STUDIO AIR 2017, SEMESTER 1, MANUEL MUEHLBAUER CHEUK YI LAI (690091)
04 06 14 18 26 32 40 42 46
PART B. CRITERIA DESIGN B.1. Research Field B.2. Case Study 1.0 B.3. Case Study 2.0 B.4. Technique: Development B.5. Technique: Prototypes B.6. Technique: Proposal B.7. Learning Objectives and Outcomes Appendix: Algorithmix Sketches Bibliography
B.1
RESEARCH FEILD
A pattern is made up of repetition. It can be viewed as a system that consists of identical or similar elements. Patterns exist in all parts of the world and in everything we do. In fact, information architect Richard Saul Wurman once said, ‘I see the world as visual patterns of connectivity... I see everything as patterns.’ [1] In the architecture discourse, patterning has been traditionally associated with symbolism and ornamentation. It has been used for centuries, for example in Gothic and Islamic architecture, and is somewhat related to religion and culture. Although its decorative quality was not favoured by the Modernism movement, it is later ‘revived’ by the Post-modernist and demonstrates its power in addressing the ‘now more problematic spaces of social and everyday life’ in the increasingly ‘fragmented’, ‘chaotic’ world. [2] In modern days, patterning has become a more cohesive and integrative system that brings
4
CRITERIA DESIGN
Fig.1. Millard House ‘textile block’ wall
together the functions and aesthetics of a building. It benefits from the parametric design tools, which can generate complex patterns by manipulating different parameters and map patterns onto a NURBS surface. Patterning can be an ideal technique for creating a monolithic yet dynamic system by integrating the building envelope with the structure and environmental performances. For example, many buildings integrate solar panels with patterns on their facades. On top of that, tessellation, the tilling of geometric patterns on a surface, can rationalise complex forms into easily fabricated and assembled parts. This speeds up the fabrication process, reduces costs and materials. In short, parametric patterning has great potentials in optimising the aesthetics, functions and assemblage of architectural designs.
Fig.2. Millar House ‘textile block’ detail
I can see patterns when I understand things. I see the world as visual patterns of connectivity. I think pattern recognition is a fundamental part of a creative mind...I see everything as patterns Richard Saul Wurman
1. RS Wurmanm ‘Seeing the World as Visual Patterns of Connectivity’, in G Schuller (ed), Designing Universal Knowledge, Lards Muller (Basel), 2009, pp 105 2. Mark Garcia (2009). Patterns of architecture (London: John Wiley), pp 9 CRITERIA DESIGN 5
B.2
CASE STUDY 1.0
The Spanish Pavilion was designed by FOA for the 2005 Work Expo of Aichi, Japan. The design aims to represent the history and future vision of Spain [3]. The design reflects the cultural diversity in Spanish cultures, namely the Islamic and Judeo-Christian communities. It features a lattice envelope, which is a reinterpretation of a traditional Spanish element. It consists of a non-repeating hexagonal grid coded in different colours—colours that associate with the Spanish national flag. [3] The design of the facade is based on a module of six regular hexagons. The hexagonal geometry is distorted within a parameter (1), resulting in a module of six unique tiles. The module is then mirrored and rotated to get four orientations (2), forming the pattern of the facade. The combination of solid and perforated tiles and adjacent colours obscure the original module and creates a differentiated effect (3). [4]
3. Rexford Newcomb, Moudlng assembling designing: ceramics in Architecture (Beaver Falls, Penn. : Associated Tile Manufacturers, 1924), pp 114 4. Farshid Moussavi and Michael Kubo, the function of ornament (Barcelona: Actar, Harvard University, Graduate School of Design, 2006), pp 106 6
CRITERIA DESIGN
(1)
(2)
(3) Fig.3. Spanish pavilion parametric design process Fig.4. Spanish pavilion (Right)
Spanish Pavilion Foreign Office Architects Aichi, 2005
CRITERIA DESIGN
7
Matrix definition
Species 2 — type of grid Rectanglular grid Triangular grid
Hexagonal grid
Discontinuity Retrieve points on the grid
Replace
Replace original points with moved points
Polyline Compose new grid
Create points in the same arrangement as the grid
Move
Move
In In U-direction V-direction
SlStarMesh
Create mesh with polylines
Wb components Mesh variations
Image sampler
