un-disciplined cmu

186
8” 16” UN- DISCIPLINED CMU A Design-Build Masonry Architecture Studio

Upload: marcelo-lopez-dinardi

Post on 24-Jul-2016

229 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Undisciplined CMU is the book that documents the second iteration of a project in which a construction is developed as part of a 2nd year undergraduate architecture studio focused on masonry. The material used is, as suggested above, the concrete masonry unit or CMU, is the single most utilized construction element in the industry besides dry wall. It is at the same time the least considered in its capacity to produce work that goes beyond its limited use as infill wall. For this studio the material is investigated as a given condition, it is inquired, analyzed formally but also culturally. Undisciplined CMU is a research project that evidences the capacity of a work to overcome its expected disciplinary use by undoing its assumed role. School of Architecture, College of Architecture and Design, New Jersey Institute of Technology, 2015.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8”

8”

16”

UN-DISCIPLINEDCMU

A Design-Build Masonry Architecture Studio

Page 2: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 3: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

BUILDIT IFYOUWANT

Marcelo López-Dinardi | Pier Paolo Pala | Chau Tran | Yuliya Veligurskaya

Page 4: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Originated in a 2nd year undergraduate architecture design-build studio competition at the School of Architecture of the New Jersey Institute of Technology, the UNDISCIPLINED CMU (concrete masonry unit) assembly was an assignment intended to produce a mock-up of a paper-project for a police station in Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Although the competition had requirements and agenda of its own, the design studio expanded the given program and material theme. Shifting from the expected representation of the building in a mock-up, the focus was given to the exploration of the material parameters and cultural dimension of the project on the given site of a 6’ x 8’ x 8’ volume. The typical CMU was chosen due to its commonplace status in the construction industry stimulating unexpected readings challenging its cultural implications. The design process was not linear and it required simultaneous exploration and production through digital, physical, and analog methods. The immersion into systematic thinking that

was embodied in the framework of the studio was key to the iterative process that allowed the final result, it is the product of the networked connections of the masonry industry and its architectural aspirations. The project also went through moments of uncertainty and frustration, as the results seemed always unpredictable or unexpected. Each step forward was treated as an accomplishment with excitement, yet research and critical inquiry were daily ingredients that encouraged the studio. Primarily this publication documents the build (or CMU-Monument), however, it showcases the individual work of a group of students including the final selection from which this project was based. While the built project is meant to last a year, this book is a long-lasting record of the process that produced it and the varied realities that were provoked through it. The book is a counter-cronology, as you advance on it you will encounter the projects and exercises that led to the constructed object.

Page 5: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 6: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

TABLE OFCONTENTS

Page 7: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

p.8

p.44

p.98

p.130

p.158

p.182

BUILD EXPLORATIONS

BUILD IT IF YOU WANT

CMU OVERLOAD

STUDIO PROJECTS

INITIAL DRAWINGS

AFTERWORD

Page 8: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

6’8’

8’

Spatial Parameter

8’

8’

8’

8’

8’6’

8

Page 9: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Material Parameter—Masonry

9

Page 10: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Starting Point—Linear Aggregation Drawings

10

Page 11: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Study Models of Cast Stone and CMU Walls

11

Page 12: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Study Model of Cast Stone and CMU Walls

12

Page 13: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Study Models of Cast Stone Walls

13

Page 14: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Drawing Exploration with CMU

14

Page 15: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Drawing Exploration with CMU

15

Page 16: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

CMU Exploration—Initial Cuts

16

Page 17: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

CMU—Final Cuts

8”

8”

16”

17

Page 18: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Diagram—Susceptible to Breaking CMU Cuts

18

Susceptible to BreakingBecomes Rubble/ Scrap

Page 19: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Diagram—Susceptible to Breaking CMU Cuts

19

Susceptible to BreakingBecomes Rubble/ Scrap

Page 20: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

20

Selected CMU Cuts

Page 21: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

21

Structural Concerns

Page 22: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Structural Concerns

22

Page 23: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Structural Concerns

23

Page 24: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Physical Model—Material: Foam Core

24

Page 25: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Physical Model—Material: Foam Core

25

Page 26: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Physical Model—Material: Foam Core

26

Page 27: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Physical Model—Material: Foam Core

27

Page 28: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Physical Model—Material: Foam Core

