentine-pavilion-sou-fujimoto/> [13 March 2015].3. Daniel Portilla, Serpentine Pavilion/Sou Fujimoto.
IMAGE 2.1 (Top): The semi-transparent Serpentine Pavilion framing the backdrop of the siteIMAGE 2.2 (Bottom left): Semi-enclosed interior space allow view from inside to outside and vice-versaIMAGE 2.3 (Bottom right): Used of the different depth of cube to create multi-purpose space.Centre.
PAGE 8
PAGE 9
A2: DESIGN COMPUTATIONICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION 2013-14
The Research Pavilion constructed by the Institute for Computational Design (ICD) and the Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design (ITKE) is a pavilion designed with the integration of biomimicry and computational design where natural form was abstracted into architectural form with the aid of computing techniques.1
COMPUTING ON DESIGN PROCESS
Unlike bottom-up design process of the past where the form and concept is first decided upon before it is put into any computer software to be generated, computational design nowadays has led to a change to top-down design process where the form of an architecture is not fixed and is dependent on the input parameters. This is clearly evident in the Research Pavilion by ICD/ITKE where the result from the analysis of the performance and structural principles of protective shell of beetles’ wings and abdomen are translated into the ultimate form of the pavilion.2
COMPUTING ON PERFORMANCE
Computational design also allows one to explore more into performance-oriented design rather than designing without consideration of site response or structural integrity. For instance, in the Research Pavilion, the use of computation allows one to use the abstracted biomimetic principles and translate it into design rules for structural morphologies of architecture.3 This results in an overall geometry that will definitely be able to stand structurally sound without needing the aid of engineers while still being site responsive as it is able to blend into the surroundings.
COMPUTING ON OPPORTUNITIES
Numerous opportunities had been created with the aid of computational technology, especially in the field of fabrication. As seen clearly in the fabrication of the Research Pavilion, computational design has led to the integration of abstracted biomimetic principles and robotic fabrication technique where the abstracted principles from nature is translated into architectural form and each of the resulting component of the structure is then directly connected to a programmable industrial robots to be cut out using the robotic coreless winding method.4
Hence, it is important to note that computational design had integrated the whole design process from the start to the end, from research to conceptualisation to designing and finally fabrication and execution.
1,2,3,4. Achim Menges and Jan Knippers, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14, <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=11187> [15 March 2015].
IMAGE 3.1 (Top): ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion on site.IMAGE 3.2 (Bottom left): Shows integration of biology, computational design and digital fabrication technique used.IMAGE 3.3 (Bottom right): Structural Morphologies resulting from the analysis of beetles.Centre.
PAGE 10
PAGE 11
A2: DESIGN COMPUTATIONLONDON CITY HALL
Norman Foster was commissioned with the design of London City Hall in 1998 and the construction was completed in 2002.1
COMPUTING ON DESIGN PROCESS
Unlike the Research Pavilion where there is no basic form at the start of the design process, the London City Hall started with a sphere and was modified further using computational modelling based on the analysis of sunlight and air circulation around the building. For instance, the sphere was skewed into an egg-like shape that leans south in order to reduce the amount of direct sunlight.2 This would be very time-consuming and might not resolve the problem to its best solution without the aid of computational analysis and plug-in into the design process.
COMPUTING ON PERFORMANCE
Using advanced computational modelling technique, the most optimum overall geometry of the structure can be obtained in order to improve its performance in terms of energy. The relationship between computational design and performance of a building is clearly evident in the London City Hall where the skewed shape, result of computational analysis, minimised the amount of area exposed to direct sunlight to the very least besides allowing natural ventilation thus resulting in a reduction in energy used.3
1. Norman Foster, City Hall London, UK 1998-2002, Foster + Partners <http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/city-hall/> [16 March 2015].2. University of Idaho, London City Hall, < http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/arch504ukgreenarch/2009archs-casestudies/gla_pataky09.pdf> [16 March 2015]
IMAGE 4.1 (Top left): Sunlight analysis into the buidling structure. IMAGE 4.2 (Top right): Natural ventilation throughout the building.IMAGE 4.3 (Right): London City Hall exterior facade view.tre.
PAGE 12
PAGE 13
A3: COMPOSITION/ GENERATIONVOUSSOIR CLOUD
By generation-based design approach, it means that formation precedes form, where design becomes the thinking of generation through a series of algorithmic thinking.1 This is clearly evident in the Voussoir Cloud by IwamotoScott where the overall geometry is not decided right from the start but was manipulated in relation with the structural integrity, connection methods (tessellation) and material system.2
In the case of the Voussoir Cloud, it would be near impossible to execute the project due to the pure complexity of the structure using human labour as it consists of 2,300 petals that need to be cut, sorted out, folded and glued together.3 However, with the aid of parametric modelling and scripting, from the proportion and geometric data of each of the petal edge to adding connection points and even unfolding and labelling can be done using series of algorithmic series as input. The only manual labour would be assembling it.
