A special thanks to family, friends, and advisors, without whom this project would not be possible.
_structural possibilities Tyler Dye Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Department of Architecture College of Architecture and the Built Environment Philadelphia University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Architecture Thesis Research Faculty Thesis Studio Instructor Susan Frosten Academic Advisor Kihong Ku Professional Advisor Matt Naugle Special Thanks To Christian Jordan Philadelphia, Pennsylvania May 2013 1
The structure of a building can have many different roles and meanings throughout the design of a project. These structural systems have various shapes, materials, and characteristics, but what they tend to have in common in mod ern day construction is an underutilization and consideration for their profound potential. However, instead of ap plying the structural system as an afterthought, a building can exploit and utilize the same strategies and techniques seen in nature to derive an integrated, efficient, and sustainable structural system. This idea of allowing nature to be the mentor, measure, and model for designing is called Biomimicry, and is defined as emulating nature’s best biological ideas to solve human problems in a sustainable manner. Biomimicry as a science can be applied to the design and integration of the structural system of a building. Methods and processes found throughout nature that exemplify optimization such as the voronoi diagram, fractal patterning, hierarchical systems, closest packing patterns, fractal patterning, and triangulation will begin to inform the design methods that formulate the shape, materials, and characteristics of a buildings structural system. This will inherently affect the structural system and the building itself from the beginning of the design process, rather than leaving the structural system to be considered as an afterthought. Nature has rigorously tested these design solutions over 3.8 billion years, and this knowledge provides a great insight into the potential structural systems currently hold. This method of allowing nature to influence the strength, integration, sustainability, and efficiency of a structural system allows for a widespread use of integrated structures rather than a partial application.
2
_table of contents
3
2
abstract
3
table of contents
4
position paper
18
investigative methods
34
site and context
40
program
44
objectives
46
appendix
50
bibliography
56
methodology
61
site analysis
77
biomimicry investigations
93
wind analysis
95
final production
109
reflection
_position paper
4
Every day, designers are searching for the next big breakthrough and the next great idea. With thousands of viable precedents existing to examine, the most obvious model of design excellence is commonly overlooked, nature. Nature offers ingenious design solutions and strategies that have been tested and adjusted for 3.8 billion years, the most imperative being it’s structure and order. Fortunately for designers, nature does not hide these extraordinary examples of structure, but rather utilizes them to derive form and function. Unfortunately, unlike the structure of nature, the structure of a building is often seen as an applied technology and utilized as an after-thought. Structures seen in modern day design are erected and habitually under utilize the vast amount of potential possessed by these systems. However, instead of applying the structural system as an afterthought, a building can exploit and utilize the same strategies and techniques seen in nature to derive an integrated, efficient, and sustainable structural system. By using nature as a mentor, measure, and model for design, the structural system of a building can greatly benefit from characteristics such as strength, order, and elimination of waste materials seen throughout nature.
5
[Utilitas, Venustas, Firmitas] When thinking about a building, and the characteristics associated with the genesis of a built form, images of walls, floors, roofs, posts, beams, and windows all come to mind. However, these defining entities are much further down the line of progression than the true essence behind a piece of architecture. Vitruvius indentifies the three most basic principles of architecture as utilitas, 1
venustas, and firmitas, which translate to ‘commodity’, ‘delight’, and ‘firmness’ . ‘Commodity’ refers to the practical functioning of a building, and the ability of the building to serve its intended use. The
1. Macdonald, Angus. Structure and Architecture. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2001.
spaces defined by the building are useless unless users can engage the program enjoyably and effectively. ‘Delight’ begins to describe the aesthetic qualities of a building experienced by the senses of a visiting occupant 2. This aesthetic comes from many different factors such as chosen
2. Ibid, 2-5.
3. Ibid, 7.
forms, spatial layout, intricate detailing, and sectional qualities. The final and most basic principle of a piece of architecture is ‘firmness’. ‘Firmness’ deals with the building’s ability to preserve its physical integrity and remain in space as a physical object, and the element of a building which satisfies the need for ‘firmness’ is structure 3. Structure exemplifies this idea of basic principles because structure itself is fundamental: without structure there is no building and therefore no ‘commodity’ and ‘delight’.