Point
Deconstruct mesh
Interpolate curve or
Polyline
Species 4 — Surface & line patterning
Species 1 — Original
Mirror
Offset
Cull pattern
Extrude
Move
Loft
extrude curve in Z-direction
move curve in Z-direction
Species 3 — Extruison
Species 5 — Projection Surface
Reference a surface in rhino
8
CRITERIA DESIGN
Project
project curves onto a curved surface
Species 1 — Original
Species 2 — Changing the type of grid
1. Original
5. Offset distance = -4
1. Traingular grid
5. Offset distance + point attraction
2. Multiple offset
6. Changing array spacing expression
2. Changing array spacing expression
6. Offset distance = -1
3. Changin sampled image
7. Cull pattern
3. Offset distant + point attraction
7. Cull pattern
4. Offset distant + point attraction
8. Piping radius = 0.5
4. Square grid
8. Changing smapled Image
CRITERIA DESIGN
9
Species 3 — Extrusion
1. Offest + move in Z-direction + loft
5. Extrusion height = attraction
2. Offset + point attraction
6. Extrusion height jitter
3. Offset + point attraction
7. offset + rotate + loft
4. Cull + multiple offset + loft
7. cull + loft + boundary surface
10
CRITERIA DESIGN
Species 4 — Surface & line pattern
Species 5 — Curved surface projection
1. WbSplitQuads (Lv.1)
1. Project on curved surface
5. Polyline
6. Extrusion Z-direction
2. WbInnerPolygons (Lv.1)
6. WbStellate
2. Extrusion (surface normal)
7. Piping
3. WbWindow (distance=20)
4. WB mesh + height = point attraction
8. Projection + loft
4. Interpolate curve
5. Extruding cylinder from surface
CRITERIA DESIGN
11
Successful Species Selection Criteria Aesthetics
Materiality
Constructability
Adaptability
Does it look good
How can different materials be applied to it
How constructable is it
How can it adapt to different usage & situations
Species 1 / Iteration 4 Point attraction differs the offset distance of the hexagonal cells, creating a dynamic effect whilst keeping the original design language. Can be easily fabricated and assembled and be incorperated into the envelope of a building. Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability
Species 2 / Iteration 3 This outcome is based on a triangular grid instead and combined with the point attraction effect. This creates an interesting and dynamic pattern that could be developed into a user-interactive design. How to connect those triangle pieces could be an issue, but it would not be a problem if they are painted on or pierced through a surface.
Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability 12
CRITERIA DESIGN
Species 3 / Iteration 2
Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability
Lofting base grid and offset grid, which is moved upwards in the Z-direction, gives thickness to the grid. Variation is achieved by a point attractor, which controls the offset distance. Highly constructale, but connections of members should be caresully designed.
Species 4 / Iteration 5 Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability
Circles are drawn from the cell centre points and extruded. It creates an elegant effect but is not highly constructable as the cylinders are not connected to each other. CRITERIA DESIGN
13
B.3
CASE STUDY 2.0
Aqua Tower is a mixed-use residential tower in downtown Chicago. It features a sculpted facade achieved by layers of undulating floor plates. It gives an ever-changing, illusory vertical landscape of dunes and lakes. In plan, the curvy slab cantilever out from the face and forms individual balconies. The balconies, unique in size, are social platforms that perform multiple tasks, such as shading and minimize wind shear [5]. The design begins with studying the views from the building, which is a primary focus of the design. Then the city topography is mapped into two-dimensional diagrams, or contours. Four unique elevational maps are generated, each representing a different orientation: north, east, south and west. Next, the topographic elevations are translated to a threedimensional model in slices. It results in unique floor plates with undulating outlines. These plates stack
Fig.5. Aqua Tower design parameters (Left) Fig.6. Digital model (Right top) Fig.7. Plan view (Right bottom) 14
CRITERIA DESIGN
up to create a three-dimensional sculpture. The distinct contour of each floor slab, 82 in total, poses challenges during the construction process. It is resolved by using a civil engineering and surveying software program to input the coordinates of each slab to a robotic station onsite [6].
