Studio Air- Part B (Carla Sujanto) by csu.img

STUDIO AIR JOURNAL

2018, SEMESTER 1, DAN SCHULZ CARLA RENATA SUJANTO [832783]

PART B | CRITERIA DESIGN

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

source: https://www.arch2o.com/voltadom-by-skylar-tibbits-skylar-tibbits/ 48

B1 | RESEARCH FIELD \\ TESSELLATION

Fig 18. Acacia seed found at Merri Creek bushlands. (photo by author).

Fig 19. The Reciprocal of Dancers by Kolomon Moser (1901). (https://www.wikiart.org/en/ koloman-moser/the-reciprocal-of-dancers-1901).

Fig 20 Voussoir Cloud by IwamotoScott. (https://www.dezeen.com/2008/08/08/ voussoir-cloud-by-iwamotoscott/).

1 | Tessellation can be found in natural forms. This Acacia seed repeats the pointed element throughout the surface of a round base form, incrementally decreasing in size as it gets closer to the top.

2| Tessellation and tiling of shapes and motifs in 2D art can be traced back to ancient times to create murals, interior decorations and surface graphics.

3| Technological developments allow architects to tessellate in 3D. Repeated components can be designed with software and fabricated with machinery.

Tessellation refers to the breaking up of a complex form into simple parts. This could involve creating elements of regular, or semi-regular geometries 1 which line up with each other and repeat to create a complex surface. A common example of tessellation is brick construction; modular blocks are stacked on top of each other to create an enclosure.

Advancements in computational design have allowed architects to explore the possibilities of tesselation in 3D. Complex surface details with simple geometries , as well as complex forms with repeated panels and elements, can be designed algorithmically by first creating the repeated component, then creating the base form/surface, and lastly arranging the component onto the surface.

1 â&#x20AC;&#x153;How did Tessellation Transform from Method to Art ?, â&#x20AC;&#x153; Widewalls, published July 10, 2016, https://www. widewalls.ch/tessellation-mathematics-method-art/.

PRECEDENT STUDY 1 Voltadom | Skylar Tibbits

Voltadom combines modern design and technology with historical references to gothic vaulted ceilings. This project for MITâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 150th anniversary consists of connecting panels of vaults of differring sizes which spans over a corridor to create an arch.

fig 21. (https://www.arch2o.com/voltadom-by-skylar-tibbits-skylar-tibbits/)

Voltadom Pseudocode

fig 22. (https://www.arch2o.com/voltadom-by-skylar-tibbits-skylar-tibbits/)

The modelling of Voltadom would’ve used a software like rhino and panelling, mesh and physics tools in Grasshopper. An initial catenary curve component may have been made, then tessellated across a lofted arch’s surface points. A portion of the tops of the cone shapes would’ve then been removed.

fig 23. (https://www.arch2o.com/voltadom-by-skylar-tibbits-skylar-tibbits/)

PRECEDENT STUDY 2 Voussoir Cloud | IwamotoScott

Voussoir Cloud tesselates wedges of varied edge curvatures to create an optimised compressive vault structure. Triangular wedges, or petals, vary in size depending on their closeness to the top, and they vary in the number of curved edges. These curves create gaps which allow light to filter through.

Fig 24. http://www.architectmagazine.com/awards/r-d-awards/voussoir-cloud_o

Voussoir Pseudocode

Fig 25. https://architizer.com/projects/voussoir-cloud/

Voussoir Cloud demonstrates Neri Oxman’s idea of a ‘fruit bearing fruit tree’ as in this case, the structure is a continuous surface made entirely of the same material- the same material that gives this design both its aesthetic appeal and structural stability.

Form-finding softwares, like Kangaroo, would’ve been used to generate the initial compressive structure of Voussoir Cloud. A point charge or graph mapping component could’ve been used to make lower petals smaller and higher petals bigger.