6
4. Ibid, 5-7.
[Establishing a Structural Perception] Structure can take on many roles in a building, but the fundamental principle of “allowing
5. Charleson , Andrew. Structure as Architecture. Architectural Press , 2005.
the building to preserve its physical integrity and remain in space as a physical object� never changes. The relationship between structural design and architectural design is an interesting
6. Macdonald, Angus. Structure and Architecture. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2001.
instance to examine. In one case, it is possible for an architect to completely ignore the structure of a building while deriving the form of a building 4. This approach completely hides the structural elements within the built form of the building, and takes away the voice a structural system can 5
have while detracting a vast amount of possible architectural meaning, richness, and potential . An example of this approach is the Statue of Liberty, which in this instance is considered a building considering it contains interior circulation such as stairways and elevators. The internal structure of the building, even though supportive and firm, does not influence the form or aesthetics of the http://www.damienb.com/english/liberty.html
architecture. However, in the opposing case, it is possible to design a building that exists with little else besides structure, where the structural system begins defining the form of the architecture itself, and express the possibilities of its potential 6. In this instance, the structural system begins to add an intricate layer of architectural richness and complexity.
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2011/10/enlightening-world-statue-liberty/
7
A good example of this case is the Olympic Stadium in Munich that employs a fabric structure to provide guests with protection from the rain. This example exploits the structural system, utilizes its potential, and amplifies its presence within the architecture. It’s not that a structurally nondescript building does not utilize structure. Structure is imperative to a building’s survival as seen in Vitruvius’ principles, “without structure, there can be no commodity and no delight”. The question being examined is not whether structure is being utilized, but rather, is the potential of a structural system being realized and is it being pushed to the limits of efficiency and form. Should designers truly be satisfied with putting up a grid of columns and connecting them with a few bar joists and considering it architecture? Everyday humans encounter several ways that nature addresses and deals with specific problems in extremely practical, efficient, and innovative methods and processes. After revisiting the precedents provided by nature,
http://westhamfootball.blogspot.com/2011/11/olympic-stadium-legacy-learning-lessons.html
designers may begin to realize that their methods are not nearly as efficient and economical as previously perceived.
http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/news/390/21/Architecture-Meets-Biology.html
8
[Biomimicry as the Design Vehicle] In addressing the core question of, “Can a building derive an integrated, efficient, and sustainable structural system”, a designer may be inclined to examine works of structural prowess such as Santiago Calatrava’s Alamillo Bridge in Seville, Spain, or Norman Foster’s Swiss Re Building in London, England, but there is a much more obvious model of design excellence. This approach requires designers to recede back to the primal instinct of taking design advice from nature and 7. Benyus, Janine. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. New York: Harper Perennial, 2002.
utilize this information to further our design knowledge. The science and philosophy called Biomimicry is the act of learning from nature and utilizing nature’s best designs and strategies to
8. Mclennan, Jason. The Philosophy of Sustainable Design. Bainbridge: Ecotone Punlishing, 2004.
solve human problems in a sustainable manner 7. Reemphasized in 1996 by Janine Benyus with the publication of her book, Biomimicry, the science relies on perceiving nature as model, measure, and mentor. Seeing nature as a model refers to taking inspiration from the designs of nature by emulating forms, processes, and strategies to solve human problems. Measure refers to using an ecological standard to judge the sustainability and “rightness” of an innovation. Finally, seeing nature as a mentor is a new way of viewing and valuing the environment. Designers can begin to focus on what can be learned from nature rather than what can be extracted from it 8.
9
Throughout her book, Benyus identifies and describes nine aspects that all of nature’s innovations on land, in water, and in the air have in common.9 Benyus states: o
Nature runs on sunlight
o
Uses only the energy it needs
o
Fits form to function
o
Recycles everything
o
Rewards cooperation
o
Nature banks on diversity
o
Demands local expertise
o
Curbs excesses within
o
Taps the power of limits
9. Benyus, Janine. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. New York: Harper Perennial, 2002.
10. Ibid, 7.
Many of these characteristics are exactly what designers have been attempting to replicate for decades, the difference is nature somehow finds a way to accomplish each task efficiently and sustainably 10. A spider is somehow able to make an equally strong and much tougher fiber (then Kevlar), without high pressures, heat, or corrosive acids. All they require are flies and crickets
10
as sustenance and are somehow able to produce the high tech material known as a spider web11. 11. Mclennan, Jason. The Philosophy of Sustainable Design. Bainbridge: Ecotone Punlishing, 2004.
Designers and scientists still to this day have not been able to accomplish such a feat even when
12. Ibid, 12. 13. Sriraman, Bharath. Interdisciplinarity, Creativity, and Learning: Mathematics with Literature, Paradoxes, History, Technology, and Modeling. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, Inc., 2009. 14. Kellert, Stephen. Biophilic Design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
using high amounts of heat, pressure, and corrosive acids. This seemingly obvious example truly 12
shows the potential that the processes imbedded within nature hold .
