Huynh_Derek_640183_PartB_Journal by Derek

AIR 2015_SEMESTER 1_CANHUI CHEN DEREK HUYNH_640183

CONTENTS PART B _ DESIGN CRITERIA

RESEARCH FIELD _ GEOMETRY

GRIMSHAW / SOUTHERN CROSS RAILWAY STATION MELBOURNE

CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE PRACTICE / CATALYTIC FURNISHINGS NEW YORK

CASE STUDY 1.0 / LAVA _ GREEN VOID

SUMMARY MATRIX + SPECIES

REFLECTION

SPECULATION

CASE STUDY 2.0 / HG-ARCHITECTURE _ DDOARIMANG

ABOUT

REVERSE ENGINEERING

PARAMETRIC PRINCIPLES OF THIS TECHNIQUE

FINAL OUTCOME OF REVERSE ENGINEERING

TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

ITERATIONS MATRIX + SPECIES

DISCUSSION ON SELECTION CRITERIA AND DESIGN SPECULATION

OPEN BOUNDARY SURFACE

CIRCLE-PACKING

TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

SITE OF INTEREST

IDEAS FOR PROPOSAL

HOW MY TECHNIQUE CAN BE APPLIED TO THE SITE

OPPORTUNITIES FOR INNOVATION

ACHIEVEMENTS OF MY TECHNIQUE

ADVANTAGES OF MY TECHNIQUE

DISADVANTAGES OF MY TECHNIQUE

CONCLUSION 67

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES

ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

72 REFERENCES

B DESIGN CRITERI A

CONCEPTUALISATION 27

RESEARCH FIELD _ GEOMETRY GRIMSHAW / SOUTHERN CROSS RAILWAY STATION MELBOURNE The form-finding nature of Geometry naturally interconnects itself with various other parametric ideologies. Rational forms are influenced by structural findings, passive performative aspects are improved through biomimicry research and expressive design intents are executed with aesthetic-based modelling such as tesselation. Grimshaw’s design for Southern Cross Railway Station exemplifies each of these aspects and showcases the joint effect of combining these research fields in one uniform design intent. In addition to general building typology requirements, the brief asked for a railway station which would provide shade and shelter for commuters, ventilation to extract diesel fumes from trains; an aesthetic that would be interesting to both direct users of the site but also viewers from neighbouring towers; and encourage connectedness between the threshold of the central business district and Docklands.13 Through initially researching natural wind-swept forms such as dunes and snow moguls, the team simulated an array of digital parametric scenarios to create a performance-based roof structure. The resulting fluid nature of the trusses, roof sheeting and panels were comprised of easy-to-manufacture materials and if constructed today, would have allowed efficient offsite pre-fabrication managed by BIM software.3 However, Grimshaw managed to provide solutions to all of the brief’s questions utilising a well-researched, integrated, performance-based structure:

Fig. 1 http://www.zigersnead.com/blog/wp-content/ uploads/2007/10/southern-cross-station-image-10. jpg (accessed 6 April 2015) Fig. 2 http://grimshaw-architects.com/project/ southern-cross-station/ (accessed 6 April 2015) 28 DESIGN CRITERIA

- the undulating pattern would control natural wind flows, passively exhausting the diesel fumes and removing the requirement of conventional, unsustainable, high-power fan machinery; - accompanied by the glass, the overall structure would present an interesting aesthetic for both ground-level viewers and those looking down from skyscrapers; - the uniform, rational structural form would provide consistent shading and shelter throughout while keeping the site open and connected to its surrounds.3 Grimshaw has highlighted the advantages of a geometric-based approach to parametric design where interconnecting various other methodologies have produced integrated structures which are multifunctional and ‘multi-solutional’.13

DESIGN CRITERIA 29

CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE PRACTICE / CATALYTIC FURNISHINGS NEW YORK In addition to maximising material and spatial efficiency, Geometric modelling can also improve performative and functional aspects of design. Contemporary Architecture Practice produced a parametric furnishing range focused on bridging the gap between the technical and cultural.11 That is, a furniture series based on a set of form-finding scripts which seek data of an individual’s characteristics and needs to produce a result. Such information not only finds the furniture’s sizes and proportions to match a specific user, but also researches how they would specifically use the object - their sitting posture, leaning and laying stature, and how these would further relate to their contexts - working, lounging, eating, etc..2 Research into materiality also played a major role in the project. Given the infinite amount of possible formfinding solutions of each person, CAP looked towards a flexible material which could be incorporated into a mass-production process.11 This would maximise flexibility in design and efficiency in manufacturing. Their choices towards fiberglass monocoque shells allowed easy-to-mold products while hybridising this with a series of gels to vary softness of the material.11 Closing the feedback loop between design, fabrication and post-production performance, the source of innovation has shifted from solely the designers to all stakeholders of a project. This cooperative method, binded by digital geometric form-finding, allows for products to be a result of more well-informed design and production decisions with clients directly participating in the process.

