A I R JOURNAL J E A N A LEX A N D R E L AW M I N 544028
I would like to thank my teammates for the awesome job they did during the semester, but also my tutors for guiding us along this incredible journey.
INTRODUCTION
My name is Jean Alexandre Law Min, but I prefer being called Alex. I hail from the beautiful island of Mauritius, and for those of you who have never heard of it before; it is located next to Madagascar in the Indian Ocean. Anyway, I am 20 year old student from the University of Melbourne, majoring in Architrecture. I have been in Melbourne for almost two years now and I simply love it; the culture, the friendly people and cozy atmosphere. I have always been a very creative person and architecture seemed to be the perfect path for me. In the beginning, I did not know what to expect from the course. I used to flick through architecture magazines and tell myself that one day I will be designing beautiful homes. However, there is more to it than just designing expensive dream homes for rich clients. Since I started this course, it has been an incredible journey for me, full of experiences and knowledge. I know that there is a long way to go, however, I know that this
is my passion and I am looking forward to the following years to come. I have had quite a bit of experience in digital modelling software. I was first introduced to Google SketchUp in high-school and I found it amazing. Then at university, I came across Rhino, AutoCAD and Grasshopper and I then realised how powerful these tools were and how it could facilitate the design process. My first experience with Rhino was in one of my first year subject called Virtual Environments. We learned how to reproduce a physical model into Rhino and consequently, modify the design with panelling tools. I was amazed at what I could come up with in the software. I must admit that digital modelling software has been a daunting experience, since I am mostly used to sketching. However, I realised the potential of computers in Architecture and this taught me that design is an ever-changing environment where you have to adapt.
PART.A
CASE FO R I N N OVATIO N
CONTENTS A.1 ARCHITECTURE AS A DISCOURSE A.2 COMPUTATIONAL ARCHITECTURE A.3 PARAMETRIC MODELLING LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES
A.1
ARCHITECTURE AS A DISCOURSE
“As will become clear, architecture is as much a philosophical, social or professional realm as it is a material one, and it is through the consideration of architecture as discourse that one can engage with it as visual culture.”1
Everything around us is shaped by the built environment. The social, cultural, emotional and experimental aspect of our lives are all constructed and moulded by architecture. What I mean is that buildings are at the core of our daily life and activities. Most of our time spent is in a building, and we tend to overlook the fact that architecture surrounds us. In this discourse topic, I will discuss the problem with defining the term ‘Architecture’ and how people perceives it differently. To the general public, architecture is an art. It is clear that people who think this way do not have proper knowledge of architecture and the design process involved in it. I believe that architecture is NOT an art. If architecture was art, then architects would not work within the boundaries and limitations set by a multitude of parameters such as the environment of the site, the wants and needs of the client. There are some factors that are impossible to control in architecture. If architecture was art, design conventions and standards would be ignored, and architects would run around the city building what they want. While it is true that aesthetic is an instrumental part of a design, it still has to function properly and abide to certain rules such as safety, fire-resistant, reduced carbon-footprint, comfort, etc.
What is architecture then? The answer is as complex as the question itself, as it involves a range of factors that infulences the way we see architecture. One of the main factor is time. Time is a great game changer. Presently, we are in the age where sustainability and green design is a requirement for most buildings. Architecture has adopted it through large glass windows, green roofs, photovoltaic cells, natural ventilation, passive heating, the list goes on and on. A century ago, it was different. Industrial revolution made it possible for buildings to be a hundred storeys high and equipped with A/C systems and the number of factories around the world exploded like a bomb. Little regard was givento the environment back then. Architecture had a different facette. The other important factor is culture. People aroundthe world have different cultures and they see things differently. They have different opinions on architecture. Some people could either critisize or love a building, or find it offensive. However, the perception of architecture, particularly contemporary architecture, seemed to have change over the past few decades with globalisation. Traditional buildings are leaving their place to modern high-tech buildings and high-rises. Is today’s architecture becoming standardized? Is traditional infrastructure at the mercy of a booming industry? What does the future have in store?
1. Richard Williams, ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, in Exploring Visual Culture : Definitions, Concepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), pp. 102 - 116.
Architecture, I believe is constant change. It does not necessarily change for the better, but it learns how to adapt to its environment and look for the best solutions within a certain framework, within which several factors acts on the design. For example, the environment, technology available, material availability, climate, and so on. Therefore, we cannot predict exactly what future architecture would be, but we can analyse current architecture and technology, and assume what this could lead to. The Wanangkura Stadium in Australia is a multi-purpose recreational area designed by ARM architecture. Wanangkura translates into ‘Whirlwind’ in Aboriginal language, and the building is an abstraction of isobars on weather maps. This building has become a landmark for the area which it was built in (Port Hedland), and it has been attracting a considerable amount of people, who not only come to use the building facilities, but also for its architecture. What has made such a building become a landmark? Is it its unusual facade and colours? We must consider the fact that visual impact is very important in architecture, as it is an object in the environment that everyone can see, therefore it contributes to the field of ideas, perceptions and ways of thinking and brings attention and awareness to the building and the practices within.
The design of the building responds to the site conditions.
http://www.australiandesignreview.com/ architecture/29281-wanangkura-stadium http://www.archdaily.com/346412/wanangkurastadium-arm-architecture/
Changsha Meichu International Culture & Art Centre by Zaha Hadid Architects shows and example of a very unusual architectural form (Deconstructivism). It has a very strong visual impact on the urban form city and the user experience seemingly focuses on creating comfort, social interactions and communication within through its fluid and curvy forms and facade. However, is architecture based only on aesthetics and visual impact? How about feasability and connection with its context? It is probably still a concept design, but if it was ever built today, builders and contractors would have a hard time figuring out how to build it. It would also cost millions of dollars to build such a project. And what about sustainability and using a minimum of resources? This project seemingly takes up more space than required for such a densely populated city. Can we consider that architecture, or is it simply a dream spaceship for the future? In our current situation, I believe that sustainability is at the core of our concerns in architectural design.
The interior of the building also seems to have construction constraints and difficulties due to a lot of curvy surfaces.
