Ascenzo_Isabella_698687_FinalJournal

AIR JOURNAL

Isabella Ascenzo 2016 Studio 14 Tutor - Chen

1

CONTENTS:

1. INTRODUCTION 3

2. PART A 4 Design Futuring 5 Design Computation 8 Composition/Generation 12 Conclusion 16 Learning Outcomes 17 Appendix 18 Footnotes + References 20

3. PART B 22 Research Field 22 Case Study 1.0 24 Case Study 2.0 30 Technique: Development 36 Technique: Prototypes 42 Technique: Proposal 46 Learning Objectives and Outcomes 52 Appendix 54 Footnotes + References 56

2

4. PART C 58 Design Concept 59 Precedence and Fabrication 62 Design Development 64 Form Finding 66 Playing with Form 68 Final Form 70 Panel Connections 72 Prototypes 74 Testing Materials 78 Final Model- Process 80 Final Model 90 Light and Shadow 100 Learning Objectives 106 Footnotes + References 108

INTRODUCTION:

About Me:

I

’m Isabella and I’m a third-year architecture major at the University of Melbourne. My passion for architecture started at a young age due to the fact that my father is a builder and that I’ve always grown up in an environment surrounded by architectural plans and drawings.

My hobbies outside of architecture are mainly creative hobbies such as sewing and crafting. I’ve always been very creative and even enjoy playing guitar and making a bit of music for fun.

For me architecture has always effected me greatly as I’ve always noted the experiential and historical aspects in every building I’ve walked into or even walked past. I have this great fascination with dwellings and the range of different dwellings all around Melbourne, especially the one’s built in the early 1900’s.

I love hand drawn perspectives and plans as I favour the earlier periods of architecture as opposed to ultra modern styles. This being so I’m quite intrigued to know how I’ll cope with the computer programing but I’m eager to learn and hopefully I can develop a whole new love for parametric design as it is very appealing to the eye due to its complexity.

3

PART A: DESIGN FUTURING: NASA Sustainability Base

William McDonough | California, U.S.A | 2012

Fig. 1.2

W

illiam McDonough is a well known architect in the world of sustainable housing and structures.

His NASA base was seen as revolutionary due to the fact that it was built in harmony with its environment, utilising natural air and heat to regulate the building, thus reducing the need for man made temperature control.¹ As Tony Fry discusses in his book Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice², our world is developing at a rapid pace and we’re beginning to care less and less about our environmental impacts, yet I believe that William McDonough is a great example of someone who has noticed that we need to make a change and create buildings that connect with the environment rather than destroying it.

McDonough’s use of solar panels, high performance building envelope and intelligent materials as shown in Fig. 1.2 allow his building to continue to be appreciated for its attention to detail and consideration of energy consumption and pollution. This building definitely expands future possibilities as it stands as a great example of a structure that can continue to minimise human impact on the world and create a better future, especially through its use of BloomEnergy motors which are 55% efficient in converting natural gas into electricity.³ Lastly, as shown in Fig. 1.4 McDonough’s sustainable base water flows for the building shows how he aims to not only reduce the use of energy consumption but also collect and utilise rainwater, thus minimising water wastage. McDonough’s NASA base is impeccably sustainable and will continue to stand as an example for future designs due its ingenious use of sustainable systems.

4

Fig. 1.3

Fig. 1.4 5

Hearst Tower

Norman Foster | New York City, U.S.A | 2006

Fig. 1.5- Air flow/ventilation/heat transfers

N

orman Foster was one of the first to create the sustainable sky scraper. His innovative designs in high rise buildings allowed him to become a revolutionary figure in terms of sustainable structures. I believe his Hearst Tower stands as a great precedent for design futuring in terms of sustainable structures due to the fact that it uses 26% less energy than skyscrapers who use a regular design code as oppose to Foster’s.⁴ Foster’s main objective for the Tower was to create a thermal efficient diagrid design which thus allows ventilation and heating to flow efficiently throughout the building in a sustainable manner as shown in Fig. 1.5. The thermal efficiency comes from Foster’s use of shading and dynamic window system which allows 30% less energy used.

Norman Foster expanded future possibilities through his use of recycled materials in design. The Hearst Tower was made of 90% recycled steal⁴ which was seen as quite revolutionary at the time, especially in high rise building design. Lastly, Foster’s building much like William McDonough’s building, utilised rain water, by collecting it from the rooftop to supplement cooling systems, control temperatures and humidity and water plant life within.⁴ The Hearst Tower still continues to be used as an office building which was its intended purpose and due to his sustainable innovative design, his building functions extremely well and is able to manage temperatures and humidity better than most buildings. This building will continue to stand as an example for future sky scrapers that intend on creating a building which functions well without costing the earth in doing so.

6

Fig. 1.6

Fig. 1.7- Air flow

7

DESIGN COMPUTATION: ICD Pavilion 2011

University of Stuttgart | Stuttgart, Germany | 2011

T

Fig. 1.8

he students at the University of Stuttgart chose to use computer programs to create this pavilion for the Institute of Computational Design showcase in 2011. Due to the structures harsh geometries the sole use of computer programs enabled the students and teachers to find the correct mathematics to create a structural and bionic assembled design. Computation is great in how it fills the gap of human error as it runs a series of tests by manipulating the structure to find the best suited geometries for the design and material chosen. The way computing affects the design process is that it manipulates the design to an extent where you’re unsure of the outcome.

Computation as learnt from this week’s readings, is when you entirely base your design through computer modelling and therefore there is no set design or drawing in which you work on beforehand. This slightly affects the traditional design process as there is no clear structural design placed on paper or modelled first. Computational designs are clearly created through their mathematical and structural boundaries as shown in Fig. 2.1. Furthermore, the ICD Pavilion design clearly falls into the computational category as the design was integrated with a biological structure and the spatial areas were tested in order to create something that could be built in a full scale⠾. Furthermore computation allowed this structure to be manufactured mechanically and bolted together through a simple connection process which was tested through computation to achieve the best possible outcome. Computation in this instance has made assembling the structure much easier and it has allowed the structure to have no interfering structural elements that ruin the design.

