STUDIO
AIR
ADELA RISHA SAPUTRA [617260]
ABPL30048: STUDIO AIR 2015/SEMESTER ONE TUTORIAL 8 - BRADLEY ELIAS
virtual environments semester 1, 2013 hand lantern red cabbage x klein bottle
adela risha saputra DOB Place of Origin Current Position Major
March 11, 1994 Jakarta, Indonesia Undergraduate Bachelor of Environments (3rd Year) Architecture Ever since I was little, I was obsessed with art, particularly drawings with curvy lines and vibrant colors, and my parents were very supportive of my interest. By the time I was in elementary, I grew an interest in science subjects and I asked my teacher what job can combine the best of both worlds: art and science? She answered an architect. That was probably the start of my determination to become an architect. Being educated in an Asian country, I was excited to begin my next journey in a Western culture, because everything was new to me. Unfortunately (or fortunately, it can go both ways), my first semester in University of Melbourne was experiencing Virtual Environments subject under the teachings of Samson Tiew (my tutor) and Paul Loh (subject coordinator). It was my first exposure of parametric design and software engineered rendering tool. I had only mastered Adobe Creative Suite as my tools of trade, and learning Rhino from practically zero to building something such in the left image in just 12 weeks was to me, one of the most amazing thing I never thought I could achieve. At the end of my Virtual semester, I was honored to have my project exhibited along with 6 other amazing projects at the Wanderlich Gallery on the previous Architecture Building. At the beginning of my summer 2014, I began my internship at a residential developer team in Tangerang, Indonesia. My role was to draft plans and contributed in designing concepts for their commercial projects, including arranging spatial elements and proposed branding concepts.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
4
CONCEPTUALISATION
5 6
A. CONCEPTUALISATION A.0 Design Futuring
10
A.1 Design Computation
14
A.2 Composition/Generation
18
A.3. Conclusion
18
A.4. Learning outcomes
20
B. CRITERIA DESIGN
22
B.1 Research Field
24
B.2 Case Study 1.0
26
B.3. Case Study 2.0
30
B.4. Technique: Development
34
B.5. Technique: Prototypes
36
B.6. Technique: Proposal C. DETAILED DESIGN C.1 Design Concept C.2 Tectonic Elements & Prototypes C.3. Final Detail Model C.4. Learning Objectives and Outcomes
CONCEPTUALISATION 5
A.0. ____design futuring precedents
embryologic houses BY GREG LYNN 2000
FIG 0.1: PHYSICAL MODEL OF EMBRYOLOGICAL HOUSE AT CCA
In 2000, Greg Lynn made a breakthrough in the architectural world when he proposed a genetic approach to mass-customize building forms, instead of “kit of parts” models or mass-producing forms (DOCAM, 2001). His design development was the first to experiment with lots of variations to create each unique individuals that have different properties and strength to withstand any kinds of environments (Lynn, 2000). Therefore, the design can be programmed to replicate the form but with variations to maintain their own individuality, as oppose to working primitively which limits the amount of variations produced (DOCAM, 2001). However, this project was never built on site and therefore remained a conceptual architecture project documentated as physical models and digital data. Lynn first experimented by creating the basic geometry of the embryo in Microstation, and establishing twelve control points which can be adjusted and affected accordingly. After that, he imported those geometries to an animation software rendering called Maya, and began to animate a variation of geometries through parametric variation in a non-linear dynamic processes (Shubert, 2008; Kolarevic, 2003). 6
CONCEPTUALISATION
Lynn was inspired by the mutation of embryo, how it slowly dissolve boundaries thus creating this blurring of boundaries in the space. As seen in figure 0.3, the simple program could produce endless iterations that ideally adapted different environmental approach (Varma, 2012). As mentioned by Lynn (2000), in this process he was not doing a selective method to determine which of the ones were perfect, because none of the iterations were ideal to any environment, but rather he provided the options that each have their adaptability properties to certain conditions. Users can customize their own embryological house accordingly to their needs and that was what made Lynn’s project a breakthrough in construction and architectural world: a notion of genetic-induced approach to masscustomize forms.
FIG 0.2: VARITION OF ITERATIONS PRODUCED
The Embryologic Houses employ a rigorous system of geometrical limits that liberate models of endless variations -
- Lynn, 2000
FIG 0.3: SURFACE VARIATIONS FOR EMBRYOLOGIC HOUSES CONCEPTUALISATION 7
A.0. ____design futuring precedents
objectiles BY BERNARD CACHE 1999
FIG 0.6: EXHIBITION OBJECTS (DOORS) FOR OBJECTILE
Objects are no longer designed but calculated. - Bernard Cache (cited from Kolarevic, 2003)
FIG 0.4: EXHIBITION OBJECTS FOR OBJECTILE
8
CONCEPTUALISATION
Objectiles is a series of furnitures and paneling in nonstandard forms, simiilar to those occuring in nature, where everything varies and looked randomly ordered even though it has a certain program behind each pattern. These objects not designed, but calculated and computerized using softwares. Therefore, it is possible to make each individual objects differentfrom one another accordingly to the users’ functions and taste (Archilab, 1999).