The philosophy of examining nature as inspiration for design is not a new concept. Many of the buildings revered by individuals today were inspired by nature and the processes that create it. The Parthenon in Athens, Greece was modeled after proportions found in the human body. The concept of mimicking nature’s proportions and geometries was extremely popular among Greek practitioners due to the belief that this universal math would bring them closer to the cosmos13. It is only recently that designers have started to turn away from nature’s excellence, focusing instead on each other’s latest innovation14. Designers instead should begin focusing on nature, the
http://lookuparchitecture.com/HistoryRome.htm
predecessor of these precedents rather than the precedents themselves. This concept of nature becoming some type of universal precedent for all designers could catapult design and sustainability into a new realm of innovation.
[Identifying the Differences Between Biomimicry and Biomorphism] While the results and products of a Biomimicry inspired design process may begin to http://scottishlimecentre.blogspot.com/2011_04_01_archive.html
11
resemble shapes, patterns, and characteristics of nature, this is not the specific goal of Biomimicry. This concept of taking and utilizing patterns and shapes found within nature is called Biomorphism15. An interesting example of this strategy is Frank Lloyd Wright’s Johnson Wax Building in Racine Wisconsin. In the large working space, Wright utilizes a column system that is intended to resemble water lilies floating in a lake16.
15. Michael Pawlyn, Biomimocry in Architecture, London: Riba Publishing, 2011.
16. Ibid, 2-3.
In this instance, Wright is strictly looking at the form of the water lillie, rather than the natural process that derives the form and shape, categorizing this investigation as an example of
17. Kellert, Stephen. Biophilic Design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
Biomorphism. Biomimicry, on the other hand, is not a style of building or an identifiable shape or 18. Ibid, 10-11.
product, but rather a design process and a way of seeking solutions to complex problems17. This process involves a designer seeking out a specific problem such as flexibility, structural efficiency, structural integration, strength under tension, wind resistance, heating, cooling, etc., and then seeking out a local organism or natural process that exemplifies the chosen function. The idea of seeking, listening, and observing is a vital component to the philosophy of Biomimicry that inherently brings the designers into a close intimacy with their biological mentors18. This shows that the final product of the Biomimicry process may not look organic or resemble the original subject; it is more about emulating the design processes and strategies found within nature. http://www.narrowlarry.com/nlflwjwax.html
12
[The Economy of Nature] After examining the possibilities and potentials of Biomimicry, the concept of efficiency and economy continue to reoccur. Every day, nature is forced to survive in extreme conditions all across the globe. Julian Vincent, professor of Biomimicry at the University of Bath, states that, “in nature, materials are expensive, and shape is cheap�19. This statement reinforces the fact that nature is extremely good at making economical and efficient use of materials. The science of Biomimicry emphasizes the importance of examining the processes of economy and efficiency rather than their 19. Michael Pawlyn, Biomimocry in Architecture, London: Riba Publishing, 2011.
inevitable byproducts. These characteristics, which are usually achieved through an evolved ingenuity of form, become evident when observed as the driving factors behind the final forms
20. Ibid, 1-12.
of nature. Strategies such as algorithmic organization, folding, vaulting, ribbing, and inflation all allow nature and the organisms within to create the forms that demonstrate amazing efficiency 20. This entire process of efficiency in nature is driven strictly by necessity. Over millions of years, the pressures of survival have driven nature to refine its structure, and discard any system or form that is inadequate. Factors such as finding sustenance, temperature control, mating, climatic events, and avoiding predator competition, amongst many others, have all designed and influenced the final forms and shapes seen today.
13
Along with the elaborate efficiency of shape and form, nature also demonstrates and operates by a completely sustainable closed loop system. This process is seen throughout all aspects
21. Ibid, 53. of nature, and is relatively absent from the human system of living. Throughout nature, every material, either component or waste, has a purpose and an inherent value to its surrounding environment. Each material promotes the success of a process and vice versa, keeping the system
22. Ibid, 53.
in a complete and sustainable cycle21. This concept is drastically different to the linear human system of living. Humans generally operate by obtaining, using, and discarding a material that they either acquired from earth or engineered themselves. Many individuals make an effort to recycle several types of plastics and papers, but the overall picture of the human system of living is not good. There are very few instances seen where people utilize the waste of someone or something to fulfill a need or complete a task. This new idea and system of living is entirely reachable if the closed loop system is considered throughout all aspects of design, and designers begin deriving far more value from the same resources while moving towards zero-waste ways of operating22.
