Revealing Structural Patterns Behind the “Veil” _DS3p2021 by Banush Shyqeriu

Revealing Structural Patterns behind the

The

“VEIL”

Quest for TECTONIC Novelties & Revival of AUTOGENIC ORNAMENT

Prishtina, 2021

Revealing Structural

“ V E I L”

Patterns behind the

RESEARCH

UBTPRESS

Revealing Structural

“ V E I L”

Patterns behind the

RESEARCH

BANUSH SHYQERIU

CONTENT CONTENT

CONTENT SYNOPSIS INTRODUCTION 1. Studio' Design Philosophy: Hedonistic Sustainability 2. Architectural Design Theme: “BIOINSPIRATION & THE REVIVAL OF AUTOGENIC ORNAMENT” 2.1. BIOINSPIRATION / Bionic Architecture 2.2. Poetics of Architecture POETICS, NOT POETRY 2.3. Structure, Construction, Tectonics 2.4. The New Structuralism 2.5. Novel Tectonics Revealing Structural Patterns behind the “Veil” What to Show and what to Analyse? List - categories of projects: Emine Imishti 22A:18B Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka 5A:30B | 8A:14B Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati 16A:16B | 23A:27B Rubina Kurti; Sellma Mustafa 26A:26B

I II 1 1 2

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..................................................

2 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 23 43 63

Course Name: DESIGN STUDIO 3 – Design, Planning and Development of Economic Facilities Subject: The HYBRID Development of Interchange Transport Terminals in Kosovo Architectural Design Theme: “BIOINSPIRATION & THE QUEST FOR TECTONIC NOVELTIES IN WOOD – STRUCTURE AS ARCHITECTURE - ARCHITECTURE AS STRUCTURE & THE REVIVAL OF AUTOGENIC ORNAMENT” Architectural Design Philosophy: Hedonistic Sustainability SYNOPSIS: Architecture begins with the spark of an idea, which grows, evolves and prepares itself to enter in the realm of physical world. Hence, architecture as material entity is a synthesis of how we redesign and restructure the world with the same primordial materials our ancestors did, but always searching for the new ways to shape and express our built environment. These new ways dene our continuous quest for novelty and the poetics with which we construct these novelties. Structures remain a fundamental dener of architecture and our world, while through tectonics we give expression to the materials we construct. Architecture goes beyond utilitarian properties, it embodies hedonistic substance

INTRODUCTION 1. Studio' Design Philosophy: Hedonistic Sustainability 1.1. From Vitruvius Utilitas to Hedonistic Sustainability In his Ten Books of Architecture during the 1st century B.C.E. Vitruvius asserted that all the various types of buildings: Must be built with due reference to durability (Firmitas), convenience (Utilitas), and beauty (Venustas).

While architecture has to fulfill the three Vitruvian components, from the dawn of Industrial Revolution we have experienced an architecture which is mostly utilitarian, unpleasant and even unhealthy. Even though today's industrial facilities do not “vomit” so much smoke as their predecessors did, their image has most of the time remained within the “cold” stereotypes set centuries ago. The design philosophy which will fertilize the Design Studio course is the assertion of Hedonistic philosophy as an approach towards the architecture of pleasure and happiness, beyond the mere utilitarian buildings. The word 'hedonism' comes from the ancient Greek for 'pleasure'. Hedonism is a school of thought that argues that pleasure and happiness is the primary or most important intrinsic goods and the proper aim of human life. In architecture this philosophy is broadly defined as utilitarian parts of architecture that not just fulfill the ordinary purpose but improve the quality of life and human enjoyment.

2. Architectural Design Theme: “BIOINSPIRATION & THE REVIVAL OF AUTOGENIC ORNAMENT” 2.1. BIOINSPIRATION / Bionic Architecture Since the formation of natural and biological systems in our planet, nature has constantly been called upon to act as an engineer in solving technical problems.

Bionics or Biomimetics, as we understand it today, dates back to the period between 1800 and 1925 and its proponents Alessandro Volta (electric battery), Otto Lilienthal (flying machine), and Raoul Francé (concepts). It was virtually reinvented under the strong influence of cybernetics in the 1960s by H. v. Foerster and W. McCulloch. The term biomimetics arose simultaneously with a slightly different connotation. “Bioinspiration” is a convenient modern overarching term that embraces everything from bionics and biotechnology to bioinspired fashion design.

According to Werner Nachtigall, the German language term Bionik originally comes from the English word "bionics", which was coined by the US Air Force Major J.E. Steele at a conference entitled "Bionics Symposium: Living prototypes – the key to new technology" in 1960, supposedly as a combination of the words "biology" and "technics" or "electronics". In German, the term "Bionik" has found a very expressive reinterpretation in the ﬁrst and last syllables of the words Biologie [biology] and Technik [technology]. In the English-speaking world, the term "biomimetics" has appeared as equivalent to the German "Bionik" and is commonly used. Otto Schmidt coined this term in the 1950s. As the part "mimetic" suggests a mimicking of nature, the term is controversial. Recently, "Bioinspiration" has been used more often in the same context, but seems to be too general to prevail. Another solution for the continuing terminology discussion is to also use the term "bionik" in English. Nowadays, the three terms bionics, bionik and biomimetics are used synonymously.

2.2. Poetics of Architecture Like everything in our material culture, every act of architecture has its poetics, that is to say a 'reading' speciﬁc to its conception and realisation. What is poetics? Strictly speaking, poetics is the theory of literature and it concerns how poetry and other creative writing should be 'read' – that is, understood and evaluated.

Etymologically poetics stems from the Greek term ποιεΐν [poiein 'to make']. Poiesis is therefore by default related to making, fabrication, production (as much as described by Aristotle in his Metaphysics as the act of production following the thinking, noesis). In architecture, poetics has come to ﬁll a similar role, that of “making” and “reading”.

POETICS, NOT POETRY We should emphasize that poetics is not used as synonymous to poetry. De facto, poetry is the form of literary art 'in which language is used for its aesthetic and evocative qualities in addition to, or in lieu of, it's apparent meaning.' As we have already set, poetics per se instead, in its classical dimension, is linked to production.

