Y U A N
-
T U N G
S O N YA
C H A O
YUAN-TUNG SONYA CHAO Portfolio 2016
M. Arch. I Harvard Graduate School of Design A.B. Princeton University ychao@gsd.harvard.edu
Contents
In the Cut US Embassy in London
04
Hudson River Pedestrian Bridge Bridge Connecting New Jersey and Manhattan
Architecture Club Architecture Club in London
26
Towards a New American Promise Peace Corps Commemorative Work Competition
106
Sukkah for Mel Brooks Sukkah in Mexico City
38
Transfiguration Composition VIII
110
Montreal Tower Mixed-Use Tower in Montreal
48
Artwork
112
Urban Configuration Apartment Complex in Gowanus
58
Infill / Passage Connecting Tissue
68
CRAB Studio Loose Furniture and Interior Design
117
Courtyard House Rethinking the Chinese Courtyard House
74
Studio Daniel Libeskind Geometry Optimization
129
Art Museum Museum in New York City
80
Reiser + Umemoto Robot Model and Railing Design
130
94
IN THE CUT Harvard Graduate School of Design Advisor: Mack Scogin
US Embassy in London The embassy program follows a rigid framework of adjacencies and edge conditions due to its stringent security measures. Situated at the threshold between openness and vulnerability, the embassy strives for embodying multiple readings while asserting its representation of authority and unity. With heightened perception of threat in both physical and virtual domains, past architectural solutions are no longer sufficient in responding to the inherent duality of an embassy. The United States faces the challenge of propelling democracy with undaunted optimism amidst terrorism and fear. London’s US embassy thus confronts this issue of reconciling opposing forces by engaging the civic realm without compromising its national image and security. Designing buildings through assembly and additive processes has
4
become the default when faced with an architectural brief. Yet, the act of cutting or removing is needed to recalibrate increasingly intricate systems, in which programmatic fissures and residues are essential for producing spatial intent and experience. The act of cutting breaks down the singular reading of an object in a world where heterogeneity intersects. From William Burroughs’s “Cut-Up Method” to the chopping of vegetables inside a kitchen, these actions culminate into the reconstitution of elements, producing results that go beyond their original states. Drawing relationships that were once foreign reveals new layers of knowledge and understanding. Through a cut, slit, or perforation, we could expose yet conceal, separate yet connect, and entangle yet disentangle a building’s components, for cutting loosens certain relationships while tightening others.
5
Battersea Tube Station
Battersea Power Station One Nine Elms by KPF
CGMA Fruit and Vegetable Market
St. George’s Square Garden Future Dutch Embassy Site Future Nine Elms Bridge
St. George Wharf Tower Riverlight Apartment
Vauxhall Bridge
Pratley Covent Garden
South West Trains
Vauxhall Station
The Rejuvenation of Nine Elms and Battersea Areas
LONDON 6
Site Plan 1:2500
View of the Main Plaza
7
Studies of Cuts I
8
a.
a. Curved Cuts and Rotation b., d., f., h. Inverse c. Multi-Directional Curved Cuts with Fixed Cube e. Single-Directional Cuts with Rotating Cube g. Three Planar Cuts
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Studies of Cuts II
9
a.
b.
c.
d.
a. Southeast Facade b. Southwest Facade c. Northwest Facade d. Northeast Facade
10
Elevations Elevations 1:250
0
250
500
Studies of Interior Cuts
11
On security: “Security is about more than building stronger or more formidable buildings - it is about providing decent workplaces and residences for diplomats as part of an overall commitment to America’s overseas presence.” On the identity crisis of the Contemporary American Embassy: “No factor is more tangible than the size and prominence of the embassy building. The same visual cues that convey the key democratic ideals of openness and accessibility can transmit vulnerability, while the embassy that conveys strength and impenetrability can transmit aloofness, anxiety, and an absence of goodwill. The lack of fit between an embassy’s “personality” and its purpose as a quasi-public building means that the American presence becomes more schizophrenic as it become more defensive.” Jane Loeffler, Architectural Historian
12
13
View of the US Embassy along the River Thames
14
View of the US Embass
sy along the River Thames
15
InteriorInterior Axonometric One Axonometric One
16
Interior Axonometric Two Interior Axonometric Two
InteriorInterior Axonometric Three Axonometric Three
InteriorInterior Axonometric Four Axonometric Six
Interior Axonometric Five Interior Axonometric Seven
Interior Axonometric Six Interior Axonometric Eight
17
Longitudinal Section
18
Longitudinal Section
0
200
400
0
200
400
Transverse Section
Transverse Section
0
19
200
View of the Southeast Facade from the Consulate Corridor
20
View of the Embassy Entrance
View of the Courtyard from the Elevator Lobby
View of the Library Common Space
21
View of 4F Office Lounge
22
View of Common Space
View of the 5F Outdoor Terrace
View of the Courtyard
23
Majo s r Axi
Roof Plan El. +156.0'
7th FL
El. +78.0'
90'
s Ln Elm
+4.
3'
Nine
90
'
60'
6th FL
El. +67.0'
10 0'
13th FL El. +140.0'
70'
Ponton Rd
5th FL
1st FL El. +7.0'
El. +56.0'
12th FL
El. + 133.0' erse nsv Tra n tio Sec n tio Sec inal tud ngi Lo
11th FL
4th FL
El. +122.0'
El. +43.0'
10th FL El. +109.0'
3rd FL
El. +30.0'
B1
El. +3.0'
9th FL
El. +100.0'
8th FL
El. +89.0'
24
B2
2nd FL
El. -4.0'
El. +18.0'
Plans 1:500
0
0
500
500
1000
1000
+4.
3'
90'
Ln lms eE Nin
90
'
6 0'
10 0'
70'
Ponton Rd
1st FL El. +7.0'
25
ARCHITECTURE CLUB Harvard Graduate School of Design Instructor: Sir Peter Cook
Architecture Club in London The Architecture Club in London serves as an incubator for creative designs and conversations in the field of architecture. Situated in a major hub of architecture firms, the Club serves not only as a venue for habitation and relaxation for young budding architects, but also as a platform for expression and design outside the firm context. This Club does not fully take on the exclusivity of a Club, for the theatre and gallery, which are easily accessible from the ground floor, are meant to engage the public in architects’ dialogues and demystify any notions of an architect. The building is divided into two wings, one public and one private, with the theatre flanked in the
26
middle. The more public wing has a bar, restaurant, and gallery, whereas the more private side contains studio spaces interspersed within the apartment units. The play of transparent and opaque glazing of the studios allows residents to glance at or carefully observe the activities taken place inside. The library and public gathering space on the top floor further unite the building as a whole. The sculptural nature of the building is a manifestation of movement and light, and it is meant to stitch the differences in program and bring people together through its flow and continuity.
Front Elevation
relaxation for young budding architects, but also as a platform for expression and design outside the firm context. This Club does not fully take on the exclusivity of a Club, for the theatre and gallery, which are easily accessible from the ground floor, are meant to engage the public in architects’ dialogues and demystify any notions of an architect. The building is divided into two wings, one public and one private, with the theatre flanked in the middle. The more public wing has a bar, restaurant, and gallery, whereas the more private side contains studio spaces interspersed within the apartment units. The play of transparent and opaque glazing of the studios allows residents to glance at or carefully observe the activities taken place inside. The library and public gathering space on the top floor further unite the building as a whole. The sculptural nature of the building is a manifestation of movement and light, and it is meant to stitch the differences in program and bring people together through its flow and continuity.
Back Elevation
Longitudinal Section
27
S6
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
GF Plan +4’
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
2F Plan +17’
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
4F Plan +25’
S6
S6
S6
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
5F Plan +39’
S6
Roof Plan
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
5F 4F 3F 2F
GF
Circulation
Private Public
4F 3F
2F GF
Program
Studio Apartment Lounge Outdoor pocket Restaurant Auditorium Gallery Library Activity space
36
37
SUKKAH FOR MEL BROOKS Harvard Graduate School of Design Instructor: Mack Scogin
Sukkah in Mexico City Through changes in scale, incongruity and constant subversion and reinvention, this sukkah elevates to a space beyond the limits of truth. The moments inside the sukkah epitomize the myriad facets of Mel Brooks and Judaism. Each space implies the presence of others, unbounded by physical reality, and each fragment is there to imply the whole, as truth can never be grasped in its entirety. Framed between two cultural icons of Mexico from the past to the
1:100 Longitudinal section A
38
present, the sukkah, with its highly specific Jewish identity, serves as the constantly evolving transition and reminder to all: to belong one must first wander. Its ephemerality and reverence cement the Jewish tradition at the same time dematerialize it further, transcending religious faith into the universal human condition. It is through these intersections of physical manifestations could we begin to comprehend empathy and humanity beyond nations and religions.