One of the disadvantage of parametric modelling is that the level of complexity and professionality in terms of knowledge are not things that can be easily understood by normal people who are not professional in this field. This might lead to the design being not fully appreaciated.
1. Oxman and Oxman, ‘Theory of Digital Architecture’, (p.3).2. Lisa Iwamoto and Craig Scott, Voussoir Cloud, IwamotoScott Architecture, <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [18 March 2015].3. Lisa Iwamoto and Craig Scott, Integration through Computation, <http://cumincad.architexturez.net/system/files/pdf/acadia11_52.content.pdf> [18 March 2015].4. Lisa Iwamoto and Craig Scott, Integration through Computation.
PAGE 14
IMAGE 5.1 (Top Left): The Voussoir Cloud installed on site.IMAGE 5.2 (Top): Prototype of the Voussoir Cloud.IMAGE 5.3 (Bottom): Fabrication layout of each of the petals on the structure.
PAGE 15
METROPOL PARASOLA3: COMPOSITION/ GENERATION
The Metropol Parasol, being one of the largest projects completed by J. Mayer H. though does not break the boundaries of elaborate form; it features a new complexity by relating the form to the history of the site instead of attempting to blend into the surrounding.1
The canopy constructed of vertical laminated wood plates cut to the same pattern and assembled together resulted in an elaborate grid shell structure that contrasts with the bland surrounding thus enliven the city. In order for the initial complex idea to materialise, computation is needed to assist the modelling, labelling and fabrication of the structure in order for fast and economical assembly of the building structure.2 Although simple parametric script such as divide surface, blend and morph box are used, ultimately, without the aid of computational technique, it would be impossible, or to be more precise very tedious and time-consuming to model the structure, let even labelling it.3
However, parametric modelling does tend to be abused by architects or designers. For instance, in the Metropol Parasol, is it a must to incorporate the sectioning grid-shell pattern on the canopy or is it just a redundant feature since it does not serve any purpose in terms of performance of the structure other than aesthetics? Often or not, many of the architects are prone to use parametric design to create exotic and elaborate forms to make an impression and icon for the design.1. J. Mayer H. Architect, Metropol Parasol, Arcspace, 2012, <http://www.arcspace.com/features/j-mayer-h-architects/metropol-parasol/> [18 March 2015].2. Peter Bradys, ‘Computation Works: The Buidling of Algorithm Thoughts’, Architectural Design, 83 (2013), p.9.3. J. Mayer H. Architect, Metropol Parasol.
PAGE 16
IMAGE 6.1 (Top): Walkway on top of the canopyIMAGE 6.2 (Right): Show the connection method adopted.IMAGE 6.3 (Bottom Left): Overall Metropol Parasol.IMAGE 6.4 (Bottom Right): Section through Metropol Parasol.
PAGE 17
CONCLUSIONArchitecture has progressed and advanced following the turn of the century from hand-drawn to computational drafting and now gradually progressing into parametric modelling and scripting. The aid of computational modelling has led to more complex and interesting overall geometry in buildings these days, some being extravagantly bombastic whereas the others being more logical and follows a specific system of rules.
My intended design approach is to make full use of the parametric modelling technique to create a design with a balance between exquisiteness and subtlety as the site is located in the middle of Mother Nature. It is vital that the design is able to respect the site while still achieving the overall aesthetics and functionality. Of course, most importantly, it is my utmost intention to design a space beneficial to the users at the site, be it visitors or locals, which is multi-purpose depending on how the user perceive the space similar to that of Serpentine Pavilion.
PAGE 18
LEARNING OUTCOMEPrior to commencing in Studio: Air, I have close to no knowledge in regards to the more complex aspect of architectural computing, such as algorithmic scripting and parametric modelling. For the past few weeks, after experimenting with Grasshopper, it has open up my eyes to the infinite possibilities that computational modelling can offer to us, be it the numerous interesting geometrical outcomes just by developing a mere surface using different commands or the ability to plug in site information into the parametric script so that the design is more site responsive. Being a person who is more bogged down with pens and pencils, the knowledge of the power of parametric modelling has sparked my interest to explore further in the field of computational design and to incorporate it into my future designs.