2.3. Structure, Construction, Tectonics 'Structure' should be understood to mean a network of relationships of elements or of elementary processes'. - Wolfgang Wieser Through tectonics the architect may make visible, in a strong statement that intensiﬁed kind of experience of reality which is the artist's domain—in our case the experience of forces related to forms in a building. Thus structure, the intangible concept, is realized through construction and given visual expression through tectonics. - Eduard F. Sekler

The simplest way of describing the function of an architectural structure is to say that it is the part of a building which resists the loads that are imposed on it. All of these loads tend to distort the building envelope and to cause it to collapse; it is to prevent this from happening that a structure is provided.

The function of a structure may be summed up, therefore, as being to supply the strength and rigidity which are required to prevent a building from collapsing. More precisely, it is the part of a building which conducts the loads which are imposed on it from the points where they arise to the ground underneath the building, where they can ultimately be resisted.

Strength, Stiﬀness, Stability, Synergy Structures must be designed to satisfy three Ss and should satisfy all four Ss of structural design: 1. Strength to prevent breaking 2. Stiﬀness to prevent excessive deformation 3. Stability to prevent collapse 4. Synergy to reinforce architectural design.

2.4. The New Structuralism The New Structuralism announces a new order in design and construction. With the onset of digital technologies, existing parameters have shifted. The old order of standardised design and its established processes no longer hold sway; contemporary architectural design can now be characterised by irregularity, and an appetite for producing customised non-standard, complex, curvilinear forms. The shift in design and production technologies requires a seamless design approach that fully acknowledges the interdependence of design and fabrication. Design is no longer wholly dictated by form with structure following behind; structure becomes integral to form-ﬁnding.

2.5. Novel Tectonics Novel Tectonics leads to a non standardized approach towards architectural expression, which in one hand comes as a result of environmental constraints (i.e. building envelope) and in the other hand from the fabrication logic itself. To realize this, it is required a close and intensiﬁed collaboration in-between innovative architects, engineers and fabricators.

Revealing Structural Patterns behind the “Veil”

The relationship of form with structure it “conceals” and the relationship of envelope with form it “reveals”, surprisingly in many project remains ambiguous. Why? Through a rapid inquiry from ancient times till nowadays, select two built project with very diﬀerent approaches on dealing with relationship in-between: structure – material- form – envelope and the intended expression. Through a concise and explicit presentation, reveal the hidden secrets of structure behind the “veil”. The two projects have to be presented through a comparative presentation, accompanied with two physical models of each project analyzed, in scale 1:50 / 1:20, which models show only one portion of the most interesting part of structural and tectonic system of each project.* The research material should be present in a concise and explicit way only the essential information required from the assignment with images, schemes, and diagrams, explained with very short paragraphs of texts.

What to Show and what to Analyse?

- Time of construction and technology used (available) - Identify and label the structural system, structural pattern - Structural elements (Structural walls, columns, beams, arches, trusses, cables, etc.) - Structural diagrams (Deﬂected, Shear, Moment) - Details and materials - Spans (horisontal span or cantilevers) - Size of structural elements (dimensions of structural members; columns, beams, trusses, etj) - Relation of Structure to Space - Relation of Structure to Function - Flexibility - Expression of Structural system and elements (is structure visible?) - Tectonics - Relation of Structure to Envelope - Structure of Envelope - Structure of Roof - Canopies - Foundations - Other relevant building components: · Bridges · Skylights, etc.

List - categories of projects: A. First Category

B. Second Category

Säntispark Health and Leisure Centre, St Gallen, Switzerland

Chapel of Henry VII, in Westminster Abbey.

Tama Art University Library, Hachioji City, Japan, Toyo Ito & Associates, 2007

Santa Maria del Fiore, Brunelleschi

United Airlines Terminal, Chicago, USA, Murphy/Jahn, 1987

Mosque of Sehzade, Mimar Sinan

Barajas Airport, Madrid, Spain, Richard Rogers Partnership, 2006.

Mosque of Suleiman, Mimar Sinan

Sharp Centre, Ontario College of Art & Design, Toronto, Canada, Alsop Architects, 2004

Saint Paul’s Cathedral, Christopher Wren

1111 Lincoln Rd, Miami Beach, Florida, USA, Herzog & De Meuron, 2010.

Mosque of Cordoba (La Mesquita)

Leutschenbach School, Zürich, Switzerland, Christian Kerez, 2008.