FIG 0.7: EXHIBITION OBJECTS FOR OBJECTILE; SAND DUNES LIKE PATTERN ITERATED
According to Kolarevic (2003), Cache’s approach for mass-customizing these objects is the modification of parameters of design, then procedurally calculated in modelling software, allowing different sizes and random arrangement in the same series to occur. Thus, providing unlimited iterations for the ideal solution (Archilab, 1999). This project was one of the pioneer of mass-customization along with Greg Lynn’s Embryological houses at that time. Computarized calculation made customization on industrial level possible, and the variations are unlimited. (Kolarevic, 2003). Architecturally speaking, the notion that producing customized individual buildings are made possible and economical challenges the modernist view of mechanically built structures. Designers can utilize technology to creatively program the variations, instead of using it to create more of the similar products (Kolarevic, 2003).
CONCEPTUALISATION 9
A.1. ____design computation precedents
FIG 1.1: MONOCOQUE 2, NERI OXMAN (2007)
monocoque 2 BY NERI OXMAN 2007
Nature is not modular and therefore it generates different forms every time. I would like to reach such flexibility in architecture as well. - Oxman, 2011
Most of Oxman’s work explore the growing of materials, how materials could be grown like in the nature instead of being exploited. How materials can be innovative and flexible just like organisms in nature, where it is adaptable to any environmental changes. She suggests exploring the world of material ecology, having materials to have vigorous properties by means of digital computation and fabrication (Dvir, 2011). Monocoque is one of her early experiments that looked at the capability of the external skin to bear structural load, to promote heterogeneity such as having variaties in material properties. In contrast to common construction practice, where there should be structural framing behind the skin layer, Furthermore, Monocoque is one of Oxman’s projects that demonstrates modifying material properties to accomodate environmental constrains (Dent, 2009). Oxman realized Monocoque’s structural skin by applying voronoi algorithm, which provide enough veins and branches to bear the load of the material (Dent, 2009).
Her approach is to observe the behaviour of nature, such as how leaves can stand firm by itself structurally and even conduct photosynthesis. Next, she deciphered down the computation codes that she created herself (Dvir, 2011). In Monocoque 2, pressumably similar to her previous project, Monocoque, she investigated the shear-stress and surface pressure in veins and arteries elements build onto the project (Oxman, 2010). She produced her project from a 3D printer which allowed a combination of multiple parts in materials to be combined as one (Dent, 2009). Her research wants to encourage designers to reverse their design process to start with observing materials at hand and working its way from there, instead of putting out the form and figuring out the materials needed later in the scheme (Dvir, 2011). In conclusion, her work in Monocoque show how materials can be compute in order to achieve the adequate properties.
A.1. ____design computation precedent
the watercube BY PTW ARCHITECTS 2008
BEIJING NATIONAL AQUATICS CENTER As the name stands, the watercube meant to form a built structure completely made of water. The means to achieve that was by taking the structure of water and began researching from there. PTW Architects looked at the state of aggregation of foam, and marveled at how it dematerialized the building (Bosse, 2008). They began investigating the foam structure from history; Plateau’s geometry of soap bubbles (Fig. 1.2), magnifying the molecular structure of water (Bosse, 2008). Eventually, the solution to Watercube’s facade was from Weaire Phelan foam, where PTW applied their theory of connecting soap bubbles into plain regular geometries (Fig. 1.2) (Carfrae, 2006). From there, they began to computate the Weaire Phelan foam pattern to the Crystalline structure algorithm, which is a very fundamental arrangement in nature, in order to achieve the most efficient sub-division arrangement in a three-dimensional space (Bosse, 2008).
The Crystalline structure is basically how water molecules would join up when in groups. As seen from figure 1.4, it is highly repetition but produces an organic and randomized shapes across the surface (Boose, 2008). Computation made this structure achievable through the algorithm of the crystalline structure. It was possible to recreate water on its facade and dematerialize the structure with its transparancy-like form. As defined by Kostas (2006). computation expands the designers’ space to manage their disability. In this case, PTW Architects have limitations on generating the form derived from nature, because its behaviour has its own algorithm pattern and it is hard to design it without the help of machines.
FIG 1.2: (FROM LEFT): PLATEAU’S GEOMETRY OF BUBBLES; WEAIRE PHELAN FOAM IN PHYSICAL AND GEOMETRY FORMS
12
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG 1.3: THE WATERCUBE, PTW ARCHITECTS (2008).
FIG 1.4: CRYSTALLINE STRUCTURE FORMATION IN DIGITAL FABRICATION
CONCEPTUALISATION 13
A.2. ____Composition/Generation precedent
icd/itke research pavilion 2011 BY ACHIM MENGES 2011
FIG 2.1: ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION 2011, ACHIM MENGES (2011)
Achim Menges work are known for its digital organic forms where he investigates organisms and applying them to built structures. ICD/ITKE research pavilion 2011 was no different, he applied the biological principals of sea urchin (sand dollar)’s skeleton structure and employing them to construct the shell structure of this bionic pavilion (Menges, 2011). As seen from figure 2.2, Menges used computation to work out each of the shell components derived from sand dollar’s skeleton. From there, he work out the whole shell structure by applying the principles of heterogeneity; having cells that are not constant in size, but rather adapting its size to its function, anisotropy; a directional structure which follows the shear and stress direction, and hierarchy; where there are two separate layers of shells, with different method of joining (Menges, 2011).