1
A
Roof Plan 1:150 2 1
A
light should come from left; after effects
+10’ Plan 1:150 2 1
A
+2’ Plan 1:150 2
39
National Museum of Anthropology
Tamayo Museum with Contemporary Art
Museum of Modern Art
Chapultepec Lake
Chapultepec Castle
40
Spatial studies
41
1:70 1:70 Transverse Transverse section section 1 1
1:70 1:70 Transverse Transverse section section 2 2
42
1:70 Transverse 1:70 Transverse section section 1 1
43
44
45
1:100 Longitudinal section A 1:100 Longitudinal section A
Unrolled elevation Unrolled elevation
+25’ +25’
+10’ +10’ +2’ +2’
South elevation South elevation
West elevation West elevation
+25’ +25’
+10’ +10’ +2’ +2’
North elevation North elevation
Facade study Facade study
46
East elevation East elevation
f
crete support
ding/facade
d structure
yer space
tral space
roof
concrete support
shading/facade
wood structure
prayer space
central space
Exploded axonometric
Exploded axonometric
47
MONTREAL TOWER Harvard Graduate School of Design Instructor: Eric Höweler
Mixed-Use Tower in Montreal I challenge the hotel typology by condensing circulation paths as a means to maximize spaces for other programs such as retail and lounges. We also want to engage with the city by embedding an urban microcosm within a tower. While the Seagram building, a cultural icon of New York City, is a stable block with a wide plaza recessed from the edge of the street, my tower strives for creating a dialogue with the urban fabric through its orientation and play of form and views. The tower has a taut and regular frontality for its hotel program, whereas the backside facing the ice rink has a more expressive geometry. All four corners of the building where entrances are designated are specifically tailored to each type of audience—gym goers, hotel guests, locals and out-oftown visitors. The building is meant to celebrate the vibrant underground City of Montreal by pulling people into the underground city by embedding gym reception spaces, retail, and restaurants/café below ground level. The plaza is sloped downward towards the basement of the tower so as to direct people to the interior of the building, as the cold climate in Montreal precludes people from gathering outside. Aside from the separation between private and public programs, the building places certain gym programs,
48
such as basketball courts and training rooms, that pay homage to the aesthetics of the human body towards the exterior façade, so as to allow passerby to view and appreciate those activities at work. The building volume could be read differently based on where people are, thus creating a building that is as dynamic as its richness of program. The large atrium directly receiving the southern sun is created by hotels on the upper floors, and the apertures of the floor plates are designed to capture rays of light that penetrate through the entire building. Rather than having an abrupt separation between hotel and the rest of the programs, hotel rooms are interspersed within gyms and pools and vice versa to create a more city-like condition. and gallery, whereas the more private side contains studio spaces interspersed within the apartment units. The play of transparent and opaque glazing of the studios allows residents to glance at or carefully observe the activities taken place inside. The library and public gathering space on the top floor further unite the building as a whole. The sculptural nature of the building is a manifestation of movement and light, and it is meant to stitch the differences in program and bring people together through its flow and continuity.
Ice Rink
rs (gym entrance) ests d visitors (Restaurant/cafe entrance)
View of the tower from the ice rink
49
View of the tower from the ice rink
ICON FOR THE CITY
TOWER IN MONTREAL N
Seagram Buliding = Icon
Building at the edge
Extreme tapering condition
Recessed plaza = dead space
Plaza at the back
(dynamic)
N
N
N
N
N
Hotel facade facing Boulevard Rene-Levesque
Form derived from the largest program
PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
STRUCTURE
Therapy pool
Thermal bath Thermal bath
Thermal bath Diving pool
Thermal bath
Lap pool
Directing to the underground city in Montreal
Basketball court Basketball court Squash court
Void spaces Pool program
Shear walls
Gym program
e
Elevator cores
Bo ule va
rd Re n
e-L ev es
qu
Floor slabs
THERMODYNAMICS Skylight
Dr
(natural light)
um
mo
nd
Southern sunlight
Str
ee
t
Atrium Stack effect ventilation
Columns
Ru Facade Double e de
Double Facade Ice Rink
la M
on
tag
ne
Solar gain heats up the pool programs, which radiate heat to the whole building
Circulation paths in response to the urban fabric SITE PLAN 1:1000 Envelope
50
Trusses
Gym goers (gym entrance) Hotel guests Locals and visitors (Restaurant/cafe entrance) Sun rays
SYSTEM
Bath
CIRCULATION Circulation Hotel
Hotel Atrium
Hotel Therapy pool
Hotel Bath Bath
Bath Diving pool Lap pool Louge Louge Conference room
Thermal bath Therapy pool Thermal bath Diving pool
Lap pool
VISIBLE (public)
Lap pool
Basketball court
Yoga Training
Basketball court Squash court Gym reception
Cafe
Squash Restaurant
BARELY VISIBLE
Cafe
Retail
BARELY VISIBLE
(private)
BARELY VISIBLE (private)
SEMI-VISIBLE VISIBLE (public)
South facade
(semi-private)
VISIBLE (public)
VISIBLE (public)
North facade
Back facade
ency
glazing
Lounge
Lobby
South facade
Cafe
Retail
Restaurant
Visitors Gym goers Hotel guests
51
Recessed plaza = dead space
Plaza at the back
(dynamic)
Boulevard Rene-Levesque
the largest program
PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
Structure
STRUCTURE
Therapy pool
Thermal bath Thermal bath
Thermal bath Diving pool
Thermal bath
Lap pool
Directing to the underground city in Montreal
Basketball court Basketball court Squash court
Void spaces Pool program
Shear walls
Gym program
Floor slabs
Elevator cores
THERMODYNAMICS Skylight (natural light)
Southern sunlight
Atrium Stack effect ventilation
Columns
Double Facade
Solar gain heats up the pool programs, which radiate heat to the whole building
Envelope Trusses
52
Double Facade
Void spaces Pool program Gym program
Thermodynamics Elevator cores
THERMODYNAMICS Skylight (natural light)
Southern sunlight
Atrium Stack effect ventilation
Double Facade
Double Facade
Solar gain heats up the pool programs, which radiate heat to the whole building
53
54
2
1
S1 S1 2
1
S1 4
3
2
1
4
3
3
8
1
4
3
4
A
0.0833 0.0833
A
A
A
A
A
A
A B
B
B B
C
L
B B
C
L
B
C
B
C
L
L M
D M
D
D
M
Hotel retail
M
D
N
E N
E
N
E O
F
F
P trash
G
N
E
O
O
I
F
P
G
Q
Storage
O P
G
Q
I
G Q
BOH
R
R
R
J
K
K
S2
J
J
K
K
-2.6m (B1)
-6m (B2) 1
2
5
6
6
5
7
1
2
W 5
6
1
2
S1 4
6
5
7
1
5
6
4 1
G
G
K
9
F
P
G
P G
Q
Q I
S2
R
R J
K
K
1
2
S2
J
K
K
S2
K
K
111.3m (24F)
41.64m (7F)
30.34m (5F) 8
N E
I
J
7
D
E
R
J
6
N
Q I
5
B
C
O
R
13.71m (3F)
4
D
M
F
Q
K
3
C
L
P
I
2
A
B
E
N
F
2
1
B
D
M
P
1
4
O
F
9
A
C
L
O
8
7
A
B
E
N
6
S1 3
B
D
M
E
2
A
C
L
5
6
A
B
C
5
7
2
S1 3
B
D
S2
2
1
A
B
7.27m (2F)
1m (Lobby)
A A
K
K
K
K
M
S1 3
2
1
Q
I
S2 S2
P
0.0833
I
R J
F
8
9
1
2
8
9
1
2
5
6
55
Restaurant
N
ing at the edge
a at the back
(dynamic)
N
N
Extreme tapering condition
N
N
N
Hotel facade facing Boulevard Rene-Levesque
Form derived from the largest program Visitors Gym goers Hotel guests
PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
Ceiling of diving pool
FACADE SYSTEM Therapy pool
Thermal bath
Hotel
Truss level for thearpy pool
Hotel
Hotel
Thermal bath
Atrium
Bath
pool
Bath
Thermal bath
Diving pool Lap
Conference room Hotel reception
Thermal bath
Lap pool
Lap pool
Basketball court
Louge
Basketball court
Hotel Thermal bath Therapy pool
Diving pool
Lappool poolLouge
Basketball court
Office
Truss level for diving pool
Thermal bath
Hotel
Diving Bath poolTherapy Bath
Retail
CIRCULATION
Yoga Training
Basketball court Squash court
Basketball court
Gym reception
Cafe
Directing to the underground city in Montreal
FACADE SYSTEM
Squash Cafe
Restaurant
Retail
Basketball court
Back facade
VISIBLE
Squash court