8

Fig. 1.9

Fig. 2.1- The technical and mathematical side of the structure- found through computation.

9

Heydar Aliyev Center

Zaha Hadid | Baku, Azerbaijan | 2012

Z

Fig. 2.2

aha Hadid is well known for her building designs due to their insanely different shapes and how they push the boundaries in structural engineering. Although some of her buildings have a parametric feel and shape to them, they are not an example of computation. Hadid’s Heydar Aliyev Center in Baku, is a great example as it’s fluidity and organic shape would suggest that it was created through computation although it was quite the opposite as the design process connects much with the traditional design process in which we would label as computerization. Computerization is when the design of the building is initially created through hand drawing or computer modelling and it is then placed onto certain programs which aid in finding a way to make the model into a real life structure. The computer programs work with the given shape and try and find certain structural materials and members that will allow it to stand in real term.

As this building is not part of computation its design innovation does not alter during the computer programing stage, it is merely fixed at the initial design phase. In preceding architectural theory this design style was seen as the most innovative as it allows the architect to do most of the design work and it brings the architect back in touch with the site and the structure. Yet computation is seen as something that distances the architect from the built process as computers do most of the work whilst the architect types in the commands. Yet this view is beginning to change the more we use computation in designs and the more this designs become a success in innovation.

10

Fig. 2.3

Fig. 2.4 11

COMPOSITION/GENERATION: Pleated Inflation

Marc Fornes | Argeles, France | 2015

Fig. 2.6 Fig. 2.5

M

Fig. 2.7

ark Fornes is a well known designer for his use of computation. I chose his Pleated Inflation structure in Argeles France as I believe it is a really interesting example of Generative design. Fornes’ structure is an example of Generation design due to the fact that it was computed to find the best possible outcome and in doing so the structure had a distinct growing and morphing process. Fig. 2.8, Images 1 to 8 show Fornes’ process changing from one structure to another in order to show the best possible outcome. His design was initially inspired by an idea of a self supported shell with pleated details.⁶ Generation is great in terms of this design project because as shown in Fig 2.8, the process of constant morphing allowed Fornes to opt for the best possible outcome in terms of structure for the light weight aluminium plates. His Generative approach also allowed him to successfully create a structure that was self supporting and unify structure, skin, ornamentation and spacial experience.⁶ As mentioned in Brady Peters “The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, the architectural industry is changing and shifting towards a design approach considered Generative. Compositional approaches are still used but as technology develops more firms are shifting towards a computational structure within.⁷ The use of computation is allowing architects to use these ever growing design tools that are linking the virtual design environment with the physical environment⁷, much like Fornes’ work.

12

Fig. 2.8- Images 1 to 8.

2

1

3

5

7

4

6

8 13

RMIT Mace

Kokkugia | Melbourne, Australia | 2015 Fig. 2.9

K

Fig. 3.1

okkugia, a group of designers and architects at RMIT in Melbourne, experiment with Generation design through advanced computation and are quite successful in producing intelligently structured computational designs. Much like Mark Forne, this design group, often directed by Roland Snooks, create a model that undergoes many computational manipulations and variations. Fig, 3.2, images 1 to 6 show the flow and movement of the parametric design, taking all different shapes through manipulation and generation. The project was inspired by old style maces and combines multi-agent algorithmic design, which is then 3D printed.â ¸ The use of computation in this instance has enabled the designers to generate an intricate project which structurally supports each fine detail and also emulates its inspiration. The design process would have required many hours of computational manipulation allowing the program to create a series of lines that are able to be produced in a real life scale. The advantages for using computation and thus creating generative design in this case, is that the fine details and series of lines could have been produced and mathematically calculated much quicker and more accurately than if it were to be calculated by hand.

Such designs were not created before computation and therefore this new generation of design is opening the world of architecture up to new styles and ways of thinking.

14

Fig. 3.2- Images 1 to 6.

1

2

3 4

5

6

15

CONCLUSION:

A

fter all the precedent study I have conducted,I have found that sustainability and computation can work hand in hand when it comes to design approaches and for me this was very important as I wanted to create something that minimized waste in terms of materials and computational programs can aid in achieving that. For my intended design I’m probably inspired most by the University of Stuttgart’s ICD Pavilion as the geometric shapes have a really interesting structure to them in which I’d wish to explore more on Grasshopper and Rhino. I found that it was really beneficial to design in a generative approach through computation as it allows you to create intricate structures that can be manipulated in millions of ways until the best possible outcome is found. It’s also beneficial in how it can take economical materials and create something structural and innovative, along with minimizing wastage.

16

LEARNING OUTCOMES:

O

verall I’ve learnt a lot about computation and how it is becoming more common in architectural practice. I came into the semester with absolutely no knowledge of computational design and I had no idea how to create anything using Grasshopper. I’ve learnt a lot about the benefits of computational design and how it is helpful in creating digital projects into real life realms. I look forward to learning a lot more about scripts and Grasshopper commands as I’m still a beginner, but I hope to create something somewhat like the ICD Pavilion. I think that if I knew about computation sooner I could have created much more fluid and intricate computer designs for my past studios and it would have saved me a lot of time in computer modelling.

17

APPENDIX:

A lg or it hm ic Sketchbook

SURFACES:

When experimenting with surfaces I found that the shape took whole new form from every angle it was looked at. I also found that when moving one pull point it took on a whole new form.