PAGE 19
APPENDIX: ALGORITHM SKETCHBOOK
PAGE 20
In the process of researching for precedent, I have come to realise that many of the parametric modelling technique is used to create exciting and complex geometrical patterns either on the façade or as the enclosure of the designed structure. Hence, while experimenting in Grasshopper, I find the Triangulation and Box Morphing commands are two of the more interesting commands as it is able to create different patterns on a surface which can essentially be the enclosure of my design.
From the look of the outcomes, it is interesting to see how while Triangulation command create an opened canopy, the Box Morphing command result in interesting geometries on the surface of the enclosure. Both of these patterns could be merged together to create spaces which is semi-enclosed, exposed and enclosed depending the experience intended and the functionality of the space.
PAGE 21
1. Achim Menges and Jan Knippers, ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14’, Universitat Stuttgart (2014) < http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=11187> [15 March 2015].
2. AECOM, Serpentine Pavilion 2013 (London, AECOM, 2013) <http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/Internet/Geographies/Europe/360%20Ingenuity%20AAward/serpentine_pavilion_2013pdf> [13 March 2015] (p.1)
3. Daniel Portilla, ‘Serpentine Pavilion/ Sou Fujimoto’, Archdaily (2013) < http://www.archdaily.com/384289/serpentine-pavilion-sou-fujimoto/> [13 March 2015].
4. J. Mayer H. Architect, ‘Metropol Parasol’, Arcspace (2012) < http://www.arcspace.com/features/j-mayer-h-architects/metropol-parasol/> [18 March 2015].
5. Lisa Iwamoto and Craig Scott, ‘Voussoir Cloud’, IwamotoScott Architecture, < http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [ 18 March 2015].
6. Lisa Iwamoto and Craig Scott, Integration through Computation < http://cumincad.architexturez.net/system/files/pdf/acadia11_52.content.pdf> [18 March 2015].
7. Norman Foster, ‘City Hall London, UK 1998-2002’, Foster + Partners < http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/city-hall/%3E> [ 16 March 2015].
8. Peter Bradys, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithm Thoughts’, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), p.9.
9. Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Theory of Digital Architecture. (London: Routledge, 2014), (p.3).
REFERENCES
PAGE 22
1.1 https://cactuslouise.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/eden.jpg1.2 http://grimshaw-architects.com/media/cache/24/02/24023245aefc956b5049f84f1dac55fc.jpg1.3 http://grimshaw-architects.com/media/cache/62/5e/625e7ef2654e176096c4e9798ab615b2.jpg1.4 http://innovativebuildings.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Water-Cube2.jpg
2.1 http://www.serpentinegalleries.org/sites/default/files/styles/half_width_custom_user_large_1x/public/images/B%20image%20serpentine_gallery_pavilion_sou_fujimoto_2013_1.jpg?itok=QSM_qYMe2.2 https://davisla.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/serpentine-gallery-pavilion-2013-sou-fujimoto-detail-entrance.jpg2.3 http://www.designboom.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/sou-fujimoto-serpentine-gallery-pavilion-designboom-02.jpg 3.1 http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/53b21346c07a806b4b0001bb_icd-itke-research-pavilion-2015-icd-itke-university-of-stuttgart_icd-itke_rp13-14_image20-1000x707.jpg3.2 http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/wp-content/gallery/rp2013-14-process/icd-itke_rp13-14_process09.jpg3.3 http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/wp-content/gallery/rp2013-14-process/icd-itke_rp13-14_process10.jpg 4.1 http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1027/development/img13.jpg4.2 http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1027/development/img14.jpg4.3 http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/1701663/img3.jpg 5.1 http://payload.cargocollective.com/1/4/140786/1871783/IwamotoScott%20VC_Figure06s_16_1040.jpg5.2 http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Journals/Graphic/k/o/t/20analysis.gif5.3 http://cumincad.architexturez.net/system/files/pdf/acadia11_52.content.pdf
6.1 http://www.arcspace.com/CropUp/-/media/756891/Metropol-Parasol-J-Maher-H-11-franck6519.jpg6.2 http://www.jmayerh.de/19-0-Metropol-Parasol.html6.3 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Espacio_Parasol_Sevilla.jpg6.4 http://www.designboom.com/cms/images/jayme01/metropole/met17.jpg & http://api.ning.com/files/Ey2-oX-rSOvaST2OVE8uBxTO5h1ISBr4WRK5aafQ1Np35ZjQn*xGnn2XrGtPRBvkS5IpNKZwlNNoMZT2Z5PcHzKSkQ2u4wIf/SEV_Sections2.jpg
REFERENCESIMAGES
PAGE 23
BCRITERIA DESIGN
CRITERIA DESIGN
CONTENT
B1. RESEARCH FIELD27
B2. CASE STUDY 1.035
B3. CASE STUDY 2.041
B4: TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT49
B5: TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPE51
B6: TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL55
CONCLUSION & LEARNING OUTCOMES56
APPENDIX: ALGORITHM SKETCHBOOK57