5. Gang, Jeanne, Reveal : Studio Gang Architects (New York : Princeton Architectural Press, 2011), pp 158 6. Chicago Architecture Foundation, Aqua, retrieved from http://www.architecture.org/architecture-chicago/buildings-ofchicago/building/aqua/
Aqua Tower Gang Architects Chicago, 2010
Fig.8. Aqua Tower persepctive view
CRITERIA DESIGN
15
Reverse Engineering
Rectangle
Box Rectangle
Deconstruct Brep
Explode Tree
Surface
Divide Surface Image Sampler
16
CRITERIA DESIGN
Graph Mapper
r
Path Mapper
Move Multiplication X4
Interpolate curves Slider
Boundary surface
Extrude
Combine the box and extruded plates
Unit Z
CRITERIA DESIGN
17
B.4
TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT
Species 1 — Original Rectangle
Divide Surface
Path Mapper
Move Multiplication
Interpolate curves
Boundary surface
Extrude
Graph Mapper
Image Sampler
Species 7 — Grid
Delaunay Mesh
Exploring potentials of a rectangular grid form
Wb Mesh tools
Species 2 — Mesh variations Loft
Species 4 — Strips Curve
Move
Species 3 — Surface mapping Curve
Divide surface
Flip
Species 6 — Box morph Surface box
Loft
Polygon Move Loft
Point attractor
or
Circle or
Sphere
Geometry BBox
Morph
Species 5 — Strips variations
Species 8 — Panelling + Point attraction
Species 9 — Gradient
Mix and match geometries and technique to create design variations
Use point attraction to vary the height of panels
Use gradient loop or field to generate curves on a surface
18
CRITERIA DESIGN
Species 1 — Original
Species 2 — Mesh variations
1. Altering graph mapper
5. Altering graph mapper
1. Delaunay mesh
2. Altering graph mapper
6. Changin sampled image
2. WbFrame
3. Altering graph mapper
7. Altering graph mapper
3. WbSierpinski (Lv.2)
4. Altering graph mapper
8. Altering graph mapper
4. WbWindow
CRITERIA DESIGN
19
Species 2 — WB mesh
Species 3 — Surface mapping
5. WbInnerPolygons
17. Decompose mesh + Spheres
21. Decompose mesh + traingles
6. WbBevelVertices
18. Circles + boundary surface
22. Decompose mesh + hexagons
7. Wb Mesh Edges + piping
19. Spheres + point attraction
23. 18. Decompose mesh + circles
7. WbStellate
20. Spheres + line attraction
24. Decompose mesh + rhombus
20
CRITERIA DESIGN
Species 4 — Strips
Species 5 — Strip variation
Species 6 — Box morph
1. Interpolate curve in U direction
1. Columns supporting strips
5. Morph + pipe
2. Interpolate curve in V direction
2. Move distance = 1
6. Morph + pipe
3. Move interpolate curve + loft
3. traingulate stips
7. Morph + pipe
4. Move interpolate curve + loft
4. pipe + stips
8. Morph + pipe
CRITERIA DESIGN
21
Species 6 — Box morph
Species 7 — Grid
1. Morph
1. Delaunay edge
5. Interpolate curves + piping
2. Morph + pipe
2. Space frame
6. Strips in U & V directions
3. Morph
3. Space frame + piping
7. Supporting columns
22
CRITERIA DESIGN
4. Triangular frame + cull + offset
Species 8 — Panelling + Attraction
1. 1 point charge
2. 2 point charges
Species 9 — Loops
1. 10 Spin forces
5. Gradient loop + project on plane + loft
2. 2 Spin forces
6. Gradient loop + move + loft
3. 2 Spin forces
7. Gradient loop + piping
4. Gradient loop
CRITERIA DESIGN
23
Successful Species
Species 6 / Iteration 33 Combines box morph and piping to create a shading system. Can potentially be a roofing system for a curved or irregular structure. Materials can be fabric and steel or timber.
Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability
Species 2 / Iteration 12 A simple Weaverbird mesh. Tessellation of a curved surface allows for various possibilities in userinteractive designs. Can be easily fabricated.
Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability 24
CRITERIA DESIGN
Species 5 / Iteration 28 Combines piping and lofting in perpendicular directions to create a weaving effect. Can be adopted on a building facade. However, in this iteration, a weaving pattern is not generated. Further investigation can be done in regards to this.
Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability
Species 9 / Iteration 52 An experiment using gradient loop. It has a very beautiful pattern that follows the curvature of the surface. However, It is not constructable because they are merely unjoined lines.
Materiality Aesthetics Constructability Adaptability CRITERIA DESIGN
25
B.5
TECHNIQUE:
PROTOTYPE
Prototype 1
Based on species 1 Materials: - 0.3mm white polypropylene - 3mm MDF - glue Method: Laser cut each piece and interlock them at the notches Aim: To test material and light effect Outcome / comments: 1. I made a mistake with the material thickness, making the notches on the polypropylene pieces larger than it should be. As a result, the pieces do not fit together tightly, and they need to be glued at the connections. This shows the importance of correctness of material sizes. 2. Since the MDF pieces are not flat at the base, they cannot stabalise on the table, causing difficulties in connecting the pieces together. Further propotype can have those MDF pieces aligned on a flat surface for ease of assemblage. 3. The material combination is successful: MDF pieces provide strength and rigidity, while the polypropylene pieces are highly adaptive and flexible. Also, the polypropylene pieces can created beautiful shadows as show in fig 1. One shortfall is the burnt marks on the edge.
26
CRITERIA DESIGN
CRITERIA DESIGN
27
Prototype 2
Based on species 6 Materials: - 0.3mm white polypropylene - 3mm MDF - glue - metal wire Method: Laser cut all pieces, construct the MDF frame, then attacted the polypropylene pieces to the frame Aim: To test light effect and types of connections Outcome / comments: 1. The MDF pieces do not connect to each other very well on the 4 outer edges. Hence, they have to be glued together in order to stay in shape. Special joints should be re-designed in further prototyping. 2. Using metal wires to connect the polypropylene pieces is a simple yet effective method. The only shortcoming is that they look a bit bulky, when there are more than one connections. Further investigation can look at how to resolve this. 3. The light effect is successful. This prototype has great potential for shading systems and light installations. Further investigations can look at how light can create a pattern by varying, for example, the shape of the triangles.
Connectors:
28
CRITERIA DESIGN
CRITERIA DESIGN
29
Prototype 3
Based on species 2 Materials: - 3mm MDF - glue Method: Laser cut all pieces, then connect the triangular pieces with connectors Aim: To test connections Outcome / comments: This propotype is considered as not successful because is fails to achieve the effect as intended (fig. 1). This happens for a number of reasons: 1. One connector per edge is insufficient. The panels are free to rotated even after glue was applied. 2. The connectors are too big, which destroy the overall form Potential improvements: 1. Use two connector per edge 2. Use smaller connectors 3. Try a different type of connector (eg. hinge joints) 4. Try a different material that can be folded (hence does not require connectors)
30
CRITERIA DESIGN
Panels are free to rotate
Panels are curved for unknown reasons
Junction is not neat
Connector is too big
CRITERIA DESIGN
31
B.6
TECHNIQUE:
PROPOSAL
About the site The chosen site is the Bigbang Studio, which stands on a site overlooking the Merri Creek. The Bigbang studio is established by Erin Veronica Ender and Henrik Ender in 2007. It is an artist’s hub that encourages the experimentation in photography, architecture, film, craft, design, styling and more. It aims to create a collaborative environment for artists and the public, and to invest in social and environmental sustainability. The studio is a renovation of an industrial warehouse, which retains much of its industrial aesthetics. Meanwhile, it incorporates environmental sustainable ideas, such as hydronic heating and replanting the backyard. The photography studio can be hired by anyone for performances, exhibitions, workshops and more; everyone is invited to explore the different possibilities in creativity [7].
