Studio Air_Emily Thomas

Page 1

STUDIO AIR EMILY THOMAS 2017, Manuel Muehlbauer


CONTENTS

PART A CONCEPTUALISATION A1 Design Futuring..............................................................................................................................................................................8 A2 Design Computation..................................................................................................................................................................12 A3 Composition / Generation.........................................................................................................................................................18 A4 Conclusion......................................................................................................................................................................................26 A5 Learning Outcomes......................................................................................................................................................................28 A 6 Appendix........................................................................................................................................................................................32 PART B CRITERIA DESIGN B1Research Field................................................................................................................................................................................36 B2 Case Study 1.0...............................................................................................................................................................................44 B3 Case Study 2.0...............................................................................................................................................................................54 B4 Technique Development...........................................................................................................................................................68 B5 Prototyping....................................................................................................................................................................................82 B6 Technique Proposal...................................................................................................................................................................104 B7 Learning Outcomes....................................................................................................................................................................126 B8 Appendix......................................................................................................................................................................................130 PART C DETAILED DESIGN C1 Design Concept..........................................................................................................................................................................136 C2 Tectonic Elements and Prototype.....................................................................................................................................154 C3.1 Final Detail Model...................................................................................................................................................................178 C3.2 Design Proposal.....................................................................................................................................................................188 C4 Learning Outcomes...................................................................................................................................................................202

2


“Design is thinking for improvement, forever� - M. Cobanli

3


INTRODUCTION About Me My name is Emily and I am currently completing my third year of undergraduate studies, majoring in architecture. I’ve always had a passion for creating things, ever since I was little and was known for my over active imagination. In year six, however, our assignment was to draw a plan view of our backyards that is where my passion for architecture stems from. You could say my way of designing is a bit quirky and experimental, probably due to my love for writing which is still a huge part of my life. From my first assignment at university, I have thought up wider concepts and narratives to fit with the

4

brief. I love manipulating restrictions and limitations to form something completely different from what was expected from the beginning of the assignment. My designs are often very dramatic and I try to weave complex narratives to denote the human experience within my architecture. Perhaps in line with my own design thinking, I find I am inspired by the work of Oscar Niemeyer. While he is known for his sensual curves and focus on human experience, I know him for a quote I found in my first year: “The rule is the worst thing. You just want to break it.” So I do


Sleeping Pod, Digital Design and Fabrication, Diana Ong, Malak Nourderine El Moussaoui and Emily Thomas, 2016

5


Conceptacle, Studio Earth, 2016

Frame and Infill, Studio Earth, 2016

INTRODUCTION Experience My experience in parametric design and computation is limited. I was introduced to Rhinoceros 3D in Digital Design and Fabrication, but my group’s design was entirely hand-made, we only used Rhino to check a box on the assignment guidelines. In other studios, my form finding techniques were limited to testing with actual models and drawings rather than using generative design methods on the

Gallery at Karlap Quay, Studio Water, 2016 (Using analogue design techniques)

6

computer. I did use Rhino as a way to computerise my assignments so they would look nice during my presentation on A1 sheets of paper, but I never used the computer for coming up with the actual design. In studio water, I did begin using Rhino to quickly model my ideas which sped up the design process but I used it in an analogue way, just to design whatever was in my head and get it out in 3D form.

View at Karlap Quay, Studio Water, 2016 (Using analogue design techniques)


Karlap Quay, Studio Water - Design in the style of Tadao Ando, 2016

7


A1 DESIGN FUTURING Times Eureka Pavilion While the project does not exactly blend into the landscape in which it sits, the pavilion does draw inspiration from the cellular structure of the plants in the garden. This is, however, not what makes the design one that enables sustainability nor design futuring; the pavilion is made from sustainable timber and recycled plastic. The plastic cells also direct water into channels to utilise any run off in the surrounding garden.

8

In terms of computational design, the cellular model was created using complex computer algorithms which depicted the overall form within the cuboid geometry. The panels and plastic were pre-fabricated and assembled quickly on site, creating a design which reflected and enabled nature as well its human visitors.


Nex Architecture, Times Eureka Pavilion, 2011 < http://www.archilovers.com/projects/54312/times-eureka-pavilion.html> [accessed: 05/03/2017]

9


A1 DESIGN FUTURING Elephant House This project does not only emphasise how computational design can be used to create complex, yet simply constructed gridshells, but also elucidates how architecture can be something to facilitate the natural world. Although the shell does not appear to be something sourced from nature, the shape and the effect are influenced by tree canopies, successfully mimicking the elephants’ natural habitat while providing shelter and shade.

10

Yet, the design also benefits the human users (visitors of the zoo) by providing portals in which they can view the animals through. The prefabricated triple layer panels were cut and shaped on site and span the entirety of the structure in one continuous surface. Furthermore, the shape and flow of the building follow the landscape, creating a sense that even though this is built work, it has a direct symbiotic relationship with nature itself.


Markus Schietsch Architekten,Elephant House, 2014 < http://www.archdaily.com/770772/elephant-house-zoo-zurich-markus-schietsch-architekten> [accessed: 05/03/2017]

11


A2 DESIGN COMPUTATION

Computing manipulates a 'human only process'2 (design) by altering it into something that works much faster and expands what is possible in the built world. There is a human/computer symbiotic relationship3 which exists wherein the two work together to create something entirely impossible had they designed alone. Humans lack the accuracy and fast processing of computers, while computers lack the design thinking skills human possess4. Therefore,

12

computation rather than analogue design (designing without using the inherent qualities of a computer) and computerisation (transferring pre-designed objects into the computer interface) is beneficial to the architectural design process. 2. Kalay, Yehuda. Architecture’s new media: principles, theories, and methods of computer-aided design (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2004), p.1 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman. Theories of the digital in architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), p.1 4. Kalay. Architecture’s new media. p 2


ICD, Base Assembly, 2012 < https://medium.com/design-manifestos/design-manifestos-oliver-david-krieg-of-the-institute-for-computational-design-icd-5e8a5ea1ce76#.ykiwo5tac> [accessed: 09/03/2017]

13


A2 DESIGN COMPUTATION The Sixth Order Computational architecture redefines the design process as designers such as Michael Hansmayer discard the basic analogue procedure to work with the computer in order to design. In the case of his installation “The Sixth Order”, Hansmayer developed the basic concept (use and manipulation of the doric column) and programmed the computer to generate results for the geometry of the columns based on his input parameters5. This creates a unique opportunity to develop something that Hansmayer may not have been able to develop himself and instead, he took advantage of the mathematical precision of technology.

14

computation rather than analogue design (designing without using the inherent qualities of a computer) and computerisation (transferring pre-designed objects into the computer interface) is beneficial to the architectural design process. 2. Kalay, Yehuda. Architecture’s new media: principles, theories, and methods of computer-aided design (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2004), p.1 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman. Theories of the digital in architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), p.1 4. Kalay. Architecture’s new media. p 2


Michael Hansmayer,The Sixth Order, 2011 < http://dandyvonnuetzen.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/ art-of-computational-architecture.html> [accessed: 09/03/2017]

15


A2 DESIGN COMPUTATION Tjibao Cultural Centre Renzo Piano is another architect whom took advantage of computational design in order to create his Tjibaou Cultural Centre which demonstrates a performative aspect as well6. With use of the precise mathematics and processing of technology, Piano’s design emulates the patterns of the surrounding trees to create architecture that is culturally reflective as well as imitative of nature. However, it can be said

16

that while utilising the technological advances and a computational design process takes away from the cultural impact the building can serve7. 6. Kolaveric, Branco. “Computing the Performative in Architecture” in Proceedings of the 21th eCAADe Conference: Digital Design. (Graz: Austria, 2003) pp. 457-463 7. David Langdon, “AD Classics: Centre Culturel Jean-Marie Tjibaou / Renzo Piano”, ArchDaily (2015) < http://www.archdaily.com/600641/ad-classics-centre-cultureljean-marie-tjibaou-renzo-piano> [Accessed: 9 March 2017]


Renzo Piano,Tjibaou Cultural Centre, 1998 <https://au.pinterest.com/trixvandermark/cultural-center-jean-marie-tjibaou/> [accessed: 09/03/2017]

17


A3 COMPOSITION AND GENERATION

The shift from compositional to generative architecture had sparked debate regarding which of the design processes is more beneficial for the technologically charged future8. While compositional architecture has history on its side and uses form finding techniques to produce design, generative architecture is clearly the most beneficial. The computational process enhances complexity of the design and the speed at which projects can

18

be completed, allowing a much more explorative and accurate performance-based9 outcome. 8. Builtr. “Generative Architecture, Transofrmation by Computation” Bultr.io, (2017) <

http://www.builtr.io/generative-architecture-transformation-by-computation/>

[acessed: 16/03/2017] 9. Peters, Brady, “Computation Works: The building of algorithmic thought”. Architectural Design, 83, 2 (2013) pp. 10-15.


Heatherwick Studio, Seed Pavilion, 2010 < http://www.archdaily.com/58591/uk-pavilionfor-shanghai-world-expo-2010-heatherwick-studio> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

19


A3 COMPOSITION AND GENERATION Church of Light With a long history of well-regarded architects behind it, compositional design allows the creation of well laid out projects which (usually) aim to produce an aesthetically pleasing building. Tadao Ando is one whom bases his ideas on geometry, using this as his form finding technique. Using this process, he is able to design buildings that utilise technological building techniques while keeping in line with the compositional procedure. You could argue there is a disconnect between the architect and the design when generative

20

architecture is used as the architect is merely the designer of the algorithm. Generative architecture also necessitates a need for training or learning the skills of computation and writing algorithms. Compositional techniques are still taught in schools and, with the case of some, can be easily self-taught with exposure to aesthetically designed buildings. One cannot simply look at generative designs and understand completely how the algorithm was written without knowledge of the technology.


Tadao Ando,Church of Light, 1999 < https://au.pinterest.com/pin/369084131942839609/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

21


A3 COMPOSITION AND GENERATION Watercube However, generative architecture is clearly more beneficial in most aspects of design. Firstly, computational design is much faster, utilising the technology to speed up the design process. Hundreds of design outcomes can be produced with one algorithm in a matter of minutes, whereas compositional designs take much longer to be realised. Generative design also provides a direct link from the actual design to futuristic and technologically advanced manufacturing processes as the design.

22

is usually already stored on the computer10While computational architecture can be in-putted or even designed using technology, it still needs to be manipulated to ensure it can be realised. The Water Cube in Bejing was computationally designed making use of the quick process of generation. The framing system was generated by a CAD algorithm which could be easily translated into built form. 10. Peters, Brady, “Computation Works: The building of algorithmic thought�.


