Politecnico di Milano
School of Architecture Urban Planning Construction Engineering Bachelor of Science in Architectural Design A.A 2019/2020 Dilara Tol 879717
ARCHITECTURE
DILARA TOL
DILARA TOL
T: +905337053270 E: dilaratol@hotmail.com A:Vadistanbul Terasevler
SKILLS Photoshop Illustrator
EDUCATION 2012-2016
High School Ted Antalya College
2016-2020
Bachelor of Science Politecnico di Milano, Architectural Design
Indesign Xd Autocad MS Word
2018
International Summer School Politecnico Di Milano
(Open City- from ecologic landscape to architectural design/ Landscape 4.0)
MS Excel Sketchup Revit
About me I am an undergraduate architecture student from Politecnico di Milano. Throughout my academic career I have gained decent knowledge about the philosophy of design and learned how to approach a design task with it. That’s one of the reasons I consider myself not only as an undergraduate junior architect, but also as a designer. I am passionate, hardworking and an easy adaptable person. In every aspect of life I always aim to make the best out of the situations, no matter what the circumstances are or will be.
FinalCut Pro LANGUAGES German (Native) Turkish (Native)
PERSONAL ACHIEVEMENTS 2020
Home - Design Your Dream, individual architecture competition, (Top 50) 2010 - 2012
Association Board of the Royal Schools of Music ABRSM Piano, Grade 4 - passed with distinction Piano, Grade 5 - passed with merit Piano, Grade 7 - passed with distinction
English (Fluent) Italian (Beginner)
2015
Model United Nations - simulation based education Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract As soon as a structure turns a space into a human scale space, that space becomes a part of our personal world. But what is the role of structure in creating and identifying architectural space? Structure is the design of forms with different materials that transmit the horizontal and vertical loads to the ground and provide the necessary static stability to a building. Thus understanding of the structure as well as the architect demands elegance, taste, art and creativity. The major theme of this portfolio is the relationship between structural design and architectural design. The study is that aesthetic considerations can be one of the main components in order to achieve successful architecture by creating a good relation between the architecture and structure. The selected projects represented in this portfolio reflect various relationships between the architecture and structure. The structural requirements imposed the form and the structure is admired as part of the visual language.
INDEX
01
Parco Maciachini Residential and landscape architecture ‘Structure as Visual Ornament’
02 03
Greenhouse Dreamhouse Design your dream
‘Structure accepted’
Archi Expo Dubai 2020, Italian Pavilion ‘Structure as Architecture’
Parco Maciachini 01 ‘structure as visual ornament’ v
L - Urban scale
M - Collective scale
S - Individual scale
Area A, residential building Redesigning the urban landscape and using the architecture to create attention and maximize the potential of the whole area is the main concept of Parco Maciachini. We can see examples of the same design concept throughout Milan such as the Liberty of trees with Bosco Verticale or City Life with Tre Torri. Parco Maciachini differs from the examples above in having a continious relation between the residential building and landscape architecture
Every apartment has a spacious terrace added to the main volume. The balconies are arranged specifically to create cros views and double height spaces to encourage the relations between neighbours.
vv
The densee volume is built up with load bearing walls and generous arch shaped window openings.
The volume is surrounded with a light structure in order to create a space for interaction and make the dense appearance of the load bearing volume lighter.
1st, 6th Floor
2nd, 5th Floor
3rd, 7th Floor
4th Floor 1:200
1:500
Area B, landscape architecture
Metropolitan Center,
Hard ground pavement, high circulation, less greenary
Main centers
1:100 Section, Metropoltan Center
Link / Merging Spot, Hard floor pavement
Axis
Social activities, connection point, multifunction structure
1:100 Section, Link
Main path
Final path
Domestic Center Quiet spot, dense greenary less hard ground, less circulation
Green areas
People flow
1:100 Section, Domestic Center
Metropolitan Center It is the first area you approach after exiting the metro stop and passing through area A. The circulation is automatically higher in this part of the project area since it is both visualy and physically easily approached. That’s why in this center the design provides mainly hard ground pavement and social functions such as a skatepark, basketball court or dog park.
1:1000
Domestic Center This area is surrounded by a quiet residential neighbourhood and is more of a quiet spot of the whole project area. The design keeps the hard floor pavement at its minimum and the greenary at its maximum in order to have less circulation and give this area the sense of alienation, peace and intimacy
1:1000
Link The so called ‘link’ is the merging spot beetween the metropolitan and domestic center. It is possible to approach this area from multiple directions. which makes it the heart of the project. By keeping the acceses to the area and the passage from the metropolitan to thve domestic area empty, two structures are designed in order to define the space. Those two structures are built for the main purpose of interaction but is adaptable to variable occasions, such as christmas markets, concerts or bazaars.