14
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG 2.2 (FROM TOP LEFT): SHELL STRUCTURE; (BOTTOM LEFT) INTERLOCKING JOINTS
Whereas for its joining method, the traditional fingerjoints was similarly programmed, and it was technically comparable to the sand-dollar’s calcite protrusions (fig. 12) (Menges, 2011). Not only does it inspire architectural projects to derive its form from nature, the method of joining each cells does not require any structural steel to provide support (Fig 2.2). The shell can stand on its own using its continuous surface interlocking each other. Since cell arrangement was programmed, the interlocking program of the shell was also done (Menges, 2011).
CONCEPTUALISATION 15
A.2. ____Composition/Generation precedent
times eureka pavilion BY NEX ARCHITECTURE 2011
The pavilion was commissioned to reflect the plant species chosen for Eureka Garden. NEX architecture expanded their research by magnifying the cellular structure of leaves and growth in plants (Lomholt, 2015). Their algorithmic approach is using the grow of capillary branching and subsequent cellular division, mimics the growth of plants and their branches (Grozdanic, 2011). Furthermore, according to figure 2.4, the cell arrangement is based on voronoi pattern, which gives them the randomized but repeatable distribution. Next, they began to randomize more points in between their cells, to recreate the leaf pattern by using voronoi algorithm (ArchDaily, 2011). The end result was a structure constructed out of algorithmic program which imitates natural growth and envisioned the users to experience the patterns of biological structure at a much larger scale (Lomholt, 2015). FIG 2.3: TIMES EUREKA PAVILION, NEX ARCHITECTURE (2011); CLOSE UP ON THE CELLULAR-LIKE CELLS
16
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG 2.4 (TOP AND BOTTOM): LEAF PATTERN STUDY AND APPLYING IT TO BUILT FACADE
This project is achievable due to the existence of genetic algorithm, which allowed the designers to investigate the behaviour of nature and translating the “formula� to digital programs. Furthermore, it also allows designers to recreate nature, because nature is generated not composed, and it is modulus not constant. Previously, designers could not generate algorithmed patterns by sketch, it was nearly impossible. However, the presence of computational programs drives the design industry into a more biological approach, as the society are becoming more aware of nature and their surroundings.
CONCEPTUALISATION 17
A.3/A.4. ____Conclusion & Learning Outcomes
conclusion designers should become the facilitators of flow, rather than the originators of maintainable ‘things’ such as discrete products or images - Wood, John (2007) Design for Micro-Utopias: Making the Unthinkable Possible (cited from Lecture Design Futuring)
As the quote goes, it sums up why algorithmic architecture existed and why it is now being explored vigurously by designers. Generative architecture, in a sense is the product of algorithmic programmed structures, where the structure is meant to ‘live’ as in its skill to adapt and grow to its surroundings. Therefore, designers have the responsibility to push society into a better worldview, because currently only we have the capability to drive society into our own ideal way of living. Personally, as I was researching for my precedents, the one that stood out for me the most was Monocoque 2 by Neri Oxman. In my research, she is one of the pioneer of
material ecology (the word she coined herself), that is to generate materials first and discover what form can be built from that. In oppose to creating a form and deciding the materials later. For me this idea is really interesting, and I intend to persue my design directions towards that organic approach. Her idea is to discover the properties of the materials needed for the project, and iterate as many forms possible, in order to achieve the most functional form. Furthermore, her initial approach to nature aligns with her organic view, how she looked at the behaviour of the patterns and translating the program instead of explicitly take the shape of nature. Environmental change and limtited resources drive people to innovate ways going back to look at nature. Historically, people have always refer to nature since ancient Greek times, but as time goes, industrialization dominated the market and nature was left behind. As a part of this new world, it is crucial to look at building as an organism in a bigger urban ecosystem. What it means to be an organism is to have the ability of growing, adapting and decomposing. Therefore, it is better to embrace the technology wave as means to develop more organic architecture rather than utilizing technology to create more and more.
learning outcomes In these short course of three weeks, Studio Air touched on history of digital architecture, that we are currently in an era where computarisation will slowly dominate the market and built structures are generated to become more like organism components in the city ecosystem. Studio Air had given me a better understanding of why we are doing this subject. From the precedents that I researched, it amazed me how I never questioned why organic and algorithmic architecture are being practiced right now. It is always interesting to see the approach of each designers when developing their work, and currently I have known several methods from my previous studio work, and algorithmic approach is one of them. 18
CONCEPTUALISATION
What I like most about algorithmic is its element of surprise and not knowing what to expect. I am personally a visualoriented person and often not satisfied with what I come up with. However, in algorithmic method the program do that for me and it reduced the amount of time I had to think over a form and instead I can program the ‘formula’ and let the script work. Therefore, I am currently anxious and at the same time excited to begin exploring the world of algorithmic architecture for the rest of the semester.