[Implementing Inspired Ideas] The concepts of efficiency and economy observed throughout nature can easily be integrated into many aspects of design, engineering, and everyday life. This efficiency has
14
applications to many of the design problems seen today, but the application and integration of these ideas towards the conceptualization of a building’s structural system is truly inspiring. Often seen in today’s buildings are generic, unsustainable structural systems that greatly underutilize the potential of these structural systems. Designers today have gravitated towards the act of observing and studying the works of great designers before them, rather than looking at nature for much more efficient and sustainable precedents. This position now poses a fundamental question that will continue to drive this project and the progress of structural design throughout the architectural and engineering industry. Are we as designers satisfied with the efficiency and aesthetics of the typical bar joist, truss, or cable member that make up the structural systems of today, or can we examine and utilize processes found within nature to better these systems and realize their full potential? Nature offers many processes for deriving structure and efficiency, all of which have applications throughout the fields of architecture, engineering, and design. In almost every piece or product of nature lies a generative process that has the potential to be utilized as a generator for a buildings structural system. Processes and products in nature such as hierarchical systems, closest packing patterns, fractal patterning, triangulation, and voronoi diagramming all have applications
15
towards the conceptualization of a structural system because they all deal with the overall concept of optimization. In one way or another, each of these processes or geometries have all been developed over billions of years by nature for the sole purposes of making nature more efficient and existing as a catalyst for survival. Architects, engineers, and designs alike should begin utilizing these processes and exploit the successes nature has garnered over its long illustrious career. These processes, along with many of natures other successes can begin taking structural systems and structural designs to new levels of sustainability and efficiency. Success has been exhibited already in the example of the Eden project, a large greenhouse facility that utilizes ETFE (Ethylene tetrafluoroethylene) panels that are able to span large distances while weighing a fraction of
23. Ibid, 18.
comparable steel structural systems. In this instance, designers were able to learn from nature and it’s processes, and benefit from achieving factor 100 savings as the air inside the facility actually weighs more than the system itself 23. This emphasis and importance placed on the structural system of a building refers back to the original concept of utilizing the full potential of these structural systems. These systems have the capability to move the architecture and engineering professions into a new realm of sustainable possibility. By efficiently designing the structural components of a building, designers can begin http://www.eden-project.net/
16
thinking about efficiency and sustainability at many different levels of the building process. This potential adds the inherent importance that this project has been so desperately searching for. Previous statements such as, “Buildings do not utilize their structural systems to their full potential�, can now begin to be realized and rationalized through this examination of a biomimicry infused design process. This design process is what will begin to carry this project into the next stages of formulating a program to act as a proof of concept. The process of learning from nature to solve human problems in a sustainable way, rather than simply copying the forms nature provides through biomorphism. The implantation of these ideas derived through biomimicry will begin to manifest themselves throughout the entire design process, suggesting a new method of design. Rather than looking strictly at built precedent during the early stages of design, this new design method will mandate the equal if not superior consideration of natural examples and processes. This amplified consideration will allow for the project as a whole to begin to holistically benefit from the advantages provided by biomimicry inspired design.
17
_investigative methods
18
_precedents algorithmic
Project: The Beijing Water Cube Architect: FTW/Arup Design Highlights: This project features a structural system that was rationalized using optimization. The bubbles, even though they appear random, are extremely repetitive, making the complex building form surprisingly buildable. The building reaches sustainability through its structure and membrane material. The outer membrane is made of ETFE (Ethylene-Tetrafluoroethylene). These “Bubble� are able to resist large loads while the frames mimic the random forming of soap bubbles. The ETFE cladding enables the structure to be about 30% more energy efficient than traditional glass by allowing more light and heat penetration. Its reuse and recycling of water is nothing short of groundbreaking, as approximately 80% of water harvested from the roof catchment areas, pool backwash systems, and overland flows are re-flowed back into the system.
19
http://www.arup.com/Home/Projects/Chinese_National_Aquatics_Center.aspx
_precedents algorithmic
Project: Transbay Terminal Tower Architect: SOM Design Highlights: Designed to be San Francisco’s Grand Central Station, Transbay Terminal Tower would become the largest skyscraper on the west coast. SOM utilizes optimization techniques to realize the exterior structural grid. This process of algorithmic optimization allowed SOM to come up with the most efficient structural system possible while using less material and making the building more sustainable. This proposal is a good example of pushing the structural system of a building to the limits and realizing its full potential. The strength is derived from an altered diagrid pattern that runs the length of the exterior façade of the building.
http://www.som.com/project/transbay-transit-center-design-competition
20
_precedents algorithmic
Project: The Astana National Library Architect: BIG Design Highlights: The Astana National Library is another project that utilizes optimization techniques. The mobius strip form of the Astana Library was engineered to maintain the ideal form, minimize deflections, panel variations, cost and material usage to make the project a reality. Through computer modeling software, BIG was able to derive the most efficient forms while obtaining an aesthetically pleasing shape. www.big.dk
21
_precedents conceptual
Project: The Eden Project Architect: Nicholas Grimshaw Design Highlights: The Eden Project is an indoor green house facility located in the United Kingdom. This project is an example of designers looking to nature to solve complex design problems. The architects and engineers looked at the processes and shapes derived from soap bubbles to create a lightweight dome structure. Using ETFE (Ethylene tetrafluoroethylene) panels, designers were able to produce a structural system that actually weighed less then the air inside the facility. This project shows the massive potential this type of design has in being able to produce factor 100 savings.