B1: RESEARCH FIELD : BIOMIMICRYICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION 2011
OPPORTUNITIES
Using the design approach of biomimicry, it allows one to explore the integration of performance capacity of biological structures and translate it into architecture using computational method which might result in a range of different geometries which are structurally sound. Also, due to the modular arrangement of the different geometries, this allows the creation of freeform enclosure surface. This is evident in the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion where the integration of performance of sea urchins’ plate skeleton morphology allows the complex morphology of the pavilion to be constructed of only thin plywood sheets. In addition, the modular arrangement of each of the plywood sheets results in interesting form, where it consists of two distinct spatial entities (large opened space and smaller interstitial space between the two layers) which reflect the double layer shell of the sea urchins. 4
FABRICATION CONCERNS
In terms of fabrication, many of the times problems are faced in terms of joints and connection between elements. Therefore, with the integration of biomimicry, this allows one to explore more as to how nature makes connection between each, single element. For instance, in the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion, it is evident that the finger joints connection between each of the polygonal element is a reflection of the finger-like calcite protrusions used to connect the edges of the shell of sea urchins.5
Biomimicry is a design approach in architecture that seeks sustainable solutions to human challenges by imitating nature’s patterns and strategies.
The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion designed by the Institute for Computational Design (ICD) and the Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design (ITKE), also with the students of University of Stuttgart is an example of architecture designed using the biomimicry approach. The pavilion structure consists of plywood sheets of 6.5mm thick slotted together using finger joints similar to that of how sea urchins’ shell plates notch together to one another.1
DESIGN IMPLICATIONS
By adopting biomimicry design method, this result in the designed structure to be constructed based on logical rules which are commonly reflected in nature. For instance, the fundamental properties of biological structure, such as heterogeneity and hierarchy, are evident in the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion.2 In terms of heterogeneity, this can be observed in the fact that the cell sizes are not constant and adapt to local curvature and discontinuities. Moreover, in terms of hierarchy, it is evident that the pavilion is organized in a two-level hierarchical system where two different connection methods are adopted for each of the level.3
1,2,3,4,5. 1,2,3,4. Achim Menges and Jan Knippers, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011, <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> [16 April 2015].
PAGE 26
IMAGE 1.1 (Top): Shows overall form of the ICD/ITKE Research PavilionIMAGE 1.2 (Bottom left): Shows the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion being lit up during the night as light streams through the small gapsIMAGE 1.3 (Bottom right): Shows the integration of the performance of shells of sea urchins being integrated into the performance of the structure.
PAGE 27
B2: CASE STUDY 1.0THE MORNING LINE
Collaboration between architect Aranda Lasch, artist Matthew Ritchie and Daniel Bosia of Arup’s AGU, commissioned by Thyssen-Bomemisza Art Contemporary, The Morning Line is an open cellular structure that incorporate the convergence of art, science and technology.1 By that, it means that each modular component of the structure is interchangeable and can adapt to changes in surrounding space.
The main concept behind The Morning Line is it being a modular structure, consisting of fractal building block that grows and is scaled by a fixed ratio in three dimensions to create lines, spaces and structure of the piece. This means that the fractal building block align itself along the curves which reflect the organization of modular fractal geometries following a recursive pattern or script.2
However, in order to improve the aesthetics aspect of the structure, the final structure is constructed using blackened frames which are based on patterns generated on each of the surface of the fractal geometries.3 Despite the fact that the surfaces are converted into polylines of blackened frames, it still follows the main concept that is series of geometries following the curve pattern based on a certain rules set up.
1. Thyssen-Bomemisza Art Contemporary, The Morning Line - Matthew Ritchie Aranda Lasch/ ARUP, < http://www.tba21.org/augarten_activities/49/page_2> [15 April 2015]. 2. Thyssen-Bomemisza Art Contemporary, The Morning Line - Matthew Ritchie Aranda Lasch/ ARUP.3. Thyssen-Bomemisza Art Contemporary, The Morning Line - Matthew Ritchie Aranda Lasch/ ARUP.
