Timber Seasoning Shelter - AA Design & Make

1

M. Arch Design and Make 2012/2013, Architectural Association, School of Architecture, Hooke Park

2

Timber Seasoning Shelter team Design and Make 2012/2013 Meghan Dorrian Kawit Ko-udomvit Omri Menashe Glen Stellmacher with Francesco Fumagalli Jack Hawker James Stubb Tutor Charley Bretnall Steward Dodd Martin Self with Charlie Corry-Wright Edward Coe

M. Arch Design and Make Architectural Association, School of Architecture Hooke Park, Beaminster, Dorset DT8 3PH, UK

TSS ARCHIVE

INDEX

pg

5 INTRODUCTION 7 TEAM PROFILE

8 NAVIGATION OF DESIGN PROCESS

I: BRIEF II: SITE ANALYSIS / PROGRAMATIC REQUIREMENTS III: PROGRESSION OF IDEAS 102 FABRICATION / MANIFESTATION I: MATERIAL AQUISITION AND MACHINING II: STEAMING, BENDING, AND SEASONING III: COMPONENT ASSEMBLY, TESTING, AND PATCH CONSTRUCTION IV: BUILDING LIFT AND FINISHING 169

DIGITAL DEPLOYMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

216

TECHNICAL DRAWINGS

APPENDIXES 250 RESEARCH 288 CONFERENCE SUBMISSIONS 298 ANNOTATED PROJECT CONTACTS 304 A DAILY CAPTURE

3

4

5

The Timber Seasoning Shelter at Hooke Park is an experiment. It’s an experiment of material. It’s an experiment of a team dynamic. It’s an experiment of an academic pedagogy. It’s an experiment of inventive manufacturing. It is an experimental building. There were no easy ways out. Words cannot convey the amount of energy and emotion imbued in this building. Hopefully its physical presence, sat perched, in repose, at the top of the yard is enough to convey the tacit and serendipitous realities of its energy.

INTRO

This is a project of four students. It’s inflorescence is attributed to their energy, vigor and motivation. However, the shelter is not solely the work of these four students. Countless people were involved in its success. A special thanks to Martin Self for helping to rationalize our ambition, to Jack Hawker, for your dedicated enthusiasm and can do jcb (we would not be here without you) to Charlie Corry-Wright for your relentless support day in and day out and to Francesco Fumagalli for leaving your life in Rome behind to help us bend wood and cook pasta. To everyone else who were involved in this project, our deepest thanks. This is more than just a project of four students. It is a project of a collective group of passionate individuals.

The premise for the building is simple; to exploit what material we have on hand, smartly. We didn’t know how we were going to do it, but we knew what we were going to use: Hooke Park beech. The forest here is full of candidates for experimentation. We knew that a building here, set within this context, could not be anything but an ode to the latent properties of her crop. The architectural brief for the project was simple, too easy. It is just a shed, ready to be infused with thought and energy from an alternative avenue. This avenue led to a series of ideas about the material on hand, it’s historic and contemporary uses, and it’s scope for inventiveness. The result of these investigations is the structure itself.

Within this document, you will find an archive of information and nostalgia, a screenplay through the process, and its resultant outputs. To all, our sincere thanks.

Photo Credit: Valerie Bennet.

6

TEAM PROFILE

7

MEGHAN DORRIAN California United States of America

KAWIT KO-UDOMVIT Bangkok Kingdom of Thailand

OMRI MENASHE Toronto Canada

GLEN STELLMACHER Seattle United States of America

8

NAVIGATION OF DESIGN PROCESS The Timber Seasoning Shelter is formalized as a building which can accommodate and dry timber which is harvested from Hooke Park.

Additionally, the shelter addresses the AA’s agenda for an experimental building. Steam bending, the technique which is normally embedded in small scale wood working, for example, kitchen utensils, furniture and boat building is fully incorporated in the Timber Seasoning Shelter.

Moreover, domestic timber, specifically, Beech has been utilized in the Timber Seasoning Shelter for a structural objective, although it is also interior purpose. Ideally, steam bending requires material which is straight grain and contains no knots. Woodland surrounding Hooke Park is able to provide beech of suitable quality, mostly in 2-3 meter lengths.

As a result, this was the primary factors that influenced the idea of reciprocal structure, where small members collectively perform together in order to acquire a wider span structure. However, it became problematic to join each member together due to the fact that reciprocal connection likely meet in various angles, which are difficult to perfectly notch and attach together. Using steam bending then helped to simplify the complexity of joinery in the reciprocal structure.

Programmatically, the configuration of the building emerged from four factors; 1) the amount of timber which Hooke Park harvests in a three year cycle, 2) the size and reach of telehandler, 3) protection of sunlight and prevailing rain, and 4) solar gain, to generate the maximum heat for a solar kiln. To develop and execute the building, the team consulted many experts such as Bath University who were involved in material testing, ARUP, Architen Landrell Associates who are membrane specialists and Petter Southall, a local furniture maker who aided us in a day long steam bending workshop. The collaboration between the Timber Seasoning Shelter team and all of these specialists from various disciplines has conveyed the innovative perspective to the project.

The design and make course offers an extraordinary opportunity for the Timber Seasoning Shelter team to push the boundary of an architectural design methodology beyond convention. Throughout the design process, hundreds of scale models and thousands of sketches initiated key ideas which were followed through with 1:1 prototyping. These prototypes directly tested and verified issues of constructability. Some of the designs had never been drawn; hammers, saws and

chisels were used as sketching tools instead of pencils. The team engaged the design with physical models in order to generates and communicate thoughts thoroughly, especially the reciprocal structure and the membrane covering. Digital modeling came to take part in the process as well in order to refine and develop geometrically these sketches and prototypes. After several mock-ups, drawings and digital iterations, the design became more tangible and moved towards spatial reality.

9

PROGRAMATIC REQUIREMENT

timber shelter

10

at Hooke Park, Hooke, Beaminster DT8 3PH

Hooke Hooke Park Park Forestry Forestry

Construction Construction

Growing Growing Forests Forests

Material Material used used

Felling Felling Trees Trees

Buildings Buildings getget built buil

Milling Milling Wood Wood

Workshop Workshop

Stacking Stacking Timber Timber Experimentation Experimentation Timber Timber Seasoning Seasoning Shelter Shelter Forestry Timber Seasoning Shelter Construction

Wood Wood Felled Felled at Hooke at Hooke - 300m3 - 300m3 avg/per avg/per year.year.

300 m3 avg/per year round wood felled at Hooke Park

Wood Storage needed at Hooke Wood Storage needed at Hooke -1

150 m3 avg/per year timber storage needed at Hooke Park

lt

e150m3 - 150m3

11

14

SOLAR KILN

SOLAR COLLECTOR

SOLAR ENERGY

bldg criteria

TARMAC ROAD

at Hooke Park, Hooke, Beaminster DT8 3PH

REPELL RAIN

REPEL RAIN

FACILITATE AIR FLOW, MOISTURE EVACUATION

FACILITATE AIR FLOW

Need for Flat Ground

SHADE FROM DIRECT SUN

COVERED TEMP STORAGE

15

5m

bldg criteria at Hooke Park, Hooke, Beaminster DT8 3PH

5m

5m 5m

5m

5m

Free Space for Machine Penetration

13m max TARMAC ROAD

Free Space

8.6m max

4.6m

18

Ash

Corsican pine

Norway spruce

Beech Western red cedar

Oak

Larch

Sitka spruce

Douglas fir Mix Conifer

Mix broad leaves

19

Beech Specimens for Bath University

*measuring MC cut list - 01 (8) @ 40MM x 150MM x 2000MM - for bending

4B - 1

(1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B + 2 Random planks)

4B - 2

cut list - 02 (8) @ 40MM x 150MM x 2000MM - straight

selection guide for specimen B

4B - 3

(1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B + 2 Random planks)

cut list - 03 (2) @ 30MM x 150MM x 2000MM - for bending

4B - 4

(2 Random planks)

cut list - 04 (2) @ 30MM x 150MM x 2000MM - for bending (2 Random planks)

1A 1A

3C

3A

5B

2C

1C

4C

5A

4B

6B

4A

3B

1A - 1 1A - 2 1A - 3 1A - 4 1A - 5 1A - 6 1A - 7

3C

3A - 1 3A - 2 3A - 3 3A - 4 3A - 5 3A - 6

5B 3C - 2 3C - 4

2B

6C

6A

5C

1C

1B

2B 1B - 1 1B - 2 1B - 3 1B - 4 1B - 5 1B - 6

Beech piles in front of Big Shed

picked specimen

N

4C - 1

4B - 1

4C - 2

4B - 2

4C - 3

4B - 3

4C - 4

4B - 4

6B

2B - 3 2B - 4 2B - 5

4A - 1 4A - 2 4A - 3 4A - 4 4A - 5

3B

5A - 1 5A - 2

6B - 1 6B - 2

3B - 1 3B - 2

5A - 3 5A - 4 5A - 5

6B - 3 6B - 4 6B - 5

3B - 3 3B - 4 3B - 5

6C 2B - 1 2B - 2

4A

4B

5A 1C - 1 1C - 2 1C - 3 1C - 4 1C - 5 1C - 6

5B - 3 5B - 4 5B - 5

3C - 3

4C 2C - 1 2C - 2 2C - 3 2C - 4 2C - 5 2C - 6 2C - 7

5B - 1 5B - 2

3C - 1

1B

2C

3A

6A 6C - 1 6C - 2 6C - 3 6C - 4

5C 6A - 1 6A - 2

5C - 1 5C - 2

6A - 3 6A - 4 6A - 5

5C - 3 5C - 4 5C - 5

20

Material density testing initial weight, weighed on: A (lower) B (middle)

27 *off scale 17.75

C (upper)

15.65

Trees 1 and 2 were felled on: March 14th, 2013 Trees 3 and 4 were felled on: March 14th, 2013 Trees 5 and 6 were felled on:

Density test sample size: 100mm x 100mm x 20mm oven dimensions/ shelf clearance: 13" w x 9.5" h x 14" deep

24.2?

18

22.2 12.2* split, measured both parts 7.55 11.75

before put in the oven

1B‐a 1B‐b 2B‐a 2B‐b 3B‐a 3B‐b 4B‐a 4B‐b 6B‐a 6B‐b A‐a A‐b 2C‐a 2C‐b avg.

9.2

Ø

Ø

7.9

Ø

Ø

5.5

Ø

Ø

after put in the oven @80c for 36 hours

after put in the oven @80c for 60 hours

29.04.13 02.05.13 03.05.13 MC (%) Weight (g) multiply factor density (kg/cu.m) MC (%) Weight (g) MC (%) Weight (g) multiply factor density (kg/cu.m) 23 148 5 740 ?

108 ?

108 5 540 29 164 5 820 ?

112 ?

110 5 550 51 178 5 890 ?

106 ?

104 5 520 53 180 5 900 ?

109 ?

107 5 535 42 210 5 1050 ?

128 ?

126 5 630 41 214 5 1070 ?

131 ?

129 5 645 37 171 5 855 ?

110 ?

108 5 540 55 166 5 830 ?

102 ?

101 5 505 44 169 5 845 ?

127 ?

126 5 630 45 178 5 890 ?

120 ?

118 5 590 64 206 5 1030 ?

111 ?

110 5 550 57 204 5 1020 ?

111 ?

110 5 550 46 171 5 855 ?

109 ?

107 5 535 43 172 5 860 ?

111 ?

111 5 555 45 180.785714 903.928571 note MC cannot be measured on 02.05.13 112.5 562.5 note 'multiply factor' is to turn 100x100x20 g/cu.mm

27

site selection at Hooke Park, Hooke, Beaminster DT8 3PH

avg wind m/s

rain

days/year d

5.4 209

N

Prevailing Sun/Shadows

avg avg relative sunshine humidity per day

80% 7 hrs

28

site selection at Hooke Park, Hooke, Beaminster DT8 3PH

avg wind m/s

rain

days/year d

5.4 209

N

West, SW Prevailing Wind Direction

avg avg relative sunshine humidity per day

80% 7 hrs

29

16.20 cubic m.

2.76 cubic m.

1.40 cubic m.

15.15 cubic m.

30

Visiting Unit Design&Make Student Neighbour

31

people logistic vehicle

32

33

34

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

35

36

Early sketches since the first design meeting which had been filtered through many meetings later on. These following pages show the variation of schematic designs.

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Design Charette

46

47

Development of schemeatic design which was proposed by the Timber Seasoning Shelter team to use an aggregation of small members which is able to cover an area of 150 sq.m.

48

303

304

251

RESEARCH 1. TIMBER FINISHING II. CPF: Form Finding, Form Shaping, Designing Architecture Submittal.

May 1 2013 III. FABRICATE July 14 2013

252

TIMBER FINISHING

TIMBER FINISHING

JAN 16 2013

AN OVERVIEW

JAN 16 2013

UNDERSTANDING BIO-DETERIORATION

WEATHERED WOOD AS FINISH

Only advisable in certain climates with certain species of durable timber. UV light deteriorates lignin, and erodes wood surface. UV damage also alters cellular structure of wood in a manner which hinders absorption of penetrating and film forming wood finishes.

PENETRATING WOOD FINISHES WRP- [WATER REPELLENT PRESERVATIVE] Contains a mixture of resin, drying oil, wax or other repellent, solvent and fungicide. WRPs help prevent checking, staining, and control mildew. First coats of WRP typically last one (1) year, and will last longer if applied to saw textured wood. Pigments in WRPs help to prevent UV degradation.

OIL BASED SEMITRANSPARENT STAINS Contain more pigment than regular WRPs. Pigments can flow into cut lamella, and carry stain into wood cells.

OILS Linseed, tung, and other organic oils perform poorly as a finish outdoors because they provide food for mildew growth. Little to nil protection from UV is gained through oil finishing.

Wood absorbs moisture primarily through end-grain. Protection of end-grain is key to a healthy lifespan of construction timber.

FILM FORMING WOOD FINISHED

CLEAR VARNISH Needs upkeep in areas exposed to direct sun. Cracking and peeling occur with direct UV exposure. Staining surface before applying varnish improves the service life of the finish. Varnish fails at the interface between wood and

sealant due to UV degradation.

PIGMENTED VARNISH Allow visible light to penetrate finish, however partially block UV radiation, improving service life. Pigmented Varnish is less prone to peeling, and degrades by crazing at the film surface, less so at the wood/varnish interface.

LATEX SEMITRANSPARENT STAINS Typically acrylic based, these stains fail to penetrate into cell walls of wood fibers. The finish tends to crack and er- rode, and is generally a poor choice as a film forming finish.

SOLID COLOR STAINS These stains have a higher concentration of pigment than semitransparent penetrating stains. They are opaque, and form a film finish.

PAINT Provides high UV radiation resistance. Paint is not a preservative and will not protect against fungal growth.

Finish ALL sides of timber used in construction, especially end grain.

MOLD Is microscopic fungi that must have organic food to live on. They exist and thrive primarily in sapwood. Mold penetrates deeply, however only appears as a surface nuisance. Fungi can infect timber immediately after felling if moisture and temperature conditions are favorable. Mold spores facilitate greater moisture absorption, which can lead to colonization of decay organisms.

DECAY FUNGI Feast mostly on cellulose and lignin. Serious decay occurs when the Moisture Content [MC] of wood reaches or exceeds the fiber saturation point (30%). There are three major types of rot; brown, white and soft. Generally, brown rot (cellulose degradation) infects softwoods, and white rot (cellulose and lignin degradation) infects hardwoods. Soft rot occurs in wood with high moisture contents, is relatively shallow, and is related to mold growth. Sapwood is more susceptible to rot decay than heartwood. A soak in preservative may provide sufficient decay resistance to high risk species. Fungal decay severeley compromises strength, and toughness of timber.

PREVENTING MOLD AND FUNGAL DECAY Immediately after felling, soaking wood in water prevents fungal growth. Air drying in conjunction with dip-treatment of fungicide is generally sufficient to prevent decay if treated and stored properly after treatment. Kiln drying is the most successful method of reducing moisture content to an acceptable level to hinder fungal growth. Clean, sanitary, dry, and sheltered conditions help hinder fungal growth. Architectural strategies can help stymie decay fungi in construction projects, through consideration of runoff, protection from driving rain, minimizing timber connections to the ground, and generally providing a well ventilated environment.

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

STRUCTURAL BEECH STUDY

STRUCTURAL BEECH STUDY

DAA

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

DAA

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

BEECH (Fagus Sylvatica) MEASUREMENTS OF STRENGTH

1. Rendle, B.J. World Timbers Europe and Africa. page 188.

BEECH (via World Timbers) Uses. In Britain more beech is used than any other hardwood. Being plentiful and comparatively cheap, it has long been the standard timber where practical, rather than aesthetic, considerations determine the choice of material. It is the most widely used timber in the furniture industry, particularly for chairs. Its superior strength properties combined with moderate weight, good working qualities and clean, white appearance make it the preferred timber for brush backs, tool handles, parts of textile and other machinery, piano wrest planks, and a wide range of turned articles. In vehicle body building beech is used in laminated form for the wheel arches and other bent parts of caravans and for the framing of coach-built motor cars. Because of its low resistance to decay it is not usually considered suitable for structural purposes out of doors but there is no reason why it should not be used, after suitable preservative treatment, for bent work in boat building, e.g., as an alternative to rock elm and oak. As flooring, beech is suitable for heavy pedestrian traffic and or the light industrial type of factory. 1

MODULUS OF RUPTURE (max bending stress)

MODULUS OF ELASTICITY (stiffness)

9800

green MC 88%

65

N/mm2

air dryed to 12%

12600

compared to European oak compared to Western Red Cedar

N/mm2

N/mm2

118

56.3N/

8300/10100 5400/7000

59/97 38/65

27.6/51.6 18.3/35.0

static bending: centre loading

5

TENSION STRENGTH perpendicular to grain

5

N/mm2 air dryed to 12%

27.6

N/mm2

N/mm2

4

green MC 88%

COMPRESSION STRENGTH parallel to grain

mm2

6

MAX SHEAR STRENGTH (modulus of rigidity)

HARDNESS

9.4

4270

15.9

6410

N/mm2

7

N/mm2

N

N/mm2

compared to European oak compared to Western Red Cedar

N

9.1/13.7 4.9/8.5 parallel to grain

Figure 1: Structural scan of beech

2. Princes Risborough Laboratory Technical Note No. 10, The strength of timber. Reprinted in 1973 by Building Resear Establishment, Department of the Environment.

Figure 2: Structural scan of oak

THE STRENGTH OF TIMBER Strength of timber is defined as the ability of a material to sustain a load. Strength is tested through stress testing. All materials have a critical load at which the test material will break or fracture. Timber is an anisotropic material and its strength depends on the direction of the stress in relation to the diretion of the grain.

Loaded parallel to the grain timber is considerably stronger than when stressed perpendicular to the grain. The strength of timber is therefore define not by one but by a number of different ultimate stress values. 2

4 - 6, 8, 9. The Strength Properties of Timber Chart, tested at the Forest Products Laboratory Canada. All numbers are the estimated mean value of the tested specimens, which for Beech was 36 specimens of UK Fagus Sylvatica.

7. Mechanical Properties of Wood. David W. Green, Jerrold E. Winandy, and David E. Kretschmann. Beech sampled is American Beech.

7

8

9

4670/5470 1650/2000 resistance to indentation on side grain

SUMMARY OF TERMS AND MEASUREMENTS ABOVE Modulus of Elasticity - Elasticity implies that deformation produced by low stresses are compleely recoverable after loads are removed. Measurement of stiffness which determines deflection from a load, i.e., floorboards. They will recover to their original shape from a stress to the proportional limit.

Modulus of Rupture - Reflects the maximum load carrying capacity of a member in bending and is proportional to maximum moment borne by the specimen.

Modulus of rupture is an accepted criterion of strength, although it is not a true stress because the formula by which it is computed is valid only to the elastic limit.