28

Page 29: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 30: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Basic Cuts—Longitudinal, Transversal, Diagonal

30

Page 31: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Diagram—CMU Cuts Matrix

31

Page 32: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Wall 1

Page 33: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Wall 2

Page 34: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Wall 3

Page 35: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Wall 4

Page 36: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Wall 5

Page 37: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Digital Model

37

Page 38: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Physical Model Explorations

38

Diagram—Wall Complexity

Wall 1High

Wall 2Intermediate

Wall 3Low

Wall 4Intermediate

Wall 5High

Page 39: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

39

Diagram—View and Perception

Page 40: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

40

Build Physical Model—Material Explorations

Page 41: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

41

Build Physical Model—Material Explorations

Page 42: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 43: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 44: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

BUILDITIFYOUWANT

Page 45: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

INSTRUCTIONS

1. Decide you want to build a monument to Concrete Masonry Units.

2. Convince a group of friends and masons to join you in this endeavor.

3. Acquire 353 CMUs plus additional 5% for contingency, and mortar.

4. Acquire or rent a masonry saw.

5. Create a concrete pad 6’x8’x4” thick; draw plan on pad.

6. Cut the CMUs in no less than 14 different ways, as illustrated in the following pages.

7. Divide the CMUs into batches corresponding with the order of assembly, as shown.

8. Using the Construction Documents (included), and will (not included), begin assembly.

9. Finish assembly; if accomplished in two days or less, marvel at your insanity.

10. Celebrate by documenting the process in book form and eating brick oven pizza.

45

Page 46: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type A Cut

EQ.

EQ.

A.1

A.1

BATCH 1—8BATCH 2—7BATCH 3—7BATCH 4—9BATCH 5—3BATCH 6—5

TOTAL—39

Page 47: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type B Cut

B.1

B.1

EQ.

EQ.

BATCH 1—10BATCH 2—10BATCH 3—18BATCH 4—11BATCH 5—4BATCH 6—2

TOTAL—55

Page 48: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type C Cut

C.1

C.1

EQ.

EQ.

BATCH 1—10BATCH 2—7BATCH 3—13BATCH 4—7BATCH 5—3BATCH 6—2

TOTAL—42

Page 49: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type D Cut

D.1

CORNERTOCORNER

D.1

BATCH 1—10BATCH 2—10BATCH 3—18BATCH 4—11BATCH 5—4BATCH 6—2

TOTAL—33

Page 50: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type E Cut

E.1

E.1

CORNERTOCORNER

BATCH 1—6BATCH 2—4BATCH 3—13BATCH 4—7BATCH 5—5BATCH 6—3

TOTAL—38

Page 51: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type AB Cut

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

AB.1

AB.1

AB.1

AB.1

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—0BATCH 4—0BATCH 5—4BATCH 6—6

TOTAL—10

Page 52: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type AC Cut

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

AC.1

AC.1

AC.1

AC.1

EQ.

EQ.

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—0BATCH 4—0BATCH 5—7BATCH 6—2

TOTAL—9

Page 53: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type AE Cut

AE.1

EQ.

CORNERTOCORNER

EQ.

AE.1

AE.1

AE.1

EQ.

EQ.

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—0BATCH 4—0BATCH 5—7BATCH 6—7

TOTAL—14

Page 54: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type BC Cut

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.EQ.

EQ.

BC.1

BC.1

BC.1

BC.1

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—3BATCH 4—0BATCH 5—7BATCH 6—4

TOTAL—14

Page 55: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type BD Cut

EQ.

EQ.

BD.2BD.1

BD.2BD.1

EQ.

EQ.

CORNERTOCORNER

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—12BATCH 4—11BATCH 5—6BATCH 6—8

TOTAL—37

Page 56: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type CD Cut

EQ.

EQ.

CORNERTOCORNER

EQ.

EQ.

CD.2

CD.2

CD.1

CD.1

CORNERTOCORNER

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—5BATCH 4—2BATCH 5—7BATCH 6—6

TOTAL—20

Page 57: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type CE Cut

EQ.

EQ.

CE.2

CE.1

CE.2

CE.1

EQ.

EQ.