PAGE 28
IMAGE 2.1 (Top Left): Shows overall form of the Morning LineIMAGE 2.2 (Top): Also shows the overall form of the Morning Line but in a different site reflecting its portabilityIMAGE 2.3 (Bottom Left): Shows how the pattern aligning itself according to the curve patternIMAGE 2.4 (Bottom Right): Shows the scaling of a three-dimensional geometry into a tetrahedron which forms part of the modular geometry.
B2: CASE STUDY 1.0
Species 1: Number of Fractal Steps
Species 2:Number of times mirrored
Species 3:Types of curve
PAGE 30
Species 2:Number of times mirrored
Species 3:Types of curve
Species 4:2 intersecting curves (Manipulate top curve)
Species 4:2 intersecting curves (Manipulate bottom curve)
PAGE 31
B2: CASE STUDY 1.0ANALYSIS
SELECTION CRITERIA
1. STURCTURAL FEASIBILITYEase in connection between the base geometries.
2. FORM FLEXIBILITYSimple base modular geometry that allows for interesting final form of the structure
3. INTERACTIVEAble to create space for interaction between human and human also human and nature
4. EVOCATIVEExperiential exploration of the design and site by the users
PAGE 32
SPECIES 1
Species 1 involved manipulating the number of segments which result in the creation of different truncated geometry. In addition, exploration of the effect of the number and sequence of fractal steps on the final form was also conducted. It was discovered that while manipulating the sequence of fractal steps result in form with openings at different levels, the overall final form is highly restricted to a vertical pyramidal shape for both 3 and 4 base segments/sides. However, it was speculated that the base geometry created using 3 segments has more design potential than that of 4 segments. This is therefore investigated in the next species.
SPECIES 2
Species 2 involved exploring the connection between base modular geometry (3/4 sides) using mirror command to connect one to another. It was realised that when the base geometry was mirrored a few times, the forms created by the 4-sided geometry are more dynamic. However, as the number of times it was mirrored at random surface, it was observed that the truncated tetrahedron base geometry resulted in more interesting form, such as the ability to spread horizontally across the landscape, clustering together to form
patterns or even curving to form openings. In contrast, the 4-sided modular geometry turned out to be too complex causing the detailed to be compromised. Therefore, from here, it was decided that the truncated tetrahedron is the more suitable choice as the base modular geometry and is further experimented in Species 3.
SPECIES 3
For Species 3, truncated tetrahedron was scripted to align itself along a curve. Using parametric modelling, this allows the form created by stacking of tetrahedron to change according to the change of curve which led to convenience in exploring the many possibilities as seen in the iterations created. However, the iterations were still limited by the two-dimensionality due to use of only one curve.
SPECIES 4
Hence, in species 4, experiment to test the ability to create a three-dimensional form was conducted. The results prove to be interesting which are to be investigated more in the next section in terms of functionality and architectural application.
PAGE 33
B2: CASE STUDY 1.0DESIGN SPECULATION
Upon initial exploration of modular geometry and form finding using repetitive base geometry and curves, 4 iterations that satisfies the selection criteria and had the most potential to be developed further in terms of form and function was selected.
The first highlighted iteration is a two dimensional aligning of base geometry along a curve. The outcome, although simple, when laid out across the landscape, it is able to act as a pathway that provides both dynamism and functionality to the site. For instance, the ups and downs of the irregular geometry allow the user to trace their path along the geometry and experience different views at different levels (inspired by Species 1) also at different angles. On further exploration of the site, this concept can be coupled with the various interesting points on the site to create an evocative experience to the users.
The second iteration also uses similar method of aligning geometry along the curves, but this time two curves intersecting one another is adopted in order to create a 3 dimensional structure. Through this, rather than just arranging geometries horizontally, the vertical aspect of the form is investigated. This results in the creation of an overhead structure, thatcan function as just pure division of space for different experiential effect as achieved in
this iteration or it can also function as a roof enclosure to the structure.
As for the third iteration emphasised here, it adopts the method of mirroring the geometry along different surfaces. An interesting discovery is that rather than all the geometries being connected to one another, changing the mirror plane can result in individual element that is separated from the main structure. This concept of collective and separation is interesting as it allows the user to choose how they want to perceive the space to be. For instance, a regular user of the site would prefer an individual spot whereas visitors would have preference towards the collective space to understand more about the site.
The last iteration that I would like to highlight combines all the above mentioned ideas into a final form. It is evident from the usage of geometry spreading out horizontally, vertical overhead roof and also the different usage of space (sitting and walking). Whilst the outcome is simple, it demonstrated the combination of the many concepts discovered through the various iterations into a single form. On further exploration and incorporation of important features of the site into the form finding process might lead to a potentially interesting form in the end.