http://grimshaw-architects.com/sectors/
22
_precedents conceptual
Project: Palazzetto Della Sport Architect: Pier Luigi Nervi Design Highlights: The Palazzetto Della Sport is a moderately sized sports arena built in Rome Italy. During the project, Nervi looked a the ribbing found in several natural circumstances to derive the structural system that would support the large span required for the dome. This fractal ribbing provided an extremely efficient structural concrete system.
http://mimoa.eu/projects/Italy/Rome/Palazzetto%20dello%20Sport
23
_precedents conceptual
Project: The Eastgate Center Architect: Mick Pearce/Arup Design Highlights: The Eastgate Center is a unique shopping center located in Zimbabwe. During the design process, Pearce looked at the way termite hills provide natural ventilation in hot arid climates. Utilizing thermal mass, Pearce is able to recreate this affect developing a building that requires no mechanical air conditioning.
http://www.mickpearce.com/
24
_precedents programmatic
Project: London Olympic Stadium Architect: Populous Design Highlights: Featured in the last Summer Olympics held in London, England, the Olympic stadium hosted hundreds of events and acted as the center piece for the entire games. Designed by Populous Architects, the stadium exemplifies sustainable design both during and after the games. Upon completion of the games, the stadium will be drastically scaled back to recycle excess materials and make the stadium more usable in the future. This design process begins looking into the idea of a closed loop system of living.
http://populous.com/
25
_precedents programmatic Project: The Birds Nest Architect: Herzog and DeMeuron Design Highlights: In 2008, Herzog and DeMeuron designed the National Stadium in Beijing for the summer Olympics. Modeled and appropriately named after a “birds nest�, the stadium is wrapped in structural members that resemble the sticks of a birds nest. This structural system is intrinsically integrated into the building’s design and informs the shape of the stadium itself. The structural members also create an amazing spatial experience throughout the intermediate circulation space. Visitors walk between the inner core and the outer structural wrapping while experiencing different levels and colors of light that are filtered by the structural members. This precedent is also relevant in that the architects and engineers utilized multiple algorithmic projections to derive the complex shape and configuration of the nest.
http://www.herzogdemeuron.com/index.html
26
_biomimicry
27
_biomimicry as:
[Model] refers to taking inspiration from the designs of nature by emulating forms, processes, and strategies to solve human problems
[Measure] refers to using an ecological standard to judge the sustainability and “rightness� of an innovation
[Mentor] refers to a new way of viewing and valuing the environment. Designers can begin to focus on what can be learned from nature rather than what can be extracted from it
28
_natural investigations This investigation dove into the processes and products seen throughout nature. In looking at different naturally occuring structural systems, a better understanding of how these concepts will be implemented into a buildings structural system can be realized.
29
30
_biomimicry vs. biomorphism While the results and products of a Biomimicry inspired design process may begin to resemble shapes, patterns, and characteristics of nature, this is not the specific goal of Biomimicry. This concept of taking and utilizing patterns and shapes found within nature is called Biomorphism . An interesting example of this strategy is Frank Lloyd Wright’s Johnson Wax Building in Racine Wisconsin. In the large working space, Wright utilizes a column system that is intended to resemble water lilies floating in a lake . In this instance, Wright is strictly looking at the form of the water lillie, rather than the natural process that derives the form and shape, categorizing this investigation as an example of Biomorphism. Biomimicry, on the other hand, is not a style of building or an identifiable shape or product, but rather a design process and a way of seeking solutions to complex problems . This process involves a designer seeking out a specific problem such as flexibility, structural efficiency, structural integration, strength under tension, wind resistance, heating, cooling, etc., and then seeking out a local organism or natural process that exemplifies the chosen function. The idea of seeking, listening, and observing is a vital component to the philosophy of Biomimicry that inherently brings the designers into a close intimacy with their biological mentors .