CORNERTOCORNER

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—4BATCH 4—1BATCH 5—8BATCH 6—11

TOTAL—24

Page 58: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type DD Cut

CORNERTOCORNER

DD.1

DD.1

DD.2

DD.2

CORNERTOCORNER

CORNERTOCORNER

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—2BATCH 4—0BATCH 5—5BATCH 6—4

TOTAL—11

Page 59: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Type EE Cut

EE.1

EE.2

EE.1

EE.2

CORNERTOCORNER

SCRAP

CORNERTOCORNER

CORNERTOCORNER

BATCH 1—0BATCH 2—0BATCH 3—1BATCH 4—0BATCH 5—5BATCH 6—1

TOTAL—7

Page 60: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

60

Wall 1

Wall 5

Wall 2

Wall 4

Wall 3

Batch 1: Wall 3 - Lower half

Batch 2: Wall 3 - Upper half

Batch 3: Walls 2&4 - Lower halves

Batch 4: Walls 2&4 - Upper halves

Batch 5: Walls 1&5 - Lower halves

Batch 6: Walls 1&5 - Upper halves

Page 61: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A101 Roof Plan

Street

Sidewalk

N

8 1640in

Page 62: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A102 Course 1 Plan at 3”

8 1640in

Page 63: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A103 Course 1 Plan at 6”

Page 64: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A104 Course 2 Plan at 3”

8 1640in

Page 65: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A105 Course 2 Plan at 6”

Page 66: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A106 Course 3 Plan at 3”

8 1640in

Page 67: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A107 Course 3 Plan at 6”

Page 68: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8 1640in

A108 Course 4 Plan at 3”

Page 69: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A109 Course 4 Plan at 6”

Page 70: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8 1640in

A110 Course 5 Plan at 3”

Page 71: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A111 Course 5 Plan at 6”

Page 72: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8 1640in

A112 Course 6 Plan at 3”

Page 73: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A113 Course 6 Plan at 6”

Page 74: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A114 Course 7 Plan at 3”

8 1640in

Page 75: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A115 Course 7 Plan at 6”

Page 76: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8 1640in

A116 Course 8 Plan at 3”

Page 77: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A117 Course 8 Plan at 6”

Page 78: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8 1640in

A118 Course 9 Plan at 3”

Page 79: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A119 Course 9 Plan at 6”

Page 80: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

8 1640in

A120 Course 10 Plan at 3”

Page 81: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A121 Course 10 Plan at 6”

Page 82: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A122 Course 11 Plan at 3”

8 1640in

Page 83: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A123 Course 11 Plan at 6”

Page 84: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A124 Course 12 Plan at 3”

8 1640in

Page 85: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A125 Course 12 Plan at 6”

Page 86: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A200 Wall 1 North Elevation

8 1640in

Page 87: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A201 Wall 1 South Elevation

Page 88: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A202 Wall 2 North Elevation

8 1640in

Page 89: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A203 Wall 2 South Elevation

Page 90: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A204 Wall 3 North Elevation

8 1640in

Page 91: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A205 Wall 3 South Elevation

Page 92: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A206 Wall 4 North Elevation

8 1640in

Page 93: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A207 Wall 4 South Elevation

Page 94: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A208 Wall 5 North Elevation

8 1640in

Page 95: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

A209 Wall 5 South Elevation

8 1640in

Page 96: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 97: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 98: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

CMUOVERLOAD

Page 99: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

No conocía esta historia del monumento al CMU ¡qué interesante!

¿?

¿?

!!

99

Page 100: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Preparation—CMU Marking and Cutting - Day 1

100

Page 101: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Preparation—CMU Marking and Cutting - Day 1

101

Page 102: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Pad - Day 1

102

Page 103: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Process - Day 1

103

Page 104: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Process - Day 1

104

Page 105: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Process - Day 1

105

Page 106: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Process - Day 2

106

Page 107: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Process - Day 2

107

Page 108: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Drying Process - Day 2

108

Page 109: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Build Drying Process - Day 2

109

Page 110: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

110

Page 111: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

111

Page 112: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

112

Page 113: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

113

Page 114: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

114

Page 115: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

115

Page 116: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

116

Page 117: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

117

Page 118: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

118

Page 119: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

119

Page 120: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

120

Page 121: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

121

Page 122: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

122

Page 123: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

123

Page 124: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 125: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

125

Page 126: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 127: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 128: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Physical Model of Build in Process (already 10 days)