PAGE 34
ITERATION 1
ITERATION 2
ITERATION 3 ITERATION 4
PAGE 35
B3: CASE STUDY 2.0REVERSE ENGINEERING
The Eureka Pavilion, designed by Marcus Barnett Landscape Architects in collaboration with NEX architecture, is an ideal example of biomimicry in architecture. This is because not only does it mimic the patterns of plants in terms of shapes and geometry, even the functioning of the building also mimics that of a plant. In the Eureka Pavilion, the pattern for the structural geometry was obtained using primary timber capillaries. In addition to that, the method for which it diverts water away from the structure also reflect the way in which water runs down the capillaries walls of a plant cell.1
The main design concept of the Eureka Pavilion is to analyse the cellular structure of plants and their growth processes. This analysis is done using computer software and the results obtained are then inputted into a set of computer algorithms such that the resulting form mimics that of nature growth.2
Through this case study, not only am I interested in the field of biomimicry but also the method of creating patterned openings rather than purely blank opened space by applying different patterns using algorithm technique.
1. Nex Architecture, Times Eureka Pavilion, < http://www.archdaily.com/?p=142509 > [ 21 April 2015].2. Nex Architecture, Times Eureka Pavilion.
PAGE 36
IMAGE 3.1 (Left): Overall form of the Eureka PavilionIMAGE 3.2 (Top): Section view of the Eureka Pavilion and its scale in comparison to human sizeIMAGE 3.3 (Bottom): Algorithm pathway adopted in order to design the Eureka Pavilion
B3: CASE STUDY 2.0REVERSE ENGINEERING
1 2 3
5 6
CURVE POPULATE 2D VORONOI 2D REGION INTERSECTION
CURVE- 0.25
21
7
PAGE 38
- 0.25
4
7
6
5
4
3
2
1 Unfold the rectangular polysurface into 2D form and populate each surface using the Populate 2D commandApply Voronoi 2D to the outer rectangular form and use region intersection to limit the voronoi cells within the unfolded geometry. Points are adjusted so that the edges match up when it is folded up
Offset and trim voronoi cells’ edges
The surface are folded up to ensure that the sides of the voronoi matches up
Populate 2D and Voronoi 2D is applied to the outer rectangular form and region intersection is used to limit the voronoi cells within the voronoi pattern created in Step 2
Cull index is used to remove the cells at the side to create openings
Each of the surfaces are folded up to obtain the final form
POPULATE 2D VORONOI 2D REGION INTERSECTION
OFFSET CURVE653
PAGE 39
REVERSE ENGINEERINGB3: CASE STUDY 2.0
With the aid of Grasshopper, the Eureka Pavilion is not difficult to reproduce. The main similarities between the reverse engineered and the original structure is that both has a secondary voronoi pattern within the main voronoi pattern. Also, the sides of the main voronoi pattern are connected to one another at the edges of the rectangular form.
In contrast, the difference between both structures lies in the fact that the secondary voronoi pattern in the original version was made 3-D so that it is constructible, whereas the reverse engineered version was left as polyline.
Interesting concept to be explored further:1. Limited geometry form - therefore interesting form to be explored using Kangaroo plugin.
2. Types of patterns, other than Voronoi, to be applied onto the surface to create various shadow patterning.
3. Position of the semi-opened openings rather than the whole external facade using cull pattern or cull index.
4. Application of patternings onto the surface of a structure to create semi-opened or semi-transparent window opening.
Reverse Engineered Ver.
Original version
PAGE 40
With the aid of Grasshopper, the Eureka Pavilion is not difficult to reproduce. The main similarities between the reverse engineered and the original structure is that both has a secondary voronoi pattern within the main voronoi pattern. Also, the sides of the main voronoi pattern are connected to one another at the edges of the rectangular form.
In contrast, the difference between both structures lies in the fact that the secondary voronoi pattern in the original version was made 3-D so that it is constructible, whereas the reverse engineered version was left as polyline.
Interesting concept to be explored further:1. Limited geometry form - therefore interesting form to be explored using Kangaroo plugin.