Fig. 3 http://www.c-a-p.net/project_furniture.html (accessed 7 April 2015)

30 DESIGN CRITERIA

Fig. 4 Rahim, A. 2005, ‘Performativity: beyond efficiency and optimization in architecture’, in Performative Architecture Beyond Instrumentality, pp. 187-188.

DESIGN CRITERIA 31

CASE STUDY 1.0 / LAVA _ GREEN VOID

SUMMARY MATRIX (GIVEN THE DENSE LINEWORK OF SUBDIVIDED MESHES, OUTCOMES WERE RENDERED

32 DESIGN CRITERIA

TO PROVIDE CLARITY)

DESIGN CRITERIA 33

SPECIES 01 SIMPLE vs COMPLEX

Original

Edit input geometry Edit rest length

Add input geometry Edit pressure

Edit input geometry Edit pressure and rest length

Edit input geometry Edit unary force

Edit input geometry Edit unary force, pressure and rest length

Edit input geometry Add curvepull

Edit input geometry Edit rest length and unary force

34 DESIGN CRITERIA

SPECIES 02 SEPARATION vs UNITY / STATIC vs DYNAMIC

Original

+ Openings

Edit input surface removing planarity

Edit unary force, pressure and rest length

+ Rotation parameter Edit unary force, pressure and rest length

Edit rotation Edit move Edit unary force, pressure and rest length

+ Move parameter Edit unary force, pressure and rest length

Edit rotation Edit move Edit unary force, pressure and rest length DESIGN CRITERIA 35

SPECIES 03 FLUID vs RIGID

Original

Edit input geometry Edit pressure and rest length

Edit input geometry Add unary force Edit pressure and rest length

Edit input geometry Edit pressure and rest length

36 DESIGN CRITERIA

Edit input geometry Edit pressure and rest length

SPECIES 04 FLAT vs VOLUMETRIC / INFLATED vs DEFLATED

Original

Edit pressure and rest length

Edit input geometry Exoskeleton

Edit input geometry Edit exoskeleton

Exit input geometry Edit exoskeleton

Edit input geometry

Edit input geometry Edit exoskeleton

DESIGN CRITERIA 37

REFLECTION

SPECULATION

SELECTION CRITERIA

ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATIONS + DESIGN IDEAS

Functionality - how can it be used, who would want to use it, how might it interact with its surrounds

Given the light nature of the form-found models, there is a much larger potential for my project to be suspended, stretched like a web or even behave with local environmental characteristcs such as sound and wind.

Potential for further development - what other ideas can stem from the current design themes? How can this further my design intents of a project based on Design Futuring principles

GOALS DURING THE ITERATION PROCESS I wanted to experiment between the extremes specifically associated with the core values of LAVA’s Green Void script.8 Stretching these formfinding principles to extremities while also finding a harmonious balance through integration: Static vs. dynamic (geometric parameters) Rigid vs. fluid (rest length parameters) Sharp vs. soft (mesh parameters) Inflated vs. deflated (pressure parameters) Separation vs. unity (anchor point parameters)

ABOUT THE FOUR HIGHLIGHTED OUTCOMES Given the nature of form-finding parametric modelling, I was not focused on the aesthetic aspects of the forms but more so the performative aspects linked to the design and scripting. From this period of experimentation, of looking to the extremes and to the balanced, I was strongly engaged with the outcomes which expressed a combination of the above spectra in a unique manner.