Fig 26. http://www.architectmagazine.com/awards/r-d-awards/voussoir-cloud_o 53

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

B2 | CASE STUDY 1.0 \\

Fig 27. IwamotoScottâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Voussoir Cloud tesselates wedges to create a light vaulted structure. (https://architizer.com/projects/voussoir-cloud/)

ANIMAL RESEARCH FIELD River Red Gum

River Red Gums are a type of Eucalyptus tree native to Australia which grows along natural watercourses 1 . The bark consists of patches instead of streaks, and it is both light grey and brown. They can grow up to 30m high,2 however, most of the River Red Gums along Merri Creek were observed to be quite young judging by their height and narrow trunks. Red Gums in Victoria flower in the summer months. These flowers produce nectar for birds and insects, and in turn, these animals pollinate the flowers. As well as being part of many creatures’ diets, they provide habitat to many birds and insects. 1 “Australia’s river redgums - Eucalyptus camaldelensis ,“ Discover Murray, last updated 2018, http://www.murrayriver.com.au/about-the-murray/river-red-gums/. 2 “Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh.,” Australian National Botanic Gardens, last update July 5, 2004, https://www. anbg.gov.au/cpbr/WfHC/Eucalyptus-camaldulensis/.

Fig 28. River Red Gum Tree. (https://whisperinggums. com/2009/11/18/the-magnificent-river-red-gums/)

Fig 29. Patches of grey and brown on River Red Gum Tree. (Photo by Ariane Garay).

A bell miner’s diet would consist of both insects and nectar. Therefore, bell miner’s would rely on the flowering of Red Gums for their source of nectar. In turn, Red Gums would rely on birds like the Bell Miner to spread its pollen so that more flowers would grow. While these creatures and the Red Gum rely on each other, it should be noted that Bell Miners could also damage Red Gums. They have become pests as they scare away other birds, spread diseases which damage trees, and maintains psyllid population (creatures which can also damage trees).1 This is a result of human intervention, habitat destruction and possibily noise from traffic. Thus, the relationship between the River Red Gum and the Bell Miner may be interpreted as parasitic due to these developments. 1 “Stop the miners: you can help Australia’s birds by planting native gardens,“ Kathryn Teare Ada Lambert, The Conversation, published November 5, 2015, https://theconversation.com/stop-the-miners-youcan-help-australias-birds-by-planting-native-gardens-49998.

Flowers on a River Red Gum provide nectar which insects and birds consume. (Sketch by author).

DESIGN TASK Arch Habitat

While the River Red Gum canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t necessarily have a digitally designed habitat, a habitat can be created for native shrubs and small birds to reduce the stress which the bell miners cause to the eucalyptus tree. The habitat should accommodate for small to medium native shrubs, growing up to 1-4m high, which would attract a diverse range of small birds and insects, and also provide protection for the smaller birds. Increasing local avian biodiversity would make sure bell miners do not overpopulate the area and cause stress to the Red Gum during flowering season.

Fig 30. Banksia shrubs would make a dense understorey and provide nectar. (https://www.gardeningwithangus. com.au/banksia-menziesii-banksia/).

CRITERIA BREAKDOWN I have included measures of aesthetics and practicality, though I have also included criteria specific to the animal community and function I aimed to acheive. SHRUB/PLANT HABITABILITY Measure of how well the design accommodates for plant growth, eg. sufficient sun exposure, room for plant to extend roots. FUNCTIONALITY AS ARCH Measure of how well it would function as a pedestrian arch. Eg. is it safe to walk under, aesthetically pleasing, non-obstructive. EASE OF MAINTENANCE Measure of how easy it is for staff and caretakers to access plant location for possible maintenance or replanting.

Plant Habitability Arch Functionality Maintenance Protection Constructability Aesthetics PROTECTIVE QUALITIES Measure of how well it protects animals from bell miners, eg. providing cover from swooping miners, blocking out their call.

Fig 31. Acacia shrubs make a thick und www.pinterest.com.au/pin/385691155

derstorey. (https:// 5558294858/).

Voussoir Cloud starting geometry (provided script did not work, new script developed).

