1
3
Course Outline THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN CAIRO DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE COURSE OUTCOMES: After completing the course, students should be able to: AENG 3553: ARCH 3553 Architectural Design Studio 2 1. Appropriately develop abilities to use graphic skills, fundamental design skills, formal COORDINATORS: Dr. Magda Mostafa Dr. Alia Fadel
TEACHING ASSISTANTS:
Arch. Ezzat Ahmed, Arch. Salma Nassar, Arch. Soha Youssef, Arch. Zeina Lasheen,Arch. Hana Shaltout
ordering systems and critical thinking skills as an individual within a collaborative environment as part of the architectural design process. (fulfillment of UIA objectives 1,3) 2. Analyze, understand and develop the ability to work appropriately within the framework of architectural precedents. (fulfillment of UIA objectives 2,6,12,16) 3. Understand and develop the ability to appropriately apply the study of human behavior, and users needs to the design process. (fulfillment of UIA objectives 6,7) 4. The ability to develop the role a building plays within its context and translate that role into functions and operations. (fulfillment of UIA objective 6) 5. Understand the impact of site conditions on the architectural decision making process and the ability to apply these criteria to building configuration and form generation. (fulfillment of UIA objective 4,5) 6. Have a preliminary understanding of simple structural systems, building materials and assemblages and their role in the form generation process, through experimentation with manual model making. (fulfillment of UIA objective 8)
Prerequisite: AENG 2512, AENG 2552. Six-hour studio period. Studio on form, space and composition. Students are required to think of architecture from the “outside-in” approach, with focus being placed on the form of architecture and its composition. An emphasis will be placed on the compositional aspects of spatial design- expression, language, intent, dynamics etc. and their use as tools of concept and functional accommodation. Three-dimensional models play an important role in design development and students will be encouraged to think spatially. Issues of meaning, message and symbolism will be discussed and applied. A critical method of working with architectural precedent through analysis of various works of architects, as well as contemporary design theory, will be reviewed and analyzed to be used as a premise for design. GRADING POLICY: Grade 1. Project 1A 5% Research, 25% Project Made In Egypt- The Global Village: Thinking Big, PREREQUISITES BY TOPICS: Building Small: The objective of this first project is to expand students conceptualization of design • Architectural drawing. beyond functionality and form-making, to include the deeper values of the role architecture can • Fundamentals of architectural design. play in society. Through the investigation of contemporary regional architectural language, in the • Influence of climatic factors on architectural design. context of the current socially conscious architectural movement worldwide, students will work to • Components of buildings. develop an understanding of the intersection of these languages. These intersections will form the • Behavioral analysis, activity mapping, and programming and their role in the architectural decision conceptual underpinning of the design phase of the project, which begins with a comprehensive making process and inter-disciplinary understanding of the forces influencing architectural decision making on a REFERENCES: given site within the city of Cairo. Students will work in groups for the research phase of the project, • Mills, C., 2005 Designing with Models: A Studio Guide to Making and Using Architectural Design and individually for the design phase. Models, 2nd edition, John Wiley and Sons Grade 2 Project 1B: 10% • Clark, R., Pause, M., 2005 “Precedents in Architecture”, John Wiley and Sons, NJ Experiential Architecture of the Elements: This project aims at investigating the inter-relationship • Elam, K., 2011 “The Geometry of Design” Princeton Architectural Press between materiality and form, and form and the elements- light, air, volume, space and user, as • Frederick, M., 2007 “101 Things I learned in Architecture School”, MIT Press, 2007 applied to the design created by students in part A of their project. Based on the anti-visio-centric • Ching, F.D.K., 2012 “Building Construction Illustrated”, Wiley Publishing theory that architecture is to be experienced in a multi-sensory way, students work with a single • Alexander, C., 1977 “A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction” Oxford University Press material to create structures and forms, and develop a deeper understanding of the qualities of • Lepik, A., 2010 “Small Scale, Big Change: New Architectures of Social Engagement”, MOMA space and experience. This helps pave the way qualitatively for future investigations of the more • A selection of video documentaries and course links