Tensile Tensile structure structure
Marketplace Marketplace
Services
Double Double height height
Piazza Piazza
Green space
Enclosed space space
Corridor
Seating Seating
space
Corridor
Shaded Shaded space space
02
Greenhouse Dreamhouse Design your dream ‘structure accepted’
02 Greenhouse Dreamhouse
The task was to design your dream house wherever and however wanted. IDEA Facing the conditions of 2020 what we believed in has shifted enourmosly and what we didn’t take for granted became the most important. Our houses became the places where we needed to find the best circumstances to shape a healthy life around. In everyones heart there is an urge for being free without limitations while having the feeling of security at the same time.. My concept was born from these thoughts. DESIGN The concept is to frame the interior space without having visual as well as spiritual limits between the outside and the inside. In order to achieve that the envelope of the house is totally transparent made out of glass. The interior is clearly divided into a living and working area which you can approach by choosing different directions when you enter the house. In order to have the desired safe outside conditions, a botanical welcomes you n the second level. To provide the necessary conditions for the plants and turn the exterior into interior the house is surrounded by a greenhouse structure. With this apprach the house serves you different spaces for different needs at any time. 1st, 2nd Floor 1:100
03
Archi
Expo Dubai 2020, Italian pavilion ‘structure as architecture’
03 Archi Pavilion
ARCHES
The task was to design a temporary pavilion representing Italy that could be assembled quickly and disassembled after the exhibition. CONCEPT ARCHI is the exploration of the iconic Italian Arch, in a modern way. We chose to explore arches, as they were a significant contribution to architecture since the 2nd millennium BC. In particular arches were significant during the Roman empire, as they were used in bridges, aqueducts, gates and later in monumental buildings such as the Colosseum and in dome structures like the Pantheon. The ingenuity of the arch was adapted in architecture all over the world, and as different styles developed the arch gained many different forms. To represent Italy through a pavilion in the Dubai 2020 expo, we chose the traditional round arch shape to represent classical Italian architecture. STRATEGY We adapted the idea of repeating a variety of arches in a linear way to create different spaces, but also crossing them over to divide spaces and guide the circulation of the space. Different spaces are created by the continuously changing width of the arch which creates a very strong visual effect.
THE PORTICO
DIFFERENT SHAPES to cover a large span
REPETITION forms various spaces
Aquedocts by romans
Ponte del Diavolo - Lucca
1:400
Ca Granda - Milano
Constantine Arch - Rome 4
Mondadori (Oscar Niemeir) Milano
1:400
STRATEGY
MATERIAL
We decided to use prefabrication techniques and designed an abacus of 10 arches that can be prefabricated and quickly assembled together. This range of arches gave us a good variety of modules to work with the create interesting ‘tunnel’ spaces within the pavilion so that spaces gradually get wider and taller or more narrow and shovrter depending on the desired effect. This is the result shown in the exploded axonometric. Using this modular system allowed us to a system of prefabricated pieces, that connect together using various connection techniques. The main elements of the pavilion are the straight panels which have mainly four different sized arches.
The panels are made of a steel structural frame which is cast with concrete. The panels are prefabricated and come onsite with all the materials cast in modular panels.
In order to keep the panels straight standing we designed cross arches which follow a diagonal path. The cross arches not only give support from a different axis but they also give the pavilion a three dimensional aesthetic.
We have several reasons for using precast concrete. One them is the relation between Italy and concrete usage. Back in the history the romans used their own concrete –opus caementicium- for buildings, bridges, aqueducts and viaducts for nearly two centuries. Since we were inspired by all these structures listed above we chose concrete in order to represent the concept even more. One other reason for choosing concrete is to have a simple but strong look at the same time and since our aim was to create a pavilion that could be disassembled afterwards easily, concrete seemed to be the best solution to for us.