La Sagrada Familia, Gaudi

London Aquatic Centre, London, UK, Zaha Hadid, 2011

Sullivan and Adler - Auditorium Building Chicago, 1889

De Young Museum, San Francisco, USA, Herzog & De Meuron, 2005

Charles Garnier - The Opera Garnier

Comparison List

10. Stansted Airport terminal, UK, Foster Associates, 1991

10. AEG Turbine Hall, Berlin, 1908; Peter Behrens, architect.

11. Oriente Station, Lisbon, Portugal, Santiago Calatrava, 1996.

11. Notre-Dame-du-Haut, Ronchamp, France, 1954; Le Corbusier, architect.

12. Railway station at Satolas Airport, Lyon, France, Santiago Calatrava, 1994.

12. TWA Terminal, Kennedy Airport, New York, USA, 1962; Eero Saarinen, architect.

13. San Francisco International Airport, USA, Skidmore Owings & Merrill LLP, 2000

13. The Eden Project, Cornwall, UK, 1999; Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners, architects

14. Hedmark Museum, Hamar, Norway, Sverre Fehn, 2005

14. Olympic Pool Tokyo, 1964, Kenzo Tange, architects.

15. Peckham Library, London, UK, Alsop & Störmer, 2000.

15. Kagawa Gymnasium, 1964, Kenzo Tange, architects.

16. Nicolas G. Hayek Centre, Tokyo, Japan, Shigeru Ban Architects, 2007.

16. SC Johnson Wax Administration Building, 1939, Frank Lloyd Wright.

17. Western Concourse, King’s Cross Station, London, UK, John McAslan + Partners, 2012

17. Town Hall at Säynätsalo, Finland, 1952, Alvar Aalto.

18. Yokohama International Passenger Terminal, Japan, Foreign Oﬃce Architects, 2002

18. Palace of Labour, Turin, Italy (1961). Pier Luigi Nervi

19. Terminal 3, Hamburg Airport, Germany, vonGerkan, Marg + Partners, 1991.

19. Palazzetto dello Sport, Rome, Italy, Pier Luigi Nervi with A.Vitellozzi, 1957.

20. Terminal 4, JFK Airport, New York, USA, Skidmore Owings & Merrill, 2001.

20. Church Of Christ The Worker [Chiesa Atántida] 1955-60, Elado Dieste

21. Terminal 2F, Charles de Gaulle Airport, Paris, Aéroports de Paris, 1999.

21. Port Warehouse [Deposito Montevideo] 1977-1979, Elado Dieste

22. Luxembourg Philharmonic Hall, Luxembourg, Christian de Portzamparc, 2005.

22. Centro de Estudios Hidrográﬁcos,1960-1963, Miguel Fisac

23. Canopy structure, World Exhibition Centre, Hanover, Germany, Herzog + Partner, 1999.

23. Fábrica Celestino Fernández, Colonia Vallejo, Mexico City, Felix Candela

24. Sendai Mediatheque, Sendai, Japan, Toyo Ito & Associates, 2000.

24. Palacio de los Deportes, Felix Candela

25. Westminster College, London, UK, Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects, 2011.

25. Toskana thermal baths, Bad Orb, Germany; architects: Ollertz Architekten; 2010.

26. Stuttgart Airport terminal, Germany, Gerkan, Marg + Partners, 1991.

26. Clubhouse, Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Course, Shigeru Ban

27. Santa Caterina Market, Barcelona, Spain, EMBT, 2005.

27. Elephant house, Zurich Zoo, Markus Schietsch

28. Riverside Museum, Glasgow, UK, Zaha Hadid, 2011.

28. Centre Pompidou, Paris, France, Piano and Rogers, 1977.

29. Paul Klee Museum, Bern, Switzerland, Renzo Piano Building Workshop, 2005.

29. New Gallery, Berlin, Germany, Mies van der Rohe, 1968.

30. Bus station, Cárceres, Spain, Justo García Rubio Arquitecto, 2003.

30. Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, Norwich, UK, Foster Associates, 1977.

31. Baumschulenweg Crematorium, Berlin, Axel Schultes Architects, 1999

31. Museum of Roman Art, Merida, Spain, Rafael Moneo, 1985.

32. National Stadium, Beijing, China, Herzog & De Meuron, 2008.

32. Dulles International Airport, Washington, D.C., USA, Saarinen and Associates, 1962.

33. Auditorio de Tenerife, Spain; Santiago Calatrava

33. Hall, Wöhlen High School, Switzerland, Santiago Calatrava, 1988.

34. The Sydney Opera House, Sydney; Jørn Utzon

34. Stansted Airport terminal, Essex, UK, Foster Associates, 1991.

35. Train Station, Chanhua County, Taiwan, Kris Yao | Artech

35. Candelaria station of the Mexico City Metro, Félix Candela

12A:7B | 6A:1B 4A:33B 8A:35B | 19A:14B 24A:28B | 30A:24B 34A:8B

| 27A:31B

7A:17B 20A:25B | 2A:26B 26A:23B 3A:32B

| 18A:12B

16A:16B | 17A:27B 25A:15B | 31A:29B 32A:28B 5A: 30B

| 23A:27B

33A:11B 1A:13B

| 22A:9B

15A:22B 35A:34B 17A:25B | 26A:26B

Research Group: Emine Imishti

22A

22. Luxemburg Philharmonic Hall, Kirchberg, Luxemburg Christian de Portzamparc, 2005. In 1997, the Christian de Portzamparc’s project was selected as a ﬁnalist in the international architecture competition launched by the Luxembourg Public Building Administration. Construction work on the new concert hall was carried out between spring 2002 and summer 2005.

In the design of Portzamparc facade it makes unusual use of the columns, incorporating 823 or 827, it depends on how they are counted, since some do not go from floor to ceiling. The striking white steel pillars are arranged in three or four rows that curl around the building and evoke numerous images for those who observe it, from organ tubes to the body of a fish. Some columns support a glass membrane, others serve for air diffusion and others transport oil that mitigates unnecessary vibrations and helps manage better acoustics within the building.

In addition to replacing the ring of trees originally designed by the architect, the colonnade surrounding the Philharmonic fulﬁlls diﬀerent functions. Steel tubes between 17.5 and 20 meters, with a constant diameter of 323mm, share these functions. The outer row supports the cover, the middle crimp the glass wall and the interior is intended for air conditioning, circulating Of the 411 exterior columns, 240 are bearing and have an integrated shock absorber to avoid the the air. phenomena of vibration and resonance in the absence of bracing. The weight of these columns varies between 767-2190kgs and the thickness of the steel between 5-14mm. The remaining 171 nonbearing columns also have the shock absorber due to its height and exposure to the wind. These weigh between 688-790kg and its thickness is constant, 5mm. The 230 columns that support the glazing are assembled by welding around a square steel bar, 80mm side, and solid Their weights vary between 3572-4141kgs.

Research Group: Emine Imishti

22A

The remaining 205 columns, placed inside, only house ventilation pipes with their corresponding insulation. They have integrated shock absorbers and their characteristics are the same as those of the nonbearing outer columns.

The Grand Auditorium has eight balconytowers placed vertically around the orchestra and orchestra pit. The audience is gathered around the musicians. The Chamber Music Hall is a volume forming an asymmetrical curved petal winding around t h e m a i n building.