A.4.1. ____END OF PART A: CONCEPTUALISATION
reference list Arch Daily, 2011, Times Eureka Pavilion / Nex Architecture, viewed in 17th March 2015, <http:// www.archdaily.com/142509/times-eureka-pavilion-nex-architecture/> Archilab, 1999, OBJECTILE, viewed in 18th March 2015, <http://www.archilab.org/public/1999/artistes/obje01en.htm#ressources> Bosse, C. 2008, National Swimming Center Beijing – Introduction, viewed 15th March 2015, <http://www.chrisbosse.com/watercube/introduction.txt> Carfrae, T. 2006, ‘Engineering the Water Cube’, Architecture Australia, vol. 95, no. 4, <http://architectureau.com/articles/practice-23/> Dent, A.H. 2009, ‘Interview with Neri Oxman’, MATTER Magazine issue 6.3, vol. 6, no. 3, <http://www.materialconnexion.com/ Home/Matter/MatterMagazine81/PastIssues/MATTER63/MATTERInterviewNeriOxman/tabid/699/Default.aspx> DOCAM, 2001, Embryological House – Greg Lynn, viewed in 17th March 2015, <http://www.docam. ca/en/component/content/article/106-embryological-house-greg-lynn.html> Dvir, N. 2011, Nature is a Brilliant Engineer, viewed 15th March 2015, <http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/ nature-is-a-brilliant-engineer-1.366511> Grozdanic, L, 2011, Times Eureka Pavilion – Cellular Structure Inspired by plants / NEX + Marcus Barnett, viewed in 17th March 2015 <http://www.evolo.us/architecture/times-eureka-pavilion-cellular-structure-inspired-by-plants-nex-marcus-barnett/> Kolarevic, B. 2003, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing, (New York; London: Spon Press) pp. 53 Lomholt, I, 2015, Eureka Pavilion, London: Chelsea Flower Show Building, viewed in 17th March 2015, <http://www.e-architect.co.uk/london/eureka-pavilion> Lynn, Greg. 2000, ‘Greg Lynn: Embryological Houses’, AD “Contemporary Processes in Architecture” vol. 70, no. 3, (London: John Wiley & Son), pp. 26-35. Menges, A. 2011, ICD/ITKE Research Pavillion 2011, viewed in 15th March 2015, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5123> Oxman, N, 2010, ‘Structuring Materiality: Design Fabrication of Heterogeneous Materials’. Architectural Design, Special Issue: The New Structuralism: Design, Engineering and Architectural Technologies, Volume 80, Issue 4, pages 78-85, March/April Shubert, H. 2008, ‘What came first, The Chicken or the Egg?: Greg Lynn’s Embryological House’, Notation, (Berlin: Akademie der Kunst), <http://www.academia.edu/3589710/What_Came_First_the_Chicken_or_the_Egg_Greg_Lynn_s_Embryological_House> Terzidis, K. 2006, ‘Algorithmic Architecture’ Varma, R. 2012, The Embryological House, Greg Lynn, viewed in 17th March 2015, <https://rahatvarma.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/fs-final.pdf>
CONCEPTUALISATION 19
PART B. CRITERIA DESIGN
B.1. ____research field
geometry: minimal & relaxed surface
FIG 1.1: EXAMPLES OF GEOMETRY RESEARCH: TRIANGULATE DOME MEMBRANE
FIG 1.2: EXAMPLES OF GEOMETRY FORM: PARABOLOID SHELLS 22
CRITERIA DESIGN
FIG 1.3: GREEN VOID BY LAVA
The geometry research field focuses on exploring minimal and relaxed surface, thus enables the geometry to achieve high efficiency of material usage. Several design approaches are going to be explored such as paraboloids, minimal surfaces, geodesic, and tensility. One of the precedents for relaxed surface is the Green Void by LAVA. Parametrically speaking, the Green Void used mathematical algorithmic spring forces to achieve minimal surface from its prescribed anchor points. It was achievable through flexible material that resembled those of spider webs and coral reefs (LAVA, 2008). This particular research field is really insightful for my design brief, which is creating a â&#x20AC;&#x153;hammockâ&#x20AC;? or a relaxed surface through experimented geometries.
CRITERIA DESIGN
23
B.2. ____Case Study 1.0
LAVA Green Void
A 02
01
As mentioned previously, an interesting element of Green Void is the usage of plugged anchor points to different sides, thus allowing the surface membrane to relax and creating minimal surface. In this exercise, the initial form of Green Lava allows various iterations largely resolve around playing with the spring kangaroo definition, and the base curve of the form. A01 A02 A03 A04 A05
Initial geometry Playing with anchor points and slider definitions More stiffness but less rest length; resulting in tube-like form Geodesic applied to base curve Curves are experimented with fields; resulting in ribs-like bone structure
B 01
24
CRITERIA DESIGN
02
03
05
06
04
03
05
04
B01 B02 B03 B04 B05 B06
Applied exoskeleton Variation of values in exoskeleton settings Voronoi pattern applied to the initial curve; and extruded with exoskeleton tool Joining base curves to create a web, applied exoskeleton and kangaroo forces to achieve minimum surface. Applied 3D voronoi - resulting in a box of voronoi patterns with its initial curve inside. Voronoi 3D pattern with kangaroo forces applied.