I was then able to break apart elements and re arrange them to create entirely new figures. I enjoyed using the loft technique as it really brought my shapes to life. I went from really fluid shapes at the begging of week one and then progressed to harsher and more rectilinear shapes near the end and I’m not quite sure which one I prefer. I’m probably leaning towards more triangular and rectangular style projects due to their clean geometries.

18

This curve was then stripped back to its original plane and each curve within the plane was then moved and lofted to create these thin bars.

I manipulated the distance between them with a number slider tool. This was probably the most interesting exercise in my sketchbook and I really like this approach as it got me thinking about materials and I wanted to play around with it a bit more further along the track,

19

FOOTNOTES:

1. Matthew Helt and others, Sustainable Base (California, NASA, 2015) <http://www.nasa.gov/ames/ facilities/sustainabilitybase> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

2. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008), p. 1–16.

3. Moffet Field, NASA Sustainability Base (California, William McDonough and Partners, 2016) < http:// www.mcdonoughpartners.com/projects/nasa-sustainability-base/> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

4. CTBUH, 2007 Best Sustainable Tall Building (2007) < http://www.ctbuh.org/Awards/AllPastWinners/07_HearstTower/tabid/1049/language/en-US/Default.aspx> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

5. University of Stuttgart, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 (Stutgartt, 2011), <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=6553> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

6. De Zeen Magazine, Marc Fornes Creates Sculptural Installation in France Using Perforated Metal Shingles (De Zeen Magazine, 2015) < http://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/02/pleated-inflation-installationmarc-fornes-the-very-many-argeles-france-digital-design-aluminium/> [Accessed 16 March, 2016].

7. Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, p. 08-15.

8. Kokkugia, RMIT Mace (Kokkugia: Melbourne, 2015) < http://www.kokkugia.com/RMIT-Mace> [Accessed 16 Mach, 2016].

REFERENCES:

- CTBUH, 2007 Best Sustainable Tall Building (2007) < http://www.ctbuh.org/Awards/AllPastW inners/07_HearstTower/tabid/1049/language/en-US/Default.aspx> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

- De Zeen Magazine, Marc Fornes Creates Sculptural Installation in France Using Perforated Metal Shingles (De Zeen Magazine, 2015) < http://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/02/pleated-inflation-installationmarc-fornes-the-very-many-argeles-france-digital-design-aluminium/> [Accessed 16 March, 2016].

- Kokkugia, RMIT Mace (Kokkugia: Melbourne, 2015) < http://www.kokkugia.com/RMIT-Mace> [Accessed 16 Mach, 2016].

- Matthew Helt and others, Sustainable Base (California, NASA, 2015) <http://www.nasa.gov/ames/facilities/sustainabilitybase> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

- Moffet Field, NASA Sustainability Base (California, William McDonough and Partners, 2016) < http:// www.mcdonoughpartners.com/projects/nasa-sustainability-base/> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

- Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, p. 08-15.

- Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008), p. 1–16.

- University of Stuttgart, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011, (Stutgartt, 2011), <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=6553> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

IMAGE SOURCES:

Fig. 1.1: (COVER IMAGE) Christoph Hermann, Emergent Design (2016) <http://www.christoph-hermann.com/parametric-architectures/emergentdesign-barotic-interiors-2/> [Accessed 17 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.2: Ana Sayfa, NASA Sustainable Base/ William McDonough and Partners (Mimdaporg, 2012) < http://www.mimdap. org/?p=102051> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.3: Aecom, Nasa Ames Sustainability Base, Building N232, (2016) <http://www.aecom.ca/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnext oid=9ca34c4b7ecc2210VgnVCM100000089e1bacRCRD> [Accessed 17 March,2016].

20

Fig. 1.4: Moffet Field, NASA Sustainability Base (California, William McDonough and Partners, 2016) < http://www.mcdonoughpartners.com/projects/nasa-sustainability-base/> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.5: Word Press, Eco Building 101 (2009), <https://ecobuilding101.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.6: ArchDaily, Flashback: Hearst Tower/ Foster and Partners (2012), < http://www.archdaily.com/204701/flashback-hearst-towerfoster-and-partners> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.7: Word Press, Eco Building 101 (2009), <https://ecobuilding101.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.8: Ashley Nelson, ICD + ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 (Knstrct, 2011) < http://www.knstrct.com/art-blog/2011/12/20/icd-itkeresearch-pavilion-2011> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 1.9: University of Stuttgart, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011, (Stutgartt, 2011), <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.1: University of Stuttgart, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011, (Stutgartt, 2011), <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.2: Zaha Hadid Architects, Haydar Aliyev Center (Zaha Hadid Architects, 2012) < http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/ heydar-aliyev-centre/#> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.3: Zaha Hadid Architects, Haydar Aliyev Center (Zaha Hadid Architects, 2012) < http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/ heydar-aliyev-centre/#> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.4: CompetitionLine, Architecture (2014) < http://www.competitionline.com/de/ergebnisse/162407> [Accessed 13 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.5: De Zeen Magazine, Marc Fornes Creates Sculptural Installation in France Using Perforated Metal Shingles (De Zeen Magazine, 2015) < http://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/02/pleated-inflation-installation-marc-fornes-the-very-many-argeles-france-digital-design-aluminium/> [Accessed 16 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.6: De Zeen Magazine, Marc Fornes Creates Sculptural Installation in France Using Perforated Metal Shingles (De Zeen Magazine, 2015) < http://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/02/pleated-inflation-installation-marc-fornes-the-very-many-argeles-france-digital-design-aluminium/> [Accessed 16 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.7: Marc Fornes and TheVeryMany, 13 Argeles-Sur-Mer ( Marc Fornes: New York, 2015) <http://theverymany.com/public-art/ argeles-sur-mer/> [Accessed 16 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.8: Marc Fornes and TheVeryMany, 13 Argeles-Sur-Mer ( Marc Fornes: New York, 2015) <http://theverymany.com/public-art/ argeles-sur-mer/> [Accessed 16 March, 2016].