(public)
BARELY VISIBLE
BARELY VISIBLE
BARELY VISIBLE
(private)
BARELY VISIBLE (private)
(private)
CIRCUL
SEMI-VISIBLE VISIBLE (public)
VISIBLE (public)
(semi-private)
Void spaces Pool program
VISIBLE (public)
VISIBLE (public)
Front facade
South facade
North facade
Back facade
Elevator cores
Egress stairs
Gym program
Visibility study
Double-Glazed Facade Systems
Opacity vs. transparency 30-cm tall opaque glazing vs. clear glazing
Elevator cores
Hotel
THERMODYNAMICS
Hotel Atrium
Hotel
Skylight (natural light)
Hotel Bath
Southern sunlight
Therapy pool
Hotel Bath
Thermal bath Therapy pool
Bath
Bath
Thermal bath
Diving pool
Lounge
Diving pool
Lap pool
Lap pool
Lap pool
Basketball court
Louge
Basketball court
Yoga
Basketball court
Louge
Basketball court
Training
Conference room
Office Retail
South facade
Atrium
Cafe
Squash Cafe
Restaurant
Retail
winter garden
Retail
Cafe
Squash court Gym reception
Hotel reception
Lobby
Front facade
inner glass Restaurant
VISIBLE
Stack effect ventilation
(public)
BARELY VISIBLEFacade Double Visitors
Gym goers
Hotel guests
Double Facade
(private)
BARELY VISIBLE
outer glass
BARELY VISIBLE
(private)
BARELY VISIBLE (private)
SEMI-VISIBLE Ceiling of diving pool
Solar gain heats up the pool programs, which radiate heat to the whole building
Truss level for thearpy pool
Truss level for diving pool
Front facade
Back facade
Elevator cores
Double-Glazed Facade Systems
VISIBLE (public)
(semi-private)
VISIBLE
Vents Sandblasted low-iron channel glass with translucent insulation inner glass
VISIBLE (public)
(public)
South facade
Back facade
Visibility study Egress stairs
S4
S3
56
VISIBLE (public)
Opacity vs. transparency
Monolithic tempered glass Concrete floor slab on metal deck Suspended ceiling winter garden30-cm tall opaque glazing vs. clear glazing Suspended ceiling Cantilevered reinforced
Operable louvers (helps moderate temperature within
North facade
Back facade
Elevator cores
Egress stairs
Double-Glazed Facade Systems
winter garden
inner glass
outer glass
S4
S3
Vents Sandblasted low-iron channel glass with translucent insulation Extruded-aluminum stack joint anchored to steel tube Steel suspension rod Triple-pane insulating glass with low-E coating and argon ďŹ ll (high-performance glazing) Automated blinds
Concrete oor slab on metal deck Suspended ceiling Aluminum spandrel with insulation
Space serving as a temperature buffer zone in the winter and vent for the summer
Monolithic tempered glass Suspended ceiling Cantilevered reinforced concrete oor slab Clear insulating glass with low-E coating Insulating glass with acid etch on second surface Tempered monolithic glass with acid etch on second srf
Operable louvers (helps moderate temperature within the facade) Thermally broken extruded-aluminum mullion Steel bracket
57
URBAN CONFIGURATION Harvard Graduate School of Design Instructor: Timothy Hyde
Apartment Complex in Gowanus This project examines the relationship between the individual and the collective, or the dwelling unit in relation to the urban fabric, as evidenced through codes and negotiations. The apartment unit can be used as a variable for a city to establish more collective functions, such as transportation, parks and infrastructure. Proximity, density, and scale of unit aggregations thus become ways to influence the vitality of the collective ecology. At the same time, individual peculiarities create a uniformed level of anonymity in the urban setting. Changing demographic and cultural trends require us to continuously reexamine the negotiation between individual and collective agendas. The studio brief challenges the possibility of designing a housing district comprised of 15,000 housing units of varying configurations on a site in
58
Gowanus, Brooklyn. Our group project specifically engages with the role of the party wall, which creates new formal and spatial possibilities in the housing blocks. Through the use of code, our group has designed a housing district that achieves a certain level of surface contact between buildings. Whenever two building surfaces touch, the opportunity allows for various volumetric and programmatic insertions that could then transform the spaces around it in both plan and/or section. Those disturbances affect views and surface apertures, alter the behavior of certain apartment units, and direct people’s circulations in new, unpredictable ways. By inserting specific programs and forms in a typical housing district, I could develop a unique urbanscape.
59
60
61
View 8
View 6 + 7
View 4 + 5
View 3
View 2
View 1
Section 1:100
62
Program insertion Shared party wall Program insertion Maximum Height
Program insertion Program insertion Shared party Aqueous lots wall Shared party Shared wallparty wall Property line Aqueous lots
General building relationships
Maximum Height MaximumMaximum Height Height Terrain/Roadways
Aqueous lots Aqueous lots Property line
General building relationships General General building building relationships relationships
Flood Plane Terrain/Roadways Sea Level Terrain/Roadways Terrain/Roadways Flood Plane
Property line Property line
Party Wall Variation
Flood Plane Flood Plane Sea Level
High-to-low
low-to-low
high-to-high
High-to-low High-to-low High-to-low
low-to-low low-to-low low-to-low
high-to-high high-to-high high-to-high
Sea Level Sea Level
Party Wall Variation Party WallParty Variation Wall Variation
Insertion of voids or solids (public spaces/programs) Insertion of voids or solids (public spaces/programs) Insertion Insertion of voids of voids or solids or solids (public(public spaces/programs) spaces/programs)
= = = = = = = =
= = = =
= = = = = = = =
+ = + = + += =
B
A A
A A
B
C
B B
C
C C
1 1 1
1
Most public
A1
Most public A1 Most public Most public
A1 A1
B1 B1
C1
B1 B1
C1
C1 C1
2 2 2
2
A2 A2
B2
A2 A2
B2
C2
B2 B2
C2
C2 C2
3 3 3
3
A3 A3
2BR
2BR
B3
1BR
1BR 18.6 ft 1BR
2BR
18.6 ft
Dominant facade of Large apartments
2BR 30 ft 2BR
30 ft
18.6 ft
30 ft
Dominant facade of Large apartments 9' Dominant facade Dominant of facade of Large apartments Large apartments
3BR
3BR
9'
=
29.5 ft 29.5 ft
29.5 ft
9' 9'
25.4 ft
9'
9'
=
9'
25 ft 33.6 ft
25.4 ft 25.4 ft
25 ft
25.4 ft
25 ft
9'
39.2 ft 33.6 ft
25 ft 39.2 ft
d = 25 ft 0.5 d = 12.5 % A = 811 sq ft 44% perforation on d = 25 ft dominant 0.5 d = 12.5surface % d = 25 ft d A == 25 811ftsq ft 0.5 d = 12.50.5 % dperforation = 12.5 % on 44% A = 811 sq ft A = 811 sq ft dominant surface 44% perforation 44% perforation on on dominant dominant surface surface
1:150 Plans of unit types 1:150 Plans of unit types 1:150 Plans 1:150 of Plans unitoftypes unit types
39.2 ft d = 25 ft 0.5 d = 12.5 % A = 465.8 sq ft 59% perforation on d = 25 ft dominant 0.5 d = 12.5surface % d = 25 ft d ft sq ft A == 25 465.8 0.5 d = 12.50.5 % dperforation = 12.5 % on 59% A = 465.8 sq A =ft465.8 sq ft dominant surface 59% perforation 59% perforation on on dominant dominant surface surface
33.6 ft
9'
9'
=
9'
33.6 ft
39.2 ft 9' 9'
9'
=
9'
d = 39 ft 0.5 d = 19.5 % A = 963.5 sq ft 90% perforation on d = 39 ft dominant 0.5 d = 19.5surface % d = 39 ft d ft sq ft A == 39 963.5 0.5 d = 19.50.5 % dperforation = 19.5 % on 90% A = 963.5 sq A =ft 963.5 sq ft dominant surface 90% perforation 90% perforation on on dominant dominant surface surface
d = 33.6 ft 0.5 d = 16.8 % A = 1210 sq ft 45% perforation on d = 33.6 ft dominant 0.5 d = 16.8surfaces % d = 33.6 ft d A == 33.6 1210 ftsq ft 0.5 d = 16.80.5 % dperforation = 16.8 % on 45% A = 1210 sqA ft= 1210 sqsurfaces ft dominant 45% perforation 45% perforation on on dominant dominant surfaces surfaces
9' 9'
9'
=
9'
9' 9'
9'
Very private
C3
Very private C3 Very private Very private
C3 C3
=
9'
3BR 29.5 ft 3BR
9'
30 ft
18.6 ft
32 ft
B3 B3
2BR
1BR
2BR 32 ft 2BR 32 ft
32 ft
B3
A3 A3
=
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
70 % perforation
70 % perforation 70 % perforation 70 % perforation 60 % perforation
60 % perforation 60 % perforation 60 % perforation 54 % perforation