I found iteration A05 and B04 the most interesting out of all due to its nature of combining different techniques in one place. A05 gives a fresh outlook on how the base curves on Green Lava can become apart from the similar geometry. For the time being, kangaroo forces does not seem to work well with this geometry because it is a series of curves instead of surface. B04 gives me a glimpse of the idea for geometry: to relax a series of web surface. Therefore, I intend to explore this particular technique more with the second case study. CRITERIA DESIGN
25
B.3. ____Case Study 2.0
Munich Olympic Stadium BY FREI OTTO & GUNTHER BEHNISCH 1968-1972
In this large-scaled project, Frei Otto managed to transform a stiff simple tent into a lightweight, tensile membrane. He derived the form by experimenting with the geometry of soap bubbles (figure 5), to achieve the shape of the membranes. This project is worth noted because it was built when there were not any digital tools assistance available at that time (Kroll, 2011). What is interesting in this building is the fact that the canopy membrane are entirely suspended by the vertical structures, and how the design allows for simple construction yet sophisticated outcome. Thinking about my own design, the vertical membranes definitely serves as anchor points that allows the form to float in the air. Moreover, the tensile membrane allows for dramatic curves to occur across the site and building heights, giving dynamic contours sectionally as seen in figure 7 (Garcia, 1968),
FIG 3.1: MUNICH OLYMPIC STADIUM IN GERMANY BY FREI OTTO
26
FIG 3.3: SECTIONAL DIAGRAM OF MUNICH OLYMPIC STADIUM
CRITERIA DESIGN
FIG 3.2: (TOP) FREI OTTO PLAYING WITH SOAP BUBBLES GEOMETRY TO ACHIEVE FORM (BOTTOM) INSIDE THE CANOPY
CRITERIA DESIGN
27
B.3. ____Case Study 2.0
Reverse Engineering of Munich Olympic Stadium 01
01 Basic geometry is rectangle; with its width shorter than length as referenced to provide for wide tensile surface. 02 Transform the surface into a mesh and laying out its vertices and grid to provide connection lines for spring by deconstructing the mesh. 04
03 Bake the points in each intersection of vertices from Grasshopper. 04 The red points are picked as anchor points to provide stress to the surface. To pick the points, apply cull pattern to selectively select those points. 05 What Kangaroo definition does here is that it converts the vertices of the mesh into spring forces while being stretch by the selected anchor points. This surface will provide for the base.
07
06 Returning to the previous grid of points, pick the points at the center of the grid as tips for the vertical member to sit on the membrane. Referenced the points to Grasshopper and add it to the definition with the previous selected anchor points. 07 Apply the Kangaroo forces again and drag the new anchor points at the center to the z axis as seen in sectional view to achieve the tent-like structure. 08 Perspective view of the tensile rectangular grid. This gives us a base to achieve the semicircle form of the stadium. Adjust anchor points while running the Kangaroo definition to achieve form 09a (perspective view) and 09b (top view).
28
CRITERIA DESIGN
09a
02 03
05
06
08
09b
CRITERIA DESIGN
29
B.4. ____Technique Development
Iterations : Series I 1
2
A
B
C
30
CRITERIA DESIGN
3
4
5
SERIES I Panelling exploration & Developing a network of spring connection
With experimenting there are trials and errors. Initially I was reconstructing San Gennero South Gate by SOFTlab as my second case study. However, due to geometry limitation, I decided to change it to Munich Olympic Stadium by Frei Otto. Therefore, this first series of iteration took the initial form of San Gennero South Gate and explore panelling surface to develop a web of connection.
A
B
C
Playing with panelling on curves and exoskeleton the ribs. Putting it into Kangaroo definition to capture the tensility (species A4). The first four of this row are mainly playing with the unary force Kangaroo definition (to z axis); I intend to experiment with the value of negative gravity in contrast to shrink the surface. This was done to achieve the base geometry for further development. The first two of this row are made by accident; C2 was supposed to be a voronoi-panelled geometry with spring forces applied to each of the vertices. However, the anchor points were not set on the surface, resulting in infinity force applied at the end of the tube and twisting the form.
CRITERIA DESIGN
31
B.4. ____Technique Development
Iterations: Series II 1
2
D
E
SERIES II Single surface iteration & Tensile capacity testing
32
CRITERIA DESIGN
3
4
5
In this series, I intend to explore the tensile capacity of a surface to various anchor points. Moreover, I think it is interesting that in the reverse engineering process, the Stadium form was derived just from a single surface; which was how it was actually built. Therefore, in this process, my exploration was largely around iterating various forms from a single surface. I found D4 interesting because it is derived from the same surface as others, however due to its twisted anchor points, it creates this valley-looking form. This second row explores a surface I made referenced with the site condition (see B.6 for site analysis). Personally I found E2 interesting due to its maximal tensility surface; which is why I chose that form to be a testing ground for my prototype.
CRITERIA DESIGN
33
B.4. ____Technique: Prototypes
Early Prototypes
My first attempt in prototyping is based on previous tensile surface iterations. Using my site context as a reference, the sticks functions as trees that will be the anchor points of the surface. The net serves as the tensile surface. In this brief trial I intend to experiment about how far the surface can be manipulate until the sticks cannot support it anymore. At this point, I still want to attempt to do more iterations because currently I do not see any of my iterations fit in the context. This is still an ongoing experiment.
34
CRITERIA DESIGN
CRITERIA DESIGN
35
36
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PART C. DETAILED DESIGN
PROJECT PROPOSAL
37
C.1. ____Feedback from Part B
Site Location
Brunswick East
Princes Hill
38
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Merri Creek
Roads for cars Pedestrians
Heavily used Moderately used Residents (passive)
Site access
Surroundings Traffic
Proposed Design AMPHITHEATRE
MERRI CREEK TRACK
PLAYSPACE
CERES Community Environment Park
PROJECT PROPOSAL
39
C.1. ____Feedback from Part B
Site Observation
PROPOSED DESIGN SITE
SECLUSION
Even though it is surrounded by active community space, this spot offers solitude and tranquility in the midst of it all. It does not have to be enjoyed only by one person, solitude can also be felt within close knit of groups; therefore founding community in seclusion.