Merri Creek Road Walking trail Vegetation
32
CRITERIA DESIGN
7. Bigbang studio, ‘About Bigbang studio’, http://bigbangstudio. com.au/about/ [20 April 2017]
2.0 m
13.4 m 3.6 m
2.7 m
3.9M high roller door
atrium ramp
7.
0
m
c lo cy
ra
a m
Accessibility = The studio can be reached by car; 30 minute walk to the tram stop; 10 minute walk to the bus stop
15 .7 m
studio 134 m²
clo cy
kitchenette
a m ra
17 .6
7 0.
m
m ra diu s
Car access
Site activity & users = The studio can be hired by artists, photographers and performers for phototaking, performances, exhibitions etc. and public audience can be invited to those events
5. 5m he
green room
ht
White concrete floor Black concrete floor
6.0 m
ig
Access
Interior = The triangular shaped studio features an 6m invisible wall, perfect for photography shooting and illusory backdrop. It is accessible from four entrances, one of which is a roller shutter that allows cars in. The studio space is well equipped with mirrors, cherry-pickers, and ceiling lighting and a number of rooms —bathrooms, pantry and greenroom.
U/S 5.225
SW L 75KG
L4
U/S 5.520
U/S 5.400
SW L 75KG
L1
U/S 5.225
SW L 75KG
SW L 75KG
L4
L3 CABLE TRAY L1
L1 L2
L1
L1
U/S 5.245
Others = The ceiling of the studio has a structural steel beam that can take load (indicated orange in plan), which gives possibilities for a hanging installation.
SW L 75KG
STEEL BEAM SW L 250KG
U/S 5.300
U/S 4.925
L2 L1
L1
Design brief = To design a performacne pavilion
L4
CRITERIA DESIGN
33
34
CRITERIA DESIGN
Design response
SUCCESSFUL ITERATIONS
PROTOTYPES
CONCEPT OF AIR
SITE RESPONSE
BRIEF
DESIGN PROPOSAL Structural beam above may provide support
Incorporate lighting at ceiling level
Maximise views on the sides
Continuation of the invisible wall
The design is aimed to express the porous quality of air through creating interesting light and shadows. This can be achieved by materiality and patterning, which are the foci of my previous algorithmic explorations and prototyping exercise. For example, in prototype 1 & 2, I explored the use of translucent material and frame systems. I would like to apply them into my design for the performance pavilion. I envision a shell structure that acts as a backdrop for shows, such as singing and dance performances. With 3-dimensional patterns on the surface, it will create different shadows on the ground when applied Fig.9-16. Perspective view of the studio interior & possible activities
Maximise views on the sides
different lighting (by manipulating the intensity, colour or direction of light). This will create an ‘atmospheric’ or ‘airy’ experience that enhances the effects of the performances. Inspirations also come from the site conditions. I am very excited about the 6m invisible wall. It is a unique feature of the studio, and I would like my design to be a continuation of it. I also notice the abundant lighting equipment at the site, which can be utilized with my design to create special light effects during a performance.
CRITERIA DESIGN
35
Kangaroo
Grasshopper definition
Slider
Unit Z
Unary force
Decompose mesh
Cull pattern List item
Surface Reference a surfae in Rhino
Surface divide
Delaunay mesh
Wb mesh edges
Springs from lines
Kangaroo Physics
Mesh Slider
Length Multiplication Slider
Decompose mesh
Partition list
Interpolate curve
Slider
36
Wb Stellate
CRITERIA DESIGN
The shell
Extrude
Unit Z Slider
Unit Y
Extrude
The ribs
In Grasshopper, I used the Kangaroo plug-in to refine the shape of the shell. Then I used the Weaverbird Stellate component to create the triangulate panels of the shell. As in my prototypes 1 & 2, the triangular panels will be made of translucent materials, while the frame that holds up the panels will be made of timber. At this intial design stage, I still have a lot more to think about. For example, the potential of developing an interactive design: can pavilion be moved or rotated? Can the triangular panel change in form? The Grasshopper tools allow me to start exploring these possibilities by adding on to the existing script I developed.