54 % perforation 54 % perforation 54 % perforation 40% perforation
40% perforation 40% perforation40% perforation 20% perforation
20% perforation 20% perforation20% perforation 10% perforation
10% perforation 10% perforation10% perforation
63 Very public - lobby
Semi-public - mini theater
Private - roof garden
2FL plan 2FL 1:100 plan 1:100 (insertion (insertion of auditorium) of auditorium)
64
2 FL plan (insertion of gym)
65
4 FL plan (insertion of garden)
66
4 FL plan (insertion of garden)
67
INFILL / PASSAGE Harvard Graduate School of Design Instructor: Mariana Ibañez
Connecting Tissue The site explores the interstitial space between two “existing” campus buildings. In addition to existing classrooms and offices, the new building provides new programs to fulfill the growing needs of the department of a small liberal arts college. This project explores how the space between buildings affects its surroundings and recalibrates the building relationships on site. The program includes and “open-air” lecture space, large conference space, administrative office suite, classrooms, lounges, and study carrels. The project is thus about the dialectic between interior and exterior, opacity and transparency, mass and surface, and public and private.
68
The two existing buildings are centrally located on campus and placed in perfect parallel, splitting the campus into two. The new extension thus serves as a connecting tissue between those two buildings while acting as a threshold and thoroughfare. The proposed angular form provides a smoother transition between the two buildings of varying heights. New plans and window perforations also respond to existing plans and building facades. This proposal strives for giving a uniquely recognizable presence and symbolic value to the campus while retaining circulation flows.
Front Section
Back Section
69
2.83'
Building A
Building B
10.75'
Simultaneous Variation in In Rhythm Analysis - Overlapping Bays for One-to-One Relationship
Lateral Transition + Oscillatory Transition
Fenestration Study
Lateral Transition + Oscillat
Window Interval Study - Establishing Continuity Roof Transition
Width Difference is 1.59' 5.33'
7.5'
Length Difference is 2.17' Interval Difference is 4.38'
Window Transition 2.83'
Building A
Building B
4.42'
Front Facade
Back Facade
15.13'
10.75'
Facade iteration
Simultaneous Variation in Interval and Dimension 68.42'
Rhythm Analysis - Overlapping Bays for One-to-One Relationship
Bay Relationship between the New Facade and the Existing Facade
Skylight
One building
Splitting into two
8163 sq ft
Lateral Transition + Oscillatory Transition
8163 sq ft
Lateral Transition + Oscillatory Transition Interior Program Agitation
New skin
Skylight
Back Facade
Front Facade
Facade iteration
68.42'
41.85'
Bay Relationship between the New Facade and the Existing Facade
70
Skylight
One building
Splitting into two
8163 sq ft
Building offset
8163 sq ft
8163 sq ft
8163 sq ft
Unequal enclosure
8
ht
Simultaneous Variation in Interval and Dimension Rhythm Analysis - Overlapping Bays for One-to-One Relationship
Lateral Transition + Oscillatory Transition
Lateral Transition + Oscillatory Transition
Window Interval Study - Establishing Continuity
Width Difference is 1.59' 5.33'
7.5'
Front Facade
Length Difference is 2.17' Back Facade
Interval Difference is 4.38'
2.83' 4.42'
15.13'
10.75'
Facade iteration
68.42'
41.85'
Simultaneous Variation in Interval and Dimension Bay Relationship between the New Facade and the Existing Facade
Skylight
One building
Splitting into two
8163 sq ft
8163 sq ft
LateralProgram Transition + Oscillatory Transition Interior Agitation
New skin
8163 sq ft
Unequal enclosure
Building offset
8163 sq ft
8163 sq ft
8163 sq ft
Unequal enclosure 2
Entrance Circulation Diagram / Site
Skylight
Back Facade
Facade iteration
68.42'
One building
41.85'
Splitting into two
8163 sq ft
Building offset
8163 sq ft
8163 sq ft
71
+ 4-0'
72
+ 15-0'
+ 27-0'
+ 38-0'
Roof Plan
73
COURTYARD HOUSE Princeton University Instructor: Axel Kilian
Rethinking the Chinese Courtyard House This project began with a study of the relationships among nine family members in Ang Lee’s film, “Eat Drink Man Woman.” The film depicts how a reticent father uses cooking and dining as a means of communicating love to his three daughters. Conflicts ensue as misunderstandings escalate, for communication mainly limits at the dining table. The characters in the film typify traditional Chinese values of filial piety, familial hierarchy, and emotional reservedness accompanied by modernity in 1994. A rectilinear form rigid in structure, traditional Chinese courtyard house or “siheyuan” mirrors traditional sentiments of suppressed emotions and social conformity. However, the narrow alleyways or “hutongs,” formed by the small spaces between siheyuans, usually encourage lively conversations and encounters. Inspired by the film and siheyuans, I intend to break the hierarchy of the traditional courtyard house by introducing curves and narrow pathways that create intimate and private interactions among family members.
74
The cooking, dining, and planting spaces are interlocking, transparent, and visible to one another, showing equal importance. Outdoor public spaces, such as the courtyard and garden, are still retained. The courtyard house is meant to house four small family units within a large family, clashing between communal (traditional) and isolated (modern) family values. The curvature of the main space, delicately separating yet uniting the four housing units, harmonizes with the rest of the plan. The design is meant to test, reconfigure, and stimulate new family dynamics. No longer are older generations more authoritative, younger generations are able to voice their opinions while bonding with them. Suppressed emotions become less frequent as more transparent and engaging communication is fostered by this courtyard house design.
S1
House unit 1
House unit 2 House unit 3 Dining/public spaces
Kitchen
COURTYARD HOUSE RECONFIGURATION House unit 4
This project began with a study of the relationships among nine family members in Ang Lee’s film, “Eat Drink Man Woman.” The film depicts how a reticent father uses cooking and dining as a means of communicating love to his three daughters. Conflicts ensue as misunderstandings escalate, for Farming/Planting communication mainly limits at the dining table. The characters in the film typify traditional Chinese values of filial piety, familial hierarchy, and emotional reservedness accompanied by modernity in 1994. A rectilinear form rigid in structure, traditional Chinese courtyard house or “siheyuan” mirrors traditional sentiments of suppressed emotions and social conformity. However, the narrow alleyways or “hutongs,” formed by the small spaces between siheyuans, usually encourage lively conversations and encounters. Inspired by the film and siheyuans, I intend to break the hierarchy of the traditional courtyard house by introducing curves and narrow pathways that create intimate and private interactions among family members. The cooking, dining, and planting spaces are interlocking, transparent, and visible to one another, showing equal importance. Outdoor public spaces, such as the courtyard and garden, are still retained.The courtyard house is meant to house four small family units within a large family, clashing between communal (traditional) and isolated (modern) family values. The curvature of the main space, delicately separating yet uniting the four housing units, harmonizes with the rest of the plan. The design is meant to test, reconfigure, and stimulate new family dynamics. No longer are older generations more authoritative, younger generations are able to voice their opinions while bonding with them. Suppressed emotions become less frequent as more transparent and engaging communication is fostered by this courtyard house design.