31
_optimization Optimization has been an integral part of this project from its conception. Optimization has many applications regarding sustainability, efficiency, and economic potentials. These diagrams describe optimization at its most basic level. The first showing how unstressed material is removed from a spanning member to create the most optimal shape and solution. The second shows this process in nature. Given a set of constraints, in this case gravity and stem to hang from, the apple over time removes unstressed and unused material leaving the final optimal shape.
optimization
optimization in nature
32
33
_site and context
34
Several sites around Philadelphia and its suburbs were considered in the siting of this project. Parameters such as large amounts of space, confirmed brown-field site, close proximity to public transportation, highway access. close proximity to cultural center city, and close proximity to water all played a major deciding factor in site selection. After considering three primary sites, the Philadelphia Naval Yard was selected for project development. This area exemplified all the qualities listed above, while providing several great design challenges and opportunities.
35
36
The Philadelphia Naval Yard Confirmed Brown-Field Site 1,200 Acres
37
_site context
38
University of Pennsylvania
_stadium proximity
Philadelphia Sports Complex 39
_program
40
bridge school of architecture/engineering
_stadium skyscraper residence
41
_stadium In searching for a program and building typology that exemplified the possibilities of an expressive structure, several large scale typologies were considered. Possibilities such as a bridge, school of architecture/engineering, skyscraper, multi-person residence, and stadium were all thoughtfully considered before concluding that a stadium was the best fit the project. A stadium provides the opportunity to explore structural possibilities while allowing another layer of programming that a bridge would not. In addition, just like biomimicry exists of many facets, a stadium has several different structure systems that work together towards the stability of the entity as a whole. This correlation of multi faceted design qualities provides the opportunity to explore several different avenues of biomimetic incorporation.
42
_olympic stadium In 2024, the Summer Olympics will be up for grabs to be hosted by a city somewhere around the world. The United States, particularly Philadelphia would be a good candidate city to host an event such as this. An Olympic Stadium would be an opportunity to utilize optimization techniques to reduce materials and promote sustainable stadium design. This goes hand in hand with an Olympic bid, given the large amount of emphasis placed on sustainability. This also refers back to the closed loop system discussed in the position paper. Could we emulate nature’s closed loop system that utilizes the waste of certain processes and incorporate it in an Olympic design and proposal? The possibilities for this type of proposal are vast and endless, allowing the project to resist constriction from unnecessary factors.
43
_objectives
44
_thesis objectives Develope the structural system for a stadium utilizing ideas derived from nature through biomimicry. Expose the potential held by structure by adding the value needed to emphasize a system. Examine the economical and sustainable benefits of designing from nature. Propose and Olympic bid utilizing the concept of a closed loop system
45
_appendix
46
_definitions
definitions provided by: http://www.merriam-webster.com/ http://www.biomimicryinstitute.org/aboutus/what-is-biomimicry.html
structure: (n.) a. something arranged in a definite pattern of organization b. the arrangement of particles or parts in a substance or body c. organization of parts as dominated by the general character of the whole d. the aggregate of elements of an entity in their relationships to each other biomimicry: (n.) a. the science and act of learning from nature and utilizing nature’s best designs and strategies to solve human problems in a sustainable manner
47
_works referenced Burry, Jane. The New Mathematics of Architecture. Thames and Hudson, 2012. Burry, Mark. Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming. Wiley, 2011. Coates, Paul. Programming.Architecture. Routledge, 2010. Delanda, Manuel. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Manuel Delanda: Deleuze and the Use of the Genetic Algorithm in Architecture.â&#x20AC;? . Manuel Delanda, n.d. Web. 1 Sep 2012. <http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/algorithm. htm>. Delanda , Manuel, perf. Deluze and the Use of the Genetic Algorithm in Architecture. Columbia University , 2004. Web. 1 Sep 2012. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50-d_J0hKz0>. Deleuze, Gilles. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press , 1987. Print. Eisenman, Peter. Diagrams of Exteriority. Print. Eisenman, Peter. Eisenman Inside Out. Yale University Press, 2004. Print. Eisenman, Peter. Written Into the Void. Yale University Press, 2007. Print. Hensel, Michael. Emergent Technologies and Design: Towards a Biological Paradigm for Architecture. Routledge, 2010. Kolarevic, Branko. Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing. Abington: Taylor and Francis, 2005. Print. Pearce, Peter. Structure in Nature is a Strategy for Design. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1980.
48
_works referenced Powell, Kenneth. 30 St Mary Axe: A Tower for London. Merrell Publishers, 2006. Print. Pugnale, Alberto. “Morphogenesis and Structural Optimization of Shell Structures with the Aid of a Genetic Algorithm .” n. page. Web. 28 Mar. 2012. <http://vbn.aau.dk/files/38938688/Morphogenesis and Structural Optimization of Shell Structures with the Aid of a Genetic Algorithm.pdf>. Riera Ojeda, Oscar. Arcadian Architecture: Bohlin Cywinski Jackson. Rizzoli, 2005. Print. Tzonis, Alexander. Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement. Universe , 1999. Print. Weinstock, Michael. The Architecture of Emergence: The Evolution of Form in Nature and Civilisation. Wiley, 2010. Xi, Y.M. “ Architecture and Urban Design through Evolutionary Structural Optimisation Algorithm.” RMIT University. (2011): n. page. Web. 28 Mar. 2012. <http://isg.rmit.edu.au/Publications/Xie et al ALGODE Japan 2011 Temp.pdf>.