One interactive approach I am proposing, is to move the lights at ceiling level to create different shadow patterns on the ground. One possibility is to change the materials (and hence the level of transparency of the panels) so different light effects can be achived when light is shone from different directions. The next step, also, would be thinking about how to construct the pavilion. Although I have done some explorations in the prototype making exercise, the construction of a real-size structure would be very different. It is important to start thinking about the connections of elements, the loads and fabrication.
CRITERIA DESIGN
37
13.4 m
2.0 m
6.0 m
15 .7 m
2.7 m
3.6 m
Plan view
(1) Plan view: the shape of the pavilion response to the shape of the traingular site and follows the natural flow of circulation (2) Front elevation: The pavilion will serve as a perfect backdrop for performances, like dancing. However, since it is not very large in size, small groups of performances are ideal (3)Section: The construction logic is to have timber frames holding up the triangular panels (4) Perspective view: Different light effects can be achieved by changing the positions of spotlights from behind or above
38
CRITERIA DESIGN
4000
6000
Front evation
5000
Section
Perspective CRITERIA DESIGN
39
B.7
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Objective 1 The brief is to design a performance pavilion in the interior of the Bigband studio in Northcote. After meeting with the client, I gained deeper understanding in the story, usage and specific requirements of the site. I began to consider more thoroughly ‘what kind of performance can my design accommodate?’, ‘how can my design facilitate the performance?’, ‘how to best respond to the brief and the site?’, ‘what kind of effects do I want to achieve?’. Furthermore, for the first time using Grasshopper as the primary design tool, I can freely explore the fabrication, the possibilities of interactive designs and the everchanging/ adaptive quality of my design.
Objective 2 In case study 1.0 and 2.0, I have explored a variety of design outcomes with a base form, by manipulating different parameters and using different components in Grasshopper plug-ins. For example, I used the Weaverbird components to achieve different effects of a mesh surface, and used point-attraction methods to create dynamic patterns. Lack of experience and confidence in algorithmic design at the beginning of the course has not discouraged me to stop trying out different forms and patterns. My skills and understanding have enhances through the iteration and reverse engineering exercises.
Objective 5 In the past few weeks, I have gone through the process of studying existing projects, developing iterations, making prototypes and then generate my own design proposal. It is a rational process in which every decision is fully justified. During the interim presentation, I can communicate my design intent and development to client. Their suggestions are very constructive and encourage me to expand on several aspects, such as the interactive potentials and construction details.
Objective 6 I analysed two architecture projects that made use of computation methods. I understood their design intent and how this informs the design development and outcome. For example, the Spanish Pavilion is aimed to exhibit the diversity of Spanish culture, hence the use of irregular hexagons patterns in combination of colour coding is fully justified. I have understood its algorithmic design process, and on this basis, developed my own iterations. Similarly, I analysed the algorithmic design of Aqua Tower, reverse engineered it, and generated a variety of design outcomes by manipulating different parameters and introducing different components.
40
CRITERIA DESIGN
Objective 3 My skills in using Grasshopper have significantly improved. I gained the ability to think three dimensionally and algorithmically to achieve the effects I have in mind. For example, when working with mesh objects and designing he connections between mesh faces. Being able to communicate my computation method is equally important. I have gained this ability when diagramming my Grasshopper definitions and when communicating with my the tutor and my peers in class.
Objective 3 One of the driving ideas of my design proposal is the porosity of air. I have examined the effects of light and shadow through patterning. For example, I have intentionally tested the effect of lighting in my prototypes, by using light-porous materials. Successful prototypes have been taken further to develop my design proposal. Some ‘qualities’ of air are fluidity, porosity, light, floating, my proposed design is aimed to embody these qualities using the surface tessellation techniques generated through previous case studies and prototypes.