S2
75
House unit 1
House unit 2 House unit 3 Dining / Public spaces
Kitchen
House unit 4
Farming / Planting
76
77
Section key Section cut
SC 1
SC 2
Cross section (left side)
Section key
Section cut 1 (SC 1)
SC 2
Front view
Back view
Cross section 1
Cross section 2
78
SC 2
SC 1
Cross section (right side)
79
ART MUSEUM Princeton University Instructor: Jesse Reiser
Museum in New York City The project challenges the conventional role of the museum as an institution only for storing and exhibiting art. As a cultural and urban connector, the museum possesses its own artistic identity and reflects its urban condition. The opening on the front faรงade allows people from the streets to see the visitors within, viewing them as a part of an exhibition of the city. This project also experiments with the interlocking of curvatures and oblique planes. While striving for a coherent composition among different geometric elements, I am also interested in focusing on the spaces formed through their differences. While the characters in Chinese calligraphy intend to break away from the limitations of paper, the curvy partitions contained within the shell of the museum convey a sense of tension and resistance against its linear confinement.
80
The sweeping gesture of the curvatures as seen from the opening on the side makes them seem like a sculptural piece to be exhibited. Following the circulation carved out by different geometries, visitors discover unexpected moments and turns as they walk through different galleries and exhibition spaces. Underneath the simple faรงade lies a more organic structure that encourages people to create their own viewing experience.
81
1F Plan
82
2F Plan
3F Plan
Roof Plan
83
84
Front elevation
Back elevation
Section 1
Section 2
85
86
Left elevation
Right elevation
Section 1
Section 2
87
Partitions
ack
B
Platform 1
Platform 2
e
nc
tra
en
Exhibition space 1
Exhibition space 2
Exhibition space 3 Gallery / Restaurant
ce
an ntr
e nt
Fro
PROGRAM
88
89
90
91
92
93
NJ NY C
HUDSON RIVER PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Princeton University Instructor: Guy Nordenson
New Jersey
Manhattan
Bridge Connecting New Jersey and Manhattan This studio concentrates on the design of foot and bike bridges, and the final design is a pedestrian/cyclist bridge connecting New York and New Jersey by crossing the Hudson River. Pedestrian bridges differ from other types of structures, for they have the freedom of being highly expressive, light, and sculptural. The overall concrete form of the bridge hinges on the differences between two cities and its connection to the urban fabric. Characterized by rising residential development, Hoboken is a quiet and serene city, which is in clear juxtaposition with the boisterous, cultural hub of Manhattan. The landing location of NJ is placed next to Hoboken’s Pier C Park, Sinatra Park, and Hoboken plaza, so as to accentuate suburban living and green space.
94
On the other hand, the landing spot for NYC is located next to Renzo Piano’s New Whitney Museum and the Highline. As people move from NJ to NYC, they will experience a gradual decrease in walking distance, corresponding with the progressive increase of a more fast-paced rhythm of life. The main structure of the bridge also becomes larger, serving as a gate to a more vibrant city. Through the use of slanted planes, the bridge provides expansive views of both Hoboken and Manhattan. Rather than merely providing the ease of commute for workers and tourists, the bridge becomes a location worth of lingering and sightseeing. The bridge represents an iconic transition between NJ and NYC.
Exploded Axo 95
96
97
24
98
Height clearance = 135’ Total length = 5950’ 30’
(5/8” = 1’-0”)
99
Knot Iteration
Water line
Bridge Iteration
100
Staircase Study
101
102
103
104
105
TOWARDS A NEW AMERICAN PROMISE
TOWARDS A NEW AMERICAN PROMISE Firmly rooted in the ground, the monolith expresses Peace Corps’ undaunted aspiration to serve others amidst adversity and challenges. Draped in blue and white stripes, the monolith is an addition to the urban landscape of the National Mall, incorporating both new and old architecture as it gives shape to the essential characteristics of our democracy. The monolith’s pattern operates as an optical
Teammate: Juan De Marco
mechanism which directs us both internally and externally, leading us in procession towards the National Mall. When viewed up close, the monolith is to be felt and touched, as the desire for improvement is a human experience that is palpable and shared across cultures and national borders. With its pattern that embodies boundlessness and movement, the monolith reflects Peace Corps’ values by echoing
C STREET NW
+22
+20
the truth of the American Promise: through service and commitment come progress and the promise of a better future for all mankind.
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
LIGHT FIXTURES
E CAP ENS GRE E EDG
+20
LIGHT
FIXTURES
LIGHT
FIXTURES
+2 4
Peace Corps Commemorative Work Competition
OF
FIXTURES LIGHT
LIGHT
1ST ST SW
E CAP ENS GRE E EDG
NA IA UIS LO
E AV
NW
15
20
25 + 24
10
+ 22
5
Overall Site Plan C STREET NW
C STREET NW
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
C STREET NW
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
APE
APE
GREENSC
APE
GREENSC
OF
GREENSC
OF
EDGE
OF
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
EDGE
NA SIA UI LO
1. The islands of green space orient the viewer towards the monolith, spatially establishing an internalized organization that encourages contemplation of multiple types and scales.
East Elevation
E AV
GREENSC OF EDGE
NW
NA SIA UI LO
2.
Simultaneously, the pavers on the ground begin to suggest a slow general movement while anchoring the monolith as the site’s center of gravity and spatial center.
North Elevation
APE
1ST ST SW
APE
NW
1ST ST SW
E AV
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
EDGE
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
APE GREENSC OF EDGE
South Elevation
106
OF
N
0
1ST ST SW
Mall. When viewed up close, the monolith is to be felt and touched, as the desire for improvement is a human experience that is palpable and shared across cultures and national borders. With its pattern that embodies boundlessness and movement, the monolith reflects Peace Corps’ values by echoing the truth of the American Promise: through service and commitment come progress and the promise of a better future for all mankind.
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
FIXTURES
Firmly rooted in the ground, the monolith expresses Peace Corps’ undaunted aspiration to serve others amidst adversity and challenges. Draped in blue and white stripes, the monolith is an addition to the urban landscape of the National Mall, incorporating both new and old architecture as it gives shape to the essential characteristics of our democracy. The monolith’s pattern operates as an optical mechanism which directs us both internally and externally, leading us in procession towards the National
E AV
GREENSC OF EDGE
NW
NA SIA UI LO
3.
Finally, the monolith’s stripes direct the viewer outwards, reconnecting the viewer externally with its urban context towards the National Mall.
West Elevation
0
5
10
15
20
25
West Elevation Overall View
0
5
10
15
20
25
North Elevation Overall View
0
5
10
15
20
25
0
5
10
15
20
25
107
C STREET NW
+22
+20
and national borders. With its pattern that embodies boundlessness and movement, the monolith reflects Peace Corps’ values by echoing the truth of the American Promise: through service and commitment come progress and the promise of a better future for all mankind.
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
LIGHT ES
FIXTUR
GE ED
OF
PE CA NS EE GR
LIGH
T
FIXTU
RES
LIGH T
FIXTU
RES
+2 4
+20
FIXTURES LIGHT
LIGHT FIXTU
1ST ST SW
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
RES
GE ED
OF
PE CA NS EE GR
NA IA IS U LO
E AV
NW
N
10
15
20
25 + 24
5
+ 22
0
Overall Site Plan C STREET NW
C STREET NW
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
C STREET NW
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
E CAP ENS GRE
E CAP ENS GRE
OF
E EDG
NA IA UIS LO
E AV
NW
monolith, spatially establishing an internalized organization that encourages contemplation of multiple types and scales.
2.
E CAP ENS GRE E EDG
OF
NA IA UIS LO
E AV
NW
Simultaneously, the pavers on the ground begin to suggest a slow general movement while anchoring the monolith as the site’s center of gravity and spatial center.