Fig. 2.9:

Kokkugia, RMIT Mace (Kokkugia: Melbourne, 2015) < http://www.kokkugia.com/RMIT-Mace> [Accessed 16 Mach, 2016].

Fig. 3.1:

Kokkugia, RMIT Mace (Kokkugia: Melbourne, 2015) < http://www.kokkugia.com/RMIT-Mace> [Accessed 16 Mach, 2016].

Fig. 3.2:

Kokkugia, RMIT Mace (Kokkugia: Melbourne, 2015) < http://www.kokkugia.com/RMIT-Mace> [Accessed 16 Mach, 2016].

21

PART B: RESEARCH:

Fig. 3.3- ZA11 Pavilion by CLJ02

Fig. 3.4- ICD 2011 Pavilion 22

Fig. 3.5

B

BIOMIMICRY

iomimicry specifically caught my eye as it is what the students used for the ICD 2011 Project and this is my favourite parametric example so far. So far from what I have gathered from the site, I am wanting to create something that could stand as a shelter or some kind of armour as when I visited the site it was raining and there were leaves and all sorts of things falling from the trees above.

I really want to explore the use of timber in design and the various geometric shapes that can be cut and assembled through digital fabrication. I also would like to look into the simple connections made with timber and how these can create dynamic shadows and interesting shapes much like the ZA11 Pavilion shown in figure 3.3. When thinking more along the lines of an armour for ones arm or shoulders I feel as though this style of Biomimicry would suit the most due to the fact that it is suppose to imitate nature and hexagonal shapes which can be really interesting to work with.

The best way to tackle such designs would probably be to laser cut them and then assemble them.I have never used the laser cutter before and I am quite new to digital fabrication, so this might be a little tricky for me. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m not quite confident in connection joints either as they would need to be executed well in order for the Biomimicry structures to work. My ideal structure would look a lot like the ICD 2011 Pavilion but I have a lot to learn in terms of grasshopper skills and also in fabrication knowledge if I want to create something somewhat similar just at a smaller scale.

The ZA11 Pavilion was made through advance parametric design in which the exact geometries were generated for each piece and then they were labelled in order for them to be easily assembled. The use of labelling is really important in such designs due to the fact that theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re a so many pieces to the design.

Connection joints were also very important in this design as each panel is connected to another panel with a specially designed connected panel which was also created through computational methods. The ICD 2011 Pavilion was fabricated in a similar fashion as its Biomimicry style design allows for it to be made entirely out of panels that need to be labeled and connected in order for it to be structurally reliant on its own shell.

23

Fig. 3.6

24

VOLTADOM

by Skylar Tibbits

Fig. 3.7

25

CASE STUDY 1.0: VOLTADOM

I started off by changing the curve shape to a rectangle so that they were arranged in a row and I then changed the number of cones to 16 and made the opening at the top quite

Made the openings larger and spre

small.

I flipped some elements and also manipulated the width of a few cones.

I once again played around with the

Using wireframe to view outcomes.

26

Combining manipulated high ratios.

ead the cones out more with the slider input.

e opening size and also the boundary curve shape.

Overlapping elements through changing different sliders.

I disabled the uncapping section of the script and kept each cone closed. I then began to manipulate the width ratio of the cones along with creating a low high ratio throughout.

Opened up the cones ones again but used a combination of open-

Manipulating through curvature

ing sizes and then interlocking the two styles.

and bring them off the XY plane

27

Elongated the cylinders and widened the opening in order to create a cone shape. I then varied the width of particular openings.

The opening widths were manipulated and so were the shapes of each cone. Parts were dragged out and I started with elongated cones in which I had created small openings at the top. I then flipped them to create a more

rotated

interesting viewing point.

28

I added Piping to the cone inputs and then increased the number of seeds and points creating overlapping.

I changed the cone inputs to create a cylinder input and then continued to adjust the width ratios. I also deleted some mesh element on grasshopper to get a more interesting array of cylinders.

I changed the seed and number of points in order to spread them out and create more cone elements.

29

Fig. 3.8

30

Fig. 4.1

CASE STUDY 2.0:

STACK PAVILION T

by FreelandBuck

his project particularly stood out to me due to its simple yet complex nature. The fabrication of the project was not too complex and the patterns made by the stacked triangular forms create such an aesthetically pleasing pattern. FreelandBuck are an architectural firm based in New York and Los Angeles, they create architecture that is fabricated as they believe it enhances the spatial and sensual qualities of digitally designed pieces. The Stack Pavilion was unique as it used a non-modular construction method and the triangular shapes are cut and assembled from plywood sheets, making it not very costly or hard to fabricate, but achieving a great aesthetic. The Pavilion was made through tesselated patterns which are then extruded to create three dimensional depth. The space is only small as it was merely an experiment but it stands as in inspiration for the company to possibly create larger scale structures with the same fabrication style and scripting method.

Fig. 3.9

31

REVERSE ENGINEERING:

Start off with contours and then a list of lengths that then create a series. The series tool is then multiplied and moves in the Z plane.

The curves is divided and a set of boundaries are defined and then surfaces are created. As the curve is divided, all different patterns can be made by adjusting the mesh resolution

When the mesh resolution tool is set to a high number it gives these really intricate patterns which Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d like to play around with later on, but for the Sumika

32

Pavilion the shapes are quite spread apart.

Lines are projected and the Delaunay Edges tool is used to A planar surface can be made through the geometries, but bring the edges upwards and give them a three dimensional the honeycomb effect is achieved through the deletion of the base. The Volume and Area tools are used to then create a internal set of volumes. solid shape and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s then capped.

The mesh resolution was set to around a 5 at the final phase and this allowed for wider shapes. I tried to create it the same pattern as the Sumika Pavilion but it was quite hard to achieve the right geometries and I believe that I may have needed to create a different starting curve or contour line.

