Design Studio 2 Portfolio

THE HOOVER part of a collaborative project known as “The Living Wall”

CHRISTOPHER OSTERHOUDT Freshman Portfolio Spring 2010

University at Buffalo ARC 102 Design Studio 2 faculty CHRISTOPHER ROMANO SHADI NAZARIAN NICHOLAS BRUSCIA teaching assistant JAMES WILLEMS RANSOM

team members PHIL GUSMANO NICOLE NGUYEN ASHLEY RUBINO RACHEL HEFTI KANE LEE OWEN CORRENTI

internet link <http://thelivingwall.blogspot.com>

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Design and fabricate a structure that accomodates

someone with a basic and minimal dwelling unit.

Inside it needs to only accomodate sleeping areas

[for a minimum of three people], a way to get in

and circulate.

2. Individual units must be adjacent to one another and

share boundaries. Each unit will need a partition

wall with adjoining structures, where unique

structural and programmatic interlocking situations

begin to evolve.

3. Each 6'x6'x8' volume should have a maximum of two

shifts, a clear design strategy. The original volume

must be registered in the development process as

well as the final outcome.

CONTENTS PHASE 1: INDIVIDUAL PROPOSALS

4

PHASE 2: MODULARIZATION

8

PHASE 3: STRUCTURE

12

PHASE 4: OFF SITE FABRICATION, TRANSPORTATION,

AND RE-ASSEMBLY

18

4

phase 1

INDIVIDUAL PROPOSALS Geometry can be defined as the shape or form of a surface or solid. A shift can be defined as a transformation of that geometry.

In this case, the geometric form of a rectangular prism [6' tall x 6' wide x 8' long] is shifted in two different ways. These two shifts create a negative space inside the volume that can be occupied according to the program of the building. The program I have proposed for my building revolves around ergonomics and the way the human body is positioned to be most comfortable. The designs in this portfolio take into account the most comfortable positions for a person who may be standing, sitting, or laying down.

5

DESIGN 1

6

DESIGN 2

7

8

phase 2

MODULARIZATION mod*u*lar*ize - to form or organize into modules mod*ule - a separable component, frequently one that is

interchangeable with others, for assembly into

units of differing size, complexity, or function

9

10

FINAL ITERATION While working with Phil Gusmano and Nicole Nguyen, I developed a new, more feasible design for a building. Shown to the left is an axon drawing showing the new transformations I made to the cube. Below the axon is one of our first attempts at modularizing the building. After considering the issue of properly structuring our building, we went through multiple iterations of modularizing the building, ending with the below concept.

11

10

phase 3

STRUCTURE Goals: I. II. III. IV. V.

Reduce weight and projections of the structure Finalize structure; create modular and joineryn details Configure a roof pitch for drainage Create a foundation with railroad ties Assemble a list of materials indicating quantities & cost

11

LOAD PATH DIAGRAMS

14

MAIN BEAM CONNECTION DETAILS Top/Bottom Module Connection

The main beam running vertically down the center of the building was perhaps the most important aspect to our structure. Too small and the structure would be weak and collapse, too strong and the beam would be unnecessarily bulky and heavy. We used three 2x6â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s that connect seemlessly in the middle to provide a continuous path for downward forces to travel through.

15

TRUSS DETAILS

The truss acted as the main structural system for the top module. Being able to direct the weight of the entire module to the main center beam was critical, as it would be the essentially the only structural point of connection. Diagonal beams were installed to direct these loads, creating a large truss similar to those in large bridges.

16

REAR BOX & STEEL ROD DETAILS

With more than half of the front of the building being one massive cantilever, tremendous forces were being acted upon the rear of the structure.

The great deal of weight on the front created sheer torque forces on the back, making the whole thing want to tip forward. To solve this problem, steel tension rods were installed and nuts were screwed in on the outside of the roof and floor. This held the rear of the top module down onto the rear box, preventing the whole thing from tipping over.

With the sheering problem solved, there was next a compression problem to solve. After being told that people could potentially have access to the roof, it became apparent that if weight was applied to the back of the roof with nothing supporting it, the main center beam would act as a fulcrum to essentially a huge seesaw, and top module would tip backwards. To solve this, we created a small box that in the massing model would be shifted up from the bottom half with the top half. This provided an opportunity to add structure in the rear to counteract any potential compression forces applied from the roof.

17

18

phase 4

OFF SITE FABRICATION, TRANSPORTATION, AND RE-ASSEMBLY Full

Scale Construct: The structure was completely fabricated on campus in the Parker Hall shop, then transported to Griffis Sculpture Park in chunks and reassembled on site. From the construction process to the final assembly on site, from frustration to satisfaction, the story is told through a series of collages on the next few pages.

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

When all was said and done, The Living Wall became not just a project installed in a park by architecture students, but it became an example of the relationships created through connection. Every building comes together to form one long â&#x20AC;&#x153;wallâ&#x20AC;?, and the shifts made to create each building makes the wall seem to come alive. And just as each individual building connects to the next through a partition wall, the entire project connects with nature through Griffis Sculpture Park. The Living Wall has and will continue to be an inspiration through its beauty of connection.