1ST ST SW
EDGE OF SIDEWALK OF
1ST ST SW
1ST ST SW
E CAP ENS GRE E EDG
1. The islands of green space orient the viewer towards the
108
E CAP ENS GRE
OF
OF
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
E EDG
EDGE OF SIDEWALK
E EDG
3.
E CAP ENS GRE E EDG
OF
NA IA UIS LO
E AV
NW
Finally, the monolith’s stripes direct the viewer outwards, reconnecting the viewer externally with its urban context towards the National Mall.
1. The islands of green space orient the viewer towards the monolith, spatially establishing an internalized organization that encourages contemplation of multiple types and scales.
South Elevation
East Elevation
2.
Simultaneously, the pavers on the ground begin to suggest a slow general movement while anchoring the monolith as the site’s center of gravity and spatial center.
North Elevation
3.
Finally, the monolith’s stripes direct the viewer outwards, reconnecting the viewer externally with its urban context towards the National Mall.
West Elevation
0
5
10
15
20
25
West Elevation Overall View
0
5
10
15
20
25
North Elevation Overall View
0
5
10
15
20
25
0
5
10
15
20
25
109
TRANSFIGURATION Princeton University Instructor: Catherine Seavitt-Nordenson
Composition VIII This project began by examining Theo van Doesburg’s painting “Composition VIII,” using the painting as a section of a model, of which a small part was chosen and extracted as a basic unit of a more complex structure. The objective was to explore the potential of a simple form by exaggerating its existing formal qualities while attaching new elements to it. To break the dominant triangular feature of the basic form, I introduced oblique planes that essentially
110
alter the stability and direction of the form. The white pathways in the model highlight the circulation that lead the viewer to the hidden spaces behind. This process of addition and subtraction does not follow any particular order throughout the transformation. Therefore, the drawing is not a chronological documentation of the transition but rather an analysis of how the model evolved.
111
Artwork
113
114
115
Professional Work
CRAB STUDIO Oberoi Project / Juice Bar Design Storage
Cabinet
Fridge Sink
Program
5
117 Juice Bar in Context
6
S1
S2
S1
S2
Section 1
Plan +1100 mm FL
Section 1
Plan +1100 mm FL 12 T. O. S.
Section 2 4
Elevation
Section 2 4
118
1
Juice Bar Perspectives Juice Bar Perspectives
2 2
119
2
2
1
1
Oberoi Project / Library Design
2 2
1 1
2
1
2
1
1: Plan +1200 mm
1: Plan +1200 mm
1: Plan +1200 mm
2: Plan +7700 mm
2: Plan +7700 mm
2: Plan +7700 mm
Section 1
Section 1
120
Section 1
Section 2
Section 2
Library FL 11 LibraryFL FL11 11 Library
LibraryFLFL1212 Library Library FL FL 12 12 Library
121
Oberoi Project / Reception Desk Design
122
123
Oberoi Project / Popsicle Table Design
Plan
nsparent or ored acrylic
nsparent or red acrylic
420
Transparent or colored acrylic Perspective
420
Transparent or colored acrylic
Plan
Plan Elevation 1:10 at A3
Plan
720
Popsicle Table One
420
Perspective
420
720
Plan
Perspective
720
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Popsicle Tables Combined Perspective
Elevation 1:10 at A3 Elevation 1:10 at A3
124
Perspective
Popsicle Table Two Popsicle Table Two
Popsicle Table Three
Popsicle Tables in Context
125
Oberoi Project / Doughnut Sofa Design
Plan
Plan Perspective
Perspective
Elevation
Doughnut Sofa Elevation
Doughnut Sofa
Plan
126
Plan
Plan
Perspective
Perspective
Perspective
Doughnut Sofa Color Options
Doughnut Sofa Color Options
Doughnut Sofa Color Options
Plan Plan Plan Polyurethane foam and fabric
Plan Polyurethane foam and fabric
Plan Plan Perspective
Polyurethane foam and fabric
Perspective
Polyurethane foam and fabric
Perspective Perspective
Perspective
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Doughnut Sofa One
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Doughnut Sofa Two
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Doughnut Sofa Three Perspective
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Doughnut Sofa One
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Doughnut Sofa Two
Elevation 1:10 at A3
Doughnut Sofa Three
Plan Plan Doughnut Sofa Combinations Doughnut Sofa Combinations
127
128
Doughnut Sofas in Context
Doughnut Sofas in Context
Doughnut Sofas in Context
Doughnut Sofas in Context
STUDIO DANIEL LIBESKIND Milan Housing / Geometry Optimization
r200 150
r300 150
r100 180
r200 300 r300 300
r300 150
r200 250 r200 250 r200 150
r200 300
r700 400
FACADE IN PLAN
r200 150 r200 250
r300 150
LENGTHS OF MODULES
r500 200 r500 200
r200 250 r200 250 r200 300 r200 150
r700 400
Linear modules Curved modules Radii (cm) Arc length (cm)
r200 150
A
B
100
A180
r300 150
C1
x8
150
700
D
x4
r200 300 r200 r300 300 300
r300 300 r200 250 r200 150
r100 180
r200 150
E
200
B2
250
r200 150
r500 200
150
E
500 500
300
B1
x8
D
C
200
x3
C2
x6
400
300
B3
x3
x2
300
x5
Total = 5 radii; 8 modules; 33 sets r = radii dimension l = arc lengths unit = cm
Eight Modules in Increasing Radii
94.1 degrees
84.5 degrees
r: 100
A l: 180
108.4 degrees
r: 200
B3 l: 300
122.7 degrees
r: 200
B2 l: 250
137 degrees
r: 300
C2 l: 300
147.3 degrees
r: 200
B1 l: 150
157.1 degrees
151.4 degrees
r: 700
E1 l: 400
r: 300
C1 l: 150
r: 500
D1 l: 200
129
REISER + UMEMOTO
130
Taipei Pop Music Center / Robot Study Model
131
Kaohsiung Port Terminal / Railing Design
15 cm 30 mm 30 mm
Plan
32 mm 25.6 mm 3 mm
3 mm
20 mm 28.5 mm
Galvanized steel 15 cm
Elevation
15 cm
32 mm
Metal splice connection of the top of railing (the splice interval should be as wide as possible depending on the maximum span of steel)
32 mm
74.8 mm
74.8 mm 3 mm
(dimensions are the same as below) 16 mm
32 mm
30 mm
paving 32 mm
97 cm (height of wire mesh) (distance between two cable wire centerlines)
97 cm (height of wire mesh) (distance between two cable wire centerlines)
Height of upright varies
Height of upright varies slab
3 mm
32 mm
70
m
m
20 mm
62 mm
height varies for the metal sleeve
10 mm
Cable wire
100 mm
m 0
92 mm
10 cm
172 mm
70 mm
m
Height varies
100 mm
10
Height varies
Paving
15 cm
70 mm
62 mm
20 mm 20 mm
Intermediate upright
Connection of the dropdown railing at central courtyard
(A)
inner
curve
inner
curve
equal
marker
inner
) 5 m rve 1.7 er cu n (in
equal ±1.7452 m
Elevation
The upright interval is based on the length of the inner curve.