PTW,The Watercube, 2008 < https://www.modlar.com/inspiration/memorable-olympic-stadiums-and-venues/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

23


A3 COMPOSITION AND GENERATION Thinktank and Life Aquatech Generative design methods also create more accuracy within the actual design process as well as when manufacturing. With complex mathematical algorithms to compute the forms of designs, computational architecture allows the architect more precision when designing11. There is also a direct link between performative and computation architecture as performance conditions can be directly in-putted into the design from the very beginning, providing less room for error in this regard. The Thinktank and Life

24

Aquatech project is of high complexity and makes use of the precise technological generation to create the design12. The building captures rain and ensures it runs through the building into certain certain areas, such as the bathroom, to create a cooling effect. The mathematically enhanced design eliminates errors in the design process creating a form that makes use of computational design benefits. 11. Peters, Brady, “Computation Works: The building of algorithmic thought”. 12. Wang, Maggie. “Thinktank and the life aquatech: water generative design” Designboom (2013) < http://www.designboom.com/architecture/thinktank-and-the-life-aquatech-water-generative-design/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]


Students at the Association School of Architecture,Thinktank and Life Aquatech, 2013 < http://www.designboom.com/architecture/thinktank-and-the-life-aquatech-water-generative-design/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

25


A4 CONCLUSION

With a focus on the future, design now involves manufacturing architecture that enables nature, rather than inhibits its growth. This is defined as design futuring. To achieve this performative aspect as well as add precision and complexity to design, computation and generation are more beneficial to utilise in the design process rather than computerization and composition. Therefore, with a symbiotic relationship between computers and humans, we can move towards a more ethical and sustainable design future.

26

Parametric design can help us achieve this desired future of architecture. My own focus for the rest of the assignment will be on sectioning, as I feel this would complement the brief, creating form that is light-weight and complex. Innovation lies in this process as the computational outcomes of technology are infinite, and in one of these infinite outcomes, I will find the right one that benefits the users of the new pavilion.


AA Students,AA Driftwood Pavilion, 2009 < http://designandmake.aaschool.ac.uk/aa-summer-pavilions/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

27


A5 LEARNING OUTCOMES

In regards to the design aspect of this subject, I have discovered how design futuring enables designers to create sustainable and facilitative architecture instead of buildings which inhibit the space in which they reside. The most influential topic however, was design computation. I love drawing and often avoid the computer when designing unless absolutely necessary. But I now see how this is computerisation which I have been practicing.

28

design computation may be a better way of design as it takes advantage of complex computer algorithms in the design process and could speed up design. In terms of Grasshopper and parametric design, I find I enjoy the precise modelling and making connections between algorithms, as if design has become a logic problem for me to solve.


Seth Moczydlowski, 2016 <http://moczys.com/category/generative-design/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

29


A5 LEARNING OUTCOMES Past Design My design in Studio Earth could have benefited from my new knowledge in parametric modelling and computational design. I created a building design based on bent wires and string which formed the motif for my design. It was criticised during my

30

presentation as being too confined, not random enough. Perhaps using computational design methods, I could have altered the design quickly and developed a form which would have suited my pavilion much better.


Studio Earth, Secrets of Herring Island, “The Underworld”, 2016

31


Algorithmic Sketchbook Image, Pipe

Algorithmic Sketchbook Image, Loft

A6 APPENDIX

Using Grasshopper and other parametric plugins such as Boid and Cocoon, I was able to create these designs. Most of the definitions I altered created a series of

Algorithmic Sketchbook Image, Rail Revolution

32

points and when I changed the number of points outputted, I used these points to create surfaces. The most common surface tool I used was the ‘pipe’ command along with other surface creator commands.

Algorithmic Sketchbook Image, Intial Structure


Algorithmic Sketchbook Image, Boid

33


Elytra Filament Pavilion, 2016 < http://www.archdaily.com/787943/elytra-filament-pavilion-explores-biomimicry-in-london> [accessed: 22/03/2017]


PART B


B1 RESEARCH FIELD Canopy An example of biomimicry, Canopy is inspired by the filtered light that one sees when walking through a forest. The modules, which are all the same geometry, are inspired by the shape and nature of leaves, which, when fit together, create a tessellated pattern. This form elucidates how biomimicry can create a multitude of design opportunities. Conceptually, inspiration can come from anywhere, from a spider web which inspires form to a tree canopy that inspires the filtering of light. With nature providing many precedents, possibilities are endless, and already exist. There is no need to create our own rule-sets for designs when nature has provided them for us to emulate in designs. In terms of materiality and fabrication concerns, nature can inspire this too. Canopy utilises a plastic that filters natural light

36

to the street scape below the installation, further demonstrating its closeness to that of trees. Biomimicry also provides a rule set for construction, a precedent that has the optimal form that can be emulated in architecture. In terms of using this precedent as one to inform my own design, I think the most interesting aspect of this is the way the light mimics trees in reality. I think this would be an interesting aspect of the design to explore further, even if my design was based on a different form. The Canopy design also demonstrates fabrication techniques I could explore myself in my own design. The cells seem to be made from planar geometry which would be easy to cut from a planar material. The plastic within the cells provides diversity within the design, the two materials come together to create a single composition, something I would like to explore in my own pavilion.


United Visual Arts,Canopy, 2010 < http://www.archdaily.com/81576/maple-leaf-square-canopyunited-visual-artists> [accessed: 22/03/2017]

37


B1 RESEARCH FIELD ZA11 Pavilion Another example of biomimicry, the Za11 Pavilion mimics the cellular structure of objects to create a rotational node based design. The cells are hexagonal and each panel which is extruded towards the interior of the pavilion has a different cut out, mimicking the uniqueness of leaves on a tree. The cells do not copy cells in nature (cells in nature are not usually squashed hexagons like in this design) but it does demonstrate the way cells are organised to create solids. Cells and atoms group together to create different objects which is used to influence the overall design of this pavilion. The design utilises this in order to create the form, but also emphases the fabrication process and construction ease. Each of the planar surfaces can be cut from plywood and joined using simplistically

38

modelled joints made from cut-out hexagons. I think this form and design could be applied to my own pavilion and inform the rule-set I follow during the design phase. The panels are similar, yet different in form which makes them interesting and could form some sort of leaf-like structure for the site. This may be better for application than the Canopy project as I think the rules can be applied to more surfaces and shapes in order to create an interesting design. In terms of fabrication concerns, this project does outline the process better in their journal, but the Canopy design has the advantage of having two different types of materials. Perhaps I could use this materiality and apply it to a design based on the form and rules of the ZA11 pavilion to create an interesting pavilion that satisfies my own brief.


Dimitrie Stefanescu, Patrick Bedarf, Bogdan Hambasan,ZA11 Pavilion, 2011 < http://www.formakers.eu/project-125-dimitrie-stefanescu-patrick-bedarfbogdan-hambasan-za11-pavillion> [accessed: 13/04/2017]

39


B1 RESEARCH FIELD Site Analysis CERES is an education and community centre based on conservation and sustainability. It is situated on Merri Creek, in Brunswick, Melbourne and is a non-for profit organisation. There is an emphasis on living well together and enhancing the beauty of people instead of prohibiting the negativity. The park consists of many community gardens, chicken farms, a playground and learning centres where many school groups visit on excursions. After school hours, the site is used for community groups. The specific site I will develop a design for is the children’s' sandpit, located in the biomimicry based

40

playground. A shading device is needed to protect children from the sun while they learn through play. The pavilion must reflect the rest of the playground and fit in with the theme, probably based on something from nature that children can interact with. The site is not large, and has some existing infrastructure (poles) that can be utilised for the design. An overhanging awning is quite close to the site and may have an impact on the design if the structures are placed too close together which must also be taken into consideration.


41


B1 RESEARCH FIELD Inspiration Neurons Neurons provide a way for different parts of the brain to communicate and respond to sensory inputs. Providing connections between nodes, these neurons could be a good precedent study for a light-weight pavilion. Connectivity is what makes these brain cells interesting, as without them, different parts of the body would be disconnected and no longer work. I find the same truth of air; air connects all of us, providing a path for communication. The geometry of the neurons is also interesting, stemming from nodes, the wires are thin and could be constructed as a pavilion.

42

Spider Web A spider web is a geometry that is stable, yet it is a light structure. Spiders use silk which is produces in their silk glands to make their webs. They can choose which type of silk they use to create different structures. The web is made of radial and orbital lines which create a structurally sound design. A web provides interesting geometry which could be used in a future design. It also emphasises movement and due to air flow, and could be mimicked through a tensile structure made from thin wires or strings of different types.


Brain Cells, < http://epilepsyu.com/blog/brain-cells-capable-of-early-career-switch/> [accessed: 24/03/2017]

43


B1 CASE STUDY 1.0 Manipulation

POP 2D (#Points)

RADIUS (Radius Size)

M SPLIT (Enabled)

DOMAIN (V0)

HEIGHT (Height =)

44


45


B1 CASE STUDY 1.0 Manipulation

SURFACE POINTS (U =)

SURFACE POINTS (DomV0 = )

GRAPH MAPPER (Height)

GRAPH MAPPER (DomV0)

GRAPH MAPPER (Height and DomV0)

46


47


B2 CASE STUDY 1.0 Selection Criteria To be a successful design, the pavilion must follow the requirements of the brief and also be an aesthetically pleasing design. The pavilion must be lightweight, which could be done through the use of different materials or thicknesses. The foundations should not be deep so the pavilion is light and not as grounded as it would be if it used a heavy concrete or thick materiality. Having gaps in a design rather than having an entirely solid form would also help in making the design lightweight. Secondly, the design must provide shading

48

during events. To do so, it would probably have to be large enough to cover most of, or the entire area. It should also be made from a material that blocks the sunlight. The final criterion is that the pavilion must be reflective on movement of air. Since the design studio's theme is this, the design will probably need to be made from a lightweight material that is thin and possible translucent. It should also some light into the design (since it will be used during the day) and probably have a symbolic resonance with air, or a process which encompasses the movement of oxygen.


Marc Fornes & Theverymany,Outdoor Amphitheatre, 2013 < https://theverymany.com/buildings/13_merriweather-park/> [accessed: 24/03/2017]

49


B2 CASE STUDY 1.0 Successful Outcomes FIGURE 1 My first chosen design iteration would be successful because it is would be light-weight and easy to make with a thin material, satisfying this aspect of the brief. However, as is, it would not provide much shade which makes this design less successful in this respect. FIGURE 2 This design is a mixture of the lightweight materiality with thinner frames combined with elements that would provide shade. The design, however is varied, so it does not mimic the bio-structure of air as well as the previous design.

50

FIGURE 3 Figure three would fix the problem in FIGURE 1 without compromising the lightweight structure or it's likeness to air in a biomimicry respect. The clustered design could provide shade and circulate air, however, it is more complex and would be difficult to make for a large area. FIGURE 4 This design has no variation in the size of the light penetration, but varies the height, providing an interesting, yet shading design. It could also be made from lightweight materials and provide a design which reflects the brief well.


Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

51


B2 CASE STUDY 1.0 Speculation Now that the geometry differs substantially from the original project, it could be applied more widely. Instead of just being used for a vaulted ceiling, it could be used for netting of some sort (in terms of the first successful outcome) or an art installation. It could also be turned on its side and used as a wall instead of ceiling. Most of my designs have holes in them, making the quality very different from the original design. It would facilitate airflow better and be more lightweight as the design

52

would use less material to fabricate. It could also allow light to penetrate, creating a shadow effect. While the original design is fully enclosed, the successful iterations, especially the design with the varied holes would create interesting shadows and qualities. The overall form and shape did not change too much, the shape could still be created by using rolled cones with holes cut into them. Even if they overlap, joints could be cut into the planar pieces for fabrication.


Elytra Filament Pavilion, 2016 < http://www.archdaily.com/787943/elytra-filament-pavilion-explores-biomimicry-in-london> [accessed: 22/03/2017]

53


B2 CASE STUDY 2.0 ZA11 Pavilion = Success The project endeavours to show how parametric design can be used in reality and to attract people to the ZA11 Speaking Architecture event.

inform form. The CNC cut material is fixed together easily and the form seems to come from a strict rule-set of applied structure.

The form of the design is based solely on ease of manufacturing. The planar timber panels easily fit together to create the complex shape.

The design is also interesting and unique, which demonstrates how it brings people to the architectural speakers event. Its strange, yet familiar geometry achieve this goal.

Hexagons line the edges of the planar pieces to join them together, but also form a part of the design language. The form is mostly based on the structure and composition of materiality, rather than an abstract ideas. I think the project is definitely successful in utilising parametric design and structure to

54

However, another goal of the project was to provide shade during performances and gatherings, similar to our own brief. From the images, it seems this pavilion has too many holes to provide shading and users may not be entirely sheltered during use.


Dimitrie Stefanescu, Patrick Bedarf, Bogdan Hambasan,ZA11 Pavilion, 2011 < http://www.archdaily.com/147948/ za11-pavilion-dimitrie-stefanescu-patrick-bedarf-bogdan-hambasan> [accessed: 31/03/2017]

55


B2 CASE STUDY 2.0 Reverse Engineering To reverse engineer the ZA11 Pavilion, I tried a few methods, some which failed. It took a while to project the hexagonal grid onto the lofted surface, but I used a tutorial online to model these curves. Following the same method on the ZA11 website, I created

56

lines from the grid points to the centre but this presented problems later so I instead extruded the geometry. I think my design has more hexagons than the real pavilion, but using less hexagons, the form started to fail.


Step 1: I Created curves in Rhino and lofted

Step 2: I projected hexagonal curves onto the

Step 3: I found the discontinuities on the

them

surface (using the hexagonal grid)

curves and created poly lines between these points and the mid point

Step 4: I created a solid cylinder in the middle

Step 5: I tried creating poly-lines between the

Step 6: When I grafted the intersecting points and the

to cut the curves. I found the intersection be-

intersections and the discontinuities on the

discontinuities, the lines worked. I then hit a dead end

tween the cylinder brep and the curves

hexagonal grid (This method failed)

as the lines were all grafted and couldn't be lofted.

Step 7: I extruded the hexagonal curves to

Step 8: I trimmed the new extrusions using

Step 9: I offset the curves to create a frame

the mid point

the cylinder brep which worked better than

look on the geometry

the original method I tried

Step 10: Using the definitions I created in step 5 and 6, I divided the curves and placed a polygon on these points. Then offset the intersections to create notches for fabrication

57


58


59


60


61


B2 CASE STUDY 2.0 Parametric Diagram

62


63


B2 CASE STUDY 2.0 Comparison SIMILARITIES: Firstly, both the ZA11 pavilion and my design use a hexagonal grid projected onto a lofted surface as the starting point for the form. The hexagons provide the basis for the extrusion which both goes back to a certain point in the middle of the design. Both designs are also constructed using planar surfaces joined together with polygonal shapes. These surfaces have offset holes within them which allow light to enter the pavilion. Secondly, both designs follow a similar form, the curves begin on the ground and rise to create an opening for people to enter through. The designs would also similarly be similarly constructed using plywood and CNC cutting to produce easily assembled pieces. DIFFERENCES: While the two forms are very similar (that was the intention) obviously, there are some discrepancies within the designs. The two pavilions have diverse lofted surfaces making

64

up the actual form. This is because it is increasingly difficult to model curves the exact same as the ones seen in modelling diagrams of the pavilion and even harder to model off the photos of the final pavilion itself. Therefore, the forms are going to be different. Additionally, my design has far more hexagons in the grid and they are more regular than those in the ZA11 pavilion. I tried mine with less hexagons but it did not look as effective and some of the joints broke (the surfaces were no longer joined effectively). My joint polygons are placed in different positions than those in the ZA11 pavilion because it was difficult to model the exact placement (again, modelling off the photos proved difficult). Finally, the offset holes in my design are a little bit different. I could not model the two holes so I modelled one to make it appear somewhat similar, but also different in some regard.


Dimitrie Stefanescu, Patrick Bedarf, Bogdan Hambasan,ZA11 Pavilion, 2011 < http://www.archdaily.com/147948/ za11-pavilion-dimitrie-stefanescu-patrick-bedarf-bogdan-hambasan> [accessed: 31/03/2017]

65


B2 CASE STUDY 2.0 If Unconstrained Firstly, if I were unconstrained by the original form, I would try to use more points to extrude the hexagonal curves to. Some could be on the outside and some on the inside. The size and shape of the hexagons could also be different. I could try using polygons with more sizes or a variation in shape size which would produce some diverse outcomes.

66

I could experiment with the lofted surface form, creating something that is taller in profile or something with more discrepancies in the curves. The joints could also be changed; the joint shapes could be altered and the placement of them could change as well. Perhaps circular joints would work better with the final shape or triangle joints.


67


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Case Study Manipulation

Move Points

Hex-grid (x,y)

Delete

Curve Shapes

68


69


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Case Study Manipulation

Change Shape

Pipe Radius

Move the points outside

Panelling

70


All failed, the curves were unable to find which point to extrude to

71


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Case Study Manipulation

Change

Grid

Move the points outside

Copy, Scale and Rotate

72


73


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Case Study Manipulation

Weaverbird

Change Joints

Pop Geometry with Circles

74


75


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Case Study Manipulation

Scale with Point attractor

Fillet

Applying to Site

76


77


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Revised Selection Criteria In addition to the brief requirements listed in B2, after meeting with the client, some points need to be considered in the pavilion design. The site I have chosen is the children’s' sandpit which requires a shading pavilion to protect users from harmful UV rays. This was outlined in the former brief and discussed. The point that was not discussed in the previous requirements outline was the fact that CERES provides a playground for the children which has an immense focus on biomimicry. Therefore, any design I choose must be reflective of this.

78

The other areas of the playground focus on providing spaces where the kids could be a part of nature (mostly by introducing them to habitats of birds and insects). The pavilion design for the sandpit should follow this concept and provide a learning and education experience through play. I could achieve this through mimicry of cells or habitats in nature and but using natural looking materials. This is a point which will affect the designs I choose as the most effective outcomes.


Tia Kharrat,Butterfly House, 2016 < https://www.dezeen.com/2016/06/28/tia-kharrat-university-westminster-architecture-graduate-butterfly-enclosure-formation-eggs-biomimicry/> [accessed: 14/04/17]

79


B4 TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT Successful Outcomes FIGURE 1:

FIGURE 3:

The most successful iteration, I believe based on the selection criteria is the dome design. The form looks structurally sound as well as lightweight and represents movement of air through the cells. Biomimicry is also represented through the cells that symbolise those inside leaves and the shape is also vaguely plant like.

I believe this design successfully demonstrates a lightweight pavilion that could present a highly controlled, but positive air-flow. The design also follows the same cellular structure of the others which makes it successful when it comes to the educational aspect of the brief and could be made from natural looking materials.

The design does not however appear to shade the user from the sun which was a highly important part of the brief. The gaps in the structure are large and could mean that the design fails in satisfying all the aims. The joints are also not detailed or feasible in this design so maybe these two disadvantages could be fixed to create a better pavilion.

This design does not have detailed joints however and despite it's light-weight look, I think when fabricated, it would be heavy as there are many panels that make up the composition. I think the designs with less cells are more successful in this regard.

FIGURE 2:

The patterning on this design is what makes it different from the others and I think this also makes it successful when you take into account the selection criteria. The design would be lightweight if made from certain materials and also provide shading as there are no holes in the panels. The cell-like structure and patterning also represent biomimicry very well, and could be used as an educational tool.

The only thing different about this iteration is the joint shape, but I feel is a successful one that must be analysed. Biomimicry is the part of the selection criteria that this design represents the best. Plant cells contain chloroplasts which the circular shapes could symbolise and while their main function to provide a simply fabricated joint, it could educate users while doing so. However, the design form is of poor quality, in regards to the selection criteria. The large gaps in the design would make it difficult to provide shading, although the framing of the panels would be lightweight and allow airflow.

80

FIGURE 4:

However, I believe this design would be difficult to fabricate. In this iteration, the patterning is bevelled on the surface which would be expensive and give the design a more detailed look, something which would not fit in well with the children’s' playground as well as other designs.


Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

81


B5 PROTOTYPING Joints I tested a series of joint types in a single model and demonstrated how well they would fit together in an overall model. I tested how the joints performed under stress as well as how aesthetically pleasing they were and how well they fit the brief. The effective joints were those that remained rigid once they were fixed and would not move under any stress applied. Simplicity also became a factor as there are many pieces in the actual design and joints were all different, so they would need to be fabricated easily. Aesthetics was also a factor since the design

82

would not be able to have an undesirable appearance once fabricated. Some of the handmade joints were surprisingly effective in this regard as the brief called for a design that looked hand-made and fit in with nature. However, some undesirable effects also presented themselves in some joints. Many of the joints would require additional bracing to be supported and work effectively under stress. The joints that showed deflection in only one direction could be easily fixed, but some joints showed twisting, shifting, shear forces and allowed the pieces to pull apart to some extent. These joints would need too much bracing to be effective.


For video documenting stress testing, please follow the link https://youtu.be/ujpKrZ28HZs

83


B5 PROTOTYPING Joints Circular Wedge

Rope

This joint was based on that used in the original ZA11 pavilion. Laser cutting could ensure that the perfect joint is created and everything fits together will in the design at the specified angle. The joint is strong and deals with stress well, only failing when significant force is applied.

The rope is more of a flexible joint but aesthetically, it provides positive design feedback.

The problems with the joints lie in the aesthetics. The joint is large and cannot be easily hidden. In a real cell (which the design is based on) nothing can penetrate the cell wall (which the hexagons represent), so this joint is also inaccurate in terms of the educational aspects. Since the joint is made from timber, it would also need to be finished adequately to protect it from moisture gain.

