Graduate Portfolio | M. Arch | Georgia Institute of Technology

Dreama D. Johnson Graduate Portfolio | Master of Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology | May 2019

Dreama D. Johnson Graduate Portfolio | Master of Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology | May 2019

FALL

2016

Core Studio I • Coons Building Survey • Epitome & Radiance • Reading Room | Hinman Courtyard

10 12 14

Media + Modeling I • Precedent | The Grand Palais

18

C o n s t r u c t i o n Te c h I • Bus Stop

22

SPRING

2017

Core Studio II • Circus School | Highland Ave • Canonical House | Glen Murcutt

26 28

Media + Modeling II • Southern Cross Station

34

SUMMER

2017

Core Studio III • Manifolds • Drone Distribution Hub

38 40

Media + Modeling III • F r e e d o m w i t h i n Te n s i o n • Kangaroo Physics | Folding • K a n g a r o o P h y s i c s | Te n s e g r i t y

44 48 50

FALL

2017

Advanced Studio I • Beltline Bridge • The Mobile Reef Generator

54 56

Shape Grammars • We ave G ra m m a rs • Grape • Architect Analysis | Eero Saarinen • Palladian Grammar • Painting Grammar

62 63 64 65 66

SPRING

2018

Advanced Studio II • Portman Studio | Cut/Fill

70

C o n s t r u c t i o n Te c h I I • Construction Documents | EBB • Construction Documents | Cut/Fill

76 78

Revelatory Drawing • Caplutta Sogn Benedetg by Peter Zumthor

84

FALL Design & Research I • Structural Folds | Morphing Origami Structures I • D e s t r u c t i o n Te s t i n g | B r i d g e

SPRING

2018 90 100

2019

Design & Research II • Performance Specs | Drain House

104

Structures II • D e s t r u c t i o n Te s t i n g | S h e a r W a l l

112

FALL

2016

Core Studio I with Brian Bell, Marisabel Marratt

Coons Building Survey

Surveying, measuring and drafting of the J. S. Coon Building at 648 Cherry St NW, Atlanta, GA. Goals of the project included familiarizing oneself with a built project through the use of hand drawing, photography, and measurements. Introduction to the modes of architectural drawings: plan, section, elevation and axonometric views as well as standard drawing conventions: line weights, poche and scaling. Drawings were made by hand with graphite pencils.

10

11

Epitome & Radiance

12

Emphasis on exploring materiality and iterative model making. Each class member was assigned a different material for initial explorations, then a second material to add in combination with the first. Models were asked to epitomize individual materials and showcase “radiance� through material pairings. Materials here are museum board and plaster.

13

Reading Room | Hinman Courtyard Each student was assigned an activity and asked to generate a series of photographs that evoke images or sensations associated with that activity. These were then paired with the materials used in the previous materials study to produce a series of drawings and a final model of a room designed around the given activity and sited in a given location. The activity here is reading, the site is the Hinman Courtyard at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

14

15

FALL

2016

Media + Modeling I with Sabri Gokman and Dennis Sheldon

Precedent | The Grand Palais Dreama Johnson, Emily Wirt Introduction in the use of Autocad, Illustrator, and Rhinocerous. Studying landmark precedents, students were challenged to model their building and produce a series of drawings and a 3-d printed model. Learning outcomes included generating a 3-dimensional model in Rhinocerous, using that model to generate 2-dimensional views, editing those views and varying lineweights in illustrator, generating plan, section, axon and details in Autocad, outputting scaled drawings, and finally creating an STL of a portion of the final model for 3d printing. Work on the 3d model was shared between team mates, and each teammate was responsible for several individual drawings of various views agreed upon within the team.

Grand Palais

Media and Modeling II | Fall 2016 | Module 4 | Presentation | December 5, 2016

Team Members: Dreama Johnson, Emily Wirt

18

19

FALL

2016

C o n s t r u c t i o n Te c h I with Charles Rudolph

Bus Stop

Detail

Detail

Student were asked to produce designs for a bus stop to service the Georgia Tech Campus. Drawings were to be rendered in whatever manner the student saw fit to do so. As this project was very early in the semester, I chose to work with the hand drafting methods I was learning in my Core I class. We were asked to produce plan, section, and elevation and to pay attention to methods of connections between components.

22

Plan

Section

Front Elevation 23

SPRING

2017

Core Studio II with David Yokum

Circus School | Highland Ave

Project involved designing a retail or other public facility and a block of housing at a given site along the Beltline on Highland Ave. After a site visit was conducted, we were asked to consider the projects engagement with the neighborhood and city at large. I chose to design a circus school devoted to education and performance of aerial arts, with a variety of single family residences on the southern slope of the lot.

26

27

Canonical House | Glen Murcutt

Students were asked to choose one of a list of canonical houses. I chose the Marie Short House by Glen Murcutt in Kempsey, New South Wales, Australia.

We were tasked to research written sources as well as examine plan, section and elevations. Central to the study was identifying particular themes pertinent to the building and generating diagrams and drawings in Autocad and Illustrator with appropriate scale and drawing conventions to illustrate the themes we identified. We were then asked to design a critical intervention, engaging those themes.

28

29

30

31

SPRING

2017

Media + Modeling II with Sabri Gokman and Dennis Sheldon

Southern Cross Station with Dreama Johnson, Adriana Perez-Leyva, and Sydney Haltom

PRECEDENT | SOUTHERN CROSS STATION Project: Southern Cross Station Location: Melbourne, Australia Architect: Grimshaw Architects Year: 2007

Dreama Johnson Adriana Perez-Leyva Sydney Haltom

Southern Cross Station is a railway station located in Melbourne, Australia. At 60,000 square meters, the building occupies a full city block, with most of that space dedicated to the railroad tracks and platforms. A street-level mezzanine wraps around the lower platform area on two The station’s main feature is its undulating roof. The placement of its peaks and valleys is determined by two sinusoid curves: a longitudinal curve running parallel to the train tracks (on a diagonal), and a transverse curve running across it (at right angles to the street grid). Steel trusses follow the longitudinal curve, supported by Y-shaped columns at the low points. A transparent gap directly above the trusses admits light to the platform area. Between the trusses, the roof rises to form peaks, which occur along the transverse curve that connects the columns. At the top of each peak is an opening for ventilation. A web of smaller steel members spans the gap between trusses, following the curves of the roof. The interior surface of the roof is made up of The rest of the station is quite simple by comparison. The facade is a simple glass curtain wall.

Brightly colored freestanding pods on the mezzanine house the station’s administrative functions, leaving most of the station open for waiting passengers.

Photographs from Grimshaw Architects (https://grimshaw.global/projects/southern-cross-station/)

Exterior

SCRIPTING DIAGRAM

Interior

Platform Area

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Roof

Columns

Roof

Trusses

34 This curvature analysis represents how the panels bend on the surface of the roof. The blue panels indicate positive Gaussian curvature (creating a dome or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, indicate negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface.

Year: 2007

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Southern Cross Station is a railway station located in Melbourne, Australia. At 60,000 square meters, the building occupies a full city block, with most of that space dedicated to the railroad tracks and platforms. A street-level mezzanine wraps around the lower platform area on two

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF

This curvature analysis represents how the panels the surface the roof.

Theandblue indicate positive Gaussian curvature (creatThe station’s mainbend feature ison its undulating roof. Theof placement of its peaks valleyspanels is determined by two sinusoidhand, curves: a indicate longitudinal curve running parallel to the train tracks (on a ing a dome or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface. diagonal), and a transverse curve running across it (at right angles to the street grid). Steel trusses The yellow panels have relatively less surface than the by blue and red panels. follow thecurvature longitudinal curve, supported Y-shaped columns at the low points. A transparent

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Interior

gap directly above the trusses admits light to the platform area. Between the trusses, the roof rises to form peaks, which occurPlatform along the transverse Area curve that connects the columns. At the

Interior

Roof

Platform Area of eachthe peaktolerance is an opening forof ventilation.

A web of material smaller steel members spans the gap The degree and type of curvature,Roof alongtopwith the roofing for deformation, determine the maximum possible size for

the roofing panels.

between trusses, following the curves of the roof. The interior surface of the roof is made up of

Roof

Columns

Roof

Columns

Trusses

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF

SCRIPTING DIAGRAM The rest The of the station is quite simple byindicate comparison. The facade is a simple glass curtain wall.