128

Page 129: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Physical Model of Build - 2 Weeks to Finish

129

Page 130: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Not good, not bad

STUDIOPROJECTS

Page 131: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

131

Page 132: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

132

Page 133: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

133

Masonry Design Competition - Studio Entry

Page 134: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

134

Page 135: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Mariza Antonio

135

Page 136: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

136

Page 137: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Spoorthi Bhatta

137

Page 138: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

138

Page 139: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Brian Mourato

139

Page 140: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

140

Page 141: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Chit Yee Ng

141

Page 142: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

142

Page 143: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Pier Paolo Pala

143

Page 144: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

144

Page 145: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Elliot Pérez

145

Page 146: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

146

Page 147: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Lauren Rose

147

Page 148: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

148

Page 149: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Roman Schorniy

149

Page 150: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

150

Page 151: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

María Silva

151

Page 152: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

152

Page 153: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Chau Tran

153

Page 154: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

154

Page 155: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Yuliya Veligurskaya

155

Page 156: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

156

Page 157: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Jeffrey Youmans

157

Page 158: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

INITIALDRAWINGS

Page 159: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

IIVision for the City

IIIVision for the Project

IContext Analysis

159

Page 160: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

III

II

I

160

Mariza Antonio

Page 161: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Spoorthi Bhatta

III

II

I

161

Page 162: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Brian Mourato

162

III

II

I

Page 163: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

163

III

II

I

Chit Yee Ng

Page 164: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

164

III

II

I

Pier Paolo Pala

Page 165: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

165

III

II

I

Elliot Pérez

Page 166: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

166

III

II

I

Lauren Rose

Page 167: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

167

III

II

I

Roman Schorniy

Page 168: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

168

III

II

I

María Silva

Page 169: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

169

III

II

I

Chau Tran

Page 170: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

170

III

II

I

Yuliya Veligurskaya

Page 171: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

171

III

II

I

Jeffrey Youmans

Page 172: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 173: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 174: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

174

Unit Aggregation

Spoorthi BhattaMariza Antonio Brian Mourato

Page 175: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

175

Unit Aggregation

Chit Yee Ng Pier Paolo Pala Elliot Pérez

Page 176: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Lauren RoseMaría Silva Roman Schorniy

Unit Aggregation

176

Page 177: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Yuliya VeligurskayaJeffrey Youmans Chau Tran

Linear Aggregation

177

Page 178: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Spoorthi Bhatta Mariza AntonioBrian Mourato

Linear Aggregation

178

Page 179: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Pier Paolo PalaElliot Pérez Chit Yee Ng

Linear Aggregation

179

Page 180: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Lauren RoseMaría Silva Roman Schorniy

Linear Aggregation

180

Page 181: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Yuliya VeligurskayaJeffrey Youmans Chau Tran

Linear Aggregation

181

Page 182: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Afterword

UNDISCIPLINED CMU is the second iteration of a project in which a physical construction is developed as part of a 2nd year undergraduate architecture studio focused on masonry. The studio is part of the core curriculum of the School of Architecture of the New Jersey Institute of Technology I taught in the Spring of 2015, and was run as an intra-studio competition sponsored by the Masonry Contractors of New Jersey (as they have done it for more than a decade). Each student is asked to design a building-project based on the material theme of masonry and tectonics complemented with a program. Later, after an internal review they select one project that will be developed by the whole studio to compete with all 2nd year studios, and after a period of two and a half weeks design and build a mock-up of the proposed building within a 384 cu.ft. space. The project was based on the assigned program by the former studio coordinator –in this case a rather charged program of a police station in a high Hispanic population in Perth Amboy New Jersey aspiring for funding for a Traffic Oriented District town. After reviewing our studio projects with the most potential to be developed collectively, students selected María Silva’s out of sixteen in an internal strictly student-based jury, and quickly moved into a vibrant period of translation of the project’s ideas into what we commonly called the build; or sometimes the CMU Monument.