Compression Strength - The ability of timber to resist compression forces when the forces act parallel to the grain dirction, as in struts, props and some truss members.

Tension Strength (perpendicular to grain) Resistance of wood to forces acting across the grain that tend to split a member. Values presented are the average of radial and tangential observations.

Load Sectional Area

Shear strength (parallel to grain) - Ability to resist internal slipping of one part upon another along the grain.

Deformation Original Length

Hardness - Generally defined as resistance to indentation using a modified Janka hardness test, measured by the load required to embed a 11.28-mm ball to onehalf its diameter.

Figure 3: Diagram of strength testing of wood 24/01/13 24/01/13

# #

STACKING

STRUCTURAL BEECH STUDY

DAA

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

DAA

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

STACKING OF WOOD

FACTORS AFFECTING THE STRENGTH OF TIMBER1 1. Princes Risborough Laboratory Technical Note No. 10, The strength of timber. Reprinted in 1973 by Building Resear Establishment, Department of the Environment.

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

269

Density kg/m3 - The strength of timber is closely related to its density. The higher the density the greater the strength. Beech density is 833 @ 50% 689 @ 12% Knots - Knots reduce the tension, compression and bending strength of timber and that the reduction is roughly proportional to the ratio of the size of the knot to the size of the timber where it occurs.

Slope of Grain - Slope of grain is a measure of the deviation of the fibres from the longitudinal axis of a piece of timber. IT may be due to the way the timber has been sawn but it is more often a characteristic of the growth of the tree. Timber is much stronger when loaded parallel to the grain than when loaded across or perpendicular to the grain with a potential ratio in these two dirctions as high as 30:1.

Moisture Content - Moisture is held partly in the fibre walls and partly within the cavities. As the timber dries, moisture is evaporated from the cavities first until the fibre-saturation point is reached. As further drying takes place, moistures is removed from the fibre walls. This results in shrinkage and at the same time most of the strength properties are increased. After the fibre-saturation point, changes in moisture content have no effect on the strength of timber.

Temperature - The strength of timbe ris influenced by its temperature - the lower the temperature the greater its strength. For most strength properties a change of 1 degree celcius produces a 1 per cent change in their ultimate values.

Figure 10

Figure 1: Seasoning sawn wood kept in the round, stacked in stick in an outdoor yard. Note the space between the boards is uniform and the stacks themsleves are raised off the ground. Sawn timber is always stacked parallel to itself.

Figure 1 Figure 1: Stacking wood for seasoning of cricket bats. Indoors. This is a typical stacking design for firewood and not suitable for sawn timber.

Material is stacked perpendicular to itself.

Seasoning is ordinarily understood to mean drying. When exposed to the sun and air, the water in green wood rapidly evaporates. The rate of evaporation will depend on: (1) the kind of wood; (2) the shape and thickness of the timber; and (3) the conditions under which the wood is placed or piled.

Figure 11

CONCLUSION 2. Email correspondence with Andrew Lawrence, ARUP Associate Director, London.

Dated Jan. 15, 2013. He went on to say he has not aware of any use of specific use of beech structurally (yet!)

24/01/13

I would agree that Beech is a strong dense timber and as long as it is not exposed to rain then it’s a good structural timber. It is listed in the German codes as D35 – 40, obviously depending what grading rules you use. However, its density and strength varies a lot with climate (Hooke Park is not in Germany!), so we would probably need to do some testing on the Hooke Park timbers if we wanted to get the most out of them – they may well turn out to be stronger that the German material because of the generally poor UK climate!! 2 Green beech has general strength properties roughly equal to those of oak, but after drying, most values increase, and beech is stronger than oak in bending strength, stiffness and shear by some 20 per cent, and considerably stronger in resistance to impact loads. Despite its strength, it has been never been considered for use in structural timber because of it’s extremely low durability. While this is a serious issue to be considered for long term building, it is not necessarily an impossible parameter to deal with and due to the quantity of Beech available at Hooke Park we are interested in implementing Beech into the structural plan. #

Figure 2 Figure 3: Spanish stacking technique for sawn timber.

Figure 4: Roundwood stacking for firewood use.

Figure 5: Typical in stick stacking method. For optimum seasoning, evenly spaced, dry, square, softwood stickers should be used. Additional load should be applied to the top of the stack to ensure even seasoning and limit deformation.

24/01/13

9

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5 #

AIR SEASONING

270

DAA

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

KILN SEASONING

DAA

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

PASSIVE AIR SEASONING SHELTERS

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

KILN SEASONING Kiln drying is effected in a closed chamber, providing maximum control of air circulation, humidity and temperature. In consequence, drying can be regulated so that shrinkage occurs with the minimum of degrade, and lower moisture contents can be reached than are possible with air seasoning. Some of the advantages of kiln-drying to be secured over air-drying in addition to reducing the shipping weight and lessening quantity of stock are the following:

Figure 6: In 1771 the Commissioners of the Admiralty Board had visited Chatham and were shocked to see howships constructed from poorly seasoned timber had rotted.

Thereafter plans were made for the construction of timber seasoning sheds to a standard design at the various Royal Dockyards. They could hold up to 3 years supply of timber at each yard. There are two rows of these at Chatham consisting of a total of 75 bays.

1. Less material lost 2. Speed: quicker method than air seasoning 3. Consistency of output 4. Dependable supply at any time of year 5. Prevention of sap stain and mould and fixation of gums and resins 6. Reduction of hygroscopicity KEY KILN DESIGN REQUIREMENTS There are many different types of kilns being used around the world with no clear leading design solution, however all kilns require the following: -Control of humidity at all times.

-Ample air circulation at all points.

-Uniform and proper temperatures.

Figure 6 Figure 7: Air Seasoning in Scandinavia.

Stacks piled high are roofed. Transport to seasoning yard is by boat. Source: Trada slides

TYPES OF MECHANICAL KILNS There are two main methods used in artificial seasoning of timber. Both methods rely on a controlled environment to dry out timber.

They are: - compartamental kilns - progressive kilns Figure 11: Industrial scale progressive kiln. Material moves through a series of controlled sub-chambers .

Figure 7

Air Seasoning - Wood can be properly air seasoned without the use of mechanized kilns down to 20% moisture content (MC) depending on the species and the local environment. MC 20 is adequate for firewood however timber used for construction requires a lower moisture content, as low as 6-8% for indoor jointery and furniture.

The most effective seasoning is without doubt that obtained by the uniform, slow drying which takes place in properly constructed piles outdoors, under exposure to the winds and the sun and under cover from the rain and snow.

What is suggested for Hooke Park is an air season, kiln finish strategy.

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13: Example of a compartment kiln. Compartment kilns are only a viable option on an industrical scale and therefore inappropriate for Hooke Parks’ seasoned timber demand. The basic concept is that the timber moves through a series of kilns programmed for each specific step of the process.

The usual flow goes from a very humid chamber to a dry chamber, allowing for a continuous flow or output of seasoned wood.

The apartment method can be arranged so that it will not require any more kiln space or

Figure 8: Air Seasoning in the round under covered shelter.

Figure9 9 &10: Invisible Studios designed timber seasoning shelter for firewood. Thin battens are used horizontally to draw air across the shelter.

24/01/13

Figure 12: Compartment kiln. Material is placed in the chamber which is then sealed for a number of days, the length of the entire seasoning process.

24/01/13

Figure 10

Figure 13 #

#

KILN SEASONING

DAA

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

SOLAR KILNS

DAA

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

SOLAR KILNS 1. Blower Kilns (aka Hot Blast) Forced circulation is produced by fans or blowers and steam is usually not added to the process, but can be. Air is heated in an auxilary compartment and pushed into the drying chamber 2. Pipe or Moist-air Dry Kilns Circulation is obtained by natural draft only, aided by the manipulation of dampers installed at the receiving end of the drying room, which lead to vertical flues through a stack to the outside atmosphere. The heat in these kilns is obtained by condensing steam in coils of pipe, which are placed underneath the material to be dried. As the degree of heat required, and steam pressure govern the amount of radiation.

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

271

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

SOLAR KILNS AS A VIABLE STRATEGY Solar kilns work under the same principles as the blower-kiln design with an indirect heat course. The sun acts as the source of heat, and while solar kiln designs vary, the singular goal is to use the suns energy to heat air within a collection chamber and then (usually with the aid of mechanical fans) circulate that air through the stack sof wood. Without a doubt this is the most sustainable design based on its low energy use rendering the solution low cost.

Figure 11: Pipe or Moist Air Dry Kiln example at an industrial scale.

Figure 18: Basic solar kiln concept, double wall construction feeds hot air into the drying chamber with the assistance of a fan.

Figure 15: Steam pipe system installed below the material.

Figure 19: Jonathan Guest’s solar kiln in Wales. See appendix.

Figure 18

Figure 19

DESIGN REQUIREMENTS Orientation - Key to solar design is the orientation of the building and the intensity of the sun in that location. For optimum solar gain, the collection surface should be south facing and perpendicular to the suns rays.

Figure 14

Figure 15

Collector Design - The top of a collector will typically be covered with one or more layers of clear or nearly transparent material. This cover is called glazing. One layer is usually quite effective, but a second layer can substantially decrease heat losses while decreasing the transparency only slightly. Collector performance can be improved by 35% or so, depending on design, when a second layer is used. Under the glazing will be an absorber whose purpose is to absorb nearly all of the incident solar energy (i.e., minimal reflection and transmittance). Typically, the absorber is a wood or metal surface painted flat black. The space between the glazing and the absorber provides a chamber to circulate the air past the absorber and transfer this heat.

In general, the heating is either direct or indirect. In the former steam coils are placed in the chamber with the lumber, and in the latter the air is heated before it is introduced into the drying chamber. Moisture is sometimes supplied by means of steam jets; but more often the moisture evaporated from the lumber is relied upon to maintain the humidity necessary. A substance becomes dry by the evaporation of its inherent moisture into the surrounding space. If this space is too confined it soon becomes saturated and the process stops. Hence, constant change is necessary in order that the moisture given off may be continually carried away.

Figure 16: Section through United States Forestry Service Humiditycontrolled Dry Kiln. Example of a pipe /moist air kiln with direct heating through steam pipes which are within the same cavity as the seasoned timber.

Figure 16

Figure 17: Solar kiln example of a forced air kiln which uses indirect heating.

Air is heated within a chamber and then mechanically pushed through the wood stack.

24/01/13

Figure 17

Conclusion: In practice, air movement, is therefore absolutely essential to the process of drying.

Heat is merely a useful accessory which serves to decrease the time of drying by increasing both the rate of evaporation and the absorbing power of the surrounding space. A great many patents have been taken out on different methods of ventilation, but in actual operation few kilns work exactly as intended. Almost any species of hardwood which has been subjected to air-seasoning for three months or more may be dried rapidly and in the best possible condition for glue-jointing and fine finishing with a “Blower” kiln, but green hardwood, direct from the saw, can only be # successfully dried (if at all) in a “Moist-air” kiln.

Figure 20: Tino Rawnsley’s design of a solar kiln in Cornwall, England.

Figure 21: Green house design with segmented interior chamber. location unknow.

Figure 22: Dehumidifier kiln converted to use energy collected via solar panels. location unknown.

Design Strategy - There are many possible solar collector designs. The following are some basic ideas. Please refer to the appendix solar design documents for further information on these strategies Hot Air Collectors Greenhouse Design Semi Greenhouse Design Opaque wall design Solar Wood hybrid

24/01/13 Figure 20

Figure 21

Figure 22

#

272

SOLAR COLLECTOR DESIGN

DAA

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

OPTIMUM RATIOS Solar collection area to volume of wood to be seasoned is 4:1 The optimum design for this collection area is a double glazed surface that lets light through, approx 5” thick . Alternative design shown in Figure 24 increases the surface area behind the glazed surface.

5” Figure 23: Angle of incidence for England.

Figure 24: Jonathan Guest’s solar kiln in Wales. Surface area of collection is increased by not creating a parallel collection surface.

51

(+/-20)

Figure 23

Figure 25

24/01/13

Figure 24

4:1

273

274

275

276

TIMBER SHELTER BRIEF

TIMBER SHELTER BRIEF

DAA 1. Source of information to right . Source here. Date.

Page. Other Info.

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

DAA

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

With regards to solar gain, wind patterns, wood stack maneuverability and logistical movement through the work-study zone, siting the building on the northern edge of the campus facilitates the greatest number of advantages to air seasoning, yard optimization and storing of material demand.

BRIEF

To fulfill the identified need for shelter to air season and store timber for the usage of current and future build projects by the AA. The proposed timber storage shelter will be an intentional step in the direction toward woodland resource management and timber research, augmenting the capabilities of the AA to pursue timber technology and design innovation.

Calculations for seasoned wood demand, conclude a footprint of 150m2 is an approximate target that feasibly meets HP’s needs with a height adequate for equipment access. Included within these calculations are anticipated volumetric timber requirements for successive Design/Make projects, Visiting AA units, and regionally collaborative timber projects.

TIMELINE

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

BACKGROUND Hooke Park (HP) is intended for experimentation and innovation in timber design, therefore, it demands a source of high quality timber, both green and seasoned to achieve this purpose. Currently, there exists no space to adequately store and season timber in a protected environment within HP. We recognize the need for a timber storage shelter. The critical driving motivation for this type of structure lies at the heart of Hooke Park’s agenda. Historically, plans for a timber seasoning shelter and the potential for a kiln have been sited within the central yard at Hooke Park since 1994. We aim to fulfill this pre-identified need.

SITE CONSIDERATIONS This enclosure will be sited within the ‘work and study’ zone of the master plan [F1]. The buildings proposed character as a negotiator between the raw harvesting processes of forestry and the educational experimentation of Hooke Park means it should be sited strategically to accommodate projected logistical patterns alongside the necessary environmental factors required for proper timber seasoning technology. Just as the Big Shed began to define a central yard for future build operations, the siting of the timber shelter will further this definition.

BUDGET A ceiling budget of 30,000 GBP has been proposed and made available through the Architectural Association. If additional sources of funding become available through currently pursued grant applications the total project budget could increase.

Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

PROGRAM The program consists of a primary flexible space of 150m2 footprint to dedicated to air seasoning. The design of this volume will consist of a large roof structure which can double as a solar collector. Secondary to the primary air seasoning program is the potential for a solar kiln, bio mass boiler and humidity controlled space in which to store timber post-seasoning, pre-use. Heated air will be collected from the roof and transferred into a solar kiln.

1. Based on data from the two build projects of 2012, (Student Lodge 1&2 and the caretakers house) which used 50 m3 of sawn timber combined.

Schematic Development December 1, 2012 – January 16th

VOLUME Within the growth plan of the master plan at Hooke Park we anticipate construction of 200 m2 a year.1 We estimate the total need for sawn timber within Hooke Park is 75 m3 per year, taking into account surplus demands from visiting units, summer build and academic collaborations. As per appropriate seasoning techniques, we propose a volume of 150 m3 dedicated to air seasoning.

AMBITION The design/make team aims to use this project as a vehicle for material experimentation while simultaneously addressing relevant issues within forestry related to low grade, short length, local timber. We aim to push traditional boundaries of timber fabrication strategies by prototyping at full scale accumulated geometry through short length, steambent members. We endeavor to use timber as a primary tectonic system sourced from Hooke Park. Collaborations with engineering consultants, local craftsmen, foresters, timber mills, technical programs in conjunction with resources available within Hooke Park provide the impetus for a valuable research contribution to the built environment.

Design Development To include Planning application submittal, Full scale prototyping, Foundation Drawings Weds 16 Jan – Friday March 22, 2013.

Construction Document Phase and Full Scale Mock up March 1st – June 1st 2013 Construction Period: April – September 2013 PARTIES The client for the Timber Storage Shelter is the Architectural Association; represented by the AA’s Hooke Park Advisory Board.

01/02/13

2 of 2

01/02/13

1 of 2

277

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013 Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park, Beaminster, Dorset, UK DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f:01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

Project Title Project No. Date Scale Drawn By Chkd By Dwg Title Sheet No.

Timber Storage Shelter 24 March 2013 NOT TO SCALE KK OM GENERAL LOCATION A0-5

278

B

B

A

WOO

TARMAC ROAD

DEN

POST

RETA

INER

173

A

B

1

SUR

FAC

ES

TRE

AM

C

2

DIT

CH

D

DIT

3

CH

A

WET AREA

BOGGY

4 4

5

CH

6

DIT

STUDENT LODGE 1&2

BIG SHED

16

9

16 8

BOGGY CH

DIT

DIT

CH

TARMAC ROAD

16

7

CH

DIT

CONTAINER

COVERED TEMP STORAGE

CONTAINER

CONTAINER

CH

DIT

CH

DIT

DIT

PIPE 225mm IL162.51

CH 16

4

TARMAC ROAD NEW TREES

WET AREA

16

2

EXISTING KITCHEN GARDEN

EXISTING TREES

DITCH EXISTING DRAINAGE DITCH

160

DITCH

ACCESS ROAD (PERMISSIBLE FOOT PATH)

WOODEN BRIDGE

CONC

CAR PARKING

MASTER PLAN BOUNDARY

TARMAC

CONCRE

TE WALL

GRASS

GRAVEL BOILER HOUSE

STEP CONC

REFECTORY

FABRICATION WORKSHOP

CARETAKERS HOUSE

TARMAC E

TIMBER BRIDG

STEPS

TARMAC

GRASS

EAM

STR

STEPS

CONC STEP STEP

CPS

STEP

GRASS

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

PORTACABIN

Architectural Association School of Architecture

STEP

M

EA

R

ST

Hooke Park, Beaminster, Dorset, UK DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f:01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TARMAC SHED STEP

STEPS

S

       

       

279

B

B

A

WOO

DEN

POS

T RE

TAIN

ER 

1

A

B

STUDENT LODGE 1&2

BIG SHED

MASTER PLAN BOUNDARY

REFECTORY

FABRICATION WORKSHOP

C

CARETAKERS HOUSE

PORTACABIN

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

2

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

D

3

A



4 4

5

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

6

      

       

280

 STUDENT LODGE 1&2

BIG SHED

MASTER PLAN BOUNDARY

REFECTORY

FABRICATION WORKSHOP

CARETAKERS HOUSE

PORTACABIN

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture

B

A

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

D

B

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

       

       

281

 STUDENT LODGE 1&2

BIG SHED

MASTER PLAN BOUNDARY

REFECTORY

FABRICATION WORKSHOP

CARETAKERS HOUSE

PORTACABIN

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

       

       

282

DD

CC

3AA 3

9757.7

6129.59

2000

BB

AA

5692.39

H3

7948.24 H5

776.87

480.42

3

5004

G15

F7

3126.18

F13

5683.11

4389.33

4436.64

900.64 4960.72

4599.99

4762.61

4916.45

E21

D7

4192.99

F21

E15

D9

1759.21

2917.66

E19

2 2

D11

4943.76

E23

2AA 2

F9 2999.89

2565.25

2745.78

2923.9

2366.88

2074.02 3097.14

5657.67

3908.55

3227.85 4994.26

2055.31

E17

22

3

G17 G19

G21 G23

1387.85

G13 1074.76

2000

1190.36

H19

527.11

201.63

33

965.74

H11

1371.52

1171.96

H7

2421.71

D15

E25

C9

5178.56

6991.77 9081.35

C11 D23

Site Plan:

766.46

C17

C19

6234.1

B13

C21 1268.73

C23

4438.83

C25 C27

3352.52 1474.71

B17

5429.14 7508.5

B24

9583.95

11

1 1

5643.48

GP GP

500

500

1000

H

500

500

500 1200

1200

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

1200

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

h ts g i e

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

m 2.6 m 3.8 m 4.2 m 3.0 m 2.0 m 4.7

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

ROOF PLAN scale = 1:100

TSS

24 SEPT 2013

1:100 MD

mm, UON

ROOF PLAN

A1.5

283

Flexure Tests: Force-Disp

20

2b_1f1

18

2b_1f2 2b_2stb

16

2b_2stf1 3a_3f1

14

3c_2f1 3c_2f2 3c_3stb

Load (kN)