38 DESIGN CRITERIA

Through the manipulation of the primary geometric forms - which could link to specific site-driven design intentions such as incorporating the land and water, nature with environment or inside and outside; and integration of different mesh and relaxation parameters, I could create a structure which possesses its own behaviour. It could have a ‘life of its own’. Continuing from LAVA’s ideology of creating maximum effect from minimal materials I could also continue down the path of rationality and efficiency.8 For example, adding perforations to the material could reduce its structural requirements while responding to or creating new experiential aspects in Merri Creek; whether it be emphasising the threshold between humans and nature, filtering sound from the environment or creating a new ornamentative aesthetic.7 9

DESIGN CRITERIA 39

CASE STUDY 2.0 / HG-ARCHITECTURE _ DDOARIMANG ABOUT The Ddoari is a traditional, hand-crafted Korean household item. Consisting of local straw from rice production, the object served as a symbol of the nation’s strength in local agriculture.4 HG-Architecture’s Ddoarimang takes this object and uses its core aesthetics as a skin, integrating the old with the modern parametric forms and geometric patterning of the pavilion.4 The levitating characteristic of both the overall forms and the circular geometry functions as an artistic sculpture while interacting with viewers through its light and shade effects and seating provisions. Given the importance of the traditional Ddoari straw, HG-Architecture’s focus on combining the old with the new has proven to be quite effective, connecting users of the site back to the nation’s younger days.4 While integrating this experience with simple joints and forms, the design carries on the association of ‘simple lives’ linked to the days of Korea’s agricultural success in rice production.4

Fig. 5 http://livecomponents-ny.com/?p=1214 (accessed 24 April 2015) 40 DESIGN CRITERIA

Fig. 6 http://livecomponents-ny.com/?p=1214 (accessed 24 April 2015)

DESIGN CRITERIA 41

04 FAILED ATTEMPT: USING PATH MAPPER BUT COULD NOT ‘WRAP’ SHIFTED DATA

REVERSE ENGINEERING

02 DIVIDE + INTERPOLATE LINES

01 SET TWO CURVES

04 DATA TREE MANAGEMENT + POLYLINE

03 BOOLEAN + CULL POINTS

03 POPULATE 2D + CULL POINTS OUT OF CURVE

42 DESIGN CRITERIA

06 INPUT TO KANGAROO WITH UNARY FORCE, EQUALIZATION FORCE, BEND FORCE + PULLTO-CURVE

05 CONSTRUCT, WELD + UNIFY MESH

05 CONSTRUCT DELAUNAY MESH

08 CREATE RANDOM LIST, CULL, BOUNDARY SURFACE AND EXTRUDE

07 CREATE CIRCLE FROM THREE TANGENTS

07 FAILED ATTEMPT: DID NOT KNOW ABOUT EQUALIZATION FORCE + BEND FORCE USED TO IMPROVE CIRCLE PACKING DESIGN CRITERIA 43

PARAMETRIC PRINCIPLES OF THIS TECHNIQUE

Circle-packing properties based on initial mesh and geometric form and adjusted through force parameters

Geometric form is a result of the position of curves which can be altered and automatically re-calculated at any time 14

44 DESIGN CRITERIA

Unique patterning output (specifically the triangular mesh which can vary based on design intent) makes use of parametric scripts of dividing data, interpolating, boolean/culling and tree management

Mesh and circle sizes are automatically updated based on parameter inputs 4

FINAL OUTCOME OF REVERSE ENGINEERING

DESIGN CRITERIA 45

TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

ITERATIONS MATRIX (HIGHLY DENSELY SUBDIVIDED MESHES HAVE RESULTED IN ‘DARK’-APPEARING

46 DESIGN CRITERIA

OUTCOMES EVEN WHEN USING MINIMUM THICKNESS LINEWORK)

DESIGN CRITERIA 47

SPECIES 01 ORGANISATION vs RANDOM

VARIABLES: INPUT MESHES (I.E. DELAUNAY TRIANGULATION) RANDOM CULL ATTRACTOR POINTS POINT CHARGE FORCE SPIN IMAGE SAMPLER CIRCLE-PACK TIGHTENING VIA KANGAROO 48 DESIGN CRITERIA

SPECIES 02 SIMPLICITY vs COMPLEXITY

VARIABLES: INPUT GEOMETRIES (XYZ MOVEMENT AND ROTATION) CIRCLE-PACKING TIGHTNESS (EQUALIZATION AND BEND FORCES) REST LENGTH UNARY FORCE PRESSURE

PULL CURVE

DESIGN CRITERIA 49

SPECIES 03 RIGIDITY vs FLUIDITY

VARIABLES: INPUT GEOMETRIES (XYZ MOVEMENT AND ROTATION) CIRCLE-PACKING TIGHTNESS (EQUALIZATION AND BEND FORCES) REST LENGTH UNARY FORCE PRESSURE 50 DESIGN CRITERIA

PULL CURVE MESH MACHINE RELAXATION PANELLING (I.E. CIRCLE PACKING)