AMPHITHEATRE Target users: Young adults and families Venue for events and festivals People seeking places to gather or having a picnic. PLAYSPACE Target users: Children aged 4-7 Elementary students top spot for site visiting.
40
PROJECT PROPOSAL
FRAMING THE VIEW
Near my proposed spot is a large preserved gully tree with short stream of river beneath it (as seen on photo 2). The sense of tranquility is unmistakeable compared to other spots of the river; the continous rushing sound of the water streaming through the rocks attract even passerby to stop and taking in the sound of nature.
PHOTO 1 The serene view (south view) from my intended installation spot, which is facing the old gully tree.
PHOTO 2 The rushing water stream beneath the old gully tree.
MERRI CREEK TRACK Target users: Young adults, bicyclists, joggers and senior citizens. Main track for having casual strolling, running or bicycle riding.
HIGH TRAFFIC
Overall CERES is a frequent elementary school children site visit target, annually held festivals and daily events which attract families and young adults, and Merri Creek track that attracts daily users.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
41
C.1. ____Feedback from Part B
Design Proposals
01. TENSILE PANELS WHAT
Derived from Frei Ottoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tensile roof stadium, this design proposed to have the surface membrane tensioned at various anchor points to create cone-like panels. The panels will cover the surface as a canopy and the users are intended to sit below the canopy.
Minimal surface membrane
Tensioned panels at various anchor points Figure C.1.1: Inspired by Frei Ottoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Munich Stadium; canopy tensioed at various points
Trees as anchor points
42
PROJECT PROPOSAL
WHY IT FAILED Too hard to fabricate; Due to the nature of the form itself, it had to be manually fabricated and measured, the aid of computer programs will only go as far as producing renders of the structure. Another alternative is 3D printing, however the down side will be no construction process involved.
Form is repetitive - bland Other than its apparent relationship with my case study building, the overall form is repetitive and dull; moreover it does not blend well with the surroundings.
Figure C.1.2: Repetitive tensioned panelling to be applied across the surface
PROJECT PROPOSAL
43
C.1. ____Feedback from Part B
Design Proposals
02. DROPPING WEIGHT
Figure C.1.4: 49th Biennale in Venezia installation by Ernesto Neto
Taking the inspiration from Green Void by LAVA, this design proposed to stretch across 5 anchor points to serve as the surface membrane. The design concept will resolve around finding community in seclusion, therefore the initial function of the membrane was to provide a space for gathering, where people could sit and lay down on the stretched surface with holes as point of entries. Furthermore, the drooping pods served as a sitting space for one person (as seen in example figure C.1.3), resembling how one would sit on a bean bag, allowing them to take in their nature surroundings without any social disturbance.
My precedent for forming the drooping pods is from Ernesto Netoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s organic installation (figure C.1.4 above). The material he used for his installation was thin gossamer-like fabric that is elastic as well as light in nylon or cotton. More often he would use fine strings to attached the fabric to the ceiling, creating the tension to let the weight down and create the organic drooping forms (Designboom, 2006).
Figure C.1.3: How one would sit on a bean bag; 44
PROJECT PROPOSAL
01
FORM FINDING
02
01
The surface was created across four anchor points (in this design the trees), and mesh faces were selected to be the holes.
02
The selected mesh were removed from the surface.
03
By applying spring forces to the surface, the whole surface became stressed and formed this organic shape with the holes being stretched out in maximal width.
04
The drooping pods were intentionally created by literally dropping a weight and pulling down the surface to gravity.
05
After three weights being dropped on the surface, it proved to be unsuccessful due to the flat dimension of the surface itself. As seen in the diagram, the height of each anchor points must be higher to allow higher impact for the weight onto the surface.
06
The outcome result was a fully stressed surface with weights successfully pinning down several points of the surface.
03
04
05
06
PROJECT PROPOSAL
45
C.2 TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES
46
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C.2. ____Tectonic Elements & Prototypes
Prototype 01 - Material Testing
MATERIAL TESTED
Cling wrap Tape Tulle fabric (gossamer fabric)
This prototype trial focused on the material capability to achieve the desired form. By using stiff wood to hold the stress from stretching out the surface, cling wrap was used to wrap the surface around because of its tensility and it easily sticks from one layer to another. Tape was used to hold the wrap in place and also as a framing material due to its stiff yet tensile property. The drooping pods were tested in a different fabric called tulle or gossamer. Unfortunately, it does not have the stretchy property that I was looking for in order for the weight to pull down the fabric.