On the other hand, this contributes (or impede) on the field of ideas and workflows of what modern architecture could be like. Such a building could not only bring controversy, but with it, bring tourists and thus boost the economic and social aspect of the area. As a conclusion, I ask myself that question: Is architecture gradually evolving into art, or is it developing its features to adapt to climate change and other natural calamities?
http://www.archdaily.com/342192/changsha-meixihuinternational-culture-and-art-centre-zaha-hadidarchitects/
A.2
COMPUTATIONAL ARCHITECTURE
“We are moving from an era where architects use software to one where they create software.”1 Computers (and digital technology in general) have an instrumental importance in every task we undertake in our daily life. Particularly in architecture, they have a major role to play in the design process as a whole. My discussion stems from the discourse over computational architecture; whether computers have had positive or negative effects on contemporary architecture and design. Computerization defines the use of computers and digital technology to render tasks easier (for example, copy, edit, delete), While computation allows designers to extend their abilities, “augment intellect of the designer and increases capability to solve complex problems...”1. Therefore, how does computing affects the design process? In my opinion, considering softwares such as AutoCAD and SketchUp, computing increases the self-efficiency of the architect. It facilitates the process, particularly at the drafting stage. Computers also makes construction easier through CNC (Computer Numerical Control) machines, which consequently allows the designer to generate more complex forms. Furthermore, computing facilitates communication with the different parties involved in the design process, such as the engineer, client, interior designer, etc. Computing (both computation and computerization) can be beneficial to an extent where the architect is in control of almost the entire process. Specific softwares could be used to test the structure, preview the interior, calculate optimal material efficiency and so on. The implication is a convergence of different fields into one.
Although a moderate use of modelling software could boost creativity, I believe that an over-dependency could hinder creativity. Let me explain why. While using digital softwares, we are limited in design space through specific constraints. For instance, Rhino does not perform similarly to Google SketchUp or Grasshopper. Each and every software will lead to a different set of possible solutions in the design space because they are dictated by different principles and algorithms. A solution to that would be to design a software that integrates all aspect of a design, but that would be almost impossible, and if it was, it would take years to learn it properly. Therefore, by being dependent on specific digital softwares, we tend to get a tunelled vision and thus, limits our creativity. Aesthetics conventions are dramatically changing in the world of architecture. Forms that were once considered unconventional such as the blob, are becoming more and more common. Perhaps the public are too bored of regular buildings and want geometries that shows complexity and fluidity. Is it an expected transition for architecture? Does architecture have change in order to adapt to new technology and digital softwares? Is computation imposing limits on the design space, or is it pushing the boundaries outwards?
Kolarevic, Branko, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 3 - 28 Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 5 - 25 http://images.theage.com.au/2009/12/22/993039/ svGREENBRAIN-420x0.jpg
RMITbuilding blobby structure
For the past few decades, computation has been at the centre of the design environment, regardless of the field of study. Architecture, product design and interior design are a few of the most common fields that uses computation. It can be argued, but in most cases, computation provides ideas, creativity and flexibility to the design. However, performance is often ignored during the process, and this could result in fragile structures or design that do not satisfy their initial function. In these cases, the focus has been deviated to other aspects of the design, most commonly on its aesthetics and appearance. While it is true that aesthetics and appearance is an imporant part of a design, it is not the foremost priority. As students in architecture in the present world, we may find that we often depend a lot on digital softwares to find new ideas. We tend to forget the importance of quick sketching and brainstorming.
A sketch of the building by Frank Gehry shows that computation is not the only to generate ideas nowadays. Quick sketching enable the designer to be free of any constraints and limitations imposed by the use of digital softwares.
We can say that design using computation allows for more complex geometries to be formed, and consequently to be built. However, it does not always facilitate the construction process. There may be challenges encountered that require better technology and equipment or sometimes CNC machines. In a way, this is like a cycle; the better the technology, the more complex the forms, and the harder it is to build. However, if we refer back to technology, it can be further developed to facilitate the construction process.
Frank Gehry is the architect of the Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center. It is a center for Brain Health and the pursuit of more effective brain treatments for brain diseases. It also provides state-of-the-art care for patients that are affected by those diseases.
Notes: 1. http://www.archdaily.com/61498/clevelandclinic-lou-ruvo-center-frank-gehry/ 2. http://www.francisandfrancis.com/data/ photos/53_1ext_05_lou_ruvo_brain_institute.jpg 3. http://www.arcspace.com/CropUp/-/media/40946/lou_ruvo_10.jpg 4. http://themissionlasvegas.files.wordpress. com/2009/07/inside-gehry-ruvo-building1.jpg
Computation and computers are not the only way too achieve complexity in forms, shapes and patterns. Nowadays, a lot of architects are totally dependent on computers, and as I said earlier, this limits their creativity (but not necessarily hinders it). For architecture students like us, we tend to believe that it is only through computers that one can create and model complex shapes. Antonio Gaudi and a few other architects such as LeCorbusier proved us wrong. These architects managed to create and build unconventional forms without the use of computers. Particularly Gaudi, in the Sagrada Familia; both the exterior and interior facades reflected patterns and blobby forms. Obviously, computerization would have made the task more efficient, but the point is; great ideas do not only come from modelling softwares.
Le Corbusier achieved smooth rounded curves in the building ‘Ronchamp’ without the use of computers.
Consequently, I ask myself: can we achieve the same solutions within the same design space if we are using traditional designing methods as compared to digital modelling softwares? Is it possible to reach a solution by taking two seperate pathways? I believe that it is possible, but the difference in time taken will be enormous. Computers allow architects to perform tasks faster and with less errors (since they are great analytical engines) than using traditional methods. I believe that the opportunities present in computation are vast. In the future, builders won’t be needed as everything will be done by machines, even construction and building. For the architect, it means that he will have more control over the design process, and we are bringing up the concept of ‘Master Builder’, whereby the architect is in charge of the whole project A to Z. As a general rule in architecture, we must learn how to adapt to our changing environment.
Sketches done by Antonio Gaudi showing details of one of the tower top.