1:200
1:200
1:20
1:40
1
Reinforced Foundation Wire Fabric@150
2
Exposed Polished Concrete Floor
3 Vertical Connection Continuity System RS (stylcomp) 4 5
Horizontal Connection Continuity System RS (stylcomp) Reinforcement Wire Fabric @150
6 Precast High Performance Concrete Arch 7 Hollow Core Slab 1350x3300x200mm 8 Floating Floor System 100mm 9 Precast Concrete Column 10 ETFE Roof Bubble 11 Floor 12 Steel Connection Roof Structure-Cladding 13 Precast Light Reinforced Concrete Slab 300mm 14 Precast Light Reinforced Concrete Stairs 15 Crossed Precast Concrete Arch
1:100
CONSTRUCTION METHOD As it is clearly visible in the detail drawing the cross arches are connected to the straight panels with the steel structure inside. The system for the junction is called the Continuity Connection RS which is a seismic resistant system for the connection of concrete elements. It guarantees the direct transfer of forces between two rebars. The system realizes a perfect emulation of cast in place structures. Thanks to an innovative adjustment system the Continuity Connection RS allows the installation of precast elements without the need for temporary supporting or bracing works. An innovative result obtained by an adjustable device (adjustment foot) interposed between the dry concrete elements to be connected. The connection between the concrete items is then completed by a “wet� seal.
Structure defining Space Space is the beginning and ending of architecture and the space is defined by the form it contains. The aesthetic and form of the architecture is the first and main impact on the audience’s impression. Form is the key element for the first impression while being the final output of the whole design process. It is the first thing to imagine but the last thing to see. Yet, it is likewise more than that. One of the tools for architectural existence as form is the structure. The most successful building designs are the ones of which the architect has good proficiency and knowledge about structural requirements and has a comprehension of the structural system’s behaviour. Vitruvius believed that an architect should focus on three central themes when preparing a design for a building: firmitas (strength), utilitas (functionality), and venustas (beauty) – that is, it must be solid, useful and beautiful. Many theorists came along with different systems but the Vitruvian breakdown nevertheless still provides a solid basis for the understanding and criticism of a building. ‘Utilitas’ is perhaps the clearest quality of Vitruvian to appreciate. It refers to the functionality and is the requirement that the spaces created with the architecture provide the requirements for the purpose the building was intended. ‘Firmitas’ is the most basic but most crucial quality a building requires. It’s the ability to preserve its physical features and survive in the world.
The quality ‘venustas’ is the most challenging one since every architect has their own perception about beauty. Venustas is the term for the aestethic characteristics of those minds who come in touch with it. Different factors create the sense of beauty for individuals in a different way. The choice of form, textures and colour, the way aesthetic problems are tackled and the aesthetic qualities of the shapes chosen are some of the generators for the quality of beauty. The term aesthetic can be defined by various subsystems such as visible dimensions, hidden dimensions and behaviour of the structural system in relation with the architecture. It has been understood from a study of successful works in the world that if one of these subcategories works the outputs become the most successful buildings in the world. The simplest way to describe the main aim of an architectural structure is to say that it is the part of a building resisting the loads that are imposed on it. More precisely, it transfers the horizontal and vertical loads to the ground in order to create the required stability for the architecture to survive and not collapse. Two of the Vitruvian qualities are strongly corelated with the structural system of the design which makes the structure fundamental. The structure has a major influence on the architectural design considering that it provides firmitas (strength) and utilitas (functionality) to the architecture. Without the structure there would be no strength which would make it impossible to create functionality or beauty. From this, we clearly understand that the structure is the starting point of the whole architectural design process.
Without structure no space can be defined and with no space no form could be created. Many architects have the opinion that the development of the forces’ flow could be effective in the aesthetic structure of construction. The extent attention to the structure of the building will inevitably lead to beauty. Creating a successful link between architecture and structure became popular by creating the venustas (beauty) with the interaction between the architecture and structure mainly. Structure is the design of forms and is architected before being calculated. That’s why the structural part of the design process is not only the concern of the structural engineer but also the architects. Throughout history the approach between architecture and its structure varies tremendously. Studying the evolution of structural and architectural harmony and the way civilizations attempted to achieve the form of the structure throughout historical periods, make us achieve the components and requirements for an aesthetic structural design. Taking the Egyptians and their pyramids as an example we see that their designs structure is directly related to strength and stability. They created the architecture calculating the stability only which created the final product as an architectural piece defined by its load bearing quantities. On contrary to the modern era the main role of the structure is achieved by the dimensions and proportions in order to stabilize. On the other hand a lot of designs were demolished throughout time because of the lack of relevance between the attempted design and its required structural strength to sustain its form in order to survive.