This curvature analysis represents how the panels bend on the surface of the roof. blue panels positive Gaussian curvature (creatBrightly colored freestanding pods on the mezzanine house the station’s administrative functions, NT | SOUTHERN CROSS STATION leaving most of the station open for waiting passengers. ing a dome or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, indicate negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface.

Dreama Johnson Project: Southern Cross Station Photographs from Grimshaw Architects (https://grimshaw.global/projects/southern-cross-station/) The yellow panels have relatively less surface curvature than the blue and red panels.

Adriana Perez-Leyva Location: Melbourne, Australia Sydney Haltom

Architect: Grimshaw Architects Year: 2007

Exterior

SCRIPTING DIAGRAM

The degree and type of curvature, along with the tolerance of the roofing material for deformation, determine the maximum possible size for PRECEDENT | SOUTHERN CROSS STATION the roofing panels.

Southern Cross Station is a railway station located in Melbourne, Australia. At 60,000 square Project: Southern Cross Station Location: Melbourne, Australia Architect: Grimshaw Architects Year: 2007

meters, the building occupies a full city block, with most of that space dedicated to the railroad tracks and platforms. A street-level mezzanine wraps around the lower platform area on two

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

The station’s main feature is its undulating roof. The placement of its peaks and valleys is determined by two sinusoid curves: a longitudinal curve running parallel to the train tracks (on a

Dreama Johnson Adriana Perez-Leyva Sydney Haltom

diagonal), and a transverse curve running across it (at right angles to the street grid). Steel trusses SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF Southern Cross Station is a railway station located in Melbourne, Australia. At 60,000 square This curvature analysis represents how the panels bend on thefollow surface of thecurve, roof.

The blue panels indicate positive Gaussian curvature (creatthe longitudinal supported

by Y-shaped columns at the low points.

A transparent This analysis represents the panels bend on the surface of the roof. The blue panels indicate positive curvature meters, the building occupies a full city block, with Gaussian most of that space dedicated to the(creatrailroad directlycurvature above the trusses admits light to the platform area.how Between the trusses, the roof ing a dome or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, gap indicate negative Gaussian curvature, generating a saddle-shaped surface. tracks and platforms. A street-level mezzanine wraps around the lower platform area on two rises to form peaks, which occur along the transverse curve thatthus connects the columns. At the a peak dome orpanels. bowl shape).

The redsteel panels, other hand, indicate negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface. toping of each is an opening for ventilation.

A web of smaller members on spansthe the gap The yellow panels have relatively less surface curvature than the blue and red

The yellow panels have relatively less surface curvature than the blue and red panels.

between trusses, following the curves of the roof. The interior surface of the roof is made up of

The station’s main feature is its undulating roof. The placement of its peaks and valleys is determined by two sinusoid curves: a longitudinal curve running parallel to the train tracks (on a Roof diagonal), and a transverse curve running across it (at right angles to the street grid). Steel trusses follow the longitudinal curve, supported by Y-shaped columns at the low points. A transparent gap directly above the trusses admits light to the platform area. Between the trusses, the roof rises to form peaks, which occur along the transverse curve that connects the columns. At the top of each peak is an opening for ventilation. A web of smaller steel members spans the gap between trusses, following the curves of the roof. The interior surface of the roof is made up of

Interior along with the tolerance of the roofing material for deformation, Platform Area determine the maximum possible Roof size for The degree and type of curvature, The rest of the station is quite simple by comparison. The facade is a simple glass curtain wall.

Thecolored degree andpods type ofmezzanine curvature, with thefunctions, tolerance of the roofing material for deformation, determine the maximum possible size for Brightly freestanding on the house thealong station’s administrative the roofing panels. leaving most of the station open for waiting passengers.

the roofing panels.

Photographs from Grimshaw Architects (https://grimshaw.global/projects/southern-cross-station/)

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF

Columns

Trusses

SCRIPTING DIAGRAM

The rest of the station is quite simple by comparison. The facade is a simple glass curtain wall.

Brightly colored freestanding pods on the mezzanine house the station’s administrative functions, leaving most of the station open for waiting passengers.

PRECEDENT | SOUTHERN CROSS STATION Exterior

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Project: Southern Cross Station Location: Melbourne, Australia Architect: Grimshaw Architects Year: 2007

Dreama Johnson Photographs from Grimshaw Architects (https://grimshaw.global/projects/southern-cross-station/) Adriana Perez-Leyva Sydney Haltom

Southern Cross Station is a railway station located in Melbourne, Australia. At 60,000 square meters, the building occupies a full city block, with most of that space dedicated to the railroad tracks and platforms. A street-level mezzanine wraps around the lower platform area on two

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF

This curvature analysis represents how the panels bend on the surface of the roof. The blue panels indicate positive Gaussian curvature (creating a dome or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, indicate negativeThe Gaussian curvature, thus generating a ofsaddle-shaped station’s main feature is its undulating roof. The placement its peaks and valleys is surface. determined by two sinusoid curves: a longitudinal curve running parallel to the train tracks (on a Platform Arearelatively less surface curvature than Roof the blue and red panels.

The yellow panels have diagonal), and a transverse curve running across it (at right angles to Roof the street grid). Steel trusses

Columns

Trusses

follow the longitudinal curve, supported by Y-shaped columns at the low points. A transparent gap directly above the trusses admits light to the platform area. Between the trusses, the roof

The degree and type of curvature, along with the tolerance of the roofing material deformation, the maximum possible risesfor to form peaks, which occur determine along the transverse curve that connects the columns. Atsize the for top of each peak is an opening for ventilation. A web of smaller steel members spans the gap the roofing panels.

TRUSS DETAIL|between 3D PRINT trusses, following the curves of the roof. The interior surface of the roof is made up of

TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT

Interior

Platform Area

The rest of the station is quite simple by comparison. The facade is a simple glass curtain wall.

Brightly colored freestanding pods on the mezzanine house the station’s administrative functions, leaving most of the station open for waiting passengers.

Roof

Roof

Columns

Photographs from Grimshaw Architects (https://grimshaw.global/projects/southern-cross-station/)

Exterior

EMENT & ANALYSIS

ture analysis represents how the panels bend on the surface of the roof. The blue panels indicate positive Gaussian curvature (create or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, indicate negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface. w panels have relatively less surface curvature than the blue and red panels.

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF

e and type of curvature, along with the tolerance of the roofing material for deformation, determine the maximum possible size for This curvature analysis represents how the panels bend on the surface of the roof. The blue panels indicate positive Gaussian curvature (creatg panels. or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, indicate negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface.

TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT ing a dome Interior Roof The yellowPlatform panelsArea have relatively less surface curvature than the blue and red panels.

Roof TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT The degree and type of curvature, along with the tolerance of the roofing material for deformation, determine the maximum possible size for the roofing panels.

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF Columns

Trusses

TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT

MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS This curvature analysis represents how the panels bend on the surface of the roof. The blue panels indicate positive Gaussian curvature (creating a dome or bowl shape). The red panels, on the other hand, indicate negative Gaussian curvature, thus generating a saddle-shaped surface.

The yellow panels have relatively less surface curvature than the blue and red panels.

SYSTEMS | TRUSSES & ROOF

The degree and type of curvature, along with the tolerance of the roofing material for deformation, determine the maximum possible size for TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT the roofing panels.

TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT

TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT

35 TRUSS DETAIL| 3D PRINT

SUMMER

2017

Core Studio III with Keith Kaseman

Manifolds Use of Grasshopper functions, including the Randomize component, in interative form-finding exercises.

Dreama Johnson

FM_47

Dreama Johnson

FM_46 Dreama Johnson

FM_43

38 Dreama Johnson

FM_29

Dreama Johnson

FM_2

39

Drone Distribution Hub Distribution hub provides a transit station for human passengers as well as cargo, with a shipping center using both trucks and drones for local area delivery.