are uploaded on blackboard and should be quantitative performance of these natural elements. The project is primarily through physical referred to throughout the semester. modeling and photography in studio in light of a series of guided experimentations and discussions. Grade 3 15% Design Portfolio and Comprehensive Final Presentation Grade 4 10% Mid term project READINGS: Grade 6 5% Class participation and reflection • Pallasmaa, J., 2013, “The Eyes of the Skin”, John Wiley & Sons, NY. Grade 7 30% Overall COP assessment as represented by and assessed through the portfolio • Pallasmaa, J., 2007 “New Architectural Horizons”, Architectural Design, 77(2), pp. 16-23 • Pallasmaa, J., 1994, “Six Themes for the New Millenium”, The Architectural Review, 194(1169), p. All assignments and projects will be discussed in studio and the students will be graded according to 74 • Pallasmaa, J., 2006, “Eyes of the Skin- Architecture and the Senses”, Architecture : the AIA Journal, their attendance, participation, and generation of new ideas. The majority of the project grade will be placed on the student’s ability to develop his ideas from concept to finished product, integrating 95(3), information and critiques at each stage. Students are expected to refer to relevant issues from their pp.28-29 discussions, readings and lectures during critiques and throughout assignments. • Selected readings from Unwin, S. 2003 “Analysing Architecture”, NY: Routledge • Selected readings from Unwin, S., 2012 “Exercises in Architecture: Learning to Think Like an Students must receive a minimum grade of 60% in each of their individual works in order to pass the course, regardless of their attendance, portfolio grade and group work. They must also receive Architect”, NY: Routledge • Tsukamoto, Y., Kaijima, M., “Behaviorology” in “Atelier Bow-Wow: Behaviorology” by Fujimori, T., a minimum of 60% in their overall Course Outcome Proficiency assessment as well as 60% of each outcome criteria individually to pass the course. Rubrics are included at the end of this document. Rizzoli • Magda Mostafa. “Learning from Cairo: What Informal Settlements Can (and Should) Teach Us” 14 Mar 2014. • ArchDaily. Accessed 07 Sep 2014. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=486294> • Selected readings from Alexander, C., 1997 “A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction” The grades will be assigned according to the following criteria: Oxford University Press Students will be expected to gather reading material appropriate to their research subject using Grade F: student failed to complete the work for the course and/or failed to meet the minimum required competency in all the required course outcomes Library OneSearch and the class’ LibGuide. Grade D: student completed the work for the course at a passing level of competency in all required course outcomes COURSE OBJECTIVE: Create an understanding of geometric and form generation principles and their role in accommodating Grade C: student completed the work for the course and illustrated basic acceptable competencies in all requiredc ourse outcomes functional needs within the multi-disciplinary, architectural context. Foster form generation and geometric manipulation skills to best satisfy multi-disciplinary architectural Grade B: student completed the work for the course at a high quality and mastered new skills. Many literal issues from discussions, readings and lectures were applied. requirements. Grade A: student exceeded expectations of the course and applied many of the design issues from
their discussions, readings and lectures to their course work. Grade R: As part of the Architectural Department’s assessment policy, each piece of design work submitted at any point by a student must fulfill the basic threshold pass requirements of that level. Failure to pass this threshold will result in the reward of an “R” grade and a request to resubmit the work until threshold performance is met. Work receiving an “R” grade will not be reviewed at that time until it is resubmitted at a satisfactory level of fulfillment of the design threshold rubric of that level. (see end of document for the threshold rubric)
ATTENDANCE POLICY:
Students in all courses at the Department of Architecture are required to abide by the University approved Attendance Policy. The following specifics pertain to the course: - Students shall attend and participate in all classes except for a pre-authorized excuse from the instructor. - Students who have a pre-authorized excuse from the instructor shall coordinate with the instructor the time and place of submitting any missing assignment or taking an in-class missed quiz, test and/ or exam. It is the sole responsibility of the student to follow-up with the instructor in this regard. - Students who miss more than the maximum three-week equivalent of absences without an authorized approval of the instructor or not in compliance with the University Attendance Policy shall receive an F in the course.