On the other hand a lot of designs were demolished throughout time because of the lack of relevance between the attempted design and its required structural strength to sustain its form in order to survive. Nowadays in the modern era, the structures of the building is presented and used as the key element in architectural designs. The attention to create qualitative and beautiful optimal space and the creation of spatial consistency slowly but surely became the main concern of designer. This change in attitude towards design priorities shifted due to the development of technological and scientific inventions. The specialization of science and high technology is highly important in various fields of engineering as well as in the growing gap between architecture and structure. The type of the space and structure relationship became an important aspect in creating architectural spaces and its effect on the audience. The architectural space and sometimes the architecture itself is born out of the structure. As an example, for this idea we could show the Crystal Palace and the Eifel Tower in both of which the architectural space is defined by its structures. We can’t escape from the fact how much the relation between structure and architecture has developed between the two eras mentioned above. Both the Crystal Palace and the pyramids have exceptionally good structural behaviours and are both created in different ways. The strength and stability of pyramids were achieved with massive materials making the whole design bulky, whereas in the Crystal Palace the aim was to use as light materials as possible. It’s even being said that the air surrounding the Crystal Palace or Eifel Tower is heavier than the structure itself.
In this portfolio, the aesthetic components of structural design are defined and specified in interaction with the architectural form as it is in the two examples listed above. Structure may be related in a wide range of ways to architecture. It can be extremes of complete domination of the architecture by the structure to total negligence of structural requirements in both the form and aesthetic treatment of the building. This infinity of possibilities can be subcategorized as ornamentation of structure, structure as ornament, structure as architecture, structure as form generator, structure accepted and structure ignored. The projects in this portfolio represent various relationships between the architecture and structure. In the first project the structural requirements affect the form of the architecture and is used to create primarily a visual sense of continuation between specific areas throughout the same design. The structural requirements imposed the form and the structure is admired as a part of the visual language which includes this project in the subcategory ‘structure as ornament’. In the second project the structure-based appearance is inevitable since it is the fundamental element for the project to keep its identity (structure accepted). The relation between the structure and architecture is carefully studied and designed in order to have a well working project, whereas in the third project the structure is the productive form which makes the structure the architecture. Using the structure to create perspective defines the space in this project. The structure is the element creating form, space and architecture. Therefore, it doesn’t need to work with an architecture since it’s the architecture itself.
This research has come to the conclusion that constructive requirements, along with functional requirements and aesthetic issues, bring together an unmatched effect. Based on what is discussed so far, the identity of the architectural space depends on its structure. The aim of the structure and its geometry is the factor of the space design. It is necessary in creating human space to design the interaction of space and structure carefully. As mentioned above the structure is accepted or neglected in different designs but the outcome of this is surely that the most successful architecture would be the one in relation with the structure. Summary of theories that are mentioned with a number of foreign theorists on the relationship between form and structure and research findings. Herbert Marcuse: Human being is in technology domination. (Marcuse, 1971) Sullivan: Form follows function (Mozhini, 2015) Edward Allen: In the book of form and forces, as it goes from the name of the book, it tries to arrange the complex forms of architecture, the effect of the force on the structure and the distribution of forces in the form. (Edward, 2009) Fantin: It offers the interpretation of an internal structure, the pillar plays a key role in this building (experimental intuition) (Friedney, 2016)
Bibliography ^Mona Aziziand, Zohreh Torabi, “The Role of Structure in the Aesthetic Creation of Architectural Space.” , Current World Environment, 15 January 2015, 15 September 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE.10.Special-Issue1.18> ^3Angus J. Macdonald, “Structure and Architecture”, Architectural Press, Oxford, Boston, 1994 ^Paul Preiss, “Form, Structure and Function – Architecture is not emergent”, An association for All IT Architects”, 2016 <https://itabok.iasaglobal.org/form-structure-and-function-architecture-is-not-emergent/> ^Nejati Fatemeh, Habib Farah, “The Role of Structure in the Aesthetic Creation of Architectural Space.” , Researchgate, April 2018 <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332709617_The_Role_of_Structure_in_the_Aesthetic_Creation_of_Architectural_Space> ^Vitruvius Pollio <http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Vitruvius.aspx> ^Otto Neugebauer, “A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy”, New York-Heidelberg-Berlin, 782–784, 1975 ^"Architects / Building Engineers in Japan" (PDF). The Japan Architectural Education and Information Center. p. 5. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-11-24. Retrieved 2014-08-16 ^Ed. Ingrid Rowland with illustrations by Thomas Noble Howe, “Vitruvius. Ten Books on Architecture” ,Cambridge, . Cambridge University Press,1999