SPECIES 04 ORDER vs CHAOS

VARIABLES: INPUT GEOMETRIES INPUT MESHES (I.E. DELAUNAY TRIANGULATION) (XYZ MOVEMENT AND ROTATION) (EQUALIZATION AND BEND FORCES) REST LENGTH UNARY FORCE PRESSURE

PULL CURVE MESH MACHINE RELAXATION MESH SUBDIVISION (CATMULL-CLARK ALGORITHM)

DESIGN CRITERIA 51

SPECIES 05 RELAXATION vs TENSION

VARIABLES: INPUT GEOMETRIES (XYZ MOVEMENT AND ROTATION) CIRCLE-PACKING TIGHTNESS (EQUALIZATION AND BEND FORCES) REST LENGTH UNARY FORCE PRESSURE 52 DESIGN CRITERIA

PULL CURVE MESH MACHINE RELAXATION MESH SUBDIVISION (CATMULL-CLARK ALGORITHM) PANELLING (I.E. CIRCLE PACKING)

DISCUSSION ON SELECTION CRITERIA AND DESIGN SPECULATION The outcomes I was most interested in strongly reflected ideas focused around mesh relaxation and parametric form-finding. My favourite from the Species 04 range, for example, was a result of complete parametric or ‘heavy’ calculations from start (Populate 2D and Voronoi) to end (Kangaroo mesh output and Catmull-Clark Algorithm). The other two iterations which appealed most to me (from Species 02 and Species 05) were a result of balance between innovations in the digital realm and real-life architecturally-applicable ideas. Both iterations I see as being canopies (although contrasting from each other in their structural formats where one is tensile and the other is compression) which have a strong association with my ‘take’ on the design brief. These points include the relationship between the structure and air, exploration in delivering digital parametric capabilities into reality and creating a site-responsive solution to my own agenda. While the iteration from Species 02 evokes feeligns towards open-ness, an inviting and communal environment, the other iteration from Species 05 I feel tends towards cosiness, intimacy and discovery. I can later apply these ideas to assist me in portraying certain emotions, atmospheres and aesthetics in my project development and refinment stages.

DESIGN CRITERIA 53

TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES OPEN BOUNDARY SURFACE The use of tabs to join panelling elements allowed for increase construction efficiency while also providing a new design aesthetic. From this idea, I decided to use thinner material (black ivory paper) to emphasise the linearity and tessellative nature of the prototype while also finding folding the material for connection tabs easier (as explained below). Furthermore, the selection of a darker hue has emphasised the light and shadow effects created by the tabs and openings within the centre of each panel. Experimenting with various angles of perspective and lighting conditions, I believe the subtle undulation effect combined with the shadow lines of the tabs creates much more interest than a flat equivalent. I found it most convenient to unroll, flatten and add connection tabs to the grasshopper model before going back into Rhino - this was an extremely efficient process given the parametric nature of dealing with a large quantity of information through simple inputs and outputs. These advantages have encouraged me to pursue fabrication as a means of producing the resources to assemble rather than hand-crafting.6

54 DESIGN CRITERIA

CIRCLE-PACKING I believe a strong aesthetic of levitation, simplicity and movement is present in both the research precedents and the intention of my prototype. As a result, I chose to conceal the joints between two plys of thick boxboard, similar to HG-Architecture’s use of solid circles in streams of structural importance in their pavilion.4 I chose boxboard as it was firm enough to have pins inserted without splitting or ripping as is the case with timbers like plywood or thin cardboards. From this exercise I believe fabrication allows the most flexibility and precision in cutting while providing a direct translation of digital model information into reality. Drafting would otherwise be inefficient in translating information of all circular panels and their subtlely adjusted angles in a real life application. Finally, I decided to attempt to add more interaction with the ‘cladding’ prototype by adding axes of rotation to circles to enhance the effects of movement and levitation.