12

3c_3stf1 3c_3stf2

10

4b_3f1 4b_3f2

8

4B-4STF1 4b_4stf2

6

4b_4stb 5a_3f1 5a_3f2

4

5a_4stb 5a_4stf1

2

5a_4stf2 6a_2stb

0 0

10

20

30

40

Displacement (mm)

50

60

70

6a_2stf1

284

Small clear compression sample Beech Compression tests, Hooke Park Operator ID Laboratory Name Company Temperature (deg C) Humidity (%) Rate 1 Number of specimens

Nick 4E 1.11 Hooke Park 18.00 50.00 2.00000 mm/min 25

SMS

Specimen label 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4B-3F 4B-3F 4B-3F 4B-3F 4B-3F 2B-2F 2B-2F 2B-2F 2B-2F 2B-2F

#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #1 #2 #3 #4 #5

Maximum Load (kN) 45.47 45.89 51.03 43.97 45.44 37.05 36.65 40.22 35.67 34.93

Compressive Strength (MPa) 28.49 29.79 32.96 28.11 29.35 31.79 29.85 33.25 29.45 27.68

Modulus (Automatic) (GPa) 4.947 5.192 5.796 5.377 5.336 5.593 5.106 5.947 5.453 4.223

Page 1 of 1

Comment

285

Specimen label

Small clear compression sample Beech Compression tests, Hooke Park Operator ID Laboratory Name Company Temperature (deg C) Humidity (%) Rate 1 Number of specimens

16 17 18 19 20

Nick 4E 1.11 Hooke Park 18.00 50.00 2.00000 mm/min 25

3C-2F 3C-2F 3C-2F 3C-2F 3C-2F

#1 #2 #3 #4 #5

Maximum Load (kN) 56.03 43.12 55.84 58.73 48.69

Compressive Strength (MPa) 40.71 31.33 40.03 41.54 34.17

Modulus (Automatic) (GPa) 6.937 6.088 6.620 6.775 5.325

SMS

Specimen label 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

3A-2STF #5 3A-2STF #2 3A-2STF #2 3A-2STF #3 3A-2STF #4 3A-3F #1 3A-3F #2 3A-3F #3 3A-3F #4 3A-3F #5 3B-2F #1 3B-2F #5 3B-2F #2 3B-2F #3 3B-2F #4

Maximum Load (kN) 48.71

Compressive Strength (MPa) 30.00

Modulus (Automatic) (GPa)

48.86

30.69

5.113

51.58

32.08

5.715

50.63

31.50

5.397

47.99

29.85

5.118

43.31 37.14 47.62 41.32 36.83 32.59 34.15 27.00 29.95 30.53

30.08 26.35 33.06 29.31 26.77 39.85 42.66 33.48 37.39 37.99

5.337 4.351 5.647 5.759 4.756 7.180 7.967 7.089 7.890 8.035

Comment

4.890

Page 1 of 2

28mm sample Central knot defect, buckled Macro buckled Macro buckled Page 2 of 2

Comment

286

Small clear compression sample Beech Compression tests, Hooke Park Operator ID Laboratory Name Company Temperature (deg C) Humidity (%) Rate 1 Number of specimens

Nick 4E 1.11 Hooke Park 18.00 50.00 2.00000 mm/min 25

SMS

Specimen label 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

5A-2F #1 5A-2F #2 5A-2F #3 5A-2F #4 5A-2F #5 5B-4STF #1 5B-4STF #2 5B-4STF #3 5B-4STF #4 5B-4STF #5 5B-3F #1 5B-3F #2 5B-3F #3 5B-3F #4 5B-3F #5

Maximum Load (kN) 34.72 40.63 41.77 37.39 42.56 41.85

Compressive Strength (MPa) 24.49 28.66 29.39 25.96 29.79 30.00

Modulus (Automatic) (GPa)

Comment

3.318 4.968 5.519 4.838 5.685 5.206

Macro buckle, (knot)

55.98

39.39

6.599

44.19

31.26

5.731

60.08

41.20

7.091

54.16

36.28

6.348

38.28 43.66 52.64 46.01 38.11

27.01 30.64 36.75 31.53 26.12

4.412 5.951 6.670 6.307 4.859 Page 1 of 2

Page 2 of 2

287

292

293

201

202

DIGITAL TO PHYSICAL

204

207

MARKING SYSTEM A clear marking system allows each of the components to be identified, it’s neighbors identified, and if the component exists above or below its neighbors. However, the marking process, typically handwritten in pen or pencil had a tendency to rub off of the components, creating a chaotic search mission for its identity or its neighbors identity. However, the logic of the layout grid of the building allowed easily for pieces to be positioned into their correct places, if other pieces around them could be identified.

CLAMPS The use of ad-hoc clamping appears early in the process to promote the re-curve in the component as it seasons. Without the clamps, the component relaxes into straight segments. This relaxing proves detrimental to the strength and security of the split ring connection joint. This is mitigated, in the use of clamps, used at the discretion of the production/design team as each component leaves the bending table.

CENTER BLOCKING A measure which was introduced within a few days to the production process. Set within the jig, a center block is used as a former to bend the component to, and is then removed with the component attached to it as it leaves the bending jig. This creates a set offset and a controlled dimension between each of the component centers.

ASSEMBLY TABLE

WEDGES

PLUG AND REDRILL

After the first few days of bending components, and comparing them to a digital printout of their target shapes, it was clear that the physical bent pieces were not accurately matching their digital counterpart. This would prove disastrous, due to the reciprocal nature of the structure, where each component relies on another’s support. It became clear that an additional method was needed to secure the components into their target shape. The assembly table was introduced, as a measure after the component has been bent, to torque into its final shape, and mark the split ring locations and bolt axis’. Successively, after the process was introduced to the production line, the construction of the large patches became significantly easier and more accurate.

In a few circumstances, wedges are applied in situ to help set the angles that the components are twisted to each other at. These wedges allow for the structure to take its form through its successive construction, leaving out a guess as to which components need to be rotated.

A few components must be redrilled at their ends, at an acute angle to perpendicular to the component. Because of the twist in the components as then negotiate a doubly curved surface, some of the bolt axis collide with the component and cannot be slipped through the 2mm tolerance on the bolt hole.

208

DIGITAL PRIORITIES Steps taken and deployed in situ along the production line to insure the physical output matches as close as possible to the digital geometry. These processes were not planned for at the time of the structure’s design.

209

EDGE BEAM Digital model serves as a method for the correct geometric construction of the edge beam through areas of double curvature. The shapes are then extracted and able to be physically constructed.

MEMBRANE Digital model serves as base template for the simulation, drawing and design of the membrane covering.

COLUMNS Digital model serves purely as a guideline to extract a series of lengths of the columns. These items will then be cut to end shapes, to length and fit to place in-situ to the structure itself, and not to a digital drawing.

STRUCTURE Digital model serves as a method for parametrically evolving the structural concept. The model is also key for the analysis of the structure by ARUP, and for the physical manufacture of the components, which is done through digital projection.

CABLE NET SYSTEM Digital model serves as base template for the simulation, drawing and design of the cable system.

FOUNDATIONS Digital model serves to define the foundation placement and the placement of the mini piles. This boundary condition is then used as a constraint for the digital generation of the structure.

210

DIGITAL TO PHYSICAL MAIN STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

RHINO

Each component of the structure is saved onto an individual layer, of which, it’s layer name is the component ID itself. A simple grasshopper script then takes the input from the user (object ID) and then displays that object on the screen. Grashopper uses the input to then call out the specific layer that the user is trying to retrieve. The screen is then connected to a projector, which projects the component onto the bending table.

GRASSHOPPER

211

212

DIGITAL DESIGN OUTPUT

All components overlaid with each other. White on black background is the most visible color scheme for projection images.

213

214

An unrolled surface map. Within the map, a layout of the component grid, component ID’s, their positions, column locations, membrane push up locations, along with which components require load testing before their installation into the structure.

215

A Z 29

0 29

28

30

27

H29

H28

F30

F29

G25

F28

F27

E29

D30

D29

D

C31 C29 B32

B31

F

D27

31

B29

30

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture

B27

28

GP GP

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

Dwg Title

TSS 05 SEP 2013

GS mm, UON

UNROLLED SURFACE COMPONENT LAYOUT

UV UNROLLED COMPONENT LAYOUT KEY MEMBRANE EXTENSION AT NODE COLUMN CONNECTION AT NODE COMPONENT NODE (EXISTING BELOW NEIGHBORS) COMPONENT NODE (EXISTING ABOVE NEIGHBORS) COMPONENT WHICH MUST BE LOAD TESTED SEE ARUP DWG # SK-S-GAR-002-A

GROUPING REGION

COMPONENT NODE (EXISTING BELOW NEIGHBORS) COMPONENT NODE (EXISTING ABOVE NEIGHBORS) COMPONENT WHICH MUST BE LOAD TESTED SEE ARUP DWG # SK-S-GAR-002-A

GROUPING REGION

F20

F19

D23

D22

B24

26

27

25

#

A3.0

A GRID ORIENTATION

G13

F17

F16

F15

F14

D19

G09

G11

G F11

F12

F13

F

B23

24

B22

23

C17

C19

B21

22

B20

21

B19

20

B18

19

B

A3.0

G05

F10

F07

F08

F09

D

F06

F03

F04

F05

D13

D04

D10

D11

D06 C05

D09

C07

5

B08

B17

18

A

B16

17

B15

16

B14

# 15

6

B09 B13

B12

B10

7

B11

8 9

14

13

10 12

11

A GRID ORIENTATION

A

B05

B07

C11

C

B

B06

C09

C13

C

D05

E09

D12

D

D03

D07

D14

E

E05

D08 D15

F

F02

E03

E07

E11

25 G

G07

C15 C21

26

H

H01

G03

E

D16

D17

H

H09

H10

H11

H07

H08

I H02

H03

H04

H05

H06

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E13

E15

D18

H12

W 8

9

10

11 I

H13

H14

E17

D20

C23

B25

F18

E19

D21

27 12

13

G15

G17

E21

D24

B26

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project

Date Scale Drawn by Units

MEMBRANE EXTENSION AT NODE COLUMN CONNECTION AT NODE

F21

C25

B28

A 29

F22

H15

H16

H17

H18

14

15

16

G19

E23

D25

UV UNROLLED COMPONENT LAYOUT KEY HOOKE PARK SITE PLAN

F23

C27

B

32

F24

D26

H19

H20

H21

G21

E25

C

B30

H22

G23

F25

E

D28

H23

G

F26

E27

32 D31

H24

H

G27

S

T

H25

28

X

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

I

H26

H27

E31

ER

S N

25

26

G29

31

Y

216

TECHNICAL DRAWINGS

217

DWG A.0.0 A.1.0 A.1.1 A.1.2 A.1.3 A.1.3.1 A.1.3.3 A.1.3.4 A.1.4 A.1.5 A.2.0 A.2.1 A.2.2 A.4.0 A.4.0 A.4.0.A A.4.1 A.4.1.1 A.4.2 A.4.3 A.4.4.0 A.4.4.0 A.4.4.1 A.4.4.2 A.4.4.3 A.4.4.3 A.4.4.3 A.5.0 A.5.1 A.5.2 XXX

TITLE MACRO SITE PLAN EXISTING SITE CONDITION SURVEY PLAN DRAINAGE FOUNDATION PLAN FOUNDATION DETAILS MINI PILE LOCATIONS COLUMN SET OUT 0 FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN ELEVATIONS SIDE ELEVATIONS EDGE BEAM SCHEMATICS CONNECTION DETAIL CONNECTION DETAIL CONNECTION DETAIL COLUMN BASE PLATE DETAILS COLUMN BASE PLATE DETAILS FOUNDATION DETAILS, SOUTH WALL BASE PLATE DETAILS, SOUTH WALL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL EDGE BEAM CONNECTION DETAIL WATER JET PARTS WATER JET PARTS WATER JET PARTS EDGE BEAM CUT LIST

173.90

BCH D0.3

17 4

175.59

0 17 .5

175

.7 5

9 5.3 16 165.5

5 16

165.93

.7

165.92

165.92

6

165.00

6

16 5

164.89

TARMAC ROAD

165.28

25

TARMAC ROAD

164.44

DITC

164.25

164.38

163.5

ASH D0.25

164.21

16

164.05

4 164

163

3 16

5 3.1 16

163.22

.5

3

2 16

16 3 16

162

160.10

159.53

160.15

160.22

160.10

160.19

160.14

160.20

IC 161.13

160.27 160.12

15

.5

CONCRET

158.41

TARMAC

IC 158.24 158.00

158.30

BCH D0.4

156.20

156.04

156.54 157.01

15 7

.5 15 6

159.03

159.09

.65 163.65 EL163 LEVEL LEV

ES EAVES EAV

156.5

161.22

160.45

160.62

160.99

9

Drawn by

158.78

158

157.5

Units

158.05 158.15 158.28 157.71

156.25156 .5 15 5.5 7

156.52

155.79

15 5

.2

156.06

4

155.67

1

15 6

155.69

BCH D0.4

Dwg title

158.24

157.23

156.34 157.69

TREE CANOPY

TSS 06 MAY 2013 1:500 MD mm, UON

(macro) SITE PLAN

157.33 158.18

157.10 156.73

SITE LOCATION scale = 1:500

Date Scale

15

EAVESLEVEL EAVES LEVEL 163.65m 163.65m

158.88

Project title

.5

158.06

159.98

0 16

158.53

158.5

IC 159.21

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

158.54

8

S

158.71

157.76

160.65

STEPS 159.36

WLW D0.25 D0.15

1 16

158.48 BCH D0.4

WLW D0.15

158.5

156

157.56

RE

157.76

157.19 IC 156.32 156.41 157.67 155.

157.18 81 15 5.7 5

156.99

51 159.

159.13

158.51

158.39

0 16

158.77

158.52

STEP

.25

160.86

158.99

7 15

5

157.50

15 6

160.89 15 9

158.65

157.68

156.78

161.62

.5 159.39

157.23 157.16

16 1.5

161.25

Otto, ABK, Happold 1985

158.97 VENT 159.01

159

156.58 157.20

FL 159.91

159.5

4.9 15

157.45

156.93 157.42

159.70

160

159.07

M EA

158

157.39

15 6.4 BCH 2 D0.45 157.31

157.80

STEP

159.03

8.5

R ST

157.94

158.99

159.09 158.95

PORTACABIN

BCH D0.3

15

PRF 161.39

TAP

160.90 BCH 161.01 160.88160.85 D0.45 159.57 160.42 STEPS

161.70

161.71

TARMAC

161.29

.95 166.95 EL166 EL LEV GELEV RIDGE RID

160.19

157.48

.5

158.34

158.19

159.09 8

.8

8 15

157.84

161.18 16

REFECTORY

IC 161.15

IC 161.04

160.96

160.58

6 15

158.47

158.5

158 .4

157.94

158.44 159.00

160.78

.5

157.48

2

BCH D0.35

157.65

156.00

156

6 .8159

8 15

158.60

158.38

9

15

159.26

159.29

8

156.4

158.52 156.09

158.75

159.37

RIDGE LEVEL 163.04m

16 0

PRF

161.61

1 .77 163.77 EL163 LEVEL ESLEV EAVES EAV

161.36

VENT 160.95 160.78

160.1 8

157.68

9

ALD D0.2 6

159.16

159.02

159

158.5

155.91

15

BCH D0.3

159.31

159.21

158.32 BCH D0.4

GRAVEL

161.93 161.85

161.33 161.22

161.12

159.10

15

6.7 15

BCH D0.35

BCH D0.4

TREE CANOPY

FL 159.97

BCH D0.4

159.57

7 15

158.31

159.24

159.32 159.46

STEP

BCH D0.4

3

BCH D0.4

159.27

159.61

159.44

159.43

159.69

159.50 STEP

159.44

159.48

158.50

158.4

ALD D0.2

ALD D0.22

159.44

159.52

156.31

159.61 159.31

156.67

159.5

159.59

159.44

159.71

ASH D0.3

159.60

150mm PIPE IL157.65

FIR D0.2

161.75

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

162

161.81

161.91

161.24

160.37

99 156. M .37 EA 157 STR

ASH D0.35

BCH D0.3

CPS

159.50

160.21

161.57

FIR D0.12

CHY D0.12

CHY D0.12

5

161.55161.

161.22

BCH D0.3

158.77

158.5

159.67

159.25

160.60

7.5 15

159.05

161.17

16 1

.52

15 9

15 8

TREE CANOPY

CONC STEP

159.88

BCH D0.5

E 160.24 TIMBER BRIDG

160.12

159.25

156.52

159.75

159.12

161.73

161.76

D0.45

160.24

Stn.2

159.46

159.5

.5

156.63

159.61

159.99

158.86

161.83 161.61

161.05

160.53 BCH

BCH D0.4

7 15

159.28

15 8

160.58

159.78

160.76

BT 161.84

161.85

161.49

161.70

7 8.1 15

7.5

158.83

156.69

BCH 159.01 D0.4 159.62

160.5

159.47

15

BCH D0.4

BCH D0.3

160.79

160.71 SV

159.66

TARMAC

160.72

9 15

160.68 160.23

159.99

159.66 159.67

160.95

6 1.0 161.01 300mm 16 159.48 PIPE 160 159.85 IL158.56 5 9.2 15 6 8.1 15

159.

96

161.44

160.97

159.26

160

Workshop Otto, ABK, Happold 1989

158.77

ALD D2x0.2

155.17

159.72

CONC

TARMAC

156.79

ASH D0.35

155.07

STEP159.76

WORKSHOP

157

ASH D0.25

159.72

ALD D0.15

159.46

ALD D0.15

ASH D0.3

159.68 SAW DUS BOILER T COLLECT HOUSE OR

160.72

159.69 158.63

BCH D0.35

161.02 161.13 161.03

159.84159.82

160.13

FL 159.84

161.11

161.20

159.5

WORKSHOP

156.59

156.24

E WALL

159.66

159.15

158.40

156.82 15 8

156.45

160.19160.15

160.11

161.36

161.37

162.08

162.05

162.11

Stn.10

161.39

161.23

5

161.

160.5

160.18

158.98

.5

8 15

ASH D0.3

161.56

161

159.66 158.72

TREE CANOPY

161.95 161.68

159.50

158.49

161.30

161.67 160.5

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

162.13 Stn.11

162.08 161.99

162.01

161

162

162

161.24

161.64

161.24

Stn.1

161.41

161.5

161.47 DITCH

160.94

160.74

160.52

161.16

161.24

161.53

162

162.00

161.5

9

160.24CONC

FH

162.12

IC 161.13

9

160

162.26

162

160.85 160.73

.9

WOODEN BRIDGE

160.67 160.17

MH 161.24

GP

162.40

161.31

161

1.5

159.72

GP

161.56

161.90

162.30

DITCH

161.48

161.5

161.06 161.02

161.07

16 0

0.5

ALD ALD D0.2 D0.2

157

157.07

160.96

16

160.20 159.72

ALD D0.22 ALD ALD D0.2 ALD D0.2 157.26 D0.15

5

161.32

161.65

160.5 5

159.73 158.86

ALD D0.2

LP 162.33

161.