Notes: http://ricci-armani.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ Barcelona.-Sagrada-Familia.jpg http://www.american-buddha.com/gaudiplate18.jpg h t t p : //a d 0 0 9 c d n b . a r c h d a i l y. n e t / w p - c o n t e n t / uploads/2012/10/1349215460-ronchamp-528x352.jpeg
A.3
PARAMETRIC MODELLING
“Design is change. Parametric modelling represents change.”1
In an article, Patrik Schumacher states that “Parametricism is able to deliver all the components for a high-performance contemporary life process.”2 While it is true that parametricism enhances dynamic forms/spaces, it also has a few drawbacks, as far as modern architecture is concerned. In the same article, Patrik Schumacher also mentioned that Parametricism is the new architectural style of the 21st century. Parametricism is not a style, but rather a process, and it is based on relationships and sets of principles that can be manipulated to fit different contexts. However, parametricism is limited by several factors such as high building and construction costs, efficient use of space, and so on and so forth. Let me explain why I believe that parametricism is not a style. Parametricism is not a fully developed and mature process. It is too early to implement parametric modelling into architecture as it lacks the technology for it to be efficient. Furthermore, it does not fit in today’s context. Why? Today, we are more concerned with the environment than ever before and this has had a major impact on global architectural designs. A building that uses parametric modelling may enhance its visual and social aspects, but may not be accepted by the general public if it does not have environmental-friendly properties, or costs a lot of money to build. Furthermore, it is disrespectful to cities as it has space constraints. Parametricism, I believe, does not have its place in cities. Cities are becoming denser and denser and blobby buildings would not resolve this issue. Rectangular buildings make better use of the space. I believe one of the main reason why parametricism cannot be considered a style in the present is because it does not respond to construction factors and consequently; buildability, efficient use of materials, costs, etc.
On the other hand, we must not believe that Parametricism is an architectural disease. It has its own advantages as being a software-dependent process. It is a process that is dynamic and time-efficient during the design process, but most importantly, it can easily respond to several factors. Building costs and space constraints aside, it allows a building to be flexible and interactive to its surrounding environment. That does not mean that modern architecture cannot achieve the same effect. It can. But it will not be as flexible and responsive as parametricism. I believe that in a few years when technology has improved considerably so that parametric modelling and building cost less time and money, then parametricism would easily adapt to the situation. At the moment, it only impedes on the flow of ideas and visions to reach sustainability and preserve the environment. The main reason why this is the case is because parametricism is softwaredependent and I believe that this will encourage young architects to overlook environmental factors. To me, it will stay a concept that has yet to be developed in order to integrate into our world. In my opinion, parametricsm is such a new concept that it will take some time to adapt, especially to building conventions and standards and people’s way of thinking. Parametricism effectively represent the term ‘change’, but sometimes too much change leads to turmoil and irrational decisions being taken.
1. Woodbury, Robert (2010). Elements of Parametric Design (London: Routledge) pp. 7-48 2. http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/the-critics/patrikschumacher-on-parametricism-let-the-style-wars-begin/5217211.article Patrik Schumacher, London 2009 Published in: AD Architectural Design – Patterns of Architecture, Vol 79, No 6, November/December 2009
The Metropol Parasol by J. Mayer H. Architects is a redevelopment of Plaza de la Encarnación in Sevilla, Spain. It is entirely made of timber and designed using parametric modelling.
Parametric design challenges traditional architecture. To the public, especially in a traditional city like Sevilla, a structure like the Metropol Parasol is an eye-sore. It creates confusion and people wonder whether it could live in harmony with the surroundings. At first, there is a bad impression and some controversy. It feels alien. However, as time passes, opinions change and it starts attracting more and more people until it becomes a landmark. Like in the video2, there is an initial unease among the citizens. Then, they start realising the importance of such an infrastructure in the social, visual and commercial context of the city. Similarly for parametricism, it is a process that is highly overlooked. A lot of people do not see any sense in such designs. However, when they realise the opportunities that it could bring, then people’s perception starts to change.
Parametric design is flexible and if used properly can reflect fluidity, enhance connections between different aspects of the surrounding environment. It has a positive effect on the social, communication and economic aspect of the area. It is a dynamic architecture that makes connection by reaching different outside and interacting with things around, rather than being a building on its own. However, as I said earlier, there are a few issues to be addressed before Parametricism can be considered a style.
The photo above shows the Metropol Parasol being build. We can see the complexity and high construction costs of such a project.
1. http://www.jochemwartena.nl/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/20520110178337_Metropol-Parasol38-web.jpg 2. http://youtu.be/tWI9OLolpxg 3. http://www.archdaily.com/201961/metropol-parasol-j-mayer-h-arup/
The project is a Stadium for the FC Bate Borisov designed by OFIS architecs. It takes into account the terrain and environment in which it is built in by preserving as many trees as possible. The soft and smooth curvature of the stadium, along with the dull grey colour integrates perfectly into its environment. The skin and structure has been designed using parametric modelling softwares. As we can see in that example, parametricism does not always have a strong visual impact. The reason is because the idea of building a stadium is completely different to that of a commercial or residential building. The context here is different to that of a metropolitan city. There are no other buildings around to compare to and this enhances its ability to merge into the context. Parametricism is broad and I believe that it cannot be classified into a specific category of architecture purely on aesthetics and appearances. We tend to think that every building that has a pattern and is blobby/ curvy is classified as Parametric. Ancient buildings also had patterns on their facade. Does it mean that it forms part of parametricism? No. Parametricism is classified according to its priniciples. However, parametricism is a new concept and therefore needs some time to mature. In the meantime, architects around the world are slowly adopting it and testing the process in the built environment. Therefore, are in the Pre-Parametricism era?
Analogy of bubbles and patterns for the skin of the stadium.
The skin of the stadium was designed parametrically. Parametricism allows for more flexible and responive design.
http://www.archdaily.com/354211/in-progress-_-fcbate-borisov-football-stadium-ofis/
CONCLUSION & LEARNING OUTCOMES Architecture is an ever-changing field. It is complex and many questions remain unanswered within. It is also subjective, thus, everyone holds different opinions and ideas. Thus, the discourse can be considered a bad thing as it can sometimes result in conflicts and a clash of ideas, but it is also what helps architecture to develop, mature and expand to new horizons. Since the beginning of time, mankind has wondered; what is the true purpose and meaning of architecture? Even if today, we have been equipped with powerful softwares and precedents from the past, the question still remain unanswered. What is architecture? The design will expand on the field of ideas and communicate innovation as well as making people aware of the issues we are facing today, such as climate change, global warming, etc. The design approach will be fexible, that is; embracing new ideas and finding ways to integrate them into the old design. Responding to variables and challenges that will be encountered throughout the design process. The design will be innovative as it will communicate architecture as being more than just art. It will contribute to the surrounding environment and promote sustainability in design (through the choice of material, forms and aesthetics). Since it is a public structure situated in an area where significant amount of people will pass by, it will catch people’s attention and communicate ideas and thoughts to them. Therefore, it has to be innovative both visually, and contextually. People who will benefit from it are mostly young architects and designers. The goal is to provide them with ideas and precedent for their career paths, and hopefully instill sustainability in their field of ideas. However, it is also for the general public and will contribute to the architectural discourse by giving rise to new thoughts and arguments.