The Philharmonic has a glazed area of 5,000m2 and 2,500tn of structural steel have been used Physical model

Research Group: Emine Imishti

18B

18. Palace of Labour Turin Italy Pier Luigi Nervi, 1961 The Palace of Labour designed and built by Nervi and his son Antonio for the Turin exhibition of 1961 was the result of a competition held in 1959. The building is a hybrid structures (concrete and steel), an unusual choice for Nervi that perhaps reﬂ ects the design climate at the time. The connection between the plate and the pilaster was provided by a steel capital. He was driven to use steel to enhance the speed of construction in order to satisfy the time limitation speciﬁed in the brief, a time-frame which he could not meet using only reinforced concrete and its lighter variant, ferrocement. Ferrocement is a particular kind of reinforced concrete, light and resistant, that

Nervi re-invented, improved and patented in 1945 under the name of ferro-cemento.

The large covering was planned to consist of sixteen square plates (38x38 m) supported by a 25 m high central column. Four perimeter beams would then stabilize the cantilevered elements. Between each plate a 2.5 m wide glass strip panel was inserted to provide natural light. The external walls, entirely clad in glass, wrapped round the perimeter of the building and incorporated large vertical mullions.

Research Group: Emine Imishti

18B

The interior border along the building perimeter is formed by the mezzanine, which has repeated reinforced concrete slabs with isostatic ribs each 10m x 10m slab is supported by columns at the four corners and the isostatic patterns follow one-eighth symmetry. With symmetry conditions at the left and bottom boundaries, monolithic perimeter conditions at the top and right boundaries, and a column support at the top right corner. The presented results show strong correlation exists between the theoretical primary and secondary isostatics and the as-built plan. The material used for this ﬂoor was Ferrocement. Ferrocement is a particular kind of reinforced concrete, light and resistant, that Nervi re-invented, improved and patented in 1945 under the name of ferro-cemento.

Umbrella

Physical model

Isostatic ﬂoor

Windows (Fasade)

Research Group: Emine Imishti 22. Luxemburg Philharmonic Hall, Kirchberg, Luxemburg Christian de Portzamparc, 2005. The buildings have different function In both building was used material of steel, the beam were built from steel the colonnade surrounding the Philharmonic fulfills different functions. And both are surrounded all in glass. The Luxemburg Philharmonic Hall, the architect was inspired on trees, and designed these column

22A:18B Comparison 22A:18B

Representative images

Comparison 22A:18B

18. Palace of Labour Turin Italy

Pier Luigi Nervi, 1961 These are two building designed and built in diﬀerent times. The both buildings are characterized with the columns The Palace of Labour beam is built with ferroconcrete and the roof is from steel. In both building was used material of steel. Surrounded all in glass. The Palace of Labour, the column has the resembles the structure of a tree.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka

5. Sharp Centre, Ontario College of Art and Design, Toronto, Canada, Alsop Architects, 2004.

“courageous, bold and just a little insane” -Worldwide Award by the RIBA

Location: Toronto, Canada Type: Educational-University 2 Status: Built in 2004 Area: 7440m

The building is formed by a rectangular structure 26m above the ground, supported by 12 brightly coloured steelcolumns, located directly over the oldest building on the campus. The free area below the building houses a plazaproviding access and extension to the Grange Park.

3 4

1.Entrance 2.Main core 3.Tabletop 4.Exit stair 5.Steel columns

5 1

The size of ‘table-top’ box is: 84m long 31m wide 9m high The ‘table-top’ contains two stories of accomodation, including: art studios, teaching spaces, meeting rooms, exhibition spaces and ofﬁces.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka

The form of the ‘table-top’ is created by a steel box truss clad in a “pixelated” black and white corrugated aluminium skin. Legs: All steel legs are the same size, seven painted in various colours and ﬁve in black to make them look thinner. The steel pipe bright red wider than the others conects the new building with the existing one. The material is steel: 2.54cm thick and a weight of 8165 kg each.

1.The columns anchor the tabletop to the ground and extend 18 meters to bedrock to prevent the building from being lifted by powerful winds. 2.The columns are coated in a layer which swells up when in contact with high temperatures. 3. The winds create vortexes around the columns which causes a structural instability, so the columns are tapered to eliminate the vortexes.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka

30B

30. Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, Norwich, UK, Foster Associates, 1977

Architects: Foster and Partners Location: Norwich, UK Project Year: 1974-1978 Status: Built Site Area: 6,186m2

Sainsbury Center for Visual Arts was the ﬁrst cultural building designed by Norman and Wendy Foster, which was called Foster Associates. The museum was completed in 1978 and it includes the key ideas of HighTech style that Norman Foster developed in his other projects. The building was designed to display the Sainsburys large collection of art. The building is a 135-metre-long, simple lattice steel structure that is glazed at both ends.

All building functions are included in a single, elongated hanger-like structure that makes up a series of free-flowing spaces. The main entrance of the building is o n t h e g r o u n d fl o o r, a n d a s e c o n d a r y entrance reached by a raised path lending to a spiral staircase at first-floor level, both lead to a common area. Reception space was the large living area an open-plan area for displaying the art collection, which was divided by moveable partitions.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka

30B

The structural concept of this 133m x 34m x 10m building was to provide a large scale, lightweight, elegant structure fabricated off site for accuracy and speed.To achieve the required degree of fit for all other major elements which were alsoprefabricated, the structure was fabricated to tolerances far closer to mechanical engineering standard then to structural ones. The roof structure alone contains more than 3.000 points which had to be located within 3mm of their defined positions.

The outer skin is formed of five different types of panels: the inner skin of fixed perforated louvers, laid horizontally. The structure is, in essence, a post and beam construction of prismatic trusses. They run along to sides walls and roof at 1.80cm and area 2.4. deep creating a double skin system.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka 5. Sharp Centre, Ontario College of Art and Design, Toronto, Canada, Alsop Architects, 2004

5A:30B

8A:14B

Comparison 5A:30B

Representative images

The structure of the Sharp Centre is uncovered by a a skin, but is open to see all its elments.

Comparison 5A:30B

Representative images

30. Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, Norwich, UK, Foster Associates, 1977

The Sainsbury Centre has a double steel trusse structure, which is then covered by a skin of panels.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka

8. London Aquatic Centre, London, UK, Zaha Hadid, 2011

Location: London, UK Project Year: 2005-2011 Status: Built Site Area:36875m2

The concept of this building design has been found in the ﬂuid geometry of water in motion, creating spaces and a surrounding environment in sympathy with the river landscape of the Olympic Park. We can see the inspiration in the undulating roofwhich sweeps up from the ground as a wave, enclosing the pools of the Centre withits unifying gesture.