Objective 7 My understanding of computational design has improved significantly throughout part B. Initially I struggled with data structures, because it was a relatively new and intricate concept for me. Later, through ‘practice makes perfect’ and learning from the Grasshopper forum, I have gained better understanding in this matter. I also gained more experience in working with mesh, which I seldom work with previously, by trying out Weaverbird components.
Objective 8 After having a few weeks of experience in Grasshopper, I begin to identity more frequently used components or methods. I effectively group and label components for specific performance and use them recurrently. This speeds up my computation design process and gives me more time to discover and experiment with new methods. Also, I often look up other people’s scripts on the forum and transform useful scripts into my language for further use.
CRITERIA DESIGN
41
B.8
42
ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES
Wb Stellate + Piping
Increseing no. of quads of mesh
Reroute mesh
Changing cull pattern
Box morph
Modifying base geometry
CRITERIA DESIGN
In
ncreseing no. of quads of mesh
Adding WbWindow component
Increseing no. of quads of mesh
Using WbSierpinski instead
Adding WbWindow component
Using WbFrame instead
Chaging base geometry
Chaging base geometry
Chaging base geometry
CRITERIA DESIGN
43
Starfish + voronoi
44
Changing no. of lines & curve param.
Changing no. of lines & curve param
Triangular grid
Triangular grid + rotating & moving opening
Millipede tiling attraction
Chaging attraction geometry
Millipede Curved structurefrane
Altering deflection
CRITERIA DESIGN
C
m.
Changing to hexagonal grid
Changing no. of lines & curve param.
Changing no. of lines & curve param.
Square grid
Radial grid
Hexagonal grid + rotating & moving opening
Chaging attraction geometry
Chaging attraction geometry
Lowering pattern density
Using mesh geometry
Increasing inflation level
Increasing inflation level
CRITERIA DESIGN
45
BIBLIOGRAPHY Bigbang studio, ‘About Bigbang studio’, <http://bigbangstudio.com.au/about/> [20 April 2017] Chicago Architecture Foundation, ‘Aqua’, <http://www.architecture.org/architecture-chicago/buildings-ofchicago/building/aqua/> [20 April, 2017] Gang, Jeanne, Reveal : Studio Gang Architects (New York : Princeton Architectural Press, 2011), pp158 Garcia, Mark (2009). Patterns of architecture (London: John Wiley), pp 9 Moussavi, Farshid and Kubo, Michael, The Function of Ornament (Barcelona: Actar, Harvard University, Graduate, p 106 Newcomb, Rexford, Moudlng Assembling Designing: Ceramics in Architecture (Beaver Falls, Penn. : Associated Tile Manufacturers, 1924), pp114 Wurmanm RS ‘Seeing the World as Visual Patterns of Connectivity’, in G Schuller (ed), Designing Universal Knowledge, Lards Muller (Basel), 2009, pp 105
46
CRITERIA DESIGN
LIST OF IMAGES Fig.1. Millard House ‘textile block’ wall. Retrieved from The Function of Ornament, pp 74 Fig.2. Millar House ‘textile block’ detail. Retrieved from The Function of Ornament, pp 76 Fig.3. Spanish pavilion parametric design process. Retrieved from The Function of Ornament, pp 106 Fig.4. Spanish pavilion. Retrieved from https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8e/12/d4/8e12d43bca4 77c1c7e0489b675a9653f.jpg Fig.5. Aqua Tower design parameters. Retrieved from http://studiogang.com/img/VUJqVVNpUVNYMWZ4ZFFlO FBZNWIyQT09/0425-aqua-image-008.png Fig.6. Digital model. Retrieved from http://www.fubiz.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Aqua-Tower2.jpg Fig.7. Plan view. Retrieved from Fig.8. Aqua Tower persepctive view. Retrieved from http://images.adsttc.com/media/images/5012/0065/28ba/0 d55/8100/00e7/large_jpg/stringio.jpg?1361274805 Fig.9-16. Perspective view of the studio interior. Retrieved from bigbangstudio.com.au/specs-features/ Fig.12. Perspective view of the studio interior. Courtesy of Bigbang Studio
CRITERIA DESIGN
47