Initially, architectural modelling softwares is a daunting experience. We are dropped into a pool of knowledge and we don’t know what to expect. Gradually, we learn the functions, properties and commands, and then everything seems to come together. We can manipulate the software and use it to your will. I learnt that in architecture, you need to adapt and change according to your environment, build a framework, expand your horizons, learn new things and follow your instincts thereon. Computing is only a tool that facilitate specific tasks in the design process. We cannot be dependent on it, as a machine cannot think like we humans do. We must not be dictatesd by what a particular software that performs in a particular way, rather, we must use a software that suits our ideas and what we are willing to design. My understanding of the subject have broaden to the point where I am asking myself questions whenever I see architecture. Why? How? What? Every information that I come across serves as a piece of puzzle for my personal discourse for architecture.
...
PART.B EXPR ESSIO N O F I NTER EST
CONTENTS B.1 DESIGN FOCUS B.2 CASE STUDIES /Initial explorations /The matrix /Reverse engineering
B.3 DESIGN AND TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT /Analogy /Persistence of Vision /Self-organising structures /Frame morphogenesis /Performative iterations
B.4 PROTOTYPES B.5 TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES
B.1
DESIGN FOCUS
The Eden Project is composed of artificial biomes that contain plants from different parts of the world. By observing nature, the architects found that the most effective way of creating a spherical surface is by using hexagons.
Biomimicry comes from the word bios, meaning life, and mimesis, meaning to imitate. It is a discipline that aims at emulating nature’s systems and their strategies, and applying it in design. We chose this approach because we believe that the study of nature offers many opportunities for our design in terms of aesthetics, structures and conceptual. In a general sense, the argument about biomimicry arises from the increasing popularity of ‘Nature-inspired design’. More and more designers are looking for better solutions by studying nature. However, it does not always yield the results we expect. For instance, architectural projects driven by extensive R&D in biomimicry costs a lot of money and humans do not always have efficiency as the highest priority. There are other factors such as building costs and time-saving that can affect the success of such projects, because at the end of the day, nothing will succeed if it does not generate profits. However, on the other hand, biomimicry can offer a multitude of solutions to the problems we face nowadays such as global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, and I believe that this will help us transition from the industrial age to the ecological age.
Biomimicry is composed of four main components that relate to our design intentions: 1. Efficiency - e.g. uses minimum material for maximum structural strength. 2. Passivity - Performs without the use of external devices. 3. Innovation - Designing that offers a new horizon of possibilities. 4. Communication of ideas - Promoting the transfer of ideas, designs and strategies to the public. 5. Adaptability - Ability to change in different situations (variables).
http://www.asknature.org/article/view/what_is_biomimicry http://biomimicryinstitute.org/about-us/what-is-biomimicry.html http://www.ted.com/conversations/9/how_do_you_envision_biomimicr.html http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/hphillips/Eden24.JPG
ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION The Pavilion is made of polygonal timber plates, structurally assembled like the sea urchin’s skeleton. It is interesting how adopting properties of biological structures can result in plywood sheets of thickness 6.5 mm being used to create a rigid structure. In the context of the Wyndham project, this property has a potential for development. Efficiency is what our team wants to achieve and the pavilion shows exactly that; minimum amount of material (and weight), for maximum strength. The spatial experience has been taken into consideration as in the morning, it shades from the sun and offers framed views to the surroundings, while at night, the inner surface lights up and create an entirely new experience.
MATERIAL EFFICIENCY
DIURNAL RESPONSIVITY
MESSAGE
However, the main point that should be drawn from this kind of project, I believe, is the communication of a particular message to the user, and that message
http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditkeresearch-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/
Canopy The Canopy is a 90 m long installation work form that is inspired by the experience of walking through the dappled light of a forest. The thousands of identical geometries represents the leaves and are organised in a “non-repeating growth pattern�. MOVING LIGHTS The aspect of this project that we found interesting is that it attempts to imitate an experience from nature. I believe that in a bustling city, Canopy can create an atmosphere of relaxation and serenity in the same way that walking through a forest reproduces. Applying it to a busy highway like in Wyndham would relieve emotional stress that traffic and highways can cause. Another interesting part of the project is its random movement of lights, thus creating difference experiences. Similarly, nature organises itself very efficiently according to certain situations. For our project, we found the concept of moving light very interesting, considering the fact that a gateway is a static structure that is always exposed to sunlight.
http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/ canopy-by-by-united-visual-artists/
DYNAMIC PATTERNS
EXPERIENCE
FALLEN STAR Fallen Star is an installation that explores concepts like emergence, growth and regeneration. It is composed of different digital algorithms combined together through video mapping. Each algorithms create a different pattern and feel. We found this particular aspect of the project very exciting, however, applying it to our design in a passive way would be challenging. There is a direct interaction between the installation and the users, and this is what we want to achieve in the Wyndham Gateway Project. People are travelling at high speed in a car, and althought the structure is static, the experience could be responsive to their movement. This creates proximity between the design and the user, and thus, better communicate the message we want to convey.
ILLUSION / PERCEPTION
INTERACTION WITH USER
http://www.suckerpunchdaily. com/2012/08/16/fallen-star-aa-dlab/
B.2
CASE STUDIES
INITIAL EXPLORATIONS
Using the definition of Skylar Tibbits - Voltadom provided on the LMS, we created a few basic iterations resulting in changing densities and patterns.
Initial explorations with the Fractal Tetrahedron by Aranda Lasch. Increasing the intensity of the tetrahedron on two different surfaces. Top and perspective views shows how the form changes. The second set of forms is reminiscence of a decay/explosion.
THE MATRIX
The matrix displays a few interesting iterations we came across during the exploration of ideas. In iteration 3, 4 & 5, a point attractor is used as the sun path.