40

41

SUMMER

2017

Media + Modeling III with Chris Parks

F r e e d o m w i t h i n Te n s i o n with Dreama Johnson, Adriana Perez-Leyva, Razan Altiraifi, and Ruicheng Gao FREEDOM WITHIN TENSION ARCH 4833/8833: Advanced Rhino School of Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology T Summer 2017

Dreama Johnson, Ruicheng Guo

Springs Component Components Iden fied Geometry Created

Polylines Exploded into Segments

Base Polygon Created Copy Translated and Scaled

Framework Created

Rest Length Variable To Create Tension

Ver cal Lines Drawn Points Shi ed and Diagonal Lines Drawn

Rest Length Fixed

Diagonal Line Lengths Paramterized

Unary Force (Gravity)

Control Points Collected and Duplicates Culled

Differen a on Rods Cables

Kangaroo Physics Component

Data Branched

Forces Applied

Rods

Geometry Input

Cables

Bake Geometry Created Pipe Radius Applied Pipe Radius Applied

Control Points Become Anchors

6" 0.6"

?

-3

1?

1?

"

8'-0

1'-

0"

0?

1'-

Placed upon a patch of grass embraced by Clough Commons, our team’s tensegrity model welcomes Georgia Te T ch students to an outdoor oasis fo f r reading, resting, and exploring. It consists of thirteen steel rods, each held in position by a airy, y with thoughtfu y, f lly articulated views of the surrounding fu campus and a fr f amed view of the cityscape beyond.

Land Slopes Downward 10’ Drop

Our tensegrity was generated using Rhino and Grasshopper, r r, relying heav av a ily upon parametric modeling techniques and the use of the Grasshopper Physics component. In this manner we were able to experiment with variations in every aspect of the model: the shape and placement of both the top and bottom plan views, the length of the rods, and the tension placed upon them.

As we wanted a structure that would be solid and stand upright, we maintained relatively high tension. Although we kept the top and bottom plans of the tensegrity cables precisely equal, our decision to vary the lengths of the rods resulted in a complex and intriguing composition of varying positions and angles. We W were particularly intrigued by the unique capabilities of tensegrity structures to fe f ature

surrounding cable structure.

to an inner reality in which we are similarly pulled by our

44

Site Plan Scale: 1/64” = 1’

FREEDOM WITH INTENTION ARCH 4833/8833: Advanced Rhino School of Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology Summer 2017 Razan Altiraifi, Adriana Perez-Leyva, Dreama Johnson, Ruicheng Guo

4-SIDED SCHEMA | PLAN DIAGRAM

4-SIDED SCHEMA | AXON RENDER

5-SIDED SCHEMA | PLAN DIAGRAM

5-SIDED SCHEMA | AXON RENDER

6-SIDED SCHEMA | PLAN DIAGRAM

6-SIDED SCHEMA AXON RENDER

7-SIDED SCHEMA | PLAN DIAGRAM

7-SIDED SCHEMA | AXON RENDER

4-SIDED VARIATION 1 | PLAN DIAGRAM

4-SIDED VARIATION 1 | AXON RENDER

5-SIDED VARIATION 1 | PLAN DIAGRAM

5-SIDED VARIATION 1 | AXON RENDER

6-SIDED VARIATION 1 | PLAN DIAGRAM

6-SIDED VARIATION 1 | AXON RENDER

7-SIDED VARIATION 1 | PLAN DIAGRAM

7-SIDED VARIATION 1 | AXON RENDER

4-SIDED VARIATION 2 | PLAN DIAGRAM

4-SIDED VARIATION 1 | AXON RENDER

5-SIDED VARIATION 2 | PLAN DIAGRAM

5-SIDED VARIATION 2 | AXON RENDER

6-SIDED VARIATION 2 | PLAN DIAGRAM

6-SIDED VARIATION 2 | AXON RENDER

7-SIDED VARIATION 2 | PLAN DIAGRAM

7-SIDED VARIATION 2 | AXON RENDER

4-SIDED VARIATION 3 | PLAN DIAGRAM

4-SIDED VARIATION 1 | AXON RENDER

5-SIDED VARIATION 3 | PLAN DIAGRAM

5-SIDED VARIATION 3 | AXON RENDER

6-SIDED VARIATION 3 | PLAN DIAGRAM

6-SIDED VARIATION 3 | AXON RENDER

7-SIDED VARIATION 3 | PLAN DIAGRAM

7-SIDED VARIATION 3 | AXON RENDER

4-SIDED VARIATION 4 | PLAN DIAGRAM

4-SIDED VARIATION 4 | AXON RENDER

5-SIDED VARIATION 4 | PLAN DIAGRAM

5-SIDED VARIATION 4 | AXON RENDER

6-SIDED VARIATION 4 | PLAN DIAGRAM

6-SIDED VARIATION 4 | AXON RENDER

7-SIDED VARIATION 4 | PLAN DIAGRAM

7-SIDED VARIATION 4 | AXON RENDER

Caption

Caption

Caption

Caption

Caption

Caption

Caption

Caption

4-SIDED VARIATION 5 | PLAN DIAGRAM

4-SIDED VARIATION 5 | AXON RENDER

5-SIDED VARIATION 5 | PLAN DIAGRAM

5-SIDED VARIATION 5 | AXON RENDER

6-SIDED VARIATION 5 | PLAN DIAGRAM

6-SIDED VARIATION 5 | AXON RENDER

7-SIDED VARIATION 5 | PLAN DIAGRAM

7-SIDED VARIATION 5 | AXON RENDER

45

46

47

Kangaroo Physics | Folding Study 1: Folded Surfaces

48

Dreama Johnson

Motif 1

Motif 2

Motif 3

Motif 4

Translation

Rotation/Reflection

Translation

Reflection

Fold A

Fold A

Fold A

Fold A

Fold B

Fold B

Fold B

Fold B

Fold C

Fold C

Fold C

Fold C

Study 1: Folded Surfaces

Dreama Johnson

Motif 5

Motif 6

Motif 7

Motif 8

Rotation/Reflection

Translation

Reflection

Rotation/Reflection

Fold A

Fold A

Fold A

Fold A

Fold B

Fold B

Fold B

Fold B

Fold C

Fold C

Fold C

Fold C

49

K a n g a r o o P h y s i c s | Te n s e g r i t y Study 2: Tensegrity

50

Dreama Johnson

4-Sided Polygon | Base Schema | Plan View

4-Sided Polygon | Base Schema | Axonometric View

5 -Sided Polygon | Base Schema | Plan View

5-Sided Polygon | Base Schema | Axonometric View

4-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1

4-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1

5-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1 | Plan View

5-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1 | Axon View

4-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5

4-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5

5-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1 | Plan View

5-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1 | AxonView

4-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5,1,0.5, t= 0.5

4-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5,1,0.5, t= 0.5

5-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5,1,0.5,1, t= 0.5

5-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5,1,0.5,1, t= 0.5

4-Sided Polygon | x= 1, y= 1

4-Sided Polygon | x = 1, y= 1

5 -Sided Polygon | x = 1, y = 1

5 -Sided Polygon | x = 1, y= 1

Study 2: Tensegrity

Dreama Johnson

6-Sided Polygon | Plan View

6-Sided Polygon |Axonometric View

7-Sided Polygon | Plan View

7-Sided Polygon | Axonometric View

6-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1

6-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1

7-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1

7-Sided Polygon | Tension (t) = 1

6-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5

6-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5

7-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1

7-Sided Polygon | Length (l) = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1

6-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, t=0.5

6-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, t=0.5

7-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, t=0.5

7-Sided Polygon | l = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1, t=0.5

6-Sided Polygon | x=1, y=1

6-Sided Polygon | x=1, y=1

7-Sided Polygon | x=1, y=1

7-Sided Polygon | x=1, y=1

51

FALL

2017

Advanced Studio I with Michael Gamble

Beltline Bridge Pedestrian and bike bridge over Ponce de Leon Avenue in Atlanta, Ga, along the Beltline next to Ponce City Market.

Site Plan N

54

Elevation

Reflected Ceiling Plan

55

The Mobile Reef Generator Conceived as a response to climage change effects on the ocean and shorelines, The Mobile Reef Generator is both research vessel, construction studio and home for a team of scientists and artistans tasked with building new, temperature resistant coral reefs in shallow coastal waters across the globe.