159.91

ALD D0.2

162.44

162.24

162.14

161.76 161.83

Architectural Association School of Architecture

162

161.99

161.5

162.07

161.94

162.39 162.32

161.86

FUEL STORAGE CONTAINERS

TAP

162.31

.5

2 16

162.49

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

162.64

161.46

161.28

2

ALD D0.2 ALD D0.15

162.04

159.92

158.75

ALD D0.12

156.59

162.64

LP

162.5

16

D0.12

ALD D0.15

162.14

162.54

162.06 ELM D0.15

162.11 161.77

16

162.11

161.5

162.12

1:2500 162.71

ASH D0.25

161.37

161.54

161.63

162.09

162.20

ELD D0.15 UNK 161.83 D0.3 162.10 SYC D0.2

161.69

CONCRETE 162.15

159.36

157.61

ALD D0.15

162.19 SYC D0.2

161.76

161.94

162.14

162.55

162.77 162.73 162.77 162.52

158.44

ALD D2x0.2

162.14

161

ALD D0.15

ALD D0.22

162.07

162.05

2

ALD D0.2

Stn.3

2.5

16 2

161

ALD D0.25

ALD D0.15

ALD D0.18

162.83

16

160

9.5

ALD D0.2

156.93

ALD D0.2

temp site bldg

15

ALD D0.15

A2 - ELEVATIONS A3 - CUTLISTS

162.91

SL3: 60m2

162.61

162.00

162.37

163.04

BCH D0.4

159.94

157.75

ALD D0.15

157.50

157.5 D0.15

162.32

163

162.89

162.69

162.14

16

161.95

15 8

157.62 ALD

BCH D0.15

162.58

162.24

16 0.5 1

2 16

BCH D0.5

158.5

163.19

BT

162.89

162.55

CHY D0.15

162.16 BCH D0.5

ASH D0.3

2.5

162.36 163.06

163.10

GP

16

162

160.5

158.25

TARMAC ROAD

16 3.0 4

162.64

162.90

159.5

159

162.42

AREA OF SMALL TREES

162.87

162.47

162.5

1.5

1

163

162.62

162.47

162.86 162.94

161.51 16

16

160.63

BCH D0.35

162.62

163.07

PIPE 225mm IL162.51 163.00

163.05

BCH D0.35

162.66

GP

163.04

162.99

BCH D0.35 ASH D0.35

AREA OF SMALL TREES

162.51

3 16

BCH D0.4

160.55

163.33

162.71

163.20

16 3.1 0

162.76

163.05

162.89

162.66

162.5

162.96

163.00

163

162.81

162.76

CH 16 3

BCH D0.6

162.14

162.60

163.01

162.71

163.26

BCH D0.3

163.28

163.05

DIT

BCH D0.35

162.08

160.47

A1.4 GROUND FLOOR PLAN A1.5 ROOF PLAN

A4 DETAILS A4.1 CONNECTION DETAIL @ NODE A4.1 FRONT EDGE DETAIL A4.2 NORTH EDGE DETAIL

BCH D0.4

162.30

AREA OF SMALL TREES

16 3

162.71

163.30

163.11

A1.3.1 FOUNDATION DETAILS A1.3.2 FND / S&W WALL DETAILS A1.3.3 MINI PILE SET OUT A1.3.4 COLUMN SET OUT A1.3.5 BASE PLATE DETAILS

162.5

16 3.2 6

.5

163.41

ASH D0.35

163.50

6

.2

2 16

162.93

163.30

161.05

161.00

162.93

162.30 162 .95

163.03 163

163.09

A0.0 COVER PAGE W/ SITE PLAN A1.0 (E) SITE PLAN CIVIL A1.1 SETTING OUT OF PTS. A1.2 DRAINAGE A1.3 FOUNDATION PLAN

1 mile

PMF

16 3.5

162.77

162.04 BCH D0.45

162.85

163.77

3 16

162.90 163.26

163.11

162.96

162.33

.4

162.89

163.57

163.28

163.76

163.16

0

163.28

163.25

163.74

163.5

161.88

DRAWING LIST

2 16

162.87

163.5

162.27

BCH D0.4

DIT 162.83

163.62

163.44

162

161.5

5

.6 162

CH

163.43

163.58

163.55

BCH D0.4

Stn.5

2

163.9 164

164.08

163.34

BOGGY

163.36

163.29

BCH D0.35

163.75

163.5

162.81

163.46

ASH D0.3

SL1&2: 80m2

163.13

164.38 163.85

5 163.3

163

163.51

163.54

164

163.5

163.21

163.56

163.5

163.45 163.27

162.00

163.54

TARMAC ROAD

16

162.96

2 16

162.11ASH D0.3

163.89

CH DIT 3

BCH D0.55

ASH D0.3

163.66

BS: 468m2

163.60

162.30

163.79

WORK YARD

163.09

165.24

0 3.8 16

16

163.47

164.5

BOGGY

163.16

163.92

164.02

163.89

163.96

16 3.5

165.03

164 163.95

163.44 163.72

164.17 163.52

165

163.64

163.88

164

ASH D0.3

165.68 164.38

164.22

164

164.34

164.27

.5

166.21

8 4.1 16

164.05

164.21

BCH D0.4

164.09

166.78

16 6

166.31

164.82

164.02

4

CONSULTANTS: Buro Happold, civil engineering ARUP, structural engineer Polyfloss, consultant engineer Bath University, material testing Hooke Park, forestry development

164.87

165.29 164.5

164.35

166.52

165.5

165

163.78

164.18

8

.5 163

164.29

166.62

166.43

166

164.18

164.35

167

166.71

166.51

167.04 167.43

164.22

H

BCH D0.35

163.00

164.61 164.5

164.38

166.67 166.35

167.64

167.25 166.83

165.07

165.01

CONCRETE BASE

164.5

164.41

164.40

167 166.86

167.05

6.5

166.41

167.53

167.51

167.30

166.11

166.01

165.5

SAW MILL

164.51

164

164.5

164.75

164.52

164.45

164.44

166.09

166.23

166

168

165.17

164.71

166.26

164.73

164.5

167.38

168.38

168.11

167.5

166.21

163.51

163.40

164.82

BCH D0.35

167.13

100 miles

BCH D0.4

169

168.5

16

166.40

166.5

164.99 164.72

168.82

166.73

167.23

167.19

166.71

165.88

167.00

BCH D0.4

170

BCH D0.25

168.11 168.01

BCH D0.5

172.16

170.99

17 72

169.

169.52 169.5

173.08

BCH D0.3

171.10

7 0.1

168.38

167.28 167.5

1 .1

2 17

167.45

5 4.

95 163.

16

3.5

164.68

SCH D0.25

170.5

BCH D0.2

167.04

168

167

166.64

5

164.75

TSS: 156m2

164.78

164.87

16

168.21

167

164.65

.5

164.42

168.20

167.38

168.32

165.5

164.75

168.46

172.67

171

171.04

168.97

168.06

168.5

168.54

16

16 4

164.66

169.26

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.3

173

172 171.72

171.00 BCH D0.5 170.25 BCH D0.25 169.21 06 169.

169.00

168.68

8

165.16 165.15

164.81

169.35

BCH D0.4

167.67

165.31 165.55

164.62 164.96 16

173.29

OAK D0.3

171.5

BCH D0.3

169.5

16

167.62

167.5

166

164.67

164.61

BCH D0.45

168.60 167.04

164.63

170.74 BCH D0.45

170.5

169.03

165.24 165.60

Stn.13

2.5

169

165

164.77

164.84

BCH D0.4

164.

169

165.26

173.37

173 .5

17

170

168.5

6.5

164.72

BCH D0.4

167.03

16

164.79

4.5

167.10

5

164.96 164.75

163.54

7

165.25

BCH D0.4

173.71 BCH D0.4

171

169.36

3.5

174.02

173.70

173.40 171.16 170.47

168.89

166.24

165.5

165.12

164.33 164.38 16

168.02

173

172.5

172

17

174

4

171.5

169.63

173.58

174.14

173.93

17

173.22

BCH D0.5

BCH D0.4

170

169.5

BCH D0.4

HLY

166

164.90 164.89

PIPE 150mm IL164.40m

BCH D0.4

164.5

165.05

165.26

168

16

165.99 3 OAK .9 D2x0.2 65 165.65 1

173.17

174.11 173.87 174.24

BCH D0.5

172.34

171.74

169.52 BCH D0.35

BCH D0.4

168.00

166.84

166.53

166.45

165.68

ASP D0.3

164.48

164.89

165

165.35

163.93 164.46

165.5 165.76

ASP 164.71 D0.3 16 5

168.71

167.5 166.5

174.08

BCH D0.45

BCH D0.5

173.59

173.5

173.37

171.84

171

169

168.5

167.95

165.92

164.80

165.48

4

7

164.98

164.21 16

165.87

164.85 165.10

165.29

.5

BCH D0.5 163.80

UNK D0.2

165.26

165.57

165.11

165.35

165.83

165.88 165.5

165.77

165.04

5 16

164.28

BCH D0.35

166.04

165.68

165.71

167.46

16

165.87

165.32

165.5

165.50 166.03

166.12

16

165.85

166.12

166.09

166.12

165.54

170.68

170.5

169.04

HAZEL CLUMP

166

174.46

BCH D0.4

172

169.5

166.5

6 16

16 6

ALD D0.3

164.19

166.33

173

171.63

171.5

170

167.5

BCH D0.4

165.61

165.34

BCH D0.25 171.13

BCH D0.3

170.5

BCH D0.4

173.15

172.5

171.11

171

8

BCH D0.22

167

BCH D0.4

172

BCH D0.4

16

TIMBER WEIR 165.51

BCH D0.4

167.75

BCH D0.45

165.92

ALD D0.35 D0.25X2

BCH D0.35 169 168.5

173.86

173.46

173.5

173

171.93

174.13

17 2.9 6

5 16

166.24

4.5

174.27

172.73

171.5

BCH D0.35

167.71

168

5

174.63

17

174

Stn.6 172.

BCH D0.55

170

174.55 174.5

BCH D0.45 173.94

173.54

171.88

9.5

BCH D0.4

174.27

173.74

173.12

171

16

4

PROJECT TITLE: TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER Agricultural/Forestry Bldg.

Bldg. application ref no.:

.5

2

BCH D0.35

BCH D0.22

BCH D0.4

167.95

BCH D0.25 167.5

16 6

174

17

167 .30

17

169 168.5

BCH D0.35

166.25

174.62

173.52 0.5

BCH D0.25

.7

.5

.5

167.65

167

166.74

BCH D0.4

171.5

174.47

D0.5

15 8

8 16

6 16

166.71

6 16

16 6

BCH D0.35

170

169

BCH D0.5

174.5

174.08

173.5BCH

172.62

BCH D0.35

BCH D0.6

3

171

170.5

173.82

17

174.50

9

7.5

174.03

174

172.5

FIR D0.5

.6

8 6.0 16

16

OAK D0.2

172

FIR D0.6

174.76

16 0

.5

166.75 TARMAC ROAD

164.68

DESIGN + MAKE TEAM: Meghan Dorrian Kawit Ko-Udomvit Omri Menashe Glen Stellmacher Stewart Dodd, AA tutor

BCH D0.3 BCH D0.25

BCH D0.3x2

174.5

174.20

161

6 16

9

174.49

BCH D0.35

.5

1 17

7 16

16

FIR D0.5

174.5

174.28

173.5

173

1.5

167.06

SITE: ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION HOOKE PARK HOOKE BEAMINSTER DT83PH

FLOOR PLAN SIZE: 156 M2 ROOF PLAN SURFACE: 205M2 MAX RIDGELINE HT.: 5072 M2

5

BCH D0.317

BCH D0.6

BCH D0.3

172.

.5

167.21

174.58

173.83

16 8

175

175

174.14 174

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.5

FIR D0.55 175.10

BCH D0.4

173.86 17 0

FIR D0.6

174.5

BCH D0.4

3.5

16 2

9.5 16

167.24 167.22

174.01 17

16 2

2 17

BCH D0.25 BCH D0.25

7 6.6 16

CLIENT: 218 ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION 36 BEDFORD SQUARE LONDON contact: martin.self@aaschool.ac.uk

163.5

3

15 8

17

175

16 4.5 7

PROJECT INFO:

175.65

17 5

BCH D0.3

157.93

156.73 156.66

A0.0

174.5 D0.35

173.90

175.59

0 17 .5

175.10

5 16 .7 5

166.24

.7

165.92

165.92

6

165.00

6

5

165.77

165.28

164.46

PIPE 150mm IL164.40m

4.5

164.

25

TARMAC ROAD

164.5

164.61 CONCRETE BASE

164.09

163.5

164.05

BS: 468m2

163.60

162.30

163.30

3 16

5 3.1 16

162.71

163.22

CH

162.76

2 16 .5

ALD ALD D0.2 ALD D0.2 157.26 D0.15

160.15

162

160.24CONC

FH

162.12

IC 161.13

160.22

160.19

160.14

160.20

IC 161.13

160.27 160.12

.5

CONCRET

15 7

.5

IC 158.24 158.00

158.30

BCH D0.4

156.20

156.04

156.54 157.01

156.5

.5 15 6

159.98

159.03

159.09

.65 163.65 EL163 LEVEL LEV

ES EAVES EAV

161.22

160.45

157.5

160.99

9

Drawn by

158.78

Units

158.05 158.15 158.28 157.71

156.25156 .5 15 5.5 7

156.52

155.79

15 5

.2

156.06

4

15 6

155.67

155.69

BCH D0.4

1

Dwg title

158.24

157.23

156.34 157.69

TREE CANOPY

TSS 06 MAY 2013 1:500 MD mm, UON

(macro) SITE PLAN

157.33 158.18

157.10 156.73

SITE LOCATION scale = 1:500

Date Scale

15

EAVESLEVEL EAVES LEVEL 163.65m 163.65m

158.54 158

Project title

.5

158.06

158.41

TARMAC

158.5

IC 159.21

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

160.62

158.88

157.76

157.19 IC 156.32 156.41 157.67 155.

157.18 81 15 5.7 5

156.99

STEPS 159.36

WLW D0.25 D0.15

0 16

158.71

157.76

RE

158.97 VENT 159.01

8

BCH D0.4

158.39

WLW D0.15

160.65

1 16

157.56

.25

160.86

51 159.

158.48

158.51

S

15 6

160.89

158.5

157.68

156.78

161.62

158.99

157.23 157.16

16 1.5

161.25

15 9

158.65

.9

STEP

158.53

159.5

159

156.58 157.20

FL 159.91 159.13

161.39

0 16

5

157.50

156.93 157.42

STEP

159.03

159.07

PRF

.5 159.39

4 15

157.45

157.80

1

Otto, ABK, Happold 1985

7 15

158

157.39

158.95

PORTACABIN

BCH D0.3

8.5

157.48

161.70

161.71

TARMAC

161.29

16

REFECTORY

159.70

160

157.48

15 6.4 BCH 2 D0.45 157.31

GRAVEL

.95 166.95 EL166 EL LEV GELEV RIDGE RID

160.19

156

157.94

157.84

161.61

161.18

TAP

160.90 BCH 161.01 160.88160.85 D0.45 159.57 160.42 STEPS

M

158.34

158.19

158.99

158.44 159.00

159.09

160.58

PRF

.77 163.77 EL163 LEVEL ESLEV EAVES EAV

IC 161.15

IC 161.04

160.96

A

158.47

158.5

159.09 8

.8

8 15

158.77

158.52

159.29

160.78

.5

RE

BCH D0.35

158 .4

9

15

159.26

6 .8159

8 15

158.60

158.38

RIDGE LEVEL 163.04m

161.22

161.93 161.85

161.33

161.36

ST

158.75

FL 159.97

16 0

6.5 15

156

159.02

STEP

159.31

159.21

159

158.5

158.52 156.09

TREE CANOPY 159.16

157.65

156.00

BCH D0.3

159.44

159.43

161.75

161.12

VENT 160.95 160.78

15

157.68

2

ALD D0.2 6

159.24

159.32 159.46 BCH D0.35

BCH D0.4 155.91

15

159.27

159.61

159.37

STEP

159.44

157.94

156.4

158.31

ALD D0.22

159.44

158.32

9 6.7 15

159.31

156.67

159.44

BCH D0.4

BCH D0.4

8

7 15

ALD D0.2

BCH D0.4

159.60

BCH D0.4

159.57 15

FIR D0.2

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

162

161.81

161.91

161.24

160.37

3 158.4

159.61

159.52

ASH D0.3

CPS

159.50

159.69

159.50

5

161.57

FIR D0.12

CHY D0.12

CHY D0.12

161.55161.

161.22

BCH D0.3

E 160.24 TIMBER BRIDG 160.1 8 158.50 159.10

99 156. M .37 EA 157 STR

159.67

159.25

159.5

160.60

158.77

150mm PIPE IL157.65

159.48

BCH D0.5

161.17

16 1

158.5

159.05

160.21

160.12

TREE CANOPY

CONC STEP

159.59

159.71

BCH D0.3

159.75

159.88

160.24

Stn.2

159.46

159.12

161.73

161.76

D0.45

7.5 15

ASH D0.35

159.99

159.78

158.86

161.83 161.61

161.05

160.53 BCH

BCH D0.4

.52

156.52

SV 159.66

TARMAC

BCH 159.01 D0.4 159.62

161.49

BT 161.84

161.85

161.70 160.76

7 15

15 8

159.61

160.71

159.66 159.67

160.79

160.58

159.25

156.63

15 9

159.5

.5

156.31

155.07

160.68 160.23

159.99

160.72

7 8.1 15

159.28

15 8

ALD D2x0.2

155.17

159.

96

160.5

7.5

158.83

156.69

159.26

160

Workshop Otto, ABK, Happold 1989

159.47

15

BCH D0.4

ASH D0.35

ASH D0.25

159.72

CONC

TARMAC

158.77

157

156.24

159.72

STEP159.76

ALD D0.15

WORKSHOP

156.79

BCH D0.3

ASH D0.3

160.72

159.46

158.63

BCH D0.35

159.68 SAW DUS BOILER T COLLECT HOUSE OR

159.69

156.59

160.95

6 1.0 161.01 300mm 16 159.48 PIPE 160 159.85 IL158.56

160.13

FL 159.84

ALD D0.15

156.45

E WALL

159.66

159.15

WORKSHOP

161.02 161.13 161.03

159.84159.82

9 15

158.72

158.40

160.97

5 9.2 15 6 8.1 15

158.98

161.11

161.20

161

160.19160.15

160.11

161.36

161.37

161.44

162.08

162.05

162.11

Stn.10

161.39

161.23

5

161.

160.5

160.18

15 8

161.56

159.5

158.49

161.95 161.68

159.66

156.82

TREE CANOPY

161.67

159.50

8 15

ASH D0.3

161.99

161.30

161.24

Stn.1

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

162.13 Stn.11

162.08

161.64

162.01

160.5

160.10

161.16

161.24

161.53

162

162.00

161.5 161

15 9

157

157.07

160.10

159.53

ALD ALD D0.2 D0.2

160.73

160.17

160

9

ALD D0.22

159.72

162.26

162

160.85

162

162

161.24

160.74

160.52

Architectural Association School of Architecture

161.41

161.5

161.47 DITCH

160.94

1.5

159.72

WOODEN BRIDGE

160.67

GP

162.40

161.31

161

MH 161.24

.9

0.5

DITCH

161.48

16

ALD D0.2

ALD D0.18

160.96

16

160.20

162.14

161.5

161.06 161.02

161.07

GP

161.56

161.90

162.30

161.32

161.65

16 0

159.73 158.86

162.33

5

162.39

162

161.99

161.76 161.83

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

162.64

161.5

162.07

161.94

162.5

162.32

161.86

5

ALD D0.2

162.24

161.