Divided into 42 equal segments Each is ±1.7589 m
(A) (A)
EL + 7.990
St on e ca p
Average = ± 1.75 upright inte m (upr rval ight inte rvals vary )
Upright steel sleeve under pavement
EL + 8.1443
±1.6276 m
±1.65 m
(A) (A)
EL + 8.3023
(A)
EL + 8.4710
(A)
EL + 8.6552
±1.68 m
(A)
EL + 8.8624
±1.69 m
± 1.75 m
(A)
EL + 9.0785
±1.75m
1.0 cm
± 1.75 m
(A)
EL + 9.2990
± 1.73 m
(A)
EL + 9.7443
± 1.75 m
(G)
EL + 9.970
± 1.75 m
equal ±1.7589 m
(G)
EL + 10.20
equal
(G)
EL + 10.4327
EL + 9.7142
(G)
EL + 10.6681
equal
(G)
equal
EL + 11.1457
EL + 11.3863
equal
EL +
(G)
EL + 10.9061
equal
EL + 10.0145 equal ±1.6865 m
equal
(G)
EL + 11.6274
(G)
EL + 11.8691 equal
EL +
equal
inner
Cable wire and rod transition
15.0 cm
2.85 cm
Stone cap
(G)
(G)
EL + 12.5968
EL + 12.3541 equal
equal
(G)
(G)
(G)
EL + 12.8376
EL + 13.31
EL + 13.0761
(G)
EL + 13.541
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
EL + 13.977
equal
(F)
(F)
(G)
(G)
EL + 13.7641
equal
EL + 14.1764
equal
EL + 14.3269
(A)
(A)
EL + 14.4297
equal
EL + 14.4931 equal
(A)
(A)
EL + 14.5167
EL + 14.522
(B)
(B)
EL + 14.405
EL + 14.4754 equal
equal
equal
equal
(B)
(B)
(B)
EL + 14.0914
EL + 14.2092
EL + 14.3151 equal
equal
equal
equal
(B)
EL + 13.9637
EL +
46 mm
EL +
12.6277
equal
EL + 13.4321
12.9283
EL +
(F)
EL + 13.5857
13.2289
equal
EL +
(F)
equal
12.4 mm
Cable tensioner for the vertical cable
12.4 mm
Cable tensioner
EL +
equal
equal
(F) EL + 14.1321
(F) EL + 14.2346
(F) EL + 14.3141
equal
(A) EL + 14.3623
Cable wire
equal ±1.7515 m
(A) EL + 14.3566 equal ±1.730 m
30 mm (B) EL + 14.2946 equal
(B) EL + 14.2155
30 mm
30 mm
32 mm
equal
(B) EL + 14.1284 equal
32 mm (B) EL + 14.046 equal
172 mm
(B) EL + 13.940
equal
100 mm (B) EL + 13.8419
Typical relationship between stone cap and railing detail
(A)
tion Cable and rod wire transi
equal
EL + 13.770 equal EL + 13.930 equal (G)
EL + 14.101 (F)
equal
70 mm
62 mm
EL + 14.2048 (F) equal
EL + 14.2688
(F)
equal equal ±1.7359 m
to glazing 45 cm (A) EL + 12.418
(A)
(A)
Cable and wire rod transition
(A) EL + 14.2961
Railing connection detail
(A)
EL + 12.418 equal
equal
equal
(A) EL + 14.3296
Divided into 23 equal segments Each is ±1.730 m
equal (A) equal equal (A) (A) EL + 14.363
EL + 11.056
Cable and wire rod transition
(B)
equal (A) equal ± 1.7084 m
equal
equal
(A)
equal
EL + 11.0228
(B)
(A) EL + 14.3912
(D) equal
EL + 12.5695
End upright (end condition) Please see detail
(B)
(D) glazing
(B)
to
EL + 12.6726
(B)
cm
(D)
equal ± 1.7454 m
equal
EL + 12.8876
(A) EL + 14.3879
EL + 11.5832
equal
45
(A)
EL + 12.7791
equal
EL + 11.301
equal
equal
equal
Divided into 33 equal segments Each is ±1.7359 m
(D) (B) EL + 14.3491
(A)
EL + 12.9974
EL + 12.4497 (of top edge of handrail)
(B)
equal
EL + 12.1478
equal
EL + 13.1081
equal
(D)
equal (B)
(B) EL + 14.2624
EL + 12.4288
equal (A)
equal
EL + 13.2193
wire Cablerod transition and
equal
EL + 12.4497
(B)
(D)
equal equal
EL + 13.3305 Cable wire and rod transition
Cable wire and rod transition
(B)
equal
EL + 13.4428
EL + 12.4150
(A)
Upright B = 12
(B)
equal
(B) EL + 14.1504 equal
equal
45 glazin cm (A) to g
EL + 12.6863
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
EL + 13.5509 EL + 13.6306
m 1.75 curve) (inner equal EL + 13.698
EL + 13.684
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.680
EL + 13.676
(A)
EL + 13.672
(A)
equal
equal EL + 13.668
equal
(A)
(A)
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
(A)
equal EL + 13.668
(A)
EL + 13.6682
equal
(D)
equal
±1.75 m (inner curve)
equal
cm
to
EL + 13.0071 equal
equal
equal ±1.7658 m
glazing
(B)
equal
tion
EL + 13.0165
(B)
EL + 12.8744
wire transi
equal
equal (B)
EL + 12.7090
EL + 12.6263
EL + 12.5437
EL + 12.4906
equal (B)
(B)
(A) equal
EL + 12.9571
glazing cm
EL + 12.4524
equal
(A)
Divided into 3 equal segments Each is ± 1.4254 m
(B)
45
EL + 12.3956
equal
equal ± 1.4254 m
EL + 12.3795
equal
(A) equal
Divided into 22 equal segments Each is ± 1.7084 m
(A)
equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) EL + 12.4644
(B)
equal
EL + 12.4690
EL + 12.3633
cm 45 glazing to
Dropdown railing (special condition only for central courtyard) Please see detail
(A)
EL + 12.3472 (EL + 11.9276 = top handrail of dropdown railing)
Cable and rod wire transit
ion
EL + 12.5024
equal (H) EL + 12.6452
(A)
equal
± 1.6146 m
EL + 12.6458
(A) equal
(A)
equal
(H)
EL + 12.5524
equal
Divided into 17 equal segments Each is ±1.7658 m
equal ± 1.75 m
equal equal
(A) equal
equal
(A)
± 1.48 m
EL + 12.1883
(B)
EL + 12.4132
n
(B)
Cable and wire rod transitio
Cable wire and rod transition equal
equal
(A)
equal ± 1.4254 m
equal equal
(A) EL + 12.5156
(A)
± 1.53 m
(I) EL + 12.9209
EL + 12.8978 (D)
(A) equal
(B)
equal
EL + 12.4801
(A)
equal
Divided into 7 different segments
(H)
EL + 12.6191
equal
equal
Divided into 13 equal segments Each is ±1.6847 m
equal
± 1.58 m (B) (I) EL + 13.2646
Cable wire and rod transition equal (A) equal (E)
EL + 13.1897
equal
equal
EL + 12.6981
equal
(H)
EL + 12.7782
equal
(A)
(G) EL + 13.5658
equal
(A) equal
EL + 12.7768
equal
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.6997
EL + 13.6997
(B)
(B)
EL + 13.3602
EL + 13.2744
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal (B)
(B)
(D)
equal
EL + 13.4955 equal
± 1.63 m (A)
EL + 13.0191
EL + 13.1017
Cable wire and rod transition
Cable wire and rod transition (G)
EL + 13.0420
EL + 12.8552
(B)
(B)
(B)
± 1.73 m
± 1.68 m (A)
EL + 12.9339 EL + 13.4404
EL + 13.5159
EL + 13.5864
EL + 13.6498
EL + 13.6954
equal
equal (B)
(B)
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.6997
equal
equal
equal
equal
(A)
EL + 13.6931
± 1.59 m
equal
(B)
equal
equal
(A)
equal
(B)
Cable wire and rod transition
Cable wire and rod transition equal
equal
Cable rod and
equal
(A) equal
to
EL + 12.4497 equal
equal
equal
(B)
(B)
EL + 12.4656
(B) equal
(A)
equal
equal
(B)
EL + 12.4174
equal ± 1.7454 m
EL + 12.4497
EL + 12.4497
(A) EL + 13.4505
(B)
equal
(A)
equal (A)
(A)
equal (A) EL + 13.668
(A) (A)
EL + 12.4095
(A)
equal
equal ±1.730 m (B) EL + 13.6778
equal
(A)
EL + 12.4150
equal
equal
EL + 12.8963
EL + 12.4497
EL + 12.4497
45
EL + 12.4497
equal
equal (B) EL + 13.8052
EL + 12.4150 (A)
equal
(A)
equal
(A) EL + 12.4497
(A)
equal
Cable and wire rod transition equal (B) EL + 13.9263
(B)
(B)
(A)
(A)
(A)
equal ±1.6847 m
equal
(B) EL + 14.0383
(C) equal ± 1.7084 m
EL + 12.4497 equal
(A) equal ±1.7359 m
Cable wire and rod transition
Cable and wire rod transition
equal
EL + 11.8655
equal
(B)
equal
EL + 13.1539
(A)
EL + 13.1489
EL + 13.7390 (EL + 13.1446 = top handrail of dropdown railing)