THE MOBILE REEF GENERATOR Coral Gardening and Research

The Mobile Reef Generator is designed to be employed in coastal areas with relatively shallow waters, appropriate to the creation of a fully functioning coral reef. Local coral species as well as engineered and/or collected species are tested for inclusion in the reef while an armature is crafted and installed for attaching the coral frags. These armatures are designed to have an intrinsic aesthetic value, increasing both the short term and long term tourism impact of the reef. Thinking of these reefs as gardens of the sea, they can be sculpted with care and with an eye toward increasing all aspects of biodiversity that reefs provide for: shelter for fish and invertebrate species, spawning grounds for commercially desirable fish species, aesthetically attractive locations for snorkeling and diving, and an opportunity to educate the public and reduce tourism related impacts on wild reefs.

56

GOALS 1. To identify and collect coral species which prove resistant to changes in ocean temperature and acidity.

2.

To utilize advanced coral culture techniques to breed new, stronger, more well adapted corals.

3. To build and seed reef communities with coral species showing promise to survive and thrive in changing global conditions.

4. To create and support ocean biodiversity through the creation of coral reefs, which are attractive to large numbers of aquatic species.

5. To educate people on the role corals play in creating ocean habitats through interactive programs and tourism opportunities.

57

Travel Mode

Assembly Mode

Living Module A

Living Module B

Living Module A

Construc�on Module

Dock

Barge

58

Laboratory Module

59

FALL

2017

Shape Grammars with Thanos Economou

We ave G ra m m a rs Exploration of basic shape grammar formalism. Create a base form and a few iterations of shape grammar rules, to explore simple x ships.

x(t)x relation-

Dreama Johnson Weaves Shape Grammars Johnson

Dreama Johnson Weaves Shape Grammars Weave Attempt 1:Weave Radiating Attempt Branches 2: Returning Branches

Grammars

diatingWeave Branches Attempt 1: Radiating Weave Branches Attempt 1: Radiating Branches

Weave Attempt 2: ReturningWeave Branches Attempt 2: Returning Weave Branches Attempt 2: Returning Branches

Rule 1

Rule 1

Weave A

Weave Attempt 3: Outstretched Weave Arms Attempt 3: Outstretched WeaveArms Attempt 3: Outs

rule 1

ru

Rule 1

Rule 1

1

ads

Weave Attempt 3: Outstretched Arms Weave Attempt 2: Returning Branches

Rule 1

Rule 1

rule 1

rule 1

rule 1

Rule 1

Rule 2

Rule 2

Rule 2

Rule 2

{1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1}

Rule 2

{1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1}

{1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1} {1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1} {1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,1} Rule 3

Rule 3

{1, 1....}

{1, 1....} Rule 3

{1, 1....}

Rule 3

{1

Rule 3

{1, 1....}

{1, 1....}

{1, 1....}

{1, 1....}

Weave 5: Density

Weave Attempt 4: Triads

Weav

Weave 5: Density

Weave Attempt 4: Triads Weave Attempt 4: Triads

Weave 5: Density

Weave 5: Density

rule 1 rule 1

rule 1

rule 1 rule 1

rule 1

rule 1

rule 2 rule 2

rule 3 ,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3} {1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3} rule 3 {1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3} {1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3} {1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3}

62

{1,1...}

{1,1...}

{1,1...}

{1,1...}

Grape Generating shapes utilizing GRAPE software. Rules are generated then applied, output forms in a block to show variations of shape computation achieved.

Dreama Johnson Schemata Grammar Explorations

Rule 0:

a

a

Rule 3:

a

b

Rule 1:

a

a+b

Rule 4:

a

a+b

Rule 2:

a

a+b

Rule 5:

a

t(a)

*Utilizing GRAPE application. Sequence was not recorded, many serial and parallel applications of rules grammars.

{1,3,3,4,4,3,4,2,34,4,3}

{5, 5, 5, 3, 3, 4, 5, 4, 5 }

{1,1,2,2,2, 3,3,3,3,2,2,2,4,3,3,3,3,2,2,3,3,3,3,5,5,5,3,5}

{1,3,2,3,4,5,3,3,4}

{5,4,5,3,4,3,4,3,5}

{0,1,3,4,5}

{0,1,3,4,3,2,2,3,4,3}

{ 2,3,4,3,3,2,2,5,2}

{5, 3, 3, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5, 3}

63

Architect Analysis | Eero Saarinen Eero Saarinen circular segments and catenary arches

Boston College Kresge Auditorium

Dulles International Airport

TWA Flight Center

Gateway Arch

64

Palladian Grammar

133

134

137

138

141

142

133

134

137

138

141

142

135

139

143

135

139

143

136

140

144

136

140

144

65

Painting Grammar

Series 1 - 9 6-sided polygons of radius 4

State 1:

+

+

/ŶŝƟĂů 'ƌŝĚ ĂŶĚ ƉĂƌĂŵĞƚĞƌƐ ƐĞƚ ĨŽƌ ŐƌĂƐƐ hopper. Polygon is form is chosen.

Grid

Random Reduce Component

+ +

+ +

+ +

+

+

(x,y) a

Random Points Radius Number of Sides

Polygons component

Random Reduce Component

Series 2 - 21 6-sided polygons of radius 2

+ + +

+

Remaining surfaces are then joined to create maximal emergent shapes. These ƐŚĂƉĞƐ ĚĞŶŽƚĞ ƚŚĞ ĮŶĂů ƐŚĂƉĞ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ŵĂƐŬ ďĞĨŽƌĞ ƉĂŝŶƟŶŐ ŵĂLJ ďĞŐŝŶ͘

Seed value

+ +++ +

+

Nine polygons are drawn on randomly selected points. Minimal emergent poly gons are delineated, then converted to ƐƵƌĨĂĐĞƐ ĨŽƌ ƌĂŶĚŽŵ ƐĞůĞĐƟŽŶ͘

Number subtracted

+

+

+

+

Minimal emergent polygons delineated.

b

Polygons randomly deselected.

Ratio has been chosen of roughly 50% of polygons will remain

Maximal emergent polygons delineate to create finalized form of painting mask.

Series 3 - 5 3-sided polygons of radius 5 + 9 3-sided polygons of radius 3

Series 4 - Starbursts (5 point and 7 point)

One polygon set can generate a virtually ŝŶĮŶŝƚĞ ŶƵŵďĞƌ ŽĨ ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘

Rule of Thirds and of Fifths An interesting composition can often be created by dividing the canvas into thirds and populating features within those regions or along the dividing lines.

Series 4 - Ellipses (mixed radii)

Design Criteria Aesthetic criteria are extremely difficult to quantify. Here are several features which are given preference for overall design effectiveness, although any of them may be absent and still create a pleasing design, or present and create a less interesting composition.

Continuous negative or positive space connecting 2-3 edges

Areas of rest- a large void of positive or negative space

66

An “island” of isolated positive or negative space

“Inversions”, places where a form can be seen to be continuous through both positive and negative space

Areas of complexity- a region with many intricate divisions

Canvas divided by thirds

Canvas divided by fifths (2/5 and 3/5)

the ngeative areas have been left white, but a second mask may also be cut and the negative areas receive asecond treatment of paint.

oduct oduct n watercolor. In this case,

neen watercolor. thisa case, left white,Inbut een left white, but a cut and the negative cut andofthe negative atment paint. atment of paint.

67

SPRING

2018

Advanced Studio II with Sonit Bafna

Portman Studio | Cut/Fill with Dreama Johnson, Maryam Atassi, Jiahe Xu - Team JMD Given a site at Amicalola Falls State Park in Dawsonville, Georgia, teams were challenged to create a visitor center which was informed both by the geological and geographic history of the area while being limited in materials to those whicih could be extracted from another given site nearby. Our team chose to push back against the very definition of buildling, utilisizing a quarry digging method to cut into the hillside and use the materials extracted to fill in the valley in font of the cut, generating a space for visitors to seek shelter as well as interact with geographic and historical exhibits and lecture programs presented by the park service. Considerations included passive heating, daylighting and environmental impacts of sourced materials. Our strategy for the extraction site was to utiliize it for storage and eventual re-use of excess stone removed from the cut.