159.91

162.31

.5

LP

162.54

161.46

161.28

2

157.61

162.44

162.71

162.06 ELM D0.15

162.11 161.77

FUEL STORAGE CONTAINERS

TAP

2 16

162.49

161.5

162.12

161.37

161.54

161.63

162.09

16

162.64

LP

162.04

159.92

158.75

ALD D0.12

156.59

162.14

159.36

ALD D0.15

ELD D0.15 UNK 161.83 D0.3 162.10 SYC D0.2

161.69

CONCRETE 162.15

162.11

ALD D0.2

ALD D0.15

162.55

162.77 162.73

162.52

158.44

ALD D2x0.2

162.14

162.20

ASH D0.25

161

ALD D0.22

162.19 SYC D0.2

161.76

161.94

162.14

162.77

161

ALD D0.15

D0.12

Stn.3

2.5

16 2

9.5

ALD D0.25

156.93

ALD D0.15

temp site bldg

15

ALD D0.2

157.75

ALD D0.15

157.50

ALD D0.15

ALD D0.15

162.83

16

160

15 8

157.62 ALD

157.5 D0.15

ALD D0.2

162.91

162.89

162.89

BCH D0.4

159.94

158.5

162.07

162.05

2

BCH D0.5

ASH D0.3

162.00

162.37

163.04 163

16

161.95

160.5

159

162.32

SL3: 60m2

162.61

162.16 BCH D0.5

159.5

158.25

BT

162.64

162.69

162.14

1.5

1

162.58

162.24 162.86

162.90

162.55

CHY D0.15

160.5

161.51 16

16

160.63

BCH D0.35

2.5

162

BCH D0.35

AREA OF SMALL TREES

162.87

16

162.36 163.06

163.19

1

ASH D0.35

162.42

TARMAC ROAD

163.05

162.94

BCH D0.35 160.55

162.5

163.10

3 16

163.11

162.62 162.47

162.47

16 3.0 4

162.99

BCH D0.4

160.47

ALD D0.2

PIPE 225mm IL162.51 163.00 3 16

16 3.1 0

BCH D0.6

162.14

162.51 162.62

163.07

162.5

2 16

BCH D0.3

163

163.20

3

162.08

ASH D0.35

162.66

162.71

163.04

16

BCH D0.4

161.05

161.00

AREA OF SMALL TREES

162.66

DIT 16 3

163.09 162.96

163.33

162.71

163.26

162.85

163.05

162.89

162.81

162.76

163.30

BCH D0.35

163.00

163

16 3

161.88

163.01 162.93

163.41

162.33

AREA OF SMALL TREES

162.60

163.05

163

BCH D0.4

162.30

163.28

163.03

162.96

162.04 BCH D0.45

161.5

163.50

6

.2

162.77

162.27

BCH D0.4

PMF

163.5

162

BCH D0.35

163.77

3 16 16 3.5

2 16

162.30 162 .95 163.11

163.28

163.76

163.16

0

162.93

163.26 162.5

16 3.2 6

.5

162.00

2.4

162.90

163.5

163.25

163.74

162.89

163.57

163.36

163.29

16

162.87

163.44

162.81

163.46

162.83

163.28

163.5

164

164.08

CH

DIT

163.43 163.62

163.55

ASH D0.3

5

.6 162

BOGGY

163.13

Stn.5

163.51

163.54

5 163.3

163

163.5

163.45 163.27

163.56

163.58

16

162.96

2 16

162.11ASH D0.3

163.89

CH DIT 3

BCH D0.55

ASH D0.3

163.54

TARMAC ROAD

163.75

2

163.9

163.85

163.34

.18

163

163.66

165.24

164.38

0 3.8 16

164

163.79

WORK YARD

163.09

164

163.5

163.21

SL1&2: 80m2

163.16

163.92

164.02

163.89

163.96

16 3.5

164.5

BOGGY

4 16

4

16

163.52 163.47

BCH D0.15

163.72

164.17

ASH D0.3

165.03

164 163.95

163.64

163.88

164

165

163.44

164

164.34

164.27

.5

166.21

165.68 164.38

164.22 164.02

164.05

166.78

16 6

166.31

164.82

163.78

164.18

164.35

4

164.21

165.29

167.04 167.43

164.22

164.21

8

.5 163

164.38

166.52

165.5

165

164.18

164.35

166.62

166.43

165.07 164.87

167.64

167.25 166.83

167

166.71

166.51

166

164.5

164.5

164.25

166.67 166.35

167.53

167.05

167.30

166.41

168

167 166.86

166.11

166.01

168.11

167.5

167.51

6.5

165.5

165.01

164.38

166.09

166.23

166

164.40

168.11 168.01

168.38

165.17

H

16

BCH D0.4

166.40

166.26

164.73

167.38

BCH D0.4

169

168.5

16

166.5

164.99 164.72

170

BCH D0.25

166.21

DITC

164.29

166.71

SAW MILL

164.5

164.41

164.52

164.45

164.44 164.51

164

164.5

BCH D0.35

166.64

167.13

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.4

168.82

BCH D0.5

167.00

173.08

172.16

170.99

166.73

167.23

167.19

169.52 169.5

168.38

167.28 167.5

.17

0 17 72

169.

BCH D0.2

167.04

168

167

165.88

5

164.75

TSS: 156m2

164.68

SCH D0.25

165.5

164.75

167.38

168.32

168.21

170.5

171.10

171

171.04

168.97

168.20

168.06

168.5

168.54 167.67

165.31 165.55

168.46

1 .1

2 17

167.45

95

164.71

163.00

8

167

164.78

169.26

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.3

171.00 BCH D0.5 170.25 BCH D0.25 169.21 06 169.

169.00

168.68

16

167.62

167.5

166

164.65

.5

164.42

164.44

ASH D0.25

167.04 165.24 165.60 164.67

16

16 4

164.66

169.35

BCH D0.4

169.03

165.16 165.15

164.81

169.5

172.67

172 171.72

171.5

169

165

164.96 16

164.82

164.75

BCH D0.45

168.60

164.62

163.

5 4.

163.40

164.72 164.63

164.61

170.74 BCH D0.45

BCH D0.3

173

2.5

BCH D0.3

170

168.5

6.5

173.29

OAK D0.3

17

170.5

167.03

16

165.26

164.77

164.75

BCH D0.35

163.51

166.24

165.25

164.33 164.38 16

167.10

Stn.13

171

169.36 169

165.5

165.12

BCH D0.4

3.5

173.37

173 .5

173.40 171.16 170.47

168.89

5

164.96

16

3.5

3 OAK .9 D2x0.2 65 1

164.79

164.87

16

7

165.99 165.65

168.02

HLY 16

166

164.90 164.89

164.84

BCH D0.4

164.5

165.05

165.26

BCH D0.4

163.54

ASP D0.3

164.48

164.89

164.80 165.35

168

166.84

166.53

166.45

165.68

164.98 165.48

163.93

4

16 5

166.5

165.5 165.76

BCH D0.4

173.71 BCH D0.4

172

17

174.02

173.70

171.5

169.63

173.58

174.14

BCH D0.5

172.5

BCH D0.4

170

169.5

BCH D0.4

174.11 174.24

174

4

173

BCH D0.5

173.87

173.93

17

173.22

172.34

171.74

169.52 BCH D0.35

BCH D0.4

168.00 167.5

165.92

ASP 164.71 D0.3

168.71

168.5

167.95

165

164.21 16

165.87

164.85 165.10

TARMAC ROAD

7

173.37

171.84

169

16 0.5

163.80

UNK D0.2

165.29

.5

165.11

165.35

165.83

165.26

165.57

5 16

165.04

BCH D0.5

BCH D0.35

166.04

165.88 165.5

167.46

16

165.87

165.68

165.71

16

164.89

164.28

165.50 166.03

166.12

16

165.85

174.08

BCH D0.45

BCH D0.5

173.59

173.5

173.17

171

170.5

169.04

HAZEL CLUMP

165.32

165.5

174.46

BCH D0.4

172

169.5

166.5

166.12

166.09

166.12

165.54

173

171.63

171.5

170.68

170

167.5

BCH D0.4

165.61

165.34

BCH D0.25 171.13

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.4

173.15

172.5

171.11

171

6 16

165.93

5 16

ALD D0.3

164.19

BCH D0.22

167

173.86

BCH D0.4

170.5

174.13

173.46

173.5

173

172

BCH D0.4

8

166

165.51

BCH D0.4

167.75

166.33

TIMBER WEIR

9 5.3 16 165.5

16 6

BCH D0.35 169 168.5

BCH D0.45

4.5

174.27

172.73

171.5

BCH D0.35

167.71

168

5

171.93

16

165.92

ALD D0.35 D0.25X2

167.95

BCH D0.4

172.

BCH D0.55

170

174.63

17

174

Stn.6 173.54

171.88

9.5

174.55 174.5

BCH D0.45 173.94

171

16

4

164.68

.5

BCH D0.35

BCH D0.22

BCH D0.4

174.27

173.74

173.12

17 2.9 6

169 168.5

BCH D0.25 167.5

16 6

2

167 .30

BCH D0.25

BCH D0.35

166.25

174.62 174

17

15 8

166.74

0.5

.7

.5

174.47

173.52

17

BCH D0.5

174.5

9

8 16

6 16

16 6

.5

174.50

174.08

D0.5

BCH D0.4

171.5

170

169

167.65

167

BCH D0.35

FIR D0.5

173.5BCH

172.62

BCH D0.35

BCH D0.6

166.71

3

171

170.5

173.82

17

FIR D0.6

174.76

.6

7.5

6 16

HEX WT. @ 12%: 110.8 KG

BCH D0.25

16

172.5

BCH D0.3x2

174.5

174.20

174.03

174

16 0

8 6.0 16

166.75 TARMAC ROAD

OAK D0.2

172

174.49

BCH D0.35

.5

.5

BCH D0.3

167.06

FIR D0.5

174.5

174.28

173.5

173

16 2

6 16

5

1.5

9

BCH D0.6

BCH D0.3

172.

BCH D0.317 16

167.21

174.58

161

7 16

16 8

175

175

174.14 174

173.83

.5

COMPONENT WT. @ 50%: 22.8 kg COMPONENT WT. @ 12%: 18.47 kg

BCH D0.4

BCH D0.3

BCH D0.5

FIR D0.55

16 2

1 17

3.5

173.86 17 0

FIR D0.6

174.5

BCH D0.4

17

163.5

2 17

9.5 16

167.24 167.22

219

175

174.01

BCH D0.25

7 6.6 16

INDV. MEMBER VOLUME: .013272 m3 COMPONENT VOLUME: .02744 m3 HEX VOLUME: .16465 m3 TOTAL BLDG TIMBER VOLUME: 4.4 M3

BCH D0.25

15 8

3

175

BCH D0.3

17 4

17

16 4.5 7

HEX INFORMATION:

175.65

17 5

BCH D0.3

157.93

156.73 156.66

A0.0

OAK 2x0.2

16 7

220

169

LANDSLIP LOCATION TEMP. INFILL W/ ROCK AND TREE DEBRIS RETAINING REQUIRED AS PER BURO HAPPOLD REVIEW

166 168.5

165 .5

YARD: GRADED IN YR. 2009 SPEC: 1 M STONE TOP SOIL: 5MM

16 6

.5

165

16 8

167 .5

APPROX. LOCATION OF STANDING WATER ON SITE 166

VIF

167

165.5

PROPOSED OD OF TSS FOUNDATION

BH2

SPECULATIVE LOCATION OF WOOD RETAINING WALL ORG. INSTALLED IN 1999 IN A COMPRIMISED STATE

16 5

SPECULATIVE LOCATION OF DRAINAGE PIPE BELOW VIF REQUIRED PRE-GROUNDWORKS DIA. UNKNOWN SPECULATIVE GREENFINGER BORDER

Site Plan: 5

.

164

GP GP

TARMAC ROAD (UNVERIFIED POSITION)

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

.5 164

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk 164

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

164

Units

Dwg title

1

EXT. SITE CONDITION scale = 1:100

TSS

06 MAY 2013

1:100 MD

mm, UON

EXST. SITE COND.

A1.0

A

221

3

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

300 0T YP .

120

00

2

D.1

E

240

00

600

1

pt. N 0.0 E O.O RWP

4 6.

41 13

0

5.3

300 0T

848

YP .

D

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

12247

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

.12

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

600

0T

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

5277

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

99.

98

844

179

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

Site Plan:

8

0

244

722 600

(N) 0.0 POST SITE LEVEL

3A

4

YP .

+175 = T.O. MINI PILES

7.8

64.78

C

B

3

8917.32

600

0T

YP .

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

2A

RWP

RWP

GP GP

2

164.18

376 1

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

.2

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

1

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by pt. N 0.0 E O.O

63.66

1

1:100 MD mm

Units

Stn.5

SETTING OUT PLAN scale = 1:100

TSS

17 JUNE 2013

Dwg title

SURVEY PLAN

A1.1

A

222

AP

PR

BOX.

C

14.

2M

D

D.1

E

CL OF SLAB & WALL TOTAL BLDGE. AREA 156 M2

AP

PR

OX .7

.7 M

500

100 0

SPECULATIVE POSITION OF EXISTING DRAINAGE PIPE

3

2

APPR

(N) LAND DRAIN AS PER BURO HAPPOLD SPEC 300 X 600 MM TERRAN 100 GEOTEXTILE LINED TRENCH W/ DRAINAGE PIPE AND 20MM FILL STONE

OX. 1

1

1.7 M

RWP

64.78

3A

ELEC. HOOKUP

APPROX. 6 M

+300 = T.O. DRAINAGE

1000 TYP. OFFSET FROM EDGE

Site Plan:

3

500

2A

RWP

APPROX. 9.8 M

RWP

GP GP

2

2 1.2

164.18

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

S. & W. WALL 20MM SINGLE SIZE STONE

Architectural Association School of Architecture

TERRAN 1OO GEOTEXTILE

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH 150MM DIA. PERFORATED PIPE

1

DRAINAGE PLAN scale = 1:100

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

TSS

16 JUNE 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

Units

Dwg title

2

DRAINAGE

TYP. LAND DRAIN DETAIL scale = 1:10

A1.2

1

A

FOR FOUNDATIONS 2

3

C

B

D

D.1

E

FINISH HEIGHT AND REBAR SHEDULE ADJUSTMENT, NO OTHER CHANGES

35 O

D

SUB-GRADE 400D x 300W BEAM SUPPORTED BY MINI PILES

5 ID

573 5 ID

(16) 100MM DIA. STEEL ENCASED, CONCRETE FILLED MINI PILES RATED FOR 40KN, MAX DEPTH 6M AS PER BEACON'S BID

59 1

652

570

EXPOSED LOAD BEARING LOW WALL, TYP. OF (2) T.O. WALL 0.5M ABOVE FINISHED GRADE

ID

550

570

0 ID

Site Plan:

5507.54 OD

666

688

81

3 ID

2 ID

3A

4783 ID

573 2 ID

121

7 ID

548

7

73

GP GP

3

2

1.3 .1

8449 ID

585

9

2A

9098 OD OF WALL

179

500

606

5848

OD

1 ID

573 9 ID

2

12353

569

570

1

0' 90째

2 ID

0 ID

2 ID

3 1.3.1

121

DO FW AL L

4.0 2O

2

GROUND BEAM 223 AND MINI PILE CHANGE. UPDATED 130716 AS PER ARUP .3DM MODEL:130713 GEOMETRY

1

2

1.3.2 1

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk 1

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

FOUNDATION LAYOUT scale = 1:100

TSS

16 JULY 2013

1:100 MD

meters

FOUNDTN. PLAN

A1.3

COLUMN TBD

224 T.O. REINFORCED GROUND BEAM 400 X 300

1 1.3.5

+200.0

T.O. B1 GROUND BEAMS

75

0.0

1 6 METERS MAX.

1.3.1

CAPPED MINI PILE DEPTH, T.B.C.

2

scale = 1:20

Site Plan:

T.O. REINFORCED GROUND BEAM 400 X 300 CONTINUOUS 300 X 300 BEAM, SEE ENG. DRAWING R-001 DATED 02/06/2013

ALIGN TYPE 1 STONE BEYOND, @ 2O0MM FILL

150

FOUNDATION DETAIL

GP GP

+200.0

0,0 level set by contractor / top of existing soil post-grading

250

550

200

T.O. B1 BEAMS

51

-50.0

top of B2 beams

150

200

(N) 0.0

150

-350.0

1

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

300

-200.0

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

FINISH HEIGHT AND REBAR SHEDULE ADJUSTMENT, NO OTHER CHANGES

3

SECTION AT GROUND BEAM A scale = 1:5

SEE ENG. DRAWINGS FOR REBAR SCHEDULE 130702

Units

Dwg title

1

GROUND BEAM scale = 1:10

TSS

16 JULY 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

FND'N DETAILS

A1.3.1

1

A

120

0

3

MP A.1

600

0.0

0

9 03 2.5

2

D

D.1

E

00

UPDATED 130716 AS PER ARUP .3DM "FROZEN" MODEL:130713 GEOMETRY FOR FOUNDATIONS

120

0

480 0

1 of 14 2

C

B

120

225

MP 3.1 5 of 14

12247

.12

0.9 120

MP C.1 6 of 14

9152.6

MP 3A.1

61

8 of 14

62

11 of 14

242

4 of 14

4536.1

MP 3A.2

6.5

MP B.2

+175

936.1 82 12 of 14

3A

Site Plan:

9 of 14

5276.401

GP

MP D.2

GP

10 of 14

8917.3 73

7 of 14

3.9

MP D.1 MP C.2

T.O. MINI PILES

MP 3A.3

722

1

2 of 14

480 0.8

MP A.2

3 of 14

(14) 100MM DIA. STEEL ENCASED, CONCRETE FILLED MINI PILES RATED FOR 40KN, MAX DEPTH 6M SEE ENG. DRAWINGS TITLED "HP GROUND BEAMS" ISSED JUNE 27, 2013

3

6459.6

1307

MP 2A.2 14 of 14

73

MP B.1

MP 2A.1

2A

13 of 14

2

1

LOCATION OF MP 2A.1 & 2A.2 ALIGN W/ CENTERLINE OF (N) GROUNDBEAM @ 445MM WIDE. 1

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

MINI SET OUT DRAWING scale = 1:100

TSS

16 JULY 2013

1:100 MD

METERS

MINI PILE LOC.

A1.3.3

226

(14) FINAL COLUMN COUNT, 114.3 Ø OD

A

3

C

B

D.1

E

F30

C 5.0

450

5

E31

C 4.0

1986

C 3.0

B32

10397

C 9.0

C10.0

C 2.0

379 0

1

C 14.0

350 7

457

3A

Site Plan:

C 12.0

C 7.0

C 11.0

C 6.0

1

9

2 4.1

452

5

156 1 998

C 1.0

EXPOSED LOAD BEARING LOW WALL, TYP. OF (2) T.O. WALL 0.5M ABOVE FINISHED GRADE

1850 C 13.0

300 3

279

5

C 8.0

290

X.X

428

6

0' 90°

X

3980

401

2

1

D

GP GP

4.3 3835

B11

B9

B7

B5 5941

3

1728 2A

676

7993 8406

1

2

130801 (6) SOUTH WALL CONNECTIONS LOCATED BASED ON .3DM FINAL GEOM. MODEL 1

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

COLUMN SET OUT DRAWING scale = 1:100

TSS

1 AUG 2013

1:100 MD

mm, UON

COLUMN SET OUT

A1.3.4

typ: wood stack:

8.51 M max

227

4.5M max A

weight range: 1200 kg = 12% mc spruce 2500 kg = 50% mc beech

3

C

B

D

D.1

COLUMN LOCATION TYP OF (5) @ ROW B

E

COLUMN LOCATION TYP OF (5) @ ROW C

40 m2 LOAD AREA

2450

2

0' 90째

1

5410

Equiptment use: Merlo Telehandler Weight w/ forks: 8820 kg 0

3A

Site Plan:

GP GP

3

2A

2

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk 1

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

GROUND FLOOR PLAN scale = 1:100

TSS

23 MAY 2013

1:100 MD

mm, UON

0 FLR. PLAN

A1.4

228

AK x0.2

A

3

I25: + 4100 I23: + 4600

C

B

663 2.5 6

242

2

I15: + 5190

D

D.1

E

81.7

8

I13: + 5330

0' 90째

1

I3: + 5420 I1: + 5620

A23: + 4350 AFG 183 15.