49
_bibliography
50
_bibliography Benyus, Janine. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. New York: Harper Perennial, 2002. Charleson , Andrew. Structure as Architecture. Architectural Press , 2005. Kellert, Stephen. Biophilic Design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2008. Macdonald, Angus. Structure and Architecture. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2001. Mclennan, Jason. The Philosophy of Sustainable Design. Bainbridge: Ecotone Punlishing, 2004. Michael Pawlyn, Biomimocry in Architecture, London: Riba Publishing, 2011. Sriraman, Bharath. Interdisciplinarity, Creativity, and Learning: Mathematics with Literature, Paradoxes, History, Technology, and Modeling. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, Inc., 2009.
51
52
_a non-linear process Design is a process. For some it’s clear, for others it’s hazy, for some it’s simplistic, for others it’s complex. But one aspect of design emphasized by this project is the absences of a linear process. What has developed has been a constant dialog between the design and something prior that drives the design. Keeping this dialog open throughout the design process is essential to our success as designers.
55
_methodology
56
Asking questions: What can life teach us about design and technology? How can nature solve the problems we face today?
57
Everyday designers are producing new and exciting products for industries all across the globe. For the most part, most precedent is taken from what previous designers have done before. This project proposes a challenge for designers. Next time you are faced with a design challenge, rather than opening a book or searching the Internet, look out the window because you just might learn something.
58
_constant dialog
59
As stated importance and the continously variety of
before, this project has exposed the of a consistant dialog between the design informer. In this case, design is referencing and speaking to a natural systems to inform progression.
_layered process
60
_site analysis
61
The Navy Yard
The Navy Yard: Abstracted
Gillette Stadium
Hayward Field
_site progression 62
63
The Navy Yard
Philadelphia, PA
_contextual analysis
64
The Navy Yard was analyzed thoroughly to determine the best location for siting a stadium of this magnitude. Public transportation, density, zoning, context, stadium orientation, and vehicular traffic were all considered before the environmental factors were introduced into the equation.
65
In an attempt to add more parameters to help facilitate a project focus, several envirnmental factors were considered to push the project forward.
66
The summation of all the previous site analysis led to the stadium being placed relative to the main entrance of the Navy Yard and towards the water to create a new dynamic set of parameters for design.
67
After concluding the previous site analysis, the site was abstracted in an attempt to rid the site of precise contextual parameters while retaining the extisting environmental parameters.
68
GILLETTE STADIUM Stemming from mid crit critcism, two additional sites were examined that had an existing issue with the specific environmental issue of wind. This specification provided a concrete parameter for the project to address. 69
http://doubled.goatfo.com/home/?page_id=1047
HAYWARD FIELD Gillette Stadium in Foxoboro Massachusetts, and Hayward Field in Eugene, Oregon were both analyzed as Stadiums with existing wind issues. Both stadiums exhibit wind circumstances that affect athletic performance.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HaywardFieldPano.jpg
70
Hayward Field Eugene, Oregon 71
72
73
74
75
This scattered process of site analysis is able to speak to the non-linear process emphasized before. This constant dialog retained throughout the project was able to help refine the site selection and thus improving the project. There were many instances where it seemed like progress would take two steps forward and three steps back, but all the investigation completed throughout the process led and contributed to the final product.
76
_biomimicry investigation
77
The Biomimicry Methodology has been an integral aspect of this project since last semester. Starting by laying the groundwork through a tri-sectional taxonomy, different groups and advantages were able to be studied. The questions, “What is this system doing?”, “Why is it doing it?”, and “How is it doing it?” were able to drive the understanding of each system, and inform the design process and product.
78
79
_CONCEPTUAL SKETCHES 80
81
BIOMIMICRY INVESTIGATIONS
82
The investigation into Biomimicry began extremely broad in an attempt to understand a variety of systems that adapt to wind in many different circumstances and in many different ways. Once an understanding of each system why attained from asking the questions, “What is it doing”, “Why is it doing it”, and How is it doing it”, the study focused in on two particular systems.