33

OUTCOME:

T

he outcome wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t exactly what I expected as the shape in the Sumika Pavilion is quite different due to its very wide openings and the web shape is a little less triangular. Whereas my shape was less honeycomb like and very triangular. Moreover the Pavilion had a consistent width of each wood element, yet mine were quite obscure and may not be able to be digitally fabricated properly, this is possibly due to my lack of skills in Grasshopper but I did learn a lot through playing with the script and manipulating it in all different directions until I got the requited outcome. Although through my failure to attempt the exact shape of the pattern on the Pavilion I have discovered a range of patterns which Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d like to work with further along the track and possibly in Part C. I really like the patterns that are created when the mesh resolution is set very high as this creates a whole array of internal compartments that are at all different widths and sizes.

34

35

High Density Mesh and Height- Stripped Low Height Mesh- Breaking Down Dense Mesh- Differing Shapes

Slowly Increasing Height and Density

TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT:

36

37

Various Base and Contour Shapes

Breakdown of Planar Surfaces

High Mesh Resolution Planar Surfaces

Change of Contour Reference

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT

38

39

OUTCOME:

T

he aesthetic quality I aimed for was something that could be seen as a second skin. I always liked sharp geometries and the use of panels in parametric design. Yet I also tried to achieve something that was more planar and could be fabricated using interlocking panels, but I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t think I achieved that with this script. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m unsure on how I can fabricate the outcomes Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve created and I may have to experiment with more wave like structures to begin with until I become more experienced in fabrication. My iterations began through experimenting with the height of the structure and the mesh density, the higher the mesh the more compartments there were to the design. I then continued to play around with the shapes by deducting certain areas and changing the referenced contours. I then singled out certain parts of the script that allowed me to extract the planar surface of the shape. From here I then began to look at small sections of each baked item and try and picture how to fabricate it. In the end, I decided that I liked the iterations that had a more dense pattern to them and that were irregular in shape. I also really wanted to work with the planar surfaces as some of them were really interesting and dynamic. In the next step I might strip these shapes down and maybe fabricate them to create more of a basic shell or curved shape.

40

41

TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES FAILED FABRICATION

FABRICATION TRIAL ONE:

I

started off by trying to fabricate a piece of one of my designs and it failed. I first started with the piece and I then broke each panel apart and labeled them. I then lay them flat and labeled them according to the 3D diagram. I then printed these out and attached them to foam, which I then cut. The pieces failed to connect as there were no connection joints as I didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know how to make them. I tried to cut a slit into them in order to slide the panels in but the material was too delicate. I then decided to try another style of script and go with a framing system that interlocks.

FABRICATION TRIAL TWO: SEMI SUCCESSFUL TRIAL

42

43

T

his trial was a lot more successful than the first as it actually came together. It was really rough as the material used wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t very easy to cut. I believe it was unsuccessful is its structure due to the fact that it may have needed some fabricated control joints and it was also only a section of the original design a I only wanted to create a small scale piece to test it out. I believe that laser cutting timber would be the best option for this particular design as it would create perfectly cut panes and allow for a sturdy structure due to the stability of timber. I tried to add some panelling at the top just to test out different lighting and ideas. As it was my first fabrication, it was very rough and it needed a lot more work to it. With more time and knowledge I believe it could have stood as an interesting structure.

44

The structure was flipped in order to see whether it was more stable and also to see if it created a better aesthetic. The panels show signs of inconsistency and hence why laser cutting would have been a better option.

Didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t perform well under stress and bent. The material was not suitable for the design as the thick cardboard was card hard to work with and it tended to break, hence the tape in certain areas.

45

FABRICATION TRIAL THREE: SUCCESSFUL TRIAL

T

his final trial was my most successful trial as I had developed more ideas on how to fabricate the design I had in mind. I was quite lost in how to create the triangular shapes and I therefore needed to experiment with other styles of fabrication as shown above, but after some research and inspiration from other classmates I came up with a solution. I joined the triangular shapes with tabs on either side and in real life fabrication these tabs could be connected through a series of bolts and if the material is malleable the connections can be folded just like the cardboard. If this was applied to a timber, the tabs would have to be attached to the triangles with some sort of connection. I need to look further into connections and how to best create these.

46

47

SITE:

TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

MERRI CREEK

Fig. 4.3

Fig. 4.2

W

hen walking around the Merri Creek I noticed that there were a lot of trees but none of them were decorated in any way. I began to see a couple of trees that had a metal sheet around them in order to protect them from having animals climb up them. I then started to think about redesigning these metal covers in order to make them more appealing. I believe that the patterning I have been working with would be perfect for this as it would look like a geometrical skin on the tree that some how mimics the harshness of the bark. I believe my design would add another dimension to the trees and allow people to capture and appreciate their walk along the creek. It will allow people to notice where they are and that they are not just passing another tree but a tree that has been thought about in terms of design and Parametrics.

Once I had applied this technique to the tree picture I then began to think further about my design and how I could manipulate its form to create something larger. I then realised that as I walked along the track there were no decent shelter areas in which you could stop and repose on the nature around you. I then came to the conclusion that my piece would stand as a sheltered area for people to stop and appreciate the nature around them whilst also admiring the contrast between the man made and the natural elements of the two areas. It would make people stop to appreciate the shelter as an art piece as well as a functioning sheltered area and it would enable them to question why it has been placed in such an area, perhaps to capture a certain view.

Fig. 4.4 48

Fig. 4.5

49 Merri Creek- From GoogleMaps

TREE COVER: I think the difficulty I will approach in my concept is actually creating something that is able to wrap around the tree or attach itself to the metal piece that is already existing on the tree.