78

Site Plan:

5507.54

3A

GP GP

A21: + 4520 AFG

A19: + 4690 AFG

3

A17: + 3990 AFG 2A

A11: + 450 AFG

A5: + 450 AFG 9097.83 2

TYP. RECIPROCAL ROOF MEMBER (468) MEMBERS TOTAL AVG. LENGTH: 1.9M SEE 4.0 FOR SECTION SIZE AND DETAILS

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk 1

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

ROOF PLAN scale = 1:100

TSS

24 SEPT 2013

1:100 MD

mm, UON

ROOF PLAN

A1.5

2 2.0

229

1

69.65

2.0

Site Plan: 326.03

2

NORTH ELEVATION scale = 1:100

GP GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture

69.65

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title TSS Date 17 SEPT. 2013 NTS Scale MD Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

SOUTH / FRONT ELEVATION scale = 1:100

ELEVATION

A2.0

230

1 2.1

2 2.1

2

WEST ELEVATION scale = 1:100

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title TSS Date 17 SEPT. 2013 NTS Scale MD Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

EAST ELEVATION scale = 1:100

SIDE ELEVATIONS

A2.1

231

STRAIGHT SECTION EB10 LAMINATED SECTION EB11

T GH

I RA ST N IO CT SE

T

EB

AIGH

STR

2

B1 N E

TIO SEC

9

H AIG

STR

N

TIO

EC TS

EB3

1 4.4.3

LAMINATED SECTIONS EB4, EB5, EB6, EB7

LAMINATED SECTIONS EB13, EB14, EB15

1 1

Site Plan:

4.4.0

4.4.1

LAMINATED SECTIONS EB0, EB1, EB2

1 4.4.2

2 4.1 GP GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title TSS Date 15 OCT. 2013 NTS Scale MD Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

EDGE BEAM DIAGRAM scale = NTS

ELEVATION

A2.2

35 x 140 mm X 2000mm STEAM-BENT BEECH COMPONENT

35

232

M20 ALL THREAD SS304 ROD

134 min. end distance

70

SPLIT RING CONNECTOR @ 102MM Ø TYP. OF (2) PER JOINT

Site Plan:

GP GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

35

387.45 MM

87.5

M20 NUT

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

140

1

TYP. CONNECTION DETAIL scale = 1:2

TSS

23 MAY 2013

1:100 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A4.0

233

M20 ALL THREAD SS304 ROD M20 NUT

35 x 140 mm X 2000mm STEAM-BENT BEECH COMPONENT

SPLIT RING CONNECTOR @ 102MM Ø TYP. OF (2) PER JOINT Site Plan:

140

387.45

70

35

35 x 140 mm X 2000mm STEAM-BENT BEECH COMPONENT

GP GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. CONNECTION DETAIL scale = 1:2

TSS

23 MAY 2013

1:100 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A4.0

M20 BOLT

234

35 x 140 mm X 2000mm STEAMBENT BEECH COMPONENT WILL SHRINK 5% OVER FIRST YEAR 5% OF 35MM = 1.7MM 35

OVERALL SHRINKAGE ACCROSS (6) MEMBERS = 10.2 MM

95

M20 NUT 134 min. end distance

SPLIT RING CONNECTOR @ 102MM DIA. TYP. OF 2) PER JOINT

400 MM

70

CL OF SURFACE / SURFACE

70

Site Plan:

GP GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

134

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

140

1

TYP. CONNECTION DETAIL scale = 1:2

TSS

23 MAY 2013

1:100 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A4.0a

COLUMN CUT TO LENGTH AND WELDED TO PLATE AS PER ENG. SPEC.

235

BEECH COMPONENT 8mm PLATE BOLTED TO COMPONENT W/ EXISTING NUT AND WASHER

130

140 TYP.

200

8mm TOP PLATE WELDED TO COLUMNS 1/4" FILLET WELD

119.88, i.e.

3

T.O. COLUMN DETAIL

114.3 Ø DIA. OD STEEL COLUMN 5mm WALL THICKNESS

200

scale = 1:5

DETAIL TYP. OF (14) COLUMN BASE LOCATIONS 4.1.1 3

8mm, 120mm Ø BASE PLATE ROTATE INTO X/Y AXIS POSITION, WELD ON SITE TO 10mm BASE PLATE 10MM PLATE M16 BOLTS W/ OVERSIZED WASHER 48MM Ø DIA. PRE-CAST INTO GROUND BEAMS (EXISTING)

Site Plan:

114

.3 2

GP GP

4.1.1

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

48

40

120 250

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

300

64

400 TYP. GROUND BEAM DEPTH

82

250

300

Architectural Association School of Architecture

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

TSS

25 OCT 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

Units

Dwg title

2

COLUMN BASE DETAIL, PLAN scale = 1:5

1

COLUMN DETAILS scale = 1:5

COLUMN BASE PLATE DETAILS

A4.1

236

200

COLUMN FABRICATION:

119.88, i.e.

COLUMNS RUN LONG @ TOP CONDTION. CAP INSIDE DIMENSION (ID) OF COLUMN WITH PRE-ASSEMBLED PART D & E. LOCATE COLUMN ON SITE. WELD PARTS B & C @ SPECIFIED ROTATION DETERMINED ON SITE TO 10MM BASEPLATE (PART A) CUT TO LENGTH AND ANGLE FROM TOP.

F

ATTACH PART F TO BOTTOM OF COMPONENT W/ EXISTING M20 NUT AND WASEHER

1/4

WELD T.O. COLUMN TO PART F ON SITE.

COLUMN TOP

2

scale = 1:2

DETAIL TYP. OF (14) COLUMN BASE LOCATIONS Site Plan:

114

.3 O

D

COLUMN LENGTH VARIES

1/4

GP

30

.62

Architectural Association School of Architecture

1/4 E

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

36

27.2

123

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

CX2 B

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

32.5

133

GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

114

129

1-3

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

A

Units

Dwg title

120 170 250

1

COLUMN BASE scale = 1:2

TSS

25 OCT. 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

COLUMN BASE PLATE DETAILS

A4.1.1

1

237

UPDATED 130716 AS PER ARUP .3DM "FROZEN" MODEL:130713 GEOMETRY FOR FOUNDATIONS

OUTSIDE EDGE REMAINS CONSISTANT WITH ORIGINAL OUTSIDE EDGE BOUNDRY. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL ADDED TO THE INSIDE ONLY.

2

G

TY 2 6 P. 4.2

181

2

13 5

+460.0

4.

3

UPDATED 130801 BASE PLATE DIM.

1-3

1/4

3

1/4

Site Plan:

459

39째

M16 THREADED BOLT EMBEDED W/WASHER 300MM DEPTH

30 0

H

WELDED CONN. TO BE SPEC'D BY ARUP

ALIGN: T.O. GROUND BEAM AND GRAVEL FILL BEYOND

+200.0

T.O. B1 BEAMS

GP

660

GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

(N) 0.0

0,0 level set by contractor / top of existing soil post-grading

222.5

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

-200.0 497

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Units

Dwg title

1

GROUND BEAM AT SOUTH WALL scale = 1:20

TSS

01 AUG 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

FND'N DETAILS SOUTH WALL

A4.2

238

10MM PLATE CAST IN PLACE M16 SS BOLTS

300

TYP OF (2) EDGE BEAM BASE PLATE DETAILS EDGE BEAM NOT SHOWN, SEE .3DM

400

320

I

1

ALL BOLTS SHOWN HERE / ON SOUTH WALL WERE CAST

40 TYP.

IN PLACE DURING JULY 2013 POUR AND NOW

136

CONSIDERED EXISTING CONDITION

82 TYP.

QUANTITY: (2) PART 'I': NEEDS DETAILING TO EDGE BEAM CONNECTION

3

10 MM STEEL TAB, TOP AND BOTTOM, BOLTED THROUGH EXISTING COMPONENT M20 END BOLT

EDGE BEAM BASE PLATE DETAIL scale = 1:5

Site Plan:

GP GP

H

Architectural Association School of Architecture

350

120

270

54 TYP.

10 MM STEEL PLATE (TEMP. PLY SPACER CAST IN PLACE) M16 SS 304 BOLT w/ WIDE WASHER EMBEDMENT DETAIL SIMILAR TO 1/A1.3.5

136

40 TYP.

181.21 82 TYP.

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

407.65 EQ.

EQ.

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

300

TSS

1 AUG 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

Units

Dwg title

QUANTITY: (4) PART 'H'

2

BASE DETAIL @ SOUTH WALL scale = 1:5

1

SOUTH WALL TYP. BASE PLATE DETAIL scale = 1:5

BASE PLATE DETAIL @ SOUTH WALL

A4.3

CONTINUOUS SOFTWOOD 239WEDGE (HOOKE PARK WRC) COUNTERBORED FOR BOLT ATTACHMENT

M20 THREADED ROD COUTNERBORED APPROX 2.1 METER CL'S BOLTED GREEN BEECH SECTION, SURFACE PLANED, EXT. MAT. RIPPED TO 75mm BOLTED W/ M10 HEX BOLTS @ 300mm CL

FERRARI 402 MEMBRANE SOFTWOOD BATTEN, HP WRC ATTACHED W/ M4 WS

75

35

20

Ø 125.54

272

TYP. OF 41 METERS TYP. OF (32) CONNECTIONS

70

20 TYP.

Site Plan:

GP

59

GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

140

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. EDGE DETAIL @ STRAIGHT SECTIONS scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.0

240 CONTINUOUS SOFTWOOD WEDGE (HOOKE PARK WRC) COUNTERBORED FOR BOLT ATTACHMENT

M20 THREADED ROD COUTNERBORED APPROX 2.1 METER CL'S BOLTED GREEN BEECH SECTION, SURFACE PLANED, EXT. MAT. RIPPED TO 75mm BOLTED W/ M10 HEX BOLTS @ 300mm CL

FERRARI 402 MEMBRANE SOFTWOOD BATTEN, HP WRC ATTACHED W/ M4 WS

75

35

20

Ø 125.54

272

TYP. OF 41 METERS TYP. OF (32) CONNECTIONS

70

20 TYP.

Site Plan:

GP

59

GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

140

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. EDGE DETAIL @ STRAIGHT SECTIONS scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.0

241 CONTINUOUS SOFTWOOD WEDGE COUNTERBORED FOR BOLT ATTACHMENT

M10 THREADED ROD THROUGHBOLTED FOR CABLE CONNECTION

FERRARI 402 MEMBRANE SOFTWOOD BATTEN ATTACHED W/ M4 WS

75

35

20

BOLTED GREEN BEECH SECTION, SURFACE PLANED, RIPPED TO 75mm BOLTED W/ M10 HEX SCREWS @ 300mm CL

TYP. OF (32) CONNECTIONS

70

Site Plan:

ALUMINIUM EXTRUSION, CONT. AS POSSIBLE

GP GP

35

6MM DYNEEMA LINE

59

DYNEMA LASH BY D&M POST MEMBRANE INSTALL SPECIALTY WASHER FOR POST-TENSIONED LASHING CONNECTION HELD IN PLACE W/ (2) M10 NUTS TYP. OF (32) CONNECTIONS ADHESIVE END CONNECTION TO WRAPPED MEMBRANE

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

140

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. EDGE DETAIL @ CABLE CONNECTION scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.1

242

CONTINUOUS SOFTWOOD WEDGE

M20 THREADED ROD COUTNERBORED TYP. OF 32 CONNECTIONS STRUCTURAL LAMINATED MEMBER KILN DRIED LARCH GLUE UP GLUE REMAINS TO BE SPECIFIED

M10 BOLT

TYP. OF 24 METERS COMPRISED OF 11 CUSTOM SHAPED SECTIONS 20 TYP.

Site Plan:

GP GP

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

KILN DRIED LARCH GLUE LAMINATED BOTTOM CHORD, CONT.

Architectural Association School of Architecture

SOFT WOOD BATTEN, CONT.

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. SOUTH EDGE DETAIL scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.2

CONTINUOUS SOFTWOOD WEDGE

243 M20 THREADED ROD COUTNERBORED TYP. OF (3) CONNECTIONS ALONG EAST EDGE

BOLTED GREEN BEECH SECTION, SURFACE PLANED, EXT. MAT. RIPPED TO 75mm BOLTED W/ M10 HEX BOLTS @ 300mm CL

75

COMPONENT CONNECTION TO EAST EDGE BEAM: H1, F2, D3

CONT. SOFTWOOD BATTEN BOTTOM CHORD BEECH TIMBER SECTION

70

Site Plan:

GP GP

115

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

140 TYP.

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. EAST EDGE DETAIL scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.3

244

BEECH BOLTED UP STRAIGHT TOP CH

37.5 SPLICE DEPTH

70

TOP BATTEN

200 SPLICE LENGTH

50

SOFTWOOD TOP BATTEN COUNTERBORED AT BOLT LOC.

300 TYP.

100

M10 THROUGH BOLT & ALUM. EXTRUSION CONNECTOR

75

TOP CHORD

M10 THROUGH BOLT

EDGE BEAM TOP CHORD BOLTED BEECH SECTIONS SEE 1/A4.4.0 COMPONENTS AT APPROX. 2.1METER INTERVALS W/ M20 BOLT, TYP.

70 35

GP GP

24

SPACE 35BOTTOM CHORD

35MM BOTTOM CHORD

BOTTOM BATTEN

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture

BEECH GLU LAMINATED

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. TOP CHORD SEAM CONNECTION scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.3

M10 DYNEEMA CHORD CONN. APPRX. 2.1 METER CL'S 70

TOP BATTEN

245 SOFTWOOD TOP BATTEN COUNTERBORED AT BOLT LOC

SPACE BLOCK FOR BOTTOM CHORD SPLICE CONNECTION

SPACE

70

GP GP

BOTTOM BATTEN

24

35

75

CONT. ALUM. EXTRUSION BEYO

35BOTTOM CHORD

TOP CHORD

M10 HEX BOLT

37.5 EDGE DISTANCE

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

75 TYP. CL

Architectural Association School of Architecture

300

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Project title Date Scale Drawn by Project no.

Dwg title

1

TYP. BOTTOM CHORD SPLIC DETAIL scale = 1:2

TSS

16 OCT 2013

1:2 MD

CONN. DETAIL

A 4.4.3

14

246 8

64

4mm RADIUS FILLET

Q: (15) E

8

16 mm x 65mm SLOT 42.5 9 9

Q: (15)

TOTAL PARTS THIS PAGE: 129

Q: (15)

42.5

65

22

120

16

103 51.5

65 130

scale = 1:4

9mm x 65mm SLOT 4 mm Ø LOCATOR THROUGH HOLE

22mm Ø THOUGH HOLE

F

Q: (30)

CHANGED TO 15MM THICK

10mm RADIUS FILLET

Q: (16)

CHANGED AS PER 13/10/25 ARUP PHONE CONVERSATION

8MM PLATE

C

scale = 1:4

64 80

17

200

8

15 MM PLATE 2

115

123

129 115

1

Site Plan:

65

8MM PLATE

D

scale = 1:4

8MM PLATE

8MM PLATE

B

scale = 1:4

scale = 1:4

GP GP

LOCATOR HOLE/ ETCHING 23mm Ø HOLE

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

82

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

10mm RADIUS FILLET 22mm dia. hole 86

120

250

t: 01308 863 588

01308 863 226 x16f:e:X10MM hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

82

60

Q: (24) 100

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

170

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

40 250

G

10MM PLATE scale = 1:4

A

AS NOTED MD mm

Units

125

300

TSS

17 OCT. 2013

Dwg title

Q: (14)

BASE PLATE 10mm scale = 1:4

WATERJET PARTS

A5.0

247

10mm MILD STEEL PLATE

136 82

300

23mm Ø THROUGH HOLE

40

I

320

400

Q: (2)

10mm BASE PLATE @ SOUTH EDGE BEAM CONNECTION

TOTAL PARTS THIS PAGE: 11

scale = 1:4

Site Plan:

10mm MILD STEEL PLATE ETCH MARKS @ CENTER

23mm Ø THROUGH HOLE

10 mm PLATE

ETCH MARKS @ CENTER

GP GP

17 mm DIA HOLE

82

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

86

136

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

82

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

82

250

300

Architectural Association School of Architecture

45.5

229 320

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

40

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

270

Dwg title

Q: (5) 10mm BASE PLATE @ W. WALL scale = 1:4

AS NOTED MD mm

Units

350

J

TSS

17 OCT. 2013

Q: (4) H

10mm BASE PLATE @ S.WALL scale = 1:4

WATERJET PARTS

A5.1

COLUMN FABRICATION:

248

COLUMNS RUN LONG @ TOP CONDTION. CAP INSIDE DIMENSION (ID) OF COLUMN WITH PRE-ASSEMBLED PART D & E. LOCATE COLUMN ON SITE. WELD PARTS B & C @ SPECIFIED ROTATION DETERMINED ON SITE TO 10MM BASEPLATE (PART A)

6000

CUT TO LENGTH AND ANGLE FROM TOP.

Q: (3)

C

114.3Ø X 5MM ROUND COLUMN scale = 1:4

ATTACH PART F TO BOTTOM OF COMPONENT W/ EXISTING M20 NUT AND WASEHER WELD T.O. COLUMN TO PART F ON SITE.

Site Plan:

5500

GP GP

Q: (6)

B

114.3Ø X 5MM ROUND COLUMN scale = 1:4

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013

Architectural Association School of Architecture Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset UK, DT8 3PH

5000

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 863 226 e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER

Q: (6)

A

114.3Ø X 5MM ROUND COLUMN scale = 1:4

Project title Date Scale Drawn by

TSS

09 OCT. 2013

AS NOTED MD mm

Units

Dwg title

WATERJET PARTS

A5.2

151

Component Assembly + Testing + Patch Construction In order for the component to function properly the top and bottom chords rely on one another. This relationship occurs because the members are bolted through each other and therefore hold one another in their shape. In order to minimize the stress loads on the bolts, a split-ring is installed between the faces of the two members. To install the splitring accurately a split ring cutter is used in a pre-drilled 22 millimeter hole. The split-ring alignment issue is resolved because both members are pre-drilled simultaneously. When the cutter is used to rout the groove in each face, the cutter is located by following the existing hole.

A secondary assembly table resolved potential drilling inaccuracies by replicating the bent conditions of the components. By clamping the members as if they were just bent we could confirm precise drilling points and reduce the risk of misalignment.

Once drilled, the components were laid out and assembled as patches. Each patch was considered for its scale and weight. The project heavily relies on a Merlo telescopic-handler to move patches into position. The patch construction sequence therefore took into account the limitations of both the machine and the fabrication space within the Big Shed.

The patches, named W, X, Y, Z, are all unique and therefore exhibited different challenges.

For example, patch Z which is significantly curved, in comparison to the other patches, required extra support during assembly.

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

Building Lift + Finishing Lifting the patches into position depended on a coordinated effort. Lots of preparation and planning was done ahead of time to ensure that the pre-fabricated structure was easily positioned in its finalized site. On October 23rd. 2013 the team lifted the patches and began the process of fixing the building to its foundations. Columns, edge beams and seaming details were all started once the position of the structure was finalized and verified.

BUILDING LIFT + FINISHING

159

160

Photographs:Valerie Bennett

Photographs:Valerie Bennett

161

162

Photographs:Valerie Bennett

Photographs:Valerie Bennett

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

DIGITAL DESIGN I. DIGITAL CREDO II. TIMELINE OF DIGITAL EVOLUTION DIGITAL WORKFLOW III. IV. PEOPLE INVOLVED IN DIGITAL OUTPUT V. GEOMETRIC PRINCIPLES VI. GEOMETRIC PROBLEMS VII. GEOMETRIC SOLUTIONS VIII. EVOLUTION OF MODEL THROUGH SCREENSHOTS IX. DIGITAL TO PHYSICAL X. SCRIPTS XII. FINAL GRASSHOPPER XIII. DESIGN OUTPUT

170

DIGITAL CREDO

171

First of all, the digital production, design and output of this project is not the work of one person but of a team with constant influx of ideas, tools, rigor and drive to find a solution.

The resultant is directly attributed to the support of tutors, collaborators, students, and influential workshop environments.