equal
equal ± 1.7357 m
equal
equal
(A)
equal
equal
(A)
EL + 12.7393
EL + 13.740
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.7398
EL + 12.7396
(A)
EL + 13.740
equal
(A)
EL + 13.7402
equal
equal
equal (A)
(A)
EL + 13.7403
equal
equal EL + 13.7404
EL + 13.7403
equal
(A)
(A)
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.7403
equal
equal
equal (A)
equal
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
(A)
(A)
(A)
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
equal
equal
(A)
equal ± 1.7357 m
equal ± 1.75 m
(A)
equal
equal
equal
equal (A)
(A)
equal
EL + 13.7118
equal EL + 13.7404
equal
(A) equal
(A)
(A)
(A)
equal
equal
equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
equal
(A)
Divided into 39 equal segments Each is ± 1.7454 m
equal
The railing is pushed outward slightly to avoid the wall of Lobe C
Divided into 32 equal segments Each is ± 1.7357 m
(A)
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
equal
(A) equal (A)
equal
equal equal (A) equal
equal
equal
(A)
Cable wire and rod transition
equal EL + 13.698 1.75
Kaohsiung Port Terminal, Taiwan
equal ±1.7658 m
(A)
(A) equal
(inner m curve)
EL + 13.684
(A)
equal ±1.7452 m
EL + 13.680
(A) equal
EL + 13.676
(A) equal
EL + 13.672
(A) equal
equal EL + 13.668
(A) equal
equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
(A)
equal equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
Cable wire and rod transition
(A)
equal
Cable wire and rod transition
Typical relationship between the stonecap and railing Please see detail
Boardwalk Plan
Front Elevation
m 1.75 curve) (inner
(A)
equal ±1.7452 m
Cable wire and rod transition
Divided into 113 equal segments Each is ±1.7452 m
132
Reiser + Umemoto RUR Architecture PC
(A) equal
equal ±1.6847 m
Span
Total span of wire mesh railing: 2145 feet Total span of handrails: 240 feet
tion Cable and rod wire transi
Divided into 11 equal segments Each is ±1.7515 m (F) EL + 14.0124
10 mm
EL + 11.8864
equal ±1.7807 m
EL + 13.097 (G)
equal
equal
equal
EL + 12.5558
EL + 12.3851
EL + 12.2144
EL + 12.0437
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
Please see detail
Cable wire and rod transition
(F) EL + 13.735
13.830
30 mm
20 mm
Cable wire and rod transition
(F)
13.5295
2 mm
8 mm
EL + 13.2662
equal
12.4 mm
1.0 cm
5.3 mm
equal ±1.7515 m
equal
equal
EL + equal
equal
equal
equal ±1.7589 m
equal ±1.7807 m
(A)
Divide Each d into is ±1.7327 equal segme m nts
46 mm
(B) equal ±1.7401 m
EL + 12.1111
EL + 12.2552
EL + 11.8852
(F) EL + 13.879
EL + 12.418
equal
equal
equal
wire Cable transition rod and
EL + 12.3982
12.3271
equal
EL + 12.418
equal
EL + 11.8852
equal
equal ±1.7320 m
EL + 12.418
EL + 12.5412
(B)
(B)
(B)
equal
Divided into 6 equal segments Each is ±1.7807 m
11.7693
2.1 mm
wire Cablerod transition and
EL + 12.6842
±1.7101 m
EL + 11.7692 equal ±1.6865 m
27.5 mm
EL + 12.418
equal
11.514
5 mm
EL + 12.418
equal
equal
(B)
(B)
EL + 12.8273
EL + 12.9703
EL + 13.1134
equal ±1.7401 m
equal
EL +
6.6 mm
EL + 12.4243
(B)
(B)
equal
11.2143
EL + equal 12.0265 ±1.7320 m
26 mm
EL + 12.4758
(B)
EL + 13.2563 equal
equal
EL + 11.9205
EL + 11.8852 EL + equal
marker
Typical condition and labeling
(B)
EL + 13.3993
EL + 13.5423 equal
10.9145
Elevation
1.0 cm
(B)
EL + 13.6859 equal
(A)
equal EL +
equal
curve
Average upright height = ± 1.1 m (heights vary based on location)
(B)
EL + 13.8279 equal
10.6146
Divide Each d into is ±1.6867 equal 5m segments
EL +
Ave rage =± 1.7 upright inte (uprigh 5 m rval t inte rvals vary)
marker
(G)
EL + 12.1113 equal
10.3146
equal
5 mm
curve
Elevation
Cable wire and rod transition
Cable wire and rod transition
(A)
EL + 9.520
26 mm
6.8 mm
(A)
Cable wire and rod transition
(A)
(A)
tion
Boardwalk railing section
Cable and rod wire transi
Cable wire connecting to the metal tube/rod
tion
Standard railing detail
Cable and rod wire transi
First or last upright
Typical condition and labeling
Typical relationship between stone cap and ra
equal ±1.7359 m
e wire ition Cabl trans rod and
ng
to glazi 45 cm EL + 12.418
equal
(A)
(A)
EL + 12.418 equal
n e sitio le wir Cab rod tran and
EL + 12.418
(A)
equal
EL + 12.418
(A)
equal
EL + 12.418
(A)
equal (A)
EL + 12.418 equal
EL + 12.418
(A)
equal
EL + 12.4243
(A)
equal
EL + 12.4758
(B)
equal
EL + 12.5695
(B)
equal
EL + 12.6726
(B)
equal
EL + 12.7791
Divided into 33 equal segments Each is ±1.7359 m
(B)
equal
EL + 12.8876
(B)
equal
EL + 12.9974
(B)
equal
EL + 13.1081
(B)
equal
n e sitio le wir Cab rod tran and
EL + 13.2193
(B)
equal
EL + 13.3305 Cable wire and rod transition
Cable wire and rod transition
(B)
equal
EL + 13.4428
Upright B = 12
(B)
equal equal ±1.7359 m
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
EL + 13.5509 EL + 13.6306
Cable wire and rod transition
ve) 5m 1.7 ner cur (in
equal EL + 13.698
EL + 13.684
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.680
EL + 13.676
(A)
EL + 13.672
(A)
equal
equal EL + 13.668
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
(A)
equal EL + 13.668
(A)
EL + 13.6682
(B)
(B)
(A)
(A)
(A)
equal ±1.6847 m g
zin
(A)
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
(A)
equal
EL + 12.4497
45
cm
to
gla
equal ± 1.7454 m
EL + 12.4497
equal (A)
EL + 12.4497
equal (A)
equal
equal
EL + 13.4505
(A)
equal
(A) EL + 12.4644 equal
equal
(A) EL + 12.5156
(A)
equal
Cable wire and rod transition equal
equal (H) EL + 12.6452
(A)
equal
equal equal
(I) EL + 12.9209
(A)
equal
equal
Divided into 13 equal segments Each is ±1.6847 m
equal
(I) EL + 13.2646
equal
(A)
equal
Cable wire and rod transition
Cable wire and rod transition
equal
equal (G)
(B)
equal
equal
EL + 13.5658
equal (A)
EL + 13.6931
(A)
EL + 13.6997
EL + 13.6954
equal
equal
equal
(A)
(A)
EL + 13.6997
EL + 13.6997
equal
equal
equal
equal
(A) (A)
equal
(B)
(B)
EL + 13.6498
EL + 13.5864
equal
equal
equal
equal
equal
EL + 12.8552
(B)
(B)
(B)
(B)
(B)
(B)
(B)
EL + 12.9339 EL + 13.0191
EL + 13.1017
EL + 13.2744
EL + 13.3602
EL + 13.4404
EL + 13.5159
equal
(A)
equal
Divided into 39 equal segments Each is ± 1.7454 m
equal
(A)
equal
equal
(A)
equal
equal
equal
(A)
equal ±1.6847 m
Cable wire and rod transition
equal EL + 13.698 1.7
(A)
(in 5 m cu ner rv e)
EL + 13.684
(A)
equal ±1.7452 m
EL + 13.680
(A) equal
EL + 13.676
(A) equal
EL + 13.672
(A) equal
equal EL + 13.668
(A) equal
equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
(A)
equal equal
(A)
equal equal
(A)
equal equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
equal
(A) equal
Cable wire and rod transition
Boardwalk Plan
Front Elevation
133
equ
(A) equal