84

When stress is applied, the joint can be moved, but tightening does create a solid joint in some respect. Another frame on the end of the design would be needed to keep the angles correct, but since the rope provides a semi-solid joint, it could be effective. The rope would also be free from rust and unlike the timber wedge of the previous prototype, withstand rain and moisture gain. The rope is aesthetically pleasing and gives the design a more 'natural' and 'handmade' look. These aspects are specified in the brief, making the rope a good choice.


85


B5 PROTOTYPING Joints Steel Cable

Plastic Cable Tie

Another flexible joint, the steel cable ties provided a similar outcome to the rope. An additional bracing system would be required to aid the design in keeping its shape, however I found the steel cable ties could not be tightened sufficiently to remain semi-rigid. The joint is completely moveable and does not withstand compressive or tensile forces.

Plastic cable ties could be tightened the most out of all the flexible joints I tested. Once the angle was set, the cable ties held the pieces in position, even after forced were applied to it. However, this is still a flexible joint so additional bracing would be needed at a 1:1 scale.

There is also the fact that the cable ties are made of steel. Although the joint will remain strong, a rust would form on the exterior of the joint. This would not be aesthetically pleasing.

The plastic cable ties are also not aesthetically pleasing. They have the large piece of plastic that ties them off at once end which stands out and the black colour does not help to hide the joint.

In addition, the joint is very viable and a different type of paint would be required if attempting to hide it.

Since they are made from plastic, they could be painted, but I do not feel this joint expresses the design intent adequately.

86


87


B5 PROTOTYPING Joints Smaller Plastic Cable Ties

Hinges

Since the black cable ties worked well in regard to how it held the shape and angle, I tried smaller, clear coloured ties. These worked similarly to the black ties, but were better hidden in the design.

When testing joints, I could not go past the hinge, even if I did not think it was going to work well.

Perhaps using even more cable ties along the joint could create a pattern to work with the design. It would also give the hand-made feeling like the rope, without standing out too much like the black joints. Again, this joint is flexible though so it would require additional framing, but I feel like this joint type would work well at a 1:1 scale for the real design.

The testing surprised me, however. The hinge was not the worst joint used in the prototype, and actually presented some positive outcomes. The joint kept the pieces together rather well, and when positioned correctly, kept at the correct angle in the design. Rivets needed to be used to join the pieces together however, so this may not be the best joint. The hinge was quite thick and when taking material thickness into account, the rivets barely made it through to hold. Perhaps a bolt could be used at 1:1 scale however, to resolve this issue.

88


89


B5 PROTOTYPING Joints Tape

Metal Brackets

Surprisingly, tape worked very well and could actually become a contender for the final joint choice.

The metal brackets actually performed the best and I tried them in two different joints.

The tape used was strong enough to hold the pieces and very difficult to remove. The black colour does stand out, but the joint runs along the entire length of the piece so it appears like a line in the model, something that could aesthetically work with the design. However, unsurprisingly, the tape does not perform well under stress. Twisting can occur, as unlike other joints, there is not stiffness in any direction. The tape would also come lose over time and the material does stretch. So the tape joint is not the best for the design, but still provided valuable feedback during the prototyping phase.

90

The joint is easy to fabricate, just bend the metal using pliers to a specified angle. The metal is difficult to bend once it is in place on the timber pieces (I know this because I originally placed the pieces in the wrong place and got the wrong angle). Since the pieces also have ready cut holes, fixing them to the material was simple. I used an aluminium rivet which could be hammered against the metal to form the end of the joint. At a 1:1 scale, this joint may not be feasible, but a bolt would work just as well. In terms of design aesthetics, I feel like this joint gives the design a 'handmade' feel similarly to the rope, but also provides a strong, rigid connection between pieces.


91


B5 PROTOTYPING Joints Wire

Metal Rings

I tested the wire because it had similar properties to the bracket, but could be bent into shape easier once fabricated.

The metal rings had a similar effect as the wire on the joint, the looseness of the joint meaning it could move too easily. The angle at this joint was not held at all and without the extra piece of wire to stop the joint from coming out of the timber, the rings continuously fell out when too much stress was applied.

However, the wire presented many problems. It actually provided a similar joint to the rope, flexible and poor quality under stress. The wire was also difficult to tighten which meant the joints moved in many directions, providing something that would require a lot of bracing to be sustainable. Aesthetics were also an issue in this joint. The wire needed a long end twisted over to prevent the joint from coming out of the timber. To do this, I had to twist the wire around itself many times which created an undesirable looking joint. The wire also has pieces sticking out at the ends which would be a safety hazard for children using the shelter.

92

The pieces also moved up and down more than any other pieces, meaning additional bracing would probably not be enough to sustain the design. The rings do look aesthetically pleasing however, as they are small and circular, but this design quality is not enough o offset the structural qualities of the joint.


93


B5 PROTOTYPING 1:1 Joint I developed the more successful joint from my last prototype to create a joint which was strong and easy to fabricate. Since this model was scaled up, the joint was a little bit more difficult to fabricate. The 6 mm thick MDF should be good for the final scale design, but it was more difficult to cut and get the rivets through. I had to buy longer rivets (aluminium) which could be easily adjusted or hammered if mistakes are made during fabrication. The metal brackets are strong and withstand a great amount of stress. It does not bend when I push on it and withstands many forces. Another issue with the first prototype was the planarity on the ends of the timber panels.

94

The pieces do not fit well together, especially when three pieces come together, but adding a piece of rope in the joint alleviates this issue. It is a material that can move, and withstand compression and tension. This works similar to a compression joint in concrete panels, and keeps the joint circular and the pieces apart from each other. Both these joints also have another benefit: they have a sort of natural, hand-made aesthetic that works in well with the CERES site. Most of the buildings and installations on the site are made of timber or mud bricks, not concrete or prefabricated materials. Therefore, I think these joints will enhance this aspect of the design, allowing it to fit in with the overall park.


For video documenting stress testing, please follow the link https://youtu.be/3_cgPQGJvxg

95


B5 PROTOTYPING Sun Site Analysis The CERES site is covered with trees which provide adequate shelter in most places, however the sandpit is open on one side, letting in harmful UV light. After documenting the sun pattern using a sun calculator, I discovered majority of the sunlight penetrates the site in the morning and early afternoon. This is the time of day when the playground would be busiest due to it being school time. Children visit CERES for school excursions and community programs and these usually run during the earlier times of day. In the afternoon to evening, the sandpit would

96

still be used, but not as popular. However, there are trees on one side of the site which provide shade during these times. So, a shading pavilion would be required to protect users from the morning sunlight. Since a larger pavilion would mean more expense, I tried to make the design as small as possibly, while still protecting the users from the sun. Therefore, I designed a form directly relating to this, something to block the harmful rays in the morning, but still be open on the other side since the trees provided protecting in the afternoon.


97


B5 PROTOTYPING Site Prototype I built up a model of the site, focusing mostly on the sandpit. Doing this allowed me to place the model on the site without seeing the old shading sail which could be seen in photos. This also allowed me to demonstrate how the design worked in a 3-dimensional sense, rather than on a screen image in 2-dimensions. The actual model of the pavilion was made using a strong, white cardboard which could be easily bent. This does not

98

demonstrate the actual joints in the real design, but does demonstrate the form, making it a useful exploration. This model also allowed me to see the scale of the model on the site. I measured the built up site carefully, whereas on an image, this was difficult to do. Therefore, this prototype allowed me to see how the design worked on site scale-wise and the aesthetics of the overall form.


99


B5 PROTOTYPING Shading Prototype The same 1:20 model was used to demonstrate the shading aspect of the design, through light manipulation and video recording. By watching the light, I found the perfect positioning for the pavilion on the site and can demonstrate how the sandpit will be shaded throughout an entire day. Firstly, I recorded the sun (light) moving without the addition of the trees to block the afternoon sunlight. This demonstrates how the design works as a singular element.

100

The next video, I filmed the design and an additional tree aspect working together to shade the sandpit. It can be seen determined through this video that the design does in fact shade the sandpit through the entire day. Lastly, I turned out all the lights except for the one I was using as the sun to emphases how shaded the sandpit will be. The sunlight is emphasised because it stands out so much and darkness continues over the sandpit throughout the entire process.


101


B5 PROTOTYPING Changes to Digital Design Originally, my digital model used the planar circular joints but this did not work in reality so I changed it. I added holes punched into the planar pieces which can be used for the metal brackets. This will allow the joints to be precise and accurate.

102

I also added the piece on the back to address the shading issue better and enlarged the overall design before the making of the 1:20 model because I found the 1:5 model scale looked out of proportion.


103


B6 TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL Research Plants use the process of photosynthesis to produce glucose (food) and oxygen. These photosynthetic cells are populated with chloroplasts, which are filled with chlorophyll molecules that absorb photons (light). Once the chlorophyll absorbs enough photos, it can split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen ions. The oxygen ions combine to form oxygen gas, some of which is released into the air and some is used by the plant itself. This stage is called the light-dependent stage. The second stage, or the light independent stage, occurs in the stroma of the chloroplast. The molecules, including the previously generated hydrogen ions, undergo a series of cyclic reactions resulting in the formation of glucose. To use this as a basis for my design, I could use the cellular structure of a leaf to form the geometry. The chloroplasts, which are spherical shapes

104

within the plant cells could be represented by the circular joints or an additional plastic interior inside the cells. To provide a shading aspect, I could have a membrane on the exterior of the pavilion which would represent the leaf at a distance, while the interior represents it on a cellular level. The chloroplasts, which are spherical shapes within the plant cells could be represented by the circular joints or an additional plastic interior inside the cells. To provide a shading aspect, I could have a membrane on the exterior of the pavilion which would represent the leaf at a distance, while the interior represents it as a cellular level. There is also a relevance to the air theme of the studio if I were to use photosynthesis as a biomimicry precedent. Plants absorb carbon dioxide and produce oxygen, playing an integral part of the air-flow system. Rabinowitch, Eugene. "Photosynthesis." Photosynthesis. (1969).


Chloroplasts < http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/09/25/botanical-wednesday-sincewe-were-extracting-chloroplasts-in-the-lab-today/> [accessed: 14/04/2017]

105


B6 TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL Design: Structure The overall structure of the design is cut from a sphere and populated with cellular geometry.

flow and light to penetrate the design and enter the sandpit which is important for the users.

Each cell is hexagonal, but they are all different sizes create diverse angles. The hexagons are not planar, but they are made from planar pieces of timber, as if the cell had been extruded and scaled outwards.

Each panel is also a different size and slightly different shape, but could be laser cut, or cut with a saw by hand. To join, holes will be drilled or laser cut into the panels where metal brackets can be riveted.

The timber panels have cut outs which are filleted slightly to soften the edges. The holes in the surfaces allow more air

A rope is also positioned between all joints to provide a compressionable material to support the pieces.