WIND ARBOR / NED KAHN The Wind Arbor is a cable net structure composed of thousands of hinged elements that move with the wind, and this displays its patterns. We found that very interesting as this is not only a completely passive design, it randomly creates a different pattern as it reacts with the wind. Moreover, it provides shade to the building, and enhances its visual effect at the same time.
http://nedkahn.com/portfolio/wind-arbor/
REVERSE ENGINEERING
Therefore, we reverse engineered the project in Grasshopper and tried to simulate different patterns from images and gradients. Tubes were also included to make the structure stronger. The process was successful, however, the main issue is the application of this concept in relation to our design intention. Several issues arises; it will not be responsive to the user’s movement, rather to the wind movement. The visual effect will always be different, and will not follow a particular trend. A few interesting points though; it is completely passive and does not require external devices to operate.
Reverse Engineering Process on Grasshopper: 1. Surface is divided into rectangular panels 2. Panels exploded to become seperate individual panels on the surface 3. Each corner of a panel is associated to a component and two of them are chosen to form a line of axis 4. The axis is connected to the rotation command. 5. The radius parameter is varied for each panel by being connected to an image, where the colour of the image determines the angle of rotation.
B.3
DESIGN & TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT
ANALOGY
trigger
pulse
carrying the message
We used the analogy of the Neuron to further develop our concept. The main elements of the neuron being; the trigger, the pusle and the message. For instance, a pinch is the trigger which sends a pulse to the brain and consequently, the message is the pain. In the context of our design, the trigger represents the car and the light, the pulse is the movement of the car, and finally, the message is the resultant of these two, which creates a specific user experience and response.
PERSISTENCE OF VISION Initially, we wanted to create the effect of moving lights from the Canopy installation. However, the main issue with that idea was the need for external lighting devices such as LEDs and lamps. We briefly explored the possibility of having LEDs on our design but it did not correspond to our fitness criteria. We wanted a passive design that does not use external devices. An independent installation. Thus, we explored the idea of persistence of vision (POV). Persistence of Vision is the “phenomenon by which an after image is thought to persist�. In other words, it is an illusion of the eye that results in the illusion of movement (as shown in the picture below). To start-off, we thought of creating static point lights that will appear to be moving with the user (car). As I mentioned previously, we wanted the experience to be responsive the movement (speed) of the car.
http://farm3.static.flickr. com/2265/1981769207_a61e205ac8.jpg https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/ wiki100k/docs/Persistence_of_vision.html
Figure A
Figure B
That brought us to investigate on the early movie projector and how it works. Basically, the system consists of three main elements; The light source (lamp), the shutter, and the film. The light source is constant while the shutter and film are in perpetual movement, and the combination creates movies we see on the screen. Figure A shows how they are positioned in the projector. Figure B shows a rough sketch of how the concept can be applied to our design. By translating it in real-life, the sun becomes the light source, and the surface of the design is divided into two layers in order to filter and reflect the light to the moving car.
http://www.madehow.com/images/ hpm_0000_0007_0_img0076.jpg
A more detailed sketch of the design concept showing how the double skin will function at a specific time of the day. The first layer will filter light from only a specific direction, while the second layer will direct the light to the driver, but also refocus it, as they will be equipped with reflectors. This will create a series of bright openings within the installation and the movement of the user will result in persistence of vision.
THE BLACK BOX Prototyping the design concept
After some useful feedback from our tutors, we decided to test whether our design concept works in real-life. Therefore, we made a black box prototype with two strips of cardboard attached to the top (representing the two layers of the surface) and proceeded with the light testing. We shone the light at the top of the box, while rotating it similarly to the sun path and witnessed the resultant effect. RESULT: The concept proved to be successful! Moving the light from left to right causes different sets of slits to let in light.
SOMA PAVILION
The Soma Pavilion in Korea is based on the natural movement principles found in the floral world to develop a kinetic facade. The fins (also called lamellas) control input of solar energy into the building. The fins are motorised and they react to the path of the sun to reduce energy consumption and increase efficiency. Not only are they efficient, they also create a moving spatial experience of fluid dancing curvatures. We explored this surface and decided to apply it to our design as it functions similarly to our conceptual sketches.
http://www.bustler.net/index.php/article/construction_photos_of_somas_thematic_yeosu_expo_pavilion/ http://www.e-architect.co.uk/korea/expo_yeosu_pavilion.htm
Rough sketches showing how the sun scoop could be implemented into our design.
SUN SCOOP OUTER SKIN Reproduced model of the sun scoop on Rhino.
A rough sketch showing how the installation could create the experience we want.
The sketch above shows a structure composed of several strips. Each strip consists of the sun scoop pattern and divided into different modulations in order to let in light only at a particular time. The next question we asked ourselves was: How do we create a structure that will hold the strips together and also the two layers? Thus, we decided to look at nature itself, more specifically at self-supporting structures found in nature.
SELF-ORGANISING STRUCTURES The pavilion he designed follows the same principle and its morphology is defined by the external pressures of the site, such as sunlight and winds. This particular approach is very informative as it is more responsive to the surrounding environment. Sharris mentions that the structure is optimised in way which gives it a high strength to weight ratio. This leads to a minimum amount of material for an optimal structural strength, which is exactly what we want to achieve in our project (material efficiency).
When we explored Andre Sharris’ study concerning self-organising structures, we were particular interested in the cellularlike pattern of the bone tissue. Sharris mentions that the structure is optimised in way which gives it a high strength to weight ratio.
http://www.andres.harris.cl/?page_id=2
FRAME MORPHOGENESIS
Following the same principle as in Andre Sharris’ case study, we applied it to the sun scoop frame.
PERFORMATIVE ITERATIONS
Development of frame, connecting structure and reflectors.
DIGITAL MODELLING
B.4
TECHNIQUE PROTOTYPES
PROTOTYPING
First attempt
Second attempt
We tried 3D modelling to test the modulation of the design. The first attempt was a failure as the skin was too thin. Therefore, one of the component’s top skin broke during the process. This gave us an idea that the initial design itself have to be strengthened for it to perform structurally well in real-life. We then thickened the structure and the second attempt was a success!
