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