CUT \ FILL

a place carved and sculpted out of the earth itself

Center for Ecological Interpretation & Land Use History Amicalola Falls, Georgia Jiahe Xu, Maryam Atassi, Dreama Johnson

32'

EXTRACTION SITE CHANGE OVER TIME

16'

1:2000

70

Starting Condition

Trees Cleared on Slope

Rubble Piles

Gravel Infill

Subsequent Mounds

Final Construction

Removal Proceeds from Top

Removal Complete

Trees Replanted

71

72

EXTRACTION SITE CHANGE OVER TIME

Starting Condition

Trees Cleared on Slope

Rubble Piles

Gravel Infill

Subsequent Mounds

Final Construction

Removal Proceeds from Top

Removal Complete

Trees Replanted

73

SPRING

2018

F

E

D

C

B

C o n s t r uA c A1 t i o Parapet n TeDetail ch II

4A1 1� = 1’ Howard Wertheimer with Dennis Sheldon and 1 2

3

4

5

Construction Documents | EBB with Dreama Johnson, Candace Seda, Elaine Lopez, Solangeli Riviera Teams studied a given precedent on campus through the use of construction document excerpts, site visits and photography. From these studies, they produced a digital model and a set of construction documents including details and sections.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Table of Contents J

J

I

I

H

G

F

F

E

E

0A0 0A1 0A2 1A0 1A1 2A1 2A2 2A3 2A4 3A1-1 3A1-2 3A2-1 3A2-2 3A3-1 3A3-2 3A4-1 3A4-2 4A1 4A2 4A3 4A4

J

I

H

H

GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) Completed Fall 2016

G

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeley Rivera

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

G

Cover Project Info, Site Map, Table of Contents Specifications Overall Plan: Floor 1 Overall 3D Model 3D Model NE Corner 3D Model SW Corner 3D Model NW Corner 3D Model SE Corner NE Section 01 NE Section 02 SW Section 01 SW Section 02 NW Section 01 NW Section 02 SE Section 01 SE Section 02 NE Section Details SW Section Details NW Section Details SE Section Details

J

I

H

G

F

F

E

E

D

D

C

C

B

B

KEY PLAN D

D

C

C

B

Scale - Optional

A

0A0

Cover A

1

2

1

3

2

4

3

5

4

6

5

6

03 00 00 Concrete 03 30 00 03 31 00 03 31 10 03 33 00 03 35 00 03 35 10 03 38 16 03 48 43

J

I

07 40 00 07 41 10 07 41 20 07 41 30 07 41 63 07 50 00 07 58 00 07 60 00 07 62 00 07 62 07

Cast-In-Place Concrete Structural Concrete - Columns Post Tensioned Structural Concrete Slab Architectural Concrete Concrete Finishing Exposed Concrete Column with Light Sandblast Post tensioned concrete Precast concrete trim

04 00 00 Masonry

04 20 00 Unit Masonry 04 21 00 Clay Unit Masonry: Brick Veneer Masonry 04 21 13 Brick masonry veneer 04 21 10 Mortar Net

H

08 50 00 08 51 00 08 51 10 08 51 23 08 80 00 08 81 00 08 87 00 08 87 10 09 00 00 09 34 00 09 50 00 09 51 00 09 54 36

06 00 00 Wood, Plastics, and Composites 06 10 00 Rough Carpentry 06 16 00 Gypsum Sheathing 06 43 00 Wood Stairs and Railings

E

07 00 00 Thermal and Moisture Protection 07 20 00 07 21 13 07 22 16 07 22 00 07 24 00

D

07 24 10 07 24 20 07 24 30 07 24 40 07 24 50 07 24 60

C

9

10

7

8

9

10

Thermal Protection Board insulation Roof board insulation Roof and Deck Insulation Exterior Insulation and Finish System Water Drainage Exterior Insulation and Finish System Flashing and Weep Holes Gypsum Exterior Sheathing Panels Vapor Retarder 2” Polystyrene Foam Air Cavity Fiberglass Insulation

11

11

12

12

13

A

A1

Site Map

0A1

Drawing Not to Scale 1

13

2

1

3

2

4

3

5

4

6

5

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

11

12

11

12

13

J

I

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeli Rivera

13

Engineered Biosystems Buildling is s concrete column structure with post tensioned concrete slabs and a brick veneer. It features a number of rain screen wall extrusions and curtain wall assemblies.

J

I

H

4

5

6

9

7

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

18

17

20

19

21

22

See Masterformat Specifications page 0A2.

H

H

A

G

F

Windows Metal Windows - Aluminum Windows Aluminum Window Frame Steel windows Glazing Glass Glazing Glazing Surface Films Colored Frit Pattern Film on Glazing Finishes Paver Tile Ceilings Acoustical Ceiling Tile Suspended Decorative Grids

3

2

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

E

F1 3A3-3

A1 3A1-1

B

G

G

A1 2A3

A1 3A3-3

A1

A1

3A1-1

C

2A1

D E

F

F

F

G A2 3A1-2

E

E

KEY PLAN

I J

A1 3A2-1 A1

D

LEGEND

3A4-1

D

Section Callout

D

K

10 00 00 Specialties

A1

3D Section Model Callout

A1 3A2-2

2A2

10 53 00 Aluminum Canopy System 10 71 13 Exterior Sun Control Devices C

C

A1

A1

3A4-2

2A4

C

SHEET INFORMATION Dreama Johnson, Elaine Lopez, Candace Seda, Solangely Rivera

SHEET INFORMATION B

B

Specifications A

Specifications 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

H

KEY PLAN

A

76

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeli Rivera

SPECIFICATIONS

3A1-1

1

Reference: http://www.plainsbuilders.com/ipin35/IPIN2/CSIDivisions.asp

J

I

A1

SPECIFICATIONS

B

0A2

0A1

GENERAL NOTES

Specifications are indicated on detail pages.

B

A1

SHEET INFORMATION Dreama Johnson, Candace Seda, Solangely Rivera , Elaine Lopez

Project Info A

GENERAL NOTES

Roofing and Siding Panels Metal Parapet Cap 16” Metal Lap-Seam Wall Panels Metal Soffit Fabricated roof panel assembly Membrane Roofing Roll Roofing Flashing and Sheet Metal Sheet Metal Flashing and Trim Board insulation

08 23 43 Steel framed storefronts 08 40 00 Entrances, Storefronts, and Curtain Wall 08 41 00 Entrances and Storefronts Aluminum-framed Entrance and Storefront 08 41 10 Aluminum Door Frame 08 41 20 Glazed Door 08 41 30 Aluminum Storefront Frame 08 44 00 Curtain Wall and Glazed Assemblies Glazed Aluminum Curtain Wall 08 44 10 Aluminum Mullion 08 44 20 Glazed Clear Curtain Wall Panel 08 44 30 Glazed Spandrel Curtain Wall Panel 08 44 40 Aluminum Angle Trim at Base

05 10 00 Structural Metal Framing 05 12 00 Structural Steel Framing 05 12 10 Primary - Steel Columns and Beams 05 12 20 Secondary - Steel Studs and Runners 05 12 30 Tertiary - Structural Steel Framing Architecturally Exposed Structural Steel Tube support 05 20 00 Metal Joists 05 22 10 Steel Framed Trellis with High Performance Paint 05 41 00 Structural metal stud framing 05 51 00 Metal Stairs 05 73 13 Architectural Glass Railings 05 75 10 4” Zinc Perforated Corrugated Metal Panels

F

8

08 00 00 Openings

05 00 00 Metals G

7

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

KEY PLAN

SHEET INFORMATION Sheet Creator B

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeley Rivera

9

10

11

12

13

0A2

Candace Sedas, Dreama Johnson 1/32” = 1 ‘

Plan: Floor 1 A

A

A1 1A0

Plan: Floor 1

1/32” = 1’ 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1A0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

GENERAL NOTES J

I

I

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeley Rivera

12

13

Northeast corner of the Engineered Biosystems Buildling features a cold rolled steel framing system with post tensioned concrete floor slabs and a cast in place concrete column system. It is finished with a brick veneer.

J

I

J

I

SPECIFICATIONS

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeley Rivera

SPECIFICATIONS

See Specifications 0A2

H

11

GENERAL NOTES

Structural Model with Detailed Section Models

J

See specifications page 0A2.