B.5
TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL
THE CONDUIT
LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES Throughout Part B of the project, we witnessed the incredible development of a simple concept (moving light), into a complex structural and visual element. The reason for that is due to our very long discussions and arguments concerning every aspect of the design. We spent a lot of time discussing the conceptual idea, rather than its visual characteristics and how it may look like. In doing so, we ensured that we built a strong foundation on which to support the rest of the project. We came across a lot of hurdles on our way. At first, the complexity of our concept was hard to grasp, but gradually, we used that to our advantage to increase our knowledge through research which gave us new ideas. This was constantly backed up with precedents from all kinds of fields of study, ranging from biology to construction. We were constantly looking for ways to improve our design. Using Rhinoceros and Grasshopper together enabled our design to expand and stretch. Without digital modeling, we would not have been able to develop
our project to such an extent. Other media also aided the process, such as prototyping and sketching, and it allowed us to test properties such as structure, scale, form, fabrication issues, etc. Having chosen Biomimicry as our design focus allowed for a better understanding of the interaction of different elements in a system, since it is the very essence of nature. Nature itself is an entire system consisting of an infinite number of subsystems. Hence, we developped our understanding of the relationship between architecture and its surroundings. We learnt how external factors such as sunlight, wind, movement of cars, time could impact on our project. The dynamic aspect of architecture is something that has to be taken into account, and parametricism help us do that.
...
PART.C
PROJ ECT PRO POSAL
Feedback Response A few points were raised by the jury panel; Our design lacked clarity and instead of focusing on one particular thing, we had a ‘multitask’ approach by attempting to do too many things at the same time. We had to consider the fact that grasshopper does not perform particular well with self-organising structures, but also the limitations of our physical model, which is going to be a real challenge to make. The lack of focus was further emphasized by another jury member, who mentioned the need to turn the little pulses into a message (metaphorical way of saying that we should focus, focus and focus!). Indeed, we explored many techniques thus far, however, they did not contribute to a create a particular message. Without a message, he said, it is not architecture, it remains a technique.
In response, we decided to direct our attention to a single aspect of Wyndham city. Firstly, the site in question and its surroundings will be explored thoroughly in order to find a coherent relationship with our design intent. Concerning Grasshopper, we are aware of its limitations, and therefore, a further insight into other Rhino and GH plugins will be required at this stage. At this point, we have not thought of another way to prototype our design, except using 3D printing. Additional methods will be examined throughout the design process. Due to time constraints, the techniques researched in PART B will be filtered down and cemented into a coherent technique accompanying our goals. We will thus take a deeply focused approach.
CONTENTS C.1 Gateway Project: Design Concept /Context /Design Synopsis /Air Shows /Aerobatic Manoeuvres /The Importance of Curves /Site Plan /Final Composition /Section Plan
C.2 Gateway Project: Tectonic Elements /Evolution of details /Prototyping /Exploration of joints /Assembly on-site
C.3 GATEWAY PROJECT: FINAL MODEL /Building final model
LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES
C.1
DESIGN CONCEPT
CONTEXT Wyndham city
Site boundaries
Looking back at our design in Part B, we then realise that we focused on too many things at once and did not explore the contextual aspect of the project. Therefore, the first thing we did was to research about Wyndham and interesting attractions it has to offer. The city has several attractions such as the river, the Werribee Zoo, the Road Cliffs, but none of them are as iconic to the place as the Royal Australian Air Force base in Point Cook. The RAAF is the oldest continuously operating military aerodrome in the world! This really defined our design intention of reviving the history and re-establishing the culture of Wyndham.
Royal Australian Air Force
through the gateway. A lot of people do not know about the Air Force base in Wyndham and its great historical background. We believe this should be the main defining feature of Wyndham city. Something that is reminiscence of the prestige of Australia in the war and this is a way to honour and respect those who bravely fought to bring peace to the country.
A few weeks back, we thought about the red arrows and their acrobatic manoeuvres and this idea of air shows springed back. The Red Arrows are officially known as the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team, and they are an aerobatic display team of the Royal Air Force in Britain. In context, integrating air shows into our design concept will have a more significant impression on people driving http://www.airforce.gov.au/ raafmuseum/exhibitions/interactive/images/Pup-14.jpg
DESIGN SYNOPSIS We formulate our design synopsis as followed; To create an iconic feature that will define and give an identity to the culture of Wyndham and its inhabitants. It will also welcome and accompany people on the freeway. We aim at revitalising and re-establishing the importance and presence of the Royal Australian Air Force within the area. We feel that Wyndham has a unique story and rich history that goes beyond its physical and geographical features and this global entity must be brought forth to the attention of the public. To do that effectively, we aim at designing an installation that will inject pride, morale, respect, honour and excitement to the freeway users and this will be translated by mimicking well-known aerobatic manoeuvres and formations such as the
‘switchblade’, ‘missing man’ and ‘headon-pass’. Each formation have different meanings and convey a different message in the language of airshows. In order to do so, the installation will respond dynamically and temporally to sunlight and thus, passively create a pattern of moving lights throughout the day. This further reinforces the organic nature of the design. What better way to be escorted by none other than the Royal Australian Air Force, celebrating one’s arrival.
AIR SHOWS
Air shows are events where aviators demonstrate their flying skills to a crowd of people. There are several aspects to an air show, but the most impressive one is definitely aerobatics manoeuvres and formations, which is, not only a unique visual experience, but also connect closely with people by injecting them with different emotions such as excitement and pride. We believe that the study of air shows is a paramount aspect of our design process, because in a general sense; if a design does not generate emotions to the user/viewer, it is a failed design.
AEROBATIC MANOEUVRES Aerobatic manoeuvres are patterns of motion created by the aircrafts. Each formation has a particular meaning and message to convey. We came across many different types of formations during our research, and eventually we chose 2 main formations to integrate into our design; the switchblade and the missing man. Why those two? Because the other formations contained loops, which would be a structural challenge to build.
THE SWITCHBLADE The Switchblade consists of planes in close formation and leaving an illusion of an imminent collision before diverging back to safety. This creates tension and excitement.
THE MISSING MAN The missing man is a significant formation whereby one of the pilots in the assemblage turns his lights and smoke off to leave the formation. The remaining pilots then pass through the crowd. This is an emotional narration to honour and pay respect to those who perished on the line of duty.
The IMPORTANCE OF CURVES
We noticed that curves created by aircrafts’ smoke trails are of a specific nature. Since airplanes move at very high speeds, there is no possibility of sharp turns. For instance, the pattern of movement of an animal or a robot would be different due to differential speeds and characteristics. Thus, airplanes trails are smooth and fluid. Our aim, therefore, is to depict such movements that are unique to aircrafts and translate them into our design. We want people to feel and understand a connection between the curves formation and aviation through this breathtaking visual experience.