The inflorescence of a digital methodology took many sleepless nights, passionate devotion of weekends and personal time by all members involved. The project is clearly better for this team dynamic, and has produced one of the most exciting pieces of architecture in the world at this moment in terms of it’s strategy of production, material processes, and material economy. The digital modes, methodology and output are a means to realization of this highly complex structure, which reveals challenges at every phase of its design to production.

The building is an experiment, a dedicated medium for research and in this respect has become a means for the honing and advancement of digital skills and geometric thinking on the part of all of the student team involved. Thank you to everyone involved with the digital success of this building, especially to Martin Self and Toby Clark for their incredible geometric sagacity and relentless support, to Jereon Van Amedeneje, Brendon Carlin, Thomas Grabner, Allison Weiler, and the principle of Make Lab, who completely revitalized the team’s mental attitude, and who instilled the idea that a solution always exists and that there is no requirement to realize a project by traditional means (this coming at a pivotal point where the realization of a digital methodology was teetering out of control).

Digital to physical.

The formal desire of the team pressed for a free-form shell which can function as wall, roof, and shelter all in one. To realize the architectural intention, a series of unique components were parametrically generated in a target formal arrangement. As a consequence, each component of the structure becomes a unique shape. The team rationalized this approach by defining all the components as the same section size and center displacement dimension. However, each component, in its planar elevation, is a unique geometry in it’s lengths and shapes.

To realize the geometry, the team conceptualized not a CNC machine, which translates gcode into cutting patterns, but a CNC jig, which is capable of clutching a piece of steaming hot wood in space, and moving that piece of wood to a numerically controlled position in space. The design team eventually would generated the g-code through output from grasshopper to control stepper motor positions in space, and desk scale proof of concept experiments were done to prove the validity of the digital approach to the system. However, this method required large push and pull resistances on the stepper motors to bend a piece of 35mm thick British hardwood into a place it did not want to be to begin with. As a consequence, the team conceptualized an alternate method of production of a series of adjustable blocks, which are oriented to a projected image of the component. The component is then pushed into the blocks by pneumatic rams. In terms of the digital sophistication this second option proved to be a tenfold more direct method of production. A simple grasshopper script was generated to allow for each component to be called out individually and displayed on the production table/ bending jig.

No g-code, and no physical drawings were required to produce all of the canopy elements. This is a paperless production process. And one which sidesteps numerically controlled

processes to produce numerically derived architecture. There is also no digital sophistication on this realm of the production process. Curves are called out by name and displayed when you want them to be. There is no way for a stepper motor to loose it’s home position, or for an extra 0 to be mistakenly placed in the GCode, or for a spindle motor to overheat. In terms of cost, no digital equipment is required beyond a cheap laptop and projector. This is a low tech solution for the production of a highly sophisticated and engineered structure. The digital model is used as a traditional template made by craftsman for hundreds of years.

Discrepancy in the translation of information to physical stuff.

Numerous steps were taken within the production process to insure that the physical outputs were as accurate as possible to their digital targets.

The system’s realm of tolerance, (far from “zero tolerance” of most other CNC manufacturing processes which rely on engineered products with square edges) was constantly changing. As more steps were made to achieve finer relative accuracy, the tolerance in the system began to increase, and components were able to connect with ease in their intended positioning. The material we are using is considered a forestry bi-product, not an added value material. Therefore, it is not homogeneous, or uniform. Each piece is unique, each piece comes from the forest at a unique length, each piece comes from the forest at a different moisture content, each piece has or has not defects, some appear riddled with knot holes, others as perfectly clear grain. These variables all amalgamate with each other to produce a building product which is constantly in flux and non-uniform in every dimension of the phrase. Thus no matter how precise the production strategy was, material would still not behave in the manner which you wanted.

To our knowledge this is the first building which uses steam bent timbers as the primary structural elements built to a digital target geometry. In this respect there was no precedent to draw

from with respect to honing the tolerance of the structure.

Being a precedent now, TSS is a wealth of imbued knowledge in terms of this relationship of tolerance in a steam bent structure.

In contrast to other digitally fabricated buildings or pavilions, the TSS has a range of tolerance between 0-200mm discrepancy.

Extreme care must be taken at every stage of the production to insure the bent members are not allowed to deform from their target shapes. They are, as a result, pampered, and walked with their hands held tight through a series of production operations which act to convince the pieces to shape. Leaving a clamp off, or resting a component down on the wrong side for a minute, forgetting to mark a piece, pushing a piece beyond it’s physical limits means hours of wasted time and energy. Words cannot convey the total sensory experience of utter and complete demoralization after the sound of a “CRACK!” Each piece must be cared for, and it’s only case of indignity is when we ask it to take the form of a digital shape. In this sense, there is an intense emotional connection to the process at all levels.

172

DECEMBER

JANUARY

FEBRUARY

MARCH

APRIL

MAY

GRASSHOPPER APPROACH 4 MAKE LAB

TIMELINE

SCRIPTED APPROACH 1

SCRIPTED APPROACH 1

2013

18

23

JUNE

29

18

JULY

3

AUGUST

18

21

23

3DM GENERATED

SEPTEMBER

OCTOBER

NOVEMBER

23

DECEMBER

173

174

RHINOCEROUS

Three dimensional modeling program with capabilities to

interface with parametric modeling, custom scripted algorhythms, andphysics simulations.

RHINO SCRIPTING With the ability to generate digital geometry or processes

through a set of logic derived by the user, rhino cripting allows for a direct connection between geometry and design intention,.

GRASSHOPPER

A Plug-In for rhinocerous. Grasshopper is a parametric tool,

which allowes for the virtual creation of geometry through a graphic parametric interface.

HUMAN

Plug-In for grasshopper. Allows extraction of elements by ID,

WORKFLOW

layer or type from rhino into grasshopper.

KANGAROO

Plug-In for grasshopper. A physics simulation engine.

PANELING TOOLS

Plug-In for grasshopper. Allows for easily patterning of surfaces or extraction or definition of UV grid systems.

PANELING TOOLS

With the ability to generate digital geometry or processes

through a set of logic derived by the user, rhino cripting allows for a direct connection between geometry and design intention,.

VECTOR WORKS

A 2D / 3D detail-centric drafting program. Primarily used by machinists.

GSA

GSA (Graphic Structural Analysis) is a proprietary program owned and operated by ARUP for the analysis of complex structural systems within an graphic interface.

175

TSS TEAM

SKETCHES ITERATIVE PHYSICAL PHYSICAL TESTS MODELS

GLEN S

KANGAROO

MARTIN

TOBY

RHINO SCRIPT

MEGHAN

GRASSHOPPER PLUG INS

VECTOR WORKS

RHINO

DESIGN GSA

GSA

ANALYSIS

FRANCIS

2D DAWINGS

GLEN R

PRODUCTION MAKE LAB

DIGITAL PROJECTION

2D DAWINGS

176

BRENDON CARLIN

Tutor, AA INTER 6 Tutor, AA Make Lab Specialist in digital design and realization.

THOMAS GRABNER

PEOPLE NO PARTICULAR ORDER

GLEN STELLMACHER

Tutor, AA Make Lab Specialist in grasshopper, parametric modeling, and scripting.

Member of TSS team in charge of digital design and execution.

TSS TEAM

Consisting of Meghan Dorrian, Kawit Ko-UDomvit, Omri Menashe, and Glen Stellmacher.

ALLISON WEILER

CERI RICHARDS

Tutor, AA Make Lab

Specialist in grasshopper, parametric modeling, and robotic control.

MAKE LAB

KOSTAS GRIGORIADIS

AA Visiting School Workshop A highly influential workshop which two members of the TSS team attended. The tutors here instilled a work ethic and mental attitude into the TSS team which produced, succesively a comprehensive digital strategy.

ARUP Structural Engineer

GLEN RUST

CRAIG IRVINE

ARUP Structural Engineer

ANDREW LAWRENCE

ARUP Specialist in timber engineering.

MEGHAN DORRIAN

TSS Team member. Primary responsible for digital corespondence between ARUP, contractors, and TSS.

JEREON VAN AMEDENEJE

Tutor, AA Inter Unit 6 Tutor, AA Make Lab Director, AA Digital Prototyping Lab Speicalist in digital design and fabrication, primarily in alternate means of digital to physical realization, and dynamic digital to physical relationships.

Architen Landrel design team. Consultant for design and fabrica tion of PVC coated polyester membrane.

Tutor, AA Design and Make.

Unit Master, AA Diploma 2 Specialist in grasshopper.

MARTIN SELF

Director, Hooke Park Director, Design and Make MArch Specialist in rhino scripting, 3D modeling, and rationalization of complex geometry.

TOBY CLARK ARUP

Specialist in parametric modeling, scripting and geometric ratio nalization.

FRANCIS ARCHER

ARUP Structural Engineer.

177

TSS TEAM GLEN S

MARTIN

TOBY

MEGHAN

CERI

KOSTAS

TOBY FRANCIS

CRAIG

ANDREW GLEN R ARUP

AMANDA THOMAS JEREON

MAKE LAB

BRENDON

178

GEOMETRIC PRINCIPLES

43

v’’ ]

Geometrically, the building is comprised of a series of components, which are built of two steam bent beech members. These components exist tied geometrically to a defining surface in the digital world. Each edge of a component exists on a point of the UV grid of this surface. The building uses parametric modeling to strategically define all components together and confirm that their interactions are suitable. The principle of the geometry for each component exists parametrically, and can therefore be deployed in another context or in a different formal arrangement if architecturally applicable.

Underlaid within the definition is a tangible, intrinsic connection to material properties gained in the conceptual stage of lofting. This is carried through the geometry of the building, and its realisation is proof of concept for the collaboration.

[ u’’ , v’’ ]

[ u ,v ]

]

[ B15 ]

SURFACE NORMAL VECTORS DEFINE INTERSECTION PLANE DIRECTION

SURFACE NORMAL VECTORS DEFINE INTERSECTION PLANE DIRECTION

CL

[ u’ , v’ ]

[ u’ , v’ ]

GEOMETRY PATTERN LINE

[ u’’’ , v’’’ ]

Left:: The geometry of a compnent. It exists as the interpolation of normals to a surface, a planar intersection with that surface, a series of nodes,(U,V points) an interpolated line between nodes, and then an offset from that line defines the two members of the component.

GEOMETRY PATTERN LINE

SURFACE GRID POINT

SURFACE GRID POINT

NORMAL PLANE TO SURFACE

NORMAL PLANE TO SURFACE

PLANAR INTERSECTION OF SURFACE

PLANAR INTERSECTION OF SURFACE

Mapping the reciprocal hexagon pattern over an underlying isoparametric UV grid.

179

180

49

48

181

4

B

A

B

A

A

C

B

D

C

D

C

D

The orientation and patterning over The orientation and patterning over the defining surface is a separate the defining surface is a separate geometric issue to that of the definigeometric issue to that of the definition of the component logic itself. The tion of the component logic itself.

The team invested time into a patterning study, which examined two types of team invested time into a patterning diagrids, a quadrilateral orientation and study, which examined two typestheoftriangle/hex scheme. Ultimately, the triangle diagrids,B a quadrilateral orientation and hexagon scheme allowed the team to efficiently use material at the triangle/hex scheme. Ultimately, the lengths available. In contrast the parallelogram options use between 50 the triangle hexagon scheme allowed 100% more material than the triangle/ the team to efficiently use material at hex arrangement. As a consequence, the team chose this arrangement on the lengths available. In contrast the the principle of material efficiency, and parallelogram options use between 50additionally on the principle of aesthet 100% more material than the triangle/ and geometric delicacy. hex arrangement. As a consequence, D the team chose this arrangement on the principle of material efficiency, and additionally on the principle of aesthetic and geometric delicacy.

182

46

GEOMETRIC SOLUTIONS

Geometric complexity at the joint between components.

Preliminary 3D parametric modeling produced results where the ends of components were not intersecting, or “noding out” into the center of the component; seen here in sketch form.

The digital model continued its evolution into real time. To solve inconsistent “noding out,” the team utilized a dynamic physics engine set within the parametric model. After the series of nodes are defined in space, the physics engine recomputes their positions in space holistically, and continually updating their positions, responding to one another in real time until a consistent relationship is reached. The engine manipulates the position of the elements in x, y, and z dimensions.

47

6 345 12

183

184

EVOLUTION OF A MODEL

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

101

102

FABRICATION Material Acquisition + Machining Steaming + Bending + Seasoning Component Assembly + Testing + Patch Construction Building Lift + Finishing

103

The production process of the Timber Seasoning Shelter at Hooke Park is a combination of distinct stages. Each stage, vital to the overall production process, took place in sequence so that the system preformed effectively at meeting production deadlines.

This part of this document will explore the various stages of the production process.

It will also, within each section, examine the experimental qualities of the Timber Seasoning Shelter. In the interest of clarity, the process can be broken down into four overarching sections. They are as follows, Material Acquisition + Machining, Steam + Bending + Seasoning, Component Assembly + Component Testing + Patch Construction, and finally Building Lift + Finishing.

104

MATERIAL ACQUISITION + MACHINING

105

Material Acquisition + Machining Raw materials are the foundation of any building system. The building relies nearly entirely on raw material provided by the forest at Hooke Park. With the help of the forester Christopher Sadd the team systematically went through an area of the forest that required thinning. This particular area of Hooke Park is covered by Beech trees and identified as Compartment 9. Because Beech is so prevalent at Hooke Park the species seemed like the perfect choice for the project. The Beech varied greatly in diameter and quality. A strict selection process was used in order to select the highest quality material available within the area. Selected in its raw form, the timber was brought to the primary breakdown saw. This saw cuts the round wood into regularized manageable planks. Cut planks ranging in thickness from 36 – 39 millimeters were once again sorted for quality and brought to the workshop to be planed to their final 35-millimeter thickness. Having been planned the edges of each member were routed for better handling and the length of the plank measured and marked in preparation for steaming and bending.

106

Compartment 9: Locating the trees from the forest.

107

Volume: Selection and Thinning

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

STEAMING + BENDING + SEASONING

115

Steaming + Bending + Seasoning Steaming wood is a technique that raises the temperature of the timber allowing it to bend more easily and reliably with a reduced chance of failure. The steaming process has only a few requirements. The timber’s internal temperature must be elevated to 100 degrees Celsius or 212 degrees Fahrenheit for one hour per inch of thickness so that the lignin in the timber softens to allow the cells to withstand greater compression.

The 35-millimeter board thickness required by the structural engineer of the project meant that each piece of timber was required to stay in the steam box for 1.5 hours.

Our team generated steam by boiling water using a custom made wood-burning stove.

This stove was designed and built using recycled materials from Hooke Park. The stove’s chimney and boiler tank were welded together so that the rising flue gases would boil the water and generate steam. The generated steam then flowed into a 300 millimeter insulated double walled drainage pipe sealed at one end, and with an operable door at the other. This pipe acted as the steam chamber in which the timber would be heated for 1.5 hours. After steaming for the period required the timber is then bent.

The bending machine used to shape the timber is a simple machine. It relies on fixed point positioning in order to ensure consistency in the bending process. Each timber board is aligned in relation to the central datum of the machine, which corresponds to the center of the component. Once in position the timber is ready to bend. The pneumatic cylinders, activated in sequence from the center of the component outwards towards its ends, push the timber into position against the forming blocks. This process takes place within thirty to forty-five seconds or the time it takes to pull the piece from the steam box and set it on the jig base in the correct position. The jig is designed to bend two pieces of timber simultaneously. This strategy allows the release of the members from the jig because the forces within the two members are opposed. The top and bottom parts of the component once bolted together support and lock one another in position. The jig set to the next shape and ready to bend a new component, keeps the production system moving on schedule.

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

COMPONENT ASSEMBLY + TESTING + PATCH CONSTRUCTION

167.5

166 .5

BCH D0.4 168

167

169

166

165

164.90

OAK D2x0.2

51

168.

5

165.

5

16 6.5

167.

5

164 .5 WOO

DEN

166

POST

RETA

INER

16 8

167

165.

5

16 5

166.5

164.78 164.68

.5 164

SL1&2

150 m2 timber seasoning shelter design and make 2013 .5

164

164.21

164.05

164.18

164

164

WOOD SEASONING EQ STORAGE

TWO ZONE SCHEME: WOOD SEASONING EQ STORAGE WOOD STACKS

workshop

Principal of geometry where the design integrates with programatic requirements

52

53

54

PATTERN STUDY

55

Early study of pattern through prototyping

56

57

58

59

RECIPROCAL GEOMETRY WITH LOCAL BENDING MATERIAL LENGTH: 2 M

Dorset DT8 3PH 60

TIMBER SHELTER BRIEF Architectural Association Hooke Park Beaminster Dorset DT8 3PH

Timber Shelter Research Program Design & Make

co

lle c

to

r

PLAN AGGREGATED MEMBERS

so

lar

CURVATURE DIAGRAM RED= 11.5M RADIUS BLUE = .5M RADIUS

een scr

re

sto

t for

rain

Mapping pattern on a freeform surface. The Timber Seasoning Shelter canopy emerged as a woven structure which has a continuity of structural pattern.

28/02/13

er imb

PROGRAM DIAGRAM AXON 01/02/13 28/02/13

3 of 7

2 of 2

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

THE PROJECT: PROJECT: TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER THE TIMBER SEASONING SHELTER This project is positioned at the confluence of a quadruple faceted research effort. Each effort informs a process for the next and each compliments the other’s strength. Together, these research agendas formulate a built work of architecture, who’s form is a manifestation of the limits in a tangible and multifaceted research program. Working to fufil the brief of the project, this shelter will allow the posterity of Hooke Park to use dry timber. This project signifies a massive paradigm shift; no longer are students and builders limited to green material at Hooke Park.

4

69

DETAIL DESIGN NODE CONNECTION AND COMPONENT GEOMETRY

70

Sketches of the differrent ideas of component, suface and joint. The team attempted to achieve planar connection which can still provide a global curvature on the free-form suface

71

72

73

74

ROOF PANEL PLANS

WALL SECTION

SECTION THRU SOLAR COLLECTOR

75

RECIPROCAL GEOMETRY CANOPY w/ ETFE MEMBRANE

2 METERS

CONNECTION DETAIL AT FLAT SECTION MATERIAL LENGTH: 2 M SECTION: 40 X 100 SPECIES: BEECH

CONNECTION DETAIL AT CURVED SECTION

76

Iterations of node connection where two components join between another component. The primary rule is to make a planar connection in every node.

77

78

79

An example of misalignment and tolerance in certain node connections

80

81

DETAIL DESIGN COLUMN

82

83

84

FABRICATION

85

86

87

88

DETAIL DESIGN SKIN

89

Early study of the building skin. The team were searching for the proper material to cover the canopy which needs to be water-tight.

90

91

92

93

Idea of concrete canvas which can be casted on the timber stucture with membrane.

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

Membrane type, this kind of material is water proof which requires a design to solve the problem of water pool on a membrane itself.

The team finalized a solution by using a series of push up rods and cables which create paths for water flow.

beech/ fagus sylvatica 50,000 available at hooke park material of choice

big shed design & make 2011

timber seasoning shelter to provide 150m3 of seasoned timber to hooke park design and make 2013

49

205

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM THE EDGE BEAM

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM: In a building which is the champion of steam bending, of material efficiency, and of local resource utilization, one facet of the project succumbed to the typical paradigm of formal design preceding material design, or thoughts on how it would be made. In the beginining we thought we would never need it. In the end, we had to wear gas masks to make it work. We are talking about the EDGE BEAM.

THE EDGE BEAM I. Overview II. The Material III. The Digital Process IV. The Physical Process V. The Output

OVERVIEW: The edge beam is used to structurally terminate the reciprocal grillage together, and also act as a member to attach the membrane to.

The structure would end up requiring three curved edge beams.

The most complex would be the Beam A, a radically doubly curved member, following the grillage from the roof to the ground beam end wall on the southern edge of the structure. This beam was glue laminated.