FEEDBACK
Although using clingwrap is an interesting approach for this design, it can only form the membrane, and not the drooping pods due to its different material properties required. From this prototype, I realized that I may have to work with two layers to achieve both the stretched membrane and the drooping pods. To achieve the drooping pods form, the height of the membrane must be high enough to allow the weight to be pulled down; therefore my initial proposal to have people onto the surface was retracted due to constructibility. Figure C.2.1: Photos of material testing prototype construction process from top to bottom PROJECT PROPOSAL
47
C.2. ____Tectonic Elements & Prototypes
Prototype 02 - Rigid framing
MATERIALS TESTED Polypropylene sheet Thin wire Wire straps
For the second prototype, the form was triangulated into smaller panels of triangles and taking the previous prototype into account, I intend to make the framing structure of the form using rigid but light material such as polypropylene sheet. Afterwards the whole structure will be covered by thin gossamer fabric for the drooping pods to be attached onto the pulled down points in the surface.
3mm holes for joints Offset from the original faces
45
Number labels for each panels Cut out panels
Figure C.2.2: Triangle panels elements
48
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Each triangulated panels were offsetted outside to allow the 3mm holes for connections (as seen in figure C.2.2). The number labels were essential because the panels had to be joined individually with joints on each corners. The panels were nested into 6 sheets of polypropylene and were sent to fablab for fabrication.
30
34
32
92
68
70
111
114
112
150
941
151
611
153
192
981
228
268
194
191
229
233
272
273
0
312
311
310
309
40
41
277
275 672
316
315
413
4
47
321
320
913
Total panels 323
31
11
01
21
53
51
49
84
64
45
43
318
713
8
3
42
279 872
9
6
5
322
239
238
237
7
2
1
313
323
199 891
632
472
308
197
235
432
271
851
691
132
270
159
157
651
195
391
232
230
269
155
451
251
190
188
119
118
117
115
311
148
79
87
67
91
110
83
77
75
37
17
109
39
37 63
72
96
108
35
33
13
47
28
05
25
44
80
87
82
81
83
85
48
120
122
121
1
06
281
280
243
59
94
55
244
51
246
542
285
682
20
81
247
173
271
212
012
249
842
252
290 982
21
23
22
771
292
291
26
25
72
58
60
912
62
61
64
36
65
66 76
75
96
98
99
79
136
392
42
56
137
138
001
931
71
104
102
101
105
106
145
146
107
301
141
144
143
241
147
187
181
1
178
176 571
312
253
251 052
288
08
174
133
211
209
782
041
134
171 071
802
206
284
283
531
54
861
207
282
132
502
16
14
169
166
204
302
242
131
130
361
201
142
129 821
167
164
202
240
127
126
561
200
39
521
162 161
Model scale 1:5
92
19
98 68
124
321
90
88
183
185
481
971
681
281 214
216
512
217
218
220
95
223
221 222
254
294
592
552
256
296
257 852
297
298
259 003
261
262
301
299 062
225
227
622
267
265
263 462
303 203
422
662
403
305
306
703
PROJECT PROPOSAL
49
C.1. ____Tectonic Elements & Prototypes
Prototype 02 - Rigid framing
CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
01 The panels were organized by their numbers for easier construction. 02 Each panels are joined in two-way connection by thin wire. As seen in the construction diagram, each pair of connection must be connected by a single wire and not continuous to other panels.
50
PROJECT PROPOSAL
03 Top view framework
of
the
completed
04 The pulled down structure from the surface was too shallow to serve as droopy pods. Therefore, the panels on these pulled down surface was removed to make space or the fabric to droop down.
CONNECTION DIAGRAM
Thin wires (not continuous seen as different colors in each holes) Flow of panel joining (only in one dimension, joined side by side)
Wire is tied up at the back
At intersections, each pair of connection must be joined by individual strips of thin wire.
05 The thin fabric was attached to the framing by tying a knot with thin wire from the holes. 06 The fabric successfully droop down from the holes due to gravity force and was still in form due to the rigid framing.
FEEDBACK
The materials used did not represent the quality of the design itself. Even though this method is easily constructible, it did not show the tensility of the structure nor the stress produced by the weight pulling down the fabric.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
51
C.2. ____Tectonic Elements & Prototypes
Prototype 03 - Materiality
MATERIALS TESTED
Spandex (Stocking fabric)
Similar to the first prototype, I used stiff balsa wood to restrain the fabric to achieve its maximum tensility. For the stretched membrane, the fabric was an excellent material because it automatically shaped the desired form only by anchoring each sides to the wood. However, in here the drooping pods were created by covering the membrane with another layer of spandex but with the fabric pushed down on the holes. Because its on another layer, the drooping pods did not produce the stressed â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;skinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; due to the weight. Instead, it wrinkled on the sides of the holes, and refused to go down any further restrained by the force going from every sides on the surface (see figure C.2.3).
Force from drooping down (pulled gravity force) Force from stretching out to anchor points
Figure C.2.3: Force diagram on the surface
52
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C.2. ____Tectonic Elements & Prototypes
Application through final design
DESIGN CONCEPT : CHANGE
Responding to feedbacks from my previous design proposal, I realized that it lacked concept that can potentially give more depth to my design. Therefore, I envisioned my design to be adaptable in its surroundings, to be dynamic and change its form according to the seasons, yet to be serene and still in response to its natural surroundings. The form will never look the same because it is organic in shape and behaviour.