Design in PART B After studying the site, we realised that our design in PART B had a few constraints. The most important one being the orientation since the idea of creating different patterns at various times of the day did not correspond to the sun path on site. Therefore, we decided to change the design by incorporating two other sets of ‘trails’, each of them reacting to the two remaining time frame. To conclude, we have 3 sets of trails; each one will be operable at respective times (morning, noon and evening).
Choregraphing the installation was a real challenge, as we had to think of what kind of experience we would like highway users to have during that time frame of 23 seconds, without actually being able to visualize it. Therefore, we divided the ‘experience’ into three major parts; the introduction, the body, and the conclusion. The introduction consists of making the user feel comfortable to the new environment in which he is brought into. Therefore, uniform lines are used at this stage. The formation is constant.
In the second part, the formation changes with several ‘switchblades’. This stage is the climax of the journey whereby the driver experiences the excitement and tension created by these formations. It is this stage that will fully capture the interest of highway users immersed in that unique experience. The conclusion is the ending and opening to the city. As with all air shows, there is a moment of respect, honour and pride nearing the end. Therefore, we introduces the missing man, where one of the trail path is diverged away from the main formation. This ends the experience and leads to individual interpretation.
SITE PLAN
We made a few additional alterations to the design. After analysing the site and integrating our design, we came to the conlcusion that the site boundaries were too vast for the installation to cover all three roads (or at least the two main roads). One possible solution to that would be to reproduce the same thing on other roads, but costs would be extremely high. Thus, we decided agreed to focus on the road that leads drivers towards the city, away from Geelong. Early sketch showing the experience of driving through the installation.
FINAL COMPOSITION
Choreography of the installation
Perspective view with section cut
Perspective of section cut showing the trails
SECTION PLAN Once the final design was done, we started thinking about how to model it, both digitally and physically. We faced two major difficulties; Time and complexity of the design. Modelling the entire choregraphy on Rhino proved to be a very time consuming task, particularly because of the non-uniformity and sheer scale of the design. The two skins and sun scoop made the task even more tedious. Therefore, we agreed onto focusing only on a particular section of the installation. To be noted that this decision was also drawn by the fact that physically modelling the installation would not only be time consuming, but extremely expensive for uni students like us.
The section was chosen based on the visual experience it projected. It is taken from the part of the installation which engender excitement and tension.
The pictures to the right and bottom shows the section rendered on Rhino using Vray.
Two layers of webs connect trails between each other for structural integrity. The whole structure supports itself and does not require additional reinforcements. Basically, the installation performs as an arched tunnel in compression.
A Rhino script called Armadillo was used to help array the sun scoop pattern on the surface of the installation. One of the main benefits of that plug-in is that there is more control of the sun scoop. It is more flexible and dynamic to work with as compoared to Rhino.
C.2
TECTONIC ELEMENTS
EVOLUTION OF DETAILS
1
2
Detailing the structure consisted of finding ways to build the installation. We focused on a single sun scoop to facilitate the process. 1. The challenge was to create the organic forms that would give the impression of a homogeneous surface. We fisrt took a mechanical approach. Thus, leaving the homogeneity behind, we agreed upon using rigid premanufactured joints that would be easier to build in a factory. Essentially, we looked into precedents and found that the market offered those joints. We thought that not only would it perform similarly to a self-organising
structure, it would also be easier to protoype. 2. We re-evaluated our previous design and decided to change it since it was not at all what we wanted. We thought of ways to make it look more organic and thus, came up with a custom design with a GRP moulded end joint and a perforated end plate that would be bonded with the mould as shown above. This would create a more organic structure while retaining its original characteristics. The purpose of the custom plate is to improve structural integrity as elements have better bonding strength if they are of the same material.
PROTOTYPING
After the morphological change of the frame, we made a prototype of the end joint to test the fabrication method and how to bond the metal joint to the resin. The initial idea was to create a male and female mould to cast the shape. However, this method is time consuming and requires more technical knowledge regarding moulding. Therefore, we used clay and shaped it manually, achieving an organic form similar to the self-organising structures studied previously. During the process, we decided to make several models; one to show the overall shape of the end joint, one to show the perforated plate fixture, and one to show how they bond together.
Benefits: Casting results in homogeneous and smooth surfaces, meaning better structural capacity (no joints), and better aesthetics. Since it is pre-fabricated, assembly on-site will be significantly faster and easier as less manual labour is needed. Drawbacks: It is expensive as it requires individual moulds to be fabricated, considering the fact that the design has a non-uniform structure, each joint will have a different mould.
3
Following a useful feedback session with our class tutors, we re-introduced the concept of self-organising structures and homogeneous structure into our design. The reason being that it was closer to our topic of biomimicry. The new design contains less joints and has an improved structural integrity. The core is made of structural foam which means that it is lighter and easier to work with, while the exterior is made of Glass Reinforced Plastic (or fibreglass resin). This material has good strength and is lightweight too. The joining system consists of a positive and negative joint, which is then fixed using a dowel (as shown in the above diagram), followed by an additional sheet of GRP which is used to hide to the gap and bond the two elements into one structural whole.
EXPLORATION OF JOINTS We explored various types of joints throughout the morphological changes of the structure from mechanical to organic. Compromising the organic form of our design, we delved into mechanical joints to find better joints that would provide optimal structural strength. We looked into architecture of the like of Norman Foster, who uses extensive mechanical joints in his works, customizing them to fit his design purpose and framework. Initially, we thought about going into that direction, as it was easier to conceive and prototype. However, the main problem was the compromised organic form, our main approach to biomimicry. We wanted the structural form to reflect our design intention.
We then moved to a more organic custom-made joint, creating a strong bond between plastic (GRP moulded joints) and metal (light-weight aluminium tubes) components. The reason for the plate being perforated is that it has a greater contact surface area to optimise the grip. This structure merges bonding and mechanical joints together, and one of the benefits is that it can be pre-fabricated. The final design was largely influenced by our tutors, who proposed an entirely new design approach using foam and fibreglass (GRP) to create the organic structure. This shows that experience is very important when it comes to architecture!