6 anchor vault species

Mesh with Kangaroo

Wireframe mesh

Piped mesh

Polygon faces

Triangulated mesh

Double vault species

Plant Habitability Arch Functionality Maintenance Protection Constructability Aesthetics

6 vault, Triangulated - large open columns spaces for shrubs to grow - interesting vaulted arches which provide shade for pedestrians -hard to maintain internal plants, cannot access -closed vaults and internal column spaces provide protection from swooping birds -lots of material needed, structure should be panellised on supporting structure -aesthetically pleasing, however the surface is homogenous and does not allow light 6 vault, Polygon - large open columns spaces for shrubs to grow, allows sunlight to flow through -would filter light to create interesting experience for pedestrians -can manually water plants, but panels would still obstruct maintenance -semi-transparent, but frame and panels could still make it harder for small birds to get mobbed -lots of material needed, but not the whole surface needs to be panellised -interesting curved structure of planar panels

Double vault, Pyramidal wireframe -plants can grow in internal space, but this provides no protection for saplings -interesting structure, but provides no shade on its own -very little obstruction for maintenance -transparent structures give little protection to smaller animals -only one type of material needed -aesthetically interesting light, transparent structure of thin wire-like material, would create interesting shadows

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

B3 | CASE STUDY 2.0 \\ Reef by IwamotoScott

Fig 32. Reef stretches over an open space to create a reef-like canopy. (https://iwamotoscott.com/projects/moma-ps1-reef)

CASE STUDY

Reef (Anemone Cloud Canopy) | IwamotoScott

IwamotoScott’s Reef project aimed to create a space which mimicked an underwater atmosphere through the manipulation of light and shadow. It consisted of a canopy, inspired by anemone, and mounds, inspired by reef rocks.1 The anemone cloud consists of modules of semitransparent fabric mesh. 2 This material’s lightness allows for the canopy to sway with the wind and emulate the movement of ocean currents. This also manipulates levels of light and shadow below, emulating the atmosphere of light filtering through water. 1 “MOMA/PS1 Reef,” IwamotoScott, last modified 2017, https://iwamotoscott.com/projects/moma-ps1-reef. 2 “MOMA/PS1 Reef”.

Reef Pseudocode

Fig 33. The Anemone Cloud canopy was intended to create an underwater atmosphere. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/isar/431629969/in/album-72157600023967187/).

Fig 34. https://iwamotoscott.com/projects/moma-ps1-reef

The computation of this design may have involved tesselating a geometry across an undulating surface of boxes then using attractor points to vary the height of the geometry and radius of each occulus. Each canopy spans across one concrete wall to another using cable trusses. Wooden spacers hang off the cable to create a frame for the fabric mesh modules. Using CATIA, the fabric canopy is designed then unfolded row by row for fabrication. CATIA was also used to determine the required lengths for plywood spacers and cable trusses.1 1 â&#x20AC;&#x153;MOMA/PS1 Reef,â&#x20AC;? IwamotoScott, last modified 2017, https://iwamotoscott.com/projects/moma-ps1-reef.

Fig 35 CATIA was used to manage pieces for fabrication. (https://www. flickr.com/photos/isar/431625992/in/album-72157600023967187/).

DESIGN TASK

Reverse-engineering REEF by IwamotoScott

1. Create square SURFACE and REBUILD surface points.

2. Extrude central CONTROL POINTS to create hill-like shape. Create another surface to trim top using BOOLEAN SPLIT.

3. Draw CURVES and LOFT them to create undulating SURFACE.

4. DIVIDE SURFACE into 10x10 point grid to create SURFACE BOXES.

5. Set a POINT some distance from surface to create a POINT CHARGE field; use this to control height of SURFACE BOXES on surface.

Isometric view of top of REEF model.

Isometric view of bottom of REEF model

6. Reference GEOMETRY and SURFACE BOXES into BOX MORPH function to tessellate geometry accross undulating surface.

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

B4 | Technique: Development

Starting geometry creates a pot-like shape, suitable for plants and shrubs. Could also function to protect saplings from frost.