2. Types of patterns, other than Voronoi, to be applied onto the surface to create various shadow patterning.
3. Position of the semi-opened openings rather than the whole external facade using cull pattern or cull index.
4. Application of patternings onto the surface of a structure to create semi-opened or semi-transparent window opening.
B4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENTITERATIONS
TRIGRIDUnary Force = 500 Rest Length = 1
TRIGRIDUnary Force = 500Rest Length = 1
TRIGRIDUnary Force = 500Rest Length = 1
VORONOIUnary Force = 350Rest Length = 1
VORONOIUnary Force = 400Rest Length = 1
HEXAGRIDUnary Force = 450Rest Length = 1.2
HEXAGRIDUnary Force = 500 Rest Length = 1
RADIAL GRIDUnary Force = 500Rest Length = 1
SPECIES 1: FORM FINDING
PAGE 42
ITERATIONSB4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT
SPECIES 2: PATTERN FINDING
Hexagonal pattern Diamond pattern Triangulated pattern
PAGE 43
SPECIES 3: CULL PATTERN
B4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENTITERATIONS
PAGE 44
B4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENTITERATIONS
SPECIES 4: CULLED INDEX & TRIANGULAR PATTERN
PAGE 45
B4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENTITERATIONS
SPECIES 5: LIST ITEM & VORONOI PATTERN
PAGE 46
B4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENTANALYSIS
SELECTION CRITERIA REVISIT
1. CONSTRUCTION FEASIBILITYEase in connection between the components
2. INTERACTIVEAble to create space for interaction between human and human also human and nature
3. EVOCATIVEExperiential exploration of the design and site by the users
PAGE 47
B4: TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENTDESIGN SPECULATION
ITERATION 1 ITERATION 2ITERATION 3 ITERATION 4
PAGE 48
From multiple attempts to create several different species and iterations that are fairly or completely distinctive to one another, four iterations that showed potential to be refined and developed further for the final design were selected.
Iteration 1 highlighted adopt the idea of applying series of patterning on a surface using lunchbox plugin following that of the Eureka Pavilion. Although all three hexagonal, diamond and triangulated pattern create interesting results, however, the main reason this was chosen is because of its construction feasibility as compared to other patterns experimented. Indentations at the intersections of two strips allow for the interlocking of two strips together.This is highly convenient with the aid of parametric modelling. The connection is to be explored further in the next section (Prototype).
Iteration 2, 3 and 4 involved exploring the method of creating openings on a surface and applying pattern to the openings created which was also inspired by the concept adopted in the Eureka Pavilion.
In addition, the form were derived from the usage of Kangaroo plugin which resulted in a more flexible form.These 3 forms are selected as it is evident to have the potential to function as a semi-enclosure space spanning across landscape for which users are able to interact both with the site and the design.
Iteration 2 firstly starts off with purely cullling the voronoi cells created on the surface to create openings. This form was selected as the overall form of the structure is still evident with several openings attached to the surface. The position of the openings can be integrated to site feature such as sun path diagram.
In Iteration 3 & 4, I begin to think about applying pattern within the culled voronoi cells. In Iteration 3, triangular pattern was adopted whearas voronoi pattern was opted in Iteration 4. It is evident in both interations that the application of patterning within openings spice up the surface such that rather than being flat surface with holes punched out of it, semi-enclosed openings are created. These semi-enclosed openings allow not only the filtering of sunlight but also resulted in interesting patterned shadow during both day and night (due to sunlight and artificial lightings).
PAGE 49
B5: TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE 1 - HEXAGONAL PATTERN
Moving beyond form finding and geometry generation through parametric modelling, computational modelling is also utlised to translate virtual computer model to constructable actual form or structure. In order to test the shadow effect of light on pattern, the hexagonal cells are unrolled and added with tabs using grasshopper and sent for laser cutting. This reduces the time and effort required to cut each of the hexagonal cells manually. Similar method was done for the skewed square pattern.
After construction of the hexagonal grid form, it is tested for the effects of light falling onto the surface. After multiple attempts, it is realised that the shadowy effect is quite apparent and dynamic based on the angle of the light. The effect created when light is shone from the side is more evocative than when it is shone from above.
PAGE 50
B5: TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE 2 - SKEWED SQUARE PATTERN
Similarly, unrolling surface and laser cutting each of the strips are done for the skewed square pattern surface. However, in this case as the resulting form consists of strips rather than individual cells, it can be slotted into one another along the folding edges which result in a more simple, but stable and constructable connection. Unlike the hexagonal cells which are glued together to one another, methods of connection are to be explored further.
The effects of light on the pattern is also experimented on the skewed square shape. However, the effects are not as apparent and dynamic as that of the hexagonal shape. Despite that fact, it is still inter
PAGE 51
B6: DESIGN PROPOSALSITE ANALYSIS
The design brief required us to design a surprising three dimensional form that can functioned to create new possibilities for life and provide contribution to and benefit the stakeholders of the site. Upon analysis of the Merri Creek trail, the highlighted area is chosen as the proposed site.