STUDIO CULTURE:
The design studio is the core of the architectural academic process. The experiences in the studio should be the primary mode of exploration and learning. All projects will be presented and discussed as a group/s at every stage and comments resulting from these discussions will be incorporated into the students work through one:one design development sessions with the academic team. This process will be supported with a series of lectures, guest speakers, video presentations, and readings- all within the studio environment to ensure integration of the presented information into the design processes being learnt. Studio time is to be used efficiently and effectively for independent development of projects, peer review, class assignments and group discussions- not for waiting to have your project reviewed only. During design development stages students will have their work reviewed on a rotating basis, with equal distribution of time for each student. Many of these discussions will be across the entire class, and all students are expected to attend, assess and discuss each others work. Students not engaged in such in-class activity will not be allowed to have this time compensated for individually outside of class. Office hours are available for questions and outside class support. Please email for an appointment. Students are encouraged to apply all the content and skills learnt thus far from his/her other courses into the design process in studio. This will be supported with lectures and possible external reviews of the students work from the related faculty members. Such integration, participation in discussions and design development sessions are a major factor in the students overall assessment. Process, rather than product, is to be focused on, where product is viewed as a cumulative reflection of that process. This multi-disciplinary, comprehensive process will be required to be documented through a design journal, online and physical journal, to be submitted and graded throughout semester.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY ISSUES:
For full definition of standards of academic integrity please refer to the University’s Code of Academic Ethics: www.aucegypt.edu/resources/acadintegrity/EthicsofAcadInteg.html Prepared by: Magda Mostafa, Associate Professor, ARCH Date: January 2018
Grade:
5
Objective:
The requirement of this assignment was to get a physical object that would take us from university to the chair that we have at home.
Outcome:
The way I chose to implement this assignment was conceptually and imaginary. I tied a thread of wool in my chair and took a picture of it, then during class I submitted a loose piece of thread that takes you outside the classroom and is then linked to the picture of the ball of thread at home in the chair. The picture is titles â&#x20AC;&#x153;curiosity killed the catâ&#x20AC;? where I conceptually used curiosity as the factor that would take us to the chair at home. Curiosity was chosen to imagine that if you keep following the the thread due to wanting to know where it goes, you will reach the other end that is tied to the chair at home.
Grade:
7
Research Outline “Made in Egypt: The Global Village” Thinking Big- Building Small Building on the work of previous semesters, which focused on developing an appropriate vocabulary for contemporary Egyptian architecture, this semester expands that understanding to frame Egyptian vocabulary, not as something that is unique, but something that is part of a larger global language. This past decade has seen a surge worldwide in the questioning of the role of architecture in our society. Working beyond the “starchitect” model, contemporary practice has begun to witness a rise in the understanding of the wider, more immediate social role of architecture towards the communities it serves. The recent International Union of Architects’ World Congress titled “Otherwhere” is witness to that. Inspired by Andres Lepik’s “Small Scale- Big Change” at New York’s Museum of Modern Art in 2010 this semester looks at the power of socially conscious design to influence communities and people’s everyday lives in a comprehensive and responsible way. Reference will be taken from the work included in the curation of this exhibit, as well as its sister collection displayed in Lepik’s follow-up “Think Global- Build Social: Architectures for a Better World” displayed at the Townhouse Gallery in Cairo, 2015. The objective of this global framing is to draw inspiration for successful works, in the region and beyond, to address the current identity crisis of contemporary Egyptian architecture. The quality of the current Egyptian architectural context, one not uncommon across the globe, has reached a heterogeneous state of characterless mass housing, informal settlements, pluralistic neo-international styles of the corporate sector and increasingly superficial elite stylistic images of western architecture. Few examples exist that are comprehensively expressive of the identity and character of the Egyptian culture in all its varied sectors, nor facilitative of its social and environmental needs. The objective of this project is to address this dynamic through research and design. Beginning with the understanding of design as a complex, multidisciplinary process, the works of various successful Egyptian, regional, and international architects of the past decades will be analysed. The objective of this analysis will be to ascertain the commonalities and differences in vocabulary and approach amongst these works, with the ultimate goal of discovering
appropriate design criteria and form generation principles to aid in the design of a contemporary architecture appropriate to today’s Egypt. This analysis will look beyond the typical stylistic approaches of classifying architecture, and explore thev “why” and “how” of architectural manifestations and organizations, rather than the “what”. In other words the analysis will be more process and philosophy driven rather than product oriented. At the end of this research stage, students will be required to design a simple architectural project within a local Egyptian context for a specific user using the conclusive design criteria of the first stage of the project. Working in groups of 5 students, the works of the following regional architects will be studied as a start point: 1. Hassan Fathy 2. Ramsis Wissa Wassef 3. Abdelhalim Ibrahim Abdelhalim 4. Rami El Dahan and Soheir Farid 5. Rassem Badran This collection of works should be framed against a transactional comparison with the works included in Lepik’s collections. These can include but are not imited to: 1. Anna Heringer, Germany 2. Elemental, Allejandro Aravena, Chile 3. Teddy Cruz, USA and Mexico 4. Urban Think-Tank, Hubert Klumpner and Alfredo Brillembourg, South America 5. Peter Rich, South Africa 6. Carin Smuts, South Africa 7. Francis Kere, Germany, Burkina Faso
resources in addition to these.