Undulations

Techniques and definitions developed: Tessellating geometry accross surface Manipulating size, aperture and orientation of geometry Manipulating surface to create undulations Using attractor points and DISTANCE function to manipulate geometry height

Extrusions on ground

Arch

Vertical Spiral Isometric

Top

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

B5 | Technique: Prototypes

MATERIAL STUDY AAMI Park \\ Boxboard \\ Tesselation, Primary & Secondary Structures

AAMI Park is a stadium consisting of partial geodesic domes joined together to create a cover. Triangle panels are tesselated across a steel frame in which intersections are welded together. This case study demonstrates how planar elements can be used to design rounded surfaces. My group intended to recreate one domed component in the structure. I intended to explore the visual effect of a smooth curved surface made using planar elements and demonstrate how it would be made when an initial primary structure is required. Fig 36. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-17/melbournes-aamipark-covered-in-combustible-polyurethane-audit/7178008

Boxboard was used to create the triangle panels since it is a rigid and lightweight sheet material that can be accurately lasercut to predetermined shapes. The construction uses pre-fabricated cylindrical steel elements as the primary structure in which intersections in the frame are welded. I intended to approach this through using straw, balsa wood sticks or thick paper then using plasticine to imitate welding at joints.

Fig 37. http://www.walkingmelbourne.com/forum/ viewtopic.php?f=2&t=826&start=66

Rhino plugin Polyhedron was used to firstly create the partial dome. Each face was then exploded, nested and labelled using grasshopper for laser cutting.

This was found to be unsuccessful. Wire was originally intended to create the primary structure, but the form couldn’t be held as the angles were incorrect and material was weak The final form would’ve appeared disjointed and wouldn’t acheive the visual effect I wanted to explore.

Using UNROLLSURFACE, a net was created from the original geometry. Keeping the surface connected would mean that once the edges were joined together again, the form would be held in place by the material and there is no need to create a primary structure (if the material is stiff and strong).

AAMI Park \\ Boxboard \\ Tesselation, Folding and Scoring

MOUNTBOARD I experimented with mountboard first to test that it would hold its shape. Because the surface isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t made of individual pieces, it creates a continuous looking surface.

BOXBOARD Boxboard held its shape better than mountboard. Although with these materials, glue is sufficient, material like polypropylene or thin wood laminates requires different joints such as tabs.

IwamotoScott resolved the issue of connecting edges through tabs and zip-ties. This method would mean that while one side would look aesthetically pleasing and smooth, the other would show connections and tabs which may be undesirable. Although in an environmental setting, joints would be suitable places for spiders to create their webs. Voussoir Cloud uses thin timber laminate which is then scored and cut with laser to acheive the desired wedges. Although this method is more efficient than creating a primary structure, there are a limited amount of strong, weatherresistant material that could also be thin enough to be scored and folded.

Fig 38. IwamotoScottâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Voussoir Cloud uses the scoring and folding method to create the wedges. Corners are joined with zip-ties. (https:// biosarch.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/voussoir-cloud-iwamotoscott/).

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

B6 | Technique: Proposal Carla Sujanto, Sherry Li, Joo Liew | River Red Gum, Fat-tailed Dunnart, Southern Boobook

My group’s two animals, the Boobook and the Dunnart, are predator and prey. The challenge of our design was finding a way to keep the two separate. Instead of creating a ‘habitat’ for the Red Gum, we decided to accommodate for native plants and shrubs which produce nectar and attract small birds and insects, reducing the stress on River Red Gums.

Proposal: Balance : Predator and Prey Habitat We considered the idea of a habitat tree being able to house communities of predators with communities of prey and we wanted to design a structure that could function similarly. The Dunnartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cell was to be well protected from introduced species like cats and foxes so that the natural predator-prey relationship that occurs between the Dunnart and Boobook does not lead to over-hunting and further endangerment of the Dunnart. Our site was between the creek and the walking trail where there is a thick understorey for the Dunnart to have more safety. Small birds that we intend to attract to the area are also inclined to feed and rest in thick understoreys to hide from territorial birds such as bell miners.

fig 39. Merri Creek trail, photo by Ariane Garay.