106


107


B6 TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL Design: Metaphor The shape of the design is based on the structure of photosynthetic leaf cells. The cell walls are modelled with the MDF which form the hexagon shapes, but the interior workings of the cell will be painted on by students from a local school. Since there are sixteen cells, each student or pair of students will create a painted on the tarp within the frame of the design. The tarp will then

108

be nailed to the timber frame to demonstrate the inner workings of the leaf design. Since the tarp will only be nailed to the back of the design, it can be removed and redone but another class whenever necessary. The timber frame will remain but the tarp will be created again and again, involving as many members from the community as possible.


Painted cells applied to the design

109


B6 TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL Selection Criteria LIGHT WEIGHT PAVILION: To address this element of the selection criteria, I used timber as a material for the design. My final selection Material, MDF is semi-lightweight, but still holds some weight so the design can stay grounded without an extensive use of footings. The design itself also supports this idea because it is created using a series of panels with cut outs. The design is made from frames, not solid shapes and creates shade through an additional tarp attached to the back. The tarp can facilitate airflow and because the pieces create hexagonal tunnels throughout the design, it emphasises the overall lightweight effect caused overall. PROVIDE SHADING DURING INTERACTIVE EVENTS: The form of the design is based on the sun patterns of the site, or more specifically, the shade patterns that could be created with the certain form. The form curves in, as if it is cut from a sphere which ensures shade will cover the entire sandpit in the morning. The tarp attached to the back will cover any holes the lightweight frame of the pavilion creates and will protect children or any other users from harsh UV rays. The other side of the sandpit is already shaded by trees so the design is one sided. REFLECTIVE ON THE MOVEMENT OF AIR: The pavilion addresses this aspect of the brief in two ways.

110

Firstly, the frame which the design is composed of allows air to flow through the site and the design. The tarp attached the back would be woven and block the shade without blocking too much air. The cellular structure of the design is also populated with cut outs which provide additional flow through the site. Secondly, the biomimicry aspect of the design supports the movement of air and oxygen. The cell shapes and the decoration of the tarp represent the creating of oxygen, among other molecules, through photosynthesis. As already explained in the previous section, the plant cells absorb photos causing the water ) H20) to split into hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Therefore, the overall design does not only support airflow through a frame like design, but also through a metaphorical sense through representation. EDUCATIONAL AND BASED ON BIOMIMICRY: The playground at CERES is the Australian Bush scaled up, so I created a giant leaf for children to play under. Leaves provide natural shade where the built environment is lacking, so this design aptly mimics this idea. It also supports the grade 2 curriculum, where children learn about the inner workings of plant cells. The tarp design will be representative of plant cells and the structure of the design bolsters this. The educational aspect can also be demonstrated through the community involvement. The class of students chosen to paint the tarp will paint the design, having learnt about cells in school and be able to share their knowledge with others.


View of the pavilion from the hill

111


B6 TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL Design Reflection Firstly, the pavilion is advantageous because it represents CERES values. There is an aspect of community involvement through the painting of the tarp. It also emphasises learning through play and fun, something important and memorable about the CERES program. The design is also innovative because it is created entirely based on the patterns of the sun and reflects this wholeheartedly. Since it was made parametrically, all the pieces are scaled proportionately and the joints and angles are precise. Each piece joins perfectly and creates a structure which can stand up and support its own weight. In comparison to my other ideas, I think this is the best as it shades the sandpit adequately. The design is also created using a lofted surfaces which can be unrolled and cut out of fabric to create the backing tarp. In comparison to other design ideas that may be presented, I feel like my design stands out as it incorporates the community and a strong aspect of learning through the cellular structure. The structure is also as small as possible to ensure the materials are not too expensive and the labour is not too intensive. This is a project that could be fabricated within a tight budget and assembled by unskilled labourers (university students). Overall, I think my design is effective and unique. It adequately addresses all aspects of the brief and could be realistically applied to the site at CERES.

112

Even though my design may adequately address the brief, it does have some drawbacks which have been pointed out and will have to be addressed. Firstly, the design is composed of some sharp edges which could be dangerous. This is a pavilion designed for children so it needs to safely address all of their needs. To address this, perhaps I could fillet all the corners of the pieces which would change the overall design, but make it much safer. There is also the issue of how the design should sit on the ground. Since it is made out of timber, it may not be feasible to have it sitting within the soil, so maybe it needs some footings to tie it to the ground I should also be tied down to prevent it from moving and injuring children in the sandpit. There are also some design drawbacks; the design itself is not very complex, and a lot of the emphasis is on patterning. While this may be an advantage, I think complexity could be added by altering the cut outs in the panels. The holes shown at the edges of the panels (for joints) also populated the ends due to the way Grasshopper interpreted the command. This may be a drawback, having more holes than necessary, but I left them in their because they introduce some more patterning into the overall design.


113


114


115


116


117


118


119


120


121


122


123


124


125


B7 LEARNING OUTCOMES

OBJECTIVE ONE: INTERROGATE THE BRIEF I feel like after this design studio task, I have began considering the process of brief formation differently. Because of the opportunities presented by Grasshopper and through computational design, I was able to better understand and design something that directly reflected the brief. The brief of this design called for a shading device, a fact in the brief I would usually ignore until the later stages of the design. However, due to the parametric programming, I was able to follow the same process I usually did (generating ideas based loosely on the brief) then alter these ideas to fit a different form that was based entirely on the sun patterns of the site. Similarly, I think I interrogated the brief by considering prototyping choices as well. Because prototyping was such a large part of the design process, I could address the shading and lightweight focuses of the brief. This could also be directly related to the computational side of things since I could again, easily change the design when I discovered something did not work. OBJECTIVE TWO: ABILITY TO GENERATE A VARIETY OF DESIGN POSSIBILITIES FOR A GIVEN SITUATION To create 30 iterations in the first case study was actually very difficult. I found myself getting stuck at around fifteen iterations because I was not content to just plug in a number slider and change it a few times for a different design outcome. However, in case study two, I found it much more rewarding to go through the process

126

of generating. Having gotten used to using Grasshopper by then, using the computational program actually enhanced my ability to generate ideas. I usually only generate five to ten different ideas, but using Grasshopper allowed me to generate ideas I would never have thought of by just drawing or model making. Especially when I used Weaverbird and mathematics to manipulate the design, outcomes were surprising and I was able to explore the design space better and more meaningfully. OBJECTIVE THREE: DEVELOPING SKILLS IN VARIOUS THREE-DIMENSIONAL MEDIA I was used to remaining in two dimensions for my past design studios as I relied a lot on hand drawing, but in Studio Air, everything was done three-dimensionally and it gave me a better understanding of the design and how it works. I feel like I understand the form and joints better, from working with a three-dimensional model in Grasshopper and Rhino and was able to use this to inform my design development. The analytic diagramming was difficult at first, but it allowed me to fully understand how the Grasshopper model worked and how it was put together. However, I still think Prototyping was the most rewarding part of the design development. Making physical models allowed me to see my model in real dimensions and understand material thickness and scale and how it would affect the overall design.


127


B7 LEARNING OUTCOMES

OBJECTIVE FOUR: UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE AND THE AIR This may be one objective I have not yet mastered. While my design does allow air-flow, I do not think it reflects the relationship between the built form and the air as strongly as it can. This could be altered in part C to create a design that fully demonstrates this point. However, conceptually, I do understand the relationship between plants and air, which was a major part of my design. Since my built form elucidated the shape of a leaf, the conversion of water to oxygen was diagrammed in the design, demonstrating on some level, the relationship between my specific built form and the air. OBJECTIVE FIVE: DEVELOPING THE ABILITY TO MAKE A CASE FOR PROPOSALS I feel like my case was made well with this design, but I do often struggle with this in other subjects. This semester, I think because I knew the design so well through Grasshopper, I was able to cut out any flaws before presentation which meant I completely understood the design and its importance during the presentation. OBJECTIVE SIX: DEVELOP CAPABILITIES FOR CONCEPTUAL, TECHNICAL AND DESIGN ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS Though this is only relevant to the first part of this section, I feel like during part B I was able to analyse the projects better than in part A. This may have been because of the introduction to biomimicry in the case studies. I enjoy using

128

metaphor and story in my designs so when I see another design such as the Canopy (from B.1) has an intrinsic narrative, I was better able to interact with the design. I could discuss each of the designs in relation to technology and see the pitfalls of them, not just the advantages. OBJECTIVE SEVEN: DEVELOP FOUNDATIONAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY, DATA STRUCTURES AND TYPES OF PROGRAMMING Since the computational side was very logical and scientific, I found I enjoyed using it more during this design task. I understand data structures, however, I still struggle with understanding how to manipulate and use them. I know they exist and what branches look like but not how to work with them. So maybe this will be a point I will work on in the future during part C. OBJECTIVE EIGHT: BEGIN DEVELOPING A PERSONALISED REPERTOIRE OF COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES I feel like the algorithmic sketch book and video tutorials have helped with this aspect of the subject. I often find myself opening definitions that I knew had a certain outcome and using them to solve a solution in a new design. And due to the need to recreate the ZA11 pavilion, I had to try many definitions and processes before I found the right one, but I found many processes that did not work that could be applied to other designs because I now know their outcomes.


129


B8 APPENDIX

The algorithmic sketches for part B of the journal were all about learning to use and manipulate different Grasshopper plug-ins such as Kangaroo Physics and Weaverbird. The panelling definition was meaningful to manipulate, I think. I could change many inputs and outputs to devise different geometries and create patterns. The radial pattern in the most effective because

130

I used a point attractor to manipulate the sizes of the holes in the geometry. I think these algorithmic sketches could be very useful in creating panels on future designs. These panels could be applied to different surfaces to create diversity within designs. I tried to use this as one of my iterations but the panels were not 3D once applied to the design, however I still think these will be useful in the future for other design solutions.


PANELLING IN GRASSHOPPER

131


B8 APPENDIX

This was another meaningful patterning definition, but this one was created using Kangaroo. To manipulate the definition, I changed sliders to alter the heights and sizes of the cells. This created a sense of diversity within the sketch which made the pattern more meaningful than it was to begin with. I also used a point attractor at one stage to manipulate the different sizes of the holes and

132

heights and plugged in graph mappers to also alter inputs gradually. This geometry could also be useful and applied to future designs. I came up with the sketch after I did the fifty iterations of my design but it could be applied later to develop the pavilion more.


USING KANGAROO TO CREATE GEOMETRY

133



PART C


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Feedback - Advantages Firstly, the pavilion is advantageous because it represents CERES values. There is an aspect of community involvement through the painting of the tarp. It also emphasises learning through play and fun, something important and memorable about the CERES program.

It adequately addresses all aspects of the brief and could be realistically applied to the site at CERES.

The design is also innovative because it is created entirely based on the patterns of the sun and reflects this wholeheartedly. Since it was made parametrically, all the pieces are scaled proportionately and the joints and angles are precise. Each piece joins perfectly and creates a structure which can stand up and support its own weight.

Firstly, the design is composed of some sharp edges which could be dangerous. This is a pavilion designed for children so it needs to safely address all of their needs. To address this, perhaps I could filit all the corners of the pieces which would change the overall design, but make it much safer.