FORMAT AND PROCESS:
Students are required to submit their final research on A2 sheets using a combination of text, images and graphic analysis. Please refer to (Lin, 1993) from the syllabus reference list for guidance. The specific structure and organization of the analysis will be proposed in class, but each group is responsible for developing creative means to communicate their work. Students are responsible for all material presented and discussed in class and during studio. All work will be developed and discussed in studio and students will be graded based on their individual contributions and discussions in class. Any non-participating member of a group will receive zero credit for the assignment. Assessment Criteria: The timeline for this stage of Project 1 is outlined in the course syllabus. This research stage will be graded according to the following rubric: • Content (20%) • Clarity and Communication- graphic, written and oral (40%) • Completeness (20%) • Comprehensiveness (20%)
REFERENCES:
Awan, N., Schneider, T., Till, J. 2011 “Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture”, Routledge, UK Lepik, A. 2010, “Small Scale, Big Change: New Architectures for Social Engagement”, MoMA, NY Lepik, A., 2015, “Think Global, Build Social: Architectures for a Better World”, Goethe Institute (catalogue), and Townhouse Gallery (exhibit) The archives and exhibition of the Rare Books library will also provide primary sources for much of this research. In addition a customized LibGuide is available at http://libguides.aucegypt. edu/AENG352. These are general references, and each group is responsible for developing their own bibliography of scholarly
8
Grade:
9
Outcome: These findings were the bases of our research. All our conclusions and final content was based on the findings of the 12 architects that were thoroughly and deeply researched. The following 12 posters include analysis of 1-3 buildings of each of the following architects: -
Ramsis Wissa Wassef Francis Kere Rami el Dahan & Soheir Farid Urban Think Tank Peter Rich Carin Smuts Abdelhalim Ibrahim Abdelhalim Rassem Badran Teddy Cruz Anna Heringer Hassan Fathy Alejandro Aravena
Grade:
23
SETTING
ENVIRONMENT
ECONOMY
STRUCTURE
C U LT U R E
BELONGING
PEOPLE
CONCLUSION
Grade:
33
Grade:
36
Grade:
38
Objective:
The requirement of this assignment was to get a physical object that would take us from university to the chair that we have at home.
Outcome:
The way I chose to implement this assignment was conceptually and imaginary. I tied a thread of wool in my chair and took a picture of it, then during class I submitted a loose piece of thread that takes you outside the classroom and is then linked to the picture of the ball of thread at home in the chair. The picture is titles â&#x20AC;&#x153;curiosity killed the catâ&#x20AC;? where I conceptually used curiosity as the factor that would take us to the chair at home. Curiosity was chosen to imagine that if you keep following the the thread due to wanting to know where it goes, you will reach the other end that is tied to the chair at home.
Spaces Entrance/ book checkout
Free rotation around book stacks on display
Social/multipurpose area
Interaction between users and for snacks/ food
Story telling rooms
Dim red lights to enhance relaxation
Book collection
Roaming through bookshelves to reach chosen destination of certain privacy
Roof Garden
Social/Multipurpose area
Free group reading/playing space
Digital learning areas
Entrance/book checkout
Digital learning areas
Outdoor reading area
Private study rooms
Natural sunlight
Outcome: The first model I made aimed to compliment the behaviour choreography I made in terms of section. I aimed to create different slabs/rooms that were placed above one another in terms of privacy and function. I believe that during this stage I should have been more conceptual and not ruch into the form of the model.