PROTOTYPING
We built a second prototype to test the feasibility, structure and overall form of the new joint. This time, we chose to use real materials as close as possible to the actual design. We have never used fibreglass before and for us, it was a daunting experience. This is how we proceeded to build the prototype; PREPARATION OF THE CORE: - The foam was cut to size and glued together using a special glue for porous surfaces. - It was then carved into shape to create the smooth organic shape. - Holes were drilled at the end of the joint for fixtures.
PREPARATION OF THE FIBREGLASS: - The resin was prepared by mixing the resin with the catalyst (hardener). - Using a paintbrush, we applied the mixture to the surface of the foam before applying a layer of fibreglass mat. Using the brush, we gently tapped the fibreglass to blend the resin together. - Shortly afterwards, another layer of resin was applied over the mat and the process is repeated over the whole surface area. - The process had to be performed quickly as the resin hardens after a few minutes. - It is left to dry overnight. - Rough edges are cut off and the surface is sanded down.
We were very satisfied with the outcome of our experiment, as it turned out to be better than expected, except for a few defects.
In terms of time of fabrication, it will be a fast process as the components will be machine worked, requiring little manual labour.
Structurally, the fibreglass proved to be a suitable material for this type of construction. It is both strong and tough, as well as waterproof. The foam provides additional structural support and gives the structure its shape. However, we did not expect the foam to shrink from the resin mixture, which led to a rather distorted overall shape instead of the smooth organic form we were expecting.
However, the costs will be real challenge, not only because of the huge number of components to be manufactured, but also because of the complexity of such a project, which will require some advanced technologies dealing with GRP and bonding techniques.
Will this be a problem in the actual fabrication process? Probably not, since the foam we used is not meant for structural purposes. Structural foam is the material which will be used in the real fabrication; it is heavier, denser and significantly stronger than polystyrene foamboard.
ASSEMBLY ON-SITE
Assembling such a huge installation is a real challenge, especially since it is composed of thousands of different components. Thus, to solve that problem, we came up with a solution that would significantly reduce the on-site assembly time. The entire structure would be divided into several parts, each one of them would be manufactured and assembled in the factory. Then, they would be transported individually on trucks, keeping in mind the minimum allowance capacity for a transportation truck. Once on site, each part would be lifted up by cranes and placed into their respective places. Workers on site would then proceed to join the parts together
using the method shown below. A dowel is inserted through the joint and wrapped with an additional layer of fibreglass to hide the gap, and finally sanded down. This method of construction has its advantages of being fast and easy, and therefore minimises time spent on site, which can sometimes cause traffic and diversions. However, using this method also means that there is less control over individual components of the structure. If there is a fault in one part, the whole structure would be affected, and it costs huge amounts of money to manufacture it again, compared to an on-site fabrication, whereby individual components can easily be re-manufactured and replaced.
C.3
FINAL MODEL
BUILDING FINAL MODEL
For the final model, we decided to use 3D printing as it was the only method we had in mind that would not be extremely time consuming to make. It took us a few nerve-racking days for the model to be printed. Surprisingly, the outcome was better than expected. To facilitate the assembly, the structure was divided into 16 different segments. Initially, we used super glue to fix the components to each other but the bond was too weak. After a few minutes of panic of not knowing what to do, we finally came up with the idea of using a glue gun. It worked like a charm and the structure was set up in a matter of minutes. Basically, the way the glue gun works is; a glue stick is inserted and the tool heats up until the stick melts. Then, the melted glue is applied to a surface, which solidifies as it cools down.
Feedback after final crit In general, we got positive responses from the jury panel, especially for our good prototype models, research into structures and materiability and the design concept. However, they also pointed out a few issues with our design, such as its complexity. Someone said that it was “too complex for its own good�. In other words, the complexity of the design will lead to challenges throughout the design process, which we encountered in digital modelling on Rhino, or difficulties in simply keeping track of our own ideas and putting them into a coherent whole. The budget of the project is also an issue due to various factors, such as; the size of the installation, the fabrication process, the materials, and the simple fact that it contains thousands of different components. Consequently, one of the jury member suggested that we should have kept the design simple and elegant, focusing on a few main features such as light and line, resulting in a more convincing and compelling design. Again, we should have narrowed down the focus instead and push forward using single technique as opposed to having a multi-prone approach. These are advices to be kept for future projects and crits. Anyway, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to all the tutors who took their time to give us feedback and tips throughout the semester.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES Improvements: Given more time, one of the main improvmements that we could have made was to consider the installation at night in the absence of sunlight. We actually discussed about it as a group but never actually delved into. We were thinking about reversing the effect of the sun scoop, so that third parties will be able to witness the formations from the outside. The source of light would then be the cars’ headlights.
What did I learn throughout THE PROJECT: #1. Research forms the backbone of our project. It was a crucial part of every conceptual idea and design we came up with. Research is what enabled our design to evolve into its full splendour. I can extend that theory to every kind of project by saying that research and documenting (also includes prototyping) is the core of the design process. It fuels the creativity that we designers need in our everyday lives.
DESIGN APPROACH: In our case, we explored the context after finalising the design concept. Having said that, I asked myself the following question; if the contextual analysis was performed before finding the design concept, would the outcomes be radically different? My answer to that is; each approach will take you through a different design process. Refering back to the early readings, depth and breadth are the 2 main types of approaches. By studying the context first, we are narrowing the design space, and therefore the number of possible solutions. The benefit of that is a more focused design approach, which is contrary to what our group pursued. The downside is that solutions outside that space cannot be explored. The opposite approach (the one we used), enables a wider perspective by looking at the whole picture. More solutions arise from this approach, but it is very time consuming and sometimes hard to focus on a particular idea (as we have experienced). Therefore, we cannot tell which one is better, as they yield different results.
#2. Ideas are great, but it is how you apply it that counts. Indeed, we had many ideas in mind, but at the end of the day, ideas remain ideas if they are not implemented into context. Execution is the second major aspect of a design process. Things need to get done! CONCLUSION: After 12 weeks into Studio AIR, I still cannot define architecture. Surely, I understand it better but the meaning is still ambiguous. I see real architecture as a multitude of systems intertwined together. A system which includes us humans, but also many things such as animals, trees, and others such as visual appearance, sustainability, comfort, etc where everything and everyone lives in harmony and perfect balance without compromising the needs of others.