In comparison to my other ideas, I think this is the best as it shades the sandpit adequately. The design is also created using a lofted surface which can be unrolled and cut out of fabric to create the backing tarp. In comparison to other design ideas that may be presented, I feel like my design stands out as it incorporates the community and a strong aspect of learning through the cellular structure. The structure is also as small as possible to ensure the materials are not too expensive and the labour is not too intensive. This is a project that could be fabricated within a tight budget and assembled by unskilled labourers (university students). Overall, I think my design is effective and unique.

136

Even though my design may adequately address the brief, it does have some drawbacks which have been pointed out and will have to be addressed.

There is also the issue of how the design should sit on the ground. Since it is made out of timber, it may not be feasible to have it sitting within the soil, so maybe it needs some footings to tie it to the ground I should also be tied down to prevent it from moving and injuring children in the sandpit. There are also some design drawbacks; the design itself is not very complex, and a lot of the emphasis is on patterning. While this may be an advantage, I think complexity could be added by altering the cut outs in the panels. The holes shown at the edges of the panels (for joints) also populated the ends due to the way Grasshopper interpreted the command. This may be a drawback, having more holes than necessary, but I left them in their because they introduce some more patterning into the overall design.


Site model of Cell Shade

137


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Scales of Consideration One of the main focuses of my design proposal was the inspiration nature had on my overall form. The design and composition was generated based on a clustering cellular system, which was informed by the manner in which atoms and cells bonded in reality to create shapes. Each cell or component in a system relies on one and other, if you were remove one aspect, the rest of the system would fail. And so, I modelled my computational design on this aspect: if one cell is removed from my design, the rest of the system fails. Even if our developed design does not utilise the same system logic, I think it would be crucial to be informed by a similar system in nature, so it would have the same effect. Every system in nature works as one part in a coherent whole and even if the cellular shape was to change, this would still be an important aspect of the design. Another focus of my design proposal is the aspect of learning through play. My shading device mimics the form of a leaf, which would shade us in nature, but also demonstrates the cellular structure of the shade at a molecular scale. I think the importance here lies in the diverse scales I have appropriated for this design, something that is fluid and once a perspective changes, the design changes. I think this use of different scales is some thing that I would like to carry on from this design into part C, where biomimicry works over the

138

entire design, no matter what you choose to see. I also think having such an explicit link to biomimicry elucidates the direct link to learning through play; since the design is not metaphorical, but represents the real workings of a photosynthetic cell, it would allow children to engage with the design more and learn without having to hear an explanation of the concept. Another main focus which really drove my design idea was the fact that students from a local school would be involved in the craftsmanship of the design. This allows for a link between the community and my design, as well as directly links to my previous point about educational and representational use of the cell. The painted design by students is a key part of the shading, which would demonstrate the diversity within the plant cells and within the greater community. Having cells painted by students would also encourage more engagement by other younger people as they would be more likely to respond to hand-paintings rather than complex diagrams printed realistically onto the tarp. This aspect of my design could also be altered to fit another form of biomimicry (something that does not have to do with cells) and still maintain the core ideas of the project.


3 Dimensional model of Cell Shade

139


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Design Developing the design as a team, we decided to create a simple structure which resembled that of a tree. The canopy would branch off two trunks, made up of smaller branches and hanging from the canopy, would be flowers.

bottles were all separate systems and created a disparity within the design. The canopy also lost its L system appearance and did not look like the branches of a tree, especially when the additional shading cloth element was added.

This design idea was very structurally sound and appeared as if it could be constructed in reality, however there were some design drawbacks.

However, some of the concepts could be considered further in the next design; specifically the effect of the bottles on the sand pit when they interact with light, the hidden joint system and the L system design.

The design itself was too busy and included too many design features in it. The trunks, canopy and

140


Sketch of Initial Design (By Boyd Hellier Knox)

141


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Design

Initial Design Render (Emily Thomas, Malak Noureddine El Moussaoui, Boyd Hel lyn Yi Thong Ong, Joshua Christian, Trenton Lim, Wang Rouxuan)

142


llier Knox, Eve-

143


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Design

Initial Design Render (Emily Thomas, Malak Noureddine El Moussaoui, Boyd Hel lyn Yi Thong Ong, Joshua Christian, Trenton Lim, Wang Rouxuan)

144


llier Knox, Eve-

145


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT L System Based on one of the feedback points about emphasising a more diverse range of scale, I experimented with an L system in order to generate a form which follows a branching system rather than a cellular system. This design logic still follows the main idea of my initial project, that components in a system will work together to create a whole, but cannot work separately. Exploring branching systems, I focused on how trees in real life informed their own branching. I utilised a basic L system definition which used a rule set, splitting each branch into three segments at a certain length. By simply changing the rule set, I could change the overall shading pattern of the tree to develop the best outcome. However, to explore further, I created a more complex L system which ostensibly branched out more randomly. The branches become turned down at edges and looked more like a tree system in real life. Based on the rules I discovered from real tree branching systems, I tried to model this, however the outcome was more complex and created a very detailed form. Stripping back the form will be more useful in the actual definition, I think due to cost and time constraints, however, I would like the complex definition to serve as a precedent for the final form.

146

Trees grow by producing cells in meristems (zones of intense cell division and activity). The new cells form and expand here, stimulating growth. The trunk and branches grow thicker when new clusters of cells expand making up vessels called xylem phloem. These vessels carry food and nutrients around the tree aiding in more growth. As a tree grows in height, it produces a certain hormone called auxin. When this hormone is released into the vascular system of the tree, it prevents future growth at this point. So, as the tree grows up, it leaves behind the hormone, preventing any more growth at the bottom of the tree. The actual pattern of growth is determined by the genetics of the tree. The auxin is also influenced by the light that it is exposed to, which is why you see plants bending towards a light source. The auxins away from the light stretch while those nearer the light contract, forcing the stem to bend. This could be an interesting aspect to explore in the design as we could create a form that bends towards the sun, mimicking the nature of a tree. So, as a biomimicry concern, we can ascertain that trees will usually grow upward and branch out, not introduce new branches coming out of the bottom of the trunk once it has grown. This could be influential on the final design and perhaps serve as a basis for our structure.


L System Explorations (Emily Thomas and Malak Nouderinne El Moussaoui)

147


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Grasshopper Sun Analysis Utilising the Ladybug plugin in Grasshopper, we were able to find the exact shading that would be created by the design. Since the main object of the brief was to provide shade for children playing in the sand pit, this analysis informed our idea greatly. While the L system informed the geometry and patterning of the canopy, we used the sun analysis to choose where the best positioning of the pavilion would be on site, and the parts of the canopy that needed to be more dense to block more intense sunlight.

148

Originally, the pattern created using the L system had very wide gaps which did not appear to shade the site enough. The overall shape of the canopy was also disadvantageous as it was too wide and unnecessarily shaded aspects of the site which were already shaded by the trees. Therefore, we manipulated the canopy again to make it more dense in some of the harsher lit areas. We also trimmed the design to ensure the bare minimum of materials would be utilised, reducing costs and waste.


Sun analysis from LadyBug Plugin

149


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT L System Development Utilising the 45 degree angle L system and Hoopsnake to create loops, we created a pattern which could form the flat canopy at the top of our design. Hoopsnake ensured an element of unpredictability in the design which made it more complex and interesting. Then, since the pattern created was very geometric and had many gaps in it, we overlaid the three

150

canopy patterns and rotated them slightly to create a new pattern which was more complex. This overlay was informed by the sun analysis as we decided which areas needed a more dense pattern and which would be simpler. Then, using the sun analysis, we trimmed the pattern to fit appropriately on the site to create the final canopy design.


Original Overlapping of L system

Redefined L system

151


C1 DESIGN CONCEPT Design Diagram The L system was developed at 45 degrees (figure 1) in three separate canopies, then overlapped to create a more diverse and complex pattern. The density of the pattern was informed by the sun analysis, as was the trimming of the overall shape.

The column positioning was determined based on the places on the canopy that required support. These points were then extruded into columns and surrounded with planar, rectangular pieces of timber to create the 'trunk' effect.

This patter was then given a thickness and extruded to create the canopy form (figure 2). From here, the canopy is ready for CNC cutting and can be overlapped and placed easily on the columns.

The canopy can then be placed on the trunk columns and placed on site according to where the existing trunks sat in the sandpit.

152


Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

153


C2 PROTOTYPING Recycled Material A very important aspect of the brief was the use of recycled materials in the design. However, to create something solid which could shade the children of the sandpit would be difficult with recycled material as we would not be able to source shade sails or use timber for the entire pavilion (as this would be too heavy). So, we decided to test the use of different waste materials that the common home hand plenty of. There were many precedents to work from which utilised waste material in construction. Of this list, two were the most viable and tested further; plastic drink bottles and plastic bags. Plastic Bottles: As a semi-transparent plastic materials, using plastic bottles could provide a good lightweight material for our shading device. These bottle are made from synthetic materials which do not degrade. This means the plastic builds up in rubbish tips (ideally) or within the environment. Burning the plastic releases harmful chemicals into the air and is destructive of the environment. Therefore, recycling the bottles would be a good way to create a new use for them. We could pack them closely together to create a screening element overhead to protect the users from the sun. The bottles also have the added benefit of being light weight and (mostly) uniform in size. Painting the bottles could also work to add some colour into the design.

154

Advantages: It would be easy to collect for the project and make use of materials that are free and available. They are also able to be cut and easily joined as the plastic is thin, but quite strong. Disadvantages: The plastic is translucent mostly so it may not protect children from the sun. The bottles could also provide points for water collection, especially if cut to a certain shape and holes are needed for joining them. This may collect water and make the structure too heavy. Plastic Bags: Plastic bags have many applications for the shading device; they could be tensioned in between support structures or woven to create a membrane (which would allow for more shading). Plastic bags also have the advantage of sound, when they interact with the wind, the sound would resemble that of leaves in a real tree which could really bolster the design intention. Advantages: As with the bottles, plastic bags are widely available (many get discarded instead of reused) and also pose a threat to the environment. Re-purposing them could be a good way for to link the pavilion to the CERES site and values. Disadvantages: Plastic bags are designed to degrade eventually, even if it takes a while. The plastic used would tear easily, especially when exposed to the elements as the pavilion would be and replacement would be constant and perhaps time consuming.


Penda,Cola-Blow, 2013 < http://www.archdaily.com/394382/the-cola-bow-installation-penda> [accessed: 12/05/2017]

155


C2 PROTOTYPING Plastic Bottle Factors The plastic bottle is an advantageous solution, as mentioned on the previous page, however there are some issues with using this materials.

and shape of the L system in the pavilion until we have a structure that works with the uniform size of the bottles.

The main issue is discovering the pattern of the bottles and how they should cluster within the frame (an issue that plastic bags do not have). To work out the clustering aspects, I have used grasshopper to generate patterns which fit within the parameters given. Then, we can alter the size

In discovering diverse ways that the bottles can be patterns, I can easily see which ways should work well with the entire structure. I can pair these patterns with joints to decide which is the best and work from here to choose a final pattern.