Our approach was to firstly create one element, or cell, that could house every animal/plant with only slight parameter changes. An enclosed geometry with one main opening and smaller openings for ventilation was created. This was initially based on the Dunnartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s habitat, which is to simulate the underside of logs and boulders, however the size of the geometry and the hole can be easily adapted to the Boobook. Openings could be further enlarged to create a planter box for flowers and small shrubs.

fig 40. Location with thick under and mid-storey, photo by Ariane Garay.

fig 42. First idea of tessellated geometry. All fig 43. Developed tessellated geometry prototype of Balsa wood, elements should be fairly closed as plants need support and both animals are nocturnal model and photo by Sherry Li. and solitary. Diagram by Joo Liew.

This cell would then be tessellated across a base geometry consisting of three levels; the bottom being the Dunnart, the middle being the Boobook, and the top being for small plants and shrubs. It would be approximately 4m in height as both animals reside in the under and midstorey. Most small birds we intend to bring into the site also reside in under and mid-storey, making the height of the plants suitable for them to eat and rest.

fig 44. Three level habitat, diagram by Joo Liew.

fig 41. Location on site, take from google maps.

When developing iterations, factors related to the construction and the habitability of the design were considered. The more important criteria being protection of the Dunnart and seperation between them and the owl. fig 45. Design Criteria

Parameters were altered to change cell transparency, smoothness and size in order to develop cells that could adapt to the three different animals/ plants. Reflecting on these iterations, a cell that is more closed off wouldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve been more appropriate for both the Dunnart and Boobook due to their nocturnal nature and also to increase protection. fig 46. Digital iterations of cell geometry, developed by Joo Liew.

The idea of a three level habitat was developed. A mesh-like structure was firstly considered as the mesh could act like a barier for the Dunnart in which it can slip through gaps while cats and foxes are kept out. However, there is the issue of transparency and construction as it would be more see-through and harder to construct with available materials. fig 47. Digital iterations of base geometry, developed by Joo Liew.

fig 48. Final concept rendering, drawing by Joo Liew.

The final outcome shows how there would be more Dunnart cells than Boobook cells so that there is less chance that many owls would nest in the structure, meaning the Dunnarts would not be over hunted. During the day, small birds would gather to the small shrubs and plants in the upper level, discouraging the owl from hunting in the day. Reflecting on our design, we found that attempting to house a predator and prey in the same small structure was impractical and quite limiting for both species; it was critiqued that they might as well be seperate. Further development would firstly include designing for one or two clients only and not including both the Boobook and Dunnart. Secondly we would refine the digital design technique and create more iterations with a clearer structure and tessellation element. Our first proposal was unclear as the cell we created was not placed on our base structure, making it hard to understand. It could be improved by adding in the cells and also showing how these cells can be adapted to each client. This would mean that the final structure would be created based on the needs of the client and our design intentions instead of creating a structure resulting from the process.

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

B7 | Learning Objectives Outcome and Conclusion I beleive that the concept of our proposal, while I think is interesting, was too ambitious; it was hard for me to justify why the final outcome was the way it is as we struggled to come up with a form that successfully depicted our concept and met the client needs. In this sense, I think I could improve on using obstacles as a design oppurtunity. Eg. having the plants level as the middle level in order to create a thicker barrier between the owl and marsupial. My prototype attempted to create the smooth curved surface of planar elements while also exploring the scoring and folding method of Voussoir Cloud. However, there is a lack of material that could simulate thin timber laminate or something stronger and weather resistant. The technique is of course more efficient than creating a supporting structure for individual parts, but scoring to acheive hard folds like Voussoir Cloud can only be done on thin material. I have also started using plugins such as Weaverbird and Kangaroo to manipulate mesh and add a physics parameter. The Voussoir Cloud iterations helped me to understand the possibilities of these two plugins. However, I believe that I am limiting myself to familiar functions such as orient and box morph (because I was focussing on tessellation), and steering away from data manipulation which would limit the design potential of my iterations. Now that I am learning more Grasshopper functions, it is easier for me to understand methods which different architectural precedents have used to acheive the final form. For Part C, I would like to explore the possibilites of Kangaroo Physics and Weaverbird. I especially like the vaulted organic form which Voussoir Cloud creates as the columns create the perfect space for small shrubs.

B7 | Appendix