I think this approach is preferable as I believe that it doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t stray out of my Grasshopper skill set and that it is a very doable project. I feel as though I can explore many options that I have created in order to achieve the best one. The examples I have show below are some of the more simple ones, but are a start.

50

PAVILION/SHELTER: After testing the mesh on the tree I began to think at a larger scale and creating a sheltered area seamed to be the best fit for my design and for the Merri Creek.

The form of my design has been manipulated in order to create various legs in which it can stand on and a more interesting shape. The shelter can be placed anywhere, but the area in which I think it would have suited best would the Fitzroy area of the creek as it was much more populated and there was a lot going on, such as outdoor garden areas. The form would need to hang from something or have a sturdy base, which needs some more development.

51

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES

52

I

believe that out of all the learning objectives outlined, objective two, was the most relevant to this part of the journal as it outlines how the subject aims to give us the ability to create a variety of designs and possibilities. I believe that Part B enabled me to push further with my techniques in Rhino and Grasshopper as it really made me push certain outcomes to the limit and create a lot of designs. The iterations took a very long time to produce but they helped me develop skills in creating three dimensional media which is the third objective outlined for the subject. Through extensive research for scrips, websites and articles I was able to expand my knowledge on the techniques used and how this can create the desired aesthetic.

I still feel as though I am a beginner with Grasshopper but I have learnt a lot and especially through the reverse engineering phase as it enabled me to create something I had never encountered before. Throughout my research I found that there are a lot of pavilions and small spaces that have utilised parametric design and although some may look complex, they are actually quite simple to make. I can pick up on the difference between computational design and computerised designs more easily now and it allows me to admire the computational designs due to their complexity and unique qualities. After this section I am fairly confident in manipulating and modeling through Grasshopper, I believe that I need to learn more about form and how I can create manipulate this in a more complex way.

53

APPENDIX

54

T

hroughout experimenting with Grasshopper I began to become more comfortable with the tools and playing around with them. I found that my most interesting concepts in the sketchbook were the concepts made in week 3 which experimented with tree statistics. I then used data structures to take these points within the circle and create different patterns and styles. I particularly liked the exploded circle which just shows all the lines that are placed on each tree point. I then used the planar surface tool and plugged it into the script I created in order to create various intersecting planes at each of the tree points.

This was very interesting and happened by accident as I was merely just plugging in all different components to see what would work.

55

IMAGE SOURCES: Fig. 3.3: ThinkParametric, CLJ02: ZA11 Pavilion (Thinkparametric, 2016) < http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/clj02-za11-pavilion/ > [Accessed 6 April, 2016].

Fig. 3.4: De Zeen Magazine, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart (De Zeen, 2011) < http://www.dezeen. com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/ > [Accessed 6 April, 2016].

Fig. 3.5: De Zeen Magazine, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart (De Zeen, 2011) < http://www.dezeen. com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/ > [Accessed 6 April, 2016].

Fig. 3.6: SJET, Voltadom By Skylar Tibbets (SJET, 2012) < http://sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html> [Accessed 14 April, 2016].

Fig. 3.7: SJET, Voltadom By Skylar Tibbets (SJET, 2012) < http://sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html> [Accessed 14 April, 2016].

Fig. 3.8: Lidija Grozdanic, Regrounding Digital Architecture/ FreelandBuck Architecture (Evolo, 2011) <http://www.evolo.us/architecture/stack-pavilion-re-grounding-digital-architecture-freelandbuck-architecture/> [Accessed 17 April, 2016].

Fig. 3.9: Lidija Grozdanic, Regrounding Digital Architecture/ FreelandBuck Architecture (Evolo, 2011) <http://www.evolo.us/architecture/stack-pavilion-re-grounding-digital-architecture-freelandbuck-architecture/> [Accessed 17 April, 2016].

Fig. 4.1: Lidija Grozdanic, Regrounding Digital Architecture/ FreelandBuck Architecture (Evolo, 2011) <http://www.evolo.us/architecture/stack-pavilion-re-grounding-digital-architecture-freelandbuck-architecture/> [Accessed 17 April, 2016].

Fig. 4.2: NC State University, Wildlife (NC State University, North Carolina, 2015) < http://content.ces.ncsu.edu/extension-gardenerhandbook/20-wildlife> [Accessed 18 April, 2016].

Fig. 4.3: Lachlan Walsh, Merri Creek Trail (Weekend Notes, Australia, 2012) < http://www.weekendnotes.com/merri-creek-trail/> [Accessed 18 April, 2016].

Fig. 4.4: Pram Walks, Merri Creek Trail (Pram Walks, 2016) <http://www.pramwalks.com.au/pramwalks/merri-creek-trail/> [Accessed 18 April, 2016].

Fig. 4.5: Landcare Australia, 20 Million Tree Project (Landcare Australia, 2014) < http://www.landcareonline.com.au/?page_id=14460> [Accessed 18 April, 2016].

TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL BACKGROUND IMAGE WITH BRIDGE: Bicycle Network, North: Merri Creek Trail (Bicycle Network, 2016) < https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/general/policy-andcampaigns/2708/> [Accessed 27 April, 2016].

PHOTOGRAPHS ON PAGES 44-47 Taken by myself, Isabella Ascenzo on 18.04.16.

56

57

PART C: DETAILED DESIGN

58

DESIGN CONCEPT

A

fter the presentation, as a group we decided to reassess our approach to the way in which we could construct the design. We wanted to keep the form and make the patterning a little more complex in order for it to look a lot more worked as there would be more triangles. We initially wanted to use Perspex but found that it was far too expensive to construct with and that it wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be practical given the size of our installation. We tried a few other materials such as acrylic mirrors but due to restrictions with the laser cutter we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have much luck. After the presentation we discovered a mirror film that can be applied to surfaces and we had thus found our solution for the mirrored side of the installation.