DESIGN CRITERIA 55

TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

SITE MAP / CERES COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT PARK SITE OF INTEREST BOUNDED IN RED BOX SCALE 1:2000

56 DESIGN CRITERIA

SITE MAP / MERRI CREEK SCALE 1:25000 DESIGN CRITERIA 57

Fig. 7 http://www.ceres.org.au/sites/default/files/ CERES_Site_Map.jpg (accessed 30 April 2015) 58 DESIGN CRITERIA

SITE OF INTEREST Not in main axes of circulation Connectivity - can interconnect with roles of Learning Centre, Community Gardens, Dam and EcoHouse to improve the value of the whole Valued as a functional zone - currently an outdoor amphitheater and public communal and event space

SITE PHOTOS DESIGN CRITERIA 59

EXISTING GOALS ON SITE (CERES)

CERES MISSION OBJECTIVES1 Address the causes of climate change Promote social wellbeing and connectedness Build local and global equity

CERES AIMS TO1 To prompt actions that will reduce water usage To appreciate water as a precious natural resource To educate the whole CERES community about ways to reduce water usage both indoors and outdoors

ACTIVITIES ON THE SITE1 Gardening Educational school excursions

60 DESIGN CRITERIA

RESPONSIVE DESIGN AGENDA

ENCOURAGE AND INCREASE SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES ON THE SITE BY

IMPLEMENTING A WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WHICH

SHOWCASES AND EDUCATES TO THE COMMUNITY AND VISITING PUBLIC THE BENEFITS OF AN INTEGRATED DESIGN WHICH BENEFITS EXISTING SITE USE

BEFORE

AFTER DESIGN CRITERIA 61

62 DESIGN CRITERIA

IDEAS FOR PROPOSAL Interactive structure - operable components such as rotatable panels could be used to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;transformâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the structure in different climate conditions Rain-capturing form which harvests rainwater and funnels into a storage outlet - this interconnects the site with its neighbours as mentioned earlier - Dam (where water can be stored), Communal Gardens (where water can be used) and Learning Centre (where the water management process can be seen and act as an educational tool.

Undecided between two pavilion styles. TOP (ITERATION A): open, inviting, communal, public, exposed, fluid, light BOTTOM (ITERATION B): closed, explorative, cozy, semi-public, intimate, semirigid, heavier I later thought - why not design one that expresses both styles? (more on following page)

HOW MY TECHNIQUE CAN BE APPLIED TO THE SITE CERES Community Environment Park offers several key design and constructability opportunities which are well suited to my technique: Large trees for tensile structure suspension Open spaces which can emphasise the play between light and shadow

DESIGN CRITERIA 63

STAGE 01 - SUNNY (ITERATION A)

STAGE 04 - RAIN BEGINNING TO FALL

STAGE 02 - RAIN BEGINNING TO FALL

STAGE 05 - DOWNPOUR (ITERATION B) Blue arrows = diversion of rain water from top of canopy into storage for later uses such as gardening, etc.

STAGE 03 - RAIN BEGINNING TO FALL

64 DESIGN CRITERIA

OPPORTUNITIES FOR INNOVATION I thought it was quite interesting how in several projects, including those I researched deeply, used form-finding processes such as Kangaroo to dynamically simulate a digital structure in an environment but produced a final outcome which was static. Force parameters, in particular Unary Force for Kangaroo, simulate loads applied on a structure at a given direction. I want to challenge this ideology and create a structure which can, rather be a static product of dynamic modelling, be a dynamic product of dynamic modelling. Given Unary Force simulates gravity, I figured in a rain event, the ‘Unary Force’ in reality would increase - how would this affect the model? From this point, I simulated a structure which could dynamically transform from one pavilion style (Iteration A) to the other pavilion style (Iteration B) depending on the weather.

ACHIEVEMENTS OF MY TECHNIQUE CONCEPTUAL Light membrane-like structure with the ability to transform given certain environmental conditions Open - no supporting members required directly underneath structure “Organic”/Soft - ability to fabricate planar surfaces which form an overall design which appears fluid TECHNICAL Structure and ornament are unified Most efficient structural outcome is found through complex computational processes DESIGN CRITERIA 65

ADVANTAGES OF MY TECHNIQUE Minimal structure footprint Maximum material efficiency Unique form given by computational modelling Newer constructability constraints given the opportunity to model-prefabricate-assemble rather than model-document-build

DISADVANTAGES OF MY TECHNIQUE Material constraints - detailed research into compressive/tensile properties and bending properties of materials will solve this challenge I have already prototyped rigid construction details using firmer materials but will investigate into tensile materials and their specific applications. Given the complex nature of forces in reality, it will be very challenging to simulate the intended environment further prototyping will assist. Structural integrity based on surrounding structures (trees) - secondary site visit focused on examining structural integrity of trees in site of interest will reduce chance of structural failure upon completion of assemblage

66 DESIGN CRITERIA

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES Through researching a range of precedents, I found that many firms were attracted to parametric design for its strong computational abilities leading to efficiency and higher accuracy in the design process. The integration of ornamentation with structure for example, highlights the new abilities where programmers can focus on specific characteristics of a material, form, space or functional criteria; develop and refine them; and eventually unify it all as a whole.6 13