156


Experimenting with Bottle Clusters

Final Bottle Prototype

157


C2 PROTOTYPING Plastic Bottle Factors Another issue with the plastic bottles is that we need to introduce an alternate way of joining them. To test, I used similar joining methods as I tested in part B of this journal, however these joints were not elegantly combined with the design. To create for of a coherent design, we tested ways in which we could cut the bottles to create slits to allow for a joint. These are quite strong joints and once

158

you add many bottles together, they become very rigid. I think even though some of the other joints we tested were simpler and worked better, overall, the slot joints are hidden and work well to create an effect which is not distracting from the overall form.


Bottle Joint Prototype

159


C2 PROTOTYPING Plastic Bottle Factors As the bottles are usually made from clear plastic, there is the issue that they do not block the sunlight effectively. In the initial design prototype, we proposed fixing a sun shade above the bottles to prevent sun exposure, but this created an ostensibly 'broken' design. The effect should be seen as one element and utilising another material in the pavilion was not as effective we thought, even if it did propose more protection.

160

To alleviate this major issue, we thought to combine the idea of community involvement in the pavilion, proposing that children could paint the plastic themselves. This would emphasise the values of CERES and additionally, the paint will provide adequate sun protection for the users of the sandpit.


Bottle Joint Prototype

161


C2 PROTOTYPING Plastic Bottle Factors The final issue with the plastic bottles is the drainage. If we were to leave the bottles as they are, the design would have a very thick profile, similar to the precedent shown in the beginning of this section of the journal. This is not in line with the brief which requires a lightweight pavilion, assuming something with a thinner profile so it does not block the view of the playground behind. Therefore, the bottles should be trimmed (they also resemble cells of a leaf more if this is the case) which presents the drainage issue. The plastic is not strong enough to support a lot of water and if the pavilion was to fill up with water, much more weight would be added to it.

162

Therefore, we tested an array of holes drilled into the plastic to see if the water would drain sufficiently. Unexpectedly, the holes needed to be very large in order for majority of the water to drain (due to cohesive water properties). This would prevent the painting of the bottles and also allow in more sunlight to penetrate the sandpit. To solve this issue, we have decided to simply turn the bottles upside down. Water is no longer an issue and design intent remains.


With limited hole, the water can drain

Water that is unable to drain

Final solution to alleviate drainage issue

163


C2 PROTOTYPING Plastic Bags While utilising plastic bags for the shading device would have more of a positive sound effect on the pavilion, there were many issued discovered during the prototyping phase. Firstly, the bags need to be woven to allow for sever tension to be applied without significant damage. Without placing knots in the bags, the plastic stretch and deforms too easily. The weaving process takes a very long time and a lot of plastic bags in order to make a small woven covering. Therefore, the use of this material may be unrealistic for this particular project.

164

The advantage of this weaving system is however, that the bags do not collect water easily. Since there are holes within the system, water cannot pool and the structure will not be heavy. In saying that, I believe the plastic bottles provide a better shading system than the bags. Even with the extensive problems the plastic bottles have, they can be resolved easily with some testing. The plastic bags take too long to realistically weave a large sheet and have poor performance under tensile forces so they are probably best to be avoided.


Woven plastic bags as method of shading

165


C2 PROTOTYPING Footings and Supports The original footing support was made with a focus on structure. Brackets and thick bolts hold the thick sheets of plywood in place and ensure the entire structure can be supported effectively.

be seen in the final design. This would essentially ruin the effect and the appearance of the design as a whole and I feel that a more refined joint should be constructed.

Even at a 1:5 scale, the prototype is very strong and I could fathom it supporting a structure, however there are some issues with the support system.

This joint is also large and covers a large part of the circular section, however to involve more of a learning aspect, we wanted the circular plates to be exposed so children can see a tree ring design, reminiscent of CERES and a real tree in nature.

The support system has bolts and joints which can

166


Original Footing system (1:5 scale)

167


C2 PROTOTYPING Footings and Supports The second joint prototype works much better with the design intent. This footing utilises three thinner branches to make up the trunk instead of one thicker one, giving it a more interesting look with the added effect of exposing the centre of the circular plate. The tree rings can be seen and observed easily. Secondly, we devised a system to hide the pieces of timber within the footing system. The circular plate is essentially a hollowed out piece with enough room underneath to hide any brackets and screws. Since none of the screws or brackets will be seen,

168

this would allow for more joints to be used, making the design stronger in comparison to the original system. As seen in the image on the right, many more brackets can be utilised and they do not have to be placed evenly or coherently since they will not be seen when the design is fully constructed. To reduce bending moments of the three thinner branches, another circular plate was needed. This plate could be placed as frequently as required and also has the added advantage of being of similar composition to the footing. Rings can be drawn on any of the plates to create an effectively design motif repeated throughout the pavilion.


Secondary footing system with hidden joints

Hidden joints cannot be seen from above

169


C2 PROTOTYPING Footings and Supports The design intent of the pavilion changed after feedback and this meant we needed to prototype a new footing and trunk system. We decided to have the tree floating instead to give the pavilion more of a magical feel, something that children would look at with wonder instead of simply looking at it and seeing a tree. To be able to make the tree seem like it is floating, we needed to utilise steel supports. We would propose the use of steel support posts which are similar to those used in fences. Upon research, we found a few people selling their old fence posts after demolition, which fit in with the CERES importance of recycled material. In order to fit this in with our new design, we

170

incorporated the original hidden footing system which would hide any joints beneath a decorated timber plate. The joint from the steel post to the canopy, however, was an issue. We wanted to hide the joints above as well, so we altered the trunk design (which was now floating) in order to conceal any joints within. With the timber trunk pieces now perpendicular or parallel to the canopy above, it was much easier to joint them as they were no longer on complex angles. This system works much better than the original as the steel connection is strong. There is also bracing provided by the trunks which connect to another circular plate below (also decorated with the tree ring design).


Connection of Steel SHS to canopy

Connection is hidden by trunk joints

171


C2 PROTOTYPING Upper Branches Joint The initial joint for the canopy elements consisted of plates which could be adjusted easily to allow for movement and bending within the design. This joint is structurally sound, however, it doesn't provide a hidden joint like with our other explorations. We would like to provide a structure which is ambiguous and seemingly magical (as the structure of a tree comes from its hidden roots) so we needed to explore more options.

Another option was to 3D print nodes which could be as complex as we needed to with the canopy and also provide a similar sense of ambiguity since the joints would look aesthetic as well as work with the structure. However, the CERES client emphasises the need to utilise recycled materials. While this would make getting recycled timber easier as we could source smaller sizes, it would mean for expensive plastic joints which cannot be recycled.

An option that was viable was laser cutting or CNC cutting plywood sheets to create the canopy. Eliminating the joints completely would make for a stronger structure and also create a well composed design.

Therefore, CNC cutting or laser cutting would be the best option for the canopy pieces to keep in line with the CERES values and with the overall design intent.

172


Original Canopy jointing

173


Final Design exploded

174


Final model making use of resolved joints

175


C2 PROTOTYPING Construction Diagram The design is made up of pieces that can be easily cut with the CNC router from materials that fit within the limitations. These can be cut from recycled ply which is light-weight and strong. Since the pieces have limitations in sizing, they can be transported to site easily. Once on site, the pieces can be assembled using steel brackets and screws. Firstly, the steel columns should be attached to the existing logs, then the hidden joint

176

can be placed on top. Following this, the hanging trunks would be placed over the steel square hollow section and fixed with brackets. The canopy, which is lightweight and made from ply can be lifted onto the columns and fixed to the trunks. From the canopy, the bottles will be tied on with rope loosely, to give them an ephemeral and hand-made aesthetic.


Laying out the design for laser cutting

Construction Diagram

177


C3 FINAL DETAIL MODEL Assembly Process The final detail model is made using a similar process to the actual construction process. It was laid out onto a template, although since it was cut at a 1:20 scale, we used the laser cutter. Once the pieces were cut, there was the matter of making the base and gluing the columns together. The columns in the model do not follow the same structure as the real thing, however, because they do not have to support as much weight.

178

Then to glue all the pieces together, it was simple to fix everything and insert lights to give the model a more interesting appearance and to highlight the gaps in the trunks which would in real life, interact with the light. After gluing the canopy pieces on, we hung beads using fishing wire and added sand to demonstrate more of the site conditions.


Initial Laser cutting

Assembly of model

179


C3 FINAL DETAIL MODEL

180


181


182


183


C3 FINAL DETAIL MODEL

184


185


C3 FINAL DETAIL MODEL

186


187


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL Inspiration Trees are sanctuaries. Whoever knows how to speak to them, whoever knows how to listen to them, can learn the truth. They are like lonely persons. Not like hermits who have stolen away out of some weakness, but like great, solitary men, like Beethoven and Nietzsche. In their highest boughs the world rustles, their roots rest in infinity. Nothing is holier, nothing is more exemplary than a beautiful, strong tree. When we are stricken and cannot bear our lives any longer, then a tree has something to say to us: Be still! Be still! Look at me! Life is not easy, life is not difficult. Those are childish thoughts. You are anxious because your path leads away from home. Home is neither here nor there. Home is within you, or home is nowhere at all. A longing to wander tears my heart when I hear trees rustling in the wind at evening. If one listens to them silently for a long time, this longing reveals

188

its meaning. It is not so much a matter of escaping from one’s suffering, though it may seem to be so. It is a longing for home, for a memory of the mother, for new metaphors for life. It leads home. Every path leads homeward, every step is birth, every step is death. Trees have long thoughts, long-breathing and restful, just as they have longer lives than ours. They are wiser than we are, as long as we do not listen to them. But when we have learned how to listen to trees, then the brevity and the quickness and the childlike hastiness of our thoughts achieve an incomparable joy. Whoever has learned how to listen to trees no longer wants to be a tree. He wants to be nothing except what he is. That is home. That is happiness.” ― Hermann Hesse Bäume. Betrachtungen und Gedichte


Canopy design looking up

189


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL Narrative Imagine you stand under a tree, your favourite tree in the world, and look up. You see the light dancing amongst the leaves, refracting through the thin membrane skin and highlighting the sinewy veins. The branches caress you, keep you safe. They slowly move and creep as their joints are stressed. A slight breeze whispers against the leaves and the light comes alive, moving in time, rustling as a ballerinas would in a pas de deux. You sit against the trunk and feel the roots below, grounding the tree so the wind cannot steal it away like it would a kite. The worn bark peels away to reveal the new beneath and hidden under the skin, you know lies

190

hundreds of rings denoting the trees wisdom. It is here, where you feel most safe. Here, you take a breath and exhale slowly, knowing nothing can hurt you. Another child runs over, ducking under the safety net of the tree and stands with her feet buried in the sand. She nods to the sand castle you have built and asks if she can help. And together, your hands mould your visions, letting our imaginations soar under the dancing light of the canopy.