O

ur overall design was then to be made out of polypropylene as it is a very versatile and cheap material that also aesthetically suites our overall design.

The feedback from the presentation also helped us develop the purpose of the kaleidoscope as we then decided that the exterior would be black whilst the inside was mirrored making it a kaleidoscope and an overall experience. The gaps in between each triangle are also purposely placed in our final concept so that the user can experience their surroundings as well as viewing things from a strange perspective within the kaleidoscope.

59

DESIGN CONCEPT

T

he site we chose was right near the Collingwood Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s farm and the carpark near the Abbotsford Convent.

It was a highly populated place when we visited the site and this is one of the main reasons why we chose it. Our installation needs to be experienced and hence why we needed a place along the creek where many people passed through. Its proximity to the carpark is also very convenient for people. Moreover it suited our design as we wanted to hang the kaleidoscope from a tree and there was a very large tree at this location that was perfect for our installation and it was also in a spot which encapsulated all the beautiful nature that the creek has to offer.

T

he views surrounding the tree were very important as we wanted our design to reflect the nature through the mirrors whilst also distorting and reflecting the person standing in it. We wanted to create a whole new perspective of the site and give it some life. Most people walk through the site and only see it in one way and that never changes. We aimed to create a kaleidoscope that would change the perspective of this and add a new beauty to the park.

60

Fig. 4.6

COMBINATION OF DESIGN IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES

61

Fig. 4.7

62 Fig. 4.8

PRECEDENCE AND FABRICATION

T

he Human Scale Kaleidoscope by Masakazu Shirae and Saya Miyazaki stood as our main inspiration as it encapsulated all the elements that we wanted to achieve in our design.

We wanted to create an interactive space that distorted views and created interesting reflections. This kaleidoscope was particularly interesting due to the fact that it was fabricated quickly and the connection joints were actually zips. Initially our design was created in order to be connected through zips. We found zips to be a good option as they are simple to apply and they are also very cost effective.

W

e initially aimed to purchase mirrored surfaces, laser cut them and then apply a zip to one panel and another panel and then alter the angles of the panels by changing the openness of the zip. The zips allowed for an ever changing reflection within but once they were experimented with they were found to be quite tricky and not very aesthetically pleasing. Due to the issues with materials and laser cutting we were unable to use zips practically and thus needed to resort to something else.

W

hen looking into connection details we decided that the most practical would be to use tabs. Through experimenting with materials we found that the tabs would have to be small in order to not sabotage the overall design and they would have to have small holes in them so that we could connect them with something.

Through some research and asking others we found that rivets worked best as connectors as they are easily accessible and easy to apply.

Rivets also create for a strong support as polypropylene is very thin and doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need much reinforcement.

63

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

64

EACH PANEL

65

FORM FINDING

A

fter we had found the pattern of triangles for each panel we then created our form which had to be somewhat like a dome or shelter so that the user can stand underneath it and experience the kaleidoscope. The panels were arranged and thus the final form shown to the left is a lot larger than overall intended form as it needed to be bigger and more complex.

T

he scale was then made a little larger in order to comply with the context and to be able to fit a human body within it. 9 panels made up the final form and the triangular panels were subdivided to make it more intricate. The basic steps shown above were too simple and we wanted the pattern within and reflections to be a lot more intense and therefore the triangles on each panel were broken down, thus creating around 230 triangles for the entire piece.

66

EACH PANEL

67

PLAYING WITH FORM

68

69

FINAL FORM

SIDE

SIDE

70

B

BENEATH BENEATH

FRONT

FONT (BACK?)

71

PANEL CONNECTIONS

72

CARDBOARD TESTING

E

ach triangle has its own tabs which contain 3.2mm holes in them in order for them to connect with another triangle with 3.2mm width rivets. 3.2mm is the smallest size we found for the rivets and we deemed this suitable as we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want large bolted connections that were extremely obvious to the eye as they would ruin the design. We wanted small connections that were easily applied and also suited the colour scheme. Silver rivets are discrete and work well with the polypropylene. The rivets were tested on cardboard and plastic before they were used on the real model.

PLASTIC TESTING

73

PROTOTYPES

R

eflective cardboard was used for the initial prototype in order to test out the workability of materials and the overall effect of the triangular pattern. At this point connection joints had not been experimented in a great deal and we had not come across our final form. This prototype proved that reflective cardboard was good but not great in reflecting its surroundings and we knew we needed a stronger mirror-like material.

74

T

his prototype was made to test out the panels at a larger scale and to also test the initial idea of zip connections. The zips were a quite difficult to work with and they didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t create the aesthetic we had hoped. Reflective cardboard was also used in this example and was still not ideal, but a few panels (the ones with the zip connections) were made out of acrylic mirrors and had a great outcome as they were super reflective and the reflections were clear.

75

PROTOTYPES

76

O

ur final experimental prototype was made out of coloured reflective cardboard and we used colourful panels in order to see if they worked better with the site or if plain mirrors were better. The colours worked well but we decided that original mirrors would be best as they are much more reflective and easier to find. We tested this small prototype on the site and we also placed it with the other silver prototype to see whether a combination of both materials would look better. Once again these prototypes did not include connections joints as we had not decided what the best connection was for the final form.

77

TESTING MATERIALS

ACRYLIC MIRROR-

HIGH REFLECTIVE MIRROR MEDIUM REF FILMROR FILM-

ADVANTAGES: - Highly reflective.

- Cost effective.

- Readily available from Bunnings.

- Self adhesive.

- Lightweight.

ADVANTAGES: - Good reflection.

- Comes in large quantities.

- Cost effective.

- Fast delivery.

- Adhesive surface for easy application.

- Lightweight.

ADVANTAGES: - Decent reflection - Comes in large qu - Cost effective.

- Fast delivery.

- Adhesive surface tion.

- Lightweight.