One of the main reasons for choosing the site is because it is located within the view range of users from all angles (from main road Gaffney Street, Merri Creek Trail, the bridge and the community area along Lake Coburg). This will invoke curiosity in the users, be it regular or visitors, to explore more in regards to the design.
In addition, it is also at the interconnection of the lake and land, therefore this encourages interaction between human and animals (ducks and birds).
Besides that, being located within the area of activity hotspots such as barbeque area, stage and playgrounds, this allows the design to relate interactively with the site and users of the site.
B6: DESIGN PROPOSALFORM FINDING
View from Gaffney Street
View from Bridge
View from Merri Creek Trail
View from BBQ & playground
PAGE 54
Adopting the technique developed from previous iterations and integrating it wiith site information, a pavilion that stretched across the landscape at the proposed site is achieved. Firstly, the major view points from all directions by the users are identified. In order to invoke curiosity in the users, anchor point is placed along the line of visions so that the openings are not created at that angle. Next, technique of using Kangaroo plugin to blow up a geometry is applied to create an overall form for the pavilion. Then, patternings are applied to the surface. Initially, as prototyped, I intended to apply the hexagonal grid pattern onto the well in the centre of the surface as it creates the most evocative pattern of all. However, due to technical issues, it was unattainable and thus simple voronoi and triangular pattern is adopted.
The major function of the designed pavilion is to add spice to the site as it is one of the major acitivty areas along the whole Merri Creek Trail, be it for local or visitors. This pavilion, firstly, act as a marker point for people to refer to as it is easily seen from all directions. Next, the patterning on the enclosure roof surface allows for experential effect especially during the night when spotlight is shone upon from the sides.
PAGE 55
B7: LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOME
Through this design process, my ability to make a case for proposals has improved through the consistent feedback of my work each week from the tutor and reflecting on it thereafter. Through this, I had realized that for every step that we take in terms of design process, it is important to evaluate the limitations and possibilities that it can provide us with and not just blindly following instructions without having a deep critical analysis of the knowledge obtained.
In terms of computational techniques, after multiple attempts at reverse engineering and experimenting with different scripts from the forum in order to push the iterations to its boundaries, I finally had the slightest bit of knowledge in terms of computational and parametric modelling. Also, through the numerous case-study projects that led to multiple failures and manual trimming due to insufficient knowledge in terms of grasshopper, although frustrating at times, had led to a clearer understanding of the fundamental logic underlying algorithm patterns and also the limitless boundaries that computational modelling offers to designers.
Through research and looking for design projects that relate to my research field, only did I realized that there are many projects out there that might look complex from the exterior view of it but in actual fact can be obtained using Grasshopper and various plugins. It is apparent that computation has gradually become the dominant method of designing especially among the younger generation.
As a whole, looking at precedents and tweaking with parametric modelling script provided had widen my horizon in the field of computational modelling and a better understanding as to how each component function and are connected to one another. Although manually writing up a whole script for a design structure might still be a bit of an extreme request on my side, however, I had had the basic understanding of parametric modelling and how it can be applied into design process through the reverse engineering exercise and matrix table.
PAGE 56
APPENDIX
PAGE 57
REFERENCES
1.1 http://static1.squarespace.com/static/51eed906e4b0953024980af9/52756b1fe4b0144957d2f690/52756b20e4b08c252c72a381/1383426850066/1.jpg1.2 http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/icd-imagedb/Web_ICD_ResearchPavilion_2011.jpg1.3 http://www.detail-online.com/uploads/pics/431_800_709_01.jpg
2.1 http://www.tb-cms.org/data/exhibition/103/3384.jpg2.2 http://images.andrearosengallery.com/www_andrearosengallery_com/03___Photo_by_Uli_Deck0.jpg2.3 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3098/3191703998_315e2450e9_b.jpg2.4 http://www.cambridgeliteraryreview.org/wp-content/uploads/3376593247_e0674d728e_b2.jpg
3.1 http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/1307636154-image-final-d.jpg3.2 http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/1307636090-plans-final-b-528x470.jpg3.3 http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/eureka_pavilion_n150611_11.jpg
IMAGES
1. Achim Menges and Jan Knippers, ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011’, Universitat Stuttgart (2011) < http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> [16 April 2015].
2. Nex Architecture, ‘Times Eureka Pavilion’, < http://www.archdaily.com/142509/times-eureka-pavilion-nex-architecture/> [21 April 2015].
3. Thyssen- Bomemisza Art Contemporary, ‘The Morning Line- Matthew Ritchie Aranda Lasch/ ARUP’, < http://www.tba21.org/augarten_activities/49/page_2> [16 April 2015].
PAGE 58