Olympic basement: 3725m2 Ground ﬂoor: 15402m2 First ﬂoor: 16387m2 Seating Area: 7352m2

The London Aquatic Centre is planned on an orthongonal axis that is perpendicular to the Stratford City Bridge. All three pods are designed on this axes. The training pool is located under the bridge with t he competition and diving pools located within the large pool hall enclosed by the roof.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka The LAC has 628 impressive panes of glass and 8 external doors, allowing lots of natural light into the pool. It is designed with an inherent ﬂexibility to accomodate 2800 seats, with an additional 1000 seats available for major events.

The pool roof is expressed with arches along with the same axis as the pools. Double-curvature geometry has been used to generate a parabolic arch structure that creates the unique characteristics of the roof.

The roof not only spans a large length, but a large width too. In the centre, the depth was used to span the distance using truss sections, but where the roof becomes thinner towards the wings, there was a new solution to be found. The inclined arch shape geometry of the roof in the contilever was used, which makes the structure support itself. This results in an eﬃcient, elegant and buildable structure.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka 14. Olympic Pod Tokyo, Kenzo Tange, 1964 Location: Tokyo, Japan Project Year: 1961-1964 Status: Built Site Area:91000m2

“A single space-not closed and oppresive but free and open-a space in which the ﬁfteen thousand spectators can also move and ﬂow ‘gently’ in functional and psychological terms.” - K.T

This building was designed and built between 1961-1964 for the Tokyo Olympics. The design was inspired by Frei Otto’s Arena for the Olympic Stadium in Munich and houses swimming pools and diving areas for the 1964 Summer Olympics.

14B

Height: 47m Total ﬂoor arena: 34204m2 First gymnasium height: 40.37m Second gymnasium height: 42.29m

The Gymnasium contains two arenas. The smaller pavillion is used for various small Olympic events and hold approximately 5300 people. The National Gymnasium was designed to be occupied by 10500 people. It could also be transformed into a space for basketball and hockey events.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka

14B

The structural design creates a dramatic sweeping curves that appear to drape from two large, central supporting cables eﬀortlessly. Its dynamically suspended roof and rough materials form one of the most iconic building proﬁles globaly.

Like Saarinan’s design for Yale’s hockey stadium, Tange employs a a central structural spine where its structure and roof originate. The subtle curves of the structural cables, the sweeping roof plane and the curving concrete base seem to emerge from the site appearing as one integrated entity.

Two steel cables are supported between two structural towers and anchored into concrete supports on the ground. The suspended cables form a tensile tent-like rooﬁng structure; a series of pre-stressed cables are suspended from the two main cables that drape toward the concrete structure that creates the gymnasium base and provides the necessary structure for seating within the stadium.

Two main cables are 33 cm in diam. and weight 250 tons. They are strung between two structural support columns 40m in height and 126m appart.

Research Group: Donjeta Zhuniqi; Edina Hameli; Leona Beka 8. London Aquatic Centre, London, UK, Zaha Hadid, 2011

5A:30B

8A:14B

Comparison 8A:14B

Representative images

The structure of this project is spaceframe kind, made of steel trusses in vertical and horizontal direction.

Comparison

14. Olympic Pod Tokyo, Kenzo Tange, 1964

8A:14B

Representative images

Its inovative structure for the time which works 80% in tenssion adds uniqueness to the building.

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

16A

16.Nicolas G. Hayek Centre, Tokyo, Japan, Shigeru Ban Architects, 2007

NICOLAS G. HAYEK CENTER was built in 2007 in Tokyo, Japan by prominent architect SHIGERU BAN. This center was built with steel and concrete, is a fourteen-story, 56 meters-high architectural construction covered with four-story-high glass shutters at its front and back facades. As explained by Shigeru Ban in his project description, once the glass shutters are opened, the building becomes “Watch Street”, a lively and dynamic passage that anyone can walk through. With the system of massive side walls and other elements such as beams, columns, slabs and with some mezzanine.

We can say that the building takes place in five separate spaces. The first space that in itself has 3 half floors (Mezzanine) supported on one side of the building, while on the other side we have an inviting lobby with a green vertical wall, and this lobby becomes a passageway, from one side of the road to the other, since the building is located between two streets. Then the other 3 spaces have each two mezzanines supported on both sides of the building, and at the end, a space covered with a parametric gridshell structure which serves as an event hall.

Sketches of functions The building has 3 underground floors where the hydraulic elevators have a basement. it is located in a congested urban area and for this reason has small dimensions 13x32 m at the base. The building have four elevators, two in a circular shape and two in a square shape which lead to the first 4 floors, while on the right side are the stairs that are exposed from the road.

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

45 © The Swatch Group Japan KK

16A

46 Spatial models

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

16B

16. SC Johnson Wax Administration Building, 1939, Frank Lloyd Wright.

Photography: Carol M. Highsmith (LOC) - G. E. Kidder Smith (MIT Libraries) - Ezra Stoller

Johnson Wax Headquarters is the world headquarters and administration building of S. C. Johnson & Son in Racine, Wisconsin. Designed by American architect Frank Lloyd Wright for the company’s president, Herbert F. “Hib” Johnson, the building was constructed from 1936 to 1939. Its distinctive “lily pad” columns and other innovations revived Wright’s career at a point when he was losing inﬂuence. Also known as the Johnson Wax Administration Building, it and the nearby 14-story Johnson Wax Research Tower (built 1944–1950) were designated as a National Historic Landmark in 1976 as Administration Building and Research Tower, S.C. Johnson and Son. The Johnson Wax Headquarters were set in an industrial zone and Wright decided to create a sealed environment lit from above, as he had done with the Larkin Administration Building. The building features Wright’s interpretation of the streamlined Art Moderne style popular in the 1930s. © atlasofplaces.com