Responding to my previous prototype trials, I realized that this particular surface can only be possible in higher points. Lowered surface will not make the drooping possible and any narrower will not stress the surface enough to create tensility. Therefore, this form can only functions as a canopy instead of initially a hammock, due to its construction issue if built any lower to the ground.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
53
C.3
54
PROJECT PROPOSAL
FINAL DE TAIL MODEL
C.3. ____Final Detail Model
Construction Process
The form was again simplified for manual fabrication. The holes punched through the surface were for the pods to be attached. Therefore, the new form does not have any idle holes on the surface.
01 Attaching the stocking fabric to the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;treesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; by using thin wire and tying it in a knot. The whole surface needs to be smaller than the actual dimension to allow the stretch.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
55
C.3. ____Final Detail Model
Construction Process : Drooping Pods
From top left to bottom right >> 01 Make sure the stocking fabric is folded on the bottom, so the weight will rest on the fold instead of the
02 The connection here is by sewing thread to the stocking fabric using blanket stitch method (as seen from figure C.3.1 and diagram below).
Seam on both sides
56
PROJECT PROPOSAL
03 Flip the fabric to cover the seam and make it more presentable.
Figure C.3.1: Blanket stitch method (via crafthub; http://www.crafthubs.com/blanket-stitch/46602)
04 The pods are able to look elastic because of the weight pulling them down on a continuous surface.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
57
C.3. ____Final Detail Model
Construction Process : Stretched membrane
05 After the pods are ready, they are attached to the surface by the same sewing method (blanket sewn).
06 The pods will be pulling down the membrane due to the weight applied.
58
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
59
60
PROJECT PROPOSAL
TOP
Giving the model a sense of scale as a canopy that is attached onto five 8-meter tall trees on the bank of Merri Creek river. LEFT
The canopy as reflected on Merri Creek surface (in the model).
PROJECT PROPOSAL
61
C.4 LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES
62
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C.4. ____Learning Objectives and Outcomes
learning objectives and outcomes
Looking back from where I started, I definitely had learned a lot from this program; and not just the skills, but I also gained a lot of valuable experiences from my own project, tutors and various feedback from people around me. Studio AIR for me was like riding a roller coaster ride; sometimes it went too fast that I started to feel sick, but sometimes it took me to places so high up that I canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t help but to open my eyes and take in the wonders of the architecture world that I am currently divulging in.
Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s better to fail fantastically than to succeed in mediocre -One of my guest judge panel feedback
That particular quote struck me the most on my final class presentations. It was not directed to me personally, but I think she (guest judge) spoke for everyone else in the room: donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be afraid to fail. One of my biggest obstacle in every studio class is that I am always too safe and indecisive because of that fear of failing. That attitude effected me throughout this design process and at the end it failed me during my final presentation when I was asked about my design concept. I was so engrossed with getting the form right that I ignored the essence of an architectural design itself. In respond to that feedback, I tried to suggest a new proposal that unintentionally changed the form itself. This is only one of the few lessons I learnt from doing studio AIR. At the beginning of the program, I was introduced to the world of parametric design where I was so excited to finally be able to fabricate from Grasshopper. However, as the program ran, I experienced first hand that parametric design involved so much bigger than to fabricate models by laser cutter. My own design took me to forms that primarily explores on materials, what the material is capable of, and utilizing materials to create spontanious forms.
I had chosen geometry as my design approach at the beginning of the subject, and to be honest, I would probably pick other approach such as sectioning or biomimicry if I were given the chance because both approach began to interest me after seeing projects from my peers. However, it does not mean I regret choosing geometry; it challenged me to force me doing things outside of my comfort zone. The most difficult challenge for me in doing this project was to finalize my form and design concept. At that time, I always felt like meeting a dead end for ideas even though at the same time I know the possibility of generating forms with Grasshopper is endless. It frustrated me that I struggle so much for ideas, and not knowing anything about Grasshopper beforehand also added to my frustration. Fortunately, my tutor, Brad was patient enough to guide me with my process and to give very helpful insights onto exploring materials really is. At the same time, I also found excitement at exploring different iterations with logical programming. It was very different with any form-finding method in other studios and I personally found this method from Grasshopper produced far more interesting forms than manual brainstorming (exceptions in some cases). Furthermore, using computational aid makes life easier especially for simulating various conditions; especially for my design where the shape itself depended highly on natural forces such as spring force and gravity. It also gives me an idea of how my design will respond to natural conditions such as wind or sunlight. At the end, I believe there are still so many things that I can improve for my design. However, due to time constraints I am only able to develop it as far as it gets now. Learning is never ending and I know that the knowledge I learned in AIR will not only take me this far, but rather it is still the beginning to a very long but exciting journey ahead
PROJECT PROPOSAL
63
C.7.1 ____END OF PART C
reference list Designboom, 2006, Ernesto Neto: the malmo experience, viewed in 10th June 2015, <http://www.designboom.com/contemporary/neto.html> Laboratory for Visionary Architecture, 2008, GREEN VOID viewed in 22th April 2015, <http://www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/> Kroll, A. 2011. AD Classics : Munich Olympic Stadium / Frei Otto & Gunther Behnisch, viewed in 27th April 2015, < http:// www.archdaily.com/109136/ad-classics-munich-olympic-stadium-frei-otto-gunther-behnisch/> Garcia, A. 1968. 1968: Olympic Stadium - Munich. Germany, viewed in 27th April 2015, < https:// aehistory.wordpress.com/1968/05/06/1967-olympic-stadium-munich-germany/>
64
PROJECT PROPOSAL