Beam B would end up being steam bend with strakes at140x15mm.

Beam C would end up being half steam bent and half glue laminated.

THE MATERIAL: Realizing that a glue laminated beam would require timber with a moisture content under 20%, the team was forced to purchase material from outside Hooke Park. At the time of construction, no material from Hooke Park had been kiln dried, and no material of suitable dimensions was available within the required moisture content range.

THE GLUE: The team decided to utilize a two part resin, Phenol Resorcinol.

We needed a resin which would prove hardy in exterior environments, and the same time allow for extended working times, and temperatures.

As a consequence, the team chose an amalgam of the most toxic chemicals available: Prefere 4050-M.

The team: Kawit Ko-Udomvit, Mark Torrens, Glen Stellmacer, Jack. Hawker

THE PHYSICAL PROCESS: A preparatory period of two weeks preceded the glue up, which was done in two phases over two days of Beam A. The prep work required planning material down to lamella thickness, milling and shaping each lamella, fabricating a form-work to lay the beam into, and coordinating space and materials to allow the glue up to unfold seamlessly when it came time to production. Thousands of pounds of material, within the jig, the glue and milled lamellas were at stake if any phase of the glue up were to happen not as planned.

PREPARING THE MATERIAL: A tight fit with the material available.

In order to fit all shaped lamella pieces into the material available, each piece of material was measured and every lamella was packed into the available lengths, making for almost no wasted length of the material purchased in.

Each piece of material needed to be thicknessed to 8mm, a dimension which seemed optimal for the bending radius of the beam. Ticknessing on both sides also provides a good glue surface.

Once thicknessed, the lamellas are laid out one layer at a time, which could consist of seven pieces, all with unique lengths. Each piece is defined in order to avoid clashing of butt joints. A clash can occur, leading to a structural defect if butt joints within each lamella occur stacked on top of each other, essentially reducing the effective section of the beam at the moment of clash.

Each lamella was CNC cut, and CNC pen marked with intersections of each frame on the jig.

These pen marks help to orient the pieces quickly in the glue up process.

A complete set of shaped lamella pieces ready for glueup.

A lot of clamps were required.

The team ended up breaking 6 clamps in the process.

They were the cheapest clamps available.

The jig begins to take shape. Laying on the ground next to the twin keelsons of the jig is a CNC cut base profile of the beam. The profile will provide a 3-dimensional template to attach the lamellas to insitu.

CNC cut ribs are then oriented within slots in the keelsons.

The template is then oriented within the ribs, forming a three dimensional formwork.

Before gluing up, a complete dry run was done to work out any discrepancies or unforeseen problems in the lay up of the pieces.

The ordering of glue application.

The brown stuff is resorcinol.

Once glued up, the beam was wrapped up in a double layer of tarps, forming an insulated shelter which was pumped with heat from a propane and portable electric heaters,. The exterior temperatures were around 0ยบ C and inside the shelter, temperatures reached 40ยบC

DIGITAL PROCESS:

DEFINING THE LAMELLAS: The lamella layers are defined using the curve of the edge member. From this curve, a series of perpendicular line segments are made, which defines the width of the beam. From those line segments, a loft is made, creating the base surface of the beam. From this base surface a series of perpendicular offsets are made, creating centerlines of all the lamella layers above. The process utilized rhino and grasshopper, allowing the lamella definition to become parametric, depending on the thickness of each lamella.

DEFINING THE PIECES: All that is needed to define the lamella shapes is a central line. This line is the unrolled centerline profile of each layer of the beam. From that centerline, an optimum fit of the stock size is applied.

Using either a reference marker alongside the line, which the user can manipulate to manually choose how long of a piece to cut, or the piece can be defined by a dimension, where the user inputs a value and the stock snaps to the centerline terminating at the specified length. All the digital work was done using grasshopper.

DEFINING THE PIECES: The output of the process produced a detailed set of pieces which kept butt joint clashing to a minimum.

THE OTHER EDGE BEAMS: Two other curved edge beams were fabricated. One on the northwest edge, which was completely steam bent, using a jig derived from a full scale template of the structure. The second was on the southwest edge, which comprised of two parts, one steam bent, and another glue laminated. The flat beams utilized beech which was deemed unfit to steam bend due to knots or imperfections.

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

300 0T YP .

120

00

2

D.1

E

240

00

848

300 0T YP .

D

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O RWP

4 6.

41 13

600 0

5.3

1

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

12247

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

.12

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

600

0T

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

179

5277

0

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

844 8

600

99.

98

0T

YP .

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

RWP

RWP

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

2A

GP GP

2

BEAM D DOUBLY CURVED GLUE LAM

164.18

ESIGN & MAKE Arch 2012/2013

Site Plan:

3

8917.32 600

(N) 0.0 POST SITE LEVEL

3A

722 4

YP .

+175 = T.O. MINI PILES

244 7.8

164.78

C

B

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013 DESIGN & MAKE

376 1

.2

Architectural Association School of Architecture

MArch 2012/2013

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION UK, DT8 3PH

1

HITECTURAL ASSOCIATION KE PARK MINSTER SET 3PH ED KINGDOM

HOOKE PARK

t:BEAMINSTER 01308 863 588 f:DORSET 01308 863 226 DT8 3PH e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk UNITED KINGDOM

308 863 588 308 863 226 okepark@aaschool.ac.uk

t: 01308 863 588

f: 01308 SEASONING 863 226 TIMBER SHELTER e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

Project title TSS Date 17 JUNE 2013 1:100 Scale TIMBER MD Drawn bySEASONING SHELTER mm Units

BER SEASONING SHELTER

163.66

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

BEAM C SINGLY CURVED STEAM BENT

1

Stn.5

SETTING OUT PLAN scale = 1:100

Project title: TSS

Dwg title Date:

SURVEY PLAN

DEC 2 2013

Scale:

N/A

Drawn by:

GFS

Units:

mm, UON

Dwg title

EB-CD SCHEMATICS

A1.1

EB.D.01

A A 3

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

240

00

TY P.

1

99.9

8

2

600

0T

4 YP .

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

600 0T

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

5

8917.32

6

600

0

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

179

7

8

pt. N 0.0 E O.O RWP

RWP

Site Plan:

3

+175 = T.O. MINI PILES pt. N 0.0 E O.O

99.9

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

8

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

0T

YP .

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

2A

RWP

RWP

Site Plan:

3

8917.32

600

2A

(N) 0.0 POST SITE LEVEL

3A

722 4

YP .

2 44 5277

3

844 8

0

179

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

600

(N) 0.0 POST SITE LEVEL

3A

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

600

164.78

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

722 4

YP .

12247.

12

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

+175 = T.O. MINI PILES

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

7.8

0T

0

300 0 600

0

300 0

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

RWP

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

600

00

4 6.

41 13

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

E

5.3

4 6.

41 13

pt. N 0.0 E O.O RWP

12247.

12

D.1

848

5.3

1

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

D

240

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

848

1

00

2

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

C

B

120

7.8

E

5277

300 0

00

TY P.

D.1

300 0

TY P.

120

2

D

2 44

C

B

844 8

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

TY P.

3

GP GP

GP GP

2 2

164.18

164.18

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013 DESIGN & MAKE

376 1

.2

MArch Design & Make 2012/2013 DESIGN & MAKE

376 1

.2

Architectural Association School of Architecture

Architectural Association School of Architecture

MArch 2012/2013

MArch 2012/2013

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION UK, DT8 3PH

1

Hooke Park Beaminster, Dorset ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION UK, DT8 3PH

1

HOOKE PARK

t:BEAMINSTER 01308 863 588 f:DORSET 01308 863 226 3PH e:DT8 hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

HOOKE PARK t:BEAMINSTER 01308 863 588 f:DORSET 01308 863 226 3PH e:DT8 hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk UNITED KINGDOM

FRAMES JUSTIFIED TO ONE SIDE OR ANOTHER OF KEELSON AS PER DRAWING

UNITED KINGDOM t: 01308 863 588

f: 01308 SEASONING 863 226 TIMBER SHELTER e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

t: 01308 863 588 f: 01308 SEASONING 863 226 TIMBER SHELTER e: hookepark@aaschool.ac.uk

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

1

TYP 500 SPACING OF FRAMES

Stn.5

SETTING OUT PLAN scale = 1:100

Project title TSS Date 17 JUNE 2013 1:100 Scale TIMBER MD Drawn bySEASONING SHELTER mm Units 163.66

pt. N 0.0 E O.O

Project title: TSS

Dwg title

SURVEY PLAN

Date:

DEC 2 2013

Scale:

N/A

Drawn by:

GFS

Units:

mm, UON

Dwg title

EB-D LAYOUT

A1.1

EB.D.02

1

Project title TSS Date 17 JUNE 2013 1:100 Scale TIMBER MD Drawn bySEASONING SHELTER mm Units

Stn.5

SETTING OUT PLAN scale = 1:100

Project title: TSS

Dwg title

SURVEY PLAN

Date:

DEC 2 2013

Scale:

N/A

Drawn by:

GFS

A1.1

Units:

mm, UON

Dwg title

SCREW DOWN POSITIONS

EB.D.04

1700

2000

2300

300

3300

3550

3900

4400

5400

5100

6050

6350

6600

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

35

70

35

214

3000

2700

4200

4800

5700

ON SITE SCARF BETWEEN E10 & E11

I09

I07

E11 ENDS RUN LONG E10 ENDS RUN LONG

1

I05

I03

I01

EAST EDGE BEAM

E10 PLAN (NODE I09 - I01) scale = 1:5

9100 OD 8650

150 A7: 2500

3245

3500

450 TYP. ON SITE SCARF BETWEEN E10 & E11 2

I07

730 100 TYP. SINGLE BLOCK

5000

4350

A9: 2800

B7: 2500

C7: 2500

I09

E10

2950

A8: 2000

B6: 3000

C6: 3000 210 TYP. BLOCK DEPTH

2850

2345

1655

4150

6550

6000

5250

B8: 2950

6850

7850

7150

A10: 1800

C8: 2800

450 TYP. SINGLE BLOCK

I05

E10 ELEVATION (NODE I09 - I01) scale = 1:5

The flat edge beams, which exist on the northern and souther edges of the structure were intricately detailed to allow for the use of material which was unsuitable for bending, (i.e. because of large knots imperfections. We utilized the same dimensions of material that the grillage is fabricated from, stacking and lapping them to form a larger edge section.

8050

C9: 900

I03

I01

EAST EDGE BEAM

6100

35

5300

1100

800

500

300

300

350

250

200

400

300

500

35

70

200

1900

1700

1400

3200

2900

2600

2300

4700

4450

4100

3500

4900

I15

I13

I11

I09

I07

7000

8000 1

E11 PLAN (NODE I15 - I09) scale = 1:5

7000 6386 6036

50

1450

850

450

150

A4: 3000

B3: 2500

3150

2850

2700

2350

1850

A5: 2500

B4: 3000

2

I15

E11 ELEVATION (NODE I15 - I09) scale = 1:5

A6: 2500

B5: 3000

C4: 3000 210 TYP. BLOCK DEPTH

4550

3850

3650

3350

5350

4850

A7: 2500

C5: 3000

450 TYP.

I13

100 TYP. SINGLE BLOCK

B6: 3000

C6: 3000

I11

I09

425

I07

E11

6000 5725 5125

35

4800

600

400

900

2150

1800

300

300

300

300

300

325

300

300

275

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

35

70

100

1600

1250

3300

2950

2700

2400

I23

I21

I19

I17

I15

7000

8000 1

E12 PLAN (NODE I23 - I15) scale = 1:2

7450

7850

6850 6350

50

150

1000

350

A1: 1500

B1: 3000

1950

1350

2350

A2: 3000

3150

4075

3350

C2: 3000

I23 2

E12 ELEVATION (NODE I23 - I15) scale = 1:5

I21

4350

6050

5375

A3: 2500

B2: 3000

C1: 3000 210 TYP. BLOCK DEPTH

E12

2850

5075

B3: 2500

A4: 3000

C3: 2500

I19

C4: 3000

I17

I15

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

October 21 2013 A series of stepped scaffolding decks are constructed which will allow the placement and connection of large patches of the structure. The platforms were then left until the membrane installation was complete.

October 22, 2013 The team plots node points of the structure onto the scaffolding. These points will act to orient the large patches correctly onto the scaffold decks on the lift day.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23, 2013 The structure was segmented into four large matches and one seaming region. A crane was hired to lift three patches (Y1, Y2, and W) into position. Here the first half of patch Y lands on the scaffolding at 10:53 AM.

October 23, 2013 The patches await lifting on the ground in front of the structure.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23, 2013 The patches are set down onto saw horses, set at corresponding heights, according to their node position in space.

October 23, 2013 The first patch is set down at 11:00.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23, 2013 The first two patches, comprising of section Y, are lifted without a hitch.

October 23, 2013 The second portion of section Y is set down at 11:40.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23, 2013 Section Y is lifted before lunchtime, and the structure begins to take shape.

October 23, 2013 After lunch, section W, which is raked at 51째 is set onto the scaffolding.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23 2013 Chain hoists were used to position the patch in space at the correct angle.

October 23, 2013 Patch W lifts off at 14:15.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23, 2013 It is determined that there is a large collision between the scaffolding and where the structure should be oriented in space. However, the team opts to leave the patch in position, and fix the scaffolding the next day.

October 23, 2013 Two large lifting beams support patch W as it is hoisted into position.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

October 23, 2013

October 23 2013 There is a collision in space on the top scaffold deck, where the positions have been laid out on the scaffold deck, however, the patch cannot physically meet the position in space.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

October 25, 2013 Section W is left overnight guyed to a tractor.

October 28, 2013 Acrow props are used to support patch W in space while Weller Scaffolding adjusts the scaffolding platforms backwards to allow the structure to reach is final positioning.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

October 31, 2013 Section W, Y1 and Y2 are seamed together leaving section X to be seamed together insitu in between the two large sections.

October 31, 2013 The seemingly infinite void between patch W and Y.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

October 31, 2013

October 31 2013 Blocking, temporary shoring, ratchet straps all help to orient the pieces in space as they are seamed together.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

October 31, 2013 A couple key nodes received packing wedges, which help to orient the components correctly as they negotiate a radically doubly curved section of structure.

November 5, 2013 Eventually, section X takes form.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 5, 2013 Meanwhile, section W is gradually pulled down into position and flexed over the scaffold with strategic ratchet straps.

November 4, 2013 Manipulating the components and seaming them together is a close quarters operation utilizing many clamps and ratchet straps.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 5, 2013 Ratchet straps, off of the scaffold, are used to pull the structure and components into positions.

November 4, 2013 So close, yet so far. These components form the furthest two to the north between W and Y.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 5, 2013 Section X nears completion.

November 19, 2013 Seaming of patch X is completed, and the installation of columns begins. They are lifted into position via a telehandler from above, and through the structure.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

November 19, 2013 Seaming is complete. The edge beam remains missing.

November 6, 2013 Patch Z is extracted from the assembly area in the big shed, and readied for lifting.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 6, 2013 Patch Z is the most dramatic lift, it sits at 90째 to the ground beam, and requires chain hoists in the lift to position it in place.

November 6, 2013 The team positions patch Z. James is brought in for help.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 6, 2013 Positioning section Z.

November 6th, 2013 Positioning section Z.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 6, 2013 Positioning section Z.

November 7, 2013 The day after lifting Z into position, the team assesses how to sequence the seaming together, in order to join all the nodes easily.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 7, 2013 The radical curvature within the transition between Y to Z proved difficult to manage

November 15, 2013 Orienting the twisted components in between patch Y and Z became a three person operation, in close quarters.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 15, 2013 Ratchet straps and a chain hoist tied to a nearby tree proved useful in the manipulation of patch Z into position.

November 26, 2013 The doubly curved gluelam beam is positioned into place, complete with membrane extrusion attached.

Within this photo you can see the threaded rod at each membrane push up nodes are elevated.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

November 26, 2013 The doubly curved gluelam is positioned onto the structure, while within the big shed, component F2, the final component to be steam bent, is completed.

January 8, 2014 The edge beams are complete around the perimeter of the structure. The aluminum extrusion is stripped off of the beams to be threaded onto the membrane.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

January 10, 2013 The membrane is delivered in one package, oriented to be unrolled sequentially over the structure, into position.

January 10, 2013 The membrane is draped over the structure, into relative position. The extrusion is then threaded on along the flatter sections, and along the curved sections, the membrane is threaded onto the edge beam.

Photo: Martin Self

Photo: Martin Self

January10, 2013 The structure is covered in a sea of PVC coated polyester cloth.

January 10, 2013 The membrane is unfurled sequentially in three moves, one north to south, one to the west, and one to east.

Photo: Martin Self

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

January 14, 2013 Long sections of threaded rod are used to pull in the membrane into the corners and dificult sections.

These threaded rod are then cut, and the membrane is wrapped around the edge beam.

January 14, 2013 Lance Rowell, of Architen Landrell, visits to assist in the membrane installation.

Photo: Martin Self

Photo: Martin Self

January 11, 2013 The mebrane is installed roughly in four days, and its final installation takes about four weeks, in the fine tuning and tensioning of the push ups and tie down cables.

January 11, 2014 The membrane is pulled down through the extrusion along the doubly curved edge.

Photo: Martin Self

Photo: Martin Self

January 11, 2014 The team opted to leave the extrusion on the doubly curved section as opposed to removing it and faceting the extrusion into small sections. This left a sinuous flowing transition from the roof to ground.

January 16, 2014 After the installation of the membrane, work continued around the edges of the perimeter beam, fixing blocking and wedges to form the gutters.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

January 20, 2014 The membrane awaits tensioning and post shaping around the pushup nodes. The diagonal patterning is the orientation of welded in cable pockets, which act to tension the fabric townwards.

January 20, 2014 Spruce blocking is used to form a gutter profile on the north and south edges. Around the curved sections, the profile is faceted.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

January 20, 2014 Underneath the edge beams, blocking is used to create a seamless under surface along the length of the beam for the mebrane to wrap around, forming the final edge profile.

January 14, 2014 Simple buoys are used as push ups. Each is adjustable upwards and down, with a threaded rod insert.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

February 4, 2014 Dyneema line is inserted into the membrane to provide valley control lines in between the push up locations across the membrane. Each control line is spliced with a thimble, and then tensioned with a lashing.

January 17, 2014 A party on the night of January 17th, culminates the build period for the students of Design and Make.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

January 17, 2014 Still left, is the membrane wrap around each edge over the blocking profiles.

January 16, 2014 Underneath, the final structure begins to take shape with most push ups remaining to be installed.

Photo: Valerie Bennett

Photo: Valerie Bennett

January 16, 2014 Meghan works to place in the adjustable push up rods.

January 28, 2014 The building’s relationship to the yard is clear. A easily accessable southern face allows for ease of movement of materials into the structure while keeping the yard free for short course activities.

Photo: Isosif Dakoronias Marina

Photo: Martin Self

January 20, 2014 Omri and glen work to secure in the bolts which connect the Dyneema valley control lines.

February 4, 2014 The edge begins to take shape as the membrane is wrapped around the gutter profiles. As the beam curves, a series of relief cuts are made and then welded together.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

February 4, 2014 One bay at a time, the scaffold begins to be removed.

February 12, 2014 Meghan’s last day is spent burning sketches and relishing inside the space with the scaffold 2/3’s removed.

Photo: Mark Torrens

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

February 12, 2014 2 /3 ‘s of the scaffolding is removed.

February 16, 2014 The scaffold is almost completely removed.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

February 16, 2014 Tower scaffold is used to spray boron, weld membrane flaps together, paint the columns matte black, and access the valley control lines.

February 16, 2014 Stripes emerge on the doubly curved edge beam as the membrane is cut to remove excess material and fold lines

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

February 16, 2014

February 18, 2014 The scaffold is completely removed.

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

Photo: Glen Stellmacher

February 18, 2014.

The scaffolding is completely removed.

205