The inspiration and evolution of the tower The entrance is within the structure, penetrating the building on one side with a covered carport on the other. The carport is supported by short versions of the steel-reinforced dendriform (tree-like) concrete columns that appear in the Great Workroom. The low carport ceiling creates a compression of space that later expands when entering the main building where the dendriform columns rise over two stories tall. This rise in height as one enters the administration building creates a release of spatial compression making the space seem much larger than it is. Compression and release of space were concepts that Wright used in many of his designs, including the playroom in his Oak Park Home and Studio, the Unity Temple in Oak Park, Illinois, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City, and many others. Throughout the “Great Workroom,” a series of the thin, white dendriform columns rise to spread out at the top, forming a ceiling, the spaces in between the circles are set with skylights made of Pyrex glass tubing. At the corners, where the walls usually meet the ceiling, the glass tubes continue up, over and connect to the skylights creating a clerestory effect and letting in a pleasant soft light. The Great Workroom is the largest expanse of space in the Johnson Wax Building, and it features no internal walls. It was originally intended for the secretaries of the Johnson Wax company, while a mezzanine holds the administrators. © atlasofplaces.com

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

16B

Photography: Carol M. Highsmith (LOC) - G. E. Kidder Smith (MIT Libraries) - Ezra Stoller

The construction of the Johnson Wax building created controversies for the architect. In the Great Workroom, the dendriform columns are 9 inches (23 cm) in diameter at the bottom and 18 feet (550 cm) in diameter at the top, on a wide, round platform that Wright termed the “lily pad.” This difference in diameter between the bottom and top of the column did not accord with building codes at the time; they deemed the pillar’s dimensions too slender at the base to support the weight. Building inspectors required that a test column be built and loaded with twelve tons of material. The test column, once it was built, was not only tough enough to support the requested weight but Wright insisted that it be loaded with ﬁvefold the weight. It took sixty tons of materials before the “calyx,” the part of the column that meets the lily pad, cracked (and even then, only collapsing when the wooden beams supporting the “lily-pad” were removed; crashing the 60 tons of materials to the ground, even damaging a water main 30 feet underground). After this demonstration, a vindicated Wright was given his building permit. © atlasofplaces.com

Spatial models The building extends more horizontally than vertically until 1950 when the Johnson Wax Research Tower was built which made a balance between horizontal and vertical. For construction, the materials were used as: brick, concrete, steel and glass. Most of the walls of the building are made of brick and glass tubes were placed on top and thus a giant window was created around the building and this was repeated on each floor. This enabled the facade from the outside to be clean in shape and to have no openings. The principle of using glass tubes instead of windows was repeated in many positions and this creates a simple decoration, but minimalistic . The most impressive space is the Great Workroom which is an airspace that surprises you as soon as you enter, with perfect zenith lighting throughout the day, and with columns as Wright called it "lily pad", a masterpiece in architectural and engineering terms. All furniture is designed by Wright including chairs, tables, etc. The Research Tower has a total of 14 floors, where every second slab is circular and the light coming through the walls of glass tubes creates a well-lit environment, ideal for research, the tower has a very minimalist facade, clean of decors and looks more 7 floors but it has 14 floors.

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

16A:16B

16.Nicolas G. Hayek Centre, Tokyo, Japan, Shigeru Ban Architects, 2007

23A:27B

Comparison 16A:16B

Verticality. symmetry. stratiﬁcation. airspace. simple geometric shapes.

Ovalitet. mezzanine. compactness. transparency. promenade

Comparison

16. SC Johnson Wax Administration Building, 1939, Frank Lloyd Wright.

16A:16B

Verticality. symmetry. stratiﬁcation. airspace. simple geometric shapes.

Ovalitet. mezzanine. compactness. transparency. promenade

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

23A

23.Canopy structure, World Exhibition Centre, Hanover, Germany, Herzog + Partner, 1999.

Canopy structure designed for EXPO 2000 in Hanover, Germany with architects Herzog + Partner BDA, Thomas Herzog, Hans Jörg Schrade, München / D. With an area of 16,000 square meters, covered by a giant roof and 4 pavilions separated from each other, enabling the development of many activities, which makes it an exhibition center. The shape of the roof modules arose from the basic shape of the hyperbolic paraboloid , which then joined to form a giant tree.

The Wood Canopy The wooden canopy is comprised of ten modular elements, each measuring 120 feet by 120 feet (40m x 40m) and installed at a height of 60 feet (20m) above the ground. The elements are timber double-curved lattice shells, each supported on a central structure. Designed by German architecture ﬁrm Herzog & Partner, the roof shells cantilever out on all sides from a central “trunk”, and are covered by a pre-stressed translucent membrane. Each square, modular element is made up of four wedge-shaped pre-fabricated sections (leaves) that utilize a compound slope downward towards the lower center of the square; rainwater naturally runs downhill to the hollow central support columns where it is collected and brought to the ground. These supports are each cut from a single tree trunk, from the classic silver ﬁr of the Black Forest. Seventy trees 150 feet (50m) tall were selected. The bark was stripped with high-pressure water jets and the trunks were cut in half lengthwise, to form each of the four corner columns. l Munich-based architects Herzog + Partner are specialists in timber research and experimentation. The World Expo 2000 theme was 'Man, Nature, Technology,’ and the architects considered their organic wood roof structure to be the perfect construction to embody a natural material grown from sustainable sources. However, they also applied conventional engineering standards and modern building codes, according to project structural engineer Julius Natterer. © 2012 Robin Rogers / Solaripedia

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

23A

© messe.de Each of the ten upturned umbrellas consists of a central four-legged tapering pylon of timber and steel supporting a 40 x 40m square crown, which is further divided into four identical square leaves. At the base of each pylon, steel feet are anchored in a 45-foot (15m) deep concrete ring foundation. The leaves of the crown are double-curved surfaces made up of a skeletal net of laminated timber struts clad in a weatherproof membrane. Rainwater is conducted to the center of each umbrella, down a rainwater pipe in the center of each pylon, and feeds into a grid of 15-foot (5m) wide canals on the piazza which complement the roof geometry. Changing daylight, the aspect of the sun and sky color, is filtered through the thin, fireproof translucent roofing membrane which is self-cleaning and recyclable.