We found out that we were more interested in translating the project and the studio’s framework rather than formalizing a construction mock-up of the selected project; the idea of constructing representative fragments of the building as a reaffirmation of the drawing seemed futile and limiting as a pedagogical tool and a lost opportunity to explore the material in a one-to-one scale considering the amount of energy that is spent in the project. We wanted to build an argument, not only a mock-up. We decided instead to formulate a project of its own inquiring the masonry theme, the culture that is contained within it, and asking questions to the construction industry and the architectural culture attached to it. The first attempts were crass examples of misunderstanding concepts and scale in translating the building project more than the studio framework into a one-to-one scale object. Most of the attempts replicated the project’s diagrammatic geometries or tried to disproportionately convey ideas of spatial continuity that would have made no sense in a 6’-0” x 8’-0” x 8’-0” object. Given the variety of materials provided by the masonry contractors to be used in the project, we considered them trying to avoid their visual and semantic value, and tested cast-stone as a piece we would need to shape and contextualize, until we ran out of time and clarity of how and why to use it. Going back to the studio framework of systematic and networked relations helped to clarify the research. The CMU (concrete masonry unit) seemed a good option to

consider as an extremely ordinary, non-valued, cheap, docile, yet systematic and widely used construction material that suggested no clear alternatives other than stacking it in different patterns.

The studio operated mostly as a combination of visual and formal subtraction, knowledge suspension, systematic geometrical investigation and, cultural and disciplinary inquiry. The building project was elaborated after the rigorous development of geometrical aggregation studies as a pedagogical strategy for erasure of precepts of buildings as square footage or programmatic arrangements, to explore the formal capacities of architecture to have consistent spatial and networked relations. Linear and unit geometrical aggregation drawings were developed before approaching the project’s formal stance, and social, cultural and politically charged collages were created in parallel to formulate each student’s critical position. Once a formal and visual language was developed understanding their systematic connections and capacities, building program, site complexities and larger cultural, social or political issues were brought back in to explore the architectural strategies and their limits to support the latter ambitions. Highly autonomous or internally-logical objects were transformed into spatial devices for community engagement, hybrid programmatic assemblages, legibility inquiries, or counter-surveillance situations. The projects are formally bold, argumentative rather than solutionist, juxtapositions rather than compositions, and investigated architectural formal and spatial capacities in dialogue with their cultural site readings and critical positioning.

The material used, the CMU, is the single most common construction element in the industry along with dry wall framing. It is at the same time the least considered in its capacity to produce unexpected results other than its use as infill wall, primarily because it is not designed to perform in any other way. For the studio this material was investigated as a physical and discursive given condition, it was inquired culturally and analyzed formally. It was (and still is) stripped down of its capacity to only be used as seen or received, it was challenged to overcome its industry standard mode and was transformed into an unexpected and enigmatic piece after intense exploration. The build is a massive concrete construction that, as an architectural device, opened the possibilities of reimagining and reconsidering the banality of a typical and non-valued material in architecture and the construction industry, by literally cutting it. The implications are varied, as the build proposes questions of how we produce artifacts based on principles of construction, or cultural-industry, as well as what is the role of architecture in manipulating a given material conditioned by its marked

182

Page 183: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Afterword

use. It also speaks about the docility that is embedded in architectural practices in the form of received (material) knowledge. Our motivations are less those of an articulation of a design process; they are above all a pedagogical tool for learning to un-do while constructing concrete arguments, real-concrete-arguments, to reinforce the tautology.

A critical mode of operation for the project is that we did not just “apply” the masonry material as a physical component to represent an architectural idea –a wall– the material became the conceptual and physical idea itself by rigorously investigating it. The typical CMU block was subdivided and cut following its main geometrical axes (based on its strength) and the resultant pieces were reconfigured into five “walls” that formally expressed the complexity of the operation. The wall with the least complex cuts is located in the center as evidence of the investigation origin, and expanding to the given volume perimeter the walls become the evidence of the amplified capacities of the usage of the created “undisciplined” pieces. The walls are not “facade” explorations nor screens or enclosures, they are the formal and material manifestation of the research on the material. They are architectural in their own right as aggregations, as walls, as conjecture, as experiment, as construction.

Undisciplined CMU is a research project that evidences the capacity of a work to overcome its expected disciplinary use by undoing among various things, the docility that is transferred in its assumed contained knowledge. The project produced is not only the physical manifestation of an idea, it is a built argument about the production of undisciplined work that aims to remove the docility that is impressed by disciplinary knowledge, utilizing the same means it provides to subvert it.