H

H

H

PROJECT DATA G

G

F

F

E

E

GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

PROJECT DATA G

G

F

F

E

GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

E

KEY PLAN

KEY PLAN LEGEND

D

Primary Structure

D

D

D

Secondary Structure Brick Veneer C

Spandrel Glass

C

C

B

B

Dreama Johnson, Elaine Lopez, Candace Seda, Solangeli Rivera

C

Glazing

SHEET INFORMATION

SHEET INFORMATION

Metal shade structure

Dreama Johnson

B

B

Structural 3D Model A

A

A1 1A1

Structural 3D Model

Drawing Not to Scale 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

11

12

13

1A1

A

A

A1 2A1

NE Corner 3D Detail

Not to Scale 1

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

03 48 43

1. A1/4A1 Parapet 3D detail 2. H8/4A1 Sill Detail 3. H5/4A1 Canopy Detail 4. H1/4A1 Wall Detail

A1

J

4A1

07 41 63 09 54 36

I

I

04 21 13

H

H8

03 48 43

4A1

04 21 13 G

H5 4A1

03 38 16 09 54 36

03 38 16

I

G

F

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

12

13

E

08 81 00

G

03 48 43

F

03 38 16 09 54 36

H1

F

KEY PLAN

C

LEGEND

08 51 23

Section poche

05 15 56

Brick of building beyond cut

D

C

07 41 63

SHEET INFORMATION 08 23 43 B

B

Dreama Johnson 1/4” = 1’

SHEET INFORMATION Dreama Johnson

08 51 23 08 23 43

B

B

NE Section 01 A

A

A1

NE Section 01

1/4” = 1’ 1

1

2

3

2

4

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

5

6

7

8

9

10

10

11

12

11

12

13

3A1-1

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

E

08 81 00 D

C

4A1

G

03 48 43

Brick of building beyond cut

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeli Rivera

H

08 51 23 E

D

J

I

09 54 36

KEY PLAN Section poche

3A1-1

2A1

SPECIFICATIONS

03 Concrete 03 38 16 Post tensioned conrete 03 48 43 Precast conrete trim 04 Masonry 04 21 13 Brick masonry veneer 05 Metals 05 15 16 Steel wire rope 07 Thermal and Moisture Protection 07 41 63 Fabricated roof panel assembly 08 Openings 08 23 43 Steel framed storefronts 08 51 23 Steel windows 08 81 00 Glass glazing 09 Finishes 09 54 36 Suspended Decorative Grids

03 38 16

LEGEND

C

11

09 54 36

H

H

E

D

13

03 38 16

03 48 43

05 41 00

03 38 16 09 54 36

12

Inset entrance with storefront glazing system and suspended metal canopy with high performance paint.

J

SPECIFICATIONS 03 Concrete 03 38 16 Post tensioned conrete 03 48 43 Precast conrete trim 04 Masonry 04 21 13 Brick masonry veneer 05 Metals 05 41 00 Structural metal stud framing 07 Thermal and Moisture Protection 07 41 63 Fabricated roof panel assembly 08 Openings 08 23 43 Steel framed storefronts 09 Finishes 09 54 36 Suspended Decorative Grids

03 38 16

F

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeli Rivera

08 81 00

05 41 00

11

GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES J

Not to Scale

NE Corner 3D Detail

14” = 1’

NE Section 02 A

A

A1

3A1-2

NE Section 02

1/4” = 1’ 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

3A1-2

13

GENERAL NOTES H1 Canopy Detail H5 Wall Detail H8 Sill Detail A1 Parapet Detail 3D

J

07 62 00

I

04 21 13

I

07 62 00 07 21 13

05 41 00

03 48 43

07 21 13

04 21 13 05 41 00

H

H1 4A1

J

03 38 16

07 41 63 08 23 43

Canopy Detail

H5

1/2” = 1’

4A1

Wall Detail

H8

1/2” = 1’

4A1

SPECIFICATIONS 03 Concrete 03 38 16 Post tensioned conrete 03 48 43 Precast conrete trim 04 Masonry 04 21 13 Brick masonry veneer 05 Metals 05 41 00 Structural metal stud framing 07 Thermal and Moisture Protection 07 21 13 Board insulation 07 22 16 Roof board insulation 07 41 63 Fabricated roof panel assembly 07 62 00 sheet metal flashing & trim 07 62 07 Board insulation 08 Openings 08 23 43 Steel framed storefronts 08 51 23 Steel windows 08 81 00 Glass glazing 09 Finishes 09 54 36 Suspended Decorative Grids

Sill Detail

1” = 1’

G

F

E

ARCH 8833 Case Study Project Project Team: Dreama Johnson Elaine Lopez Candace Seda Solangeley Rivera

H

G

F

PROJECT DATA GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERED BIOSYSTEMS BUILDING (EBB) BUILDING NO. 195 950 ATLANTIC DRIVE ATLANTA, GEORGIA Architects: Cooper Carry Lake Flato

E

KEY PLAN LEGEND Steel Webbing, Steel Framing, Flashing

D

D

Sheathing Self Adhering Waterproof Membrane Insulation Board

C

C

Brick Veneer

SHEET INFORMATION

Wire Tie Backs

Dreama Johnson

Blocking

B

B

Scale - Varies

NE Details A

A

A1 4A1

Parapet Detail

1” = 1’ 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

4A1

77

Construction Documents | Cut/Fill with Dreama Johnson, Maryam Atassi, Jiahe Xu Teams from Advanced Studio II were asked to produce construction documents for their Portman Project designs. Additional considerations included ADA and building code compliance, parking and site drainage.

1940'

1900' 1920'

1900'

1900'

1880' 1960'

1940'

1880'

1900' 1920'

1920' 1867' 1901'

1929' 1960' 16'

78

1940'

1882'

1920' 1900'

1880'

1860'

1 A430

2 A430

2 A330

4 A430

3 A430

1/8” = 1’

3 A430

2 A330

1 A430

2 A430

79

1 A330

1/8” = 1’

05 73 16 Wire Rope Decorative Metal Railings

6 1/2"

37"

05 05 19 Post-Installed Concrete Anchors

5

2 Ramp Railing Axon A430 Not to scale

48"

05 52 13 Pipe and Tube Railings

Railing Detail 1 A430 11/2” = 1’

06 20 13 Exterior Finish Carpentry

16"

Stud Wall Detail 3 A430 11/2” = 1’

80

06 16 53 Moisture-Resistant Sheathing Board 07 21 23 Loose-Fill Insulation

06 11 00 Wood Framing

Stair Railing Section 4 A430 Not to scale

Bedrock L 330

Soil Rammed Earth

9’ AFF Rubble Fill

0’ AFF

-19’ AFF

-53 ’ AFF

Stone paving

Sod

0’ AFF

Added Soil for Planting

Or

igi

na

l So

il Bedrock Soil Rammed Earth Rubble Fill

81

SPRING

2018

Revelatory Drawing with Mark Cottle

Drawing Style: Analytique

84

Caplutta Sogn Benedetg by Peter Zumthor

Drawing Style: Exploded Axonometric

85

Drawing Style: Cabinet Oblique

86

Drawing Style: Full Scale Detail

Drawing Style: Speculative

87

FALL

2018

Design & Research I with Daniel Baerlecken

Structural Folds | Morphing Origami

Morphing origami is a form of origami being developed by Dr. Glaucio H. Paulino at Georgia Tech. It is a fascinating combination of both the eggbox and miuora-ori tessellations. Poisson’s ratio desribes the behavior of these forms in the x and y dimensions. Miura-ori has a positive poisson’s ratio, which is to say as x decreases in length through the folding process, y decreases by the same ratio. Eggbox origami has a negative poisson’s ratio, as the distance in x is decreased,morphing the distance in y is increased (and vice combination versa). Morphing origami, both of miuora-ori these ratios depending upon which dimension is being the b origami is a fascinating of both thedisplays eggbox and tessellations. poisson’s ratio desribes compressed, showing eggbox behavior in one dimension and miuora-ori behavior in the other.