Outcome: During this stage, I chose to tackle the flow of children within the site. I found that children prefer interacting around certain areas in the streets. I attempted to create those slabs with the main staircase connecting them together. Within the site itself, the slabs were modeled to be stepped from the streets side to allow visual connection between the people in the library and the streets.
Outcome: This model was developed from he previous one in terms of making the areas flow more instead of being symmetrical. The main staircase also was given more flexibility and was shifted in different directions. The ground floor was lifted on pilotis so children can flow around them in an open plan, feeling free. The staircase aimed to achieve visual connection within the building so that children on it can see the rest of the building. It was also modelled to be used as a reading staircase with platforms.
Grade:
43
Aesthetics/ Finishes
Types
Properties /Uses Concrete is used in structure to make columns, beams, slabs and foundations. It is a composite natural material containing cement, water and aggregates (sand,gravel, rock)
Plain
Reinforced
Precast
Strengths & Limitations
High density
Structural Systems
Air-entrained
One-way solid slab Two-way solid slab Hollow slab
Flat slab
Flat plate
Load-bearing wall
Lightweight
Shear wall
Structural System
The structural design features rigid slabs with spans up to 60 feet and cantilevers up to 25 feet, some with highly concentrated end loadings. The main ramp cantilevers 14 feet 6 inches to the inner court from a 13 inch deep rigid exterior beam of varying widths. Since the greater widths occur at the higher levels, the overall width of the ramp increases as it spirals upward.
Exterior Design
The exterior of the Guggenheim Museum is a stacked white cylinder of reinfored concrete swirling towards the sky.
Technical Drawings Columns used to support swirling slab
Swirling slab towards glass occulus designed towards the sky
Each wall runs the full length of the building.
Technical Drawings
Openings within each floor
Aesthetics
Open/visible building achieved through openings in load bearing walls
Load Bearing Walls
Five load bearing walls with openings that determine the interior function of the building.
Supporting structure is made out of five large perforated walls, tree vertical and two of them tilted. Complex spatial relationships are created using only these five walls and a combination of horizontal and sloped floors.
Structure
Section
The structure is based on one block, raised on free-standing pillars, which allows for the whole ground space to be freed-up for gardens and leisure space, with its reinforced concrete structure acting like li a shelf over the top.
Materials & Aesthetics Le Corbusier implemented brutalist architecture style to it with chunky pilotis that supports the 18-storey slab blocks. The materials used are reinforced concrete with a visible coating and glass that wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t decorated. The interior featured the same materials.
Beam and slab system
Section Drawing
Pilotis Pilotis are supports such as columns, pillars, or stilts that lift a building above ground or water.
Raising the house on pilotis allowed a free grid of space to be created. Also, the house was subjected to open surroundings meaning more light exposure to the house as raising the building gave it a better angle with light
Non-bearing walls with large openings
Concrete elements
Pilotis
Stairs
Rooftop Garden Corbusier used concrete column (pilotis) that raised the building up which gave it a feel of lightness and ďŹ&#x201A;oating. Pilotis allowed the structure to not have bearing walls which meant the pilotis acted as separate structure system and the walls were free to be placed anywhere. No bearing walls meant that a free plan could be created without concern.
Supported and raised on concrete columns (pilotis)
Tetrahedron Waffle Slab
Ceiling plan showing slab
Reflected ceiling plan showing tetrahedron slab. Tetrahedron slab is strong enough to prevent the use of columns in the middle of it, therefore the columns were placed on the edges of each slab.
The system of three-dimensional tetrahedrons was strong enough to support open studio space — unencumbered by columns
Slab Detail and Elevation
Concrete Elements
Concrete columns seen from exterior facade
Central unfinished rough concrete stairwell
Ceiling detail
Grade:
50
Grade:
53
Grade:
64
Final Submission: For the final submission, I thought it was a very good opportunity to carry out further studies on my design that I did not have time to do in the prefinal. I was able to carry out research on the green wall I decided to have, finding out what types of plants would survive in the condition of my building. Also, I developed the lighting experiments and techniques within my submission because it was not given enough attention before. I related the research and site mapping stage to my design, which allowed my building to build a stronger connection with its context.