The timber originated in the Black Forest in southwest Germany where the largest concentration of ancient white oaks in Western Europe exists. The oaks chosen for the Expo Roof columns were up to 150 feet (50m) long with a typical diameter of approximately four feet (1.4m), and some trees were up to 250 years old (Editor's Note: this seems like a dubious sustainable practice, although selective culling of "weak" trees is sometimes considered acceptable for old growth forest systems). Suitable trees were selected using ultrasonic equipment that could reveal internal structural weaknesses. © 2012 Robin Rogers / Solaripedia

Hyperbolic Paraboloid

Architect Thomas Herzog has said that his design goal was to reﬂect the solidity of a tree with its structural strength visible in the progression from a large supporting trunk to the smaller branches and twigs. Computer technology made precision possible and even saved trees from unnecessary felling thereby saving time and resources. The double-curved roof deck and supporting structure were coordinated using a computer program that guided robot cutting machines in the manufacture of factory-made sections that were small enough for highway transport, to be assembled on site. Specialists on the project carefully studied vibration, wind and snow loads, lighting and daylighting, membrane and color. The design process included collaboration among the architect, engineers and contractors who tested structure and construction feasibility using real models and computer simulations, wind tunnel and loading tests. Steel shafts were incorporate at critical points but this project is considered by some to have been the ﬁrst time that timber alone, in the form of large area plate collars, solid and laminated sections, was used for structural wind bracing. It is one of the few Expo 2000 structures remaining on Hannover’s extensive Deutche Messe fairgrounds - the largest fairgrounds in the world as of November 2012. © 2012 Robin Rogers / Solaripedia

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

27B

27. Elephant house, Zurich Zoo, Markus Schietsch. Elephant House Zoo Zurich, is a zoo built in Switzerland in 2014 by the architect Markus Schietsch who in an area of 8,440 m2 designed a shallow dome which with a free-form bends in some parts of it creating a shell parametric constructed of cross laminated timber due to the low weight that wood has.

The characteristic element of the new elephant house is its striking wooden roof which blends into the landscape as a shallow free-form shellstructure. The roof dissolves into a transparent mazelike structure that establishes an organic relationship to the surrounding forest. In the interior the roof unfolds its atmospheric effect: as if through a canopy of trees the sunlight ﬁlters through the intricate roof structure generating constantly changing light atmospheres. The roof is designed as a shallow, free-spanning wooden shell. Prefabricated triple-layer panels were bent on-site into their form and nailed up. The openings were cut out on-site from the massive wooden shell. The continuously changing façade structure consists of lamellas that seemingly grow up to the edge of the roof as an organically shaped band indicating the loadbearing areas. The iconographic shell of the roof together with the dynamic façade form an atmospheric envelope and pictographic “Nature-Construction” concentrating the essence of the design into a symbiosis between architecture and landscape. © Markus Schietsch

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati

27B

The Kaeng Krachan Elephant Park at Zoo Zurich offers six times as much room as the previous enclosure, creating an environment where the mammals can roam freely between indoor and outdoor spaces, while also making it easier for visitors to observe the animals. © Markus Schietsch

The decision to use a timber structure was made due to the low weight of the material and the advantages in production. Traditional carpentry rms were used for the timber construction. The pace of work was dictated by the construction workers; at times there were are many as 80 carpenters working on the roof simultaneously.

Markus Schietsch Architekten collaborated with landscape ﬁrm Lorenz Eugster and engineering ofﬁce Walt + Galmarini on the project, creating a compound that can accommodate up to 10 elephants at a time.

The building's most prominent feature is its domed wooden roof, which has an area of 6,800 square metres. It is interspersed with 271 ETFE plastic skylights – all in different shapes and sizes – to create the impression of tree branches.

"The roof dissolves into a transparent maze-like structure that establishes an organic relationship to the surrounding forest," said the architects in a project text. © dezeen.com © Andreas Buschmann

The individual pieces of the timber shell were CNC milled and assembled like a giant puzzle.

Research Group: Fuad Bajrami, Enis Hasimi, Jetmira Murati 16.Canopy structure, World Exhibition Centre, Hanover, Germany, Herzog + Partner, 1999.

Natural material for construction Zero waste

Pattern from the structure of nature

61 Inspired by nature, parametric form

Many components, Prefabrication

16A:16B

23A:27B

Comparison 23A:27B

Comparison

27. Elephant house, Zurich Zoo, Markus Schietsch.

23A:27B

Inspired by nature, parametric form

Pattern from the structure of nature

62 Many components, Prefabrication

Natural material for construction

Research Group: Rubina Kurti; Sellma Mustafa; 26. Stuttgart Airport terminal,Germany Gerkan, Marg + Partners, 1991. Stuttgart International Airport is a public airport located in Germany that was ﬁrst constructed to be a German Airbase in 1938 replacing an existing air strip.After World War II,the Airport was seized by the US Army

until 1948.

26A In the 1990 s,the original terminal was demolished and then replaced with

four

new interconnected

terminals featuring a spacious ﬂor plan and eﬃcient transportation layout to manage a maximum of 12 million passengers yearly.Designed by Architecture group Gerkan,Mag and Partners, each of the four terminals have separate check - in

SECTION A-A

and bagging stations creating small transport networks for both people and luggage to be in close proximity with one of the eight jet bridges. SECTION B-B

Structurally speaking,what makes the tree-like support branches

holding up the roof so unique is how large of a span the column holds in comparison to its footprint at ground level..

What makes this airport unique is that for a relatively small airport,the use of bio-mimicry in the light weight structural members creates a powerful blend with the built and natural enviroment giving the entire building an open and inspiring viber.The concept of Biomimicry,considered as the science and philosophy of learning from nature , is a source of architecturall design inspiration with diﬀerent approaches undertaken by architects and engineers.

Research Group: Rubina Kurti; Sellma Mustafa;

26A

STRUCTURAL DESIGN The Stuttgart Airportuses Tree-like Support Structures in the entry terminals to

create an ascending open

warehouse-like space.