morphing origami

is to say as x decreased in length through the folding process, y decreases by the same ratio. eggbox origami has a negative Morphing origami, displays both of these ratios, depending upon which dimension is being compressed, showing eggbox be

miura-ori cell

eggbox

a=1 α = 60°

a=1 α = 60° a

α

miura-ori sheet behavior

eggbox

ations. poisson’s ratio desribes the behavior of these forms in the x and y dimensions. miura-ori has a positive poisson’s ratio, which atio. eggbox origami has a negative poisson’s ratio, as the distance in x is decreased, the distance in y is increased (and vice versa). ng compressed, showing eggbox behavior in one dimension and miuora-ori behavior in the other.

eggbox cell vertices are connected

a=1 α = 60°

morphing cell

a

α a=1 β α = 60° eggbox sheet behavior b β = 40° cos α a b = a( ) α cos β

90

vertices are connected

morphing cell are connected eggboxvertices mode

morphing cell a=1 α = 60° β = 40° cos α b = a( ) cos β

morphing cell eggbox mode

β b a α

morphing cell miura-ori mode

morphing cell miura-ori mode

morphing sheet in miura-ori mode

morphing sheet in eggbox mode

morphing sheet in eggbox mode

morphing sheet in miura-ori mode

91

eggbox

miura-ori

eggbox offers a few unique properties, one of which is its ability to be scaled and stacked. It is can also be flat folded in both the x and y dimensions, even in this stacked state.

miura-ori offers a unique folding condition in which the vally fold allows it to be folded from a flat plane and achieve flat foldability in the y dimension.

typologies curvilinear forms

planar behavior

mixing scale

shelled structures rely upon non planar deformations.

morphing form lends itself to flat planar applications.

due to the miura-ori characteristic planes folding beneath one another, stacking units and mixing scale constrains the ability of the morphing tessellation to flat fold in miura-ori mode. it will still flat fold in the eggbox mode however.

considerations non-planar deformations : allow the sheet more flexibility due to out-of-plane bending across the structure. Rigid materials may only accoodate such bending if another hinge is added to triangulate the planes.

non-planar deformations

92

flat-foldability: hinge assemblies that allow for flat-foldability across 360 degree of rotation are very complex. regular hinges constrain the ability to flat fold by creating impingements due to the width of the material.

constrained flat-foldability

water retention: origami sheets composed of ridges will catch water if sealed, or fail to shelter from rain if not sealed.

Applications must be considered with this property in mind.

water retention

shell forms: symmetrical arch-like

shell forms: non-symmetrical shell-like

shell forms: self-constrained

construction details

93

aluminum folded hinge v. 1 & 2

aluminum folded hinge v. 1 & 2

Construction version 1 is 18 guage aluminum, created by extending tabs to be bent around an 1/8th inch rod as a hinge pin and pierced to accomodate no. 2 pop rivets. This is a cold connection- no heat has been applied. the complexity of the unit requires 4 separate pieces to be deďŹ ned, with variations made for each piece lying upon an edge. this results in a total of 16 unique pieces required to assemble a 4x4 unit assemblage. Version 2 is a tab which is square in side view. Both prototypes failed due to bending stress on the aluminum exceeding its capacity.

Failure photos right.

Construction version 1 is at 18bottom guage aluminum, created by extending tabs to be bent around an 1/8th inch rod as a hinge pin and pierced to accomodate no. 2 pop rivets. This is a cold connection- no left: layout of the rivet holes. above: 2 variations tab result heat has been applied. the complexity of the unitof requires 4 in 2 variations of hole layout. right: one bottom left: version 2made with for squared hingelying tabs.upon center: separate pieces topiece. be deďŹ ned, with variations each piece anpieces edge. displayed this resultsin all possible alignment variations for a single unit. in a total of 16 unique pieces required to assemble a 4x4 unit assemblage. Version 2 is a tab which is square in side view. Both prototypes failed due to bending stress on the aluminum exceeding its capacity. Failure photos at bottom right. left: layout of the rivet holes. above: 2 variations of tab result in 2 variations of hole layout. right: one piece. bottom left: version 2 with squared hinge tabs. center: pieces displayed in all possible alignment variations for a single unit.

hinge concepts single material, tube hinge

double material, tube hinge

double material, double hinge

double material, fabric hinge

hinge concepts single material, tube hinge

impingements in standard hinge assemblies double material, tube hinge

double material, double hinge

double material, fabric hinge

impingements in standard hinge assemblies

94

construction prototypes: aluminum hinge v. 3 18 guage aluminum sheet with tab hinge knuckles cut from same. Hinges are individually formed then pop riveted into place. A 3x3 grid of modules calls for 255 hinge knuckles, 510 pop rivets with 37 hinge pins.

3¹⁄4”

5³⁄4”

40o ¹⁄8” ¹⁄2” 60o

2”

construction prototypes: piano hinge v. 1 Panels are ¹⁄4” plywood cut to 10” on the long edges connected by 25 steel piano hinges. A total of 8.3 feet of hinge material, connected by 100 pop rivets. Dividing the largest panel into 2 pieces and connecting with a hinge allows this panel to bend. Piece is therefore able to accomplish non-planar bends but loses some stability and ease of handling.

4“ 2“

10

40o

“

10 “ 60o

5“ 3.7

construction prototypes: fabric hinge v. 1 Panels are ¹⁄4” plywood cut to 10” on the long edges connected by 6” strips of fabric fixed with 3 pop rivets and washers. Dividing the largest panel into 2 pieces allows for non-planar bending. Softness of the fabric “hinge” allows for flexible, variable poses of the module but the reduces stability makes it difficult to control.

¹⁄8 “

10 “ 2“

6“

40o 60o Fillet @ ¹⁄2”

95

1

2

3

1

96

2

3

97

FALL

2018

Structures I with Jim Case and James Park

D e s t r u c t i o n Te s t i n g | B r i d g e with Dreama Johnson, Kathryn Farrell, and Shamiah Grant Group project called for design of bridge to meet specific tolerances. Bridge was then build and tested to destruction. Our bridge experienced a failure at a connection which invalidated the testing, causing it to fail far before the pieces began to experience breaking loads.

100

Learning Outcomes The bridge failed at a weight of 29 pounds. The joint of the top chord gave way causing the bridge to fail to support more weight. We deduced from the test that if braces were added to the top chords, it would have provided the necessary support from lateral forces to allow the structure to withstand the required weight. The break itself occurred at the gusset, allowing the truss to shear outward from beneath the top chord.

Unfortunately, this means the strength of the truss members was not actually tested, since the failure occurred from lateral forces in the joint.

In retrospect, mock ups out of chipboard to test various elements beforehand could have revealed weaknesses in the design. Also, the bridge would have been easier to build by laser cutting each solid side instead of each member. While that approach relies less on glue and construction quality, it does put stresses against the grain. This would have required more thickness for the truss members and aesthetic sacrifices.

Conclusions While the structure as built did not fulfill the desired outcome, the test results clearly show the value in including considerations of lateral forces in the design process. The lightweight and aesthetic design could be readily improved with an iterative design process and additional tests.

101

SPRING

2019

Design & Research II with George Johnston

Performance Specs | Drain House Utilizing performance specifications as a means of exploring a deeper thesis, with final output in the form of a book formatted like an issue of Pamphlet Architecture. Research, writing and development of a thesis proposal as well as design, model making and final presentation of the completed work.

Drain HousePlumbing Habitation There is a social hierarchy embedded in the standard floorplan of the “Single Family Residence”, which can be traced directly through the exclusivity of plumbing access given to bedrooms. By dissolving the walls of the house, attention can be brought to this relationship. Released from subordination, plumbing becomes generative of an architecture rather than subject to the dictates of its enclosure. Given its own voice, it becomes the factor to which other architectural forms conform.

Fig. 1 Modest, American Traditional style floorplan. Three bedrooms, two baths. Master suite is highlighted in green. The remainder of the house is serviced by the single bath highlighted in orange.