The large quantity of outcomes driven by parametric scenarios can efficiently be reviewed by a design team, culling those of lesser interest and further refining those of higher potential. Whether it be Herzog and de Meuron’s project-specific scripts, or Foster+Partners’ environmental simulation programs or SHoP architect’s fabrication software, designers have entered a realm where their focus can be solely on the conceptual end or technical end or a balance of both in the spectrum.9 5 Firms are in a position to propose designs which have already been accurately simulated to perform as specified by clients and, in the process, create a feedback loop.11 13

I have personally found myself improving vastly in the parametric and computational design realm over the past few months (my Case Studies). Familiarising myself with plug-ins such as Kangaroo, I have acquired the skills to create forms primarily reliant on computational inputs (Obj. 2 and Obj. 3). The mesh relaxation outcomes that follow can be efficiently adjusted to meet my design intentions whether it be aesthetic, philosophical or technical (Case Study 2.0) (Obj. 6 and Obj. 7). Furthermore, the force inputs of Kangaroo have allowed me to simulate environments where real-life material effects and forces such as gravity exist (Obj. 3 and Obj. 4). Consequently leading to research and experimentation into joints, detailing and materiality, I have been pushed in a direction where the design process strays from the traditional sense of designing, drafting and contracting to a designing-feedback-prototype loop followed by fabrication and assembly. My technical knowledge of data management in Grasshopper has grown immensely over this time. This has allowed me to push the boundaries with my designs given the efficiency of changing few components of a script to re-align iterations towards newer design intentions (Obj. 6-8). Experimenting with Case Studies has allowed me to specialise in a specific technique, examining how data flows and functions will stretching it to its limits. In this process, I have been able to develop my own understanding of the flow of components and create my own scripts (Obj. 8) as seen in the latter stages of my Case Studies. Applying all of this new information in the context of a design studio, I have been introduced to new methods of approaching briefs and developing agendas (Obj. 1). The potentialities associated with parametric design and new design processes has led to new design possibilities such as the structures I have prototyped and proposed for Merri Creek.

DESIGN CRITERIA 67

ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

68 DESIGN CRITERIA

DESIGN CRITERIA 69

70 DESIGN CRITERIA

DESIGN CRITERIA 71

REFERENCES CERES 2015, Welcome to CERES, viewed 26 April 2015, <http://www.ceres.org.au/>. 1

Contemporary Architecture Practice 2012, Contemporary Architecture Practice, viewed 7 April 2015, <http://www.c-a-p.net/project_furniture.html>. 2

Grimshaw 2015, Southern Cross Station < Project | Grimshaw Architects, viewed 6 April 2015, <http:// grimshaw-architects.com/project/southern-crossstation/>. 3

HG-Architecture 2015, HG-Architecture | Live Components, viewed 24 Aprile 2015, <http:// livecomponents-ny.com/?p=1214>. 4

Holden, K., Pasquarelli, G., Sharples, Ch., Sharples, Co. and Sharples W. 2012, shop architects: out of practice, Thames & Hudson Pty Ltd., London. 5

Kolarevic, B. and Klinger K. 2008, Manufacturing Material Effects: Rethinking Design and Making in Architecture, Routledge, New York, pp. 6–24. 6

Kolarevic, B. 2014, ‘Computing the Performative’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, ed by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Routledge, London, pp. 103–111. 7

LAVA 2015, Green Void, viewed 21 April 2015, <http:// www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/>. 8

Moussavi, F. and Kubo, M. 2006, The Function of Ornament, Actar, Barcelona, pp. 5-14. 9

Peters, B. 2013, ‘Realising the Architectural Intent: Computation at Herzog & De Meuron’, in Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 56-61. 10

72 DESIGN CRITERIA

Rahim, A. 2005, ‘Performativity: beyond efficiency and optimization in architecture’, in Performative architect Beyond Instrumentality, Spon Press, New York, pp. 177-192. 11

Tedeschi, A. 2014, AAD_Algorithms-Aided Design, Le Penseur, Brienza. 12

Whally, A. of Grimshaw 2005, ‘Product and process: performance-based architecture’, in Performative Architecture Beyond Instrumentality, Spon Press, New York, pp. 22-40. 13

Woodbury, R. 2014, ‘How Designers Use Parameters’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Routledge, London, pp. 153–170. 14