From walking through the main entrance to checking in bags to approaching the gates,the height of the roof increases providing the subtle ease of orientation

smooth ﬂow as the guest

prepares for take oﬀ.The entire roof is divided into twelve sections partitioned

by skyligts,erected

Details of structure

as a two-way slabs.These

“columns” gather all the loads passing down through the branches which are translated into the trunk and then down to the foundation. The advantage of using this Tree-like structure system is that the distances betwen the loading points and the support system is minimized.While the column structure is termed as “tree-like”,it would d . be more correct to refer to the structure as an umbel systems, where the total load is distributed to one point and from there transmit the total load via a single member to a support point,

Structure

the point of application of the reaction force providing total

equilibrium.A pin jointed connection between the support point and the roof structure it is holding prevents movement .

Umbel structure

UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES Trees in nature have inspired many forms of architecture and withouta doubt,they have inﬂuenced the construction of the Stuttgart Airport. However,the inspiration ends at its appearance because these “branching” structures cannot be compared with that of a natural tree.In nature,tree branches are subject to mending forces which would negatively impact constructed tree-like structure. This concept of “lightweight” structure requires less material, introducing optimal calculations to determine structural strength. In simpe terms,the basic rules to follow when designin with light weight members is to...

BUILDING SIGNIFICANCE This building eﬀectively showcases a visible structural system that is vital toward building.What truly makes this building is that un-like real trees,the smaller,outermost branches of this

-Avoid bendinf stresses and moments. -Only carrt compression forces over short distances to minimize the chance for stability problems and unnecessary added mass.

structure system is able to carry relatively heavy loads..

And contain and incorporate compression forces over long distances into self stablizing systems.

MODEL

66 SECTION

Research Group: Rubina Kurti; Sellma Mustafa;

26B

26. Clubhouse, Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Course,

Shigeru Ban.. Shigeru Ban’s work with traditional materials and the timber structures continues in this Nine Bridges Country Club-clubhouse in South Korea, unveiles in 2009.The 20,000 square-metre facility is only a two-hour drive away from Seoul and consists od 3 buildings; the mainatrium clubhouse for regular members, a VIP members area and an accommodation for Vip members.Each of these buildings has been designed to feature its own structural system as te architect in partnership with KACI international worked to meet the local regulations that prohibit construction of timber structures spanning more than 6,000 square meters.

PLAN

FACADE The atrium features a glass curtain wall system with a base made of localy . available stone fancies by the South Koreans.The envelope of the main space is composed of glass to provide for a clear,transparent space.Its entrance features 4.5-meter-wide glass

shutters that open and close fuly making them unique components connecting the space to the green ﬁelds outside.The timber and glass atrium is a three-story .

The most innovative feature of the building is the hexagon grid shell roof made of wood.This hexagon grid shell is based on an ecological and natural ventilated concept of hexagon pattern occurref from Korean

traditional

summertime

pillow.

The wooden structure is ﬁre-resistant and the roof and columns are exposed in the interior spaces. The canopy of woven timber girders which carries the roof has 21 slender columns support 32 roof elements, DESIGN MOTIVE and is assembled from more than 3.500 intricately 1.Korean traditional detaildes gluelam segments prefabric in Switzerland.

summer pillow

The main design concept

2.Column erection

of Haesley Nine Bridges

3.Crown erection

Golf Club House is

4.Roof construction

natural lighting and ventilation through circular openings

The use of sustainble materials in its design also complements

above the tree like

its aesthetic ability.During cold weather,the tall wooden columns

columns.

and roofs insulate the area creating warmth in various spaces.

Research Group: Rubina Kurti; Sellma Mustafa;

26B

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS The roof and the columns structure is formed as an uninterrupted continuity. This timber complex is of surface construction which is one homogeneous entity acting as the supporting structure and space deﬁning element simultaneously. Therefore there is no distinc verticle columns and horizontal beams to be found. This free form structure although has a methamatical geometry in 3D space, it requires specialized design,construction and material expertise to realized. It get its strength and stability from double curvature lattice structure which is overlaid in regular crisscross pattern.Hence no bracing is needed to prevent lateral deformation by wind pressure.The surface is formed using intersecting parallel timber members in three directions to form a hexagonal and triangular grid system

Model

COMPOSITE STEEL DECK FLOOR CONSTRUCTION Composite steel deck floors consist of a profiled steel deck with concrete topping.Light welded mesh reinforcment is placed in the concrete to control cracking and to resist longitudinal shear.In case of fire,it can act as tensile reinforcement too.Indentations in the profiled deck allow the concrete and steel to bond and share load.Composite action between the supporting beams and the concrete is created by weldind shear studs through the deck into the top flange of the beam.The increased use of steel frames in new buildings is one of the biggest trends globally,as it allows more flexibility. One of the key benefits of this type of construction compare to traditional reinforced concrete floor is the speed of construction.Weight is reduced due to the intrinsic efficiency of composites construction and the dispoacement of concrete by the profile shape.This reduce both primary structure and foundations.

Research Group: Rubina Kurti; Sellma Mustafa; 26. Stuttgart Airport terminal,Germany Gerkan, Marg + Partners, 1991

Comparison 26A:26B

The Stuttgart Airportuses Tree-like Support Structures in the entry terminals to create an ascending open warehouse-like space.The entire roof is divided into twelve sections partitioned by skyligts,erected as a two-way slabs. Each of these areas are supported by the steel tree-like structures.These “columns” gather all the loads passing down through the branches which are translated into the trunk and then down to the foundation..The advantage of using this Tree-like structuresystem is that the distances betwen the loading points and the support system is minimized.

SECTION

26A:26B

AXONOMETRY

26. Clubhouse, Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Course,

Comparison

Shigeru Ban...

26A:26B

Clubhouse building is composed of a hexagonal wooden grid shell roof structure that encompasses the whole building.The atrium is composed of timber columns and roof with an envelope of clear glass providing a transparet and open spacee.The laminated timber columns arranged in radially climb vertically and curve to become horizontal members at the roof plane forming a hexagonal grid.

Axonometry Section