83
Shape not held consistent Surface area Flexibility
ADAPTABILITY
After examining many different systems dealing with wind in several different ways under many different circumstances, the three similar characteristics were 1. Shape not held consistent, 2. Surface Area, and 3. Flexibility. These three characteristics were then grouped under the single defining aspect of adaptability. All of the examples presented have the ability to be flexible and adapt to external forces and stimuli that are applied to them. This was seen as a contrast to the typical building architects design today, given the majority of static buildings that comprise the built environment. This characteristic of adaptability was the driving force behind many of the resulting design decisions.
84
_BONE STUDIES
85
_APPLICATIONS OF BONE STUDIES 86
_PHYLLOTAXIS STUDIES 87
_PHYLLOTAXIS ARRANGEMENTS
_STRUCTURAL MEMBERS
88
CURLING LEAF The first system further investigated is a broad leaf. As wind blows across this leaf, the leaf curls to form the most aerodynamic shape to resist getting torn from itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s respective branch. It is not the shape of the leaf being looked at here, but rather the principle of adaptability and flexibility to applied force.
89
THERMO BIMETAL
After seeing this curling motion exhibited by the leaf, the idea of Thermo Bimetals presented itself. Thermo Bimetal is a singular material comprised of two different metals, both with two different coefficients of expansion, usually brass and aluminum given their vastly different expansion rates. There was an interesting relationship between the leaf curling under stress, and the metal curling under an external stimuli, heat. This was applied to a skin system, emphasizing the relationship between heat and air movement. As the temperature heats up, a spectator inside the stadium would inherently want more airflow. The air temperature heats up, causing the material to curl, thus allowing more air to pass through.
90
The second system further investigated was a low lying moss type plant. Prevalent in colder climates, the plant mitigates wind penetration to create a micro climate within it’s barriers. The plant achieves this by increasing it’s outer surface area by densely packing it’s flower buds.
91
Looking at how the plant system blocks the wind through increased density of dynamic packing, a system was developed that can adjust depending on several parameters around the stadium. Depending on how much air penetration is desired, the system can shift from a convex to concave shape.
92
_CONVEX
93
_CONCAVE
94
_final production
95
Moving into final production, an emphasis was placed on the individual systems and the dialog process that got the project to where it is today. This process truly has been the main focus of the project, allowing the final product and program to act as the vehicle for testing this methodology.
96
97
98
_EXPLODED SYSTEMS 99
100
101
102
_THERMO BIMETAL FACADE SYSTEM 103
104
_DYNAMIC CUSHION SYSTEM 105
106
107
108
Pursuit of Knowledge Goal number one for this project from the beginning for me was to learn things and learn them well. I had spent four extremely influential years at Philadelphia University designing towards the norm, and this was my chance to break out and add many different aspects to my tool kit. Everything from project type, software, methodology, and execution I tried to address in ways of which were unfamiliar to myself. This certainly was not the most time efficient way of doing things, given the fact that I had to learn many things before I could execute, but I am undoubtedly a better designer for it. It was a struggle, but a struggle worthwhile.
Non-Linear As stated before, my position on the idea that design is not a linear process holds true, and I believe my thesis project is a true testament to that statement. I set out to define a methodology for myself not usually taken by designers, and I believe I did this. This may be one of the more consistent or solid pieces of this project. Sure the vehicle, or â&#x20AC;&#x153;programâ&#x20AC;?, that would be testing this methodology changed many times, but that never really was the focus of the project. I was able to design through a consistent consultation with nature, allowing my designs and nature to have a crucial conversation with each other. This is what was able to drive the project forward while retaining my sometimes seemingly misconstrued ambitions.
109
Progression If you told me I would have been designing an adaptable skin system that examines the way a leaf blows in the wind, I probably would have laughed. I began this project with a focus on structure, asking the question, “Can we as designers utilize structure in a more proactive way by adding value to the particular system we are designing”. This was a good start but I had no focus, and that really is what this year became, a search for focus. I threw around ideas like what actually is structure, can we inhabit it and is that the right way to add value, but again it didn’t really derive a focus. It wasn’t until I added the final piece of Biomimicry that I found my focus and my passion for the project. I became extremely intrigued at the process, even though it took me an entire year to figure out. I started extremely shallow, falling into the trap of learning about nature and utilizing simple shapes, but eventually refined my process and began learning from nature as Biomimicry suggests.
Reflection Looking back on the year as a whole is a bit overwhelming and sometimes I can’t comprehend how I made it from where I was back in August to where I am now in May. The process was extremely taxing, exhausting, and painful with the occasional urge to throw a computer through a window, but I don’t think I would have traded it for something else. The knowledge I have gained and the experiences I have had are undoubtedly valuable and I know will propel me through my career as an architect. Again I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone involved in the project including professors, advisors, friends, and family. Without all of you and your unwavering support this project would not be what it is today.
110
TYLER DYE