DISADVANTAGES: - Can’t be laser cut!

- Must be placed onto another material and done by hand.

- Distorts reflections.

DISADVANTAGES - Can’t be laser cut - Must be placed o terial and done by - Distorts reflection - The quality of r quite poor depend plied.

DISADVANTAGES: - Small Panels.

- Can’t be laser cut!

- Hard to cut by hand.

- Shatters if you cut it.

78

FLECTIVE MIR- COLOURED REFLECTIVE CARDBOARD-

n. uantities.

e for easy applica-

S: t! onto another mahand. ns. reflection can be ding how it is ap-

ADVANTAGES: - Colourful.

- Cost effective.

- Easily accessible.

- Can be laser cut.

- Lightweight.

DISADVANTAGES: - Rips easily.

- Easily defected.

- Cheap aesthetic.

- Poor reflection.

POLYPROPYLENEADVANTAGES: - Flexible.

- Reasonably affordable.

- Can be laser cut!

- Easily accessible.

- Aesthetically pleasing.

- Lightweight.

DISADVANTAGES: - Bend easy.

- Can break or rip at joints.

- Thin.

79

FINAL MODEL - PROCESS

F

or the final model we came to the conclusion that we would use polypropylene for the triangles and have the laser cutter cut each triangle with the tabs discussed above. The triangles would then be placed on the high reflective mirror film as it had many advantages that we felt made it the best suited material for the reflective interior.

The reflective mirror had a self adhesive side to it which easily stuck to the polypropylene and the triangles were then re cut by hand and placed together with 3.2mm sized rivets. The rivets were applied with a rivet gun and held the structure together very well as the structure was quite light in weight and didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need a spine support. As the model was made the triangles began to deflect and warp but we found that this created a better aesthetic than what we initially anticipated.

Some of the tabs didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t match up perfectly the triangles began to cup and warp, but overall this added a new element to the design which we desired more than the original design intent.

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

FINAL MODEL

91

92

O

nce all the panels were made and assembled they were then put together according to the grasshopper file. The final form created a dome and this was then hung from the large tree near the Collingwood Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Farm with fishing wire. The final model showed great potential as people were already intrigued and wanted to experience the kaleidoscope for themselves. It was a great success as it hung from the tree in a graceful manner, reflecting the sunâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rays and decorating the foliage around it. The black polypropylene worked out well as the dark tones suited the dark rocks below and the silver inside reflected all the greenery around it, creating a very pleasant piece for the park. The piece was then brought to other areas of the park in order to test how well it would reflect other scenery, but overall the best place for the piece was hanging from the large tree. It is a very versatile kaleidoscope and can be used in any area of the park, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s just a matter of capturing the views you want to. Have gaps between the triangles meant that there was a great connection with the nature around and the person experiencing the kaleidoscope.

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

LIGHT AND SHADOW

100

T

he model was tested with various lights in order to see what kind of shadows it would produce. The installation could stand as a kaleidoscope during the day and a light feature at night at the park. The shadows made are incredible and when placed in the park it could make for an attraction site at night as the place isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t used much during the night time. A few colours were tested in terms of light to see which one created a better shadowing effect.

101

102

103

104

105

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

106

T

his studio has been an overall learning experience for me. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve learnt a lot about construction verses computer modeling and how the two are very different. This subject has made me much more confident in computer modeling as I was a beginner in Grasshopper and not very proficient in Rhino either. Computation is very important in architecture as it can reduce the impacts of human error and also cuts the time of human labour due to great machinery such as the laser cuter and 3D printers. I had never used the laser cutter before and I have found that it is the most simple way to creates panels, especially when you have over 200 over them, like in this project. At the beginning of the semester I never thought that Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d be able to produce the final model that my group and I produced as I had never attempted such a project before. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m still not very good at Grasshopper but I am a lot more knowledgable on how computation can be used in architecture and how it is becoming more dominant. During the final project I believe that my group and I achieved all the learning objectives of the studio, especially objective two. As a group we were able to create a various amount of outcomes and explore many possibilities of design.

B

efore I had taken this subject I had never heard of parametric design and through the extensive research and precedent studies, I have found so many buildings and pavilions that I have admired greatly due to their complex and aesthetically pleasing computational designs. I am quite proud of my efforts and how much I have learnt throughout this subject, I am able to grasp the basic ideas of the relationship between architecture and air. Moreover I have learnt a lot about computer fabrication as fabrication through laser cutting and other means was very foreign to me before this subject and I have now learnt that it is a great tool when making physical models. Furthermore I really enjoyed creating the final physical model as it turned out to be exactly what we hoped for and it is an overall beautiful piece with a very simple fabrication method. I hope to continue with parametric design and hopefully create some more prototypes as they can turn out to be incredibly intelligent in their structure and poetry.

107

IMAGE SOURCES: Fig. 4.6: GoogleMaps, Collingwood Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Farm (GoogleMaps, 2016) < https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/Collingwood+Child renâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s+Farm+Inc./@-37.8033789,145.0038228,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x6ad643077cc3be07:0xb95f6b8be886bcc2!8m 2!3d-37.8033832!4d145.0060115 > [Accessed May 23, 2016].

Fig. 4.7: Designboom, Designers Turn Shipping Container Into A Human Scale Kaleidoscope (Designboom, 2014) < http://www.designboom.com/art/masakazu-shirane-saya-miyazaki-kaleidoscope-shipping-container-04-05-2014/ > [Accessed May 24, 2016].

Fig. 4.8: Designboom, Designers Turn Shipping Container Into A Human Scale Kaleidoscope (Designboom, 2014) < http://www.designboom.com/art/masakazu-shirane-saya-miyazaki-kaleidoscope-shipping-container-04-05-2014/ > [Accessed May 24, 2016].

108

Isabella Ascenzo Studio Air 2016 698687

109

110