The student’s learning outcome exceeded the project’s general ambitions as set in the 2nd year program, while following the parameters and scope of the studio. Students did not only get enthusiastic for doing a design-build project, they learned about the limits and complexities of a material capacity beyond its use as a passive application; inquiring for example, its cultural form. The course was designed in a way that students developed their own critical positions in order to not just manage or use a material theme –masonry– but to use it as a media for constructing knowledge based on its research and analysis, allowing themselves to create the unexpected while not necessarily searching for it a priori. The studio ambition offered the students a systematic mode of thinking that was not only helpful during the intense short period in which this project was developed (2.5 weeks of design including only 2 days for construction), but as a tool

that is allowing them now to reconsider an assignment beyond a problem-solving logic. Three students, Pier Paolo Pala, Chau Tran and Yuliya Veligurskaya besides having developed a high level of team work during the intra-studio competition, kept working on the project over the summer and edited and designed this book that collects the project’s process, including the complete set of drawings to construct a version of it and a documentation of the final result.

The studio provoked many discussions related to tectonics and masonry and also prompted discussions about reality, concreteness, the sources of ideas, enthusiasm and the capacities of physical objects. Students were also confronted with a different set of realities that challenged their initial ideas about the built work. The mock-up competition jury formed by architects, members of the masonry industry as well as the school’s administrative leaders, described after a rather long hesitant explanation a statement about the power of the project, yet were astounded by its enigmatic character and the difficulty it poses in being legible, in being architecture or architectural. This was suggested by a member of the jury in saying that when projects are “real” (referring to having a design and building practice) they need to be able to be constructed by a series of clear set of documents and follow budget and time constraints. However, the physical presence of the CMU construction a few feet from us built in two days and with the same limited resources available to all was apparently not real enough to be the evidence of reality, or at least not enough a building reality. At that moment, students had already confirmed their suspicion about the real, built-work, its images, appearances and ghosts. We built the argument we explored creating architectural tools for learning to un-do –the CMU achieved its own independent value from the industries that produces it– its physicality proved its value, not as reaffirmation of the expected or what can be build, but as argumentative un-disciplined construction.

Marcelo López-Dinardi

183

Page 184: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

This edition, Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Use the book as instructed. Editors are not responsible for personal endeavors based on the content of this book.

Printed in the USAISBN: 9781364855161

Edited byMarcelo López-DinardiPier Paolo PalaChau TranYuliya Veligurskaya

Graphic DesignPier Paolo PalaChau TranYuliya Veligurskaya

Graphic Design AdaptationAndrés Macera

Build Photography CreditsMarcelo López-Dinardi and Andrés Macera

Studio Participants, Spring 2015Mariza AntonioSpoorthi BhattaRawad El-AawarMonica GirgisFreddy MartínezBrian MouratoChit Yee NgJoel NuñezPier Paolo PalaEliott PérezLauren RoseMaría SilvaRoman SchorniyChau TranYuliya VeligurskayaJeffrey Youmans

The editors would like to thank Michael (Mike) Schmerbeck past president of the Masonry Contractors of New Jersey and their co-sponsors: the New Jersey Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Labor Management Committee for making this event; to Julio Figueroa for coordinating the studio; to the jury James Boland, Alan Chimacoff, School of Architecture Director Richard Garber, Dean Urs Gauchat, Carlos Jimenez, Maria Viteri and David K. Williams; to staff, bricklayers and laborers Eric Schaffer, Joe Acchione, Robert Alesandro, John Fajnor, Charlie Shea, Mark Wells, Rob Lostocco, John Potter, John Bensal, Scott Price, Tom Parsons, Amirilldo Horst, Robert Kockan, Joe DiSilva, Dave Zehnbauer, Jefferson Lopes, Manny Oliveria, Jack Lima, Antonio Markis, Mike Pudelka, Gazment Ceko, Steve Jobman, Ren Englehardt, Jeff Anderson, James Anderson, Charlie Sternaimolo, Dan Wysinski, Chuck Bartell, Mark Wells Jr., Jimmy Carden, Chuck Pilliphs, Danny Rutkowski, Rinaldo Jimenez and Chris Viana; and to our allies the sawmen Sam Barry and Michael Alesandro.

School of Architecture, College of Architecture and Design.

®

Page 185: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU
Page 186: UN-DISCIPLINED CMU

Marcelo López-Dinardi | Pier Paolo Pala | Chau Tran | Yuliya Veligurskaya