104

branch vent Main Stack Auxiliary Stack

vent stack

Auxiliary Stack

vent stack

toilet

wet vent

slope 1/4� per 1’ to Sewer Water Heater

soil stack Supply

Fig 5 Vent terminology

Fig 11 Plumbing diagram with house

90o

90o

90o

90o

Fig 7 Supply line split

Supply 90

Fig 8 Drain line combine

Supply Tee

Fig 6 Supply line fittings

toilet suppy

vent stack

air chambers 135.58o

91.15o

91.15o

sink supply

tub/shower supply

sink drain DWV 90

DWV 45

DWV Tee

91.15o

135.58o

tub drain

hot cold

DWV Trap

Fig 9 Drain waste vent fittings

DWV Why

tub trap

waste

closet bend

Fig 10 Plumbing detail

105

Project 1 | Half Bath I am the base condition. This is what you would find, if you cared to look. I am quiet. I conform to walls, peeking out only shyly. You can pretend I do not exist, until I am needed. Indeed, this seems to be your preference and I do not mind. I am subordinate- to your desires, to the enclosure of the wall. My space is harshly delimited within 2x4 frames. I am a prisoner here, rendered mute.

106

Project 2 | Four Toilets I have dissolved your taboos as I have dissolved your walls. Existing in uncomfortable proximity but egalitarian in access, this toilet brooks no hierarchy, offers no privacy, conveys no importance. Your toilet is exactly as everyone else’s. Here you utilize the same space. Drains serve the room but are no longer subordinate, they dominate with their structures and their needs. Elegant supply lines, without such restrictions as imposed by gravity, zig and zag to their proscribed destination with caprice. They cater to your needs but are unconcerned with your comfort. This is not a room of luxury, it is one of necessity, and navigating it entangles you in layers of implications, both physical and social. You are reduced to an input to this system.

107

Project 3 | Two Point Five Baths Why have one “master bedroom�? Why not have two? I offer this, a luxurious plenty of water and privacy.

The expressive intersection of structural extrusions and clean, smooth interfaces allow the pipes freedom within the playground of its constraints. We see what is obligate is rendered a frame upon which to hang form. Plumbing here becomes form, informs structure.

Given imaginative latitude with which to express, lines in space delineate volume and imply negative mass.

base plan

108

cold overlay

hot overlay

waste overlay

vent overlay

Project 4 | Four Showers Three Sinks As Four Toilets had no concern for your taboos, I too take little interest in such. I do, however, seek to make a space for you. My limbs arch overhead and weave a canopy of water to rain upon you as you stand in the margin between input and output. You engage me through fixtures and all of your senses. Fluid moving across your skin.

Mist in the air. The music of pipes playing rhythms all around. I am a compositional conceit‌ two modules multiplied, shower and sink. Each makes its own demands of input and outflow, placing you at their intersection.

109

SPRING

2019

Total Force 171 lb

Structures II with Russell Gentry

Weigh

D e s t r u c t i o n Te s t i n g | S h e a r W a l l with Dreama Johnson, Maria Pastorelli, Michelle Bunch, Yuhang Li Group was given specifications for size of a model designed to demonstrate shear wall resistance to lateral forces. Final model was cut on water jet cutter from concrete hardi-board and constructed to weight as little as possible while simultaneously resisting as much force as possible before failure. Results were then analyzed and presented to the class.

Group 6: Shear Walls

Dreama Johnson, Maria Pastorelli, )TQWR 5JGCT 9CNNU Michelle Bunch, Yuhang Li

&TGCOC ,QJPUQP /CTKC 2CUVQTGNNK /KEJGNNG $WPEJ ;WJCPI .K

2�

- goal to optimize profile based on moment force diagram

IQCN VQ QRVKOK\G RTQĆ‚NG DCUGF QP OQOGPV HQTEG FKCITCO - use floor slabs to brace the shear walls

2�

WUG ĆƒQQT UNCDU VQ DTCEG VJG UJGCT - wooden “beamsâ€? to attach floor to YCNNU shear wall 2â€?

- 3in overlap between shear wall YQQFGP pDGCOUq VQ CVVCEJ ĆƒQQT VQ elements UJGCT YCNN - staggered overlaps KP QXGTNCR DGVYGGP UJGCT YCNN GNGOGPVU

2�

70�

- foam base

UVCIIGTGF QXGTNCRU HQCO DCUG

10�

10�

112 CONSTRUCTION

10�

CONSTRUCTION

CONSTRUCTION

CONSTRUCTION

CONSTRUCTION

#NKIPOGPV QH DCUG HQCO

1. Alignment of base foam + EGOGPV DQCTF cement board.

5GVVKPI VJG VYQ JCNXGU YKVJ

2. Setting the two halves with #NKIPOGPV QH DCUG HQCO 1. lots Alignment base foam + NKSWKF PCKNU of liquidofnails.

EGOGPV DQCTF cement board. +PUGTVKQP QH EGPVGT UWRRQTV 5GVVKPI VJG VYQ JCNXGU YKVJ 3. Insertion of center support CPF HQCO ƃQQT RNCVU 2. and Setting the twoplates. halves with foam floor NKSWKF PCKNU lots %QORNGVG UVTWEVWTG of liquid nails. +PUGTVKQP QH EGPVGT UWRRQTV 4. Completed structure 3. Insertion of center support andCPF HQCO ƃQQT RNCVU foam floor plates.

%QORNGVG UVTWEVWTG

4. Completed structure

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

FAILURE

(#+.74'

FAILURE

(#+.74'

ional failure at 171 pounds. ional failure at 171 pounds. o: b o:= 9 b=9

/QOGPV QH HCKNWTG TGXGCNKPI 1. Moment of failure revealing failureHCKNKPI D[ VQTUKQP by torsion.

4GUWNVKPI VQTSWGF UVTWEVWTG 2. Resulting torqued structure. /QOGPV QH HCKNWTG TGXGCNKPI 1. Moment of failure revealing 5GRCTCVKQP QH ƃQQT RNCVGU failure by torsion.

HCKNKPI D[ VQTUKQP 3.

Separation of floor plates from HTQO UJGCT YCNNU FWG VQ HCKNWTG shear 4GUWNVKPI VQTSWGF UVTWEVWTG walls due to failure.

2. Resulting torqued structure.

W = 17/7 lbs/in

1

1 Results: Tortional failure at 171 pounds.

Standard Cantilever

Results: Ratio: Tortional failure at 171 pounds.

Weight Standard Cantilever 4'57.6 6QTUKQPCN HCKNWTG 171 lb / 19 lb = 9 Weight Ratio: CV RQWPFU 4'57.6 6QTUKQPCN HCKNWTG 171 lb / 19 lb = 9 CV RQWPFU Results: Tortional failure at 171 pounds.

6QVCN YGKIJV QH UVTWEVWTG ND

Shear Diagram

/CZKOWO NQCF ND Results: Tortional failure at 171 pounds.

Weight Ratio: 6QVCN YGKIJV QH UVTWEVWTG ND Floor Plates Shear Diagram 5VTGPIVJ VQ YGKIJV TCVKQP 171 lb / 19 lb = 9 /CZKOWO NQCF ND Weight Ratio: Floor Plates

5VTGPIVJ VQ YGKIJV TCVKQP 171 lb / 19 lb = 9

171 lb

2

3

Moment Diagram

Standard Cantilever

5950 pound-inch

170 pounds

W = 17/7 lbs/in

170 pounds

W = 17/7 lbs/in

Shear Diagram

5950 pound-inch Standard Cantilever 170 pounds

Moment Diagram

Shear Wall

W = 17/7 lbs/in

170 pounds Standard Cantilever

5950 pound-inch Standard Cantilever

Floor Plates

5950 pound-inch Moment Shear Diagram Diagram

TotalWall Shear

Force

Shear Wall

Total Total 171lbs Force Force Total 171171lbs lb Basement Level Force 171 lb

Shear Wall

Floor Plates

Moment Shear Diagram Diagram

170 pounds

5950 pound-inch

Floor Plates 5950 pound-inch Moment Diagram Shear Wall

Basement Level

Basement Level

Shear Wall

Basement Level

Weight 19 lb Weight 19 lb

3

W = 17/7 lbs/in

170 pounds

Shear Diagram Floor Plates

Total Force Total 171 lb Force

2

W = 17/7 lbs/in

5GRCTCVKQP QH ƃQQT RNCVGU 3. Separation of floor plates from HTQO UJGCT YCNNU FWG VQ HCKNWTG shear walls due to failure.

Weight 19 lb Weight 19 lb

Weight 19 lb

Moment Diagram

Tension

Tension

Tension

Tension

Basement Level

Compression Tension Compression

Basement Level

Compression Tension Compression Compression

113