Effect of the design in sunlight

191


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL Composition The final design is composed of different parts to make up a structure that mimics a floating tree. The trunks are composed of irregular geometry, as real trunks in nature. However, to demonstrate the inner workings of the tree, the trunk is cut off so children can see the rings on the circular plates, which are drawn to represent the transformation of CERES itself. The five trunks support a complex canopy, grown from a simplistic L system, mimicking the branching system in real trees. The tree canopy pieces come together to demonstrate the trees are stronger together, similar to how trees connect and support each other through the roots, however, the design

192

has demonstrated this above the children's heads. The bottles are the leaves of the tree, hanging from the complex branches to create a simplicity about the design. Each bottle would be hand painted by children who can leave their own mark on the site. The bottles are recycled, which incorporates the importance of protecting the environment, and are also hanging. The hanging effect ensures the bottles will move in the wind and interact with the surrounding air of the site, crashing against one and other as trees do in a real canopy. The sound and light effects work together to create a truly remarkable sight mimicking the towering trees surrounding the sand pit.


Mimicking trees beyond

193


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL

194


195


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL

196


197


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL

198


199


C3 DESIGN PROPOSAL Evaluation Compared to the initial design, this one utilises computational techniques the best in order to create a well-developed pavilion. The patterning is far more complex than what could be created utilising traditional design methods and the sun analysis allows the pavilion to shade the site exactly as it should throughout all hours of the day. This design is also well composed and the elements fit in together into one singular system. The trunks link to the branches seamlessly and we have incorporated all hidden joints to ensure the structure does not distract from the design.

200

The effect of the design is also advantageous as the bottles and complex L system branches create interesting shadows on the ground. The bottles also move in the wind which create a similar effect to what can be described in the inspirational poem. Some disadvantages of the design come from the constraints of the brief. Although the design appears to be floating, the steel poles can still be seen to some extent, whereas if we had a larger budget or were unconstrained by the use of recycled materials, we may have been able to create an entirely hanging pavilion.


Design in site context

201


C4 LEARNING OUTCOMES Crit Evaluation The initial design presented in week 12 was work from our larger group. This project had some positive points, however there was a lot of development still required, which is why the design changed so significantly in the final model. In terms of what was advantageous about the design, the critics enjoyed the narrative and inspiration that was woven into our design. They also enjoyed the initial idea of incorporating an L system into the design. However, there were many negative points of feedback. The major point was that the design was an amalgamation of too many ideas, since we worked in such a large group. Each individual worked on their own section of the design but when they came together, the design was not well composed. There were double ups of elements (such as the shade cloth and the plastic bottles) which both achieved the same outcome and in the presentation itself, we were unclear of what the final design system actually was.

202

Additionally, the structure was not well composed in the initial design. It appears from the render as if the columns are too thin to support the weight of the strong canopy above and with bracing, the factor of children climbing the structure is introduced. Finally, there are only two places where the structure touches the ground in the initial design. This means the design could twist and collapse, as I discovered when making the model for the presentation. To alleviate these issues in the final design, we added extra columns which are thicker and made from steel. This also allows us to create a seemingly floating design, which interacts better with the air and prevents children from climbing it. We also made the L system more complex and enhanced it more in the final design. The shade cloths were removed and the bottles and branches now serve as the main shading element, based on Ladybug sun analysis.


Initial Design for presentation

Final Developed design

203


C4 LEARNING OUTCOMES Studio Objectives OBJECTIVE ONE: INTERROGATE THE BRIEF In part B, I designed something using a mix of analogue design and computation to result in something that reflected the brief. However, moving into part C, I engaged with computation more and used Grasshopper to resolve my design based on the needs of the brief. Specifically, we used the Ladybug sun analysis to determine where the design would be best suited on site and also how the pattern should develop further and be trimmed to maximise shading while minimising unnecessary elements and cost. Utilising these parametric techniques, the design accurately shades the site which would have required much more work using analogue techniques. The increased accuracy improved the overall performative qualities and ensured the pavilion adequately related to the brief. OBJECTIVE TWO: ABILITY TO GENERATE A VARIETY OF DESIGN POSSIBILITIES FOR A GIVEN SITUATION In part B, I used various Grasshopper techniques to generate designs, however these related to a change in sliders or numerical inputs to create iterations. These designs did not push the boundaries of what was possible. However, in part C, using the L system allowed us to generate a multitude of complex designs which could be overlaid to create interesting patterns. There was also the benefit of the L system reflecting

204

how an actual tree grows and branches in nature, bolstering the biomimicry aspect of our design. To create so many variables in such little time, would not have been possible without computational design which allowed for much more complexity and accuracy in the actual logic of the L system. OBJECTIVE THREE: DEVELOPING SKILLS IN VARIOUS THREE-DIMENSIONAL MEDIA Moving from 2D to 3D media was simpler this time as I engaged with technology in order to produce the final model. The complex L system design would have been difficult to create in 3 dimensions by hand, but with the laser cutter, we were able to cut pieces only 1.7 millimetres thick, increasing the complexity and accuracy of the design. There was also the prototyping in this phase which necessitated problem solving across a range of scales. From the joints of the plastic bottles to the over arching supports, we endeavoured to created hidden and elegant joints which were strong enough to work in reality without compromising the design intent. I think we eventually discovered appropriate solutions which ensured a design which was well-composed but structurally sound, however without the prototyping phase, these joints would not have been discovered. Working in Rhino, we would attempt to create the joints effectively but without real gravitational forces and material thicknesses and weaknesses, we would not appropriately solve the issues. Making the joints as a full scale ensured they worked in reality and satisfied our need for them to work elegantly.


Complex L system Exploration using Hoopsnake

205


C4 LEARNING OUTCOMES Studio Objectives OBJECTIVE FOUR: UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE AND THE AIR Previously, I discussed how my part B design did not engage with the relationship between architecture and air, but I feel like the part C design appropriately reflects this. One main focus of the design was creating a structure which had the same effects as a tree canopy, specifically in regards to light and sound effects. The plastic bottles interact with the air and move in a way that mimics leaves in a real canopy dancing in the wind. The columns also demonstrate a relationship with the air as the timber trunks have small slits where each piece joins. These slits are large enough to allow air flow, but small enough to create the sound of a whistling wind to add to the effect of the pavilion. Finally, the entire tree appears to be floating, reflecting a direct engagement with the air. The pavilion is physically in the air, floating above the children in the sandpit to create sort of a looming, but protective feel to the design and site. OBJECTIVE FIVE: DEVELOPING THE ABILITY TO MAKE A CASE FOR PROPOSALS The case we made for the final presentation was not well made and there were many issues with the final design. However, developing the work from that stage and moving on from the larger group, I think we ensured the design was a proposal that could be made in reality. I think the case for our design is made in the extensive prototypes and when creating the model at 1:20 scale, it worked as a whole, ensuring the design was resolved and effective.

206

OBJECTIVE SIX: DEVELOP CAPABILITIES FOR CONCEPTUAL, TECHNICAL AND DESIGN ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS Since part C denoted a final development of the design, there was no engagement with contemporary architectural projects, however the analysis of designs in part A and B did reflect an improvement across the semester. I think I liked engaging with the biomimicry examples the best as I enjoyed this part of the subject, however it would have been interesting to engage with another project which utilised an L system in the design. OBJECTIVE SEVEN: DEVELOP FOUNDATIONAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY, DATA STRUCTURES AND TYPES OF PROGRAMMING From part B, I noted that I could understand data structures but not how to manipulate them so I tried to work on this in Part C. Using the L system, I was able to manipulate the data to create complex patterns which were more interesting than the explorations in part B. I think I now have a better understanding of how to manipulate data in order to create complex designs and feel like my pavilion design benefited from this immensely. OBJECTIVE EIGHT: BEGIN DEVELOPING A PERSONALISED REPERTOIRE OF COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES The main computational techniques I used in part C were the L system and the sun analysis, both in which informed the outcome of my design. Having worked with these so closely, I think I am capable of manipulating and utilising them for another design in the future, forming a basis for my repertoire of computational techniques.


Laser cut canopy of model

207


C4 LEARNING OUTCOMES Final Conclusion I think beginning in part A, I definitely did not have the computational design skills that I have utilised in part C. My algorithmic sketches were basic and utilised only basic Grasshopper techniques and nodes. In part B, I tried to engage more with computational design however, not having one particular system I was interested in was disadvantageous. I was trying to come up with ideas and iterations which were too diverse and did not focus on manipulating one particular element in order to stretch the definition fully into something completely new. In part C, I finally found the L system which ensured a I could create complex and engaging designs

208

which formed the canopy for my final structure. I think comparing this back to part A, there is a huge difference in what I knew and my Grasshopper skills, but in part C I think I fully engaged with the computational aspect of design to create something interesting that satisfied the brief and the design intent to the best of my abilities. I think had I used these computational skills in previous studios, I would have been able to devise a more complex and elegant solution to other projects instead of using simplistic and basic geometry to compose a design. I think these parametric techniques will be useful in future design studios and will allow me to explore the brief more thoroughly and accurately.


Canopy design looking up

209


REFERENCES Builtr. “Generative Architecture, Transofrmation by Computation” Bultr.io, (2017) < http://www.builtr.io/generative-architecture-transformation-by-computation/> [acessed: 16/03/2017] David Langdon, “AD Classics: Centre Culturel Jean-Marie Tjibaou / Renzo Piano”, ArchDaily (2015) < http://www.archdaily.com/600641/ad-classics-centre-culturel-jean-marietjibaou-renzo-piano> [Accessed: 9 March 2017] Fry, Tony. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford:Berg, 2008), p. 1-16 Kalay, Yehuda. Architecture’s new media: principles, theories, and methods of computer-aided design (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2004), p.1 Kolaveric, Branco. “Computing the Performative in Architecture” in Proceedings of the 21th eCAADe Conference: Digital Design. (Graz: Austria, 2003) pp. 457-463 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman. Theories of the digital in architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), p.1 Peters, Brady, “Computation Works: The building of algorithmic thought”. Architectural Design, 83, 2 (2013) pp. 10-15. Von Nutzen, Dandy. Art of the computational architecture [online blog] < http://dandyvonnuetzen.blogspot. com.au/2013/01/art-of-computational-architecture.html> [Accessed: 9 March 2017 Wang, Maggie. “Thinktank and the life aquatech: water generative design” Designboom (2013) < http://www.designboom.com/architecture/thinktank-and-the-life-aquatech-wa ter-generativedesign/> [accessed: 16/03/2017]

210


Credits Part A - Emily Thomas Part B - Emily Thomas Part C - Initial design: Emily Thomas, Malak Noureddine El Moussaoui, Boyd Hellier Knox, Evelyn Yi Thong Ong, Joshua Christian, Trenton Lim, Wang Rouxuan Final Design: Emily Thomas and Malak Noureddine El Moussaoui

211


212


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.